Optimisation of broilers performance to different dietary levels of fibre and different levels and sources of fat from 0 to 14 days of age

Figures & data

Table 1. Dietary nutrient concentrations used in central composite design response surface methodology to feed broiler chicks from 0 to 14 days of age.

Item (% of diet)	Level
	1	0	−1
Sugar beet pulp (SBP)	3.50	1.75	0.00
Tallow (T)	1.00	0.50	0.00
Soybean oil (SO)	1.00	0.50	0.00

Table 2. Sugar beet pulp (SBP), Tallow (T), and Soybean oil (SO) concentrations in experimental diets prepared according to a central composite design (3 levels, 3 factors) and corresponding experimental response values for ADG and FCR in broiler chicks from 0 to 7 days and 7 to 14 days of age.

Treatment numbers	Replications^a	Factors (% of diet)			Experimental response (0–7 days)				Experimental response (7–14 days)
		SBP	T	SO	ADG, g/bird/day	±SD	FCR	±SD	ADG, g/bird/day	±SD	FCR	±SD
1	18	1.75	0.50	0.50	18.29	0.87	1.24	0.09	44.21	3.07	1.61	0.27
2	3	3.50	1.00	0.00	11.66	0.77	1.94	0.77	21.81	0.90	2.18	0.08
3	3	0.00	0.00	1.00	15.12	1.79	1.56	0.12	28.84	1.61	1.31	0.07
4	3	3.50	1.00	1.00	11.94	0.47	2.10	0.12	22.81	1.60	2.66	0.56
5	3	0.00	1.00	1.00	16.78	0.51	1.36	0.16	37.73	3.87	1.62	0.16
6	3	1.75	0.00	0.50	17.69	1.99	1.45	0.13	43.03	3.14	1.14	0.14
7	3	0.00	1.00	0.00	15.64	1.89	1.21	0.06	24.03	2.01	1.55	0.14
8	3	0.00	0.50	0.50	19.04	1.01	1.19	0.09	42.89	1.36	1.45	0.06
9	3	1.75	0.50	0.00	17.42	0.88	1.50	0.13	45.23	3.09	1.11	0.14
10	3	1.75	1.00	0.50	17.69	0.40	1.38	0.17	34.60	3.03	1.39	0.03
11	3	3.50	0.00	0.00	12.14	0.19	2.05	0.19	24.81	3.38	2.25	0.11
12	3	1.75	0.50	1.00	15.07	1.53	1.40	0.06	23.73	2.54	1.57	0.18
13	3	3.50	0.00	1.00	12.48	0.44	2.04	0.15	22.81	0.57	2.28	0.29
14	3	0.00	0.00	0.00	22.65	0.53	0.86	0.01	38.63	3.57	1.74	0.19
15	3	3.50	0.50	0.50	11.80	0.66	2.10	0.08	22.53	1.07	2.50	0.13

^aA total of 60 run numbers were provided.

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil; SD: standard deviation.

Table 3. Composition of the experimental diets.

Ingredient (%, as-fed basis)	Treatments^a
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
Broken rice	69.06	69.14	68.98	66.17	66.82	70.14	69.79	69.38	70.55	67.98	71.30	67.58	68.33	71.95	68.74
Soy protein concentrate, 84% CP	20.07	19.89	20.25	20.18	20.46	19.96	20.17	20.21	19.92	20.17	19.68	20.21	19.97	19.96	19.93
Dicalcium phosphate	1.42	1.41	1.43	1.45	1.46	1.41	1.42	1.42	1.40	1.43	1.39	1.44	1.42	1.39	1.42
Limestone	1.59	1.56	1.61	1.54	1.60	1.59	1.62	1.62	1.60	1.58	1.57	1.58	1.55	1.63	1.56
Soybean oil	0.50	0.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.50	0.00	0.50	0.00	0.50	0.00	1.00	1.00	0.00	0.50
Tallow	0.50	1.00	0.00	1.00	1.00	0.00	1.00	0.50	0.50	1.00	0.00	0.50	0.00	0.00	0.50
Sugar beet pulp	1.75	3.50	0.00	3.50	0.00	1.75	0.00	0.00	1.75	1.75	3.50	1.75	3.50	0.00	3.50
Sand	3.52	1.91	5.14	3.57	6.07	3.05	4.41	4.77	2.69	3.99	0.97	4.35	2.64	3.47	2.27
Vitamin and mineral premix^b	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50
L-Lysine HCl	0.10	0.10	0.10	0.09	0.09	0.10	0.10	0.10	0.11	0.10	0.11	0.10	0.10	0.11	0.10
DL-Methionine	0.57	0.56	0.57	0.57	0.58	0.57	0.57	0.57	0.56	0.57	0.56	0.57	0.57	0.56	0.57
L-Threonine	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09	0.09
NaHCO3	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12	0.12
Salt (NaCl)	0.21	0.21	0.21	0.22	0.22	0.21	0.21	0.21	0.21	0.21	0.21	0.22	0.21	0.21	0.21

