"عسى ان تكون علما ينتفع به" Organic acids in broiler Clinical trial on organic acids Citric acid - Propionic acid - Formic acid

1. Organic Acids in Broiler
Clinical Trials

2. Citric Acid

3. Materials and Methods
 108 one day old straight run broiler chicks (Hubbard Classic)
for a period of 35 days.
 The chicks were randomly divided into 4 equal treatment
groups (A, B, C and D) each having 27 chicks.
 Each treatment was subjected to 3 equal replications of 9
chicks each.

4. Treatment
1. A: Control diet
2. B: Control diet + 0.5% citric acid
3. C: Control diet + 0.5% acetic acid
4. D: Control diet + 0.5% citric acid + 0.5% acetic acid
with drinking water.

5. Evaluation
 Weight gain
 Feed conversion ratio
 Mortality
 Dressing percentage
 Economy of broiler production were recorded and calculated.
 At the end of experiment, two birds from each treatment
were selected randomly to record the dressing yield, organs
weight and cut up parts

6. Live Weight Gains
Dietary treatments
A B C D
Age (weeks) / Initial weight 46.2 46.1 46.4 46.1
1 84.5 88.7 73.1 70.3
2 210.3 219.8 175.0 176.6
3 286.4 299.2 247.6 281.0
4 396.8 447.2 368.5 372.2
5 403.5 451.5 424.7 507.9
0-4 977.9 1054.0 864.2 900.1
0-5 1381.4 1506.3 1289.0 1408.0
Final body weight (g) 1427.6± 1552.4 1335.4 1454.1

7. Feed Intake
Age (weeks)
Dietary treatments
A B C D
1 122.3 124.1 120.0 117.0
2 320.9 325.9 292.2 301.1
3 514.5 532.9 499.1 561.1
4 738.2 804.4 769.9 801.9
5 1217.2 1331.2 1348.8 1320.8
0-4 1696.0 1787.0 1681.0 1781.0
0-5 2913.2 3118.6 3029.9 3101.9

8. FCR
Age (weeks)
Dietary treatments
A B C D
0-2 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7
0-3 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.9
0-4 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9
0-5 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.2

9. Carcass Characteristics
Parameters Dietary treatments
A B C D
Live weight (g) 1146.7 1300.0 1150.0 1150.0
Organ weights (%
live weight)
Killed weight 89.6 89.9 89.2 89.9
Shank weight 4.6 4.9 4.9 4.9
Head weight 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.2
Giblet weight 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.2
Skin weight 16.2 15.1 15.7 14.8
Visceral weight 7.8 7.7 7.3 7.7
Carcass yield 54.98 55.4 51.9 56.8

10. Production Cost
Parameters Dietary treatments
A B C D
Total feed cost 1464.48 1568.04 1523.3 1559.49
Total chick cost 378 378 378 378
Management cost1 484.59 537.35 502.68 566.2
Total acid cost ----- 60.31 90.77 156.27
Total production cost (Tk.) 2327.07 2543.73 2494.75 2503.69
Total production cost (Tk.)/kg live weight 60.35 60.7 69.21 63.77
Total sale priced (Tk.) 3084.48 3352.32 2883.6 3140.64
Total net profit (Tk.) 757.48 808.59 388.25 636.95
Net profit (Tk.)/kg live weight 19.7 19.3 10.7 16.2

11. Propionic Acid

12. Effect of PA on Growth
 The mechanism of growth promotion of PA is seems to be:
1. The reduction of pathogenic burden by reducing gut ph
2. Increasing digestibility
3. Improving the permeability of the intestinal mucosa and
thus increase the rate of absorption and also increase the
utilization of protein, amino acids, minerals and other
nutrients.

13. Cont. …
 Additions of Luprosil® NC (containing 53.5% PA) @ 0.4%
showed significant body weight gain of broiler chicken at 49
days of age compared to unsupplemented group (Izat et al.,
1990).

14. Cont. …
 An experiment with organic acid salt (1g/kg each of calcium
propionate, ammonium formate and calcium lactate) as
substitute for antibiotics (virginiamycin @ 0.5 g/kg as
antibiotic) showed numerically higher live weight and live
weight gain in organic acid salt supplemented group
compared to antibiotic supplemented group (Paul et. al.,
2007).

