Mitigating Potential of Three Phytogenic Feed Additives in Broilers Exposed to Dietary Aflatoxin

Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science

مقاله 17، دوره 12، شماره 3، آذر 2022، صفحه 571-581   

نوع مقاله: Research Articles

نویسندگان

A.O. Salako^{* 1}؛ J.O. Atteh¹؛ T.O. Akande²؛ I.O. Opowoye³؛ T.A. Aderibigbe¹

¹Department of Animal Production, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilorin, P.M.B 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria

²Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Obafemi Awolowo University, P.M.B 13, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

³Institute of Food Security Environmental Resources and Agricultural Research, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria

چکیده

A feeding trial was researched to evaluate the mitigating potential of three phytogenic additives on performance, visceral organs, hematological and some biochemical indices of broilers exposed to dietary aflatoxin. A total number of 192 one-day-old unsexed Abor Acre broiler chicks were used in a 2 × 4 factorial design of two levels of aflatoxin (0 and 500 ppb) and three different phytogenic powdered additives (Garlic, Ginger and Turmeric) at 2 g/kg and control diet. Phytogenic additives of ginger and turmeric (T3 and T4) to diet without aflatoxin increased the feed conversion ratio and the cost of raising 1kg of live broiler chicken (P<0.0001). Dietary aflatoxin in broiler chickens reduced the performance and digestibility of crude protein and crude fiber while phytogenic additives intervention improved the feed intake, weight gain, feed conversion ratio, cost of producing 1kg of broilers, digestibility of crude protein and crude fiber (P<0.0001). The inclusion of aflatoxin affected the values of liver, kidney, proventriculus, bursa of fabricius, intestine, white blood cells (WBC), neutrophils, red blood cell (RBC), hemoglobin (HGB), packed cell volume (PCV), platelet, urea, creatinine, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase and alkaline phosphatase. Inclusion of phytogenic additives (garlic, ginger and turmeric) at 2 g/kg to the diet with aflatoxin improved the values of the parameters. The study concluded that aflatoxin in diets induced detrimental effects on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, hematological and serum biochemical indices and there was a mitigating effect of the phytogenic additives in case of aflatoxicosis.

کلیدواژه‌ها

aflatoxin؛ blood indices and phytogenic powder؛ digestibility؛ performance

اصل مقاله

INTRODUCTION

The poultry industry has gained considerable attention as one of the world's most important livestock economic base. However, it is faced with the major challenge of contaminants that reduce profit margin, feed efficiency and hamper birds’ wellness. Mycotoxins are secondary fungal metabolites and a worldwide threat to food safety and security. Fungal growth in raw material for feed is inevitable under aerobic conditions. Almost 200 species of fungi producing mycotoxins have been documented. Majority of these mycotoxin-forming fungi are of three genera: Fusarium, Penicillium and Aspergillus. There are more than 500 mycotoxins produced by these known fungi, although only some of these exert toxigenic properties. The most common ones are aflatoxins, ochratoxin and fumonisins (Skalická and Koréneková, 2016). Aflatoxins are a group of toxigenic secondary metabolites characterized by furanocoumarins derived from polyketides, and are primarily of the Aspergillus spp. such as A. flavus, A. parasiticus. Aflatoxins B1, G1, and their B2 and G2 dihydroxy derivatives are natural contaminants of feeds (Dohnal et al. 2014; Filazi et al 2017). There are variety of effects caused by aflatoxins in poultry, they are: reduction in weight gain and feed utilization (Patil et al. 2013; Skalická and Koréneková, 2016), decrease in the size of egg and production, increased deposit of fat and damage of the liver, decreased serum protein levels, changes in organ weight, poor pigmentation, decreased activity of several enzymes involved in digestion of fiber, protein and lipids (Manafi and Khosravinia, 2013; Murugesan et al. 2015). Decontamination strategies in feed commodities to reduce mycotoxins are different and based on biological, chemical, and physical approaches. Chemical remedy strategies include the conversion of mycotoxin through several chemical reactions. Peroxidation, ammonization, and the use of ozonation on one or more mycotoxins are reported to be successful but with a clear insight of toxicity that affects the product’s palatability and nutritional quality (Faris et al. 2020). Hence, the use of organic, safe and biodegradable natural phytogenic additives which provide a synergistic approach as protectants of aflatoxin contamination and further stimulate pathways that elicit the natural defense systems (Gacem et al. 2020; Meng et al. 2020). Essential oils, spices, herbs and crude extracts are known as phytogenic, and have presented outstanding alternatives for the discovery of bio-fungicides and nutraceuticals for mitigating aflatoxicosis and related infections (Kim et al. 2005; Razzaghi-Abyaneh et al. 2009; Makhuvele et al. 2020). The phytogenic phenolic compounds which inhibited the production of aflatoxin were syringaldehyde, and sinapic acid, while acetosyringones were the phenolic compounds which stopped growth in A. flavus and also the production of aflatoxin (Hua et al. 1999; Mahmoud, 1999; Kim et al. 2006; Makhuvele et al. 2020). The curcuminoid pigments present in the dried root powder and turmeric rhizomes (Curcuma longa) were reported to have protective tendencies against aflatoxin (Soni et al. 1997; Pauletto et al. 2020). Garlic, in contact phase, was reported to be more effective in inhibiting growth, spores and aflatoxin B1 production of A. flavus (Ismaiel et al. 2012). It also exhibited antioxidant properties by its ability to scavenge free radicals, reduce oxidative stress and mutation and lipid peroxidation (Shaarawy et al. 2009). The research work (Hassan et al. 2019) clearly indicated that ginger is effective as an antifungal agent, reducing aflatoxins contamination in stored maize grains. It acts as a scavenger of free radicals in several ways, prevents or breaks the lipid peroxidation chain, possesses anti-inflammatory properties, enhances the antioxidant defense mechanism and modulates detoxifying enzymes (Arpit Saxena and Raja Fayad, 2013). The effectiveness of these phytogenic additives is still subject of research in the situation of aflatoxicosis in broilers. The aim of this study is to determine the potential of garlic (Allium sativum), ginger (Zingiber officinale) and turmeric (Curcuma longa) on the performance, nutrient digestibility, some organs’ characteristics and the blood parameters of broilers exposed to dietary aflatoxin.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Location of study