^aFifteen diets of central composite design containing 3 levels of SBP (0.00, 1.75, 3.50%), T (0.00, 0.50, 1.00%) and SO (0.00, 0.50, 1.00%).

^bProvided the followings per kg of diet: vitamin A (trans-retinyl acetate), 12,500 U; vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol), 5000 U; vitamin E (D L-α tocopherol acetate), 80 U; vitamin K (menadione), 3.20 mg; riboflavin, 8.6 mg; pantothenic acid (D-Ca pantothenate), 18.6 mg; pyridoxine (pyridoxine-HCl), 4.86 mg; thiamine, 3.2 mg; vitamin B₁₂ (cyanocobalamin), 0.02 mg; biotin, 0.25 mg; folic acid, 2.2 mg; nicotinic acid, 62.51 mg; ethoxyquin (antioxidant), 2.5 mg. Fe, 20.23 mg; Zn, 110 mg; Mn, 120 mg; Cu, 16 mg; I, 1.25 mg; Se, 0.30 mg.

Table 4. Chemical composition of the experimental diets (calculated and determined analysis, %).

	Treatments: fifteen diets of central composite design containing 3 levels of SBP (0.00, 1.75, 3.50%), T (0.00, 0.50, 1.00%) and SO (0.00, 0.50, 1.00%).
Calculated analysis, %	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
AME, kcal/kg	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100	3100
Crude protein	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00	23.00
Ether extract	1.78	1.30	2.25	2.25	2.21	1.79	1.26	1.76	1.30	1.76	1.34	2.25	2.29	1.30	1.80
Crude fibre	1.28	1.56	1.00	1.51	0.97	1.29	1.01	1.01	1.30	1.26	1.59	1.26	1.54	1.04	1.55
Insoluble fibre	1.10	2.05	0.15	2.04	0.15	1.10	0.16	0.15	1.10	1.10	2.05	1.10	2.05	0.16	2.05
Soluble fibre	0.22	0.41	0.04	0.41	0.04	0.22	0.04	0.04	0.22	0.22	0.41	0.22	0.41	0.04	0.41
Acid detergent fibre	1.65	2.06	1.25	2.01	1.20	1.67	1.25	1.24	1.67	1.63	2.10	1.62	2.04	1.29	2.05
Neutral detergent fibre	4.38	5.03	3.74	4.87	3.60	4.43	3.76	3.74	4.46	4.32	5.15	4.30	4.99	3.88	5.01
Lysine	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40	1.40
Methionine	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.84	0.85	0.85	0.85	0.85
Met + Cys	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05	1.05
Threonine	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95	0.95
Tryptophan	0.26	0.26	0.26	0.25	0.25	0.26	0.26	0.26	0.26	0.26	0.26	0.25	0.26	0.26	0.26
Calcium	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96
Available phosphorus	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.45	0.48	0.48	0.48	0.48
Sodium	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16	0.16
Chlorine	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.17	0.18	0.17	0.18	0.17	0.18	0.17	0.17	0.18	0.17
Determined analysis, %
Crude fibre	2.32	2.71	2.03	3.05	2.12	2.41	2.14	2.00	2.29	2.24	2.80	2.22	1.67	1.11	1.69
Insoluble fibre	2.15	3.00	1.10	2.11	0.99	2.43	1.00	2.21	2.25	1.12	3.11	2.13	4.03	0.95	2.00
Soluble fibre	0.47	0.69	0.12	1.56	0.50	0.18	0.17	0.20	0.30	0.41	0.75	0.39	1.27	0.11	1.01
Acid detergent fibre	2.71	3.10	2.29	3.25	2.42	2.75	2.22	2.30	3.12	2.60	3.25	2.74	3.30	2.42	4.24
Neutral detergent fibre	5.36	7.11	4.60	5.46	5.23	5.34	4.78	4.80	5.32	5.48	6.14	5.58	6.42	5.01	6.25

