Journal of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine

Volume 8(3), pages 72-81, June 2023

Article Number: E3362FEC4
ISSN: 2536-7099
https://doi.org/10.31248/JASVM2023.366
https://integrityresjournals.org/journal/JASVM
Full Length Research

Effect of different probiotics on the growth performance

of broiler chicken
Menardo D. Villanueva
Apayao State College, College of Agriculture and Forestry, Malama, Conner, Apayao, Philippines 3308.
Email: menardovillanueva517@gmail.com

Copyright © 2023 Villanueva. This article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received 28th February 2023; Accepted 5th April 2023

ABSTRACT: The study was conducted from December 15, 2019 to January 26, 2020 at College of Agriculture and
Forestry, Apayao State College, Cubet-Malama, Conner, Apayao, Philippines aimed to evaluate the effect of different
probiotics on the growth performance of broiler chicken, specifically on the initial and weekly body weight, gain in weight,
percentage rate of growth, feed consumption, dressing percentage and feed conversion ratio and efficiency, using T 1-
pure Water, T2 – commercial probiotics, T3 – effective microorganism, and T4 – fermented fruit juice as water additive. The
experiment was laid out using the Completely Randomized Design. The probiotics and the fermented fruit juice did not
show any significant effect on the growth performance of broiler chicken on body weight, gain in weight, percentage rate
of growth, feed consumption, water consumption and feed conversion ratio and efficiency. The percentage livability of
Treatments 1, 3, and 4 was still impressive since the standard of 5% mortality rate was not reached, which implies that
the used of commercial probiotics and fermented fruit Juice or organic acids affects immunity. On the income over feed,
additive and chick cost, the use of fermented fruit juice had the potential to improve the growth performance of broiler
chicken in the sense that it was comparable with the effective microorganism and commercial probiotics as exhibited in
the body weights, feed and water consumption, gain in weight, percentage rate of growth and feed conversion ratio and
efficiency. Therefore, the use of probiotics and fermented fruit juice from banana are safe in raising broiler chicken for
table meat, and it is recommended to use in the chicken production as it increases the income over feed, additive and
chick cost. Further study is recommended using other ingredients of fermented fruit juice to validate the concept of
probiotics as a viable modality in poultry production.

Keywords: Effective microorganism, fermented fruit juice, growth, probiotics.

INTRODUCTION

Poultry production is one of the segment of livestock environmental issues like global warming which is
production which plays an important role in the Gross associated with the industrialized poultry production
National Product of the Philippines and to the world system.
economy as well. Nowadays, global production of poultry Probiotics are used mainly to help ensure health status
meat has been growing faster than that of any other meat. by maintaining the digestive microbial balance and
But farmer’s major problem in the Philippines is the very reducing potential pathogenic bacteria which have the
high cost of conventional feedstuffs, medicines and other effect improving performance and productivity (growth,
inputs which are very important in the production. Broiler increases egg production, and feed conversion).
raiser faces increasing challenging to come up with Probiotics used in birds aiming to prevent and combat
positive market outlook. One of these is consumer digestive disorders based on competitive exclusion of
concerns over food safety, product quality and potentially pathogenic bacteria (Salmonella, Escherichia
 Krismiyanto et al. 73

