Randomized trial evaluates growth and health impact of various dietary fats in broiler chickens, suggesting innovative feed options.
The present study evaluated the effects of different dietary oil and fat sources on growth performance, serum biochemical profile, nutrient digestibility and carcass characteristics of broiler chickens. A total of 300 day-old Cobb 430Y broiler chicks were randomly allotted to five dietary treatments, each comprising six replicates of ten birds. Birds were fed iso-caloric and iso-nitrogenous diets containing different lipid sources: soybean oil (T1), palm oil refinery by-product (T2), palm oil (T3), rice bran oil (T4) and lard (T5). Oils and fats were included at 3.0% during the pre-starter phase and 5.0% during the starter and finisher phases. Broilers fed lard (T5) exhibited significantly higher (p < 0.05) body weight gain, improved feed conversion ratio and the highest performance index (p < 0.01), followed by T2 and T1. The best protein efficiency ratio (p < 0.05) was observed in T1, followed by T5 and T2. Feed intake during the overall period was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in T2, T4 and T5. Serum biochemical analysis revealed significantly higher (p < 0.01) total protein and albumin levels in T5. The lowest LDL cholesterol concentration (p < 0.01) was recorded in T2, followed by T1 and T3, while serum triglycerides and total cholesterol were significantly elevated in T5 and T4. Dry matter and crude protein digestibility were significantly improved (p < 0.05) in T1, T2 and T5. Ether extract digestibility was lower (p < 0.01) in T2, whereas nitrogen-free extract digestibility was higher (p < 0.01) in all treatments except T4. Carcass yield, dressing percentage and breast meat yield were significantly higher (p < 0.01) in T1, T2 and T5. In conclusion, dietary lipid source significantly influences broiler performance and metabolic responses. Palm oil refinery by-product demonstrated comparable performance to conventional oils and may serve as a potential alternative energy source under practical feeding conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suradkar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: