45 4, (2018) Korean J. Poult. Sci. Vol.45, No.4, (2018) Effect of Dietary Ene

45 4, 273 283 (2018) Korean J. Poult. Sci. Vol.45, No.4, 273 283 (2018) https://doi.org/10.5536/kjps.2018.45.4.273 273 1 2 3 3 3 Effect of Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Performance, Meat Quality and Foot Pad Score of Male and Female Slow-Growing Korean Meat-Type Chicken (Hanhyop 3) Jun Yeop Lee 1, Myung Ho Lee 2, Yong Han Song 3, Jong In Lee 3 and Sang Jip Ohh 3 1 Researcher, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA, Wanju 55365, Republic of Korea 2 Graduate Student, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Republic of Korea 3 Professor, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Republic of Korea ABSTRACT Two diet energy levels (high or low) and two bedding material (rice husk or saw dust) treatments were designed for either male or female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) to make totally eight treatments for 11 75 d feeding trial. Body weight gain (BWG) were influenced by energy levels, sex of bird and bedding material type. There were interaction effect among those three factors. Feed intakes (FI) by male bird during each and overall periods were higher than those by female. Diet energy levels and bedding material affected the FI only during final 56 75 d period, of which FI of high energy diet was higher in male whereas that of low energy diet was higher in female. Although feed conversion ratio (FCR) was improved by high energy diet, the better FCR has dissipated during 41 75 d, when the most of overall BWG were achieved. Apparent total tract retention (ATTR) of nutrients were higher in male than those in female birds with exception on fat ATTR. Fat ATTR was improved when fed low energy diet regardless of the sex of birds. Both energy levels and sex of bird influenced the color of breast. Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) value of female thigh was higher than that of male. Levels of moisture and P in female thigh were lower although level of fat in female breast was higher than those in male, respectively. This study showed that diet energy levels for Hanhyop 3 chicken, especially during 41 75 d, should be differently formulated between male and female bird. (Key words: Hanhyop 3, diet energy, bedding material, performance, foot pad score).. (Fanatico et al., 2008; Batkowska et al., 2015),,,., (Wang et al., 2009).. 3 To whom correspondence should be addressed : sjohh@kangwon.ac.kr

274 : 3. 3. (Dozier et al., 2011)..... (foot pad dermatitis) (Bjedov et al., 2013), (Bilgili et al., 2009).,.. 3,,,. (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Kangwon National University, Korea). ( 3, ) 3 848 ( 400, 448 ) 10, 11 75 65. kg (ME) 150 kcal, (high) (low), (, ),, 2 2 2 8. pen(, 230 150 60 cm), 4 32 pen. pen (kg) (kg/m 2 ), 25, 28. (rice husk) 2, (saw dust) 2. 5 cm, 40 5 cm. 65 (11 40, 41 75 ). kg (Metabolizable Energy) 150 kcal (high) (low). Table 1, (crumble). pen 10 1 (nipple),. 16L/8D, 15 lux.,,. (11 ), 30, 45, 60 75 (body weight gain; BWG) (feed intake; FI). (F/G). 3 48, 3, 2, (total collection method). 3 60 72. (%).