coli, Clostridium perfringens), antimicrobial secretions concentrated EM solution that contains all beneficial
(bacteriocins), the stimulation of an immune response that microorganisms. Stock EM is not a fertilizer, a chemical or
contributes to the maintenance or reinstallation of a synthetic. It is not also genetically engineered. Stock EM
‘intestinal health” (Higgins et al., 2008). Organic input is is a basic dominant form of EM and is therefore usually
highly recommended to use as water additives that may used to produce multiplied EM (M-EM). Multiplied EM is
contain wide array of substantial vitamins and minerals the activated, secondary form of EM. It consists of S-EM
which is considered necessary to animals. (1-3%), molasses (3-5%) and water ((94%). The molasses
The Apayao province where the study was conducted is serves as a nutrient source for the microorganism,
located deep in the Cordillera mountains of Norther Luzon, consequently leading to the growth and multiplication of
Philippines. The Apayao province is classified into upper the microorganisms. EM Bokashi is an essential
and lower. Upper Apayao with 3 municipalities occupies supplement feed for animals. It is made from 1 to 2%
67.2% of the total land area and has mountainous Multiplied EM, 1% molasses and 98% water, which is then
topography classified by towering peaks, plateaus and added to organic feed materials. It has various
intermittent patches of valleys. Lower Apayao on the other applications, but is mostly used as a form of animal feed.
hands comprising 4 municipalities is in 32.8% of total land According to Chantsawang and Watcharangkul (2003),
area described as flat with rolling mountains and plateaus EM was first introduced and used extensively in Asia; the
(PSA, 2020). The province of Apayao is known as an technology was later introduced to other various countries.
agricultural province that produces agricultural commodi- The use of EM in animal husbandry nowadays is very well
ties such as rice, corn, cassava, and banana. Based on identified in many parts of the world. In a study conducted
the 2018 PSA survey, the top three crops produced by the in Belarus by Konoplya and Higa (2000), EM was
province were casava with 76.3 percent followed by successfully used in poultry and swine units as feed
banana with 7.9 percent and squash fruit with 6.5 percent constituent and sanitation spray. In south Africa, EM was
contributed to the total production in Apayao (PSA, 2018). used to increase productivity in integrated animal units and
In the formulation of Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ), banana poultry farms (Hanekon et al., 2001). Result of EM
fruit was recommended as the best substrate and Apayao experiment conducted on 27000 Kuroki broilers in Japan
has its vast resources on this production. was reported by Higa (1994). EM was administered in
drinking water, EM Bokashi in feed slicing and cleaning out
the hen coops with an EM dilute solution. Of the 27000
Probiotic chicks reared by this operation, survival rate increased to
97% for the birds raised by EM methods. In actual figure,
Probiotics contribute to recover the histology of both the this made an increase of 3780 fowls ready and shipped to
intestine and the thymus damaged. Probiotic bacteria are market. An alternative is the use of probiotics, prebiotics
emerging as a safe and natural strategy for allergy and symbiotic (feeding probiotic microorganism together
prevention and treatment. Probiotic bacteria, their cell with prebiotic substances) which might contribute to
walls or probiotic fermented milk have significant effects digestion due to the development of beneficial
on the functionality of the mucosal and systemic immune microorganisms in the gastro-intestinal tract (Pelicano et
systems through the activation of multiple immune al., 2004).
mechanisms (Maldonado Galdeano et al., 2019). Effective Microorganisms (probiotics) may be suitable
replacements of antibiotics. According to Fuller (1992) and
Effect of fermented fruit juice and effective Reid et al. (2003), probiotic is defined as live
microorganism (EM) to animals microorganisms that, when administered in adequate
amounts, confer a health benefit on the host. There is now
Fermented fruit Juice (FFJ) can be used as spray to animal mounting evidence that selected probiotic strains can
beddings to hasten manure decomposition. Fermented provide health benefits to their human host. Besides their
Fruit Juice contains beneficial microorganisms that help in use for controlling pathogenic bacteria, probiotics have
the decomposition process. FFJ, likewise use as a also been used to improve the growth of poultry (Stavric
nutritional drink- a 20% Fermented Fruit Juice solution and Kornegay 2008).
makes an excellent drink for both human and livestock.
(Business Diary Philippines, 2019).
It was concluded that fermented feed influences the Effects of probiotics on the performance of chicken
bacterial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract and reduces
the levels of eneterobacteriaceae in the different parts of Probiotics are defined as live microbial food supplements,
the gastrointestinal tract (van Winsen et al. 2001). which beneficially influence human (Songisepp et al.,
Effective microorganism (EM) products that are for 2005) and animal health (Carroll et al., 2007; Messaoudi
poultry production are Stock EM, Multiplied EM and et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2008; Gratz et al., 2010). Al-khalaifa
Bokashi (solid form of EM). Stock EM is the basic, et al. (2019) said that probiotics and prebiotics can be used
74 J. Anim. Sci. Vet. Med.

in chicken feed safely and without any adverse effects on compartments, surrounded by curtains and electricity was
the productive parameters and immune status of the flock. installed using incandescent bulb of 100 watts. Each pen
The resulting inhibition of nuclear factor-kB and increased measured about 24 x 24 inches. The chicks were cared
expression of heat shock proteins may account for the anti- and managed for 14 days before they were transferred to
inflammatory and cytoprotective effects reported for the growing house. It was subdivided by 12 experimental
probiotics and may be a novel mechanism of microbial- units with a measurement of 1 x 1 m. The study was
epithelial interaction (Petrof et al. (2004). Several studies conducted at the Agriculture Instructional, Research, and
reported the antioxidant activity on probiotic bacteria using Production Unit, College of Agriculture and Forestry,
assays in vitro (Shen et al., 2011). Widely, probiotics Apayao State College, Cubet-Malama, Conner, Apayao.
contain different lactic acid producing bacteria: The experimental house so as the feeding and drinking
bifidobacteria, lactobacilli or enterococci (Songisepp et al., jars were thoroughly cleaned with powder soap and
2005). For the chicken, the intestinal lactic acid bacteria disinfected with Lysol mixed with water for one week
are mainly Lactobacillus and Enterococcus (Mitsuoka, before the arrival of the chicks. Likewise, proper hygiene,
2002). sanitation, and strict biosecurity measures were observed
Additives such as enzymes, probiotics, organic acids, throughout the study to prevent the occurrence of
plant extracts and also supplements improve food flavour diseases. One hundred twenty (120) day-old Minerva
and palatability. Numerous studies show that probiotics broiler was used in the study. These were purchased at
have a positive effect on chicken performance – growth Belstenn Commercial and Farm Supply, Public Market,
and feed efficiency (Ahmad, 2006; Abaza et al., 2008; Roxas, Isabela. The brooder pen was matted with rice hull
Cakιr et al., 2008) and on health and immune response which was checked daily to maintain cleanliness and
(Audisio et al., 2000; Koenen et al., 2002; Griggs and sanitation for the chicks. Curtains were made up from
Jacob, 2005; Demeterova et al., 2008). empty sacks and placed around the housing to conserved
Probiotics are microorganisms that are fed to animals to heat inside the brooder. Light was switched from 6:00 PM
colonize the intestinal environment and promote a better until 6:00 AM to maintain heat requirements.
flora balance. Besides, these microorganisms are respon-
sible for the production of vitamins and the B complex and
digestive enzymes, and for stimulation of intestinal Feeds and feeding management
mucosa immunity, increasing protection against toxins
produced by pathogenic microorganisms. Some authors To meet the crude protein requirement of the birds at
reported advantages of probiotic administration (Jensen young stage, a commercial chick booster was given. They
and Jensen, 1992; Maruta, 1993; Correa et al., 2000; were fed for 7 days and gradually shifted for 3 days with
Vargas Jr. et al., 2002), whereas others did not observe 75% commercial, 50% commercial and 25% commercial.
improvement when probiotics were used (Quardos et al., The formulated mash from home mixed rations with 20%
2001). crude protein was given to the birds to all treatments in full
after gradual shifting process up to harvesting period using
the chemical composition of the different feed ingredients
Objectives of the study used in the study. The feedstuffs used in the preparation
of the experimental diets were as follows; corn grits,
The general objective of the study was to evaluate the soybean, rice bran (D1), fish meal, limestone, salt,
effect of probiotics using Commercial Probiotic (Protexin), vitamin/mineral premix (Table 1). These were purchased
Effective Microorganism (EM-1) and Fermented Fruit Juice at Belstenn’s Commercial Farm Supply, Public Market,
(FFJ) as water additive for broilers. Specifically, the study Roxas, Isabela. The experimental birds in the different
aimed to determine the performance of broiler chicken in treatments were fed on ad libitum. The birds were placed
terms of the following: Initial and weekly body weight; gain in their semi-automatic feeding jar regularly checked to
in weight; percentage rate of growth; feed consumption; ensure the availability of the feeds for the birds. The feed
water consumption; feed conversion ratio and efficiency; consumed per day was recorded daily. The formulated
dressing percentage with and without giblets; and feeds given to the experimental birds second week
economic importance in using Commercial Probiotic following the shifting process for three days until six weeks
(Protexin), Effective Microorganism (EM-1) and and reached the average body weight of 1.5 kg.
Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) as water additive for broilers.