This research was carried out at the Poultry Pavilion, Teaching and Research Farm, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria, situated in the Guinea Savanna belt with longitude 4˚ 35'E and latitude 8˚ 20'N. It is at an approximate altitude of 310 m above level.

 

Sourcing and processing of phytogenic additives

Turmeric (Curcuma longa), Ginger (Zingiber officinale) rhizomes and Garlic (Allium sativum) bulbs were sourced from Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria, and confirmed at the Herbarium, University of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. The phytogenic materials were washed with water (pH=6.7), and disinfected with 2% sodium hypochlorite in water solution for about one hour. The materials, afterwards, were rinsed with sterile distilled water to eliminate residual sodium hypochlorite and dried in shade for 14 days (25±2 ˚C). The shade-dried materials were ground and passed through a 1 mm sieve, and the phytogenic additives used were free of aflatoxin.

 

Aflatoxin preparation

Toxigenic Aspergillus parasiticus obtained from Mycotoxin Unit of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria, was used for aflatoxin production. Aflatoxin was produced in rice (Shotwell et al. 1966). The autoclaved culture rice was dried, ground to powder and 500ppb of total aflatoxin quantified were used in experimental diets. Aflatoxin in fungal culture rice and experimental diets were directly quantified on TLC plates with a scanning demonstration (canning TLC scanner 3 with way (ATS 1.4.2 software)).

 

Experimental birds, management and diets

This experiment was laid out in a 2×4 factorial design of inclusion of aflatoxin at two different levels (0 and 500 ppb) in basal diet and four types of phytogenic additives (Control, Garlic, Ginger and Turmeric). Mixed sexes of 192 one-day-old broiler chicks of Abor Acre strain with average body weight of 40 ± 0.28 that were sourced from a commercial hatchery located in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria and allotted randomly to eight treatments, three replicates of eight birds each, were raised in a regulated metabolic cage and provided with water and fed ad libitum throughout the experimental trial. Feed ingredients (maize, wheat offal, soybean meal, full fat soya bean, fish meal) used for the preparation of basal diet were screened for the presence of aflatoxin. Only feed ingredients free of aflatoxin were used for the preparation of experimental diets. All the diets were isocaloric (3200 kcal/kg) and isonitrogenous (23% CP) (AOAC, 2000) as shown in Table 1. Vaccination and other routine practices were duly followed all through the experimental period. The mouldy rice containing known quantities of each of aflatoxin, ginger, garlic and turmeric were used in the preparation of experimental diets and they are as follows: T1: basal diet only, T2: basal diet + garlic (2g/kg), T3: basal diet + ginger (2 g/kg), T4: basal diet + turmeric (2 g/kg), T5: basal diet + aflatoxin (500 ppb), T6: basal diet + aflatoxin (500 ppb) + garlic (2 g/kg), T7: basal diet + aflatoxin (500 ppb) + ginger (2 g/kg), T8: basal diet + aflatoxin (500 ppb) + turmeric (2 g/kg).

 

Feed intake, weight gain and feed conversion ratio estimation

Initial weights of the birds were measured on day 1 and subsequent weight of broilers and feed intake were measured weekly until 5 weeks of age. The average daily feed intake and daily body weight gain per bird were calculated. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was calculated as the ratio between average daily feed intake and average daily body weight gain per bird. The economic benefit was estimated as feed cost per kg of live broiler weight which was calculated by multiplying feed cost (₦/kg diet) with the FCR (Salami et al. 2018).

