FFECTS OF HEATING WITH SOAKING OF RAW SOYBEANS ON IMPROVING ITS NUTRITIONAL VALUE AND PRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE OF ROSS 308 BROILER

FFECTS OF HEATING WITH SOAKING OF RAW SOYBEANS ON IMPROVING ITS NUTRITIONAL VALUE AND PRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE OF ROSS 308 BROILER

SARDAR YASSIN TAHA^* and ROZHGAR BAYIZ SAEED^**

^* College of Agriculture, 

^{* *} Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Salahadin University-hawler University of Sulaimani, Kurdstan Region

Email: ya_kargery@yahoo.com

Email: rozhgarbayzesaeed@yahoo.com

INTRODUCTION

Soybean products are the most important sources of protein and energy in livestock feeds for many animals. Soybeans have a good amino acids profile,  with a high content of lysine, tryptophan, isoleucine, valine, and threonine (Larbier and Leclercq, 1994) in addition, soybeans contain 180–220 g/kgof good quality oil mainly with a high proportion of linoleic acid (Waldroup, 1982).

FFSB considered a rich feed ingredient in protein and energy when compared with soybean meal. Sara (2002) reported that digestible energy of FFSB was 4660 kcal/kg, in comparison with 3561 kcal/kg for Soybean meal, while the fiber percent were 5.5 and 6.2%, respectively. FFSB contains a set of inhibitors (Anti–Nutritional Factor, ANF). The negative effect of inhibitors in simple stomach animals is a damage of wall stomach and immune reactions, as well as poor digestion of nutrients (Huisman, 1989). Trypsin inhibitor considered one of the most important ANF found in the FFSB because of its effect on enzymes secreted by the pancreas (Stahly et al., 1991). This inhibitor affected without doubt in birds performance through decrease effectiveness of trypsin and kimotrypsin via decrease digestion of protein )Al-mjamaii, 2002).

Trypsin inhibitor divided into two type: KuntizTrpsin inhibitor and Bowman Birk (Masic et al., 1990, Duragic et al., 2008, Kirkpinar and Basmacioglu, 2006). Phytic acid also found in oilseeds, legumes and grains. Which is a source for phosphorus and naturally confounded, and it is necessary for seeds fetus growth (Gibson and Ullah, 1988).

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of heating and soaking soybean on performance of broiler chicks.

MATERIALS and METHODS

The experiment started from 5/2/2010 to 15/6/2010, to study the effect of partial replacement of soybean meal by Full Fat Soya Bean on the performance of broiler chicks. A total of 225 one-day old broiler Ross308 chicks treated as one group during the first week. During this period chicks were fed a uniform starter diet contains 21.8% protein and 3049 kcal metabolizable energy /kg. At the beginning of the second week all chicks were weighed (176-182g) and distributed randomly into 5 experimental groups each with 3 replicates, each replicate contains 15 birds reared on floor cages. The control group fed a ration without FFSB (Table 1) the first treatment T1: 20% raw full fat soybean (FFSB) in the diet for the stages starter, grower, and finisher the feeding showed in the (Table 2). The second treatment T2: 40% of FFSB in the diet for the stages starter, grower, and finisher (Table 2). The third treatment T3: 20% FFSB treated by soaking for 6 hours with heating on temperature of 120-130˚c for 20 minutes for the stages starter, grower, and finisher (Table 3). The fourth Treatment of T4: 40% FFSB treated by soaking for 6 hours with heating on Temperature 120-130˚c for 20 minutes starter and grower phases and 30% treated FFSB soaked and heated for the finisher stage (Table 3). An individual chick was weighed with weighting sensitive scale 1kg±0.01 at one day–old. As well as the birds weighed weekly for each replicate started from the first week till marketing ages (38, 42 or 45 days). Weight gains for each replicate were calculated.

Weekly feeds consumed for each replicate were calculated according to this Equation: Average feed consumption = amount of feed consumption by birds during period (gm/bird/ experimental period) /(number of live birds during same period × experimental period in days) x total dead birds age (al-hadme, 1994). Accordingly feed conversion ratio was calculated for each replicate.

Statistical analysis were done according to CRD to study the effect of treatments using XL stat, version 7.5 (2004) Comparison of meanS were done using (Duncan, 1955).

