Dietary supplementation of Echinacea purpurea powder improved performance, serum lipid profile, and yolk oxidative stability in laying hens

Figures & data

Table 1. Ingredients and chemical composition of basal diet (as-fed basis).

Items (g/kg unless stated otherwise)	43–54 wk of age
Ingredients
Corn, yellow	551.9
Soybean meal	253.7
Wheat bran^a	50.0
Sunflower oil	17.7
Monocalcium phosphate	14.7
Limestone	69.7
Oyster shell	30.0
Mineral premix^b	2.5
Vitamin premix^c	2.5
Common salt	2.9
Sodium bicarbonate	1.5
DL-Methionine	1.8
L-Lysine.HCl	0.5
L-Threonine	0.5
Nutrient composition
AMEn (MJ/kg)	11.3
Crude protein	162.5
Methionine	4.4
Methionine + cysteine	7.2
Lysine	8.9
Threonine	6.8
Tryptophan	2.3
Arginine	11.2
Calcium	41.0
Non-phytate P	4.6
Sodium	1.7

^aVarying levels of Echinacea powder (2.5–10 g/kg of diet) were included into the diets at the expense of equal amount of wheat bran, so chemical composition was similar among the experimental diets.

^bMineral premix provided per kilogram of diet: Mn (from MnSO₄.H₂O), 90 mg; zinc, 80 mg; Fe (from FeSO₄.7H₂O), 60 mg; Cu (from CuSO₄.5H₂O), 10 mg; I (from Ca (IO₃)₂.H₂O), 0.8 mg; Se, 0.3 mg; cobalt, 0.15 mg.

^cVitamin premix provided per kilogram of diet: vitamin A (from vitamin A acetate), 9000 IU; vitamin D₃, 2500 IU; vitamin E (from dl-α-tocopheryl acetate), 15 IU; vitamin B₁, 2.2 mg; vitamin B₂, 4 mg; pantothenic acid, 8 mg; vitamin B₆, 2 mg; niacin, 30 mg; vitamin B₁₂, 0.015 mg; folic acid, 0.5 mg; biotin, 0.15 mg; choline (from choline chloride 60%), 400 mg.

Table 2. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on performance parameters of laying hens during 44–49 wk of age.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Egg production (%)	Egg weight (g)	Egg mass (g/d per hen)	Feed intake (g/d per hen)	FCR (g feed/g egg)
Control	–	74.85^b	60.11	44.90	104.30	2.34^a
Echinacea	2.5	82.22^a^b	60.47	49.70	107.78	2.19^a^b
	5	81.41^a^b	61.02	49.68	105.58	2.13^b
	7.5	86.24^a	60.88	52.45	106.51	2.04^b
	10	77.70^b	60.40	47.01	104.48	2.24^a^b
SEM		2.33	0.69	1.50	1.85	0.10
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.0435	0.6932	0.1629	0.5127	0.0500
Control vs. Echinacea		0.0391	0.4285	0.0104	0.3619	0.0743

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,bMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.

Table 3. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on performance parameters of laying hens during 49–54 wk of age.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Egg production (%)	Egg weight (g)	Egg mass (g/d per hen)	Feed intake (g/d per hen)	FCR (g feed/g egg)
Control	–	77.70^b	63.88	49.27^c	103.46	2.13
Echinacea	2.5	80.03^a	65.44	51.89^a^b	104.36	2.00
	5	80.52^a	65.02	52.50^a	105.80	2.03
	7.5	78.82^a^b	62.92	49.57^c	105.11	2.13
	10	77.14^b	65.02	50.15^b^c	103.69	2.07
SEM		0.65	0.83	0.66	1.47	0.08
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.0428	0.5917	0.0381	0.7315	0.2349
Control vs. Echinacea		0.0204	0.6346	0.0174	0.6237	0.3157

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,b,cMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.