Lee et al. : Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Male and Female Slow Growing Broilers 275 Table 1. Formula and chemical composition of experimental diet High energy diet Low energy diet 11 40 d 41 75 d 11 40 d 41 75 d Formula ------------------------------- % ------------------------------------- Corn 46.42 39.75 47.66 40.99 Wheat 10.00 20.00 10.00 20.00 Gluten 3.00 3.00 Soybean meal 28.08 24.56 32.20 28.72 Canola meal 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Limestone 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 M.D.C.P (18%/21%) 1.56 1.32 1.48 1.24 Salt 0.29 0.20 0.29 0.20 Beef tallow 6.12 6.64 3.96 4.44 Choline chloride (50%) 0.12 0.15 0.10 0.13 DL-Methionine (98%) 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.31 L-Lysine (98%) 0.44 0.41 0.33 0.30 Threonine (98.5%) 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 Vit. premix 1 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Min. premix 2 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Calculated compositions Moisture (%) 11.28 10.84 11.66 11.23 Protein (%) 21.00 19.99 20.99 20.00 Fat (%) 8.27 8.65 6.20 6.54 Fiber (%) 3.48 3.33 3.73 3.58 Ash (%) 5.61 5.13 5.72 5.24 Ca (%) 0.90 0.85 0.90 0.85 P (%) 0.68 0.63 0.67 0.62 Available P (%) 0.54 0.49 0.52 0.48 TME (kcal/kg) 3,150 3,200 3,000 3,049 ME (kcal/kg) 3,148 3,206 2,991 3,046 Lysine (%) 1.35 1.25 1.36 1.25 Methionine (%) 0.63 0.61 0.63 0.61 Methionine+cysteine (%) 0.98 0.95 0.98 0.95 Threonine (%) 0.81 0.78 0.81 0.78 1 The vitamin(vit) premix contains the followings per kg of diet: vit.a, 18.000IU; vit.d 3, 4.500 IU; vit.e, 31.5 IU; menadione (K 3 ), 3.6 mg; thiamin (B 1 ), 1.8 mg riboflavin (B 2 ), 4.8 mg; pyridoxine (B 6 ), 3.6 mg; cobalamin (B 12 ), 0.03 mg; niacin (B 3 ), 22.5 mg; panthothenic acid (B 5 ), 15 mg; folic acid (B 9 ), 0.45 mg. 2 The mineral(min) premix contains the followings per kg of diet: Mn, 86.4 mg; Zn, 72 mg; Fe, 74.6 mg; Cu, 6 mg; I, 1.5 mg; Co, 0.288 mg; Se, 0.216 mg. Abbreviations, MDCP: Mono-di-calcium phosphate, TME: True metabolizable energy, ME: Metabolizable energy.

276 : 3 4, 24.. 4 10, TBARS(Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances). TBARS Botsoglou et al.(1994). Chromameter(Model CR-410, Minolta Co., Japan)., (L*=, a*=, b*= ), L*=88.6, a*=0.893, b*=0.754. 5.,, Ca P AOAC(2007). 600 5 (1:1) 10 ml Whatman No 6, Ca P. Ca EDTA, P molybdovanadate reagent 470 nm. 10 foot pad score. foot pad score Dowsland(2008).,, 0, 1,,,, 2. 10 10 foot pad score. SAS(2004) 9.1 GLM procedure.,. Duncan. 3 Table 2. 26 40 (P>0.05) (P<0.0001). 41 55, 56 75. 11 25,., 3 41, 56. 43 56 (Carrasco et al., 2014). 51, 40, 3 56., 26 40 56 70,., 26 40 (P<0.0001), 56 70 (P<0.05)., (Carrasco et al., 2014; Pauwels et al., 2015).., (P<0.05),. ME, (Dozier et al., 2011).,. (Table 3).. 10 25 (P<0.05). (P<0.05), (Toghyani et al., 2010).

Lee et al. : Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Male and Female Slow Growing Broilers 277 Table 2. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on body weight gain of male and female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Body weight gain (g/period/bird) Sex Bedding Energy 11 25 d 26 40 d 41 55 d 56 75 d Male Female Overall 11 75 d High 386 ab 362 a 1,110 a 672 b 2,529 a Low 393 a 298 bc 984 c 698 b 2,372 b High 368 bcd 348 a 1,026 bc 788 a 2,530 a Low 377 abc 326 abc 1,071 ab 712 b 2,486 a High 359 cde 356 a 791 d 498 d 2,004 d Low 350 de 294 c 787 d 655 b 2,086 c High 350 de 338 ab 839 d 545 cd 2,072 c Low 337 e 323 abc 831 d 590 c 2,081 c SEM 15 26 34 44 40 Main effect (P-values) Sex <0.0001 NS <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 Bedding 0.014 NS NS NS 0.015 Energy NS <0.0001 NS 0.021 NS S B NS NS NS 0.022 NS S E NS NS NS 0.0003 0.0002 B E NS 0.020 0.008 0.002 NS Abbreviations, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05). (Huang et al., 2009). 1, 2.,. Table 3., (P<0.01), (Carrasco et al., 2014) (Dozier et al., 2011)., 41 55 (P=0.065)., 10 25 56 70, (P<0.05), (Carrasco et al., 2014).., (P<0.05), (P<0.05). (P<0.05), (Carrasco et al., 2014). 56 75,. AME (InfanteRodríguez et al., 2016),.

