Korean Journal of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회지)

Korean Association of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회)
권호 표지

Effects of Feed Additive as an Alternative for Antibiotics on Growth Performance and Feed Cost in Growing-finishing Pigs

항생제 대체제로서 첨가제가 육성 및 비육돈의 성장능력과 사료비에 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2010.01.29
  • Accepted : 2010.03.18
  • Published : 2010.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to evaluate two different types of feed additive as an alternative for antibiotics on growth performance and feed cost in growing and finishing pigs. One additive is an herb extract, with Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum graecum) as the main component, while the other feed additive contains aminolevulinic acid (ALA). In the first experiment, 128 grower pigs were allotted to 4 different treatment groups and replicated 4 times with 8 pigs per replicate; the trial lasted for 28 days. The positive control group (PC) which is the control group supplemented with antibiotics was significantly higher (p<0.05) in growth rate (580.6 g/d) followed by the ALA group (532.0 g/d), there was no significant differences in terms of feed intake and feed efficiency. There were marginal reductions in feed costs measured as feed cost per head in ALA and HE added diet. However, the feed cost per weight gain of ALA treatment was higher than the control group (PC) supplemented with antibiotics. In the second experiment, 80 finisher pigs were allotted to 4 treatment groups and replicated 4 times with 5 pigs per replicate; the trial lasted for 70 days. The treatment group supplemented with an herb extract (HE) had a significantly higher (p<0.05) feed intake (2,415.8 g/d) compared to the other treatment groups, but there was no significant differences in terms of growth rate and feed efficiency. Feed cost per head in HE and ALA treatments were higher than PC treatment, and feed cost per weight gain of HE was higher than PC treat (p<0.05). The results from these experiments suggests that these two types of feed additives can both be used as an alternative for antibiotics without having a negative effect on the performance of the animals. And aminolevulinic acid was good in performance and production cost of grower and finisher pigs.