 

Nutrient digestibility and proximate composition

At third week ending, nutrient digestibility trial was carried out using the total collection method (AOAC, 2000). Weighed quantities of feed were supplied to the birds and excreta samples collected from them over a 72-hour period. Samples of excreta were oven-dried at 70^oC, weighed and ground prior to proximate analysis. Both samples of feeds and excreta were passed through 1mm sieve for determining of proximate composition. Total nitrogen in the feed and excreta samples was determined by the Kjeldahl procedure. Crude fat was determined by Soxhlet extraction (BP 60-80 ˚C) AOAC (2000).

Digestibility %= [(N_intake–N_excreta) / N_intake] × 100 ....(1)

Where:

N_intake and N_excreta: concentration (g/kg) of nutrients ingested and voided in excreta, respectively.

 

Blood collection and analysis 

At the end of the experiment, birds were fasted for 6 hours and 6 birds (2 per replicate) were randomly selected from each treatment. A 5 mL blood sample was collected into heparinized bottles (for complete blood count) and non-heparinized bottles (for serum samples) from the jugular vein of each bird. The blood was drawn carefully with the use of 4ml syringe fitted with a 24-guage sterile hypodermic needle. Blood samples were incubated at 37 ˚C for 2 h, centrifuged at 1500 × g for 10 min and serum was separated and stored in 1.5 mL centrifuge tubes at −20 ˚C until analysis. The full blood counts were analyzed using an auto hematological analyzer at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. Indices such as serum creatinine, urea nitrogen, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were determined with the ELISA technique and using the ELISA Reader BioTek, Elx 800 and Elabscience® commercial kits.

 

Absolute and relative organ weight

After blood collection, the same birds were weighed individually, anaesthetized with carbon dioxide and euthanized by cervical dislocation. Broiler organs including liver, kidney, gizzard, proventriculus and bursa of fabricius were collected from the birds, excised, weighed and expressed as a percentage of bird’s body weight (Bowes and Julian, 1988).

 

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed by two-way (ANOVA) using the Statistical Analysis System Software package, version 9.4 (SAS, 2004). The following statistical method was applied: aflatoxin, additives and the interaction between aflatoxin and additives were considered as sources of variation. Paired treatment means were separated using the least significant difference method at a significant level of P < 0.05 and the tendency of effects were observed when 0.05 ≤ P ≤ 0.10.

R_ijk= µ + A_i + P_j + AP_ij + E_ijk   (2)

Where:

R_ijk: any observation made in the experiment.

µ: population means.

A_i: effect of aflatoxin (i=0, 500 ppb).

P_j: effect of additives (j=control, garlic, ginger and turmeric).

AP_ij: effect of aflatoxin and additives.

E_ijk: experimental error.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There were interactive effects of aflatoxin and phytogenic additives on performance indices for broiler chickens (P<0.0001) (Table 2).

 

Table 1 Gross feed composition of experimental diets

¹ Broiler premix contained the following: univit. 15 Roche: 1500 IU; vitamin A: 1500 IU; vitamin D: 3000 IU; vitamin E: 3.0 g; vitamin B₂: 0.3 g; vitamin B₆: 8.0 mg; vitamin B₁₂: 8.0 g; vitamin B₃: 3.0 g; Ca-pantothenate: 50 mg; Fe: 1000 g; Al: 0.2 g; Cu: 3.5 mg; Zn: 0.15 mg; I: 0.02 g and Se: 0.01 g.

 

Phytogenic additive of garlic to diet of broiler with no aflatoxin showed decrease in feed intake (FI) when compared with diets T1, T3 and T4 (P<0.0001). Values of weight gain (WG) were comparable for diets with no aflatoxin. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) for T2 was reduced (P<0.0001) compared with T1, T3 and T4 which were comparable for birds on diets without aflatoxin. The cost of producing 1kg of broilers increased with diets T3 and T4 (P<0.0001), a decrease for T2 (P<0.0001) when compared with T1. Broilers on diets with aflatoxin T5 had a decrease in FI, WG, increased FCR and cost of producing 1kg of broilers for broilers on diet. Phytogenic additives intervention increased feed intake, weight gain and reduced FCR and cost of producing 1kg of broilers (P<0.0001). There were interactive effects of aflatoxin and phytogenic additives (P<0.0001) on nutrient digestibility in broiler chickens (Table 3). Dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives to diets without aflatoxin were comparable for crude protein digestibility while that of crude fiber and ether extract were improved by Ginger (T3) and Turmeric (T4) inclusion (P<0.0001), respectively. Dietary aflatoxin (500 ppb) in broilers diet reduced (P<0.0001) the digestibility of crude protein and crude fiber while phytogenic additives improved (P<0.0001) the digestibility of the same protein and fiber. Ether extract digestibility in diet with aflatoxin was comparable with phytogenic additives of garlic (T6) and ginger (T7) while there was a significant improvement with turmeric (T8). Effect of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on organs of broilers expressed as a percentage of their body weights (Table 4) showed no interactive effect for gizzard and lung. For gizzard (P>0.0945) and lung (P>0.1434) there was no difference in broilers on diets with or without aflatoxin. The values for phytogenic additives were comparable for both gizzard and lung. There was significant interaction between aflatoxin and phytogenic additives for liver (P<0.0234), kidney (P<0.0212), proventriculus (P<0.0001), bursa of fabricius (P<0.0010) and intestine (P<0.0004) in broiler chickens. The inclusion of aflatoxin (500 ppb) in the diets was observed to have significant (P<0.05) effect on the organ weights as values were increased for liver, kidney, proventriculus, bursa of fabricius and intestine.

