“The Effect of Adding Malic and Acetic Acid to Feed and Drinking Water on the Production Performance and Some Physiological Traits of Broiler Chickens”

“The Effect of Adding Malic and Acetic Acid to Feed and Drinking Water on the Production Performance and Some Physiological Traits of Broiler Chickens”

Haneen . A. Saffawy

Northern Technical University, Iraq

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.807195

Received: 05 July 2024; Accepted: 25 July 2024; Published: 27 August 2024

SUMMARY

This study was conducted in the poultry field of the Animal Production Department at the College of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Mosul, over a period of 49 days. The study involved 630 one-day-old unsexed broiler chicks of the Ross 308 type. The chicks were randomly assigned to 7 treatments, with each treatment having 3 replicates and 30 chicks per replicate. The treatments were as follows: the first treatment (control) without the addition of organic acids, the second treatment (adding 0.25 g/kg of malic acid to the feed), the third treatment (adding 0.5 g/kg of malic acid to the feed), the fourth treatment (adding 0.25 ml/kg of acetic acid to the feed), the fifth treatment (adding 0.5 ml/kg of acetic acid to the feed), the sixth treatment (adding 0.25 g/liter of malic acid to the water), and the seventh treatment (adding 0.5 ml/liter of acetic acid to the water).

The results showed that adding acid to the feed or water significantly increased live body weight, total weight gain, and feed consumption compared to the control treatment. There was a significant improvement in feed conversion ratio for the second and seventh treatments compared to the control and other treatments. However, there were no significant differences in dressing percentage, glucose concentration, or the relative weights of the liver, heart, thighs, and breast among the treatments.

INTRODUCTION

Poultry farming is considered one of the profitable businesses worldwide, providing meat and eggs for human consumption in a short time (Singh, 1990; Banerjee, 1992). Antibiotics have been used as feed additives in low concentrations to enhance growth performance significantly. However, their widespread and indiscriminate use has led to their accumulation in animal tissues and products, transferring to consumers and posing a real problem causing abnormal physiological effects, including allergic reactions in humans. Moreover, it has contributed to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant microorganisms due to continued use in animal feed. Consequently, researchers in several advanced countries have moved towards banning antibiotics as growth promoters, opting instead for organic acids. Organic acids are characterized as weak acids, which does not imply lower acidification ability or effectiveness compared to stronger acids, but rather indicates that they dissociate fewer hydrogen ions (H+). This property of hydrogen ion dissociation correlates with their ability to combat microbes, making them much more effective than undissociated acids. Hence, organic acids have been intensively used in recent years in Europe as growth enhancers in poultry nutrition and to inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria such as Salmonella in raw materials and feed formulations (Radcliffe, 2000). Organic acids and their salts are considered amino acid supplements.

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of adding different proportions of organic acids (such as malic and acetic acids) on the production performance, certain qualitative characteristics of the carcass, and some biochemical blood traits of broiler chickens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted at the poultry field of the Department of Animal Resources, College of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Mosul. The objective was to investigate the impact of adding malic and acetic acids to feed and drinking water on the production performance and some physiological traits of broiler chickens. A total of 630 one-day-old broiler chicks (Ross 308 strain), with an average weight of 40 grams per chick, were used in this study. The birds were housed in a half-open hall and randomly distributed into 7 treatments, with 3 replicates per treatment and 30 chicks per replicate. Lighting was provided for 23 hours per day throughout the experiment.

Feed was manually provided using circular plastic feeders from day one until two weeks of age, then replaced with hanging cylindrical feeders with a capacity of 15 holes per feeder, each inverted plastic feeder with a capacity of 5 liters, with two feeders per replicate. Feed and water were provided ad-libitum throughout the experiment. Two diets (starter and finisher) were used, in the form of homogeneous mash feed. Table 1 shows the components of the diets used in the study, and the chemical analysis of the diets was calculated based on the National Research Council (N.R.C. 1994). Table 2 displays the calculated chemical analysis. Samples of the diets were taken and analyzed in the nutrition laboratory of the Department of Animal Resources using A.O.A.C. (1980) methods to determine their nutrient content, as shown in Table 3, which presents the actual chemical analysis of the diets.

