The Effect of Stocking Density on Growth Performance and Average Cost in Partridge Rearing (Alectoris graeca) A. Gu¨nlu¨, 1 K. Kırıkc¸ı, O. C¸ etin, and M. Garip Department of Animal Science, Veterinary Faculty, University of Selc¸uk, 42031 Konya, Turkey ABSTRACT In this study, stocking density and economic evaluation of partridge rearing was investigated. Experimental design was constructed as 576.9 cm2 /chick (group I), 384.6 cm2 /chick (group II), 288.5 cm2 /chick (group III), and 230.8 cm2 /chick (group IV). Live weights of the first, second, third, and fourth groups at 12 wk of age were determined as 376.46, 367.95, 371.07, and 358.80 g, respectively. Additive feed consumption and feed conversion ratio of the groups were determined as 1,781.74 Key words: partridge, stocking density, growth performance, cost 2007 Poultry Science 86:1800–1804 INTRODUCTION Partridge is the common name of the birds classified as alectoris and perdix of the Phasianide family (Turan, 1990; O¨ zcelik, 1995). The most common partridges are red legged with the names Alectoris chukar, A. graeca, A. rufa, A. magna, and A. barbary (C¸ etin and Kırıkc¸ı, 2000). Redlegged partridges are the kind that is intensively bred. It is becoming increasingly popular to raise partridges for hunting or conservation areas and for sale to the gourmet food markets. Birds raised for meat must attain marketable weight as early as possible. Although partridges have been raised domestically for approximately 20 yr in Turkey, they are still wild birds compared with other domesticated poultry. There are a lot of papers on the intensive rearing of these birds (Hermes et al., 1984; Kırıkc¸ı et al., 1999; C¸ etin, 2000). It is reported that mature live weights of males and females are 500 to 650 g and 400 to 450 g, respectively (C¸ etin and Kinkc¸i, 2000). Optimal fattening period in partridges has been reported as 10 to 12 wk of age by Kırıkc¸ı et al. (1999). In the same research, hatching weight was reported as 14.22 g, and live weights of 10 to 12 wk were reported as 307.29 and 335.58 g, respectively, and additive feed consumption at 12 wk of age was reported as 1,640.37 g. After 12 wk of fattening, live weight, additive feed consumption, and feed conversion ratio were reported as 408.57 to 425.50 g; ©2007 Poultry Science Association Inc. Received January 29, 2007. Accepted April 16, 2007. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected] 1800 g and 4.93, 1,805.13 g and 5.13, 1,830.51 g and 5.15, and 1,720.09 g and 5.02, respectively. Total mortality rates of the groups at the end of the feeding time were determined as 3.5, 3.75, 6.75, and 13.00%, respectively (P < 0.05). As a result, it was concluded that rearing in 288.5 cm2 /chick was suitable according to live weights of partridges, feed conversion ratio, and mortality rates. Also, it was concluded that decreasing costs and increasing profitability in partridge rearing could be achieved. 1,249.45 to 1,582.27 g, and 3.16 to 3.84, respectively. In another report by Arslan et al. (2001b), partridges were fed 4 different rations, which had 16, 20, 24, and 28% CP contents for a 9-wk period. In the first group, live weight, additive feed consumption, and feed conversion ratio were 282.02 g, 700.29 g, and 4.52, respectively. In the second group, these data were found as 333.38 g, 694.24 g, and 3.95. For third group, the values were 357.75 g, 710.23 g, and 3.71. In the fourth group, the data were reported as 372.01 g, 596.68 g, and 3.04, respectively. The live weight and feed consumption values of the control and experimental groups fed with a diet containing enzynes for 12 wk of fattening periods (Arslan et al., 2001a) were reported as 421.57 to 439.77 g and 1,463.79 to 1,483.57 g, respectively. The effects of stock density on feed consumption, feed conversion ratio, and carcass characteristics were investigated in different poultry species (Cain et al., 1984; Shanawany, 1988; S¸engu¨l et al., 2000). The comfort provided by the optimal stock density affects the health and the performance of the animals in a positive way, whereas having more animals than the optimal stock density per unit space affects animal comfort and performance in a negative way similar to having fewer animals than needed does to the company’s profitability. Cain et al. (1984), in a study about pheasants categorized in the same family with the partridges, reported that 190, 390, and 740 cm2 / pheasant stock density has no effect on fattening performance; however, if space per animal is reduced, the frequency of cannibalism increases. Optimal stock density of partridge rearing has been recommended as 600 cm2 / partridge by C¸ etin and Kırıkc¸ı (2000). In the literature review, sufficient amount of knowledge related to economic aspects of partridge rearing could not Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/86/8/1800/1521704 by guest on 18 December 2018 STOCKING DENSITY IN PARTRIDGE REARING 1801 Table 1. Composition of the starter and grower diets (%) Starter Grower Ingredient (0–5 wk) (5–12 wk) Corn 32.5 46.5 Soybean meal 42.5 31.0 Sunflower seed meal 1.8 2.0 Cotton seed meal 3.0 1.5 Fish meal 7.5 5.7 Vegetable fat 9.8 9.6 Limestone 0.8 1.0 Dicalcium