Loading

Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Research

Growth Performance and Serum Biochemical Profile of Broiler Chickens Fed on Diets Supplemented with Afrostyrax lepidophyllus Fruit and Bark as Alternative to Antibiotic Growth Promoters

Research Article | Open Access

  • 1. Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Sciences, University of Dschang, Cameroon
+ Show More - Show Less
Corresponding Authors
Kana Jean Raphaël, Laboratory of Animal Production and Nutrition, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Sciences, University of Dschang, Cameroon
ABSTRACT

Background: Due to its side effects, antibiotic feed additives have become a real public health concern and trigger an explosion of interest in the use of alternatives such as plants products as supplements in animal rations. This study was designed to assess the effects of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus fruit and bark powder on growth performances and serological parameters of broiler chickens.

Methods: A total of 240 day-old Cobb 500 strain chicks were randomly assigned to five experimental diets formulated from a negative control ration (R0- ) by adding 1g antibiotic (Doxycycline®) which served as a positive control (R0+), 2g of powder from the fruit (F), 2g of the bark powder (B) and 2g of the mixture (1/1) of fruit and bark (FB) of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus in a kg of basal diet.

Results: During growing-finishing phase (22-49 days) and throughout the study period (1-49 days), feed intake (FI), and live body weight (LBW) and body weight gain (BWG) were significantly higher with A. lepidophyllus bark powder as compared to the negative control diet. Irrespective to the study phase, A. lepidophyllus bark’s powder and antibiotic induced the highest FI and the highest BWG, while the lowest BWG was recorded the A. lepidophyllus fruit-bark mixture. Gain/food ratio and abdominal fat deposit did not vary with the inclusion of A. lepidophyllus fruit, back and their mixture in the ration. The lowest cost of production was recorded with the ration supplemented with Afrostyrax lepidophyllus bark powder.

Conclusions: The study clearly showed that 2g/kg Afrostyrax lepidophyllus’s bark can replace antibiotics in the ration to promote growth performances and reduce the cost of production of broiler chickens in the finisher phase.

CITATION

Kana JR, Mube Kuietche H, Ngouana Tadjong R Yangoue A, Komguep R et al. (2017) Growth Performance and Serum Biochemical Profile of Broiler Chickens Fed on Diets Supplemented with Afrostyrax lepidophyllus Fruit and Bark as Alternative to Antibiotic Growth Promoters. J Vet Med Res 4(6): 1095.

KEYWORDS

•    Afrostyrax lepidophyllus
•    Antibiotic
•    Broiler chickens
•    Growth performance
•    Feed additive
•    Serological parameters

INTRODUCTION

In Africa, farmers are generally faced with the challenge of improving livestock performances in order to ensure more net returns and cover the proteins needs of populations. A lot of research and production strategies have been developed, including the use of antibiotics as feed additives to achieve this aim [1]. Although antibiotics achieved good performances, their potential side effects have become a real public health concern [2,3]. This triggers an explosion of interest in the use of naturals and non synthetics alternatives such as herbs, spices and their products (phytobiotics) as supplements in animal rations [4,5].

Phytobiotics contain active secondary plant metabolites belonging to the classes of isoprene derivatives, flavonoides and glucosinolates, and a large number of these compounds have been suggested to act as antibiotics or as antioxidants [6,7]. Beneficial effects of these products in farm animal arises from activation of feed intake and secretion of digestive secretions, immune stimulation, anti-bacterial, coccidiostatic, anthelmintic, antiviral or anti-inflammatory activity and antioxidant properties [8]. Previous studies revealed that ginger (Zingiber officinale), garlic (Allium sativum), and scent leaf (Ocimun gratissimun) and porridge fruit (Tetrapleura tetraptera) contain active substances such as alkaloids, tannins, flavonoids, saponins and phenols compounds [9-11]. Those compounds are known to improve livestock performances through their anti-oxidative and antimicrobial action, improve palatability, reduce cholesterol level in eggs and meat and maintain gut equilibrium [12].

Afrostyrax lepidophyllus fruits and bark are popular spices in Cameroon and most African countries. Fongang et al. [13], revealed that A. lepidophyllus bark contains sulfur and phenylpropanoid (eugenol) which have the ability to stimulate the function of pancreatic enzymes (lipases, amylases and proteases) and increase the activity of digestive enzymes of gastric mucosa. Both bark and fruits contain polyphenolics compounds possessing significant antioxidant properties [10,14,15] with many other attributes including digestive enzymes stimulation, lipid metabolism and modulation of microbial populations [8]. Fongang et al. [13], also reported that some compounds found in A. lepidophyllus bark like eugenol methyl, limonene, β-ocimene, apinene, trithiapentane, methyl-trithiahexane, dimethyltetrathiaoctane, and pentathiaundecane are not present in the fruits.