METHODOLOGY Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) formulation

Brooding Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) was formulated using

substrates such as ripe banana and molasses. The
A brooding house was constructed using lumber, screen banana fruits were chopped into small pieces so that the
as walling and flooring and was subdivided into 12 juice can be easily extracted and placed in a pail and
 Krismiyanto et al. 75

Table 1. Composition and calculated nutrient analysis of the consumption. Water mixed with probiotics and fermented
broilers’ diets. fruit juice was changed daily to avoid the occurrence of
harmful microorganisms.
Ingredients Parts (%)
Corn 53.5
Soybean Meal 25.9
Distribution of experimental birds to different
treatments
Rice Bran (D1) 12
Fish Meal (US) 5
Following the Completely Randomized Design (CRD), the
Dicalcium Phosphate (Dicaphos) 1 experimental birds were distributed into four (4) treatments
Limestone 1.3 and each treatment was replicated thrice (3) with 10 birds
Salt 0.5 per replication. The Least Significant Difference (LSD) was
Vitamin/Mineral Premix 0.5 used for the comparison of means for results with
Methionine 0.1 significant findings.
Antioxidant 0.2
Total 100
Experimental treatments
Calculated nutrient analysis
The treatments used in the study are as follows;
Crude Protein (%) 20.00
Metabolizable Energy (Kcal,ME) 2,944.40
Treatment 1 – Control (Pure Water)
Calcium (%) 0.85 Treatment 2 – Commercial Probiotic (Diluted Protexin – 10
% P Avail. 0.43 ml/litre water)
% Lysine 1.14 Treatment 3 – Effective Microorganism (10 ml/litre water)
% Methionine 0.43 Treatment 4 – Fermented Fruit Juice (10 ml/litre water)

mixed thoroughly with molasses with a ratio of 1 kg of Data gathered

banana into 1 kg of molasses. The pail was covered with
newspaper tied with string and allow fermentation for 7 The following data were collected and recorded base on
days. The substrate was squeezed with clean and fine the growth performance parameters:
cloth after the fermentation processed. The fermentation
extract was collected and preserved in a plastic bottle and Initial and weekly body weight: The initial body weight of
covered with cloth to allow the gas to escape during further birds was taken upon the arrival or before they were
fermentation. It was stored in a cool dry place. distributed to the experimental pens. Thereafter, the body
weights were recorded weekly up to sixth week of the
study.
Procedures of probiotics and fermented fruit juice
utilization Gain in weight: The gain in weight of the birds was taken
by subtracting the initial weight from the final weight.
The probiotics and fermented fruit juice were utilized
following the recommended amount for each treatment. Percentage rate of growth: The percentage rate of
For treatment 2, which is the commercial probiotics growth of the experimental birds was determined by
(protexin) was diluted with a ratio of 10 grams per litre of means of the Asmundson and Leiner’s formula as follows:
distilled water, treatment 3, 10 ml of EM-1 concentrated
was mixed in 1 litre of water, treatment 4, 10 ml of FFJ was W2 – W1
mixed in a litre of water. All the mixture was offered to the Growth Rate (%) = 𝑥 100
½ (W2 + W1)
experimental birds all throughout the study.
Where: W1 – the previous weight of birds at a given period,
Provision of probiotics and fermented fruit juice in and W2 – the current weight of birds at a given period.
drinking water
Final body weight: This is the weight of the birds in the
Fresh drinking water was mixed with the recommended different treatments taken at the end of the study.
volume of probiotics and fermented fruit juice for all the
treatments in the study. Water with commercial probiotics, Final gain in weight: The final gain in weight was
effective microorganism and fermented fruit juice was determined as a difference between the initial and final
measured before and after in order to monitor water weight of the birds.
76 J. Anim. Sci. Vet. Med.