phosphate 1.2 1.4 Salt 0.5 0.5 Vitamin mix 0.25 0.25 Trace mineral mix 0.1 0.1 L-Lys — 0.25 DL-Met — 0.2 Calculated composition ME, kcal/kg 3,202 3,305 CP 28.01 22.5 be reached. But there is quite a lot of research about economic evaluation of broiler rearing (Pandey and Tewari, 1985; Lance, 1990, Sakarya, 1990, Petek, 1999). In broiler rearing, the most important expenditure factor was reported as feeding expenditure (45.64 to 64.11), and following expenditure factor was reported as chick costs (19.63 to 31.85). In these studies, the output/input ratio denoting the products by means of the inputs used through the yielding process (in other words, the index screening how economical the process is) has been reported between 1.096 to 1.26 by Sakarya (1990) and Petek (1999). There is a consensus that fattening time should be 10 to 12 wk of age. However, there is no study of what the optimal stock density in partridge fattening should be to get economic productivity. In this study, the aim was to investigate optimal stock density in partridge rearing and also to calculate the cost of partridge fattening. MATERIALS AND METHODS Birds and Husbandry Partridge chicks obtained from Veterinary Faculty Research and Application Farm were used for this research. In total, 728 chicks were hatched in mid-June from a random production in this study. Table 2. Average live weight of the groups weekly Group I Group II Group III Group IV Week (576.9 cm2 /chick) (384.6 cm2 /chick) (288.5 cm2 /chick) (230.8 cm2 /chick) ±SEM1 Hatching 14.60 14.68 14.75 14.62 0.07 1 23.23b 25.79a 24.61a 25.60a 0.32 2 43.11 44.90 43.12 43.68 0.52 3 67.81 72.72 68.15 73.16 1.20 4 92.50 97.25 90.92 97.63 1.45 6 153.61 158.78 151.45 154.56 2.55 8 256.25 257.60 256.05 261.82 2.31 10 319.20a 295.22b 324.26a 294.58b 4.07 12 376.46 367.95 371.07 358.80 5.32 a,bDifferences of average values holding at the same row are significant (P < 0.05). 1 ±SEM = SEM of the groups. Experimental design was constructed as group I (576.9 cm2 /chick), group II (384.6 cm2 /chick), group III (288.5 cm2 /chick), and group IV (230.8 cm2 /chick). Each treatment was replicated 4 times. After hatching chicks were weighed and were located in 2 rooms (4 × 4 m) having 8 cages in each room. There were 104 chicks in group I (26 × 4), 156 chicks in group II (39 × 4), 208 chicks in group III (52 × 4), and 260 chicks (65 × 4) in group IV (65 × 4). The chicks were heated with spotlights at 32°C in the first week, and then temperature was decreased 2 to 3°C per week. Heating process was ended after 4 wk. After housing, water including 5% sugar was given to chicks on the first day. The chicks were fed ad libitum for 5 wk with a ration that included 28.1% CP and 3,200 ME of kcal/kg. The following weeks, chicks were fed with a ration that included 22.5% CP and 3,300 ME of kcal/kg (O¨ zek et al., 2003). Formulations and composition of the starter and grower diets used in this study are given in Table 1. The fattening period lasted for 12 wk. Lighting process was applied 24 h/d during the fattening period. Four centimeters length of feeder space per animal and 1 nipple waterer/10 birds were provided in the cages. The chicks were weighed weekly, and weight and feed consumption in the first 4 wk were determined and later were weighed periodically for 14-d periods. Mortality was recorded daily. In this study, all the expenditures such as the unit partridge chick, feed, labor, energy, veterinary and drug costs, depression costs, repair and maintenance expenditures, water, chick loss, and management costs were taken into consideration. The method mentioned by Ac¸ıl (1977) is used in calculating the unit cost. The economical ratio of partridge rearing and the proportion between the sale income and the costs were calculated (Akso¨z, 1972; Mu¨ftu¨- og˘lu, 1989). Statistical Methods Variance analysis has been used for determination of the differences among live weights, additive feed consumption, feed conversion ratios, and to weekly percentages of the mortality rates of the groups. In order to obtain normal distribution, arc sin transformation was applied to raw data of the weekly percentage rate (Yıldız and Bircan, Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/86/8/1800/1521704 by guest on 18 December 2018 1802 GU¨ NLU¨ ET AL. Table 3. Weekly average feed consumption of the groups Group I Group II Group III Group IV Weeks (576.9 cm2 /chick) (384.6 cm2 /chick) (288.5 cm2 /chick) (230.8 cm2 /chick) ±SEM1 0–1 13.46 16.21 13.61 13.96 0.63 1–2 61.54 68.35 61.78 59.92 2.80 2–3 111.54 115.38 109.23 108.85 2.02 3–4 129.81 136.55 161.92 152.62 5.52 4–6 276.23ac 288.53a 236.05c 257.59bc 6.14 6–8 372.29 368.16 355.41 348.12 5.98 8–10 376.30b 379.97b 415.94a 370.87b 5.73 10–12 440.57ab 431.97a 476.57b 408.16a 8.62 a–cDifferences of average values holding at the same row are significant (P < 0.05). 1 ±SEM = SEM of the groups. 1991). Importance of the differences among the groups has been determined in number of square centimeters by Duncan’s multiple range test (Petrie and Watson, 1999). Statistical analysis has been made with the package and SPSS for Windows 11.0. Each treatment was replicated 4 times. