Effect of dietary supplementation with full-fat silkworm (Bombyx mori L.) chrysalis meal on growth performance and meat quality of Rhode Island Red × Fayoumi crossbred chickens

Figures & data

Table 1. Ingredients of the experimental diets (g/kg as fed).

	Experimental diets
	Control	SWM25	SWM50
Maize	520	560	510
Rice bran	115	100	163
Soybean meal	280	210	140
Bombyx mori chrysalis meal	0	70	140
Meat and bone meal	45	20	0
Soybean oil	10	0	0
Dicalcium phosphate	20.0	31.5	40.0
DL-Methionine	2.5	2.0	1.0
L-Lysine	2.0	1.0	0.5
NaCl	2.5	2.5	2.5
Na-Bicarbonate	0.5	0.5	0.5
Vitamin–mineral premix^a	2.5	2.5	2.5

^aThe vitamin–mineral premix provided the following per kg of diet: Vitamin-A, 125000 I.U.; Vitamin-D3 2500, I.U.; Vitamin-E, 20 mg; Vitamin-K3, 4 mg; Vitamin-B1, 2.5 mg; Viaamin-B2, 2 mg; Viatamin-B6, 4 mg; Folic acid, 40 mg; Pantothenic acid, 12.5 mg; Vitamin-BI2, 12 mg; Biotin, 0.l mg; Cobalt, 0.4 mg; Copper, 10 mg; Iron, 60 mg; Manganese, 60 mg; Zinc, 50 mg; Selenium, 0.15 mg; Choline chloride, 300 mg.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Table 2. Chemical composition (g/kg, as is basis) of the silkworm chrysalis meal (SWM) and of the experimental diets.

	SWM	Experimental diets
		Control	SWM25	SWM50
Dry matter	899	897	898	900
Crude protein	502	170	170	168
Ether extract	335	67	60	64
Nitrogen-free extracts^a	–	566	582	581
Crude fibre	–	49	48	49
Ash	63	45	39	38
Ca	–	9.6	10	10
P	–	6.0	7.0	7.8
ME (MJ/kg)^b		12.8	12.8	12.8

^aCalculated as indicated by Cullere et al. (2016).

^bCalculated according to National Research Council, subcommittee on Poultry Nutrition (1994).

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Table 3. Fatty acid profile (% of total FAME) of the of the Bombyx mori pupae meal (SWM) and of the experimental diets.

Fatty acid (FA)	Bombyx mori pupae meal	Experimental diets
		Control	SWM25	SWM50
C6:0	0.00	0.09	0.06	0.05
C14:0	0.00	0.24	0.21	0.19
C15:0	0.17	0.00	0.00	0.00
C16:0	24.2	15.6	17.1	18.2
C17:0	0.00	0.10	0.10	0.11
C18:0	5.45	3.45	3.35	3.90
C20:0	0.00	0.12	0.13	0.06
C23:0	0.59	0.00	0.00	0.00
C24:0	0.00	0.10	0.11	0.00
C16:1	1.04	0.04	0.05	0.06
C18:1 n-9	31.2	32.8	34.5	34.0
C18:1 n-11	0.00	1.01	0.72	0.58
C20:1 n-9	0.00	0.39	0.50	0.61
C24:1 n-9	0.54	0.00	0.00	0.00
C18:2 n-6	6.16	40.7	33.8	28.4
C18:3 n-6	0.00	0.29	0.00	0.00
C20:3 n-6	0.00	0.07	0.00	0.00
C20:4 n-6	0.00	0.06	0.07	0.00
C22:2 n-6	0.06	0.00	0.00	0.00
C18:3 n-3	29.5	2.17	7.21	12.0
C20:5 n-3	0.00	0.06	0.00	0.00
C22:6 n-3	0.00	0.09	0.00	0.06
SFA	30.4	19.7	21.1	22.5
MUFA	32.8	34.3	35.8	35.2
PUFA	35.7	43.4	41.1	40.5
n-6	6.22	41.1	33.8	28.4
n-3	29.5	2.32	7.21	12.0
n-6/n-3	0.21	17.7	4.69	2.36
Identified FA, %	98.9	97.4	97.9	98.2

MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFA: saturated fatty acids.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Figure 1. (a) Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on the weekly body weight (g) of male chickens. ^a–cDifferent superscript letters differ for p < .05. ^A,BDifferent superscript letters differ for p < .01. (b) Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on the weekly body weight (g) of female chickens. ^a,bDifferent superscript letters differ for p < .05. ^A,BDifferent superscript letters differ for p < .01.

Table 4. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on chickens’ daily weight gain (g) for every week of the experiment.

	Experimental groups						SE^1	p-Diet	p-Sex	p-Diet*Sex
	Control		SWM25		SWM50
N.	32	33	40	25	27	38
Sex	M	F	M	F	M	F
Week 1	4.05	3.40	3.88	3.27	4.16	3.53	0.14	0.22	<0.001	0.98
Week 2	4.25	3.73	5.32	4.79	4.99	4.36	0.20	<0.001	<0.001	0.87
Week 3	12.0	10.0	13.4	12.8	11.9	13.4	0.59	0.06	<0.001	0.12
Week 4	15.2^A	13.7^B	15.8^A	15.5^A	14.4^AB	13.6^B	1.14	0.57	<0.001	0.01
Week 5	22.2^AB	20.7^C	23.8^A	23.5^A	23.3^A	21.8^BC	0.66	0.05	<0.001	0.01
Week 6	19.6	17.9	20.3	19.1	20.2	18.7	0.97	0.75	<0.001	0.60
Week 7	21.7^ABbc	15.2^C	25.1^Aa	22.4^ABc	17.8^BCd	16.4^C	0.85	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Week 8	20.4	13.2	24.7	18.6	16.3	10.5	1.36	<0.001	<0.001	0.72
Weeks 1–8	13.0	12.1	13.5	12.7	12.5	11.7	0.17	<0.001	<0.001	0.72

¹SE: Pooled standard error; ^A–CMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < .01; ^a–dMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < .05.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Table 5. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on feed intake (FI) and feed convertion rate (FCR) of chickens.