278 : 3 Table 3. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on feed intake of male and female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Feed intake (g/period/bird) Sex Bedding Energy 11 25 d 26 40 d 41 55 d 56 75 d Male Female Overall 11 75 d High 611 ab 1,021 a 2,242 a 2,239 bc 6,114 a Low 639 a 954 ab 2,063 bc 2,178 c 5,835 b High 578 bc 999 a 1,978 c 2,409 a 5,963 ab Low 630 a 1,000 a 2,108 b 2,356 ab 6,093 a High 558 c 972 ab 1,593 d 1,706 e 4,830 d Low 577 bc 892 b 1,678 d 2,131 c 5,278 c High 561 c 935 ab 1,616 d 1,766 e 4,878 d Low 556 c 950 ab 1,606 d 1,899 d 5,010 d SEM 29 56 82 83 159 Main effect (P-values) Sex <0.0001 0.008 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 Bedding NS NS 0.065 NS NS Energy 0.031 NS NS 0.002 NS S B NS NS NS 0.001 NS S E NS NS NS <0.0001 0.011 B E NS 0.048 NS 0.038 NS Abbreviations, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05). (Fanatico et al., 2008). 3,. 3 Table 4., 26 40 (P<0.05)., 10 25 26 40 (P<0.05). (Dozier et al., 2011). 40,., 41 55 (P<0.01). (Huang et al., 2009), (Mahmoud et al., 2014).,. (Toghyani et al., 2010).,..,,,.,

Lee et al. : Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Male and Female Slow Growing Broilers 279 Table 4. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on feed conversion ratio in male and female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Feed conversion ratio (F/G) Sex Bedding Energy 11 25 d 26 40 d 41 55 d 56 75 d Overall 11 75 d Male Female High 1.59 ab 2.83 de 2.02 ab 3.33 ab 2.42 bc Low 1.63 ab 3.20 cde 2.10 ab 3.14 bc 2.46 ab High 1.57 ab 2.88 ab 1.93 b 3.06 c 2.36 c Low 1.67 a 3.08 e 1.97 ab 3.32 ab 2.45 b High 1.56 b 2.73 e 2.01 ab 3.43 a 2.41 bc Low 1.65 ab 3.04 abc 2.13 a 3.26 abc 2.53 a High 1.60 ab 2.77 e 1.93 b 3.24 abc 2.36 c Low 1.65 ab 2.95 bcd 1.93 b 3.23 abc 2.41 bc SEM 0.06 0.11 0.11 0.16 0.05 Sex NS 0.004 NS NS NS Bedding NS NS 0.003 NS 0.004 Main effect (P values) Energy 0.005 <0.0001 NS NS 0.0004 S B NS NS NS NS NS S E NS NS NS NS NS B E NS NS NS 0.013 NS Abbreviations, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05).. 3 Table 5.,,, (P<0.05), (P=0.063).. 70, (Carrasco et al., 2014).,,. (P<0.001). (Dozier et al., 2011). (P<0.05),,.., TBARS Table 6., (L*) (b*) (P<0.05), (a*). (P<0.05), (P<0.05). 3 (Batkowska et al., 2015)

280 : 3 Table 5. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on apparent total tract retention (ATTR) of nutrients in male and female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Nutrients ATTR (%) Sex Bedding Energy Dry matter Protein Fat Total CHO Crude ash Male Female High 81.39 a 70.49 a 89.61 bc 70.96 a 39.00 ab Low 80.99 ab 68.77 ab 92.94 a 70.89 a 38.09 ab High 78.28 c 64.14 bcd 87.43 c 65.65 b 32.12 b Low 81.12 ab 68.23 abc 91.70 ab 70.92 a 42.57 a High 79.44 abc 67.42 abcd 87.90 c 67.66 ab 31.91 b Low 79.68 abc 64.01 cd 92.25 ab 67.36 ab 33.90 b High 78.72 bc 64.59 bcd 90.27 abc 66.74 b 32.57 b Low 79.64 abc 63.09 d 92.74 ab 67.18 ab 35.24 ab SEM 1.86 3.59 2.49 3.07 6.08 Main effect (P values) Sex 0.063 0.004 NS 0.011 0.015 Bedding NS 0.014 NS NS NS Energy 0.035 NS <0.0001 NS NS S B NS NS 0.034 NS NS S E NS 0.013 NS NS NS B E NS NS NS NS NS Abbreviations, CHO: Carbohydrate, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05).., 3. TBARS (Table 6), 1 TBARS., TBARS (P<0.05). 4 Table 6., 12 TBARS,., TBARS (P<0.05). (Table 7) (Reitznerová et al., 2017). Table 7. (breast) (P<0.01), (Dozier et al., 2011) (Carrasco et al., 2014). 3.,,,. (P<0.01), (Carrasco et al., 2014).,., (P<0.01).