15. Cont. …
 Marcos et al. (2004) reported that broiler fed organic acid
mixture (70% formic acid and 30% PA) @ 0.25 and 0.50% with
diet showed higher gain compared to birds fed higher level
(1.0 and 2.0%) organic acid mixture.
 Significant improvement in body weight and weight gain of
turkey poult by supplementing MC (Myco curb containing PA)
@ 0.625 and 1.25% was reported by Roy et al., (2002).

16. Effect of PA on
Feed Intake and Feed Conversion
 PA reduces the pH of feed
 PA improves the hygienic condition of feed
 PA improves palatability and increases feed intake (Higher
level of PA reduces feed intake)
 PA increases permeability of mucosal cell of the intestine
which increases the rate of utilization of nutrients.
 PA improves feed conversion rate.

17. Cont. …
 Cave (1984) reported that when PA was included in the feed
up to levels of 100 g/kg, from 0 to 28 days, voluntary feed
intake of broiler chicks was decreased with increasing dietary
levels of acid.

18. Cont. …
 Organic acid salt (calcium propionate, ammonium formate
and calcium lactate @ 1g/kg) as an alternative to antibiotic
(virginiamycin @ 0.5 g/kg) showed that the cumulative feed
intake in broiler was significantly higher in antibiotic treated
group than other, whereas improved feed conversion ratio
(FCR) was found in organic acid salt supplemented group (Paul
et. al. 2007).

19. Cont. …
 In a study, Celik et al. (2003) observed better FCR of turkey
chicks supplemented with organic acids (propionic caid,
formic acid, acetic acid) as compared to unsupplemented
group.

20. Effect of PA on
Carcass Yield
 It is well established that PA used as growth promoter
improves the rate of utilization of all nutrients especially
protein which results better dressing percentage.

21. Cont. …
 Female broilers fed 7.3 kg/ton (0.8%) of Luprosil® NC (53.5 %
PA) resulted in a significant improvement in carcass dressing
percentage (Izat et. al., 1990).
 Significant effect on carcass yield of broiler chicken fed diet
supplemented with PA was reported by Hume et al. (1993).

22. Antibacterial Effect of Propionic Acid
 The antimicrobial activity of PA is related to:
1. Reduction of pH.
2. PA is lipid soluble in the undissociated form, in which it is
able to enter the microbial cell. PA can dissociate inside
the bacterial cell and break down the DNA structure in
the bacterial cell nucleus.

23. pH and Bacterial Growth
 The pH level in specific areas of the gastro intestinal tract
(GIT) is a factor which establishes a specific microbial
population, and also affects the digestibility and absorptive
value of most nutrients.
 Most of the pathogens grow in a pH close to 7 or slightly
higher.
 In contrast, beneficial microorganisms live in an acidic pH (5.8-
6.2) and compete with pathogens (Ferd, 1974).

24. Cont. …
 In addition, lowering the pH by organic acids reduces the
pathogenic microbes from GIT and improves nutrient
absorption (Boling et al., 2001).
 Propionic acid effectively inhibits the growth of E. coli bacteria
in the animal’s gastrointestinal tract.
 At the same time it does not inhibit the growth of
Lactobacillus bacteria.
 Addition of PA in feed has a potential role in reducing
Salmonella spp. in the chicken intestine.

25. Cont. …
 Kwon et al. (2003) reported buffered propionic acid (BPA)
markedly decrease the growth of Salmonella and other
intestinal anaerobic microbes by decreasing PH from 7 to 5
and maximum inhibitory effect was found at 3% level of BPA
in broiler.
 The results of this study indicated that the growth inhibitory
effect of PA against S. typhimurium strains was enhanced by a
decrease in pH and suppressed by anaerobiosis, suggesting
that the growth response of S. typhimurium to PA in the
chicken intestine might be affected by the environmental
conditions such as pH and anaerobiosis.

26. The Minimum Inhibiting Concentration
(MIC) of PA
Test-organisms (Bacteria) MIC % of propionic acid
Staphylococcus aureus 0.25
Bacillus subtilis 0.25
Aerobacter aerogenes 0.5
Escherichia coli 0.25
Escherichia freundii 0.125
Proteus vulgaris 0.2
Pseudomonas aeroginosa 0.25
Pseudomonas fluorescens 0.25
Serratia marcescens 0.25

27. Propionic Acid as
Mould Inhibitor and Preservatives
 Fungal inhabitations in feedstuffs during storage seem to be
inevitable without the presence of effective preservative(s) if
the humidity is over 16% with atmospheric temperature
higher than 200C (Ronald, 1996).