Many studies have concluded that combination of individual spices with different active compounds has a greater antibacterial effect than individual’s spice alone, indicating a synergy between spices of different composition and origin [6,16]. Based on the chemical composition of the Afrostyrax lepidophyllus fruits and bark, their ability to balance biota population in gut and digestive enzyme stimulation as revealed by previous studies [6,15], we believe that this spice characterized mostly by the volatile sulfurcontaining compounds [13] which are known to stimulate appetite and digestion [6] could positively impact other physiological functions, help to ensure good health and welfare, what can positively affect growth performances of broiler. We also believe based on the diversity of actives compounds found in fruits (phenols, tetrathiaoctane, pentathiadecane, trithiahexane and hydrolysable tannins) and bark (sulfur-containing compounds mainly: eugenol methyl, flavonoïds, phenylpropanoïd…) that their antibacterial and growth promoting effect could be more significant when combined. Thus the objective of the present study was to determine the effect of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus fruit and bark as antibiotic substitute on the growth performance and biochemical profile of broiler chickens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Site of study

The study was conducted at the poultry unit of the Teaching and Research Farm of the University of Dschang, Cameroon. This farm is located at 5° 26? North and 10° 26? EST and at an altitude of 1420 m above sea level. Annual temperatures vary between 10° C and 25° C. Rainfall ranges from 1500-2000 mm per annum over a 9 months rainy season (March to November).

Birds, dietary treatments and experimental design

240 day old Cobb 500 strain broiler chicks were reared on wood shaving litter floor at density of 20/m2 and 10/m2 respectively in brooding and finishing phase. There were randomly assigned to the five treatment diets including negative control diet in a completely randomized design with 48 birds per treatment. Each group was further sub divided into 4 replicates of 12 birds each (6 males and 6 females). The chicks were vaccinated against Newcastle diseases and Infectious Bursal Disease on day 7 and 18. Chicks were weighed at the beginning of the experiment and on weekly basis thereafter using a digital kitchen scale (SF-400 SF-400A, Capacity 7000g, Division 0.1-1g, China). Feed and water were offered ad libitum.

The fruit and the bark of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus were bought at the local market then ground, sieved and the powder was incorporated in broiler feed. Antibiotic used (Doxycycline®) in positive control ration was bought from a local veterinary pharmacy. Four experimental diets were formulated by adding in a kg of basal ration (R0-) (Table 1), 1g antibiotic (R0+) (Doxycycline®); 2g fruit powder (F), 2g bark powder (B) and 2g mixture of fruits + bark (FB) of A. lepidophyllus.

Growth

Feed intake (FI) was obtained by calculation at weekly intervals by difference in the quantity of feed distributed during the week and the left over for each replicate. Life body weight (BW) for each replicate was recorded weekly; BWG was obtained by difference in BW of two consecutive weeks. Gain/ food ration was obtained by dividing weekly FI by weekly BWG. The mortalities recorded during the first week of the experiment were replaced by new chicks of the same size and weight; from week 2 till the end of the experiment no mortality was recorded. At the end of the feeding trial at 49 days, 16 chickens from the 4 replicates (2 males and 2 females per replicate) of each treatment groups were randomly selected, fasted for 24 hours and slaughtered for carcass evaluation.

Serum biochemical analysis

Blood from each slaughtered bird was collected for biochemical analysis. This blood was collected in non-heparinised test tubes and left at rest during 12 hours, and the serum was collected and preserved in the freezer. Serum biochemical analysis consisted of the quantification of total protein, urea, creatinine, aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT) and alanine aminotransferase (ALAT) using colorimetric method as prescribed by the Chronolab® commercial kits.

Cost of production The cost of a kg of feed was calculated based on the price of each ingredient as practiced in the local market. The cost of feed intake was obtained by multiplying the average feed intake by the price of a kg of the corresponding diet. The cost of production of a kilogram of live body weight was calculated by multiplying the cost of the kg of feed by the corresponding feed conversion ratio.

Statistical analysis The results on growth parameters, carcass characteristics and biochemical profile obtained from each replicate were expressed as means and used for statistical analysis. The data were analyzed using one way Analyses of Variance test by General Linear Model’s procedure of Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS 21.0) software. Significant treatment means were separated using Duncan’s multiple range tests and probability values less than 0.05 were considered as significant [17].

Table 1: Proximate nutrients composition and price of experimental diets.

Ingredients (g/kg) Starter phase Finisher phase
Maize 560 600
Wheat grain 30 80
Soybean Meal 49 230 130
Coton meal 50 60
Fish meal 60 55
Bone meal 5 5
Osher shell meal 5 5
Palm oil 10 15
Premix* 50 50
Calculated nutrients composition
Metabolizable Energy (MJ/kg) 12.40 12.60
Crude Protein (g/kg) 233.2 205.4
Lysine (g/kg) 14 12.0
Methionine (g/kg) 4.8 4.5
Calcium (g/kg) 11.1 13.2
Available P (g/kg) 5.4 5.8
Crude fibre (g/kg) 47.6 49.1
Price (francs CFA/kg) 311 283.75
*Vitamin-mineral premix provided per kg of diet: Lys, 33mg; Meth, 
24mg; Ca, 80g; P, 20.5g; Na, 1.5g; Fe, 80mg; Zn, 50mg; Mn, 60mg; Retinol, 
2.59mg; Cholecalciferol, 30µg; DL-α-Tocopherol, 25mg; Thiamin, 5 mg; 
Riboflavin, 5 mg; Pyridoxin, 2,5mg; Cyanocobalamin, 0.05 mg; Folic 
acid, 1 mg and Niacin, 2 mg.

 

RESULTS

Performances and carcass traits Table 2 summarizes the effects of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus fruits, bark and their mixture on feed intake (FI), live body weight (BW), body weight gain (BWG) and the gain/food ratio. All these parameters were significantly affected (P<0.05) by the treatments, except for FI and gain/food ratio during the brooding phase (1-21 days).