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 2 shows the weekly live weight of the groups. Although no differences were observed between the groups in the first 8 wk with respect to live weight, the differences among the groups in wk 10 are significant. In this week, groups I and III are different from groups II and IV (P < 0.05). But, live weights of the groups were similar at the end of the fattening period. Live weights of the groups were similar to the literature review reported by Kırıkc¸ı et al. (1999) and Arslan et al. (2001b). In that research, partridges were fed with a ration that included 16, 20, and 24% CP; a similar value of partridges and feed with a ration additive enzyme was reported by Arslan et al. (2001a). But live weights of the partridges in this study were lower than those reported by C¸ etin (2000) and Arslan et al. (2001b) with a feed ration that included 28% CP. Table 3 shows the weekly feed consumption of the groups, and Table 4 shows the weekly additive feed consumption of the groups. As seen in Table 3, there were not any differences among the groups with respect to feed consumption of the groups wk 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8, whereas there were important differences among the groups in wk 6, 10, and 12 (P < 0.05). In the study, it was determined Table 4. Weekly average additive feed consumption of the groups Group I Group II Group III Group IV Weeks (576.9 cm2 /chick) (384.6 cm2 /chick) (288.5 cm2 /chick) (230.8 cm2 /chick) ±SEM1 0–1 13.46 16.21 13.61 13.96 0.63 0–2 75.00 84.56 75.39 73.89 1.97 0–3 186.54 199.94 184.62 182.73 3.62 0–4 316.35 336.50 346.54 335.35 6.21 0–6 592.27 625.03 582.59 592.94 7.62 0–8 964.86 993.19 938.00 941.06 9.58 0–10 1,341.17 1,373.16 1,353.94 1,311.93 10.32 0–12 1,781.74ab 1,805.13a 1,830.5a 1,720.09b 14.13 a,bDifferences of average values holding at the same row are significant (P < 0.05). 1 ±SEM = SEM of the groups. that there was not any difference among the groups with respect to additive feed consumption in the first 10 wk (Table 4). But there was important difference among the groups with respect to additive feed consumption in wk 12 (P < 0.05). Feed consumption values of the groups were significant in wk 6, 10, and 12 (P < 0.05). But, this difference didn’t affect feed conversion value of the groups, except for the feed conversion ratio in wk 10. The difference of feed consumption value in the wk 10 ages can be attributed to live weight gain, and differences in 10 to 12 wk of age can be attributed to stock density. In those weeks, especially partridges in the group IV consumed less feed than the other groups. It was determined that additive feed consumption per bird in the groups was ranging from 1,720.09 to 1,830.51 g. As seen in Table 4, additive feed consumption of the groups was different (P < 0.05). In this week, additive feed consumption of group IV was lower than groups II and III (P < 0.05), and group I was similar to the others. Additive feed consumption value determined in this study is higher than the value reported as 1,640.37 g for 12 wk by Kırıkc¸ı et al. (1999) and is similarly reported as 1,302.67 g for 10 wk by Kırıkc¸ı et al. (1999). Determined additive feed consumption in this study is higher than the additive feed consumption value reported by C¸ etin (2000) for wk 10 and 12. This value is also higher than the additive feed consumption of partridges fattened for 9 wk. This result can be attributed to the difference of the fattening time. Additive feed consumption of the groups is also higher than the results reported by Arslan et al. (2001a) for 12- Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/86/8/1800/1521704 by guest on 18 December 2018 STOCKING DENSITY IN PARTRIDGE REARING 1803 Table 5. Weekly average feed conversation ratio of the groups Group I Group II Group III Group IV Weeks (576.9 cm2 /chick) (384.6 cm2 /chick) (288.5 cm2 /chick) (230.8 cm2 /chick) ±SEM1 0–1 1.56 1.46 1.38 1.27 0.05 0–2 2.63 2.80 2.67 2.54 0.05 0–3 3.50 3.48 3.47 3.13 0.07 0–4 4.06 4.09 4.55 4.06 0.09 0–6 4.27 4.34 4.29 4.25 0.05 0–8 3.99 4.10 3.89 3.81 0.05 0–10 4.41b 4.90a 4.38b 4.70ab 0.07 0–12 4.93 5.13 5.15 5.02 0.06 a,bDifferences of average values holding at the same row are significant (P < 0.05). 1 ±SEM = SEM of the groups. wk fattening periods. This result can be explained with the different composition of the rations. Weekly average feed conversation ratio of the groups is presented in Table 5. Difference in feed conversion ratio of the groups was found important in wk 10, and feed conversion ratio of the groups was similar to one another in other weeks. Feed conversion of the groups is similar to one another except for wk 10. At the end of the fattening period, feed conversion ratio of groups I, II, III, and IV were calculated as 4.93, 5.13, 5.15, and 5.02, respectively. Difference of the feed conversion value in the 10th week can be explained with the difference of feed consumption value in the 10th week of the partridge. Feed conversion of the groups is lower than the same values reported by C¸ etin (2000) and also lower than the value reported for partridge fattening with a ration including 20, 24, and 28% CP by Arslan et al. (2001b). But the feed conversion value