Lee et al. : Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Male and Female Slow Growing Broilers 281 Table 6. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on color scores of breast and TBARS values of thigh from either male or female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Color score of breast TBARS of thigh at Sex Bedding Energy L* a* b* 1d 12d Male Female High 51.17 ab 1.54 b 5.19 ab 0.1795 c 0.5001 b Low 52.22 ab 2.18 ab 3.85 b 0.2041 a 0.5076 ab High 49.86 b 2.62 a 4.78 b 0.1937 abc 0.5147 ab Low 53.09 a 1.73 b 4.28 b 0.1959 ab 0.5109 ab High 52.05 ab 1.80 b 5.23 ab 0.1854 bc 0.5115 ab Low 53.35 a 1.55 b 5.03 ab 0.1896 abc 0.5267 ab High 52.85 a 1.92 ab 6.50 a 0.1962 ab 0.5284 ab Low 53.16 a 2.10 ab 4.81 b 0.2023 a 0.5312 a SEM 1.50 0.50 0.95 0.0096 0.0182 Sex 0.028 NS 0.020 NS 0.017 Bedding NS NS NS 0.041 NS Main effect (P values) Energy 0.012 NS 0.013 0.015 NS S B NS NS NS NS NS S E NS NS NS NS NS B E NS NS NS NS NS Abbreviations, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant, TBARS: Thio-barbituric acid reactive substances. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05). (Duarte et al., 2014)., (Dozier et al., 2011). (P<0.05),. (P<0.01), (P<0.01).,,,,, foot pad score (Youssef et al., 2010; Zikic et al., 2017). foot pad score.,, foot pad score 0.,,, 3 foot pad score. foot pad score (Son, 2010). foot pad score. (, ), (, ), ( ) 3 ( ).,,,.

282 : 3 Table 7. Effect of dietary energy levels and bedding materials on chemical composition * of breast and thigh meats from either male or female slow-growing Korean meat-type chicken (Hanhyop 3) Treatments Moisture (%) Sex Bedding Energy Thigh Male Female Main effect (P values) Fat (%) Breast Ca (%) Breast P (%) Thigh High 76.74 ab 1.36 bc 0.15 a 0.16 b Low 77.03 ab 1.40 bc 0.14 b 0.20 a High 77.20 a 0.95 c 0.15 a 0.18 ab Low 77.09 ab 2.01 ab 0.14 b 0.19 a High 75.95 abc 2.51 a 0.15 a 0.16 b Low 76.11 ab 1.88 ab 0.14 b 0.17 b High 75.97 bc 1.49 bc 0.15 a 0.14 c Low 75.24 c 2.43 a 0.15 a 0.16 b SEM 0.71 1.02 0.01 0.01 Sex <0.0001 0.0002 NS <0.0001 Bedding NS NS NS NS Energy NS NS 0.044 0.0006 S B NS NS NS NS S E NS NS NS NS B E NS 0.0002 NS NS * Data on composition of moisture, protein, P in breast and protein, fat, Ca in thigh were not enlisted in this table since there were no significant differences. Abbreviations, S B: Sex Bedding, S E: Sex Energy, B E: Bedding Energy, NS: Not significant. a c Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (P<0.05).., 41 75.,., TBARS.,. 3, 41 75, 56. ( 120090477). AOAC 2007 Official Method of Analysis. 18th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA. Batkowska J, Brodacki1 A, Zi eba1 G, Horbaczuk JO, Łukaszewicz M 2015 Growth performance, carcass traits and physical properties of chicken meat as affected by genotype and production system. Arch Anim Breed 58(2):325-333. Bilgili S, Hess F, Blake JB, Macklin JP, Saenmahayak KS, Sibley B 2009 Influence of bedding material on footpad dermatitis in broiler chickens. J Appl Poult Res 18(3): 583-589. Bjedov S, Žikić D, Perić L, Đukić Stojčić M, Milošević N