 

Table 2 Effects of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on performance of broiler chickens (5 weeks)

FC: feed cost and ⁺₦ (1 Nigeria Naira=0.0028 USA Dollars).

The means within the same column with at least one common letter, do not have significant difference (P>0.05).

SEM: standard error of the means.

 

Table 3 Effects of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on nutrient digestibility in broilers at 21-24 days of age

The means within the same column with at least one common letter, do not have significant difference (P>0.05).

SEM: standard error of the means.

 

Table 4 Effect of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on organs of boiler chickens expressed as percentage body weight (5 weeks)

The means within the same column with at least one common letter, do not have significant difference (P>0.05).

SEM: standard error of the means.

 

Inclusion of phytogenic additives at 2 g/kg (T6, T7 and T8) to the diet with aflatoxin reduced the percentage values for liver, kidney, proventriculus and bursa of fabricius. Effect of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on blood hematology (Table 4) showed no interactive effect for monocytes (P>0.9452), mean corpuscular volume (MCV) (P>0.9872) and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC) (P>0.3452). Dietary aflatoxin increased the value of monocyte (P<0.0001) but there was a decrease in the values of MCV (P<0.0001) and MCHC (P<0.0001). The effect of phytogenic additives (B, C and D) reduced the value for monocytes (P<0.0001), the same trend was observed for MCV (P<0.0001) although only for garlic and turmeric. MCHC (P<0.0001) values were increased with phytogenic additives intervention. There was significant interaction between aflatoxin and phytogenic additives for WBC (P<0.0134), neutrophils (P<0.0012), lymphocyte (P<0.0001), RBC (P<0.0111), HGB (P<0.0116), PCV (P<0.0042), MCH (P<0.0123) and platelet (P<0.0001) in broiler chickens. Dietary inclusion of aflatoxin significantly influences the values of WBC, neutrophils, RBC, HGB, PCV and platelet. Inclusion of phytogenic additives to diet with aflatoxin had a positive influence on the parameters also. There was significant (P<0.05) interaction amongst diets with and without the inclusion of aflatoxin and phytogenic additives for urea, creatinine, ALT, AST and ALP as shown in Table 6. They were all significantly influenced by the dietary treatments (P<0.05). Diet T5 elevated the serum biochemical indices (P<0.05) compared to other experimental diets. The principal effects of experimental diets with and without the inclusion of phytogenic additives and aflatoxin on the serum biochemical parameters of broiler chickens was shown to be significant. The diets B, C and D reduced (P<0.05) the serum indices significantly while the serum indices for birds on diets with aflatoxin (500 ppb) were significantly (P<0.05) increased.

 

Table 5 Effect of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on blood haematology of boiler chickens (0-5 weeks)

WBC: white blood cell; RBC: red blood cell; HGB: hemoglobin; PCV: packed cell volume; MCV: mean corpuscular volume; MCH: mean corpuscular hemoglobin and MCHC: mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration.

The means within the same column with at least one common letter, do not have significant difference (P>0.05).

SEM: standard error of the means.

