Effect of different bedding materials on growth performance, physiological response and economic efficiency in three commercial broiler strains

DOI: 10.18805/ijar.B-795    | Article Id: B-795 | Page : 545-550
Citation :- Effect of different bedding materials on growth performance, physiological response and economic efficiency in three commercial broiler strains.Indian Journal Of Animal Research.2019.(53):545-550
M. Irfan, S. Mehmood, A. Mahmud, J. Hussain, Saima, M.S. Shaheen, S. Ahmad and M.W. Zia doctorwsi639@gmail.com
Address : Department of Poultry Production, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore-54000, Pakistan
Submitted Date : 4-07-2017
Accepted Date : 18-10-2017


The experiment was conducted at Ravi Campus of the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan to assess the effect of wood-shaving, wheat-straw, corn-cob pulp and rice-husk (bedding materials) on the performance of three commercial strains of broiler viz, Ross-308, Cobb-500 and Arbor Acres. Three-hundred-sixty day-old chicks, 120/ strain were distributed into 36 replicates (10 birds/ replicate) according to 4×3 factorial arrangements. Weekly weight gain, FCR, livability and rearing cost was recorded. Birds raised on corn cob pulp exhibited enhanced (P£0.05) body weight, FCR, lesser rearing cost and superior (P£0.05) livability. Among strains, Ross-308 and Cobb-500 showed improved performance compared to Arbor Acres. Serum glucose and immune response were not affected by bedding material or strain; serum cholesterol was higher at rice husk; abdominal fat pad and foot pad dermatitis were higher at corn cob pulp and wood shaving. It was concluded that corn cob pulp proved to be a better bedding material, especially in Ross-308 and Cobb-500.


Broiler Bedding materials Economics Growth Immune response.


  1. Abdullah, Y., Al-BeitawiRjoup, M., Qudsieh, R. and Abu Ishmais, M. (2010). Growth performance, carcass and meat quality characteristics of different commercial crosses of broiler strains of chicken. Poultry Science, 47: 13-21.
  2. Amao, S.R., Lamidi, O. and Olalekan, A.S. (2011). Growth performance traits in strains of broiler chicken. World Journal of Young Researchers, 1: 28-31.
  3. Benabdewelil, K. and Ayach, A. (1996). Evaluation of alternative litter materials for poultry. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 5: 203-209. 
  4. Berg, C. (2009). Effect of pododermatitis and hock burn in broiler chickens in measuring and auditing broiler welfare. Weeks CA, Butterworth A, CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. 39-43.
  5. Bilgili, S., Hess, J., Blake, J., Macklin, S., Saenmahayak, B. and Sibley, L. (2009). Influence of bedding material on footpad dermatitis in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 18: 583-589.
  6. Bolan, N.S., Szogi, A.A., Chuasavathi, T., Seshadri, B., Rothrock, M.J. and Panneerselvam, P. (2010). Uses and management of poultry litter. Journal of Poultry Science, 166: 673-698.
  7. Chikumba, N., Swatson, H. and Chimonyo, M. (2013). Haematological and serum biochemical responses of chickens to hydric stress. Animal, 7: 1517-1522. 
  8. Choo, Y.K., Kwon, H.J., Oh, S.T., Um, J.S., Kim, B.G., Kang, C.W., Lee, S.K. and An, B.K. (2014). Comparison of growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality of Korean local chickens and silky fowl. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 27: 398-405.
  9. Coneglian, J.L., Vieira, S.L., Berres, J. and Freitas, D.M. (2010). Responses of fast and slow growth broilers fed all vegetable diets with variable ideal protein profiles. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 39: 327-34. 
  10. Duncan, D.B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11: 1-42.
  11. Grimes, J., Carter, A., Gernat, E. and Godwin, J. (2007). A novel bedding material made from cotton waste, gypsum, and old newsprint for rearing turkeys. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 16: 598–604.
  12. Hafeez, A., Suhail, S.M., Durrani, F.R., Dawood, J., Ahmad, I., Chand, N. and Rehman, A. (2009). Effect of different types of locally available litter materials on the performance of broiler chicks. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 25: 581-586.
  13. Huang, Y., Yoo, J.S., Kim, H.J., Wang, Y., Chen, Y.J., Cho, J.H. and Kim, I.H. (2009). Effect of bedding types and different nutrient densities on growth performance, visceral organ weight, and blood characteristics in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 18: 1-7.
  14. Kosarachukwu, C.O., Iheshiulor, O.O.M., Omede, A. and Ogbuewu, P.I. (2010). Effects of strain on growth, carcass characteristics and meat quality of broilers reared for 12 weeks. New York Science Journal, 3: 112-116.
  15. Lacy, M. (2002). Litter quality and broiler performance. The University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Cooperative Extension Service.
  16. Lopez, K., Schilling, M. and Corzo, A. (2011). Broiler genetic strain and sex effects on meat characteristics. Journal of Poultry Sciences, 90: 1105-1111
  17. Mayne, R. (2005). A review of the etiology and possible causative factors of foot pad dermatitis in growing turkeys and broilers. Poultry Science, 61: 256-267.
  18. Miles, D.M., Branton, S.L. and Lott, B.D. (2004). Atmospheric ammonia is detrimental to the performance of modern commercial broilers. Poultry Science, 83: 1650-1654.
  19. Nagaraj, M., Wilson, C.A., Saenmahayak, B., Hess, J.B. and Bilgili, S.F. (2007). Efficacy of a litter amendment to reduce pododermatitis in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 16: 255-261.
  20. NRC, (1994). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th rev. edn. National Academy Press, Washington, 
  21. Pappas, A., Zoidis, E., Theophilou, N., Zervas, G. and Fegeros, K. (2010). Effects of palygorskite on broiler performance, feed technological characteristics and litter quality. Applied Clay Sciences, 49: 276-80.
  22. Pundir, R.K., Singh, P. and Dangi, S. (2011). Factor analysis of biometric traits of Indian River broiler to explain body conformation. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 24: 449-456.
  23. SAS. (2004). User’s Guide. Version 9.1: Statistics. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute.
  24. Shim, M.Y., Tahir, M., Karnuah, A.B., Miller, M., Pringle, T.D., Aggre, S.E., and Pesti, G.M. (2012). Strain and sex effects on growth performance and carcass traits of contemporary commercial broiler crosses. Poultry Science, 91: 2942-2948. 
  25. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H. and Dickie, D.A. (1997). Principle and Procedures of Statistics-A Biometric Approach. 3rd Edition. McGraw-    Hill Book Publisher Company, Toronto, Canada.
  26. Thirumalesh, T., Guggari, A.K., Ramesh, B.K. and Suresh, B.N. (2013). Effect of different crop residues as litter material on performance of commercial broilers. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 47: 23-28.
  27. Tasistro, A.S., Ritz, C.W. and Kissel, D.E. (2007). Ammonia emissions from broiler litter: response to bedding materials and acidifiers. British Poultry Science, 48: 399-405. 
  28. Van Harn, J., Aarnink, A., Mosquera, J., Van Riel, J. and Ogink, N. (2012). Effect of bedding material on dust and ammonia emission from broiler houses. Transactions of the ASABE, 55: 219-226.
  29. Woyengo, T., Golian, A., Bennett, C. and Guenter, W. (2010). Performance of two 1970s and Ross 308 broiler strains fed drug-free low protein and recommended protein diets. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 19: 101-111. 

Global Footprints