AME: apparent metabolisable energy.

Table 5. Analysis of major fatty acids in tallow and soybean oil (%).

Fatty acids	Tallow	Soybean oil
Stearic acid (C18:0)	29.29	3.79
Palmitic acid (C16:0)	27.34	11.54
Lauric acid (C14:0)	3.04	0.50
Oleic acid (C18:1)	28.51	23.51
Linoleic acid (C18:2)	3.81	52.78
Linolenic acid (C18:3)	0.51	6.95
SFA:UFA	60:33	16:84

SFA: saturated fatty acids; UFA: unsaturated fatty acids.

Table 6. Analysis of variance on the experimental results along with the contribution of each type of effect (linear, quadratic, and interaction) to the statistical fit in response surface model for ADG and FCR in broiler chicks from 0 to 7 days of age.

Source of variation	ADG model				FCR model
	df	Sum of squares	R2	p-Value*	Sum of squares	R^2	p-Value
Linear	3	288.10	0.49	<.0001	5.13	0.60	<.0001
Quadratic	3	136.17	0.24	<.0001	1.65	0.20	<.0001
Interaction	3	53.29	0.10	<.0001	0.25	0.03	.04
Total model (regression)	9	477.56	0.82	<.0001	7.04	0.83	<.0001
Lack of fit	5	37.83		<.0001	0.87		<.0001
Pure error	45	61.72			0.55
Total error	50	99.55			1.43

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio.

*p < .05 = significant.

Table 7. Optimisation analysis on response surface model (RSM) to reach maximum ADG and minimum FCR in broiler chicks from 0 to 7 and 7 to 14 days of age.

Item	Input variable^a (% of diet)			Predicted output variable at optimal point
	SBP	T	SO
0 to 7 days of age
ADG	0.00	0.00	0.00	Maximum= 21.56 g/bird/day
FCR	0.00	0.00	0.00	Minimum= 1.01
7 to 14 days of age
ADG	0.60	0.33	0.45	Maximum = 43.44 g/bird/day
FCR	0.98	0.00	1.00	Minimum = 1.10

^aDietary percentage of sugar beet pulp (SBP), tallow (T), and soybean oil (SO).

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio; SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil.

Figure 1. Absolute t-value indicating contribution of each response surface model term to the statistical fit for average daily body weight gain (ADG) in broiler chicks. SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil (0–7 days of age); ns: not significant.

Figure 2. Absolute t-value indicating contribution of each response surface model term to the statistical fit for feed conversion ratio (FCR) in broiler chicks. SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil (0–7 days of age); ns: not significant.

Table 8. Estimated parameters of response surface model for ADG and FCR in broiler chicks from 0 to 7 days of age.