Feed consumption: The feed consumption of the birds in study. The birds in all treatments had a similar morphology
different treatments was done by taking into accounts the with the uniform feathering rate and beak.
volume of feeds consumed and the volume of feeds During the first up to second week of rearing, alertness
offered. The amount of left-over was subtracted from the and activeness was observed every time when feed and
feeds offered to determine the actual feed consumption. water were offered and they were all apparently healthy.
As the bird grew up particularly during the third week of the
Water consumption: The water consumption of the birds study, leg problems and lameness was observed.
in the different treatments was done by taking into account After 5 days from the start of the study, the yellow color
the amount of water consumed and the amount of water was gradually changed in white color from the head, wings,
offered. The amount of leftover was subtracted from the tail until white colors were prevalent. Their combs showed
water offered to determine the actual water consumption. reddish and relatively small and erect on the fourth week
of the study.
Feed conversion ratio and efficiency: The feed
conversion ratio (kg) and efficiency (%) was determined by
using the formula as follows; Growth performance parameters

Feed Consumption Body weight

Feed Conversion Ratio (kg) =
Gain in Weight
The initial and weekly body weight of the experimental
Gain in Weight birds as influenced by probiotics and Fermented Fruit
Feed Conversion Efficiency (%) = 𝑥 100 Juice are shown in Table 2. The initial weight of birds was
Feed Consumption
comparable with each other with means ranging from
Dressing percentage: The dressed weight of the sexed 62.72 to 65.21 grams. The body weight of the birds from
broilers from every replication were recorded and as basis the first week up to sixth week obtained insignificant
in computing the dressing percentage. results. The results of the study imply that inclusion of
Effective Microorganism (EM), Fermented Fruit Juice
Income over feed, additive and chick cost: The income (FFJ), and Commercial Probiotics (Protexin) via drinking
above feed, additive and chick cost was computed at the water did not influenced the body weights of the birds from
end of the experiment by considering the value of the the first week to sixth week of rearing based on the
broilers produced less cost of feeds consumed. computed analysis of variance. Although the result was
statistically comparable with all the treatments mean,
The cost of feeds was computed based on the prevailing Treatment 4 (FFJ) had recorded the highest body weight
price of the different ingredients used, while the value of compared to birds in treatments 2 and 1 that consumed
broilers was determined by the market price per kilogram commercial probiotic (Protexin) and pure water
live weight. respectively. It was observed that FFJ has the potential to
improve body weight. This is probably due to the beneficial
effects of lactic acid bacteria present on it which help
Statistical analysis digestion on chicken. The result is in contrast to the
findings of Vargas Jr. et al. (2002).
All the data gathered were tabulated and analysed using
the Analysis of Variance following the Completely
Randomized Design (CRD). The Least Significant Gain in weight
Difference (LSD) was used for the comparison of means if
the result is significant. Sirichai 6 1.0 program was used The influenced of probiotics on the weekly gain in weight
for the computation of data gathered. of broilers is presented in Table 3. The probiotics and
fermented fruit juice failed to influence the first week gain
in weight of broilers with means ranging from 56.73 to
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 87.71 grams. No significant result was also observed on
the second week, third week, fourth week, fifth week and
Characteristics of the experimental birds used in the sixth week with a mean value of 114.56 to 176.67, 236.23
study to 284.67, 405.33 to 447.67, 475.33 to 558.33, and 199.67
to 332.00 grams, respectively. The total gain in weight of
All the experimental birds used in the study exhibited a broilers did not revealed any significant differences among
healthy appearance and vigorous growth as indicated in treatments with mean ranging from 1538.33 to 1776.79
their weekly body weights. The birds were lively, alert, grams. The result does not agree with the findings of Faria
good eaters and drinkers throughout the duration of the Filho et al. (2006) and Awad et al. (2009).
 Krismiyanto et al. 77

Table 2. Initial and weekly body weights (g) of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weekly Body Weight (g)

Treatments Initial weight
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
T1- Control (water) 64.00 132.33 309.00 593.67 1015.00 1573.33 1795.00
T2 - Commercial 62.72 150.44 265.00 537.67 948.00 1423.33 1623.00
T3 - EM-1 64.60 121.33 241.10 477.33 882.67 1380.00 1604.33
T4 - FFJ 65.21 128.33 298.67 571.33 1019.00 1510.00 1842.00
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns Ns ns
C.V. (%) 4.69 16.85 12.26 9.86 11.37 8.65 9.64

Table 3. Weekly gain in weight (g) of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weekly gain in weight (g) Total gain in

Cumulative
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th weight
T1- Control (water) 68.33 176.67 284.67 421.33 558.33 221.67 1731.00
T2 - Commercial 87.71 114.56 272.67 410.33 475.33 199.67 1560.28
T3 - EM-1 56.73 119.77 236.23 405.33 497.33 224.33 1539.73
T4 – FFJ 63.13 170.33 272.67 447.67 491.00 332.00 1776.79
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns ns Ns
C.V. (%) 32.62 23.62 9.17 16.23 11.78 37.33 9.98

