Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 1 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index EFFECT OF SUPLEMENTING DIET WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF DRIPED KEFIR MILK ON PRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE OF LAYING HENS Ammar T. Diab Al-Tamimi 1,3 Mohammed S. Salman Al-Tamimi 2 Dr.ammaraltememy@gmail.com msalm377@gmail.com 1 Assist prof., Dept. of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, Univ. of Diyala, Iraq. 2 Agric. engineer, Agric. Directorate of Diyala, Iraq. 3 Corresponding author: dr.ammaraltememy@gmail.com ABSTRACT This work was carried out to study the effect of supplement diet of laying hens with dried Kefir Milk the on their productive performance. A total number of 144 laying Lohmann brown hens aged 22 weeks were, distributed randomly to four treatment with three replicates per treatment (12 hen/ replicate) The first treatments served as control group and was fed basal diet (no Kefir), The second treatments was fed the basal diet supplemented with 2 g, of dried Kefir milk/ kg feed the third treatments was fed the basal diet supplemented with 4 g dried Kefir milk/kg feed, while the fourth treatment was fed the basal diet supplemented 6g dried Kefir milk/kg feed .The experiment lasted for 16 weeks till the age of 38 weeks. The results revealed significant improvement of the productive traits of the treatment received dried Kefir milk compared with the control group (P <0.05) It may be concluded that rate of egg production (% hen day production) number weight mass of eggs. And feed efficiency during the production periods under study were significant better due to inclusion of dried Kefir milk to layers diet. Key words: Kefir milk, laying hens, productive traits. INTRODUCTION Animal health and growth are affected by many factors such as diet, stress, antibiotics and modern breeding systems, The health of birds is maintained and made stable using antibiotics in preventive doses, However, antibiotics may have indirect side effects, which affect human health through consumption of animal origin food, Increase antibacterial resistance to antibiotics in humans, Some diseases may cause harm to public health. Prompting some researchers in the developed world to reduce the use of antibiotics, and the use of alternatives. The use of Kefir milk can be considered as one of the alternative methods to replace the added chemicals by adding lactic acid bacteria. These bacteria have been used in foods and feed without having any obvious negative effects on the Received: 23/10/2017 Accepted: 9/4/2018 mailto:Dr.ammaraltememy@gmail.com mailto:msalm377@gmail.com mailto:dr.ammaraltememy@gmail.com Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 2 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index consumer (Yaman et al., 2006), Kefir is a fermented milk product used in the North Caucasus and in Central Asia for thousands of years (Rodrigues et al., 2005). The word Kefir originated from the Turkish word (Keyif) (Chaitow and Trenev, 2002). Kefir milk is produced from milk fermentation with prepared Kefir grain, Kefir appears to be a piece of coral or small blocks of cauliflower (Bensmira et al., 2010). Kefir contains more than (50) species of microorganisms useful for human and animal health, these include biology Aspergillus, Streptococcus, Saccharomyces and Lactobacillus (Karademir, 2008). It was reporedly that the milk of Kefir leads to improve the efficiency of food conversion, increase live weights, and reduce cholesterol, Lipid levels in the blood serum in birds (Karademir, 2008 ; Cenesiz et al., 2008). Bird performance and feed conversion are closely related to the microbiology of the digestive system and the structure of the intestinal wall and the activity of the immune system (Huyghebaer et al., 2011). The strains Lactobacillus isolated from Kefir milk has significant