determined in this study is similar to the value reported by Arslan et al. (2001b) for partridge fattening with 16% CP and also similar to the values calculated concerning the partridges fed with the ration addition of some enzymes and to the feed conversion value determined as 4.99 to 5.35 in another study Arslan et al. (2001a). The difference can be attributed to the raw material of the ration. Weekly mortality rates percentage of the groups is presented in Table 6. Cumulative mortality percentages of the groups compared with the starting number were similar in the first 4 wk. But the differences among the groups with respect to mortality rates were determined to be significant in wk 6, 8, 10, and 12 (P < 0.05). Especially, it was determined that Table 6. Cumulative mortality percentage of the groups (%) Group I Group II Group III Group IV Weeks (576.9 cm2 /chick) (384.6 cm2 /chick) (288.5 cm2 /chick) (230.8 cm2 /chick) ±SEM1 0–1 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.13 0–2 0.50 1.25 1.25 2.50 1.26 0–3 0.75 2.00 1.75 3.75 1.80 0–4 1.50 2.00 2.25 4.25 0.56 0–6 2.25b 2.75b 6.00ab 10.50a 1.03 0–8 2.50b 3.25b 6.00ab 10.50a 1.00 0–10 3.25b 3.25b 6.00ab 11.50a 1.06 0–12 3.50b 3.75b 6.75ab 13.00a 1.16 a,bDifferences of average values holding at the same row are significant (P < 0.05). 1 ±SEM = SEM of the groups. mortality rates of group IV had increased. Feather packing might have been a cause of mortality. Mortality rates of the groups I, II, III, and IV at the end of fattening period were determined as 3.50, 3.75, 6.75, and 13.10%, and differences between wk 8 to 12 were important (P < 0.05). When Table 6 is examined, it can be seen that increasing flock density was the reason for the increase of mortality rates in the groups. Especially, mortality rates in group IV are similar to group III and are higher in groups I and II (P < 0.05). Average mortality for the 0 to 16 wk fattening period of partridges was reported to be 17.9% by O¨ zek et al. (2003). This value is higher than this study. So, it can be said that more density in 288.5 cm2 /chick may affect mortality rates of partridge unless some precautions are taken to prevent feather packing. Taking relative importance of chicks’ expenditure in the total cost into consideration (Table 7), it can be said that choosing stock density is very important for profitability and productivity of enterprises. As a matter of fact, Cain et al. (1984) reported that frequency of mortality rates increase when stock density is increased. According to the investigated production parameters, it can be said that fattening the partridges in 288.5 cm2 /chick is suitable for the purpose of broiler type partridge rearing. This stock density is half of the density reported for partridge rearing by C¸ etin and Kırıkc¸ı (2000). Average cost of the partridges was presented in Table 7. At the end of the fattening period, the average cost of partridges was calculated as 5.07 Turkish new liras in a pen including 620 live partridges at the end of the research. It was seen from the related table that the most important Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/86/8/1800/1521704 by guest on 18 December 2018 1804 GU¨ NLU¨ ET AL. Table 7. Average cost of partridge and percentage expenditure (Turkish new liras)1 Item Expenditure % Chick costs 1,092.00 34.71 Feed costs 686.99 21.84 Depressions costs 403.99 12.84 Labor costs 384.00 12.21 Energy costs 215.04 6.84 Chick loss 156.00 4.96 Veterinary and drug costs 110.00 3.50 Management costs 61.68 1.96 Water 20.00 0.64 Repair and maintain expenditure 16.19 0.51 Total expenditure 3,145.90 100.00 Average partridge cost 5.07 1 US$1 = 1.44 Turkish new liras. expenditure in partridge rearing was chick expenditure, which was 34.71%. In this study, average partridge cost was calculated as 5.07 Turkish new liras in a pen, including 620 partridges, during the 12 wk of fattening period. The highest cost factor in partridge fattening was chick purchase. The other important expenditure factors were feed cost, depression cost, labor cost, and energy cost according to the percentage distribution in total. In the study, average partridge cost was not calculated because main cost factors like feed consumption, feed conversion ratio, and live weight were similar. But it could be said that choosing optimal rearing density in partridge fattening decreases average cost by means of reducing depression cost and mortality rates. Percentage distribution of chick expenditure in partridges is similar to the reported value for broiler fattening, but feed cost percentage is lower (Sakarya, 1990; Petek, 1999). According to the cost factor, partridge rearing could be very productive and profitable production if integration in partridge rearing could be achieved. It is obvious that expenditure of cost factor would be decreased. This process is a benefit for the producer and the customer. Taking the live partridges at the end of fattening periods and the current sale price into consideration, some economic indexes (for example, output/input ratio rantability factor ratio), were calculated as 1.97 and 0.49, respectively. In the study, the output/input ratio denoting the products by means of