Skip to the page content area.

Influence of Bacillus SPP. Culture Supplementation through Feed or Drinking Water on the Performance of Layer Chickens

News source: Indonesian Animal Production Research Institute
For further information, contact Kompiang, IP.
E-mail: balitnak@indo.net.id, 2003-02-01

Three thousand 65-week-old layer chickens were used in this study. The chickens were divided into three groups each of 1,000 birds, and further divided into four sub-groups each containing 250 birds as treatment replication, and distributed randomly.

Three Groups Given Different Treatments

Group 1 were fed a basal diet + growth promoter antibiotic (AB); group 2, a basal diet + 109 cfu of Bacillus spp. culture/kg (PB-M); and group 3, a basal diet and 109 cfu of Bacillus spp. culture/Liter of water supplemented into their drinking water (PB-A). The trial was conducted for 14 weeks (2 weeks adaptation period, 10 weeks feeding treatments, and 2 weeks post treatment) where the AB group was continually given antibiotic but not supplementation of Bacillus spp. culture, as well as the PB-M and PB-A group.

Better Results from Bacillus Than Antibiotic

During the treatment period, egg production (% HD) and FCR of the chicken supplemented with Bacillus spp. culture (PB-M and PB-A) were highly significant (P<0.001), better than those receiving antibiotic. There was no significant difference between the PB-M and the PB-A groups.

The percentage of HD production and FCR during post treatment of the birds supplemented previously with Bacillus spp. culture (PB-M and PB-A) remained significant (P<0.001), better than the ones receiving antibiotic (AB). The birds previously supplemented with Bacillus spp. culture had significant percentage of HD production and FCR (P<0.01), better than the group which previously received the supplement through their drinking water. It can be concluded that Bacillus spp. culture could be used to replace the function of antibiotics as a growth promoter, and can even give a better result.

Download the PDF. of this document, 24,176 bytes (23.6 KB).