During growing-finishing phase (22-49 days) and throughout the study period (1-49 days), the lowest FI was recorded with A. lepidophyllus fruits powder (RF) and the highest with the bark powder of this spice (RE). During the whole trial period, the consumption of the rations supplemented with the fruits and the fruits-bark mixture were comparable (P>0.05).

Irrespective of study phases, the highest BW and BWG were recorded with the antibiotic (R0 + ) as compared to the mixture of A. lepidophyllus fruits-bark (RFE) and the control ration without supplement (R0- ) during the growing phase and all over the study period. During the growing phase (22 to 49 days), birds fed on diets supplemented with antibiotic and A. lepidophyllus bark were comparable (P>0.05) for BW and BWG. In the same way, there was no significant difference (P>0.05) between BW and BWG of animals fed on control diet without supplement (R0- ) and those fed on diet supplemented with the mixture of A. lepidophyllus fruits-bark, and between chickens fed on diets supplemented with the antibiotic and the mixture of bark and fruits of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus. During the growing phase (22- 49 days) and throughout the experimental period (1-49 days) antibiotic induced the lowest gain/food ratio whereas the highest value was recorded with the negative control ration without supplement.

The carcass characteristics of broiler birds fed on diets supplemented with A. lepidophilus fruits and bark are presented in Table 3. There were substantial variations within each parameter from one treatment to another (P<0.05) except for abdominal fat. A. lepidophyllus fruits powder promoted a significantly (P<0.05) lower carcass yield as compared to antibiotic. The smallest relative weight of the liver was recorded with the antibiotic as compared to the bark powder of A. lepidophyllus which induced the heaviest liver. The fruits and the bark powder of this phytobiotic respectively induced the highest relative weights of the heart and the pancreas (P<0.05) as compared to all other treatments.

Cost of production Throughout the study period, the highest (P<0.05) costs of feed intake and cost of production of a kilogram of live body weight were recorded with the antibiotic (R0+ ). The lowest production cost of a kilogram of the live body weight during growing phase (22 to 49 days) and throughout the experimental period (1 to 49 days) was recorded with the bark and fruits of A. lepidophyllus (Table 4).

Serum biochemical parameters Proteins and urea serum contents were not significantly affected by antibiotic and phytobiotics. Creatinine, ALAT and ASAT concentrations significantly (P<0.05) increased with A. lepidophyllus fruits, antibiotic and A. lepidophyllus back respectively (Table 5). The phytobiotic bark and the mixture of bark and fruits supplement decreased the creatinine contents of blood serum as compared to negative (R0-), positive (R0+) control and fruits powder. The lowest ASAT content was recorded with antibiotic whereas the highest (P<0.05) value was recorded with A. lepidophyllus bark powder. The supplementation of broiler diet with antibiotic induced the lowest (P<0.05) ASAT serum content whereas the highest value was recorded with A. lepidophyllus bark powder (RE).

Table 2: Effects of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus on growth performances of broiler chickens.

Study periods (days) Rations
R0- R0+ F B FB SEM P-value
Feed intake (g)
1 - 21 1003.29a 1024.38a 982.29a 1018.04a 994.19a 29.95 0.271
22 - 49 4746.38ab 4825.37bc 4663.87a 4883.72c 4705.44ab 113.00 0 .019
1 - 49 5749.67ab 5849.74bc 5646.16a 5901.76c 5699.63a 121.76 0.003
Body weight (g)
21 763.92ab 774.60b 743.79ab 761.69ab 742.98a 21.03 0.034
49 2584.00a 2929.83b 2761.31ab 2834.64b 2629.01a 174.84 0.010
Body weight gain (g)
1-21 726.96ab 737.64b 706.83ab 724.73ab 706.02a 21.03 0.034
22-49 1820.08a 2155.22c 2017.52abc 2072.95bc 1886.03ab 171.81 0.017
1-49 2547.04a 2892.87b 2724.35ab 2797.68b 2592.05a 174.84 0.010
Feed conversion ratio
1-21 1.38a 1.39a 1.39a 1.41a 1.41a 0.04 0.897
22-49 2.62b 2.24a 2.31ab 2.36ab 2.53ab 0.23 0.006
1-49 2.26b 2.02a 2.07ab 2.11ab 2.21ab 0.15 0.008
a.b.c: Means with the same superscript on the same row are not significantly different (P>0.05).
SEM= standard error of mean; 
R0 - = control diet; R0 + = R0 - +0.1% Doxycycline ®; F = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; 
B = R0 - +0.2% of the bark of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; FB = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit+bark mixture.

 

DISCUSSION

The present result revealed that the feed intake of broilers increased with A. lepidophyllus bark powder as compared to the fruits and their combinations. This increase in feed intake could be attributed to the improvement of diet flavor by the volatile fractions of A. lepidophyllus bark [18] made up by the sulfurcontaining compounds which provided the garlic- or onion-like odor to the feed [13]. This flavor might have stimulated the appetite of the chickens. The absence of these compounds in the fruits can explain the difference recorded in feed intake in the present study. Sadji et al. [19] reported that good flavor of feed prepare the digestive tract to feed intake through stimulation of digestive secretions and intestine motility. The variation in feed intake in this study could also be explained by the variability and the complexity of actives compounds found in the fruits and bark. In fact, in the same plant the type and the amount of actives compounds found in leaves differed from compounds found in the twigs, bark and fruits [13]. The properties of spices identified so far are extremely varied and their main active compounds made up mainly by terpenoids and phenolics acids [20,21] produced a wide range of beneficial effects on growth performances traits in chickens which can be enhanced through synergetic effects with other compounds of different composition and origin.