 

This trial was carried out to evaluate the mitigating potential of three phytogenic additives on performance, digestibility of nutrients, visceral organs, blood and serum parameters of broilers exposed to dietary aflatoxin. Birds that consumed diet with inclusion of aflatoxin at 500 ppb were observed to have the lowest intake of feed, WG and FCR. This research agrees with previous reports of how performance of poultry is manifestly obstructed after they are fed diets containing aflatoxin level that exceeds (500 ppb) the hygiene regulations for animal feeds. Broilers are one of the domesticated animals that are sensitive to aflatoxin and their performance is significantly affected when they ingest aflatoxin above the required limits of 20µg approved in poultry diet (Denli et al. 2003). Aflatoxin has the capacity to cause growth depression, reduction in FI and poor feed conversion (Afzal and Zahid, 2003; Manafi et al. 2014; Mohajeri et al. 2018; Akande et al. 2019). Reduced feed consumption is suggestive of decreased appetite after ingesting aflatoxin and this might be a protective mechanism adopted by birds to consume less aflatoxin. This reduction might be as a result of high absorption of aflatoxin in the gastrointestinal tract which was evident in the reduced nutrient digestibility in this study. The metabolism of aflatoxin in liver generates toxic metabolites which inhibits protein synthesis hereby cumulating in a reduction in the intake of feed which eventually affects the WG (Yang et al. 2012; Filho et al. 2016). The WG promoting effect exerted by turmeric in the diets with and without aflatoxin could be linked to curcumin which is a major antioxidant ingredient of turmeric which has been implicated to inhibit the aflatoxin to aflatoxicol in the liver by biotransformation (Gowda et al. 2008; Abdulbaqi et al. 2018; Limaye et al. 2018). Garlic exerted a positive effect on diets with aflatoxin and are largely due to the anti-nutritional factors (ANFs) such as saponin and flavonoid which are present in Garlic (Otunola et al. 2010). They have therapeutic advantages in a diseased situation (Soetan, 2008). Also, improvement in WG of birds on diets with inclusion of garlic at 2 g/kg might be due to allicin which influence better absorption of nutrients (Fayed et al. 2011; Gautam et al. 2017).

 

Table 6 Effect of dietary inclusion of phytogenic additives with or without aflatoxin on serum biochemistry of boiler chickens (0-5 weeks)

ALT: alanine transaminase; AST: aspartate transaminase and ALP: alkaline phosphatase.

The means within the same column with at least one common letter, do not have significant difference (P>0.05).

SEM: standard error of the means.

 

For the diet with aflatoxin, supplementation with ginger led to increase in body weight due to increase in feed intake (FI). This might be possible because ginger contains volatile oils such as zingibaine, zingiberol, gingrol and resin which speed digestion and enhance protein digesting enzymes (Demirca et al. 2005; Javid et al. 2019). The phytogenic additives improved the digestibility of nutrients for crude protein and crude fiber. Lee et al. (2004) and Jang et al. (2007) observed that phytogenic extracts such as turmeric, garlic and ginger improve the activity enzymes especially those related to digestion. Furthermore, it has been reported that phytogenic additives enhance liver and metabolism functions (Al-Kassie, 2009). Aflatoxin exerted potentiated distressing effect on bursa of fabricius, liver, kidney, gizzard, proventriculus and intestine weight when fed. Although, Huff et al. (1992) did not report any influence of the feeding of aflatoxin on bursa weight in broilers, the increase in weight of bursa of fabricius in the diet containing aflatoxin might be linked to the hypertrophy of liver to enhance its detoxification role (Kumar et al. 2014). In aflatoxin fed birds, the change in weight observed in the kidneys, liver, proventriculus, gizzard and intestine aligned with the observations of (Kumar and Balachandran, 2009; Kumar et al. 2014; Fouad et al. 2019). The inflation in the intestine might have resulted in venous congestion in the systemic circulation leading to anoxia and poor supply of nutrients to the vital organs like liver and kidneys, which would have further reduced their function and caused degeneration of their cells. Feeding phytogenic additives in combination with the aflatoxin was suggestive of beneficial effects aiding the function and performance of the organs (Gholami-Ahangaran et al. 2016; Saei et al. 2017; Limaye et al. 2018). Results of hematology revealed that hemoglobin content, red blood cell, and packed cell volume were reduced and this is suggestive that the reduction observed in the hemoglobin levels may be as a result of the reduced synthesis of protein in the case of aflatoxicosis (Juma et al. 2015). The reduction in the mean values of hematology tissue and the increased value of WBC and increase of its component in the present study indicate the deleterious effects of aflatoxin, and the result is in accordance with the studies of (Samuel et al. 2009). The ability of phytogenic additives to improve the feed intake and digestibility and synthesis of protein may be the reasons for the improvement of complete blood count in diets with garlic, ginger and turmeric. The toxicity of aflatoxin in this trial was expressed as significant alterations in serum indices, this is observed in the elevation of hepatic enzyme activities (ALT and AST) and uric acid and creatinine in chickens receiving aflatoxin. This is also suggestive of hepatic and renal damage and leakage of the same enzymes in the bloodstream (Nazarizadeh and Pourreza, 2019). This finding and previous findings about the effect of aflatoxin on liver enzyme activity emphasize previous report in literature in which liver and kidney are the primary target organs in the metabolism of aflatoxin. The phytogenic exerted the protective properties to mop up some of the leakages in the serum (Limaye et al. 2018; Mohajeri et al. 2018; Javid et al. 2019; Negera and Washe, 2019).

