AUSTRALIAN POULTRY CRC - Poultry Hub

More documents

Recommendations

Info

utyldimethylsilyltrifluoroacetamide (MTBSTFA; 40 μL) for derivatisation of organic acids. Theconcentration of derivatised organic acids was quantified using a Varian CP 3400 CX gaschromatograph (Varian Analytical Instruments, Palo Alto, CA, USA).2.6.11 Necrotic enteritis challenge modelNecrotic enteritis tests involved challenge with C. perfringens and Eimeria spp. A gross pathologicdiagnosis of NE in all dead birds and sampled birds was based on the presence of intestinal lesionstypical of naturally occurring and experimentally induced NE, as described by Prescott et al. (1978)and Broussard et al. (1986): gas-filled small intestines, with confluent necrosis and sloughing of themucosal surface of the intestinal tract which appeared as tan-orange pseudomembrane (“dirty turkishtowel”-like appearance). The small intestine from each bird was incised longitudinally and examinedfor evidence of gross necrotic lesions. Small intestinal lesions were scored according to the criteria ofPrescott et al. (1978) with slight modifications as illustrated in Plate 2.1. All birds were examinedtwice daily and all dead chickens were immediately collected for postmortem analysis.2.7.12 Statistical analysisData were analysed according to appropriate statistical design of each experiment. Percentage datawere arcsine-transformed prior to analysis and data from all the response variables were analysedusing the ANOVA procedures of SAS (SAS Institute Inc., 2000) or StatGraphics 5 Plus computerpackage (version 5.1 - Professional Edition, Manugistics Inc., Rockville, Maryland, USA). Variableshaving a significant F test were compared using Duncan‟s Multiple Range Test. Differences betweenmean values were considered significant at P0.05.2.7.13 Animal ethicsAll experimental procedures were approved by the University of New England Animal Care andEthics Committee, and throughout the experiments, health and husbandry practices complied with theCode of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (National Health andMedical Research Council, 2004), for the Commonwealth of Australia and the Australian Model Codeof Practice for the Welfare of Animals: Domestic <strong>Poultry</strong> (Primary Industries Standing Committee,2002).3 Results3.1 Strategy A3.1.1 Water-soluble prebiotic compounds from Australian and New Zealandplants: isolation and characterisationThe underground parts (rhizome) of Arthropodium cirratum (Rengarenga lily extract); third orderbranches of Cordyline australis (Cabbage tree extract); a seaweed, Undaria pinnatifida (Undariaextract), and exudates from Acacia pycnantha (Acacia extract) contained 576, 250, 275, and 794 g/kgDM water-soluble carbohydrates (WSCs), respectively. Constituent sugar analysis by gas-liquidchromatography (GLC) showed that extracts of Rengarenga lily and Cabbage tree containedpredominantly fructose and glucose (82-95 %). The analysis also revealed that Acacia extractcontained mainly galactose (78 %) and arabinose (22 %) while Undaria extract, contained fucose (55%) and galactose (44 %). Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) showed that the fructan composition ofRengarenga lily extract and Cabbage tree extract was different. Cabbage tree extract contained 45%(w/w) fructans while Rengarenga lily extract contained 65 % (w/w) fructans (Table 3.1).18
Table 3.1: Yield and chemical analyses of the plant extractsLilyextractCabbagetree extractPlant extractUndariaextractAcaciaextractYield of water-soluble carbohydrates (g/kg 576 250 275 794DM)Dry matter (g/kg) 938 880 885 930Total sugar content (g/kg DM) 680 480 370 790Crude protein (g/kg DM) 49 143 21 32Molecular weight (Da) ~5,000 1 N.D 511,000 30,000Polydispersity index 2 (M w /M n ) 1.10 - 1.46 1.07Fructan content (%, w/w) 65 45 - -N.D = Molecular weight is too low for determination.1 approximate molecular weight only; close to limit ofmethod.2 Polydispersity index (M w /M n ) = M w (Weight average molecular weight) / M n (Number-averagemolecular weight).Table 3.2: The amino acid composition (weight percentage) of the plant extracts 1Amino acidLilyExtractAmino acid composition (g/100 g protein)Cabbagetree extractUndariaextractAcaciaextract Frutafit 2Alanine 11 10 10 5 6Glycine 6 8 20 8 N.DValine 5 4 11 8 7Lecine 6 6 11 11 7Isolecine 3 3 4 4 7Proline 5 4 3 7 6Methionine 1 Tr 2 N.D N.DSerine 4 4 9 10 N.DThreonine 3 3 6 2 1Phenylalanine 2 3 4 3 N.DAspartic acid 8 9 6 12 30Hydroxyprolin 2 3 6 23 N.DeGlutamic acid 16 26 6 6 36Lysine 7 4 N.D N.D N.DArginine 12 4 N.D N.D N.DHistidine 8 4 N.D N.D N.D1 Average of duplicate determinations. 2 Commercially available fructooligosaccharide. N.D = Not detected.Tr = Trace amount (
Page 6: diets. The FCR on whole-wheat diet
Page 10 and 11: 2.2.7 Fermentation characteristics
Page 12 and 13: 2.3.3 MeasurementsBody weights were
Page 14 and 15: approximately 126m. The experiment
Page 18 and 19: 2.6.6 Digestibility of nutrientsApp
Page 22 and 23: High performance size-exclusion chr
Page 24 and 25: 3.1.3 Prebiotic plant extracts for
Page 26 and 27: The ARDRA and partial 16S rRNA gene
Page 28 and 29: WSCs from the two plant sources was
Page 30 and 31: Results from Experiment Two demonst
Page 32 and 33: irds was also 15 % higher than that
Page 34 and 35: The tested plant extracts and prebi
Page 36 and 37: et al., 1992; Nir et al., 1994a). H
Page 38 and 39: The results of the current study su
Page 40 and 41: Cambie, R. C. & Ferguson, L. R. (20
Page 42 and 43: Mitsuoka, T. (2002). Prebiotics and
Page 44 and 45: 9.0 Plain English Compendium Summar

AUSTRALIAN POULTRY CRC - Poultry Hub

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?