SCVMJ, XII (2)

Transcription

1 SCVMJ, XII (2) EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF ENROFLOXACIN AND SOME FEED ADDITIVES ON THE PERFORMANCE OF BROILER CHICKS. Gammaz, H.A., Fayez, M. M., Fathy, W. E. and Rasha A. Bekhet. Suez Canal University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Pharmacology Department. ABSTRACT The present study was conducted to compare between the effects of probiotic and some antibiotics as enramycin and enrofloxacin on the broiler performance. The experiment was carried out on 6 one day old chicks divided into six groups each contain 1 chicks. The chicks were reared in separated blocks, provided with wood shaving litter, plastic feeders and water troughs. The birds were fed on a starter ration for the first three weeks and then on a grower ration for the next three weeks and the water was provided ad libitum. The average feed intake, body weight, weight gain, feed conversion ratio and feed efficiency were measured. The results showed that all treated groups showed lower feed intake than the control group except enrofloxacin treated birds showed higher feed intake than the control group. In the same time all treated birds revealed higher body weight, weight gain, organs and carcass weights except enrofloxacin treated birds which showed lower levels than the control group. Feed efficiency and feed conversion ratio were more efficient in all treated birds except that of enrofloxacin treated birds which were less efficient than the control and treated groups. INTRODUCTION Medicated feeding is considered as one of the most effective means for growth promotion in poultry. It is well known that administration of antibiotics is effective in treatment and prevention of many poultry diseases (Ibrahim, 1988). Chicken are raised in intensive or even extremely intensive systems. Under such conditions many feed additives, chemicals and drugs are used (Kodam and Govindwar, 1995). Antibiotics are used in poultry industry not only to treat disease but also to promote growth and increase feed efficiency (Peters, et al., 22). Probiotics have been administrated to poultry to enhance production performance and to protect the fowel against pathogens by colonization in the gastrointestinal tract (Huang, et al., 24).

2 14 Gammaz et al., The field of using probiotics has emerged as a new science with applications in farming and aquaculture as alternatives to antibiotics as well as prophylactics in humans. Probiotics are being developed commercially for use in poultry and aquaculture industries. (Hong, et al., 25). The aim of this work is to evaluate the comparative effects of probiotics and some antibiotics on the performance of broiler chicks. MATERIAL & METHODS I) Drugs: a) Probiotic bacteria (Galibro) : Is a probiotic agent used in poultry field produced by Biochem International, Germany. It is a powder product (freeze dried bacteria) administered through feeding ration. 2 gm/ton of broiler's ration. Composed of Bacillus Subtilus , carrier Whey permeate + Sodium Aluminum Silicate b) Enramycin hydrochloride : It is a basic polypeptide antibiotic developed by Schering- plough, Animal Health, America, and used as 25 gm/ton of broiler's ration. Its molecular formula is: Enramycin A (C 17 H 138 N 26 O 31 CL 2 ) and enramycin B (C 18 H 14 N 26 O 31 CL 2 ). c) Enrofloxacin (Spectrama - Vet): Enrofloxacin is a quinolone carboxylic acid derivative with Antimicrobial action. Supplied from Amoun Pharmaceutical Co, Egypt, in the form of 1% solution. Its Chemical name is Cyclopropy1-6-fluoro-1,4-dihydro-4- oxo-7-[ (4-ethyl)-1- piperaziny1]-3- quinolinecarboxylic acid, hydrochloride. Its Molecular formula: C 19 H 22 FN 3 O 3 II) Experimental design: 6 one day old chicks were classified randomly into six groups (each of 1 chicks) and kept separately using wooden chick partitions. The chicks were reared in sparated blocks, provided with wood shaving litter, plastic feeders and water troughs. The birds were fed on a starter ration for the first three weeks and then on a grower ration for the next three weeks and the water was provided ad libitum. The chicks were reared at 24 hours of light daily. The brooding period started with a temperature of 32 c over the first week, and this temperature was then decreased by 2 c each week until it reached 22 c and fixed till the end of rearing period (42 day of age) Yeo and Kim (1997). All groups were kept under the same conditions and received the same procedures of management and vaccination program. The first group served as control group received basal diet free from any additives or treatments, The second group received basal diet supplemented with probiotic (Gallipro ) (2 gm/ton ration) all over the