Table 1: Shows the percentage composition of the starter and finisher diets used in the study as follows:

Table (2): Calculated Chemical Analysis of the Starter and Finisher Diets Used in the Study

Table (3): Estimated Chemical Analysis of the Starter and Finisher Diets Used in the Study

* Analyzed at the nutrition laboratory affiliated with the Department of Animal Production, College of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Mosul.

And the experimental treatments were as follows:

Treatment 1: (Control) Without addition of organic acids.

Treatment 2: Addition of 0.25 g/kg feed (malic acid) as powder.

Treatment 3: Addition of 0.5 g/kg feed (malic acid) as powder.

Treatment 4: Addition of 0.25 ml/kg feed (acetic acid) as liquid.

Treatment 5: Addition of 0.5 ml/kg feed (acetic acid) as liquid.

Treatment 6: Addition of 0.25 g/l water (malic acid) as powder.

Treatment 7: Addition of 0.5 ml/l water (acetic acid) as liquid.

A completely randomized design was utilized following the methodology outlined by ( Steel and Torrie 1960). To assess the significance of differences between means, Duncan’s multiple range test (Duncan, 1955) was employed at a probability level of (P ≤ 0.05). Statistical analysis of the data was conducted using the SAS software (2005). The chicks were under veterinary care throughout the rearing period.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From Table (4), it is observed that the control treatment showed significant superiority compared to the treatments involving the addition of organic acids (malic and acetic) to either the feed or drinking water, except for treatment three (addition of 0.5 g/kg feed of malic acid) where the differences were not significant. It can also be noted that adding organic acids to drinking water had a negative effect on the live body weight compared to the treatments where the acid was added to the feed, such as in treatment two. These results are consistent with the findings of Fascina et al. (2012), Abdel-Fattah et al. (2008), Levic et al. (2007), and Vale et al. (2004).

Regarding weight gain, it is observed that all treatments with the addition of organic acids resulted in a significant decrease in weight gain compared to the control treatment. To observe the overall impact of the treatments on weight gain, it is noted that adding organic acids to either feed or drinking water resulted in a significant decrease in weight gain compared to the control. The addition of malic acid at proportions (0.25, 0.5 g/kg feed) showed significant superiority in weight gain compared to treatments where the organic acid was added to drinking water or treatments where acetic acid was added.

In terms of feed consumption, the control treatment showed a significant increase compared to the other treatments. Overall, the amounts of feed consumed by the birds in the treatments where the organic acid was added to the water were significantly lower compared to those where the organic acid was added to the feed. As for the feed conversion ratio, a significant decrease was observed in favor of the second treatment (addition of 0.25 g/kg feed of malic acid) and the seventh treatment (addition of 0.5 ml/l water of acetic acid) compared to the control and the other treatments.

Table (4): The Effect of Adding Different Concentrations of Malic and Acetic Acids to Broiler Chicken Feed and Drinking Water on Live Body Weight, Total Weight Gain, Feed Consumption, and Feed Conversion Ratio.

The values bearing different letters vertically indicate significant differences at the probability level         (a ≤ 0.05).

Table (5) shows the percentage of purification and the relative weight of the liver, heart, and gizzard, where statistical analysis results indicate no significant differences in purification percentage among experimental birds, whether organic acids were added to the feed or to the water, compared to control birds. These results are consistent with findings reported by Abdel-Fattah et al. (2008), Nuh et al. (2009), Mohamed (2009), Aldouri and Al-Hamdani (2012), and Moharrery (2005), who also found no significant differences in purification percentage for treatments supplemented with acid.

Similarly, in the relative weight ratio of the liver and heart, no significant differences were observed among all treatments. However, a significant superiority of the control birds was noted in the relative weight of the gizzard compared to birds in the seventh treatment group (addition of 0.5 ml/liter of acetic acid), with no significant differences observed among the remaining treatments.

The table also shows no significant superiority of the control treatment and the fifth treatment (addition of 0.5 ml/kg feed of acetic acid) in the gizzard ratio compared to treatments where acid was added, whether to feed or drinking water.