Due to the wide variety and amount of active compounds, different herbs and spices affect digestion process and growth performance differently [6]. In the present study, supplementing broiler chickens with fruits and bark powder of A. lepidophyllus markedly enhanced BW and BWG as compared to negative control and their combination. This result can be explained by the presence of the anti-oxidative and antimicrobial [12] substances such as alkaloids, flavonoids and phenolics compounds [10,11] which are known to maintain gut equilibrium and improve growth performances of chickens [6]. The fruits-bark combination (1/1) felt to enhance growth performances as expected suggesting a negative synergistic effect between active compounds found in A. lepidophyllus fruits and bark. The previous study of Fongang et al. [13] based on the phytochemicals screening of this spice revealed that many compounds found in bark like eugenol methyl, limonene, β-ocimene, apinene, trithiapentane, methyltrithiahexane, dimethyl-tetrathiaoctane, and pentathiaundecane are not present in the fruits, and compounds like tetrathiaoctane, pentathiadecane, trithiahexane, hydrolysable tannins present in the fruits are absent in the bark. The present result could also be explained by the low amount (1/2) of individual active compounds in the combination (1/1) which was half the amount found in the rations supplemented with fruits or bark alone.

Body weight of chickens fed on diets supplemented with antibiotic and A. lepidophyllus bark were comparable and significantly higher than the BW recorded with the fruits alone and the fruits-bark mixture. The improvement in BW recorded with bark could be attributed to the antimicrobial properties of their specifics active compounds and their impact on gut function [22]. In fact, the bark of this spice contains flavonoïds and phenylpropanoids compounds not present in the fruits; which are known to improve livestock performances by changing the intestinal ecosystem of the animal through their antimicrobial action [12]. These compounds act by forming the complexes with many proteins, cause the destructuration of the bacterial membranes, making unavailable certain substrates for the bacteria and inactivate bacterial enzymes [6]. The changes in intestinal ecosystem due to their antimicrobial action could lead to a greater availability of some nutriments for the host and consequently improve BWG. This is in agreement with Franki? et al. [6], who noticed that the growth promoting effect of most herbs and extracts of spices act by killing parasites that hinder digestibility and growth performance of birds. Moreover, it was reported by Nain et al. [23], that the animals selected for their rapid growth, like broiler suffered from a significant oxidative stress. The improvement in BW of broilers achieved with bark of A. lepidophyllus could also be attributed to the potent antioxidant properties of their major components as reported by Fongang et al. [13], and Moukette et al. [15].

Although not significant, A. lepidophyllus fruits and bark tend to reduce gain/food ratio compared to the control diet. This could be attributed to the higher weight gain recorded in birds fed on diets supplemented with fruits and bark. Windisch et al. [24], reported that incorporating phytobiotics in the rations improved intestinal health, and animals are less exposed to microbial toxins and other undesired microbial metabolites such as ammonia and biogenic amines. As a result, animals are relatively relieved from immune defense stress during critical situations and there is increased availability of essential nutrients for absorption, thereby helping the animals to grow better within the framework of their genetic potential. Al-Kassie et al. [20], also provided an evidence of the enhancement of gain/food ratio through the dietary addition of Capsicum annum which contain active substances such as alkaloids, flavonoids and phenolics compounds found in A. lepidophyllus used in the present study.

Within the framework of this study, supplementing broilers feed with A. lepidophyllus fruits and bark did not have any marked effect on the carcass yield as compared to the control diet without any supplement. This could be attributed to the low quantity (2g/kg of feed) of supplements used in this study. The present findings contradict the results of Al-Kassie et al. [20], who reported that some common spices containing the same active substances like flavonoids and phenolics compounds present in A. lepidophyllus such as green pepper (Capsicum annum) at 0.5; 0.75 and 1% in the ration significantly increased the carcass yield of broiler chickens. The difference with the present findings could be explained by the high quantities of green pepper (0.5; 0.75 and 1%) compared to the 0.2% of A. lepidophyllus fruits and bark used in the present study.

Biological effects of active compounds in the plants depend on their amount which varies depending on the variety of plant. This preliminary study on feeding A. lepidophyllus fruits and bark, and their 1/1 mixture to broiler chickens revealed no significant effect on the relative weights of liver and heart as compared to the control diet. This result suggest that the amount of the secondary metabolites or active compounds contained in 2g of fruits and bark of A. lepidophyllus in a kg of feed are not toxic to chickens. The present results are close to the findings of Uno [25] who revealed that feeding 0.25% of the gingember, garlic and the gingember-garlic mixture to broiler chickens have no significant effect on the relative weight of the liver and the heart.

In the present study, the A. lepidophyllus bark powder markedly increased relative weight of the pancreas as compared to the control ration. This finding might suggest that pancreas released more enzymes with A. lepidophyllus bark powder in the ration. A number of reports have also provided evidence of the enhancement of digestive enzyme secretion through the dietary addition of herbs, spices and their products [5,8,26,27].

