Effects of Cassava and Yam Peel Meals on Carcass Traits and Economics of Production of Finishing Broilers

Effects of Cassava and Yam Peel Meals on Carcass Traits and Economics of Production of Finishing Broilers
Peter-Damian Chukwunomso Jiwuba*, Okechukwu Samuel Okechukwu
Department of Animal Production Technology, Federal College of Agriculture
Received Date: 10 August, 2018 Accepted Date: 20 August, 2018; Published Date: 22 August, 2018

*Correspondence: Peter-Damian Chukwunomso Jiwuba, Department of Animal Production Technology, Federal College of Agriculture, P.M.B. 7008, Ishiagu, Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Tel: +2348063622456;E-mail: jiwubapc@gmail.com or jiwubapc@gail.com
Citation: Jiwuba PC, Okechukwu OS (2018) Effects of Cassava and Yam Peel Meals on Carcass Traits and Economics of Production of Finishing Broilers. Adv in Nutr Fd Sci: ANAFS-103.


Abstract
     A four week study was conducted using 180four weeks-old Abor acre broilers to determine the carcass traits and economics of production of finishing broilers fed cassava and yam peel meals as partial replacement for maize. They were randomly assigned to three treatment groups of 60 birds each. Each treatment group was replicated three times with twenty birds constituting a replicate. The three treatment groups were fed the three experimental diets(T1, T2 and T3)in a completely randomized design (CRD) for 28 days. Feed and water were provided ad libitum for the period. Proximate composition results revealed that cassava and yam peel meals are rich in energy and minerals. Birds on diets T1 and T3 had similar (p > 0.05) final live and de-feathered weights, which were higher (p<0.05) than those on diet T2.Birds on diet T2 and T3 had the lower (p < 0.05) carcass weight than the birds on diet T1. There were no significant (p > 0.05) differences in the cut parts and organ weights, but there were significant differences in the dressing percentage of the birds across the treatments. Revenue generated per bird was influenced (p < 0.05) with T3birds having better income. It was concluded that sun-dried yam peel meal can replace 20 percent of maize in the finishing broiler diet without adverse effects on performance and at reduced cost of production.


Keywords: Agro Waste; Poultry; Production Traits; Roots and Tubers; Unconventional Feedstuffs


Introduction
      In developing countries like Nigeria, the consumption of poultry products (chicken and egg) are considered as luxury by a large number of people [1].  This is greatly due to high cost of poultry meat and eggs, which is controlled by the high cost of conventional feedstuffs. This problem of high cost of conventional feed ingredients has called for an urgent search for cheap and readily available local feedstuffs such as tropical agricultural waste among poultry researchers [1]. However, the diets should be formulated at a cheaper rate and at the same time supply the required nutrients without altering the physiological status of the [2].

      Large numbers of agro-by product feedstuffs with enormous potentials exist in Nigeria, amongst them are cassava peel and yam peel. These agro-based by products are sources of energy but also have their limitations. The feeding values of these agro-byproducts are well documented [3]. Cassava peel and yam peel has inestimable value in livestock and poultry feeding because of their reported  energy values and mineral contents[3][4]. Yam peels are wastes or by- product of processing when the tubers are being processed. Yam peel meal can be sourced in substantial quantities from household kitchens, commercial eateries and markets but, information on the chemical composition and effects on broiler nutrition is scanty. Its availability in Nigeria was 1,000 tonnesin 1993 and 1,700 tonnes in 2000 (Presidential Task Force on Alternative Formulation of Livestock Feed, 1992). Importance is currently placed on the expanded program  of yam cultivation; many high yielding and disease resistant varieties through the improvement effort of IITA and National Root Crop Research Institute, Umudike; this thus will enhance the availability of the peels. Study with yam peel meal (YPM) [5] revealed that it can replace up to 15% of the maize in broiler chicken diets without adverse effects on performance and at reduced cost of production. Cassava peel has been extensively exploited in ruminant feeding. Its use in poultry has been limited due to the low protein content [6], high cyanide content [7, 8], high fiber and moisture contents [9]. Cassava can be harvested to produce garri, fufu, iwu, tapioca, abacha, chips, starch, flour, bread etc which are all in high demand in Nigeria  [10]. These numerous uses of the cassava has led to its high demand for different human or industrial uses thereby enhancing the availability of the peel which are grossly underutilized and are hitherto discarded as waste. These by-products are abundant and can be easily sourced at no cost. This study was therefore carried out to compare the performance of finishing broiler fed cassava peel meal(CPM) and yam peel(YPM).