Table 1: Physical and calculated chemical composition of control diet. 

* Protein concentrate (Provimi –Jordan) components.44%protein, 2100 Kcal/Kg ME, (5%Fat,2%Fiber, Calcium 6.5%, phosphor 6%, Lysine3.85%,Methionine3.75%,Met. + Cys4%, Sodium 2.3%).

** Enriched With vitamin A,D.

Table 2: Physical and calculated chemical composition of experiment of diets in treatments T1 and T2.

protein concentrate (Provimi –Jordan) components.were 44%protein 2100 Kcal/Kg ME, (5%Fat, 2%Fiber, Calcium 6.5%, phosphor 6%, Lysine3.85%,Methionine3.75%,Met. + Cys4%, Sodium 2.3%).

** Enriched With vitaminA,D.

Table 3: Physical and calculated chemical composition of experiment of diets in treatments T3 and T.

Protein concentrate (Provimi –Jordan) components. 44%protein 2100 Kcal/Kg ME, (5%Fat, 2%Fiber, Calcium 6.5%, phosphor 6%, Lysine3.85%,Methionine3.75%,Met. + Cys4%, Sodium 2.3%).

** Enriched With vitaminA, D.

RESULTS

Table (4) showed the effect of FFSB treated by soaking and heating on final weight gain of chicks at 38, 42 and 45 days of age. Liner decrease (p<0.05) in body weight of birds fed FFSB with each increase in FFSB level in the diet was noticed. It is obvious when first and Second birds groups were compare versus control group at all ages. Effect of using treated FFSB on the total weight gain of chicks showed in table (5). Birds fed in the fourth treated group showed superiority (p<0.05) in the weight gain (1908.76 and 2434.40 kg) compared to other treatments, during 1-38 and 1-45 days old. It was noticed that birds in the third treated group were superior in final weight gain (2257.48) compared to control and second treated during 1-42 days old.

Table (6) illustrates the effect of using treated FFSB on feed consumption of chicks up to market weights. Feed conversion ratio was the highest for birds of fourth group (1.79) (Table 7).

The results in Table (8) showed that the effected of using raw and treated FFSB on the percentage of livability of the birds. The average mortality resulted in all groups were similar and within normal range. The statistical analysis resulted in a non-significant effect among treatment groups on the percentage of livability of the birds at all ages. Minimum production index was found in birds second treated (Table 9).

Table (10) showed the live-weight at slaughter while Table (11) presented carcass weights with edible entrails. The statistical analysis referred a significant differences in percentages of dressing with edible entrails (Table 12). Birds in the second treated group had highest dressing percentage (89.72%) (p<0.05) by 38 days old and this may due to highest body weight before slaughter. On the other hand, birds in the first treated group gave highest percentage (80.59%) in dressing with edible entrails, while the birds in the second treated group had the lowest percentage (58.51%) at 42 days of age.

Table (13) illustrated the breast percentage, where significant (p<0.05) between control versus soaking and heat treatments at 38 days old. Furthermore, soaking and heating FFSB significantly (p<0.05)  had better breast % compared both control and raw FFSB groups at age 45 days.

Table (14) showed effect of treatment of FFSB on percentage of thigh weights at 38, 42 and 45 days. It was noticed significant differences found for percentage of thigh at 42 and 45 days old between treated FFSB compared to control group. Moreover, inclusion rate of FFSB affected thigh weights. The minimum percentage for the thigh was recorded for birds in the second treated group (21.74%) while the highest percentage for the thigh was recorded for birds in the third treated group (28.86%).

Table 4: Effect of feeding raw and treated FFSB of final body weights (g) of broilers (mean ± standard deviation).

Table 5: Effect of feeding raw and treated FFSB of final weight gain (g) (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05)

Table 6: Effect of feeding raw and treated FFSB of feed consumption (g/ chick) of broiler during the different experimented point (mean ± standard deviation).

* Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 7: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on final feed conversion ratio (mean ± standard deviation).

* Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 8: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on percentage of the final livability (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 9: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on directory final production index (mean ± standard deviation.

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 10: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on live weight at slaughter (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 11: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on carcass weights with edible viscera (g) (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05) 

Table 12: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on percentage of dressing percentages with the edible viscera (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05)

Table 13: The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on percentage of breast (mean ± standard deviation).