 

CONCLUSION

The present study is about feeding broilers with or without aflatoxin contaminated diets from 1 to 35 d of age. Dietary inclusion of ginger and turmeric without aflatoxin increased the FCR and the cost of raising 1 kg of broilers. Aflatoxin in diet induced detrimental effects on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, hematological and serum biochemical indices. There was a mitigating effect of the phytogenic additives for performance, nutrient digestibility, some of the organs, hematological, and serum biochemical changes associated with aflatoxin toxicity. The data from this trial suggests that the three phytogenic additives may mitigate some of the toxic effects of aflatoxin in growing broilers and might prove to be beneficial in case of aflatoxicosis in young broiler chicks.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank Dr. Emeka Azogwa of Central Research Laboratory Ilorin for making his Laboratory accessible for the research work. We also thank Alltech Ltd distributor in Indonesia for its in-kind contribution for this research. The valuable assistance of Dr. Kazeem Adeyemi, Mrs. Awopetu and the technical staff at the Teaching and Research Farm, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilorin is fully appreciated.

مراجع

Abdulbaqi N.J., Dheeb B.I. and Irshad R. (2018). Expression of biotransformation and antioxidant genes in the liver of albino mice after exposure to aflatoxin B1 and an antioxidant sourced from turmeric (Curcuma longa). Jordan J. Biol. Sci. 11(1), 93-98.

Afzal M. and Zahid S. (2003). effects of addition of a mycotoxin detoxifier in poultry feed containing different levels of aflatoxins on the performance of broilers. Asian-Australian J. Anim. Sci. 17(7), 990-994.

Akande T.O., Salami T.K. and Salako A.O. (2019). Nutrient stability in mould-infested feed and mitigating effect of dietary supplemental vitamins in brown laying hens. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 52(1), 293-299.

Al-Kassie G.A.M. (2009). Influence of two plant extracts derived from thyme and cinnamon on. Nutrition. 29(4), 169-173.

AOAC. (2000). Official Methods of Analysis. 17^th Ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Washington, DC., USA.

Arpit Saxena R.H. and Raja Fayad A.R.S. (2013). Ginger protects the liver against the toxic effects of xenobiotic compounds: preclinical observations. J. Nutr. Food Sci. 3(5), 1-6.

Bowes V.A. and Julian R. (1988). Organ weights of normal broiler chickens and those dying of sudden death syndrome. Canadian Vet. J. 29, 153-156.

Demir E., Sarica Ş., Özcan M.A. and Suiçmez M. (2005). The use of natural feed additives as alternative to an antibiotic growth promoter in broiler diets. Arch. Geflugelkd. 69(3), 110-116.

Denli M., Celik K. and Okan F. (2003). Effects of vitamin a supplementary in the feed to reduce toxic effects of aflatoxin B1 on Japanese Quails (Coturnix coturnix Japonica). Int J. Poult. Sci. 2(2), 174-177.

Dohnal V., Wu Q. and Kuča K. (2014). Metabolism of aflatoxins: Key enzymes and interindividual as well as interspecies differences. Arch. Toxicol. 88(9), 1635-1644.

Faris Ab Aziz M., Hayat M.N., Kaka U. and Hirawaty N. (2020). Physico-chemical characteristics and microbiological quality of broiler chicken pectoralis major muscle subjected to different storage temperature and duration. 9(6), 741-753

Fayed R.H., Razek A.H.A. and Ouf M. (2011). Effect of dietary garlic supplementation on performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in broiler chickens. Pp. 471-474 in Proc. 15^th Int. Congr. Int. Soc. Anim. Hygiene, Vienna, Austria.

Filazi A., Yurdakok-Dikmen B., Kuzukiran O. and Sireli U.T. (2017). Mycotoxins in poultry. Pp. 73-92 in Poultry Science. M. Manafi, Ed. IntechOpen.

Filho S.T.S., Junqueira O.M., Laurentiz A.C., Filardi R.S., Rubio M., Duarte K.F. and Laurentiz R. (2016). Effects of mycotoxin adsorbents in aflatoxin B1 and fumonisin B1-contaminated broiler diet on performance and blood metabolite. R. Bras. Zootec. 45(5), 250-256.

Fouad A.M., Ruan D., El Senousey H.A.K., Chen W., Jiang S. and Zheng C. (2019). Harmful effects and control strategies of aflatoxin B1 produced by aspergillus flavus and aspergillus parasiticus strains on poultry: Review. Toxins. 11(3), 1-21.