Quadratic model term^a	ADG model					FCR model
	Estimated parameter from raw data	SE	t- value	p-Value*	Estimated parameter from coded data	Estimated parameter from raw data	SE	t- value	p Value	Estimated parameter from coded data
Intercept	21.56	0.28	64.28	<.0001	18.00	1.01	0.03	38.64	<.0001	1.30
SBP	−0.04	0.25	−11.34	<.0001	−2.92	−0.003	0.03	13.04	<.0001	0.40
T	−5.07	0.25	−2.47	.01	−0.63	0.01	0.03	0.08	.93	0.002
SO	−0.29	0.25	−3.15	<.01	−0.81	0.16	0.03	2.90	<.01	0.08
SBP × SBP	−0.69	0.49	−4.35	<.0001	−2.13	0.08	0.05	4.43	<.0001	0.26
T × T	0.55	0.49	0.28	.77	0.13	0.14	0.05	0.59	.55	0.03
SO × SO	−5.24	0.49	−2.67	.01	−1.31	0.28	0.05	1.18	.24	0.07
SBP × T	0.62	0.28	1.88	.06	0.54	−0.03	0.03	−0.78	.43	−0.02
SBP × SO	1.00	0.28	3.04	<.01	0.87	−0.09	0.03	−2.51	.01	−0.08
T × SO	4.31	0.28	3.74	<.0001	1.07	−0.18	0.03	−1.35	.18	−0.04

^aDietary percentage of sugar beet pulp (SBP), tallow (T), and soybean oil (SO).

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio; SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil.

*p < .05 = significant.

Table 9. Analysis of variance on the experimental results along with contribution of each type of effect (linear, quadratic, and interaction) to the statistical fit in response surface model for ADG and FCR in broiler chicks from 7 to 14 days of age.

Source of variation	ADG model				FCR model
	df	Sum of squares	R2	p-Value*	Sum of squares	R^2	p-Value
Linear	3	1178.23	0.21	<.0001	5.56	0.42	<.0001
Quadratic	3	2796.37	0.50	<.0001	3.51	0.27	<.0001
Interaction	3	274.94	0.04	.03	0.63	0.05	.02
Total model (regression)	9	4249.53	0.74	<.0001	9.71	0.74	<.0001
Lack of fit	5	1079.16		.09	2.49		.10
Pure error	45	346.36			0.77
Total error	50	1425.52			3.27

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio.

*p < .05 = significant.

Figure 3. Absolute t-value indicating contribution of each response surface model term to the statistical fit for average daily body weight gain (ADG) in broiler chicks. SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil (0–7 days of age); ns: not significant.

Figure 4. Absolute t-value indicating contribution of each response surface model term to the statistical fit for feed conversion ratio (FCR) in broiler chicks. SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil (0–7 days of age); ns: not significant.

Table 10. Estimated parameters of response surface model for ADG and FCR in broiler chicks from 7 to 14 days of age.

Quadratic model term^a	ADG model					FCR model
	Estimated parameter from raw data	SE	t-value	p-Value*	Estimated parameter from coded data	Estimated parameter from raw data	SE	t-value	p-Value	Estimated parameter from coded data
Intercept	39.48	1.06	40.33	<.0001	42.74	1.62	0.05	30.11	<.0001	1.52
SBP	5.82	0.97	−5.88	<.0001	−5.73	−0.49	0.46	9.00	<.0001	0.42
T	−3.83	0.97	−1.76	.08	−1.71	0.36	0.46	1.45	.15	0.06
SO	15.11	0.97	−1.91	.06	−1.86	−0.09	0.46	1.36	.18	0.06
SBP × SBP	−2.55	1.86	−4.21	<.0001	−7.82	0.18	0.89	6.50	<.0001	0.57
T × T	−6.89	1.86	−0.93	.73	−1.72	−0.51	0.89	−1.45	.15	−0.12
SO × SO	−24.23	1.86	−3.26	<.01	−6.06	−0.22	0.89	−0.64	.52	−0.05
SBP × T	0.39	1.09	0.31	.75	0.34	0.02	0.05	0.48	.63	0.02
SBP × SO	−0.70	1.09	−0.56	.57	−0.61	0.12	0.05	2.07	.04	0.10
T × SO	13.25	1.09	3.04	<.01	3.31	0.47	0.05	2.29	.02	0.11

^aDietary percentage of sugar beet pulp (SBP), tallow (T), and soybean oil (SO).

ADG: average daily body weight gain; FCR: feed conversion ratio; SBP: sugar beet pulp; T: tallow; SO: soybean oil.

*p < .05 = significant.

Abudabos AM. 2013. Feeding alternative source of fat to broilers. Res. 10:84–87.

 Google Scholar