 *Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05)

Table 14:The Impact of the use of raw and soy beans treatment on percentage of thigh (mean ± standard deviation).

* Different letters meant that there is a significant differences (P<0.05)

DISCUSSION

The results of this experiment agreed with result of Simeanu, (2008), who found the efficiency of soaking treatment and heating reduced the activity level of enzymes urease and trypsin inhibitor. Agunbiade, (2000) concluded that Significant improvement in live body weight and weight gain for the first two periods was observed in broilers fed diets containing 10% raw full fat soybean(RFFSB). The highest body weights and gains were obtained with the diets that contained the roasted, full-fat soybeans and the lowest values for the birds given the SBM-containing diet. Neither type of basal diet nor dietary full-fat soybean level influ-enced           (P > 0.05) final body weights (36 d), weight gains or feed intakes and feed conversions during the finisher period(22–36 d) (Hamiltom and Mcnivan, 2000).  The result of body weight and weight gain was in agreement with the finding of Etusim et al. (2008) this may be due to better utilization and efficiency heated and soaking of FFSB which may led to get rid of some toxic materials or anti nutritional factors. This also agreed with Amaefula et al. (2005). Popescu and Criste (2003) noticed a marginal differences when using FFSB during 1-42 days old, and this also agreed with the study of Rathgeber       et al. (2005).

It was noticed that total feed consumption for the control group was higher than other treatment groups at 38 and 42 days old. This is an evidence that raw FFSB as well as treated FFSB contain varying proportions of anti-nutritional factor which decrease feed consumption due to urease enzyme activity. Similar result was found by Popescu and Criste (2003). Consuming feed has positive relation with body weight as it is known (North, 1984). FFSB treatments and it is inclusion rate up to 38-42 days old had a significant effect on feed consumption compared to soybean meal.

This may be due to rid of anti-nutritional factors which are responsible of decrease growth as a result of untreated raw Soybean (Saxena et al., 1963 and Lepkovsky et al., 1965).

Autoclave heating of FFSB at 102◦ c for 30 minutes led to increase the growth and feed conversion ratio by 31% compared to raw Soybean. Such differences werereduce with advanced age and disappear by 6 weeks old. Autoclave heating of FFSB at 102◦ c for 30 minutes led to increase the growth and feed conversion ratio by 31% compared raw Soybean. Such differences were reduce with advanced age and disappear by 6 weeks old. This may an evidence that FFSB in all treatment had no negative effects on livability of the birds, this agreed with Etusim et al. (2008).

A high percentage of the share breasts in the group that consumed the heat treated soybeans can be explained by a sufficient quantity of proteins that chickens adopted during the growth, what is not the case for the group where the heat treated soybeans were used. Where is due to the presence of anti-nutritive factors in the first place of the proteases , proteins adoption was difficult or impossible (Beukovic et al., 2012). Considering the drumsticks, which have a larger share in the group on raw soybeans than in the group that has been on heat treated soybeans, the explanation lies in the fact that in terms of relative weight ratio (compared to conventional treatment), noting that the mass after conventional treatment of chickens was half less in the group that consumed a meal without heat treatment (Beukovic et al., 2012).

REFERENCE

Agunbiade, J.A. (2000): Utilisation of two varieties of full-fat and simulated soyabeans in meal and pelleted diets by broiler chickens. J. of  sci. of food and Agriculture 80: 1529-1537.

Al -hadme, Jawad Nor Alden. (1994): Practical guidefor the production ofchickenmeatand eggs, the first edition-city press found ationpress. Jeddah/ saudia Arabia.

Al -Mjamaii, Raa`ed Ibrahim Khalil. (2002): Improvement of nutritional value of locally broad – beans as a substituent for soybean meal in broiler die. Master thesis. College of agriculture. University of baghdad.

Amaefula, K.U.; Iheukwumere, F.C. and Nwaokoro, C.C. (2005): A note on the grwth performance and carcass characteristics of rabbits fed graded dietary levels of boiled pigeon peab seed. Cajanuscajan. Meal livestock research for rural development 17.5. Lrrd news.