Gacem M.A., Gacem H., Telli A. and Khelil A.O.E.H. (2020). Mycotoxins: Decontamination and nanocontrol methods. Pp. 189-216 in Nanomycotoxicology. M. Rai, and K.A. Abd-Elsalam, Eds. Academic Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Gautam G., Shrestha N. and Bhandari S. (2017). Effect of Allium sativum on immune status against newcastle disease virus and productive performance of broiler chicken. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 16(12), 515-521.

Gholami-Ahangaran M., Rangsaz N. and Azizi S. (2016). Evaluation of turmeric (Curcuma longa) effect on biochemical and pathological parameters of liver and kidney in chicken aflatoxicosis. Pharm. Biol. 54(5), 780-787.

Gowda N.K.S., Ledoux D.R., Rottinghaus G.E., Bermudez A.J. and Chen Y.C. (2008). Efficacy of turmeric (Curcuma longa), containing a known level of curcumin, and a hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate to ameliorate the adverse effects of aflatoxin in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 87(6), 1125-1130.

Hassan R., Mosaad G. and Abd El-wahab H. (2019). Effect of Dietary Supplemental Ginger on Broiler Performance, Carcass Characteristics and Blood Profile. SVU-Int. J. Vet. Sci. 2(1), 108-118.

Hua S.S.T., Baker J.L. and Flores-Espiritu M. (1999). Interactions of saprophytic yeasts with a nor mutant of Aspergillus flavus. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65(6), 2738-2740.

Huff W.E., Kubena L.F., Harvey R.B. and Phillips T.D. (1992). Efficacy of hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate to reduce the individual and combined toxicity of aflatoxin and ochratoxin A. Poult. Sci. 71(1), 64-69.

Ismaiel A.A., Rabie G.H., Kenawey S.E.M. and Abd El-Aal M.A. (2012). Efficacy of aqueous garlic extract on growth, aflatoxin b1 production, and cyto-morphological aberrations of aspergillus flavus, causing human ophthalmic infection: topical treatment of a flavus keratitis. Brazilian J. Microbiol. 1355-1364.

Jang I., Ko Y., Kang S. and Lee C. (2007). Effect of a commercial essential oil on growth performance, digestive enzyme activity and intestinal microflora population in broiler chickens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 134, 304-315.

Javid M.A., Abbas G., Waqas M.Y., Basit M.A., Asif M., Akhtar M.S., Masood S., Saleem M.U., Qamar S.H. and Kiani F.A. (2019). Evaluation of comparative effect of feed additive of allium sativum and zingeber officinale on bird growth and histomorphometric characteristics of small intestine in broilers. Brazilian J. Poult. Sci. 21(2), 1-6.

Juma K.K., Fulakeza R.M.J., Ngeranwa J.N., Ngugi M.P. and Mburu N.D. (2015). Evidence based phytopharmacological potential of herbal extracts in post- ingestion management of mycotoxins in animal models. J. Clin. Toxicol. 5(4), 1-8.

Kim M., Lee J.H., Koh H., Lee S.Y., Jang C., Chung C.J., Sung J.H., Blenis J. and Chung J. (2006). Inhibition of ERK-MAP kinase signaling by RSK during Drosophila development. EMBO J. 25(13), 3056-3067.

Kim W., Spear E.D. and Ng D.T.W. (2005). Yos9p detects and targets misfolded glycoproteins for ER-associated degradation. Mol. Cell. 19(6), 753-764.

Kumar R. and Balachandran C. (2009). Histopathological changes in broiler chickens fed aflatoxin and cyclopiazonic acid. Vet. Arhiv. 79(1), 31-40.

Kumar T.A., And C. and Balachandran C. (2014). Pathological effect of citrinin and aflatoxin in broiler chicken. Int. J. Life Sci. Pharma Res. 4(4), 1-14.

Lee K.W., Everts H. and Beynen A.C. (2004). Essential oils in broiler nutrition. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 3(12), 738-752.

Limaye A., Yu R.C., Chou C.C., Liu J.R. and Cheng K.C. (2018). Protective and detoxifying effects conferred by dietary selenium and curcumin against AFB1-mediated toxicity in livestock: A review. Toxins. 10(1), 1-18.

Mahmoud A.L. (1999). Inhibition of growth and aflatoxin biosynthesis of Aspergillus flavus by extracts of some Egyptian plants. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 29(5), 334-336.

Makhuvele R., Naidu K., Gbashi S., Thipe V.C., Adebo O.A. and Njobeh P.B. (2020). The use of plant extracts and their phytochemicals for control of toxigenic fungi and mycotoxins. Heliyon. 6(10), e05291.

Manafi M. and Khosravinia H. (2013). Effects of aflatoxin on the performance of broiler breeders and its alleviation through herbal mycotoxin binder. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 15, 55-63.

Manafi M., Hedayati M. and Yari M. (2014). Aflatoxicosis and herbal detoxification : The effectiveness of thyme essence on performance parameters and antibody titers of commercial broilers fed aflatoxin B 1. Res. Protozool. 4(2), 43-50.