The effects of active compounds from herbs and spices depend largely on dosage used. Incorporating 2g of fruits and bark, and the fruits-bark mixture of A. lepidophyllus powder in a kg of feed did not have any significant effect on the abdominal fat deposit. However, Muneendra et al. [8], reported that A. lepidophyllus bark and fruits contain polyphenolics and flavonoids compounds possessing a significant attributes on digestive enzymes stimulation and lipid metabolism. In the present study the effect of polyphenolics and flavonoids was not significant on fat deposit, may be due to their low content since they are not the major active compounds found in this spice.

Spices are not only appetite and digestion stimulants, they impact on other physiological functions that can help to sustain good health and improve animal performance. The biochemical values obtained in this study indicated no detrimental impact of A. lepidophyllus bark and fruits, and their combination on serum content in total protein, creatinin, urea, ALAT and ASAT. In fact, the A. lepidophyllus bark and the fruits-bark combination markedly decreased the serum content in creatinin. This decrease in creatinin content can be attributed to the active compounds present in A. lepidophyllus bark and fruits on the glomerular function of chickens. The fruits and fruits-bark mixture led to a marked variation in the serum content of ALAT within the references range (5-25 IU/L) without however affecting the content of ASAT. This result is in contradiction with the findings of Al-Shuwaili et al. [21], which revealed that the addition of ginger, garlic and cinnamon in the ration of the turkeys lowers the serum content in ALAT and ASAT.

Table 3: Carcass characteristics of broilers fed on diets supplemented with fruit and bark of A. lepidophilus powder.

Carcass parameters Rations SEM P-value
R0- R0+ F B FB
Final body weight (g) 2584.00a 2929.83b 2761.31ab 2834.64b 2629.01a 174.84 0.010
Carcass yield (% BW) 74.29 ab 76.34b 73.58a 75.54 ab 74.66ab 2.18 0.028
Head (% BW) 2.27a 2.00a 2.54b 2.19a 2.04a 0.32 0.001
Liver (% BW) 1.83b 1.61a 1.68ab 1.85b 1.74ab 0.24 0.009
Heart (% BW) 0.47ab 0.46ab 0.54b 0.50ab 0.41a 0.09 0.004
Pancreas (% BW) 0.16a 0.19ab 0.17ab 0.22b 0.18ab 0.06 0.009
Abdominal fat (% BW) 1.68a 1.38a 1.35a 1.75a 1.13a 0.67 0.322
a, b: means along the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05). 
SEM= standard error of mean; BW: body weight
R0 - = control diet; R0 + = R0 - +0.1% Doxycycline ®; F = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; 
B = R0 - +0.2% of the bark of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; FB = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit+bark mixture.

Table 4: Costs of production of broiler fed on diets supplemented with A. lepidiphillus.

Study periods (days) Rations SEM P-value
R0- R0+ F B FB    
Cost of feed intake (FCFA)
1-21 312,02a 395,41b 320,82a 319,67a 316,95a 33.19 <0,000
22-49 1346,79a 1731,10d 1673,16c 1400,41b 1371,87ab 148.02 <0,000
1-49 1658,81a 2126,51d 1993,98c 1720,07b 1688,82ab 179.67 <0,000
Cost of production of kg of live weight (FCFA)
1 – 21 429,44a 536,36b 449,69a 441,18a 449,13a 41.46 <0,000
22 – 49 743,17ab 803,651b 685,86a 676,36a 736,78ab 70.18 0,051
1-49 652,49a 735,23b 630,60a 615,38a 656,018a 54.15 0,004
a, b: means along the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05). 
SEM= standard error of mean; FCFA=Francs CFA (1 US$= 600 CFA)
R0 - = control diet; R0 + = R0 - +0.1% Doxycycline ®; F = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; 
B = R0 - +0.2% of the bark of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; FB = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit+bark mixture.

Table 5: Serum biochemical parameters of broilers fed on diets supplemented with fruit and bark of A. lepidophyllus.

Serum parameters Rations SEM P-value
R0- R0+ F B FB
Proteins (g/dl) 2.48 2.57 2.58 2.57 2.54 0.24 0.964
Urea (mg/dl) 0.96 0.79 1.21 0.94 0.54 0.65 0.663
Creatinin (mg/dl) 1.20c 1.08b 1.14c 0.62a 0.69ab 0.36 <0.000
ALAT (IU/L) 20.84ab 57.24c 33.81b 10.90a 27.11b 17.17 <0.000
ASAT (IU/L) 119,12b 59,93a 130,28b 186,88c 117,57b 50.27 <0.000
ASAT/ALAT 0.16a 0.95b 0.30a 0.07a 0.25a 0.35 <0.000
a, b, c: means along the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05). 
SEM= standard error of mean; ASAT: aspartate aminotransferase; ALAT: alanine aminotransferase
R0 - = control diet; R0 + = R0 - +0.1% Doxycycline ®; F = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; 
B = R0 - +0.2% of the bark of Afrostyrax lepidophyllus; FB = R0 - +0.2% of the fruit+bark mixture.

 

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that supplementing broilers diet with Afrostyrax lepidophyllus bark indicate favorable influences on growth performance, blood serum components and reduced the cost of production. The present findings provided a ray of hope to the natural alternative to the antibiotic additives that are still commonly and very intensively used in animal husbandry in tropical area where climate conditions are very suitable for microbial growth.