Table 4. Percentage rate growth of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weekly Percentage Growth Rate (%)

Treatments
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
T1- Control (water) 68.81 78.86 63.32 52.19 43.74 13.08
T2 - Commercial 80.48 66.27 67.96 55.18 40.05 12.81
T3 - EM-1 63.10 65.94 66.05 59.51 43.76 15.17
T4 – FFJ 63.93 80.28 62.73 56.14 39.28 19.50
ANOVA ns Ns ns ns ns ns
C.V. (%) 20.46 16.15 6.74 9.81 11.98 31.72

Percentage rate growth broilers offered with various probiotics are presented in
Table 5. The offering of probiotics did not influence the
The weekly percentage rate growth of birds as influenced feed consumption of broilers on the first week up to the
by probiotics and fermented fruit juice is presented in Table sixth week of the study. The cumulative feed consumption
4. Insignificant results were obtained among treatments in of broilers was therefore not influenced by the probiotics
terms of growth rate from the first week up to the end of as showed in the result the analysis of variance in Table 5.
the study. This fermented fruit juice given to the birds via The study implies that the inclusion of EM, FFJ and
drinking water found comparable with all the treatments as Commercial Probiotic on broiler’s diet via drinking water
reflected by the analysis of variance. The study is in had no effect on the feed intake of broilers. However,
contrast to the study of Awad et.al. (2009) that the broilers given with Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) had
inclusion of probiotic on broiler serves as a greater growth recorded the highest feed intake as revealed in the
promoter. cumulative feed consumption with 3,561.59 grams.
Increasing the rate of fermented fruit juice into 20 ml by
980 ml of water may reveal significant result on the feed
Feed consumption intake of broilers. According to Landuay et. Al. (2020),
birds treated with 20 ml FFJ by 980 ml of water resulted in
The weekly feed and cumulative consumption of the a significant increase in broilers feed intake.
78 J. Anim. Sci. Vet. Med.

Table 5. Weekly and cumulative feed consumption (kg) of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weekly Feed Consumption (kg)

Treatments Cumulative
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
T1- Control (water) 113.37 338.17 597.33 803.00 920.50 679.30 3451.67
T2 - Commercial 101.00 268.50 616.83 731.67 879.17 969.50 3293.67
T3 - EM-1 108.83 304.50 578.58 734.67 860.25 736.67 3323.50
T4 – FFJ 107.00 350.00 689.35 804.63 884.69 725.93 3561.59
ANOVA Ns ns ns ns Ns ns ns
C.V. (%) 10.70 19.75 16.77 9.02 8.45 9.65 10.23

Table 6. Weekly and cumulative water consumption (L) of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weekly Feed Consumption (kg)

Treatments Cumulative
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
T1- Control (water) 0.32 0.81 1.84 2.65 4.79 4.92 15.34
T2 - Commercial 0.29 0.89 1.71 2.78 4.90 3.80 14.40
T3 - EM-1 0.33 0.49 1.55 2.91 4.67 3.78 16.03
T4 – FFJ 0.29 0.95 1.95 2.91 4.92 4.99 16.03
ANOVA Ns ns ns ns Ns ns ns
C.V. (%) 12.80 27.70 17.88 14.74 6.89 17.90 8.47

Water consumption Table 7. Feed conversion ratio and feed conversion efficiency
(%) of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit
The water consumption by the broilers given with different juice.
sources of probiotics from first to sixth week is presented
Treatments FCR FCE (%)
in Table 6. Analysis of variance revealed that all the
treatments were found comparable with that of the birds in T1- Control (water) 1.99 50.33
Treatment 1 (Pure Water) and Treatment 2 (commercial T2 - Commercial 2.12 47.35
probiotic), which means that the inclusion of different T3 - EM-1 2.19 47.55
probiotics via drinking water did not show any significant T4 – FFJ 2.14 46.79
effect on the water consumption of the experimental birds. ANOVA Ns Ns
Although statistically all the treatments were found C.V. (%) 13.49 12.87
comparable with each other, it was clearly observed that
birds in treatment 4 with the inclusion of fermented fruit
juice were consistently garnered the highest water Dressing percentage
consumption from second to sixth week of the study.
The influenced of probiotics and fermented fruit juice in the
Azizah (2019) stated that probiotic of lactic acid bacteria in
dressing percentage of birds with and without giblets is
drinking water reduce feed conversion rates but did not
presented in Table 8. Results shows that Treatment 2
reduce broiler feed consumption.
(Commercial Probiotic), Treatment 3 (EM-1), and
Treatment 4 (FFJ) were not significantly different to
Feed conversion ratio and efficiency Treatment 1 (Pure Water) which implies that there is no
effect as to the offering of probiotics, FFJ and pure water
The feed conversion ratio and efficiency of broilers as on the dressing percentage with giblets with the mean
influenced by the probiotics on the drinking water of the values ranging from 75.37 to 85.90 percent. Likewise,
experimental birds is presented in Table 7. The data shows insignificant result on the dressing percentage without
that the feed conversion ratio and efficiency were not giblets was observed having a dressing percentage from
significantly different. The result of the study conforms with 69.74 to 79.68 percent. This conformed with the study
the findings of Hosseini et al. (2013) that probiotics has no conducted by Rehman et.al. (2020) that apart from
influence on FCR and FCE. This result is also in contrast dressing percentage, no interaction or individual effect of
to the findings of Abaza et al. (2008) and Cakιr et al. (2008) probiotics and prebiotics was observed for carcass, breast,
that probiotics improved FCR and FCE in broilers. thigh, heart, liver, and gizzard weight.
 Krismiyanto et al. 79

