Journals / Bozok Veterinary Sciences / 2025 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

Determination of the Effects of Carrageenan Supplementation Alongside a Probiotic & Enzyme Complex to Broiler Diets on Performance and Carcass Parameters

Broyler Rasyonlarına Probiyotik & Enzim Kompleksi Yanında Karagenan Katkısının Performans ve Karkas Parametreleri Üzerine Etkilerinin Belirlenmesi

Mehmet Demirci(KIRIKKALE UNIVERSITY, DELİCE VOCATIONAL SCHOOL, DEPARTMENT OF VETERINARY, LABORATORY ASSISTANT TRAINING AND VETERINARY LABORATORY SERVICES PR.)0000-0002-0199-4559
Muhittin Gedikkaya(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ)
Pages
79–87
Publication Date
2025-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Based on the overall results, no statistically significant differences were observed between the C and T groups in terms of average LBW, BWG, FI, and FCR (P>0.05).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the effects of dietary supplementation with 0.1% probiotic & enzyme complex (PEC) in combination with 0.1% carrageenan on live body weight (LBW), body weight gain (BWG), feed intake (FI), feed conversion ratio (FCR), and carcass yield parameters in broilers were investigated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 66 day-old broiler chicks were used, and they were assigned to two main groups as control (C) and treatment (T).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on the overall results, no statistically significant differences were observed between the C and T groups in terms of average LBW, BWG, FI, and FCR (P>0.05).
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Broyler · Enzim · Performans

Abstract

In this study, the effects of dietary supplementation with 0.1% probiotic & enzyme complex (PEC) in combination with 0.1% carrageenan on live body weight (LBW), body weight gain (BWG), feed intake (FI), feed conversion ratio (FCR), and carcass yield parameters in broilers were investigated. A total of 66 day-old broiler chicks were used, and they were assigned to two main groups as control (C) and treatment (T). Each main group was further divided into three subgroups containing equal numbers of chicks. Two different diet formulations, namely starter and grower diets, were prepared for the trial. The control group was fed the basal diets without additives, whereas the treatment group received the basal diets supplemented with 0.1% PEC and 0.1% carrageenan. The experimental diets were offered to the groups ad libitum for a period of 42 days. During the experimental period, FI and LBW measurements of the groups were recorded at weekly intervals. Based on the overall results, no statistically significant differences were observed between the C and T groups in terms of average LBW, BWG, FI, and FCR (P>0.05). Also, the intergroup data was similar for almost all carcass and internal organ parameters. (P>0.05). However, only the data related to the gizzard showed a statistically significant change and/or tendency in the treatment group, with lower values recorded compared to the control group (P<0.05). In conclusion, it was determined that the combined use of PEC and carrageenan at the specified levels did not cause any significant changes in the performance parameters of broiler chickens. This condition may have arisen from the insufficient or inadequate bioactive efficacy of the commercial PEC product and/or carrageenan due to its specific chemical structure, or it may have been shaped particularly by cage-related stress. Nevertheless, no adverse effects of these feed additives on the growth performance of the broilers were observed.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, broyler rasyonlarında %0.1 oranında probiyotik & enzim kompleksi (PEK) ile birlikte yine %0.1 oranında karagenan kullanımının broylerlerde canlı ağırlık (CA), canlı ağırlık artışı (CAA), yem tüketimi (YT), yemden yararlanma oranı (YYO), karkas verimi parametreleri üzerine etkileri incelenmiştir. Çalışmada, toplamda 66 adet günlük yaşta broyler civciv kullanılmış; bunlardan biri kontrol (K) diğeri deneme (D) olmak üzere iki ana grup oluşturulmuş ve her biri ise eşit sayılarda civciv içeren üç alt gruba bölünmüştür. Denemede, broyler başlangıç ve geliştirme olmak üzere dönemsel iki ayrı yem formülasyonu hazırlanmış, bu formülasyonlar K grubuna katkısız olarak, D grubuna ise -temel rasyona ilaveten- %0.1 oranında PEK ve yine aynı oranda karagenan katkısı yapılmış; bu yemler gruplara 42 gün boyunca ad libitum olarak yedirilmiştir. Deneme süresince grupların YT ve CA verileri haftalık periyotlarla ölçümlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre K ve D gruplarının totalde ulaştıkları ortalama CA, CAA,YT ve YYO verileri yönü ile gruplar arasında istatistikî anlamda bir farklılığın olmadığı belirlenmiştir (P>0.05). Ayrıca hemen tüm karkas ve iç organ parametreleri yönüyle de gruplar arası veriler benzer sonuçlanmış (P>0.05); yalnızca D grubunda taşlık organına ait verilerde istatistiki öneme sahip bir değişimin ve/veya eğilimin olduğu, kontrol grubuna kıyasla deneme grubunda daha düşük sonuçlandığı belirlenmiştir (P<0.05). Sonuç olarak, PEK ile Karagenanın belirtilen oranlarda birlikte kullanımının broyler piliçlerin performans parametrelerinde önemli bir değişime neden olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Bu durumun, ticari bir ürün olan PEK’in ve/veya özel kimyasal yapısından dolayı karagenanın biyoaktif etkinliğinin uygun ve yeterli olamamasından kaynaklanmış olabileceği gibi özellikle kafes stresine bağlı olarak da şekillenmiş olabileceği düşünülmektedir. Bununla birlikte bu katkı maddelerinin piliçlerin gelişim performansları üzerine herhangi bir olumsuz etkileri ile de karşılaşılmamıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Demirci, M., Gedikkaya, M. (2025). Determination of the Effects of Carrageenan Supplementation Alongside a Probiotic & Enzyme Complex to Broiler Diets on Performance and Carcass Parameters. Bozok Veterinary Sciences, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 79–87. https://doi.org/10.58833/bozokvetsci.1806219

