Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Wheat bran (WB) and biscuit crumbs (BC) offer alternative feed sources for laying hens, potentially improving productivity and economic efficiency.
Objective: This work evaluated the partial replacement of maize meal with WB or BC, with or without the addition of CECT 5940, on the productive and economic performance of laying hens.
Methods: Five treatments were allocated as follows: T1: a basal diet; T2: a basal diet where 20% of maize meal was replaced by WB; T3: a basal diet that included 20% of WB plus CECT 5940; T4: a basal diet where 20% of maize meal was replaced by BC; and T5: a basal diet that included 20% of BC plus CECT 5940. Productive parameters (live weight, laying rate, feed conversion per egg mass, feed conversion per dozen eggs, feed consumption, and viability) and economic metrics (feed costs, production cost per egg, production cost per dozen eggs, gross revenue, gross added value, profitability index, contribution margins, and break-even point) were assessed using ANOVA and the Tukey test.
Main Findings: A statistically significant ( < 0.05) increase was observed in the LR and FC/dz when maize meal was partially replaced with BC. While the addition of CECT 5940 to WB significantly improved LR and FC/dz when compared to T2 ( < 0.05), no significant difference was seen for BC ( > 0.05). As for the economic evaluation, both T2 and T3 significantly reduced production costs ( < 0.05). Compared to T1, the partial replacement of maize meal with WB significantly reduced ( < 0.05) gross revenue. The addition of CECT 5940 significantly increased ( < 0.05) gross value added, profitability index, and contribution margins, and significantly reduced the break-even point ( < 0.05) in comparison with T1 for WB and BC both with (T3 and T5) and without CECT 5940 (T2 and T4).
Conclusion: It was concluded that the addition of CECT 5940 to both WB and BC diets was as efficient as the basal diet in terms of productivity and improved economic performance.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400520 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1557640 | DOI Listing |