REFERENCES

1. Kehinde AS, Obun CO, Inuwa M, Bobadoye O. Growth performance, haematological and some serum biochemical indices of cockerel chicks fed ginger (Zingiber officinale) additive diets. Animal Research International. 2011; 8: 1398-1404.

2. Donoghue DJ. Antibiotic residues in poultry tissue and eggs. Human health concerns. Poult Sci. 2003; 83: 618-621.

3. Nweze BO, Nawankwagu AE, Ekwe OO. The performance of the broilers chickens on African porridge fruit (Tetrapleura tetraptera) pod under different feeding regimes. Asian J Poult Sci. 2011; 5: 144- 149.

4. Anyanwu M. Evaluation of the feed preservative potentials of Ocimum gratissimum L. B.Sc. project Department of Animal Science Federal Unversity of Technology, Owerri. 2010.

5. Owen J. Introduction of alternative antibiotic growth promoters (AAGPS) in animal production in Nigeria: A review. Proceedings of the 36th Conference of Nigerian Society of Animal Production, 13-16th March, 2011 Univ. of Abuja, Nigeria. 2011.

6. Franki? T, Voljc M, Salobir J, Rezar V. Use of herbs and spices and their extracts in animal nutrition. Acta argiculturae Slovenica. 2009; 94: 95- 102.

7. Toghyani M, Tohidi M, Gheisari AA, Tabeidian SA. Perfoemance, immunity, serum biochemical and hematological parameters in broiler chicks fed dietary thyme as alternative for an antibiotic growth promoter. Afr J Biotech. 2010; 9: 6819-6825.

8. Muneendra K, Vinod K, Debashis R, Raju K, Shalini V. Application of Herbal Feed Additives in Animal Nutrition - A Review. Int J Livest Research. 2014; 4: 1-8.

9. Muhammad J, Fazil-Raziq D, Abdul H, Rifatullah K, Ijaz A. Effects of aqueous extract of plant mixture on carcass quality of broiler chicks. J Agricult Biol Sci. 2009; 4: 37-40.

10. K-W Lee, H Everts, HJ Kappert, H Wouterse, M Frehner and AC Beynen. Cinnamaldehyde, but Not Thymol, Counteracts the Carboxymethyl Cellulose-induced Growth Depression in Female Broiler Chickens. Int J Poult Sci. 2004; 3: 608-612.

11. Abdou Bouda A, Njintang YN, Scher J, Mbofung CMF. Phenolic compounds and radical scavenging potential of twenty Cameroonian spices. Agricu Biol J N Am. 2010; 1: 213-224.

12. Odoemelam VU, Nwaogu KO, Ukachukwu SN, Esonu BO, Okoli IC, Etuk EB, et al. Carcass and Organoleptic assessment of Broiler fed Ocimum gratissimum Supplemented diets. Proceediongs of the 38th Conferences of Nigeria Society of Animal Production. 17-20th March, 2013, Rivers state University of Sciences and Technology., Port Harcourt. 2013.

13. James Ndukui, Murithi B, Muwonge H, Sembajwe LF, Kateregga J. Antidiarrheal activity of ethanolic fruit extract of Psidium guayava (Guava) in castor oil induced diarrhea in albino rats. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2013; 3: 191-197.

14. Fogang HPD, Maggi F, Tapondjou LA, Womeni HM, Papa F, Luana Quassinti, et al. In vitro Biological Activities of Seed Essential Oils from the Cameroonian Spices Afrostyrax lepidophyllus Mildbr and Scorodophloeus zenkeri Harms Rich in Sulfur-Containing Compounds. Chemist Biod. 2014; 11: 161-169.

15. Oben J, Etoundi CB, Kuaté D, Ngondi JL. Anti-amylase, anti-lipase and antioxidant effects of aqueous extracts of some Cameroonian spices. J Nat Products. 2010; 3: 165-171.

16. Moukette M, Constant AP, Prosper CNB, Vicky JAM, Eustace B, Jeanne YN. Afrostyrax lepidophyllus extracts exhibit in vitro free radical scavenging, antioxidant potential and protective properties against liver enzymes ion mediated oxidative damage. BMC Res Notes. 2015; 8.

17. Oleforuh-Okoleh, Harriet MN-F, Solomon OO, Joesph OU. Evaluation of Growth Performance, Haematological and Serum Biochemical Response of Broiler Chickens to Aqueous Extract of Ginger and Garlic. J Agric Res. 2015; 7: 167.

18. Steel RGD, Torne JH. Principles and procedures of statistics a biometrical approach. 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill International. U.S.A. 1980.

19.  Adepoju OT, Oyewole EO. Nutritional importance and Micronutrients potentials of non-conventional indigenous green leafy vegetable from Nigeria. Agri J. 2008; 3: 362-365.

20. Sajid HQ, Ahsan H, Fawwad A, Shahid R, Pervez A, Naeem A, et al. Vying Efficacy of Livol, Livotal, and Hepato Promoter on Performance and Immune Response of Broiler. Advances Zool Botany, 2015; 3: 31-37.

21. Al-Kassie GAM, Al-Nasrawi MAM, Ajeena SJ. The Effects of Using Hot Red Pepper as a Diet Supplement on Some Performance Traits in Broiler. Pak J Nutrition. 2011; 10: 842-845.

