State University of Valley Acaraú (UVA), Center of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Campus Betânia, 62040370, Sobral, CE, Brazil.
State University of Valley Acaraú (UVA), Center of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Campus Betânia, 62040370, Sobral, CE, Brazil.
J Therm Biol. 2020 Dec;94:102773. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2020.102773. Epub 2020 Nov 12.
This study had the following objectives: (i) to evaluate the thermoregulatory and behavioral responses of light laying hens supplemented with different types and dosages of phytases in the two day shifts; and (ii) to integrate the thermoregulatory and behavioral responses with performance of these birds raised in a hot environment. 270 light laying hens of the Hy-Line White lineage, with a body weight of 1.60 ± 0.092 kg were distributed in a completely randomized design in a 2 × 2 + 1 factorial model with two types of phytases (bacterial and fungal) and two dosages (450 and 900 FTU), and a control diet. The day shift (morning and afternoon) was considered as a fixed effect in the factorial arrangement. Principal component analysis (P), correspondence analysis (C) and canonical discriminant analysis (C) were used. There was no interaction (P > 0.05) between phytases and dosages for thermoregulatory responses. Respiratory rate (R), cloacal temperature (C), and surface temperature with feathers (S) and featherless (S) were higher (P < 0.001) in the afternoon. Birds show different thermoregulatory and behavioral responses in the two shifts of the day. We also observed that birds supplemented with bacterial and fungal phytase showed similar thermoregulatory and behavioral responses to the control group in both day shifts. Expression of the "eating" activity was greater in the morning, while the birds remained sitting longer in the afternoon. Egg production was higher (P < 0.001) in birds supplemented with bacterial phytase. The phytase dosages had no effect on thermoregulatory, behavioral or performance responses. Egg production, feed conversion per dozen eggs corresponded to 81.1% of the differences between bacterial and fungal phytase supplementation and group control. Thus, we conclude that: (i) phytase dietary supplementation has no effect on the thermoregulatory responses of laying hens reared in a hot environment; (ii) birds supplemented with bacterial phytase showed higher egg production; and (iii) phytases (450 and 900 FTU) do not interfere with productive, behavioral and thermoregulatory responses.
(i)评估在两个白天班次中补充不同类型和剂量植酸酶对轻产蛋鸡的体温调节和行为反应;(ii)将这些鸡在热环境中的体温调节和行为反应与性能整合起来。270 只海兰白系轻产蛋鸡,体重 1.60±0.092kg,采用完全随机设计,在 2×2+1 因子模型中分为两组,两组分别补充两种植酸酶(细菌和真菌)和两种剂量(450 和 900 FTU),对照组采用基础日粮。白天(上午和下午)作为因子设计中的固定效应。采用主成分分析(P)、对应分析(C)和典型判别分析(C)进行分析。在体温调节反应方面,植酸酶和剂量之间没有相互作用(P>0.05)。呼吸率(R)、泄殖腔温度(C)、羽毛(S)和无羽毛(S)表面温度在下午较高(P<0.001)。鸡在一天的两个班次中表现出不同的体温调节和行为反应。我们还观察到,在白天的两个班次中,补充细菌和真菌植酸酶的鸡与对照组表现出相似的体温调节和行为反应。“进食”活动的表达在上午较高,而下午鸡的久坐时间较长。补充细菌植酸酶的鸡产蛋量较高(P<0.001)。植酸酶剂量对体温调节、行为或性能反应没有影响。产蛋率、每蛋饲料转化率分别对应于细菌和真菌植酸酶补充与对照组的差异的 81.1%。因此,我们得出结论:(i)植酸酶日粮补充对热环境中饲养的产蛋鸡的体温调节反应没有影响;(ii)补充细菌植酸酶的鸡产蛋量较高;(iii)植酸酶(450 和 900 FTU)不会干扰生产性能、行为和体温调节反应。