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (36)

  1. Lancaster PA, Larson RL. Evaluation of strategies to improve the Environmental and Economic sustainability of cow–calf production systems. Animals 2022; 12: 385.
  2. Kaushal S, Sharma RK, Singh DV, Shukla SK, Kumar S, et al. Performance, carcass characteristics and economics of broiler chickens fed dietary enzymes and probiotic. Iranian Journal of Veterinary Research 2019; 20: 293-298.
  3. Maria LP, Lizana RR, Camargos RDS, Leme BB, Marçal BV, et al. Effect of probiotic and β-mannanase supplementation on the productive performance and intestinal health of broiler chickens challenged by Eimeria maxima and Clostridium perfringens. Poultry 2024; 3: 239.
  4. Mun JY, Tajudeen H, Ha SH, Lee JH, Lokhande A, et al. Nutrient density and the collaborative impact of exogenous enzyme blend on the performance of broiler chicken. Animal Bioscience 2024; 38: 131.
  5. Valente Junior DT, Genova JL, Kim SW, Saraiva A, Rocha GC. Carbohydrases and phytase in poultry and pig nutrition: a review beyond the nutrients and energy matrix. Animals 2024; 14: 226.
  6. Slominski BA. Recent advances in research on enzymes for poultry diets. Poultry Science 2011; 90: 2013-2023.
  7. Alagawany M, Elnesr SS, Farag MR. The role of exogenous enzymes in promoting growth and improving nutrient digestibility in poultry. Iranian Journal of Veterinary Research 2018; 19: 157-164.
  8. Chen X, Zhang GM, Wang WW, Liu GH, Cai HY, et al. Compound non-starch polysaccharide enzymes improve growth performance, slaughter performance, immune function, and apparent utilization rate of nutrients in broiler chickens fed a low-metabolizable energy diet. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 2023; 10: 1162811.
  9. Isah A, Loh TC, Foo HL, Samsudin AA, Chung ELT, et al. Influence of microbial phytase on nutrient digestibility, growth performance, geometric bone characteristics, and expression of calcium and phosphate homeostasis genes in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Animal Research 2025; 53: 2491557.
  10. Cowieson AJ, Adeola O. Carbohydrases, protease, and phytase have an additive beneficial effect in nutritionally marginal diets for broiler chicks. Poultry Science 2005; 84: 1860-1867.
  11. Halder N, Sunder J, De AK, Bhattacharya D, Joardar SN. Probiotics in poultry: a comprehensive review. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology 2024; 85: 23. doi: 10.1186/s41936-024-00379-5.
  12. Swanson KS, Allenspach K, Amos G, Auchtung TA, Bassett SA, et al. Use of biotics in animals: impact on nutrition, health, and food production. Journal of Animal Science 2025; 103: skaf061.
  13. Naeem M, Bourassa D. Probiotics in poultry: Unlocking productivity through microbiome modulation and gut health. Microorganisms 2025; 13: 257.
  14. Krysiak K, Konkol D, Korczyński M. Overview of the use of probiotics in poultry production. Animals 2021; 11: 1620.
  15. Polidoro BR, de Oliveira MJK, Braga FDSC, Polycarpo GDV. Mannan oligosaccharide as an alternative to infeed antibiotics to improve growth performance of broilers: a meta-analysis. British Poultry Science 2025; 66: 98-106.
  16. Ravanal MC, Contador CA, Wong WT, Zhang Q, Roman-Benn, et al. Prebiotics in animal nutrition: Harnessing agro-industrial waste for improved gut health and performance. Animal Nutrition 2025; 21: 179-192.
  17. Yue T, Lu Y, Ding W, Xu B, Zhang C, et al. The role of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, and postbiotics in livestock and poultry gut health: A review. Metabolites 2025; 15: 478.
  18. Trela J, Kierończyk B, Aslam MR, Szymkowiak P, Rawski M, et al. Bacillus licheniformis and phytase combination in broiler chicken diets: Effects on growth performance, digestibility coefficients, gut microbiome activities, and bone quality. Livestock Science 2024; 289: 105586.
  19. Atuahene D, Sam BA, Idan F, Sana SS, Knop R, et al. Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics in Pigs and Poultry: A Review of Gut Health, Performance, and Environmental Outcomes. Veterinary Sciences 2025; 12: 1054.