3 SCVMJ, XII (2) experiment, the third group received basal diet supplemented with enramycin at a dose of (25 gm/ton feed) all over the experiment, the fourth group received basal ration supplemented with enrofloxacin at a dose of (2 ml/ liter water) for three days and non treated water for seven days in an alternative manner till the end of experiment, the fifth group received basal ration supplemented with probiotic mixed with enramycin (2 gm/ton feed, 25 gm/ton feed), respectively together all over the experiment, the six group received basal diet supplemented with enrofloxacin (2 ml/ liter) in the water for three days and probiotic (2gm/ton) in the ration for the next seven days in an alternative manner till the end of experiment. III) Growth performance parameters: a) Feed intake: The amount of feed consumed daily by each group was calculated by subtracting the remaining feed daily from the allowed amount,. Then the average feed intake per chick daily was calculated for each group. b) Body weight: Average body weight of the chicks was determined at the start of the experiment; at one day old then weekly by weighing the whole birds of each group and then divided by the number of birds in the group. c) Weight gain: The average weekly gain in body weight was calculated through the difference between body weights of two successive weeks for each group. d) Feed conversion ratio (FCR): According to Wagner et al. (1983) the FCR and FE were calculated as following: FCR = Thus obtaining the FCR/ bird/ week for each group. e) Feed efficiency (FE): FE = Feed intake ( gm ) in given period Body weight gain ( gm ) in the same period Body weight gain in a given period (gm) Feed intake in the same period (gm) IV) Weight of organs: At the end of the experimental period (42 day of age) 5 birds from each group were randomly selected and slaughtered. Birds were weighed before slaughtering. All viscera were removed carefully by hand. Carcass weight was recorded; also liver, gizzard and heart (edible giblets) and intestine were weighed. V) Statistical analysis: The Statistical analysis was performed using the least square means described by Likelihood program of SAS (1996). The significances of

4 142 Gammaz et al., group differences were carried out according to Duncan s (1955). The obtained results were expressed as Mean+ S.E. RESULTS & DISCUSSION The result of this study showed that the total feed intake (Fig.1) for the chicks received probiotic alone in their diet continuously up to 6 weeks was less 5.95% than the control chicks. In the same time these chicks have higher final body weight (Fig.2) by 15.89% more than the control as well as the FCR (Fig.4) was less than the control group by 18.85% and the feed efficiency (Fig.5) was higher 2.% than the control birds. This might be attributed to the competition of bacterial probiotic with the undesired bacteria leading to improvement of the condition of intestine and so improve the body weight, weight gain, increasing feed efficiency, decreasing feed intake and FCR. The present results were in complete agreement with Fuller and Booker (1974) reported that probiotics improved the balance of enteric organisms and improved body weight gain, feed conversion and feed efficiency. Also these results was in agreement with Windschitl (1992) and Dhingra (1993) who stated that probiotic improved microbial environment of intestine, decreased digestive disturbance, inhibited pathogenic intestinal microorganism and improve feed conversion efficiency. On the other hand these results were not in accordance with Pisarski et al., (1995) who found that feeding broiler chicks on diet supplemented with probiotic (3g/kg ration) had no effect on body weight in starting and finishing periods than the control group. This may be attributed to the differences the rearing enviroment in broiler species, type of bacterial probiotic used or to the dose used in his experiment. Rasic (1983) recorded that bacterial probiotic maintain a healthy balance of intestinal flora by producing organic compound, such as lactic acid, hydrogen peroxide and acetic acid that increase the acidity of the intestine and inhibit the reproduction of many harmful bacteria Mulder (1991) reported that the beneficial effect of probiotics could be produced in two ways. Firstly suppressing harmful bacteria, or in decreased concentration of harmful metabolites such as enterotoxin. Secondly, stimulation of bacteria which are engaged in beneficial activities and help in production of essential nutrients like vitamins or help in digestion of food components. The group which administered enramycin recorded higher percentage than the control group regarding final body weight, body weight gain and feed efficiency which were 2.73%,