Table (5): Shows the effect of adding different concentrations of malic and acetic acids to broiler diets and drinking water on the relative weight ratio of the heart, liver, and gizzard.

Values bearing different letters vertically indicate significant differences at a probability level (p ≤ 0.05).

Table (6) demonstrates the impact of study treatments on the biochemical characteristics of serum. No significant differences were observed for all treatments of organic acid supplementation compared to the control treatment regarding total protein concentration, except for the fourth treatment (addition of 0.25 ml/kg feed of acetic acid), which showed a decrease in total protein concentration. Additionally, all treatments of organic acid supplementation showed no significant differences compared to the control treatment in terms of cholesterol concentration. However, adding malic acid at all concentrations to the diet or drinking water had an effect in reducing serum cholesterol concentration compared to adding acetic acid at a concentration of 0.25 ml/kg feed. Regarding albumin, the effects of adding organic acids to broiler diets varied in albumin levels. It was noted that adding malic acid at a concentration of 0.25 g/kg feed or adding it to drinking water at 0.25 g/liter resulted in a significant decrease in albumin concentration compared to the control treatment. On the other hand, adding acetic acid at 0.25 ml/kg feed caused a significant decrease compared to the control treatment, while other additions of acetic acid did not reach significant levels compared to the control treatment.

It is noted that adding organic acids (malic and acetic) did not show any significant difference in albumin concentration between them. No significant differences were observed in glucose concentration among all treatments.

Table (6): Shows the effect of adding different concentrations of malic and acetic acids to broiler diets and drinking water on the biochemical indicators of serum (total protein, cholesterol, albumin, glucose, packed cell volume).

Values bearing different letters vertically indicate significant differences at a probability level of (p ≤ 0.05).