  20. Jenkins G, Mason P. The role of prebiotics and probiotics in human health: a systematic review with a focus on gut and immune health. Food & Nutrition Journal 2022; 7: 245. doi: 10.29011/2575-7091.100245. 21. Ballini A, Charitos IA, Cantore S, Topi S, Bottalico L, et al. About functional foods: The probiotics and prebiotics state of art. Antibiotics 2023; 12: 635.
  21. Gao Q, Wang Y, Li J, Bai G, Liu L, et al. Supplementation of multi-enzymes alone or combined with inactivated Lactobacillus benefits growth performance and gut microbiota in broilers fed wheat diets. Frontiers in Microbiology 2022; 13: 927932.
  22. Zhao Z, Liswaniso S, Qin N, Cao S, Wu X, et al. Effects of a novel synbiotics-enzyme complex as a replacement for antibiotics on growth performance, slaughter and meat characteristics, immune organ index, and intestinal morphology of broilers. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 2024; 11: 1468847.
  23. Dong S, Li L, Hao F, Fang Z, Zhong R, et al. Improving quality of poultry and its meat products with probiotics, prebiotics, and phytoextracts. Poultry Science 2024; 103: 103287. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.103287. 25. Yuliarti O, Sentana AD, Ong CY, Yassin ZAR, Ng L, et al. Structural properties of cottonii seaweed (Kappaphycus alvarezii) gels in the presence of coconut milk. Food Hydrocolloids 2023; 145: 109087.
  24. Zheng LX, Liu Y, Tang S, Zhang W, Cheong KL. Preparation methods, biological activities, and potential applications of marine algae oligosaccharides: A review. Food Science and Human Wellness 2023; 12: 359-370.
  25. Kiaalhosseini FS, Ashayerizadeh O, Dastar B. Effect of different levels of probiotic primalac and kappa-carrageenan on growth performance, gut microbiota and blood parameters of broiler chickens. Research On Animal Production 2023; 14: 59-69.
  26. NRC. National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of poultry. 9th Rev Edition. Washington: National Academy Press, 1994.
  27. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 18th edition. Gaithersburg: AOAC International, 2005.
  28. Ren Y, Tian Y, Hou M, Zhao Y, Li J, et al. Evaluation of stimbiotic on growth performance and intestinal development of broilers fed corn-or wheat-based diets. Poultry Science 2023; 102: 103094.
  29. Pedersen NB, Zaefarian F, Storm AC, Ravindran V, Cowieson AJ. Mathematical prediction of ileal energy and protein digestibility in broilers using multivariate data analysis. Poultry Science 2021; 100: 101106.
  30. Kırkpınar F, Açıkgöz Z, Mert S, Işık Ö. Effects of dietary probiotic, prebiotic and enzyme mixture supplementation on performance, carcase, organs, ileal ph and viscosity of broilers. Hayvansal Üretim 2018; 59: 1-9.
  31. Saiyed MA, Joshi RS, Savaliya FP, Patel AB, Mishra RK, et al. Study on inclusion of probiotic, prebiotic and its combination in broiler diet and their effect on carcass characteristics and economics of commercial broilers. Veterinary World 2015; 8: 225.
  32. Brenes A, Smith M, Guenter W, Marquardt RR. Effect of enzyme supplementation on the performance and digestive tract size of broiler chickens fed wheat-and barley-based diets. Poultry Science 1993; 72: 1731-1739.
  33. Brenes A, Marquardt RR, Guenter W, Viveros A. Effect of enzyme addition on the performance and gastrointestinal tract size of chicks fed lupin seed and their fractions. Poultry Science 2002; 81: 670-678.
  34. Askri A, Raach-Moujahed A, M’hamdi N, Maalaoui Z, Debbabi H. Broiler’s performance and carcass characteristics improvement by prebiotic supplementation. Large Animal Review 2020; 26: 249-256.
  35. Cordeiro DA, Dos Santos FR, Dos Santos HB, Silva MRS, de Oliveira NF, et al. Enzymatic complex for broilers fed on a diet containing different levels of distiller dried grains with solubles. Food Chemistry 2022; 386: 132761.
  36. Omrani AH, Mousavi SN, Foroudi F, Jafarabadi GA, Hosseini SA, et al. The effects of probiotic and threonine application on the carcass yield, internal organ development, intestinal morphology and cecal microbiota of broilers challenged with Clostridium perfringens. Research in Veterinary Science 2023; 160: 1-10.