the inputs used through the yielding process (in other words, the index screening how economical the process is) has been reported between 1.09 and 1.26. These values are higher than the values reported for broiler fattening by Sakarya (1990) and Petek (1999). According to the economic index results, it is obvious that partridge fattening could be a good source of income for enterprises. Furthermore, consumers can be presented with new types of products with different tastes and aromas, which increases protein consumption of people. Partridge rearing could increase the tourism income of a country via hunting tourism and could also increase employment. As a result, it was determined that optimal stock density for broiler type production was 288.5 cm2 per chick. It is possible to reduce average cost via reducing mortality rate and depression cost. Partridge rearing could be done for economic purposes and for some social reasons. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Selcuk University Research Foundation supported this work. REFERENCES Ac¸ıl, F. 1977. Calculating of Agricultural Product. A.U. Agriculture Faculty. No: 665. S¸ark Press, Ankara, Turkey. Akso¨z, I. 1972. Introduction to Agricultural Economics. No. 15:197. ATA. UNI Press, Erzurum, Turkey. Arslan, C., M. Garip, and F. I˙nal. 2001a. The effects of enzyme supplementation of wheat and corn based ration on growth performance and carcass characteristics of partridge. J. Poult. Res. 3:42–46. Arslan, C., M. Garip, A. Yılmaz, and K. Kırıkc¸ı. 2001b. The growth performance of Rock Partridge (Alectoris graeca) fed the diets with different protein level. Vet. Bil. Derg. 17:127–130. Cain, J. R., J. M. Weber, T. A. Lockamy, and C. R. Crager. 1984. Grower diets and bird density effects on growth and cannibalism in ring necked pheasants. Poult. Sci. 63:450–457. C¸ etin, O.2000. Fattening performance and carcass characteristics of rock partridges (A. greaca) at different ages. J. Poult. Res. 2:41–44. C¸ etin, O., and K. Kırıkc¸ı. 2000. Alternative Poultry Raising. Pheasant-Chukar. Selcuk Univ. Found. Press, Konya, Turkey. Hermes, J. C., A. E. Woodard, P. Vohra, and R. L. Snyder. 1984. Different feeding regimes for growing red legged partridges. Feedstuff 16:27–28. Kırıkc¸ı, K., C. Tepeli, O. C¸ etin, A. Gu¨nlu¨, and A. Yılmaz. 1999. Some production characteristics of Rock Partridges (A. graeca) under different sheltering and lighting conditions. Vet. Bil. Derg. 15:15–22. Lance, G. C. 1990. Economic evaluation of farm efficiency rates for integrated broiler and contract grower operations in Georgia by type of housing systems. Poult. Sci. 69:554–562. Mu¨ftu¨og˘lu, T. 1989. Economics. Turhan Press, Ankara, Turkey. O¨ zcelik, M. 1995. World of birds. Sci. Technol. 328:66–73. O¨ zek, K., O. Yazgan, and Y. Bahtiyarca. 2003. Effects of dietary protein and energy concentrations on performance and carcase characteristics of Chukar Partridges (Alectoris chukar) raised in captivity. Br. Poult. Sci. 3:419–426. Pandey, N. K., and S. K. Tewari. 1985. Economics of commercial poultry enterprises. Ind. J. Poult. Sci. 20:321–325. Petek, M. 1999. The production parameters and economic efficiencies of different genotypes in broiler enterprises in Bursa province and its near vicinity. J. Lalahan Livest. Res. Inst. 39:61–72. Petrie, A., and P. Watson. 1999. Statistics for Veterinary and Animal Science. Blackwell Sci. Ltd., Malden, MA. Sakarya, E. 1990. Productivity and profitability analysis of broiler enterprises in Ankara province. Ankara Univ. Vet. Fak. Derg. 37:375–398. S¸engu¨l, T., A. Yıldız, and Y. Konca. 2000. Effect of stocking density on the growth performance and carcass characteristics in bronze Turkey. J. Poult. Res. 2:33–39. Shanawany, M. M. 1988. Broiler performance under high stocking densities. Br. Poult. Sci. 29:43–52. Turan, N. 1990. Game Birds of Turkey. Forestry Ministry Press, Ankara, Turkey. Yıldız, N., and H. Bircan. 1991. Research and Methods. No. 57. Atatu¨rk Univ. Press, Erzurum, Turkey. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/86/8/1800/1521704 by guest on 18 December 2018

Introduction Partridges are game birds in the wild and are raised for hunting tourism. Recent studies have shown that the partridge, especially the rock partridge, can also be raised for meat production (1-5). The desire for products of exotic animals (e.g., quail, partridge, pheasant, ostrich) has increased and they have become available in markets for human consumption in recent years. The average mature live weight of rock partridges varies between 350 and 450 g under farm conditions (3- 5). This bird completes its growth around the end of 12 weeks of life and is usually slaughtered at the age of 10- 12 weeks as feed efficiency declines after 12 weeks of life (2-5). Probiotics are defined as “live microorganisms or specific products of their metabolism which beneficially affect the host animal by improving its intestinal microbial balance” (6,7). The modes of action of probiotics are still unclear despite the following suggestions: beneficial changes in gut flora with reductions in the population of Escherichia coli, lactate production with subsequent changes in intestinal pH, low redox