Lee et al. : Dietary Energy Levels and Bedding Materials on Male and Female Slow Growing Broilers 283 2013 Effect of different litter treatments on production performance of broiler chicken. Biotechnol Anim Husbandry 29(4):625-630. Botsoglou NA, Fletouris DJ, Papageorgous GE, Vassilopoulos VN, Mantis AJ, Trakatellis AG 1994 Rapid, sensitive, and specific thiobarbituric acid method for measuring lipid peroxidation in animal tissue, food and feedstuff samples. J Agric Food Chem 42(9):1931-1937. Carrasco S, Bellof G, Schmidt E 2014 Nutrients deposition and energy utilization in slow-growing broilers fed with organic diets containing graded nutrient concentration. Livest Sci 161:114-122. Dowsland I 2008 Broiler foot health - Controlling foot pad dermatitis. Ross Tech Note. www.aviagen.com Dozier WA, Gehring CK, Corzo A, Olanrewaju HA 2011 Apparent metabolizable energy needs of male and female broilers from 36 to 47 days of age. Poult Sci 90(4): 804-814. Duarte KF, Junqueira OM, Borges LL, Rodrigues E, da Filardi RS, Praes MFFM, de laurentiz AC, de Domingues CHF 2014 Performance, carcass traits, and body composition of broilers fed different linseed oil levels between 21 and 56 days of age. Bra J Poult Sci 16(4):55-60. Huang Y, Yoo JS, Kim HJ, Wang Y, Chen YJ, Cho JH, Kim IH 2009 Effect of bedding types and different nutrient densities on growth performance, visceral organ weight, and blood characteristics in broiler chickens. J Appl Poult Res 18(1):1-7. Infante-Rodríguez F, Salinas-Chavira J, Montaño-Gómez MF, Manríquez-Nuñez OM, González-Vizcarra VM, Guevara- Florentino OF, Ramírez De León JA 2016 Effect of diets with different energy concentrations on growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat chemical composition of broiler chickens in dry tropics. SpringerPlus 5(1):1937. Fanatico AC, Pillai PB, Hester PY, Falcine C, Mench JA, Owens CM, Emmert JL 2008 Performance, livability, and carcass yield of slow- and fast-growing chicken genotypes fed low-nutrient or standard diets and raised indoors or with outdoor access. Poult Sci 87(6):1012-1021. Mahmoud MSH, Soliman FNK, EL-Deen MB, Sebai AAE 2014 Effect of different types of litter on broiler performance. Res J Poult Sci 7(1):1-6. Pauwels J, Coopman F, Cools A, Michiels J, Fremaut D, De Smet S 2015 Selection for growth performance in broiler chickens associates with less diet flexibility. PLoS ONE 10(6):e0127819. Toghyani M, Gheisari A, Modaresi M, Tabeidian SA, Toghyani M 2010 Effect of different litter material on performance and behavior of broiler chickens. Appl Anim Behaviour Sci 122:48-52. Reitznerová A, Šuleková M, Nagy J, Marcinčák S, Semjon B, Čertík M, Klempová T 2017 Lipid peroxidation process in meat and meat products: A comparison study of malondialdehyde determination between modified 2-thiobarbituric acid spectrophotometric method and reverse-phase high -performance liquid chromatography. Molecules 22(11): 1988. SAS 2004 SAS User s Guide Ver. 9.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA. Son JH 2010 Influence of sex ratio on behavior and welfare indexes in broiler chicken. Kor J Poult Sci 37(1):43-49. Wang KH, Shi SR, Dou TC, Sun HJ 2009 Effect of a free-range raising system on growth performance, carcass yield, and meat quality of slow-growing chicken. Poult Sci 88(10):2219-2223. Youssef IMI, Beineke A, Rohn K, Kamphues J 2010 Experimental study on effects of litter material and its quality on foot pad dermatitis in growing turkeys. Int J Poult Sci 9(12):1125-1135. Zikic D, Đukić SM, Bjedov S, Peric L, Stojanovic S, Uscebrka G 2017 Effect of litter on development and severity of foot-pad dermatitis and behavior of broiler chickens. Bra J Poult Sci 19(2):247-254. Received Nov. 12, 2018, Revised Dec. 13, 2018, Accepted Dec. 17, 2018