REFERENCES

1. Abd El-hakim, A. S.G. cherian and M.N. Ali (2009).Use of organic acid, harbs and their combination to improve the utilization of commercial low protein broiler diets.Int.j. Poult Sci. 8: 14-20.
2. Abdel Aziz, A. (2006). Effect of organic acid on body weight, serum total protein, total cholesterol, glucose and cecal conlonization of salmonella of  broilers med university of Al-qadisiya, no.2:5.
3. Abdel-Fattah, S. A., M. H. El-sanhoury, N. M. El-mednay and F.Abdel-azeem (2008).thyroid activity , some blood constituents, organs morphology and performance of broiler chicks fed supplemental organic acid .International journal of poultry science. 7(3): 215-222.
4. Abdo, M. A. Zeinb. (2004). Efficacy of acetic acid in improving the utilization of low-protein low energy broiler diets-poultry science. Egypt. 24:123-141.
5. Acikgöz, Z. H. Bayraktar and O. Altan (2011). Effect of formic acid administration in the drinking water on performance, Intestinal microflora and carcass contamination in male broilers under high ambient temperature Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 24,No. 1:96-102.
6. Adil, S., T. Banday, G. Ahmed Bhat, M. Saleem mir and M. Rehman. (2011).Effect of dietary supplementation of organic acid on performance, Intestinal Histomorphology, and serum biochemistry of broiler chicken.journal of central European agriculture,12 (3), 498-508.
7. AI-Kassi , G.A.and M.A. Mohssen (2009). Comparative study  between single organic acid effect and synergistic organic acid effect on broiler performance . Pakistan  journal of  nutrition 8(6):896-899, ISSN   1680-5194.
8. Akeregd, F. and F. Michael. (1993) Landons problem Solving model The British journal for the philosophy of science 44: 785.
9. Akyurek, H. and A. yel. (2011).Influence of dietary thymol and carvacrol preparation and/ or an organic acid blend on growth performance, digestive organs and intestinal microbiota of broiler chickens. African journal of microbiology research vol. 5 (7) pp.xxx-xxx.
10. AO AC (Association of official Analytical chemists) (1986). Official method of the Association of official Analytical chemists. Volume 1, 16^th Arlington. USA.
11. Banerjee, G. C. (1992). Poultry 3^rd, oxford and IBH publishing Co. New Delhi, India.
12. Berchieri, A. jr. Barrow, P.A. (1996).The antibacterial effects for salmonella Enteritidis phage type 4 of different ehemical disinfectants and cleaning agents tested under different conditions. Journal Avivan Pathology. Volume 25-Issue 4.
13. Biggs, P. and C.M. Parsons. (2008). The effects of several organic acid on growth performance, nutrient digestiblities and cecal microbial population in the young chicks. poutl.sci.,87:2581-2589.
14. Bozkurt, M., K. Kucukyilmaz, A.U. Cath and M. Cinar.(2009).The effect of single or combined dietary supplementation of prebiotics on performance and slaughter characteristics of broilers .south African journal of animal science, 39 (3
15. Brody, S.(1949). Biomergetics and growth, renihold publ. crop.,Newyork.
16. Celik Kemal, I., E. Erbil, U. Ahmet and M. Erturk.(2007).The using of organic acid in califorina turkey chicks and its effect on performance before pasturing.International journal of poultry science 2 (6):446-448.
17. Cengiz, O. B. H. Koksal, O. Tatli, O. Sevim, H. Avci, T. Epikmen, D. Beyaz, S. Buyukyoruk, M. Boyacioglu, A. Uner and A. G. Onol. (2012). Influence of dietary organic acid blend supplementation and interaction with delayed feed access after hatch on broiler growth performance and intestinal. Veterinarni Medicina, 57,2012(10):515-528.
18. Cherrington,C. A. Hinton, M. Mead, G. C. and I. Chopra. (1991). Organic acids: chemistry, antibacterial activity and practical applications advances in microbial physiology, 32:87-107.
19. Dairo, F.A.S.A.O.K., Adesehinwa, T.A. Oluwasola and J.A. Oluyemi. (2010). High and low dietary energy and protein levels for broiler chickens. African journal of Agriculture Research Vol. 5(15) pp.2030-2038.
20. Davidson, P.M. (2001). Chemical preservatives and natural antimicrobial compounds. Food micro biolog. P.593-627 In: Ibid. USA.
21. Dehghani, N. and R. Jahanian.(2012). Effect of dietary organic acid supplementation on immune response and some blood parameters of broilers fed diets with different protein levels. Isfahan University of  Technology, Isfahan 48156-83111, Iran.
