All-veg broiler feed cost optimization with HP AviStart

calendar icon 8 April 2021
clock icon 6 minute read

In summary, the inclusion of HP AviStart in only the starter diet (0-14 days) resulted in performance equal to or better than the inclusion of MBM, CGM, or DDGS for the entire growout period (0-42 days). Return on investment analysis of including 5% HP AviStart in the starter period (0-14 days) compared to 3% MBM, CGM, and DDGS fed the entire trial confirmed HP AviStart to have the greatest return of vegetable protein alternatives in broiler diets.

Figure 1. Body weight gain (BWG, kg) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).
Figure 1. Body weight gain (BWG, kg) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).

The inclusion of HP Avistart significantly increased BWG compared to CGM and led to numerical increases in BWG compared to DDGS. At the conclusion of the trial (42 days) a treatment effect was also observed on FI (Figure 2). Similar to BWG, the inclusion of HP Avistart significantly increased FI compared to CGM and led to numerical increases in FI compared to DDGS.

Figure 2. Feed Intake (FI, kg/bird/day) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).
Figure 2. Feed Intake (FI, kg/bird/day) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).

Alternative protein source had a significant effect on FCR during the grower phase (14-35 day) and cumulatively through 35 days (Figure 3). A carry-over effect of including 5% HP AviStart in only the starter diet led to numerical reductions in FCR compared to other vegetable protein alternatives improving it to levels similar of MBM. At the conclusion of the trial a similar trend was observed (p=0.09) where 5% HP AviStart in only the starter diet led to numerical reductions in FCR compared to 3% of CGM and DDGS fed during the entire trial. A treatment effect was also observed on mortality adjusted FCR in the grower phase where the inclusion of HP AviStart in the starter diet significantly improved FCR compared to CGM fed in both starter and grower diets. The inclusion of HP AviStart resulted in equally as good growth performance as MBM evident by no significant differences observed in BWG, FI, or FCR compared to MBM during individual growth phases or at the conclusion of the trial (Figures 1-3).

Figure 3. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).
Figure 3. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources. Data with different labels represent significant difference (p≤0.05).

Though not significant, numerical differences were observed in uniformity where broilers fed HP Avistart had a lower CV than those fed MBM, CGM, or DDGS (Figure 4). Return on investment (ROI) analysis (cost and performance) was evaluated for HP AviStart at the conclusion of the trial and resulted in returns of -15.18, 35.07, and 3.34 compared to MBM, CGM, and DDGS, respectively.

Figure 4. Uniformity (CV, %) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources.
Figure 4. Uniformity (CV, %) of broilers fed diets with the inclusion of different alternative protein sources.

In summary, the inclusion of HP AviStart in only the starter diet (0-14 days) resulted in performance equal to or better than the inclusion of MBM, CGM, or DDGS for the entire growout period (0-42 days). Return on investment analysis of including 5% HP AviStart in the starter period (0-14 days) compared to 3% MBM, CGM, and DDGS fed the entire trial confirmed HP AviStart to have the greatest return of vegetable protein alternatives in broiler diets.

References
References
Beski, S.M., et al. "Specialized protein products in broiler chicken nutrition: A review." Animal Nutrition 1.2 (2015): 47-53.
Corzo, A., et al. "Dietary limitation of isoleucine and valine in diets based on maize, soybean meal, and meat and bone meal for broiler chickens." British poultry science 51.4 (2010): 558-563.
Kim, E. J., et al. "Comparison of amino acid digestibility coefficients for corn, corn gluten meal, and corn distillers dried grains with solubles among 3 different bioassays." Poultry science 91.12 (2012): 3141-3147.
Steed, J., et al. "A comparative analysis of an enzymatically processed soy protein and non-SBM protein sources on broiler live performance and economic benefit under NAE conditions." 2020 International Poultry Scientific Forum Abstracts (2020) 54.
Visscher, C.F., et al. "Influence of different protein sources in the broiler diet on the presence of Campylobacter spp. in excreta and caecal content." Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition 101 (2017): 95-104.
Willis, S. "The use of soybean meal and full fat soybean meal by the animal feed industry." 12th Australian soybean conference. Soy Australia, Bundaberg. 2003.

Kyle Brown

Nutritionist at Hamlet Protein
© 2000 - 2024 - Global Ag Media. All Rights Reserved | No part of this site may be reproduced without permission.