본 시험은 육성돈과 비육돈에서 항생제 대체를 위하여 두 가지 첨가제의 가축의 생산성과 사료비를 평가하였다. 본 시험에 사용된 첨가제는 두과식물인 호로파(Trigonella foenum graecum) 추출물(HE)과 aminolevulinic acid(ALA)를 사용하였다. 시험 1은 자돈 128두를 4처리 4반복으로 돈방 당 8두씩 28일간 사양시험을 하였다. 항생제 첨가구(PC)의 일당증체량은 580.6g으로 532.2g의 ALA처리구보다 많이 증체하였다(p<0.05). 한편 일일 사료섭취량과 사료효율은 처리간에 유의적인 차이가 없었다. 자돈의 두당 사료비는 첨가제 처리구인 HE 및 ALA 처리구 모두 항생제 처리구(PC)보다 적었으나, 1.0kg 증체당 사료비는 HE 처리구가 항생제(PC) 처리구보다 높았다. 시험 2는 육성 비육돈 80두를 4처리 4반복으로 돈방당 5두씩 70일간 사양시험을 하였다. 육성 비육돈의 1일 사료섭취량은 HE 처리구가 2,425.8g으로 다른 처리구보다 많이 섭취하였다(p<0.05). 한편 육성 비육돈의 일당증체량과 사료효율은 처리간 유의적인 차이가 없었다. HE 처리구는 두당 사료비와 1.0kg 당 사료비 모두 항생제 처리구보다 많았으나 ALA 처리구는 1.0kg 당 사료비가 항생제 처리구와 같았다. 이상의 시험결과를 종합해 볼 때 항생제를 대체를 위한 첨가제는 가축생산성이 항생제 처리구보다 떨어지지 않았으며, 특히 aminolevulinic acid는 사료비에서도 항생제와 차이가 없어 경쟁력이 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Barton, M. D. 2000. Antibiotics use in animal feed and its impact on human health. Nut. Res. Rev. 13: 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1079/095442200108728972
  2. Bourne, C. 1998. Herbs, spices and botanicals as new feed additives. In: (Ed. T. P. Lyons), Proc. Alletech's 14th Ann. Smp. On Biotechnol. Feed Industry. pp. 79-93.
  3. Chen, Y. J., O. S. Kwon, B. J. Min, K. S. Son, J. H. Cho, J. W. Hong, and I. H. K. 2005. The effects of dietary biotite V supplementation as an alternative substance of antibiotics in growing pigs. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 1642-1645. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2005.1642
  4. Choi, Han-Pil, Jeong-Woon Hong, Ki-Hyeong Rhee, and Ha-Chin Sung. 2004. Cloning, expression, and characterization of 5-aminolevulinic acid synthase from Rhodopseudomonas palustris KUGB306. FEMS Microbiology Letters 236: 175-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2004.tb09644.x
  5. Close, W. H. 2000. Producing pigs without antibiotic growth promoters. Advances in pork production. 11: 47-56.
  6. Corpet, D. E. 2000. Mechanism of antimicrobial growth prometers used in animal feed (French), Rev. Med. Vet. 151: 99-104.
  7. Doyle, M. E. 2001. Alternatives to antibiotic use for growth promotion in animal husbandry, Food Research, April. pp. 1-17.
  8. Duncan, D. B. 1995. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 1-42.
  9. Dzelzkalns, V., T. Foley and S. I. Beale. 1982. $\delta$-Aminolevulinic acid synthase of Euglena gracilis: Physical and kinetic properties. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 216: 196-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(82)90204-1
  10. Henry, R. W., D. W. Pickard, and P. E. Hughes. 1985. Citric acid and fumaric acid as food additives for early-weaned piglets. Anmi. Prod. 40: 505-509. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100040204
  11. Jonson, R. 1992. Role of acidifiers and enzymes in assuring performance and health of pigs post-weaning. In: Biotechnology in the Feed Industry (Proc. Alletech's Eighth Annual Symp.) Alltech Technical Publication. Nicholasville. Ky. USA. pp. 139-150.
  12. Kiatpapan, P. and Murooka, Y. 2001. Construction of an expression vector for ropionibacteria and its use in production of 5-aminolevulinic acid by Propionibacterium freudenreichii. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 56: 144-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002530100603
  13. Kiser, J. S. 1976. A perspective on the use of antibiotcis in animal feeds, J. Anim. Sci. 42: 355-368.
  14. Kim, Y. Y., D. Y. Kil, H. K. Oh, and In K. Han. 2005. Acidifier as alternative material to antibiotics in animal feed. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 1048-1060. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2005.1048
  15. Kyriakis, S. C., I. Georgoulakis, A. Spais, C. Alexopoulos, C. C. Miliotis, and S. K. Kritas. 2003. Evaluation of toycocerin, a probiotic containing Bacillus toyoi spores, on health status and productiveity of weaned, growing and finishing pigs. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16: 1326-1331. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2003.1326
  16. Leibetseder, J. 2004. New feed additives - the growth of a niche. In: World Nutrition Forum, Biomin Edition, 2004. Salzburg, Austria. pp. 14-15.
  17. Mateo, R. D., J. L. Morrow, J, W. Dailey, F. Ji and S. W. Kim. 2006. Use of - Aminoleulinic acid in swine diet: Effect on growth performance, behavioral characteristics and hematological/immune status in nursery pigs. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 19: 97-101.
  18. NRC. 1998. Nutrient requirements of swine (10th Ed.). National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
  19. Nishikawa S and Y. Murooka. 2001. 5-Aminolevulinic acid: production by fermentation, and agricultural and biomedical applications. Biotechnology & Genetic Engineering Reviews 18: 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02648725.2001.10648012
  20. Rebeiz, Constantin A., John A. Juvik, and Carole C. Rebeiz. 1988. Porphyric insecticides. 1. Concept and phenomenology. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 30: 11-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-3575(88)90055-7
  21. Samarasinghe, K., C. Wenk, K. F. S. R. Silva, and J. M. D. M. Gunasekera. 2003. Tumeric (Curcuma longa) root power and mannanoligosaccharides as alternatives to antibiotics in chicken diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16: 1495. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2003.1495
  22. SAS Instute Inc. 1995. SAS user's guide: Statistics. Version 6.12 Edition SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
  23. Taylor, D. J. 1997. A realistic assessment of the risks of antimicrobial use in animals and its effects on feed safety. Pig J. 40: 46-59.
  24. Wenk, C. 2002. Herbs and botaniclas as feed additives in monogastric animals. Proc. 2002. Int. Symp. On Recent Advances in Animal Nutri., New Delhi, India, 22nd Sept. 2002. pp. 14-21.