probiotic properties and is useful for improving intestinal microbial balance (Santos et al., 2003). It ensures the promotion and development of beneficial bacteria; these bacteria live in the mucous membrane of the small intestine, it also prevents the growth of pathogenic microorganisms by forming a beneficial microbial community against harmful microorganisms (Golowczyc, 2007 ; Santini et al., 2010). In addition, Kefir contains vitamins, minerals and essential amino acids that lead to the maintenance of healthy body, It is as well also contains complete proteins that are easily digestible (Semih, 2003). This study aims at comparing effect different levels of diet to dryer Kefir milk on the productive performance of laying hens. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study was conducted in the poultry farm of Animal Production Department - College of Agriculture - University of Diyala in the period from 12/9/2016 to 8/1/2017, for a period of 16 weeks. It aims to study the effect of adding different levels of milk powder Kefir on the productive performance of laying hens. The experiment was carried out on 144, laying at the age of 22 weeks. After a week of adjusting to the conditions and symptoms of the experiment, the experiment began at the age of 23 weeks, the average live body weight of the hens was 1650 g the birds were randomly distributed in four treatments with three replicates per treatment (12 birds each). The first treatments served as control group and was fed basal diet (no Kefir) (Table1). The second treatment was fed the basal diet supplemented with 2g of dried Kefir milk/ kg feed; the third treatment was fed the basal diet supplemented with 4 g Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 3 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index dried Kefir milk/kg feed; while the fourth treatment was fed the basal diet supplemented with 6 of dried Kefir milk/kg feed. The experiment lasted for 16 weeks till the age of 38 weeks. Every two weeks, the powdered Kefir milk loaded on soybeans was mixed with a small amount of feed manually, then gradually increased in order to obtain desired homogeneity, thereafter, mixed with the rest of the feed until the desired homogeneity of the feed particles is achieved, after the completion of the mixing, it was packaged in bags each according to the treatment to which they belong until the feed is presented to the birds. Kefir granules were brought from the College of Science - University of Babylon, which was used in the preparation of Kefir milk loaded on soybeans, this mixture was placed in aluminum dishes, and enter it in the incubator in the nutrition lab In the Faculty of Agriculture - University of Diyala, the incubator temperature was 37 °C, and for 48 hours to remove the moisture to complete dryness. The statistical analysis was performed using the full random design (CRD), and ANOVA to study the main effect of the factor under study using the statistical program, (SAS), (SAS, 2004). The significance of the differences between the averages were tested using Duncan test, 1995 (Duncan, 1955) at a significant level 0.05. Table 1. Ingredients (%) and chemical composition of the mixture used in the experiment Components % yellow corn 63.7 Soybean Meal 44% 26 Premixes (*) 2.5 Limestone 7.5 Common salt 0.3 Total 100 Calculated chemical composition Crude protein,% 17 ME Kcal / kg 2740 Methionine% 0.41 Methionine and Cysteine % 0.70 Lysine % 0.92 Calcium % 3.45 Available phosphorus % 0.36 (*) premix contained 5.9%, protein, 1074 kcal / kg energy, 2.3%, lysine, 5.4% methaneine 5.8% methionine and cysteine 0.3%, threonine 0.1%, tryptophan 26.3% calcium 9.5% phosphorus available and all the minor mineral elements and vitamins required. Chemical analysis of the ingredients of the bush according to NRC (1994). Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 4 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1. Egg production (H.D %) The results presented in Table 2 indicate that there were no significant differences between all treatments and control group in egg production during the first four weeks (23-26 weeks). However; during the second four weeks (27- 30 weeks) all Kefir supplemented groups were significantly higher in egg production (hen per day percent) than the control group (P <0.05) The highest rate of production was recorded for T4 91.06%, followed by T3 90.17 T2 89.77% Respectively, compared to the control group 88.78%. This positive effect of Kefir on egg laying rate continued through the third and fourth four weeks of the (P <0.05), T4, the fourth treatment continued to record the highest rates of egg production, 93.04 and 94.04 (%), respectively. In regard to the whole experimental period (23to38weeks of age) all treatments were significantly higher in laying rate then the control group (P <0.05), where T4 92.71 followed by T3 91.66% then T2 91.06% compared to their control 89.01%. Table 2. Effect of different levels of the dried Milk Kefir supplementation on egg laying H.D (%), Average ± standard error Treatments Experimental periods (weeks) Overall rate 26-23 30-27 34-31 38-35 T1 control 80.35 ±2.07 88.78 c ±0.17 88.88 d ±0.22 89.37 d ±0.30 89.01 d ±0.14 T2 84.61 ±1.03 89.77 b ±0.34 91.06 c ±0.17 92.35 c ±0.17 91.06 c ± 0.22 T3 84.32 ± 0.87 90.17 b ±0.25 91.75 b ± 0.17 93.04 b ± 0.13 91.66 b ±0.22 T4 83.92 ±1.22 91.06 a ±0.27 93.04 a ± 0.13 94.04 a ±0.12 92.71 a ±0.23 significance N.S * * * * *Means in the same column with different superscripts are significantly different (P <0.05). (N.S): There are no significant differences within the single column. 2. Egg weight The result obtained for egg weight table 3 proved the positive significant effect (P <0.05) of Kefir on egg weight of the supplemented group over the control group .This impact was detected at all periods of study (23 to 26, 27 to 30, 31 to 34 and 35 to 38 weeks) and for the whole experimental periods (23-38 weeks). However, no significant differences in egg weigh was detected between the supplemented group themselves; except slight numerical difference between T2 and T4, T3 (65.47, 66.16, and 66.52 and 65.47 g, respectively. Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 5 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Table 3. Effect of different levels of the dried Milk Kefir supplementation on egg weight (g/egg)(Average ± standard error) Treatments Experimental periods (weeks) Overall rate 26-23 30-27 34-31 38-35 T1 59.12 b ±0.47 59.41 b ±0.47 59.89 c ±0.40 61.29 b ±0.33 60.20 b ±0.26 T2 62.89 a ±0.46 64.30 a ±1.13 65.24 b ±0.58 66.86 a ±0.65 65.47 a ± 0.49 T3 62.85 a ±0.70 64.69 a ±0.53 66.86 a ±0.44 67.99 a ±0.46 66.52 a ±0.35 T4 62.10 a ± 0.72 65.26 a ±0.46 66.29 ab ±0.67 66.93 a ±0.81 66.16 a ±0.39 Significance * * * * * *Means in the same column with different superscripts are significantly different (P <0.05) 3. Egg mass Table 4 present the average egg mass (g) per hen per day during the different periods of experiment. Due to the significant positive effect of Kefir supplementation on laying rate and egg weight, a similar trend was detected for egg mass (P <0.05) for each period and also for the whole experiment period where T4 and T3 recorded 61.34 and 60.98 g/hen/day, respectively; followed by T2 (59.63 g/hen/day) as compared with their control (53.58 g/hen/day). Table 4. Effect of different levels of the dried Milk Kefir supplementation on egg mass (g/bird/day) (Average ± standard error) Treatments Experimental periods (weeks) Overall rate 26-23 30-27 34-31 38-35 T1 47.50 b ±1.29 52.74 b ±0.42 53.23 c ±0.41 54.78 b ±0.36 53.58 c ± 0.26 T2 53.23 a ±0.89 57.74 a ±1.16 59.41 b ±0.58 61.74 a ±0.59 59.63 b ±0.53 T3 53.04 a ±1.08 58.33 a ±0.51 61.35 a ±0.46 63.26 a ±0.40 60.98 a ±0.43 T4 52.17 a ±1.21 59.42 a ±0.43 61.67 a ±0.64 62.94 a ±0.76 61.34 a ±0.43 Significance * * * * * *Means in the same column with different superscripts are significantly different (P <0.05). 