22. Al-Shuwaili MA, Ibrahim IE, Naqi Al-Bayati MT. Effect of dietary herbal plants supplement in turkey diet on performance and some blood biochemical parameters. GJBB. 2015; 4: 85-89.

23. Nain S, Ling B, Bandy B, Alcorn J, Wojnarowicz C, Laarveld B, et al. The role of oxidative stress in the development of congestive heart failure in a chicken genotype selected for rapid growth. Avian Pathol. 2008; 37: 367-373.

24. Windisch W, Schedle K, Plitzner C, Kroismayr A. Use of phytogenic products as feed additives for swine and poultry. J Anim Sci. 2008; 86: 140-148.

25. Onu PN. Evaluation of two herbal spices as feed additives for finisher broilers. Biotech Anim Husb. 2010; 26: 383-392.

26. Simsek UG, Ciftci M, Dalkilic B, Guler T, Ertas ON. The effects of dietary antibiotic and anise oil supplementation on body weight, carcass characteristics and organoleptic analysis of meat in broilers. Revue Méd Vét. 2007; 158: 514-518.

27. El-Deek AA, Al-Harthi MA, Mona O, Fahd Al-Jassas, Rehab N. Hot pepper (Capsicum annum) as an alternative to oxytetracycline in broiler diets and effects on productive traits, meat quality, immunological responses and plasma lipids. Archiv Geflügelkunde. 2012; 76: 73-80.

Kana JR, Mube Kuietche H, Ngouana Tadjong R Yangoue A, Komguep R et al. (2017) Growth Performance and Serum Biochemical Profile of Broiler Chickens Fed on Diets Supplemented with Afrostyrax lepidophyllus Fruit and Bark as Alternative to Antibiotic Growth Promoters. J Vet Med Res 4(6): 1095.