Materials and Methods
      The study was conducted at the Poultry Unit of the Teaching and Research Farm, Federal College of Agriculture, Ishiagu, Ebonyi State, Nigeria. The College is located at about three kilometers (3 km) away from Ishiagu main town. The College is situated at latitude 5.56°N and longitude 7.31°E, with an average rainfall of 1653 mm and a prevailing temperature condition of28.50°C and relative humidity of about 80%  [1]. Fresh cassava and yam peels were collected from the Root and Tuber Processing Unit of the Federal College of Agriculture, Ishiagu, and its environs. The peels were subsequently sun dried to about 10% moisture content before milling with 2mm hammer mill and used in the formulation of the experimental diets. A total of 180, four weeks old Abor acre broilers were used for this study. They were randomly assigned to three treatment groups of 60 birds each. Each treatment group was replicated three times with twenty birds constituting a replicate. The three treatment groups were fed the three experimental diets (Table 1) in a completely randomized design for 28 days. Each replicate was housed in a concrete floor covered with wood shavings as the litter material. The birds were stabilized for 7 days before the commencement of the study in line with the permission and guidelines of research policy of the College’s Animal Ethics Committee. Before the arrival of the 4 week-old chicks, the brooding house was swept, washed, disinfected, and allowed to dry. Feed and water were provided ad libitum. At the end of the experiments, 2 birds per replicate were randomly selected, starved from feed for 12 h, and slaughtered for de-feathered, carcass, and organ weight determination. Carcass weight was calculated by removing the head, lower shank bones, and internal organs from the de-feathered weight. Dressing percentage is calculated as the percentage of the carcass weight to the final live weight. The internal organ weight and weight of the cut parts were expressed as percentage of carcass weight. The prevailing market prices of the feed ingredients at the time of the experiment were used to estimate the unit cost of the experimental diet (N360 = $1 at the time of the experiment). The variable costs of feeding the birds considered the cost of the feeds and all other costs (i.e., labor, capital investment, and housing) were the same for all the treatments. The costs of processing the cassava and yam meals were included as the feed cost. Proximate analysis of different of the test ingredients were carried out at the College of Animal Science and Animal Production, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Animal Nutrition Laboratory, using the methods (AOAC,2000). The results were analyzed with the general linear model (GLM) procedures of Special Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 17.0).

Ingredient T1 T2 T3
Maize 60.50 40.50 40.50
Cassava peel meal 0 20.00 0
Yam peel meal 0 0 20.00
Soybean meal 30.20 30.20 30.20
Palm oil 2.00 2.00 2.00
Fish meal 4.00 4.00 4.00
Bone meal 2.50 2.50 2.50
Common salt 0.25 0.25 0.25
Methionine 0.10 0.10 0.10
Lysine 0.20 0.20 0.20
Premix * 0.25 0.25 0.25
Total 100 100 100
Calculated Analysis
Crude Protein (%) 21.33 20.37 21.63
Metabolizable Energy (Kcal/kg) 3173.37 3075.97 3007.57

Table 1: Percentage composition of experimental diets.

 *supplied per kg of diet: 5,000iu Vit A; 100,00iu Vit D3; 800mg vit E, 400mg vit K; 1,200mg vit B2; 1,000mg Vit B3; 4mg vit B12; 3,00mg; Niacin; 4,00mg vit. C; 11200mg chlorine; 24000mg Mn; 8,000mg Fe 1,600mg Cu; 18,000mg Zn; 500mg iodine; 48mg selenium; antioxidant (BHT).

Results and Discussion
      The proximate composition of the sun-dried cassava and yam peel meals used in this study is presented (Table 2). The proximate composition of cassava peel revealed high dry matter (DM) of 87.90% which is compared with 90.28% reported by Jiwuba et al. [11]. The crude protein (CP) content in the present study is highly comparable with 5.49% reported by Oloruntola et al. [12]. The proximate composition for the cassava peel meal is in agreement with the reported values of Oloruntola et al. [12], Jiwuba et al. [11] and Guimarães et al.[13]. The proximate composition of the YPM is comparable with the reported values of Ezieshi and Olomu [14].

                          

Nutrient Cassava Peel Yam peel
Dry Matter (DM) 87.90 89.74
Crude Protein (CP) 5.12 10.21
Crude Fiber (CF) 12.09 6.40
Ether Extract (EE) 1.19 1.34
Ash 6.01 5.22
Nitrogen-Free Extract (NFE) 68.93 70.55

      Table 2: Proximate composition of sun-dried cassava and yam peel meals.