Table 8. Dressing Percentage with and without Giblets of Broilers as Influenced

by Probiotics and Fermented Fruit Juice

Dressing percentage
Treatments
With giblets Without giblets
T1- Control (water) 75.37 69.74
T2 - Commercial 81.49 76.09
T3 - EM-1 78.62 74.00
T4 – FFJ 85.90 79.68
ANOVA ns ns
C.V. (%) 9.19 8.93

Table 9. Weight (g) of giblets of broilers as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice.

Weight of Weight of Weight of Weight of Total weight

Treatments
liver gizzzard spleen hearts of giblets
T1- Control (water) 45.00 42.50 1.50 10.83 99.83
T2 - Commercial 47.83 41.67 2.00 9.17 100.67
T3 - EM-1 43.33 39.12 2.33 9.17 93.95
T4 – FFJ 45.00 46.67 3.33 10.00 105.00
ANOVA ns ns ns ns Ns
C.V. (%) 27.24 12.10 41.78 19.78 17.37

Table 10. Income over feed, additive and chick cost.

Item T1 T2 T3 T4
Weight gain per broiler (g) 1795.00 1623.00 1603.33 1842.00
Return per broiler (PhP) 215.40 194.76 192.48 221.04
Prevailing market price per kilo 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Amount of feeds consumed (g) 3451.67 3293.67 3323.50 3561.59
Cost of feeds per kg (PhP)/ Prevailing price of feed ingredients 34.15 34.15 34.15 34.15
Cost of feeds consumed 117.87 112.48 113.50 121.63
Cost per chick 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00
Amount of additives consumed (ml) - 11.16 12.50 14.47
Cost of additives per 10 ml (PhP) - 0.70 0.70 0.08
Total cost of additive consumed (PhP) - 7.81 8.75 1.09
Income over feeds, chicks and additive cost (PhP) 57.53 34.47 30.23 58.33
1. Computed based on the prevailing market prices of PhP 120 per kilo live weight.
2. Computed based on the prevailing price of the ingredients used.

Weight of giblets giblets with those birds given commercial probiotics. The
results imply further that the probiotics did not influenced
The weight of gizzard, spleen and hearts are presented in organ weights but inclusion of prebiotics and antibiotic in
Table 9. It was found out that the introduction of probiotics diet significantly reduced the weight of abdominal fat pad
and fermented fruit juice showed no significant differences of birds (Toghyani et al., 2011)
in terms of weight of gizzard, spleen and heart. It was also
observed that total weight of giblets showed no significant
differences among treatments with means ranging from Income over feed, additive and chick costs
83.37 to 109.17 grams. The result of the study implies that
broilers given Effective Microorganism (EM) and The income over feed, additive and chick costs on broilers
Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) had comparable weight of as influenced by probiotics and fermented fruit juice was
80 J. Anim. Sci. Vet. Med.

