Abstract
Purpose. To investigate the effect of probiotic preparations on the digestibility of young pig rations. Methods. Zootechnical analysis, experiment and method of analogue groups. Results. Calculations showed that, on average, the piglets of the second and third experimental groups digested more of the nitrogen consumed with feed by 0.98 g and 2.26 g, respectively, than the young pigs of the control group. The average amount of nitrogen absorbed in the body and consumed with feed was greater in pigs of the second experimental group by 0.56 g, or 4.23%, in the third experimental group - by 3.48 g, or 26.3%. The highest level of assimilation of nitrogen from ingested and digested in piglets of the third experimental group was 9.43% and 8.26%, respectively. It was established that the average daily weight gain in piglets of the first control group was 550 g, in the second experimental group - 567 g (17 g, or 3.1%, more), in the third experimental group - 613 g (63 g, or 11.5%, more). The difference between the control and the third experimental group is not statistically significant, but there is a tendency to the increased gains in the third group. It was determined that the coefficient of digestibility of nutrients in piglets of the second experimental group is higher: as to dry matter – by 2.3%, organic matter – by 2.1%, protein – by 2.73%, fat – by 2.81%, fiber – by 0.83%, BER – by 2.32%. The third research group has higher indicators of: dry matter – by 5.11%, organic matter – by 4.86%, protein – by 5.82%, fat – by 4.31%, fiber – by 4.54%, BER – by 4.05% compared to the control group. The difference is not significant, but there is a tendency to increase in the digestibility coefficients in the third group that received subtiform probiotic (400 g/t). Conclusions. Probiotic preparations have a positive effect on the digestibility of nutrients in the diets of young pigs.
Publisher
Publishing House of National Academy Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine
Reference16 articles.
1. Shkromada O.I., Fotina T.I., Fotina H.A. et al. Vplyv Bacillus subtilis na porosiat na vidluchenni [Effects of Bacillus subtilis on piglets at weaning]. Visnyk Sumskoho natsionalnoho ahrarnoho universytetu [Bulletin of the Sumy National Agrarian University], 2022, no. 1(56), pp. 51-57. https://doi.org/10.32845/bsnau.vet.2022.1 [in Ukrainian].
2. Islam, K.S., Shiraj-Um-Mahmuda, S. & Hazzaz-Bin-Kabir, M. (2016). Antibiotic usage patterns in selected broiler farms of Bangladesh and their public health implications. Journal of Public Health in Developing Countries, no. 2(3), pp. 276-284. https://www.jphdc.org/index.php/jphdc/article/view/84.
3. Tanih, N.F., Sekwadi, E., Ndip, R.N. & Bessong, P.O. (2015). Detection of pathogenic Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus from cattle and pigs slaughtered in abattoirs in Vhembe District, South Africa. The Scientific World Journal, 2015, p. 195972. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/195972.
4. Menegat, M.B., DeRouchey, J.M., Woodworth, J.C., Dritz, S.S., Tokach, M.D. & Goodband, R.D. Effects of Bacillus subtilis C-3102 on sow and progeny performance, fecal consistency, and fecal microbes during gestation, lactation, and nursery periods 1,2. Journal of animal science, 2019, no. 97(9), pp. 3920-3937. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skz236.
5. Ibatullin I.I., Melnyk Yu.F., Otchenashko V.V. et al. (2015). Praktykum z hodivli silskohospodarskykh tvaryn: navchalnyi posibnyk [Practicals on feeding farm animals: study guide]. Kyiv, 422 s. [in Ukrainian].