Received : 28 Jun 2017
Accepted : 25 Jul 2017
Published : 28 Jul 2017
Journals
Annals of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
ISSN : 2379-948X
Launched : 2014
JSM Schizophrenia
Launched : 2016
Journal of Nausea
Launched : 2020
JSM Internal Medicine
Launched : 2016
JSM Hepatitis
Launched : 2016
JSM Oro Facial Surgeries
ISSN : 2578-3211
Launched : 2016
Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science
ISSN : 2333-6706
Launched : 2013
JSM Regenerative Medicine and Bioengineering
ISSN : 2379-0490
Launched : 2013
JSM Spine
ISSN : 2578-3181
Launched : 2016
Archives of Palliative Care
ISSN : 2573-1165
Launched : 2016
JSM Nutritional Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3203
Launched : 2017
Annals of Neurodegenerative Disorders
ISSN : 2476-2032
Launched : 2016
Journal of Fever
ISSN : 2641-7782
Launched : 2017
JSM Bone Marrow Research
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2016
JSM Mathematics and Statistics
ISSN : 2578-3173
Launched : 2014
Journal of Autoimmunity and Research
ISSN : 2573-1173
Launched : 2014
JSM Arthritis
ISSN : 2475-9155
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Neck Cancer-Cases and Reviews
ISSN : 2573-1610
Launched : 2016
JSM General Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2573-1564
Launched : 2016
JSM Anatomy and Physiology
ISSN : 2573-1262
Launched : 2016
JSM Dental Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1548
Launched : 2016
Annals of Emergency Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1017
Launched : 2016
Annals of Mens Health and Wellness
ISSN : 2641-7707
Launched : 2017
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Health Care
ISSN : 2576-0084
Launched : 2018
Journal of Chronic Diseases and Management
ISSN : 2573-1300
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vaccines and Immunization
ISSN : 2378-9379
Launched : 2014
JSM Heart Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2578-3157
Launched : 2016
Annals of Reproductive Medicine and Treatment
ISSN : 2573-1092
Launched : 2016
JSM Brain Science
ISSN : 2573-1289
Launched : 2016
JSM Biomarkers
ISSN : 2578-3815
Launched : 2014
JSM Biology
ISSN : 2475-9392
Launched : 2016
Archives of Stem Cell and Research
ISSN : 2578-3580
Launched : 2014
Annals of Clinical and Medical Microbiology
ISSN : 2578-3629
Launched : 2014
JSM Pediatric Surgery
ISSN : 2578-3149
Launched : 2017
Journal of Memory Disorder and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-319X
Launched : 2016
JSM Tropical Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2578-3165
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Face Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3793
Launched : 2016
JSM Cardiothoracic Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1297
Launched : 2016
JSM Bone and Joint Diseases
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2017
JSM Bioavailability and Bioequivalence
ISSN : 2641-7812
Launched : 2017
JSM Atherosclerosis
ISSN : 2573-1270
Launched : 2016
Journal of Genitourinary Disorders
ISSN : 2641-7790
Launched : 2017
Journal of Fractures and Sprains
ISSN : 2578-3831
Launched : 2016
Journal of Autism and Epilepsy
ISSN : 2641-7774
Launched : 2016
Annals of Marine Biology and Research
ISSN : 2573-105X
Launched : 2014
JSM Health Education & Primary Health Care
ISSN : 2578-3777
Launched : 2016
JSM Communication Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3807
Launched : 2016
Annals of Musculoskeletal Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3599
Launched : 2016
Annals of Virology and Research
ISSN : 2573-1122
Launched : 2014
JSM Renal Medicine
ISSN : 2573-1637
Launched : 2016
Journal of Muscle Health
ISSN : 2578-3823
Launched : 2016
JSM Genetics and Genomics
ISSN : 2334-1823
Launched : 2013
JSM Anxiety and Depression
ISSN : 2475-9139
Launched : 2016
Clinical Journal of Heart Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7766
Launched : 2016
Annals of Medicinal Chemistry and Research
ISSN : 2378-9336
Launched : 2014
JSM Pain and Management
ISSN : 2578-3378
Launched : 2016
JSM Women's Health
ISSN : 2578-3696
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in HIV or AIDS
ISSN : 2374-0094
Launched : 2013
Journal of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity
ISSN : 2333-6692
Launched : 2013
Journal of Substance Abuse and Alcoholism
ISSN : 2373-9363
Launched : 2013
JSM Neurosurgery and Spine
ISSN : 2373-9479
Launched : 2013
Journal of Liver and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2379-0830
Launched : 2014
Journal of Drug Design and Research
ISSN : 2379-089X
Launched : 2014
JSM Clinical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2373-938X
Launched : 2013
JSM Bioinformatics, Genomics and Proteomics
ISSN : 2576-1102
Launched : 2014
JSM Chemistry
ISSN : 2334-1831
Launched : 2013
Journal of Trauma and Care
ISSN : 2573-1246
Launched : 2014
JSM Surgical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2578-3688
Launched : 2016
Annals of Food Processing and Preservation
ISSN : 2573-1033
Launched : 2016
Journal of Radiology and Radiation Therapy
ISSN : 2333-7095
Launched : 2013
JSM Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-3572
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical Pathology
ISSN : 2373-9282
Launched : 2013
Annals of Cardiovascular Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7731
Launched : 2016
Journal of Behavior
ISSN : 2576-0076
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical and Experimental Metabolism
ISSN : 2572-2492
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases
ISSN : 2379-0636
Launched : 2013
JSM Microbiology
ISSN : 2333-6455
Launched : 2013
Journal of Urology and Research
ISSN : 2379-951X
Launched : 2014
Journal of Family Medicine and Community Health
ISSN : 2379-0547
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pregnancy and Care
ISSN : 2578-336X
Launched : 2017
JSM Cell and Developmental Biology
ISSN : 2379-061X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Aquaculture and Research
ISSN : 2379-0881
Launched : 2014
Clinical Research in Pulmonology
ISSN : 2333-6625
Launched : 2013
Journal of Immunology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6714
Launched : 2013
Annals of Forensic Research and Analysis
ISSN : 2378-9476
Launched : 2014
JSM Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
ISSN : 2333-7109
Launched : 2013
Annals of Breast Cancer Research
ISSN : 2641-7685
Launched : 2016
Annals of Gerontology and Geriatric Research
ISSN : 2378-9409
Launched : 2014
Journal of Sleep Medicine and Disorders
ISSN : 2379-0822
Launched : 2014
JSM Burns and Trauma
ISSN : 2475-9406
Launched : 2016
Chemical Engineering and Process Techniques
ISSN : 2333-6633
Launched : 2013
Annals of Clinical Cytology and Pathology
ISSN : 2475-9430
Launched : 2014
JSM Allergy and Asthma
ISSN : 2573-1254
Launched : 2016
Journal of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
ISSN : 2334-2307
Launched : 2013
Annals of Sports Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2379-0571
Launched : 2014
JSM Sexual Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3718
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vascular Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-9344
Launched : 2014
JSM Biotechnology and Biomedical Engineering
ISSN : 2333-7117
Launched : 2013
Journal of Hematology and Transfusion
ISSN : 2333-6684
Launched : 2013
JSM Environmental Science and Ecology
ISSN : 2333-7141
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cardiology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6676
Launched : 2013
JSM Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
ISSN : 2334-1815
Launched : 2013
Journal of Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
ISSN : 2475-9473
Launched : 2016
JSM Ophthalmology
ISSN : 2333-6447
Launched : 2013
Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology
ISSN : 2333-7079
Launched : 2013
Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health
ISSN : 2374-0124
Launched : 2013
Medical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN : 2333-6439
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pediatrics and Child Health
ISSN : 2373-9312
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Pharmaceutics
ISSN : 2379-9498
Launched : 2014
JSM Foot and Ankle
ISSN : 2475-9112
Launched : 2016
JSM Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia
ISSN : 2378-9565
Launched : 2014
Journal of Addiction Medicine and Therapy
ISSN : 2333-665X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Public Health and Research
ISSN : 2378-9328
Launched : 2014
Annals of Orthopedics and Rheumatology
ISSN : 2373-9290
Launched : 2013
Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Research
ISSN : 2379-0652
Launched : 2014
Annals of Community Medicine and Practice
ISSN : 2475-9465
Launched : 2014
Annals of Biometrics and Biostatistics
ISSN : 2374-0116
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Case Reports
ISSN : 2373-9819
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cancer Biology and Research
ISSN : 2373-9436
Launched : 2013
Journal of Surgery and Transplantation Science
ISSN : 2379-0911
Launched : 2013
Journal of Dermatology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2373-9371
Launched : 2013
JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology
ISSN : 2373-9487
Launched : 2013
Annals of Nursing and Practice
ISSN : 2379-9501
Launched : 2014
JSM Dentistry
ISSN : 2333-7133
Launched : 2013
Author Information X