22. Denli, M., F. Okan and K. Celik (2003). Effect of dietary probiotic, acid and antibiotic supplementation to diets of broiler performance and carcass. Yield Pakistan journal of nutrition 2,2:89-91.
23. Denyer, s. p. Stewart, A. B. (1998). Mechanisms of action of disin fectants. International Biodeterior Biodegrodation. 41: 261-268 development of broiler chicks. Poultry science, 84:1015-1021
24. Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple and Multiple F test biometrics.11:1-42.
25. Fascina, vitor Barbose. Sartori, jose Roberto. Gonzales, Elisabeth and fabyola barros de carvalho, ivan mailinch goncalves pereiva de souza, Gustavo do valle polycarpo Ana cristina stradiotti, Vanessa cristina pelicia. (2012).phytogenic additives and organic acid in broiler chicken diets. Revista brasileira de zootecnia.
26. Frankenbach, S.D., J.L snow, C.M. parsons and D.H, Baker (2001).  The Effects of citric acid on the calcium and phosphorus requirements of chicks feed corn-soybean diets.poult.sci., 80: 783-788.
27. Galib, A. Al-Kassi and M. and Aqeel Mohssen.(2009). Comparative study between single organic acid effect and synergistic organic acid effect on broiler performance. Pakistan journal of nutrition 8 (6):896-899.
28. Gauthier, R., (2002). Intestinal health, the key to productivily ( the case of organic acid ) XXVII convencion ANECA-WPDSA Puerto Vallarta, Jal. mexico.
29. Ghazalah, A. A. Atta, A. M. Kout Elkloub, M. El- Moustafa and Riry, F. H. Shata. (2011). Effect of dictary supplementation of organic acid on performance nutrients digestibility and geaith of broiker chicks – International Journal of poultry science. 10 (3): 176-184.
30. Gunal, M., G. Yayli,O. Kaya,N. Karahan and O.Sulak. (2006). The effect of antibiotic growth promoter, probiotic or organic acid supplementation on performance, Intestinal microflora and tissue of broilers, International journal of poultry science 5(2): 149-155.
31. Hamed,D.M. and M. Hassan (2013). Acids supplementation to drinking water and their effects on Japanese quails experimentally challenged with salmonella enteritidis.Research in zoology,3(1):15-22.
32. Hasan, H. M. A. Mohamed, M. A. Youssef, Amani W. and Eman R. Hassan. (2010). Effects of using organic acid to substitute antibiotic growth promoters on performance and intestinal microflora of Department of animal production, national research center.12311. Dokki. Egypt.
33. Hernandez, F.,V. Garcia,J.Madrid, J.Orengo, p.Catala and M.D. Megias. (2006). Effect of formic acid on performance, digestibility, intestinal histomorphology and plasma metabolite levels of broiler chickens.Br. polt.sci. 47:50-56.
34. Hinton, A.J. Buhr and K. D. Ingram. (2000). Reduction of salmonella in the crop of broiler chickens subjected feed with drawal. Poult. Sci. 79:1566-1570.
35. Hons, B. S. (2008). The potential of neokstose as aprebiotic for broiler chickus theseis, in the faculty of natural and agricultural sciences – south Africa.
36. Houshmand, M. ,K. Azhar, I.Zuilfli, M. H. Bejo and A.amyab.(2012). Effects of non-antibiotic feed additives on performance, immunity and intestinal morphology of broilers fed different levels of protein South African journal of animal science,42(No.1).
37. Hudha, M.N., M.S. Ali, A.A. Azad, M.M. Hossian, M. Tanjim, S.C. Bormon, M.S. Rahman and M.M. Rahman, A. Paul (2010). Effect of acetic acid on growth and meat yield in broiler . Int.J.Bio Res. 1(4):31-35.
38. Islam, K.M.S., A. Schumacher,H. Aupperle and J.M. Gropp,(2008).Fumaric acid in broiler nutrition: A dose titration study and safety aspects.Int.J. Poult. Sci.,7:903:907.
39. Jain, N. Cedi,(1986). schalms veterinary hematology lae and febiger U.S.A.,(267-282).
40. Kabir, S. M. L. Islam, M. W. Rahman, M. M. (2004). Effect of probiotics supplementation on growth performance and certain Haemato – biochemical parameters in broiler chickens. Journal of veterinary medicine. Bangladesh. 2(1): 39-43.
41. Karl, H.M., (2005). Hydroxy Carboxylic acid, aliphatic in ullmanns encyclopedia of industrial chemistry, wiley-vch, weinheim dhawale, a., better eggshell quality with agut acidifier. Poultry Int., 44:18-21.
42. Kaya, C.A. and S.D. Tuncer.(2009). The effect of an organic acid  and etheric oil mixture on fattening performance, carcass quality and some blood  parameters of  broiler, journal of animal and veterinary advance 8, 1:94-98.