	Experimental groups			SE^1	p Value
	Control	SWM25	SWM50
N. pens	5	5	5
FI week 1–8, g/day/bird	39.7^ab	40.8^a	39.2^b	0.86	.03
FCR week 1–8	3.21	3.09	3.23	0.10	.10

¹SE: Pooled standard error; ^a,bMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < 0.05.

Table 6. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on carcase traits, internal organs and breast meat traits of male chickens.

	Treatments			SE^1	p Value
	Control	SWM25	SWM50
N. of birds	10	10	10
Slaughter weight (SW), g	821	846	809	15.3	.27
Carcase weight (CW), g	600	605	580	13.7	.40
Slaughter yield, %SW	73.2	71.6	71.7	1.51	.69
Gizzard, %SW	3.73	3.31	3.59	0.17	.64
Liver, %SW	3.61	3.56	3.51	0.16	.91
Heart, %SW	0.83^b	1.03^a	0.95^ab	0.04	.03
Leg, g	155	158	151	4.17	.56
Leg, %SW	25.8	26.2	26.1	0.67	.92
Thigh, g	86.3	87.1	86.0	2.42	.93
Thigh, %SW	14.9	14.6	14.8	0.66	.96
Drumstick, g	68.6	70.8	65.6	3.26	.54
Drumstick, %SW	11.3	11.5	11.2	0.37	.80
Breast (Pectoralis major m.)
Weight, g	98.8	103	102	3.75	.73
% SW	16.4^b	18.0^a	17.1^ab	0.33	.02
pHu	5.93^b	5.97^ab	6.13^a	0.04	.01
L*	57.3	59.1	56.1	1.33	.31
a*	2.84	3.64	3.18	0.40	.40
b*	8.63	10.5	8.50	0.77	.15

¹Pooled standard error; ^a,bMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < .05.

L*, a*, b* is the way to indicate colour coordinates for the CIE colour (CIE L*a*b*) system.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Table 7. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on the breast meat proximate composition (g/100 g meat) of male chickens.

	Treatments			SE^1	p Value
	Control	SWM25	SWM50
N of samples	5	5	5
Water	74.8	75.8	74.7	0.35	.07
Protein	23.3^a	22.2^b	23.3^a	0.29	.03
Lipids	0.83	0.91	0.95	0.19	.09
Ash	1.11^a	1.05^b	1.09^ab	0.01	.04

¹Pooled standard error. ^a,bMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < .05.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Figure 2. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on the breast muscle C18:3 n-3 (mg/100 g of meat) of male chickens. ^a–cDifferent superscript letters differ for p < .05. *C18:3 n-3: 6.75 versus 15.0 versus 28.4 mg/100 g meat for Control, SWM25 and SWM50 treatments, respectively.

Table 8. Effect of the dietary inclusion of 0% (Control), 25% (SWM25) and 50% (SWM50) silkworm meal on the breast meat fatty acid profile (% of total FAME) of male chickens.

	Treatments			SE^1	p Value
	Control	SWM25	SWM50
N of samples	5	5	5
C14:0	0.09	0.09	0.07	0.08	.98
C16:0	22.6	23.1	22.2	0.44	.32
C18:0	10.8	10.6	9.87	0.45	.38
C20:0	0.15	0.24	0.21	0.04	.24
C16:1	1.90	1.70	1.56	0.22	.56
C18:1 n-9	29.8	31.4	32.5	1.08	.24
C18:1 n-11	2.05^a	1.81^ab	1.65^b	0.10	.04
C18:2 n-6	18.3	16.5	17.0	0.66	.17
C20:2 n-6	0.27	0.28	0.24	0.03	.66
C20:3 n-6	0.52	0.42	0.41	0.05	.31
C20:4 n-6	4.93	3.96	3.17	0.63	.19
C22:2 n-6	0.04^b	0.20^a	0.04^b	0.03	.02
C18:3 n-3	0.88^B	1.88^ABb	3.20^Aa	0.27	<.001
C20:5 n-3	0.21	0.23	0.33	0.06	.31
C22:6 n-3	0.73	0.94	0.89	0.29	.88
SFA	33.7	34.0	32.3	0.54	.10
MUFA	33.7	34.9	35.7	1.19	.52
PUFA	25.9	24.4	25.3	0.85	.49
PUFA n-6	24.1^a	21.3^ab	20.9^b	0.74	.02
PUFA n-3	1.82^B	3.05^AB	4.43^A	0.39	<.01
n-6/n-3	14.0^A	7.50^B	4.91^B	1.06	<.001

MUFA: Monounsaturated Fatty Acids; PUFA: Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids; SFA: Saturated Fatty Acids. ¹Pooled standard error. ^a–cMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < 0.05. ^A–BMeans in the same row with different superscript letters differ for p < .01.

SWM= Silkworm meal; SWM25: diet in which the 25% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM; SWM50: diet in which the 50% of soybean meal was replaced by SWM.

Cullere M, Tasoniero G, Giaccone V, Miotti-Scapin R, Claeys E, De Smet S, Dalle Zotte A. 2016. Black soldier fly as dietary protein source for broiler quails: apparent digestibility, excreta microbial load, feed choice, performance, carcass and meat traits. Animal. 10(12):1923–1930.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

NRC-National Research Council, subcommittee on Poultry Nutrition. 1994. Nutrient requirements of poultry (9th revised edition, National Academy of Sciences). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

 Google Scholar