5 SCVMJ, XII (2) % and 23.33% respectively, while feed conversion and feed intake were 26.18% and less than the control group respectively. This might be attributed to the antibacterial activity of enramycin on the gram positive bacteria especially and its ability for inhibition of major pathogens of the gut flora which leads to improving the performance of the chicks. The obtained results are compatible with those reported by Pedroso et al. (26) who found that the better performance of the birds on enramycin treatment could be related to changes in the intestinal bacterial community. The birds which received drinking water containing enrofloxacin and diet free from any medication or feed additives showed high feed intake.94% and high feed conversion ratio 11% more than the control group. Meanwhile final body weight 1.75%, total body weight gain 1.76% and feed efficiency 6.67% less than the control group. Kobayashi (1985) suggested that the gastrointestinal tract disturbance in chicks treated with enrofloxacin may hinder absorption of nutrients and consequently led to an increase of food consumption without an increase in body weight or body weight gain. The present results were incompatible with Barbour et al. (1998) who mentioned that when broilers infected with Mycoplasma gallisepticum and subjected to enrofloxacin treatment program this was associated with lower body weights and higher feed conversion ratios for the broilers. The results showed an improvement in the performance of birds received probiotic plus enramycin and probiotic plus enrofloxacin than the control groups and this may be due to the double effects of probiotic and enramycin in group, and due to the effect of probiotic which improved the bad effects of enrofloxacin group. Regarding other treatments like probioitic plus enramycin and probiotic plus enrofloxacin all over the experiment we can see that there were a good performance parameters are obtained. This can be explained as; the use of antibiotic alone causing the ph of the small intestine to rise. This allows existing bad bacteria to take a place in the lining of the intestine because of the deterioration of the protective mucus lining. Because of this, the 'villi' of small intestine, can be lost which slow the movement of food as it passes through. Treating with probiotics immediately after the use of antibiotics, or together with some antibiotics help to repopulate the gut with the good bacteria and will compete against the bad bacteria, change the ph environment, allow nutrient absorption, and prevent infection. (Theodore, 2).

6 144 Gammaz et al., Birds treated with probiotic plus enramycin, enramycin, probiotic plus enrofloxacin and finally probiotic, treated birds showed higher giblet weight than control groups, this may be attributed to the improvement in their total performance parameters, versus of enrofloxacin treated group of birds which showed a decrease in giblet weight than control groups because of its bad effects on the broiler performance; as mentioned before. The present results were in complete agreement with Kalavathy et al., (23) who reported that bacterial probiotic had increased organ weights of broiler chicks from 1 to 42 day. Average feed intake (gm) age (weeks) Fig.(1): Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg /liter of drinking water) on the feed intake of broilers.

7 SCVMJ, XII (2) Average body weight (gm) age (weeks) Fig. (2) :Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg /liter drinking water) on the body weight of broilers. Average body weight gain (gm) age (weeks) Fig. (3) :Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg /liter drinking water) on the body weight gain of broilers.

8 146 Gammaz et al., feed conversion ratio age (weeks) Fig. (4): Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg /liter drinking water) on the feed conversion ratio (feed intake: weight gain) of broilers. Feed effeciency age (weeks) Fig. (5): Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg /liter drinking water) on the feed efficiency ratio (weight gain: feed intake) of broilers.

9 SCVMJ, XII (2) Weight of edible giblets (gm) age (weeks) Fig. (6) :Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg/liter drinking water) on weight of giblets of broilers. carcass weight (gm) age (week) Fig. (7): Effects of probiotic (2 g/ton ration), enramycin (25 g/ton ration) and enrofloxacin (2 mg/liter drinking water) on the carcass weight of broilers.

10 148 Gammaz et al., REFERENCE Barbour, E.K. Hamadeh, S.; Talhouk, R.; Sakr, W. and Darwish, R. (1998): Evaluation of an enrofloxacintreatment program against Mycoplasma gallisepticum infection in broilers. Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences,. Prev. Vet. Med. 1: 35(2): Dhingra, M.M. (1993): Probiotic in poultry diets. Poult. Adviser 26(8): Duncan, D.B. (1955): Multiple Ranges and Multiple 'F' test. Biometrics, 11:1. Fuller, R. and Booker, B.E. (1974): Lactobacilli which attach to the crop epithelium of the fowls. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 27: Hong, H.A; Duc le H. and Cutting, S.M. (25): The use of bacterial spore formers as probiotics. School of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London, UK. Sep., 29(4): Huang, M.K.; Choi, Y.J.; Houde, R.; Lee, J.W.; Lee, B. and Zhao, X. (24): Effects of Lactobacillus and an Acidophilic Fungus on the Production performance and Immune Responses in Broiler Chicken. Poult. Sci. 83: Ibrahim, F.M.A. (1988): Some pharmacological aspects of virginiamycin in chicken. M.V.Sc. Thesis presented to the Faculty of Vet. Med., Cairo University. Kalavathy, R.; Abdullah, N.; Jalaldudin, S. and Ho, Y.W. (23): Effects of Lactobacillus culture on growth performance of broiler chicken. Brit. Poult. Sci; 44(1): Kobayashi, H. (1985): Summary of clinical study on ciprofloxacin: efficacy and adverse reactions. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of chemotherapy, Kyoto, Japan. Kodam, K.M. and Govindwar, S.P. (1995): Effect of sulphamethazine on mixed function oxidase in chicken. Vet. Hum. Toxicol. 37(4): Mulder, R.W.A.W. (1991): Probiotic as a tool against Salmonella contamination. Misset-World Poultry, 7(3): 6. Pedroso, A.A.; Menten, J.F.; Lambais, M.R.; Racanicci, A.M.; Longo, F.A. and Sorbara, J.O. (26): Intestinal bacterial community and growth performance of chicken fed diets containing antibiotics. Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Brazil. Poult. Sci., 85(4): Peters, T.L.; Fulton, R.M.; Roberson, K.D. and Orth, M.W. (22): Effect