presented in Table 10. The results shows that the highest (2008). Evaluation of some natural feed additive in growing
return was obtained from the birds given fermented fruit chicks diets. International Journal of Poultry Science, 7(9),
juice with an income of PhP 58.33 followed by Treatment 872-879.
1 – control (pure water) with 57.53 and Treatment 2 – Abdel-Hafeez, H. M., Saleh, E. S., Tawfeek, S. S., Youssef, I. M.,
& Abdel-Daim, A. S. (2017). Effects of probiotic, prebiotic, and
Commercial Probiotics with PhP 34.47 and the lowest was synbiotic with and without feed restriction on performance,
obtained from the birds with Treatment 3 – EM-1 with only hematological indices and carcass characteristics of broiler
PhP 30.23. It is impressive that using fermented fruit juice chickens. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal
have a higher return in terms of income; aside of the Sciences, 30(5), 672-682.
safeness of the products when consumed. Add probiotic Ahmad, I. (2006). Effect of probiotics on broilers
or symbiotic to increase weight, improve feed conversion performance. International Journal of Poultry Science, 5(6),
rate and reduce feed cost of production as reflected by 593-597.
Abdel-Hafeez et al. (2017) on his study entitled: Effects of Al-Khalaifa, H., Al-Nasser, A., Al-Surayee, T., Al-Kandari, S., Al-
probiotic, prebiotic, and symbiotic with and without feed Enzi, N., Al-Sharrah, T., Ragheb, G., Al-Qalaf, S., &
Mohammed, A. (2019). Effect of dietary probiotics and
restriction on performance, hematological indices and prebiotics on the performance of broiler chickens. Poultry
carcass characteristics of broiler chicken. science, 98(10), 4465-4479.
Audisio, M. C., Oliver, G., & Apella, M. C. (2000). Protective effect
Conclusion of Enterococcus faecium J96, a potential probiotic strain, on
chicks infected with Salmonella pullorum. Journal of Food
The inclusion of probiotics and fermented fruit juice did not Protection, 63(10), 1333-1337.
influence weekly body weight, gain in weight, and feed Awad, W. A., Ghareeb, K., Abdel-Raheem, S., & Böhm, J. (2009).
consumption of birds. The introduction of probiotics and Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and synbiotic on growth
performance, organ weights, and intestinal histomorphology of
fermented fruit juice to the birds did not affect the dressing broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 88(1), 49-56.
percentage with and without giblets and weight of giblets. Azizah, N. K. (2019). Pengaruh probiotik bakteri asam
No significant differences were also obtained in the feed laktat dalam air minum terhadap konversi pakan ayam
conversion ratio and feed conversion efficiency. The broiler (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Airlangga).
highest return over feed, additive and chick cost among Business Diary Philippines (2019). How to Make Fermented Fruit
treatments in the study was obtained by treatment 4, birds Juice or FFJ. Business Diary Philippines. Retrieved from
that were treated with fermented fruit juice with PhP 58.33 https://businessdiary.com.ph/3470/how-to-make-fermented-
per bird. fruit-juice-or-ffj/.
The study concludes that fermented fruit juice had the Cakιr, S., Midilli, M., Alp, M., Ylιmaz, H., Muglal, O. H., Turan, N.,
potential to improve the growth performance of broilers in & Kocabaglι, N. (2008). Effects of dietary probiotic and
the sense that it was comparable with that of effective prebiotic supplementation on growth performance and serum
microorganism and commercial probiotics as exhibited in IgG concentration of broilers. South African journal of animal
science, 38(1), 21-27.
body weights, feed consumption, gain in weight, Carroll, I. M., Andrus, J. M., Bruno-Bárcena, J. M., Klaenhammer,
percentage rate of growth, dressing percentage, FCR and T. R., Hassan, H. M., & Threadgill, D. S. (2007). Anti-
FCE. In terms of income over feed, additive and chick cost, inflammatory properties of Lactobacillus gasseri expressing
the use of FFJ obtained the highest return. manganese superoxide dismutase using the interleukin 10-
deficient mouse model of colitis. American Journal of
Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, 293(4),
Recommendation G729-G738.
Chantsawang, S., & Watcharangu, P. (2003). Influence of EM on
The use of fermented fruit juice from banana is quality of poultry production. In: Senanayake, Y. D. A., &
recommended in the production of chicken as it increases Sangakkara, U. R. (eds.). Proceedings of the 5th International
the income over feed, additive and chick cost. Further conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, Thailand, pp. 133-150.
study using other ingredients of fermented fruit juice and/or Demeterova, M., Maskalova, I., & Pistl, J. (2008). Performance
increasing rate of FFJ with water is recommended to and health of broiler chickens fed diet supplemented by the
validate the concept of probiotics as a viable modality in probiotic Enterococcus faecium. Veterinarstvi, 58(6), 391-394.
poultry production. Faria Filho, D. E., Torres, K. A. A., Faria, D. E. D., Campos, D.
M. B., & Rosa, P. S. (2006). Probiotics for broiler chickens in
Brazil: systematic review and meta-analysis. Brazilian Journal
CONFLICT OF INTEREST of Poultry Science, 8, 89-98.
Fuller, R. (1992). History and development of probiotics.
The author declares no competing interests. Probiotics: The Scientific Basis. Pp. 1-8.
Gratz, S. W., Mykkanen, H., & El-Nezami, H. S. (2010).
Probiotics and gut health: a special focus on liver
REFERENCES diseases. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 16(4), 403-410.
Reid, G., Jass, J., Sebulsky, M. T., & McCormick, J. K. (2003).
Abaza, I. M., Shehata, M. A., Shoieb, M. S., & Hassan, I. I. Potential uses of probiotics in clinical practice. Clinical
 Krismiyanto et al. 81