Meng D., Garba B., Ren Y., Yao M., Xia X., Li M. and Wang Y. (2020). Antifungal activity of chitosan against Aspergillus ochraceus and its possible mechanisms of action. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 158, 1063-1070.

Mohajeri M., Behnam B., Cicero A.F.G. and Sahebkar A. (2018). Protective effects of curcumin against aflatoxicosis: A comprehensive review. J. Cell. Physiol. 233(4), 3552-3577.

Murugesan G.R., Ledoux D.R., Naehrer K., Berthiller F., Applegate T.J., Grenier B., Phillips T.D. and Schatzmayr G. (2015). Prevalence and effects of mycotoxins on poultry health and performance, and recent development in mycotoxin counteracting strategies. Poult. Sci. 94(6), 1298-1315.

Nazarizadeh H. and Pourreza J. (2019). Evaluation of three mycotoxin binders to prevent the adverse effects of aflatoxin B 1 in growing broilers. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 47(1), 135-139.

Negera M. and Washe A.P. (2019). Use of natural dietary spices for reclamation of food quality impairment by aflatoxin. J. Food Qual. 2019, 1-10.

Otunola G.A., Oloyede O.B., Oladiji A.T. and Afolayan A.J. (2010). Comparative analysis of the chemical composition of three spices - Allium sativum L. Zingiber officinale and Capsicum frutescens L. commonly consumed in Nigeria. African J. Biotechnol. 9(41), 6927-6931.

Patil R.J., Tyagi J.S., Sirajudeen M., Singh R., Moudgal R.P. and Mohan M. (2013). Effect of dietary melatonin and L-tryptophan on growth performance and immune responses of broiler chicken under experimental aflatoxicosis. Iranian J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 3(1), 139-144.

Pauletto M., Giantin M., Tolosi R., Bassan I., Barbarossa A., Zaghini A. and Dacasto M. (2020). Curcumin mitigates afb1-induced hepatic toxicity by triggering cattle antioxidant and anti-inflammatory pathways: A whole transcriptomic in vitro study. Antioxidants. 9(11), 1-27.

Razzaghi-Abyaneh M., Shams-Ghahfarokhi M., Rezaee M.B., Jaimand K., Alinezhad S., Saberi R. and Yoshinari T. (2009). Chemical composition and antiaflatoxigenic activity of Carum carvi, Thymus vulgaris and Citrus aurantifolia essential oils. Food Control. 20(11), 1018-1024.

Saei M.M., Taee H.M., Siahpoust S. and Taheri M. (2017). Effects of toxin binder biotox on growth performance survival, enzymatic activity, hematologichal and biochemical parameters of fingerlings rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fed diets- contaminated with aflatoxin. J. Aquac. Res. Dev. 2, 1-5.

Salami S.A.S.A., Agbonlahor E.M.E.M., Salako A.O.A.O., Sideeq B.A., Agboola J.O. and Atteh J.O. (2018). Nutritive values of wheat bran-based broiler diet supplemented with different classes of enzymes. Trop. Agric. 95(3), 245-256.

Samuel A.O., Olubukola O. and Matthew A.O. (2009). Hematological and immunological effect on chicken exposed to aflatoxin. Vet. World. 2(1), 5-7.

SAS Institute. (2004). SAS^®/STAT Software, Release 9.4. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. USA.

Shaarawy S.M., Tohamy A.A., Elgendy S.M., Abd Elmageed Z.Y., Bahnasy A., Mohamed M.S., Kandil E. and Matrougui K. (2009). Protective effects of garlic and silymarin on NDEA-induced rats hepatotoxicity. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 5(6), 549-557.

Shotwell O.L., Hesseltine C.W., Stubblefield R.D. and Sorenson, W.G. (1966). Production of aflatoxin on rice. Appl. Microbiol. 14(3), 425-428.

Skalická M. and Koréneková B. (2016). The effects of sodium humate and aflatoxin B1 on body weight of broiler chicks. Iranian J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 6(2), 415-421.

Soetan K.O. (2008). Pharmacological and other beneficial effects of anti- Nutritional factors in plants-A review. African J. Biotechnol. 7(25), 4713-4721.

Soni K.B., Lahiri M., Chackradeo P., Bhide S.V. and Kuttan R. (1997). Protective effect of food additives on aflatoxin-induced mutagenicity and hepatocarcinogenicity. Cancer Lett. 115(2), 129-133.

Yang J., Bai F., Zhang K., Lv X., Bai S., Zhao L., Peng X., Ding X., Li Y. and Zhang J. (2012). Effects of feeding corn naturally contaminated with AFB 1 and AFB 2 on performance and aflatoxin residues in broilers. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 57(11), 506-515.