43. Khalied, Nadira, T. N. pasha, A. khaligue and S. A. Khan. (2002). Effect of Replacement of feed Additive Antibiotic with different level of lactic acid on broiler performance. Pakistan vet . J. 22(4): 158-161.
44. Khosravi, A. R. Mehrdad, M. Behzad, M. M. M. Kiaei, Khazraeinia, P. Farkhoy, M. Masoumi, Z. (2008). Effect of diatomaceous earth on the performance and blood variables of broiler chicks during experimental aflatoxicosis. Journal of the science of Food and Agriculture.           Vol 88(4): 626-632.
45. Kopecky, J.H. Cyril and J. Weis.(2012). Effect of organic acids supplement on performance of broiler chickens. Animal sciences and biotechnology. 45(1).
46. Kral,M. Angelovicova, M. Mrazova, L. Thacova, j. Kliment, M.(2011). Probiotic and acetic acid of broiler chickens performance, scientific papers animal science and biotechnologies, 44,149-152.
47. Lambert, R.J. Startford, M. (1999).weak acid preservatives modelling microbial inhibition and response. Journal of applied bacteriology 86: 157-146.
48. Leeson, S.,Namkung, H. antongiovanni, M. and E. H. Lee.(2005). Effect of butyric acid on the performance and carcass yield of broiler chickens poultry science.84: 1418-1422.
49. Lehninger, D, L. Nelson and M. Michael (1982). Principles of   .4thed.
50. Levic, J.S. Sredanovic, O. Duragic, D. Jakic, Lj. Levic and S. pavkov.(2007). New feed additive based on phytogenics acidifiers in animal nutrition, biotechnology in animal husbandry 23(5-6),p 527-534.
51. Liem, A. Pesti, G.M. and H.M. Edwards jr.(2008). The Effects of several organic acid on phaytate phosophorus hydrolysis in broiler chicks. Department of poultry science 87:689-693.
52. Livingston,K. A. Raface, Parsons,C.M. and R. A. (2005). The Effect of various organic acid on phytate phosphorus utilization in chicks. Poultry science 84:1356-1362.
53. Luckstadt, C.N. Senkoylu, H. Akyurek and A. Agma.(2004). Acidifier a modern alterative for anti- biotic free feeging in livestock production with special  focus on broiler production, veterinarija ir zootechnka. 27.49 1392-2130.
54. Luckstadt,C. Mellor,S. (2011).The use of organic acid in animal nutrition, with special focus on dietary potassium diformate under European and austral-asian conditions. Animal nutrition-Australia 18.
55. Mahdavi, R. and Torki, M. (2009). Study on usage period of dietary protected Butyric acid on performance, Caracas characteristics, serum Metabolite levels and Humoral Immune Response of broiler chickens. 8(a): 1702-1709.
56. Mohamed, S.B., (2009). Effect of using malic acid on performance of Japanese quail fed optimal and sub-optimal energy and protein levels. Egypt poult.sci., 29(1): 263-286.
57. Moharrery, A. and M. Mahzonieh.(2005). Effect of malic acid on visceral characteristics and coliform counts in small intestine in the broiler and layer chickens. International journal of poultry science 4(10):761-764.
58. R.C. (1994). Nutrient of domestic animals L. Nutrient requirement of poultry. Acad. Science Washington D.C.
59. Nourmohammadi, R., S.M. Hossiani and H. farhangfar. (). Effect of dietary acidification on some blood parameters and weekly performance of broiler ckickens. Journal of animal and veterinary advances 9(24): 3092-3097.
60. Nuh, O. Guray, E. Burak, F.(2009). Astudy on feeding hazelnut Kernel oil meal as a protein source for broiler chickens. Animal science journal. V. 80(3): 305-309.
61. Nursey, I. (1997). Control of salmonella. Kraftfutter. 10: 415-22.
62. Ozek, K.K.T.Wellmann, B. Ertekin and B. Tarim.(2011). Effects of dietary herbal essential oil mixture and organic acid reparation on laying traits, gastrointestinal tract characteristics, blood parameters and immune response of laying hens in ahot summer season. Journal of animal and feed sciences 20: 575-586.
63. Ozturk, E., N. Ocak, I. Coskun. S. Turhan and G. Erener (2010). Effects of humic substances supplementation provided through drinking water on performance , carcase traits and meat quality of broilers . journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition. 94: 78-85.
64. Parker, D.C. Hofacre, G.F. Mathis M.A. Quiroz, j Dibner and C. Knight.(2011). Organic acid water treatment reduced salmonella horizontal transmission in broiler chickens. Poultry research. David parker@ novusint.com.
65. Peleg, M. (1988). An empirical model for the description of moisture curves. Journal of Food Science. 53(4): 1216-1217.
