摘要
An experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of replacing corn with pearl millet in commercial layer diets, formulated according to the minimal requirements for total and digestible amino acids. Two hundred and forty Lohmann LSL laying hens with 25 weeks of age were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design according to a 2 x 5 factorial arrangement with 3 replicates of 8 birds. Feed was formulated on two amino acid basis (total or digestible) according to Rostagno et al. (2000) and there were five pearl millet inclusion levels (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%). Performance and egg quality were evaluated during five periods of 21 days.At the end of each period, feed intake, egg production, egg weight and feed conversion were evaluated. In the last three days of each period, the following egg quality parameters were evaluated: Haugh Unit, yolk pigmentation index, egg specific weight, shell percentage and shell thickness. Digestible amino acid requirements resulted in decreased feed intake (p<0.01) and increased production costs per mass of eggs (kg) or per dozen eggs (p<0.01) compared to total amino acid requirements. There was a linear reduction in feed intake, egg production, egg weight and yolk pigmentation index with increasing inclusion levels of pearl millet. Therefore, increasing levels of replacement of corn by pearl millet affected bird performance negatively. Besides, production costs were higher with increasing pearl millet levels.
摘要译文
一个进行实验，以评估在商业层日粮珍珠粟取代玉米的效果，按照总量和可消化氨基酸的最低要求制定。ö一百四十罗曼LSL蛋鸡用25周龄的根据具有8鸟类3次重复一个2×5因子排列分布在完全随机的实验设计。饲料是根据Rostagno等配制在两个氨基酸的基础上（或总可消化）。 （2000），并有5珍珠粟包含水平（0％，25％，50％，75％和100％）。期间的21 5周期days.At每个周期结束时，饲料的摄入量，产蛋率，蛋重和饲料转化率，评价性能及蛋品质进行了评价。在每一个时期的最后三天，以下鸡蛋质量参数进行了评价：哈氏单位，蛋黄色素沉着指数，蛋比重，壳率和蛋壳厚度。可消化氨基酸的需求导致采食量下降（P 0.01），相比总氨基酸要求每蛋（公斤）质量或每打鸡蛋生产成本增加（P 0.01）。有采食量，产蛋量，蛋重和蛋黄色素沉着指数直线下降与珍珠粟增加包容水平。因此，增加替代玉米的含量由珍珠粟影响家禽生产性能产生负面影响。此外，生产成本的增加珍珠粟的水平。
FILARDI, RS. Pearl millet utilization in ccommercial laying hen diets formulated on a total or digestible amino acid basis[J]. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Avícola, 2005,7(2): 99-105