Microbiology Reviews, 16(4), 658-672. Pelicano, E. R. L., De Souza, P. A., De Souza, H. B. A., Oba, A.,
Griggs, J. P., & Jacob, J. P. (2005). Alternatives to antibiotics for Norkus, E. A., Kodawara, L. M., & De Lima, T. M. A. (2003).
organic poultry production. Journal of Applied Poultry Effect of different probiotics on broiler carcass and meat
Research, 14(4), 750-756. quality. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 5(3), 207-214.
Hanekon, D., Prinsloo, J. F., & Schoonbee, H. J. (1999). A Petrof, E. O., Kojima, K., Ropeleski, M. J., Musch, M. W., Tao,
comparison of the effect of Anolyte and EM on the faecal Y., De Simone, C., & Chang, E. B. (2004). Probiotics inhibit
bacterial loads in the water and on fish produced in pig cum nuclear factor-κB and induce heat shock proteins in colonic
fish integrated production units. In: Senanayake, Y. D. A., & epithelial cells through proteasome
Sangakkara, U. R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International inhibition. Gastroenterology, 127(5), 1474-1487.
Conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, South Africa. PSA (2018). Survey on Agricultural statistics, 1st Semester 2018
Higa, T. (1994). Effective Microorganisms: A new dimension for Crop Production of CAR.
nature farming. In: Parr, J. F., Hornick, S. B., & Simpson, M. E. PSA (2020). Philippine Statistic Authority Survey, Apayao
(eds.). Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Province.
Kyusei Nature Farming. US Department of Agriculture, Quardos, A. R. B., Kiefer, C., Riberio, N. L. C., & Zink. L. A.
Washington, DC, USA (pp. 20-22). (2001). Caracteristicas qualitativas da carne de suinos
Higgins, S. E., Higgins, J. P., Wolfenden, A. D., Henderson, S. alimentados com raaies contend ou n,,o probioticos. In:
N., Torres-Rodriguez, A., Tellez, G., & Hargis, B. (2008). Reuni,,o Annual da SBZ, 2001, Piracicaba. Anias Piracicaba.
Evaluation of a Lactobacillus-based probiotic culture for the Pp. 794-795.
reduction of Salmonella enteritidis in neonatal broiler Rehman, A., Arif, M., Sajjad, N., Al-Ghadi, M. Q., Alagawany, M.,
chicks. Poultry Science, 87(1), 27-31. Abd El-Hack, M. E., Alhimaidi, A. R., Elnesr, S. S., Almutairi,
Hosseini, Z., Moghadam, H. N., & Kermanshahi, H. (2013). Effect B. O., Amran, R. A., & Swelum, A. A. (2020). Dietary effect of
of probiotic supplementation on broiler performance at starter probiotics and prebiotics on broiler performance, carcass, and
phase. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop immunity. Poultry Science, 99(12), 6946-6953.
Sciences, 5(11), 1221-1223. Songisepp, E., Kals, J., Kullisaar, T., Mändar, R., Hütt, P., Zilmer,
Jensen, J. F., & Jensen, M. M. (1992). The effect of using growth M., & Mikelsaar, M. (2005). Evaluation of the functional efficacy
promoting Bacillus strains in poultry feed. In World’s Poultry of an antioxidative probiotic in healthy volunteers. Nutrition
Congress (Vol. 18, pp. 398-402). Journal, 4, Article number 22.
Koenen, M. E., Heres, L., Claassen, E., & Boersma, W. J. (2002). Stavric, S., & Kornegay, E. T. (2008). 10 Microbial probiotics for
Lactobacilli as probiotics in chicken feeds. Bioscience and pigs and poultry. In: Wallace, R. J., & Chesson, A.
Microflora, 21(4), 209-216. (eds.). Biotechnology in animal feeds and animal feeding (pp.
Konoplya, E. F., & Higa, T. (2000). EM application in animal 205-31). V.C.H., Wienhiem, Germany.
husbandry-poultry farming and its action mechanisms. A Paper Toghyani, M., Toghyani, M., & Tabeidian, S. A. (2011, May).
presented at the international Conference on EM technology to Effect of probiotic and prebiotic as antibiotic growth promoter
constant chronic heat stress. Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 17, substitutions on productive and carcass traits of broiler chicks.
60-64 In International Conference on Food Engineering and
Landuay, R. D., Olaybar, B. B., Ramada, J. M., & Soriano, M. L. Biotechnology (Vol. 9, pp. 82-86).
(2020). Feed intake, growth and breast fillet sensory analysis Vargas, Jr J. G., Toledo, R. S., Albino, F. F. T., Rostango, H. S.,
of broiler chickens given drinking water with bio-organic Oliviera, J. E. & Caravalho, D.C.O. (2002). Caracteristcas de
supplements. Animal Biology & Animal Husbandry, 12(1), 9- carca de frango de corte, submetidos a raaies contend
19. probioticos eantibiuticos. In: Reuni,,o Annual Da SBZ, 2002,
Lee, N. K., Yun, C. W., Kim, S. W., Chang, H. I., Kang, C. W., & Recife. Anias Recife, 2002, CD ROM.
Paik, H. D. (2008). Screening of Lactobacilli derived from van Winsen, R. L., Urlings, B. A., Lipman, L. J., Snijders,
chicken feces and partial characterization of Lactobacillus J. M., Keuzenkamp, D., Verheijden, J. H., & van Knapen,
acidophilus A12 as an animal probiotics. Journal of F. (2001). Effect of fermented feed on the microbial
Microbiology and Biotechnology, 18(2), 338-342. population of the gastrointestinal tracts of pigs. Applied
Maldonado Galdeano, C., Cazorla, S. I., Lemme Dumit, J. M.,
Vélez, E., & Perdigón, G. (2019). Beneficial effects of probiotic
and Environmental Microbiology, 67(7), 3071-3076.
consumption on the immune system. Annals of Nutrition and
Metabolism, 74(2), 115-124.
Maruta, K. (1993). Probiuticos e seus beneficios. In: Conferencia
APINCO de Clinica e tecnologia Avicolas; 1993 Santos, S.O.
Paulo, Brasil. Pp. 203-219
Messaoudi, M., Lalonde, R., Violle, N., Javelot, H., Desor, D.,
Nejdi, A., Bisson, J. F., Rougeot, C., Pichelin, M., Cazaubiel,
M. & Cazaubiel, J. M. (2011). Assessment of psychotropic-like
properties of a probiotic formulation (Lactobacillus helveticus
R0052 and Bifidobacterium longum R0175) in rats and human
subjects. British Journal of Nutrition, 105(5), 755-764.