Beukovic, M.; Ljubojevic, D.; Stanacev, V.; Bjedov, S. and Ivkovic, M. (2012): Effect soybean heat treatment on broiler slaughter traits dejanbeukovic. Third International Scientific Symposium "Agrosym Jahorina

Duncan, D.B. (1955): Multiple range and multiple f test. Biometrics. 11: 1-42.

Duragic, Olivera; Dragan, M.; Palić, V.; Jovanka D. Lević and Slavica A. Sredanović (2008): Quality control of full-fat soybean using urease activity: critical assessment of the method. Apteff, 39, 1-212 1450-7188 39, 47-53 original scientific paper.

Etusim, P.E.;  Iheukwumere, F.C.;  Ndubisiandf, E.C. and Mazi, A. (2008): Growth, carcass and gut morphology of broiler finisher chickens fed raw and processed soybean seed meal. research j. of poult. Sci.s, volume: 2, (3): 49-52.

Gibson, O.M. and Ullah, A.H.J. (1988): purification and characterization of phytase from cotyledon of germination soybean seeds. archives of biochemistry andbiophysic. 260. (2): 503-513.

Hamilton, R.M. and Mcniven, M.A.  (2000): Replacement of soybean meal with roasted full fat soybeans from high-protein or conventional cultivars in diets for broiler chickens. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 80: 483-488.

Huisman, J. (1989): Anti-nutritional factors. Anf. In the nutrition of monogastric farm animals. In: e.j. van weerden and j huisman. Eds., nutrition and digestive physiology in monogastricanimals. pudocwageningen, the netherlands. P 17-35.

Kirkpinar, F. and Basmacioglu, H. (2006): Effects of pelleting temperature of phytase supplemented broiler feed on tibia mineralization, calcium and phosphorus content of serum and performance. Original paper czech j. Anim. Sci., 51, 2006. (2): 78 84.

Larbier, M. and Leclercq, B. (1994): Nutrition and Feeding of Poultry. 1st Ed. Nottingham University Press, Notting-ham, UK.

Lepkovsky, S.; Furuta, K.; Koike, T.; Hassegawa, H.; Dimick, M.K.; Krause, K. and Barnes, F.J. (1965): The effect of raw soybean upon the digestion of proteins and upon the function of pancreas of intact chickens and of chickens with ileosmoties. British j. of nutrition 19:    41-56.

Masic, B.; Z. Boiovlc; 'V. Bekric and Pavlovski. (1990): Effects of differently treated soya-bean as' a component in broiler feeds options méditerranéennes, sér. A j n "7, 1990 - l'aviculture en méditerranée.

North, M.O. (1984): Breeder management.in commercial chicken production manual. theavi. Publishing company. Inc. Westport, connecticut. 240-243, 298-321. Pp.

Popescu, P. and Criste, R. (2003): Using full fat soybean in broiler diets and its effect on the production and economic efficiency of fattening manuscript received: 18 february 2003. accepted for publication: 7 may 2003.

Rathgeber, B.R.; Macisaac, J.L.; Burgoyne, K.L. and Anderson, D.M. (2005): Roasted full-fat soybeans in starter, grower, and finisher dietsfor female broiler turkeys. Poult. Sci. Inc.

Sara, Willis. (2003): The use of soybean meal and full fat soybean meal by the animal feed industry12th australian soybean conference. Publisher: north australian soybean industry association, pages: 1-8.

Saxena, H.C.; Jensen, L.S.; Spencer, J.V. and Mcginnis, J. (1963): Production, interior egg quality and some physiological effects of feeding raw soybean meal to laying hens. Poult. Sci. 42: 291-293.

Simeanu, D. (2008): Research regarding the use of thermicaly treated soya seeds in nourishing the broiler chicken bulletin uasvm. Animal sci. And biotechnologies, 65.1-2.

Stahly, T.S.; Herkelman, K.L. and Cromwell, G.L. (1991): Effects of heating time and sodium metabisulfite on the nutritional value of full-fat soybeans for chicks. J. of animal sci. 69.(11) 4477-4486, copyright © 1991 by american society of animal sci.

Waldroup, P.W. (1982): Whole soybeans for poultry feeds. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 38, 28–35.

Xl Stat, Version 7.5. 2004. (addinsoft, 2005). Addinsoft. 2005. Xlstat pro version 7.5.3. Http: // www. Xlstat.com/en/ho.