potential, production of antibiotic-type substances, production of enzymes, competition for adhesion receptors in the intestine, competition for nutrients, reduction of toxin release and immunostimulation (7-9). There are contradictory results concerning whether the growth performance of poultry is improved by Turk J Vet Anim Sci 28 (2004) 887-891 © TÜB‹TAK 887 Effect of Dietary Probiotic Supplementation on Growth Performance in the Rock Partridge (Alectoris graeca) Cavit ARSLAN Department of Animal Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Kafkas, 36300, Kars – TURKEY email: [email protected] Received: 13.03.2003 Abstract: This study was conducted to determine the effect of dietary probiotic supplementation on growth performance in the rock partridge. One hundred 1-day-old chicks were used. They were divided into 2 groups and each group was divided into 5 replicate groups containing 10 chicks. One group served as the control, while the other group was the treatment group fed 0.15% probiotic (Lactobacillus bulgaricus) in the diet. The experimental period was 12 weeks with the first 6 weeks as the starter period and the last 6 weeks as the grower period. There were no statistical differences between the groups in growth performance at the end of the study. Live weight (g), cumulative feed consumption (g) and average feed conversion ratio (kg feed / kg gain) for the control and probiotic groups were 396.3, 2682 and 7.78 and 392.6, 2549 and 7.36, respectively, at the end of the study. In conclusion, under good hygienic conditions probiotic supplementation may not be necessary for improving partridge performance . Key Words: Probiotic, growth performance, rock partridge Probiyotik ‹lavesinin Kaya Kekliklerinin Büyüme Performans› Üzerine Etkisi Özet: Bu çal›flma, rasyona probiyotik ilave edilmesinin kaya kekliklerinin büyüme performans›na etkisini belirlemek amac›yla yap›lm›flt›r. Araflt›rmada 100 adet bir günlük yaflta kaya kekli¤i civcivi kullan›lm›flt›r. Civcivler iki ana gruba ayr›lm›fl, her grup kendi içinde 10 civcivden oluflan 5 alt gruba ayr›lm›fllard›r. Gruplardan biri kontrol olarak kullan›l›rken, di¤er grubun rasyonuna % 0,15 probiotik (Lactobacillus bulgaricus) ilave edilmifltir. Araflt›rma ilk 6 haftas› bafllang›ç, son 6 haftas› büyütme olmak üzere 12 hafta sürdürülmüfltür. Araflt›rma sonu itibariyle büyüme performans› bak›m›ndan gruplar aras›nda farkl›l›k görülmemifltir. Kontrol ve probiyotik grubunda canl› a¤›rl›k (g), kümülatif yem tüketimi (g) ve ortalama yemden yararlanma oran› (kg yem / kg canl› a¤›rl›k art›fl›) s›ras›yla 396,3; 2682; 7,78 ve 392,6; 2549; 7,36 olarak bulunmufltur. Sonuç olarak, hijyenik flartlarda yap›lan keklik besisinde probiyotik ilave edilmesinin performans› iyilefltirici bir etki göstermedi¤i için kullan›m› tavsiye edilebilir bulunmam›flt›r. Anahtar Sözcükler: Probiotik, büyüme performans›, kaya kekli¤i Research Article probiotics. Roth and Kirchgessner (10) noted that probiotic supplementation (Streptococcus faecium M 74) did not affect live weight, but significantly decreased feed intake and feed conversion in broiler chickens. No positive response was observed in live weight, feed intake or feed conversion, when diets with Lactobacillus casei (11) and Lactobacillus acidophilus (12) were fed to broiler chickens. It is reported that Saccharomyces cerevisiae supplementation to quail rations did not affect growth performance (13). In contrast, Arslan and Saatci (14) found a positive response on live weight, feed consumption and feed efficiency in quail fed diets with Lactobacilluc bulgaricus via both the feed and drinking water. Antibiotics and hormones have been used in feeds for stimulation of animal performance. However, these promoters have undesirable side effects such as toxicity, allergy, cancer, drug resistance, and residues in food. Their use in practice is therefore either diminished or banned. The use of natural growth promoters has increased in many countries over the last 15-20 years (15). However, the research on feeding partridges, especially related to feed additives, is limited. The use of probiotics in commercial poultry production is still new. No literature about probiotic usage in partridge feeding could be found. The present study was conducted to evaluate the effect of dietary probiotic supplementation on the growth performance of the rock partridge (Alectoris graeca). Materials and Methods Animals, Treatment and Management One hundred 1-day-old unsexed rock partridge chicks were divided into 2 groups, each with 5 subgroups, and 10 chicks were allocated into each subgroup. The study lasted 12 weeks: the first 6 weeks as the starter period and the last 6 weeks as the grower period. The treatments were a diet containing no probiotic (control group) and a diet supplemented with 0.15% probiotic (probiotic group), which included Lactobacillus bulgaricus 1 x 107 CFU/g (Biostart, Bimpeks, Kimya Sanayi ve ‹thalat ‹hracat Tic. Ltd. fiti. ‹stanbul-Turkey). The diets were formulated to meet the recommendations of Coflkun et al. (16) for partridges (Table 1). The temperature of the brooder with continuous lighting was maintained at 34 ºC initially and was then reduced by 3 ºC/week until the desired