      The results of the carcass characteristics of finishing broilers fed cassava and yam peel based diets are presented in (Table 3). Birds in T1 and T3 produced similar (p > 0.05) live weight and de-feathered weight, which differed significantly (p<0.05) from those in T2. Birds on diet T2 and T3 had significantly (p < 0.05) lower carcass weight compared to birds on T1 diet. The dressing percentage differed significantly (p<0.05) across the treatment groups. There was no significant effect (p < 0.05) of cassava and yam peel based diets on breast muscle weight, back cut weight, thigh muscle weight and drumstick weight. The significant differences observed in the de-feathered weight and carcass weight in this present study is in agreement with the earlier results of Jiwuba et al. [1] in broilers fed Siam weed leaf meal. The carcass weight ranged 1297.49 –1583.00 g and this is in tandem with earlier results of Jiwuba et al. (2016b)[15] on broilers fed sweet potato root meals. The significant poor carcass weight of broilers on T2 could be attributed to the impaired nutrient utilization. This maybe further attributed the higher concentration of linamarin content in cassava peel meal. This cyanogenic glucoside releases toxic cyanide (HCN) during hydrolysis at the time of digestion, which may also impair nutrient digestion and absorption. Also the higher crude fiber revealed in the proximate analysis could also limit nutrient utilization. The dressing percentage (54.41 – 61. 69%) reported in this study is lower than the reported range (78.61- 83.37%) by Jiwuba et al. (2016c) [16] for broilers fed aerial yam tuber meal. The significant lower dressing percent observed in this study is in agreement with the earlier findings of Jiwubaet al. (2016b) [15] who fed sweet potato root meal to broilers. The weights of the meat cuts and the internal organs showed no significant (p>0.05) difference across the groups. The non-significant difference reported for the organs are an indication that the physiological and anatomical functions of these organs were not influenced by the experimental diets. This further indicated that the cassava and yam peel meals may not have anti-nutritive factors at the levels that may hamper the normal physiological and anatomical functions of the organs of the broilers.
 

     

Parameters T1 T2 T3 SEM
Live weight (g) 2566.17a 2384.60b 2577.40a 112.64
De-feathered weight (g) 2143.97a 1717.63b 2053.51a 53.11
Carcass weight(g) 1583.00a 1297.49b 1500.75b 47.65
Dressing percentage 61.69a 54.41c 58.23b 2.25
Breast cut (%) 33.09 33.02 33.16 1.41
Back cut (%) 24.11 23.46 23.88 0.78
Thigh (%) 16.66 15.87 16.76 0.69
Drumstick (%) 16.70 15.75 16.86 0.70
Organs
Kidney (%) 0.42 0.79 0.65 0.16
Heart (%) 0.31 0.33 0.32 0.03
Spleen (%) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Liver + gall bladder (%) 1.62 1.94 1.68 0.12
Lungs (%) 0.56 0.55 0.57 0.03
Means within the same row with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05)

     

      Table 3: Carcass traits of finishing broiler birds fed cassava and yam peel based diets.
The economics of production of finishing broilers fed cassava and yam peel meals are presented in (Table 4).Cost of production per kilogram of feed differed (p<0.05) among the treatment groups, with T1 showing significantly (p<0.05) higher cost than T2 and T3. The significantly lower cost/kg feed may be attributed to the inclusion of the cassava and yam peel meals in the respective treatment diets. This is in agreement with the earlier report of Jiwuba et al. (2018a) [9] who reported low cost/kg feed due to the addition of locally available alternative feedstuff. The values for feed cost per daily weight gain were lowest for the broilers fed T3 diet (N187.67); however, this unit cost differed (p < 0.05) significantly from the values recorded on broilers fed diets T1 and T2. Revenue generated per bird showed significant (p < 0.05) differences with birds on diet T3 having the best income. This result was in agreement with the results of earlier studies by Ogundipe et al. (2003). The result demonstrated the qualitative benefits and financial returns of using YPM diet.
     

Parameters T1 T2 T3 SEM
Cost/kg feed (N/kg) 130.51a 80.20b 80.20b 1.46
Total feed intake (kg) 3.55 3.98 3.58 0.35
Total cost of feed consumed/bird (N) 463.31a 319.20b 287.12c 2.50
Daily feed cost (N) 16.55a 11.40b 10.25c 0.03
Feed cost/kg weight gain (N/bird) 305.39a 239.00b 187.67c 7.63
Revenue generated per bird (N) 1702.69b 1665.40c 1890.28a 22.31
Means within the same row with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05)

     

      Table 4: Economic of production of finishing broiler birds fed sun-dried cassava and yam peel based diets.


