• Korean Journal of Poultry Science
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.275-280
• /
• 2003

This study conducted to investigate the effect of dietary germanium biotite by protein level in laying hen diets. One hundred forty four, 51 weeks old ISA brown commercial layer, were used in experiment. Dietary treatments were 1) low protein diet(LPD), 2) high protein diet(HPD), 3) LPD-GB(LPD + 1.0% germanium biotite) and 4) HPD-GB(HPD + 1.0% germanium biotite). Henday egg production tended to be increased as the concentration of protein in diets increased with significant difference(P<0.01). Egg weight tended to decrease by increasing of supplementation germanium biotite in the diets(P<0.01). Egg shell breaking strength was not influenced by germanium biotite supplementation(P>0.05). Large band of egg decrease as increasing of supplementation germanium biotite in the diets(P<0.02). Sharp and middle band of egg were not influenced by germanium biotite supplementation. Egg yolk index tended to decrease as increasing of supplementation germanium biotite in the diets(p<0.01). Fecal propionic acid(P<0.01) and butyric acid(P<0.03) were decrease as the concentration of germanium biotite in the diet was increased. Also, butyric acid increased as the concentration of protein in diets increased with significant difference(P<0.02). Supplementation germanium biotite in the diet reduced the fecal acetic acid(P<0.01). Fecal $NH_3$-N of hens fed HPD-GB diet was decreased(P<0.05) compared to that LPD-GB diet. In conclusion, germanium biotite supplementation to layer diets can reduce fecal volatile fatty acid compabebts.

• Journal of Animal Science and Technology
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.355-368
• /
• 2003

In Exp. 1, this study was conducted to determine the effect of dietary germanium biotite on growth performance and nutrient digestibility in nursery pigs. A total of sixty crossbred pigs (initial body weight 15.09$\pm$0.18kg) were used in this experiment. This study was carried out for 28 days. The five treatments were control (CON; basal diet), GB0.1 (basal diet + germanium biotite 0.1%), GB0.3 (basal diet + germanium biotite 0.3%), GB0.6 (basal diet + germanium biotite 0.6%) and GB1.0 (basal diet + germanium biotite 1.0%). For overall period, ADG and Gain/feed were not significantly different among the treatments. In Exp. 2, a study was conducted to evaluate the effect of germanium biotite as a substitute for antibiotics in growing pigs. A total of fifty five crossbred pigs (initial body weight 32.47$\pm$0.9kg) were used in this experiment. The three treatments were negative control (NC: basal diet without antibiotic), positive control (PC: basal diet + 200ppm CTC) and GB0.3 (basal diet + germanium biotite 0.3%). Pigs fed PC (17%, 385 vs 451 g/d) and GB0.3 (14%, 385 vs 438 g/d) diets grew faster(P<0.05) than pigs fed NC diet. Pigs fed PC and GB0.3 diets resulted higher(P<0.05) ADFI than pigs fed CON diet. However, pigs fed GB0.3 diet had improved gain/feed compared to pigs fed NC diet(P<0.05). Apparent digestibility of DM and N by pigs fed PC and GB0.3 diets were greater(P<0.05) than those by pigs fed NC diet. In Exp. 3, a study was conducted to determine the effect of dietary germanium biotite on growth performance, plasma characteristics, backfat thickness and fecal ammonia gas concentration in finishing pigs. A total of seventy-two finishing pigs (initial body weight 78.56$\pm$1.32kg) were used in this experiment. The treatments included 1) Control (CON; basal diet) 2) GB1.0 (basal diet + germanium biotite 1.0%), 3) GB3.0 (basal diet + germanium biotite 3.0%). Pigs fed GB1.0 diet grew faster than pigs fed CON diet and GB0.3 diet (P<0.05). Also, pigs fed CON diet showed higher(p<0.05) ADFI than pigs fed GB3.0 diet. Pigs fed GB diets had improved gain/feed compared to pigs fed CON diet(P<0.05). Total?and VLDL concentrations in plasma of pigs fed GB diets treatments were significantly decreased compared to those in pig fed CON diet(P<0.05). However, HDL-cholesterol concentration in plasma of the pig was significantly increased compared to those in pigs fed CON diet (P<0.05). Pigs fed CON diet exerted higher(P<0.05) backfat thickness than pigs fed GB1.0 (5.4%, 27.19 vs 25.71mm) and GB3.0 (16.1%, 27.19 vs 22.81mm) diets. Feces from CON treatment were higher in fecal ammonia gas concentration than faces from pigs fed GB1.0 (64.1%, 17.00 vs 6.10mg/kg)and GB3.0 (61.8%, 17.00 vs 6.50mg/kg) treatments(P<0.05). In conclusion, the results suggest that the dietary addition of germanium biotite into diets for nursery pigs did not affect growth performance. The results also suggest the possibility of germanium biotite to replace antibiotic in diets for growing pigs. In finishing pigs, dietary supplementation of germanium biotite was an effective means for improving growth performance and for decreasing Total-and LDL+VLDL-plasma cholesterols, backfat and fecal ammonia gas concentration.

• Journal of Animal Science and Technology
• /
• v.45 no.5
• /
• pp.787-796
• /
• 2003

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of germanium biotite (GB) on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and fecal gas emission in pigs. In Exp 1., a total of one hundred nursery pigs (initial body weight 13.12${\pm}$0.15kg) were used in a 21 d growth assay. The five treatments were control (CON, basal diet), GB0.5-200 (basal diet + 0.5% GB, 200mesh), GB1.0-200 (basal diet + 1.0% GB, 200mesh), GB0.5-325 (basal diet + 0.5% GB, 325mesh), GB1.0-325 (basal diet + 1.0% GB, 325mesh). Each treatment had four replicates with five pigs per replicate. ADG, ADFI and gain/feed were not significantly different among the treatments. Fecal NH3-N concentration of pigs fed the GB325 diet was lower than that of pigs fed the GB200 diet (P=0.01). The GB treatments reduced fecal volatile fatty acids significantly compared to the CON (propionic acid, P=0.01; butyric acid, P=0.01; acetic acid, P=0.02). Especially, fecal propionic acid concentration of pigs fed the GB325 diets was lower than that of pigs fed the GB200 diets (P=0.02). In Exp 2., a total of seventy five pigs (initial body weight 21.18${\pm}$0.15kg) were used in a 28 d growth assay. The treatments were same as described for Exp. 1. Each treatment had five replicates with three pigs per replicate. The GB1.0 treatments significantly increased the ADG compared to the GB0.5 treatments (P=0.03). The DM and N digestibility of pigs fed the GB1.0 diets were higher than that for pigs fed the GB0.5 diets (P=0.01). Also, the Ca digestibility of pigs fed the GB diets was higher than that for pigs fed the CON diets (P=0.01). The fecal NH3-N concentrations for the GB treatments were lower than that for the CON (P=0.01). The GB325 treatments significantly decreased the fecal NH3-N concentration compared to the GB200 treatments (P=0.03). The fecal butyric acid concentration for the GB325 treatments was lower than that for the GB200 treatment (P=0.04). In conclusion, the results obtained from these feeding trials suggest that the dietary GB for nursery pigs affects fecal noxious gas emission. In growing pigs, dietary GB was effective to improve ADG and decrease fecal noxious gas emission.