temperature (21 ºC) was reached. This temperature was maintained for the rest of the feeding period. On day 22 of the study, the partridges were transferred to the feeding cages, made from metal wire. They had free access to feed (mash form) and water during the study. Data collection Individual live weights of the partridges were recorded fortnightly. Feed consumption was determined at the same time and the feed conversion ratio (feed / gain) was calculated on a subgroup basis. Chemical analyses of diets The dry matter, crude protein, crude fibre, ether extract, and ash content of diets were determined according to AOAC procedures (17). Statistics The results were statistically analysed using the t test in SPSS. Statistical differences were set at P < 0.05. Results Live weight, live weight gain, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio were not significantly affected by probiotic supplementation. The pooled results are given in Table 2. During the starter period the partridges quickly gained weight and had lower feed conversion ratios. After this period, live weight gain and feed conversion ratio gradually reduced. Discussion The average hatching live weight of chicks at the beginning of the experiment was similar between the groups: 12.9 and 12.1 g in the control and probiotic groups, respectively. Hatching live weight of partridge chicks was in agreement with other research on rock partridges (2,4,5). Probiotic supplementation did not affect live weight gain during the 12 week experimental period (Table 2). Live weight was 396.3 and 392.6 g at the end of the experiment in the control and probiotic groups, respectively. These results are higher than those of Kırıkçı et al. (2) and similar to those of Çetin (3) and Arslan et al. (4,5). Some previous studies reported that there were no significant effects of probiotics composed of different Effect of Dietary Probiotic Supplementation on Growth Performance in the Rock Partridge (Alectoris graeca) 888 Table 1. Ingredients and nutrient compositions of diets, %. Starter period Grower period Ingredient Control Probiotic Control Probiotic Corn 48.10 48.00 47.90 47.75 Soybean meal 35.00 35.00 27.00 27.00 Fish meal 7.00 7.00 2.00 2.00 Barley 6.95 6.90 12.00 12.00 Wheat bran .... .... 7.90 7.90 Limestone 1.20 1.20 1.40 1.40 Dicalcium phosphate 1.15 1.15 1.20 1.20 Salt 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 Vit. Min. Premixes1 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Probiotic .... 0.15 .... 0.15 Chemical analysis Dry matter 92.32 92.33 91.56 91.60 % of DM Metabolisable energy2 , kcal/kg 2800 2799 2700 2699 Crude protein 25.11 25.10 20.05 20.04 Ether extract 2.88 2.86 2.67 2.66 Crude fibre 3.58 3.57 4.17 4.14 Ash 6.02 6.02 5.11 5.10 1Provided per kg concentrate: Vitamin A, 21,000 IU; Vitamin D3, 4200 IU; Vitamin E, 52.5 mg; Vitamin K3, 4.38 mg; Vitamin B1, 5.25 mg; Vitamin B2, 12.25 mg; Vitamin B6, 7 mg; Vitamin B12, 0.03 mg; Folic acid, 1.75 mg; D-Biotin, 0.08 mg; Vitamin C, 87.5 mg; Niacin, 70 mg; Cal-D-Pantothenat, 14 mg; Choline chloride 218.75 mg, Fe, 140 mg; Zn, 105 mg; Cu, 14 mg; Co, 0.35 mg; I, 1 .75 mg; Se, 0.26 mg; Mn, 140 mg. 2 Provided by calculation. bacterial cultures on the live weight of broiler chicks and quails (6,13,18). During the whole experimental period, no statistical difference was found in feed consumption between the 2 groups (Table 2). Cumulative feed consumption was 2682 and 2549 g for the control and probiotic groups, respectively. Partridges in the probiotic group consumed slightly less feed than the control group, but their live weight gain was similar to that of the control group. Therefore, the feed conversion ratio was better in the probiotic group than in the control group. The average feed conversion ratio was 7.78 and 7.36 in the control and probiotic groups, respectively. This indicated that the use of a probiotic slightly decreased feed consumption and improved the feed conversion ratio. This may be considered beneficial for the breeder. On the other hand, it can be concluded that due to the dramatic decrease in live weight gain and poor feed conversion after 10 weeks, rock partridges should be slaughtered at the end of 10 or 12 weeks. The feed consumption and feed conversion results in this study were similar to previous results reported for rock partridges (3-5). Yeo and Kim (11) and Buenrostro and Kratzer (12) showed that supplementation with different Lactobacillus spp. did not alter feed consumption or conversion in broiler chicken. Kahraman et al. (6) found similar feed conversions of broilers supplemented with different 0.075% or 0.15% bacterial culture combinations (S. faecium, S. cerevisiae, L. acidophilus) compared to the controls. In contrast, supplementation of S. faecium in broiler chicken rations (10) and Lactobacillus bulgaricus in quail rations (14) significantly decreased feed intake and increased feed C. ARSLAN 889 conversion. No information is available on the use of probiotics in partridge feeding, and so no actual comparison with this study is possible. The differences between the studies can be attributed to species, composition and doses of probiotic, management conditions and the ration composition