4. Food conversion ratio The results mentioned in Table 5 revealed that the feed efficiency was significant improved (P <0.05) due Kefir supplementation to the layer diet. All treatment showed loss units of feed consumed to produce unit of egg which mean better feed conversion .All treatment (T2, T3, T4) recorded better but unstable trend towards FCR during the different experimental periods; however the overall efficiency came in the following order: T4 first, T3 second, T2 third Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 6 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index (1.78, 1.85 and 1.89 g feed/ g egg), respectively compared to the control group (215 g feed/ g egg). Table 5. Effect of different levels of the dried Milk Kefir supplementation on feed conversion ratio (g feed/g egg) (Average ± standard error) Treatments Experimental periods (weeks) Overall rate 26-23 30-27 34-31 38-35 T1 2.28 a ±0.05 2.22 a ± 0.01 2.24 a ± 0.01 1.99 a ± 0.11 2.15 a ± 0.04 T2 1.96 b ±0.01 1.99 b ± 0.04 1.93 b ± 0.02 1.75 ab ± 0.09 1.89 b ± 0.03 T3 1.99 b ±0.03 1.97 b ± 0.03 1.86 c ± 0.02 1.71 c ± 0.08 1.85 b ± 0.03 T4 2.06 b ±0.04 1.84 c ± 0.02 1.79 d ± 0.01 1.71 c ± 0.08 1.78 b ± 0.03 Significance * * * * * *Means in the same column with different superscripts are significantly different (P <0.05) The positive impact of Kefir on the different studied criteria may be due its probiotic effect since Kefir a source of good bacteria such Lactobacilli and Streptococci. These bacteria counteract the effect of bad bacteria and improve the function of the gastrointestinal tract. (Mehmet, 2014) Probiotic, Which works to increase the useful microorganisms, which exist in intestinal flora, such as Lactobacilli bacteria, which secrete lactic acid, which provides an environment conducive to their growth, which works to remove harmful bacteria, (coliform) in the process of competitive exclusion, by covering the receptors on the epithelial cells present in the gastrointestinal tract, as well as prevent the arrival of harmful bacteria to these receptors, thus facilitating the process of displacement and discourage its work, making it more advantageous than the digested food (Saad, 2011). Also, Kefir is good source for different minerals and water soluble vitamins. Therefore, our results agree with the findings of Abdelqader et al., (2013). However, these results disagree with those reported by (Horniakova et al., 2006). Therefore it could be concluded that supplementing layers diet with 6 gram dried milk Kefir kg feed is recommended for better egg production. RREEFFEERREENNCCEESS Abdelqader, A., A. R. Al-Fataftah and G. Das. 2013. Effects of dietary Bacillus subtilis and inulin supplementation on performance, eggshell quality, intestinal morphology and microflora composition of laying hens in the late phase of production. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech., 179: 103–111. Bensmira, M., C. Nsabimana, and B. Jiang. 2010. Effects of fermentation conditions and homogenization pressure on the rheological properties of Kefir. Food Science and Technology. 43: 1180–1184. Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 7 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Cenesiz, S., H. Yaman, A. Ozcan, A. Kart, and G. Karademir. 2008. Effects of Kefir as a probiotic on serum cholesterol, total lipid, aspartate amino transferase and alanine amino transferase activities in broiler chicks. Medycyna Wet, 64(2): 168-170. Chaitow, L. and N. Trenev. 2002. Probiotics. Natasha Trenev Website. www.Natren.com. Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F-test. Biometrics.,1: 1-42. Golowczyc, M., A. P. Mobili, G. L. Garrote, A. G. Abraham, and G. L. De Antoni. 