11 SCVMJ, XII (2) of antibiotics on invitro and invivo avian cartilage degradation. Department of Animal Science, Michigan State University, Avian Dis. Jan-Mar., 46(1): Pisarski, R.K.; Wojcik, S. and Kondzielska, L. (1995): Effectiveness of probiotics in relation to the composition of feed mixture for broiler chicken. Biuletyn-Naukowy. Przemyslu. Paszowego, 34(3-4): Rasic, J. L. (1983): The role of dairy foods containing bifido and acidophilus bacteria in nutrition and health. N. Eur.Dairy j., 4: SAS, (1996): SAS User s Guide. Statistical Analysis System. Institute, Inc. Cary., NC. Theodore, K.J. (2): What are probiotics?.california Animal Health and Food Safty. Poult. Health Article. Wagner, D.D.; Furrow, R.D. and Bradley, A. (1983): Sub-chronic toxicity of growth promoters in broiler chickens. Vet. Pathol., 2: Windschitl, P.M. (1992): Effects of probiotic supplementation of hulless barley and cornbased diets on bacterial fermentation in continuous culture of ruminal contents. Can. J. Animal Sci. 72: Yeo, J. and Kim, K. (1997): Effect of feeding diets containing an antibiotic, a probiotic or yucca extract on growth and intestinal urease activity in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 76: الملخص العربى تقييم تأثير االنروفلوكساسين و بعض اإلضافات العلفية على أداء بدارى التسمين أ.د./ حاتم عبد الخالق جماز, أ.د./ مصطفى فايز محمد حسن, د./ ط.ب./ راشة أحمد بخيت قسم االدوية البيطرية, كلية الطب البيطرى, جامعة قناة السويس وليد فتحى خليل, استتتتتدفت تتترا الدراستتتة الم ارثتتتة بتتتين تتتت ير البروبيوتتتك البكتيتتر و بعتتا الماتتادا الحيويتتة م تتتل االثراميسين و االثروفلوكساسين على أداء بدارى التسمين و قد تمت تربية 66 كتكتو عمتر يومتا واحتد لترا الغرض.

12 15 Gammaz et al., قسمت الكتاكيت إلى ست مجموعا كل منتا يحتوى على 66 كتكتو تمتت معاملتتتا معاملتة واحتدة متن حيث و من حيث )درجة الحرارة و الرطوبة و اإلضاءة(. و قد أسفر النتائج عن زيادة في أوزان الطيور و أوزان الربائح و الكفاءة الغرائية لجميع المجموعا كما قل معدل استتالك الغراء أياا في جميع المجموعا فيما عدا المجموعتة المعالجتة باالثروفلوكساستين ف تد أظتر قلة فتي أوزان الطيتور و أوزان اضعاتاء و الكفتاءة الغرائيتة كمتا استتتلكت الطيتور المعاملتة بتترا الع ار كمية من الغراء أعلى من الكمية المستتلكة من قبل المجموعة الاابطة. و كاثتتت المجموعتتة الخامستتة تتي أفاتتل المجموعتتا علتتى اإلطتتالج و لتتك بستتبب التتت ير االيجتتابي للبروبيوتتك متع محفتز النمتو االثراميستين التر أدى إلتى ارتفتاي الكفتاءة اإلثتاجيتة للطيتور, يليتف فتي لتك االثراميسين محفز النمو منفردا م المجموعة السادسة )البروبيوتك +االثروفلوكساسين(.