66. Pichaya, S., Y. Reangpanit, T. Poeikhampha, N. krutthai and C. Bunchasak, (2009). Effects of adding formic acid in drinking water on production performance, carcase quality and microbial ecology in digestive tract of broiler department of animal science, faculty of agriculture. Kasetsart university. Bangkok 10900.
67. Radcliffe, j. (2000). British super markets: forging changes in poultry hutrition. Aust. Poult. Sci. symp. 12: 25-31.
68. Rahman, M. S .M .A .R. Howlider, M. Mahiuddin and M. M. Rahman. (2008). Effect of supplementation of organic acid on laying performance, body fatness and egg quality of hens. Bang. J. anim. Sci.2008, 37(2): 74-81.
69. Roe, A. j.D. Mclaggan, I. Davidson, C. O.Byrne and I.R. Booth. (1998).perturbation of anion balance during inhibition of Escherichia coli by weak acid j.Bacteriol, . 180: 767-772.
70. Sallh, N. R. and N. A. J. Al Hussary. (2009). Effect of probiotics supplementation on some biochemical parameters of broiler chickens. Journal of animal and veterinary advances.No: 23,239-249.
71. Samanta, S.S. Haldar and T. Kumar Ghosh. (2010). Comparative efficacy of an organic acid blend and bacitracin methylene disalicylate as growth promoters in broiler chickens: effect on performance, gut histology and small intestinal milieu. Veterinary medicine international article ID 645150, 8 Pages.
72. SAS Institute (2001).SAS user guide: statistics. Version 8.2ed. SAS Institute Inc., cary, NC.
73. Singh, H.P. Mishra, M. Sahoo, G. Mishra, S. C. (1990). Effect of different of treatment of used litter on growth feed efficiency and economics in broiler prodaction. Indian journal of animal production and management. Vol. 6 No. 2 pp. 109-114 ref. 12.
74. Soltan, M .A. (2008). Effect of organic acid supplementation on egg production, egg quality, and some blood serum parameters in laying hens. International journal of poultry science, 7, 613-621.
75. Steel, R. M. D. and J. H Torrie. (1960). Primciples and procedures of statistics, megraw- hill book. Co., lne. Newyork , N. Y. 481P.
76. Taherpour, K. H. Moravej, M. Shivazad, M. Adibmoradi and Yakhchali.(2009). Effect of dietary probiotic and butyric acid glycerides on performance and serum composition in broiler chickens. African journal of biotechnology vol.8(10),pp. 2329-2334.
77. Thompson, J.L. and M. Hinton. (1997). Antibacterial activity of formic and propionic acids in the diet of hens on salmonellas in the crop. Br. Poult. Sci. 38:59-65.
78. Vale, M. M. J. F. M. Menten, S. C. D. Morais and M. M. A. Brainer.(2004). Mixture of formic and propionic acid as additives in broiler feeds, sci. agric (Piracicaba, Braz.), v.61,n.4,p. 371-375.
79. Viola, S. E. S. L. Vieira, C. A. Torres, D. M. de freitas and j. Berres.(2007). Performance of broilers supplemented with blends of lactic, formic, acetic, and phosphoric in the feed or water. R. Bras. Zootec. V 37,n.2, p.296-302.
80. Wolfenden, A.D., C.M. Pixley, J.L. Vicente, L. Avina, B.M. Hargis and G. Tellez.(2007). Effect of an organic acid product during feed withdrawal on broiler mortality, shrinkage and carcass condemnation following transport to processing. International journal of poultry science 6 (7):497-500.
81. Yakhkeshi, S., S. Rahimi and K. Gharib Naseri.(2011). The effect of comparison of herbal extracts, antibiotic, probiotic and organic acid on serum lipids, Immune Response, GIT Microbial population, intestinal morphology and performance of Journal of medicinal plants. Volume 10. No. 37.
82. Yesilbag, D. and Colpan I.(2006). Effects of organic acid supplemented diets on growth performance, egg production and quality and on serum parameters in laying hans. Revue de medicine veterinaire, 157,280-284.
83. Yoneda, N. S. Kusano, M. Yasui, P. pujodo.Wilcher. (2001). Recent advances in processes and Catalysts general. 221-253-265.
84. Youssef A. Attia, E. El-Hamid, F. Hany Ellakany, F. Bovera, A. Mohammed Al-Harthi, A. Sharehan Ghazaly.(2013). Growing and laying performance of Japanese quail fed diet supplemented with different concentrations of acetic acid. Italian journal of animal science 2013; volume 12:e37.
85. Zhang, A .W. B. L. Lee, K. W. Lee, G. H. An, K. B. Song and C. H. Lee.(2005). Effect of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) cell components on growth performance, maet quality and ileal mucosa development of broiler chicks. Poultry science, 84: 1015-1021.