28. Cont. …
 Fungal growth on feed can substantially decrease its quality,
as the moulds thriving there in consuming majority of fat,
protein, carbohydrate and even mineral elements, leading
subsequently to stuff discolorations, heating, mustiness and
biochemical transformations yield the accumulation of toxic
substances in most cases.

29. Cont. …
 Bacteria and yeast contamination in compound feed have a
negative impact on the intestinal flora, resulting in nutrient
losses and negatively influencing the feed intake of animals.
 High microbial counts in feedstuffs not only result in a
reduced nutrient value, but they also have a negative impact
on palatability, which consequently results in a reduced feed
intake and performance.
 To avoid these problems animal feed products have to be free
of mold and have a long storage life. For this PA is an ideal
animal feed preservative.

30. Cont. …
 The presence of growing moulds and produced mycotoxins in
feedstuff decreases feed intake, efficiency and rate of feed,
while increasing the risk of infection and reproduction
disability (Lin and Chen, 1995).
 The fungal toxins such as aflatoxins, zearalenone, ochratoxin
and fumonisin, among those aflatoxins are dominant
(Hamilton, 1985 and Zou et al., 1997).

31. Cont. …
 The strategy for the control of mould growth, suitable for feed
industry, is the careful application of antifungal preservative(s)
(Holmquist et al. 1983 and Hamilton, 1985).
 An ideal feed preservative must be efficacious, inexpensive,
corrosion-free and safe to the animal (Holmquist et al. 1983
and Lin and Chen, 1995).
 Preservatives available today are mainly synthetic chemicals
such as propionate as well as acetic, sorbic and formic acids
(Goering and Gordon, 1974 and Bartov, 1983).

32. Cont. …
 Propionic acid has been proven to show the broadest efficacy
among all organic acids against fungi and yeasts.

33. The Minimum Inhibiting Concentration
(MIC) of Propionic Acid on Fungi
Test-organisms (Fungi) MIC % of propionic acid
Aspergillus niger 0.25
Aspergillus flavus 0.25
Aspergillus versicolor 0.5
Chaetomium globosum 0.125
Penicillium expansum 0.125
Penicillium funiculosum 0.125
Penicillium spinulosum 0.1
Penicillium roqueforti 0.125

34. Conclusion
 As an antimicrobial feed additive, PA is efficient than that of
other organic acids. It creates favorable response on
performance and overall health condition of avian species. It
is also popular as preservatives.
 Furthermore, like antibiotic growth promoter it has no risk of
microbial resistance.
 Therefore PA with its performance and health enhancing
properties is an effective alternative to feed antibiotics in food
animal production.

35. Formic and Propionic Acids

36. Materials and Methods
 360 one day old commercial broiler chicks of either sex were
randomly allotted to 8 dietary treatment groups.
 Each group was having three replicates comprising 15 birds in
each replicate.

37. Treatment
1. Group 1: basal diet
2. Group 2: basal diet + virginiamycin (0.05% of feed)
3. Group 3: basal diet + formic acid at 0.10% (FA-0.1)
4. Group 4: basal diet + formic acid at 0.15% (FA-0.15)
5. Group 5: basal diet + propionic acid at 0.10% (PA-0.1)
6. Group 6: basal diet + propionic acid at 0.15% (PA-0.15)
7. Group 7: basal diet + combination of formic (0.05%) and
propionic (0.05% each) acids (FA+PA-0.1)
8. Group 2: basal diet + commercial gut acidifier (CGA-0.1) at
0.1% level.

38. Production Performance
Body weight gain (g) Cumulative feed intake (g) Feed conversion ratio (FCR)
Control 1,946 3,620 1.86
AGP-0.05 1,954 3,441 1.76
FA-0.1 1,926 3,465 1.79
PA-0.1 1,915 3,445 1.80
FA-0.15 1,882 3,369 1.79
PA- 0.15 1,917 3,476 1.81
FA+PA-0.1 1,956 3,316 1.70
CGA-0.1 1,928 3,358 1.74

39. Conclusions
 Based on the feed efficiency and economics, it can be inferred
that combination of formic (0.05%) and propionic (0.05%)
acids at 0.1% level in the diet of broilers is found to be
beneficial and can replace the antibiotic growth promoters in
broiler feed.