Table 4. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on egg quality indices in laying hens at wk 49 of age.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Shell strength (kg/cm^2)	Shell thickness (mm)	HU	Yolk index	Yolk colour
Control	–	2.66	0.384	84.54	0.448	7.44
Echinacea	2.5	2.78	0.388	81.12	0.443	7.78
	5	2.71	0.391	84.88	0.455	7.90
	7.5	2.66	0.383	81.03	0.458	7.88
	10	2.13	0.387	80.67	0.462	7.79
SEM		0.33	0.01	1.76	0.01	0.15
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.4361	0.6751	0.2943	0.1746	0.2761
Control vs. Echinacea		0.3248	0.5953	0.1802	0.0825	0.0383

SEM, standard error of means.

Table 5. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on egg quality indices in laying hens at wk 54 of age.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Shell strength (kg/cm^2)	Shell thickness (mm)	HU	Yolk index	Yolk colour
Control	–	2.90	0.384	84.41	0.433	8.17
Echinacea	2.5	2.73	0.382	85.81	0.452	8.30
	5	2.74	0.370	86.04	0.442	8.37
	7.5	2.71	0.381	84.65	0.450	8.24
	10	2.80	0.375	85.37	0.433	8.45
SEM		0.11	0.01	1.68	0.01	0.15
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.3452	0.6752	0.4619	0.0827	0.3193
Control vs. Echinacea		0.2009	0.2763	0.2130	0.1146	0.1842

SEM, standard error of means.

Table 6. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on proportion (%) of peripheral leukocyte subpopulations in 54-wk-aged laying hens.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Lymphocytes (L)	Monocytes	Heterophils (H)	Eosinophils	H:L ratio
Control	–	70.0	1.7^b^c	27.2	1.1	0.389
Echinacea	2.5	70.3	1.9^b^c	25.8	2.0	0.367
	5	69.9	2.2^a^b	26.2	1.7	0.375
	7.5	69.3	2.9^a	25.8	2.0	0.372
	10	68.4	1.3^c	28.6	1.7	0.418
SEM		1.58	0.28	1.50	0.39	0.02
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.7124	0.0091	0.5113	0.1705	0.2246
Control vs. Echinacea		0.5017	0.1873	0.5461	0.0805	0.3096

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,b,cMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.

Table 7. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on antibody responses (log₂) against NDV and SRBC in laying hens.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	NDV titre	Anti-SRBC antibody titres
			Primary	Secondary
Control	–	2.98	1.92	1.85^b
Echinacea	2.5	3.25	2.38	2.40^a^b
	5	3.20	2.18	2.22^b
	7.5	3.31	1.81	2.53^a^b
	10	2.95	2.32	3.35^a
SEM		0.23	0.33	0.31
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.4287	0.3191	0.0470
Control vs. Echinacea		0.2361	0.1842	0.0116

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,bMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.

Table 8. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on serum lipid metabolites (mg/dl) of laying hens during different ages.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Triglycerides		Cholesterol		HDL
		wk 49	wk 54	wk 49	wk 54	wk 49	wk 54
Control	–	1475^a	1581	216	138^a	36	16^b
Echinacea	2.5	1429^a^b	1510	176	112^b	51	16^b
	5	1400^b^c	1528	176	133^a	44	21^a
	7.5	1350^c	1536	170	120^a^b	47	22^a
	10	1338^c	1466	160	128^a^b	48	24^a
SEM		22.01	26.67	13.53	5.62	2.93	1.59
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.0074	0.1139	0.0846	0.0382	0.1224	0.0063
Control vs. Echinacea		0.0013	0.0359	0.0015	0.0531	0.0204	0.0375

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,b,cMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.

Table 9. Effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of Echinacea purpurea powder on egg components and yolk oxidative stability in laying hens.

Treatments	Level (g/kg of diet)	Triglycerides (mg/egg)	Cholesterol (mg/egg)	MDA (ppb)
Control	–	150	141^a^b^c	297
Echinacea	2.5	178	150^a	272
	5	164	143^a^b	279
	7.5	184	130^b^c	191
	10	179	124^c	207
SEM		10.07	6.09	32.71
Probability
Dietary treatments		0.1648	0.0274	0.1209
Control vs. Echinacea		0.0107	0.2006	0.0413

SEM, standard error of means.

^a,b,cMeans with no common superscripts within each column are significantly (P < .05) different.