 Conclusion
      The results indicated that sun-dried yam peel meal can be better utilized by finishing broilers than cassava peel meal. The inability of the cassava peel to support carcass traits and economics production of finisher broiler could be attributed to higher HCN and fiber contents. Finally, sun-dried yam peel meal can replace 20 percent maize in the finishing broiler diet without adverse effect on performance and at low cost of production.


References

  1. Jiwuba PC, Ogbuewu IP, Nwachukwuguru K (2018a) Performance and economy of production of broilers fed Siam weed(Chromolaenaodorata)leaf meal(SWLM). Tropical Animal Health and Production 50: 1305-1311.
  2. Jiwuba PC, Onunwa EC (2018) Dietary effect of velvet bean (Mucunautilis) leaf meal on haematology and serum biochemistry of broiler finisher birds. Sustainable Food Production 2: 1-5.
  3. Ojewola GS, Longe OG (1999) Comparative response and carcass composition of broiler chickens fed varying protein, Conc. ASAN Conference Proceedings 69-72.
  4. Jiwuba P.C, Ezenwaka L.C, Ikwunze K, Nsidinanya N O (2016a) Blood profile of West African dwarf goats fed provitamin a cassava peel- centrosema leaf meal based diets. AnaleleStiintifice ale Universitatii, AlexandruIoanCuz”, Sectiunea Geneticasi Biologie Moleculara TOM XVII, Fascicula, 3: 27-134.
  5. Akinmutimi H. and Orien G.E. (2008) The Response of Broiler Finisher Birds fed gradedlevels of yam             peel meal in place of maize – based diets. Int. J. of poultry. Sci. 7: 474-479.
  6. Salcedo A, Valle AD, Sanchez B, Ocasio V, Orti A, Marquez P, Siritung D (2010) Comparative evaluation of physiological post-harvest root deterioration of 25 cassava (Manihotesculenta) accessions: visual vs. hydroxycoumarins fluorescent accumulation analysis. African J. Agricult. Res 5: 3138 –3144.
  7. Ubalua AO, Ezeronye OU (2008) Growth responses and nutritional evaluation of cassava peel based diet on Tilapia (Oreochromisniloticus) fish fingerlings. Food Techno 6: 207-213.
  8. Morgan NK, Choct M (2016) Cassava: Nutrient composition and nutritive value in poultry diets. Nutr 2: 253-261.
  9. Jiwuba PC, Ogbuewu IP, Nwachukwuguru K (2018a) Performance and economy of production of broilers fed Siam weed(Chromolaenaodorata)leaf meal(SWLM). Tropical Animal Health and Production 50: 1305-1311.
  10. Jiwuba  PC, Assam EM, Inyang EC (2018b)  Effects of feeding varying levels of fufusieviate meal based diets with Panicum maximum basal on the blood characteristics of West African dwarf goats. Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research 6: 1-10.
  11. Jiwuba PC, Ezenwaka LC, Ikwunze K, Nsidinanya NO (2016a) Blood profile of West African dwarf goats fed provitamin a cassava peel- centrosema leaf meal based diets. AnaleleStiintifice ale Universitatii, AlexandruIoanCuz”, SectiuneaGeneticasiBiologieMolecularaTOM XVII, Fascicula 3: 27-134.  
  12. Oloruntol OD, Agbede JO, Onibi GE, Igbasan FA (2016) Replacement value of rumen liquor fermented cassava peels for maize in growing rabbit diet. Archivos de Zootecnia vol. 65: 89-97.
  13. Guimarães GS, da Silva FF, da Silva  LL, Galvão  LMG , dos Santos  M , et.al. (2014) Intake, digestibility and performance of lambs fed with diets containing cassava peels. Ciênc,  Agrotec.,Lavras 38: 295-302.
  14. Ezieshi EV, Olomu  JM (2011) Bio-chemical evaluation of yam peel meal for broiler chickens. Journal of agriculture and social research 11: 36-48.
  15. Jiwuba PC,  Dauda E, Onyekwere  MU, Okechukwu  SO, Ubogu VR (2016b)  Responses of broiler finisher birds fed diets containing sweet potato (Ipomoea batata) rootmeal. Asian Research Journal of Agriculture 1: 1-7.
  16. Jiwuba PC, Ezenwaka LC, Ikwunze K, Nsidinanya NO (2016c) Growth performance, haematological, carcass and organ characteristics of broiler birds fed aerial yam (Dioscoreabulbifera) tuber meal. Case Studies Journal 5: 197-203.
  17. AOAC (2000) Association of Official Analytical Chemists: Official Methods of Analysis. 6th Edition. Washington DC, USA.