of the diets used. In this study, live weight, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio did not differ between the groups. This may be attributed to the optimal hygienic conditions in which the experiment was carried out. Evidence already exists that under good hygienic conditions probiotics have less effect on the performance of broilers (19,20). In conclusion, dietary probiotic supplementation at the 0.15% level did not significantly affect growth performance, but slightly decreased feed intake and improved the feed conversion ratio. Probiotic supplementation may not be required under optimum hygienic conditions for partridge feeding. Effect of Dietary Probiotic Supplementation on Growth Performance in the Rock Partridge (Alectoris graeca) 890 Table 2. Live weight, live weight gain, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio of partridges (mean ± sx- ). Week Relative to Hatching Group Hatching 2 4 6 8 10 12 Live weight, g Control 12.9 ± 0.2 47.2 ± 0.8 109.8 ± 1.6 188.8 ± 3.9 283.4 ± 2.8 357.0 ± 4.5 396.3 ± 1.3 Probiotic 12.1 ± 0.2 44.0 ± 1.1 105.8 ± 1.1 185.9 ± 1.8 275.3 ± 2.2 355.4 ± 3.9 392.6 ± 2.7 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Live weight gain, g Control 2.45 ± 0.1 4.47 ± 0.1 5.64 ± 0.4 6.75 ± 0.4 5.26 ± 0.1 2.80 ± 0.3 Probiotic 2.27 ± 0.1 4.41 ± 0.1 5.72 ± 0.1 6.39 ± 0.1 5.72 ± 0.4 2.66 ± 0.3 NS NS NS NS NS NS Feed consumption, g/day/bird Control 6.54 ± 0.2 18.54 ± 0.9 27.92 ± 0.6 39.03 ± 0.4 47.62 ± 0.8 51.94 ± 1.5 Probiotic 5.78 ± 0.2 13.77 ± 0.8 26.54 ± 0.7 41.33 ± 0.8 46.47 ± 1.5 48.22 ± 0.9 NS NS NS NS NS NS Feed conversion ratio kg feed/kg gain Control 2.69 ± 0.2 4.15 ± 0.2 5.06 ± 0.4 5.88 ± 0.3 9.06 ± 0.5 19.34 ± 1.5 Probiotic 2.55 ± 0.1 3.12 ± 0.2 4.64 ± 0.4 6.48 ± 0.2 8.21 ± 0.3 19.14 ± 2.1 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS: Not significant (P > 0.05) References 1. Çetin, O., Kırıkçı, K., Gülflen, N.: Farklı bakım flartlarında Kınalı kekliklerin (A. chukar) bazı verim özellikleri. Vet. Bil. Derg., 1997; 13: 5-10. 2. Kırıkçı, K., Tepeli, C., Çetin, O., Günlü, A., Yılmaz, A.: Farklı barındırma ve aydınlatma flartlarında Kaya kekliklerinin (A. graeca) bazı verim özellikleri. Vet. Bil. Derg., 1999; 15: 15-22. 3. Çetin, O.: Farklı kesim yafllarında Kaya kekliklerinin (A. graeca) büyüme, besi performansı, kesim ve karkas özellikleri. Tavukçuluk Arafl. Derg., 2000; 2: 41-44. 4. Arslan, C., Garip, M., Yılmaz, A., Kırıkçı, K.: Farklı oranlarda protein içeren rasyonlarla beslenen kaya kekliklerinde (Alectoris graeca) büyüme özellikleri. Vet. Bil. Derg., 2001; 17: 127-130. C. ARSLAN 891 5. Arslan, C., Garip, M., ‹nal, F.: Mısır ve bu¤daya dayalı keklik yemlerine enzim ilavesinin büyüme performansı ve karkas özellikleri üzerine etkisi. Tavukçuluk Arafl. Derg., 2001; 3: 42- 46. 6. Kahraman, R., Alp, M., Kocaba¤lı, N., Irmak, G., fienel, H.S.: The effects of Fastrack‚ and sodium bicarbonate on performance of broilers. Tr. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 1996; 20: 383-386. 7. Leeson, S., Summers, J.D.: Commercial Poultry Nutrition. 2nd ed., University Books, Guelph, Ontario, 1997. 8. Barrow, P.A.: Probiotics for chickens. pp. 225-257 in: Probiotics. R. Fuller, ed. Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 1992. 9. Montes, A.J., Pugh, D.G.: The use of probiotics in food-animal practice. Vet. Med., 1993; 88: 282-288. 10. Roth, F.X., Kirchgessner, M.: Nutritive effects of Streptococcus faecium (strain M 74) in broiler chicks. Arch. Geflugelk., 1986; 50: 225-228. 11. Yeo, J., Kim, K.: Effect of feeding diets containing an antibiotic, a probiotic, or yucca extract on growth and intestinal urease activity in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci., 1997; 76: 381-385. 12. Buenrostro, J.L, Kratzer, F.H.: Effect of Lactobacillus and antibiotic feeding of chickens on availability of dietary biotin. Poult. Sci., 1983; 62: 2022-2029. 13. Yalçın, S., Önol, A.G., fiehu, A., Onbaflılar, ‹.: Bıldırcın besisinde enzim, probiotik ve antibiyotik kullanılması. Ankara Üniv. Vet. Fak. Derg. 2000; 47: 351-360. 14. Arslan, C., Saatci, M.: Effects of probiotic administration either as feed additive or by drinking water on performance and blood parameters in Japanese quails. Arch. Geflugelk., 2004; 68: 160- 163. 15. Gill, C.: Probiotics. Feed International, 1988; November, pp. 9- 10. 16. Coflkun, B., fieker, E., ‹nal, F.: Hayvan Besleme. Selçuk Üniv. Vet. Fak. Yayın Ünitesi, Konya, 1997. 17. AOAC.: Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemistry, 14th ed., Ed by Sidney Williams, Arlington, Virginia, 1984. 18. Mohan, B., Kadirvel, R., Natarajan, A., Bhaskaran, M.: Effect of probiotic supplementation on growth, nitrogen utilisation and serum cholesterol in broilers. Br. Poult. Sci., 1996; 37: 395-401. 19. Watkins, B.A., Kratzer, F:H.: Effect of oral dosing of Lactobacillus strains on gut colonisation and liver biotin in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci., 1983; 62: 2088-2094. 20. Kahraman, R., Özpınar, H., Abafl, ‹., Eseceli, H., Bilal, T., Kutay, H.C.: Effects of probiotic and antibiotic on performance of broilers. Arch. Geflugelk., 2000; 64: 70-74.

Article GROWTH, FATTENING PERFORMANCE, SLAUGHTER and CARCASS CHARACT...