The Effect of Probiotic and Humic Acids on Internal and External Egg Quality of Japanese Quails

A research was carried out to determine effect of probiotic and humic acids on external and internal egg quality parameters of Japanese quail housed in 3-floor cage technology. A total of 60 animals were divided into 3 groups. In the control group (n=20) birds fed on basal diet without any additive...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cyril Hrnčár, Emília Hanusová, Anton Hanus, Marcela Capcarová, Anna Kalafová, Henrieta Arpášová, Dariusz Kokoszyński, Jozef Bujko
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Agroprint Timisoara 2023-09-01
Series:Scientific Papers Animal Science and Biotechnologies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://spasb.ro/index.php/public_html/article/view/814
Description
Summary:A research was carried out to determine effect of probiotic and humic acids on external and internal egg quality parameters of Japanese quail housed in 3-floor cage technology. A total of 60 animals were divided into 3 groups. In the control group (n=20) birds fed on basal diet without any additive. Japanese quails in experimental group no. 1 (n=20) were received addition of probiotics preparation in a single dose of 1 g.kg-1 of feed mixture. In the experimental group no. 2 (n=20) received a preparation of humic acids in a single dose of 3 g.kg-1 of feed mixture. Feed mixture contained 11.7 MJ ME and 200.0 g crude protein. Feed and water were given ad libitum. We recorded statistically no significant differences (P>0.05) among groups in egg weight, egg shape index, eggshell weight, albumen weight, albumen percentage, albumen weight, Haugh units, yolk index and yolk colour. The yolk weight and yolk percentage were significantly lower (P≤0.05) in the group with the application of humic acids in feed mixture compared with the control group and the group with the addition of probiotics to feed. The parameters of eggshell quality (percentage, strength, thickness) were recorded significantly higher values (P≤0.05) in both experimental groups compared to the control.
ISSN:1841-9364
2344-4576