2007. Protective action of Lactobacillus kefir carrying S-layer protein against Salmonella enterica serovar enteritidis. Food Microbiol., 118: 264-273. Horniakova, E., L. Busta, and F. Flatnitzer 2006. Application of probiotic preparation IMB 52 in laying hens´ nutrition. Slovak J. Anim. Sci., 39(4): 191-196. Huyghebaert, G., R. Ducatelle, F. V. Immerseel. 2011. An update on alternatives to antimicrobial growth promoters for broilers. Food Microbiol., 187: 182- 188. Karademir, G. and Y. Ünal. 2008. The use of kefir as probiotic in broiler. Lalahan Hay. Araşt. Enst. Derg., 49(1): 47-54. Mehmet, Akif YÖRÜK Güler YENİCE, Demet ÇELEBİ, mer UÇAR,Yavuz Selim SAĞLAM, Muhammet Ali TUNÇ, Serdar ALTUN. 2014. Effect of Kefir upon the Performance, intestinal microflora and histopathology of certain organs in laying hens. Res. Art. 20(3): 363-370. N.R.C, National Research Council. 1994. Nutrient requirement of poultry. 9th ed. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.,U.S.A. Rodrigues, K., L. L. R. G. Caputo, J. C. T. Carvalho, J. Evangelista, and JM. Schneedorf. 2005. Antimicrobial and healing activity of Kefir and Kefiran extract. Antimicrob. Agents. 25(5): 404-408. Saad, A., B. S. Zankana, M. Al-Qazaz, H. Al-jaabie and G. Al-Kaisse. 2011. Iraqi probiotic, 1 st Ed., Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Univ. of Baghdad, Iraq. (In Arabic). Santini, C., L. Baffoni, F. Gaggia, M .Granata, R .Gasbarri, D. Di Gioia, and B. Biavati. 2010. Characterization of probiotic strains: An application as feed additives in poultry against Campylobacter jejuni. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 141: 98-108. Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 1-8, 2019 Al-Tamimi & Al-Tamimi 8 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Santos, A., M. San Mauro, A. Sanchez, J. M. Torres and D. Marquina. 2003. The antimicrobial properties of different strains of Lactobacillus spp. isolated from Kefir. Syst. Appl. Microbiol., 26(3): 434-437. Semih, O. 2003. Kefir: A Probiotic Dairy-Composition, Nutritional and Therapeutic Aspects. Food Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Ege University, 35100, Bornova - Izmir, Turkey. Yaman, H., Z. Ulukanli, M. Elmali, and Y. Unal. 2006. The effect of a fermented probiotic, the Kefir, on intestinal flora of poultry domesticated geese (Anser anser). . t., 157(7): 379-386. ومعرفة تأيرها في تعط الصفات اإلوتاجية إظافة مستويات مختلفة مه حلية الكيفير المجفف للعليقة للدجاج الثياض عمار طالة ذياب التميمي 1،3 دمحم صثيح سلمان 2 3،1 ، انعشاق.خايعت دٌانى –كهٍت انضساعت حٍىاٍَت، قسى انثشوة انأسخار يساعذ، 2 .افظت دٌانى، انعشاق، يحيذٌشٌت صساعت دٌانىيهُذط صساعً، dr.ammaraltememy@gmail.comانًسؤول عٍ انُشش: لمستخلصلمستخلصا خايعت كهٍت انضساعت/ أخشي هزا انبحث فً حقم انطٍىس انذاخُت انخابع انى قسى االَخاج انحٍىاًَ/ ، بهذف دساست حأثٍش إظافت يسخىٌاث يخخهفت يٍ 8/1/2017ونغاٌت 12/9/2016دٌانى خالل انًذة يٍ دخاخت بٍاظت 144حهٍب انكٍفٍش انًدفف فً األداء اإلَخاخً نهذخاج انبٍاض. اسخخذيج فً هزِ انذساست عهى اسبع اً اسبىع 23أسبىعاً، وصَج فشدٌا ووصعج عشىائٍا عُذ عًش 22سالنت نىهًاٌ انبًُ بعًش انًعايهت االونى دخاخت/يكشس( وكاَج انًعايالث: 12يعايالث بىاقع ثالثت يكشساث نهًعايهت انىاحذة ) ايا انًعايهت انثاٍَت ،غزٌج انطٍىس عهى انعهٍقت انقٍاسٍت )بذوٌ اظافت انكفٍش( إربًثابت يدًىعت انسٍطشة انًعايهت انثانث ، وفًغشاو يٍ حهٍب انكفٍش انًدفف/ كغى 2 ـانعهٍقت انقٍاسٍت انًكًهت ب انطٍىس حى حغزٌتفقذ غٍىس / كغى فً حٍٍ حى حغزٌتى حهٍب انكفٍش انًدففغ 4 ـانًكًهت ب حى حغزٌت انطٍىس انعهٍقت انقٍاسٍت األعالف واسخًشث حهٍب انكفٍش انًدفف/ كغى يٍ غى 6انًكًهت انعهٍقت انقٍاسٍت انًعايهت انشابعت عهى ً ، وقذ أظهشث انُخائح ححسُاً أسبىعاً 38حخى عًش أسبىعاً 16انخدشبت نًذة فً انصفاث اإلَخاخٍت يعُىٌا %( إَخاج انبٍط )P <0.05) انسٍطشةيقاسَت يع انًدًىعت (حهٍب انكفٍش انًدفف)انزي حهقاِ نهًكًم اإلَخاج قٍذ انذساست أفعم يذدءة األعالف خالل . وكاَج كفاانذخاخت ٌىو اإلَخاج( عذد انىصٌ كخهت انبٍط .عهٍقت انذخاج انبٍاضإنى حهٍب انكفٍش انًدفف ظافتإلبشكم يهحىظ َظشا حميب الكيفير، دجاج بياض، الصفات اإلنتاجية. الكممات المفتاحية: