Skip to main content
PMC home page
Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences logoLink to Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences
. 2015 May 14;24(2):276–285. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.05.009

Dietary inclusion of raw faba bean instead of soybean meal and enzyme supplementation in laying hens: Effect on performance and egg quality

ME Abd El-Hack a, M Alagawany a, V Laudadio b, R Demauro b, V Tufarelli b,⁎
PMCID: PMC5272949  PMID: 28149163

Abstract

An experiment was conducted with 160 Hisex Brown laying hens to evaluate the effect of different inclusion levels of faba bean (FB) and enzyme supplementation on productive performance and egg quality parameters. The experimental diets consisted of five levels of FB: 0% (control), 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%, substituting soybean meal (SBM), and two levels of enzyme supplementation (0 or 250 mg/kg). Each dietary treatment was assigned to four replicate groups and the experiment lasted 22 weeks. A positive relationship (P < 0.05) was found between FB inclusion and body weight (BW) change of hens when compared to those of the control treatment. Enzyme supplementation significantly affected the final hens’ BW. Feed consumption (FC) of hens was statistically increased with increasing FB level up to 50%. Supplementing dietary enzyme mixture at 250 mg/kg led to improvement in FC at all studied ages (P < 0.05). Inclusion of 25% or 50% FB in diets had no adverse effects on feed conversion ratio (FCR) compared to the higher FB inclusion levels (75% or 100%). Egg weight (EW), egg number (EN) and egg mass (EM) were significantly (P < 0.05) influenced by FB inclusion in diet during the entire experimental periods, except for EN and EM at 20–24 weeks of age. Egg productive parameters were not influenced by enzyme mixture supplementation (P > 0.05). The main effect of FB levels replacing for SBM affected (P < 0.05) yolk and shell percentages, yolk index, yolk to albumen ratio, shell thickness and egg shape index. It can be concluded that FB and enzyme supplementation could be included in hens diet at less than 50% instead of SBM to support egg productive performance, however higher raw FB levels negatively affected egg production indices and quality.

Keywords: Faba bean, Enzyme, Performance, Egg quality, Layer

1. Introduction

It is well known that prices of corn and soybean, which are mainly used in poultry diet, hit an all-time record high. Thus, there is an urgent need for affordable and nutritious feeds. Soybean meal (SBM) is the most commonly used protein source in poultry feeding and it is usually known for its high quality. Because SBM is the major by-product of oil extraction from soybean, costs and availability of SBM are strongly correlated with the price of agricultural commodities on the world market (Vicente et al., 2009; Jezierny et al., 2010). World market prices are influenced by variations in economic growth and changes in consumer product preferences and on weather conditions (Trostle, 2008, Jezierny et al., 2010, Cazzato et al., 2014). Therefore, price and availability SBM on global markets may change rapidly, thereby stimulating interest in maximizing the use of locally produced feed ingredients including grain legumes (Ravindran and Blair, 1992, Laudadio and Tufarelli, 2011).

Fava beans (Vicia faba L.) are widely produced in several countries, such as the Mediterranean area, and because of their good nutritional value, they can be used as an alternative protein source in place of soybean meal (Castanon and Perez-Lanza, 1990, Nalle et al., 2010). However, the presence of anti-nutritional factors (ANFs), such as vicine and convicine, precludes the incorporation of FB into poultry diets (Perella et al., 2009, Laudadio et al., 2011). Moreover, some concerns were observed for high faba inclusion into broiler diets, which might result in increased feces viscosity due to the high non-starch polysaccharide (NSP) contents. The NSP are not degraded by monogastric digestive enzymes impairing the gastro intestinal tract functions. The NSP contents vary accordingly in species and cultivars (Kocher et al., 2000), and the attempt to reduce the negative effects of NSP involves enzymes’ addition to diets (Moschini et al., 2005).

The effects of faba bean (FB) inclusion in feeds for laying hens have been studied for many years, but with conflicting results. Perez-Maldonado et al. (1999) showed that the optimum level of inclusion of FB in laying hen diets was about 250 g/kg. It has also been shown that yolk color, albumen quality and Haugh unit scores are not affected by concentrations as high as 300 g/kg of FB in ration (Guillaume and Bellec, 1977). Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010) reported that most of the ANFs found in the beans are located in the dehulled cotyledon, which led them to recommend dehulling and micronizing the FB for optimum efficiency of seeds.

Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore in hens’ diet an appropriate inclusion level of raw FB as an alternative protein source instead of SBM with or without enzyme mixture supplementation on the productive performance and egg quality criteria of laying hens during the early stage of production.

2. Materials and methods

This study was conducted at the Poultry Research Farm, Department of Poultry, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagazig University, Egypt. All experimental procedures were carried out according to the Local Experimental Animal Care Committee, and approved by the ethics of the institutional committee. Birds were cared for using husbandry guidelines derived from Zagazig University standard operating procedures.

2.1. Birds, experimental design and diets

One hundred sixty Hisex Brown laying hens were used in the experiment. A completely randomized design was used, with four replications of four hens each; four birds were housed per (50 × 50 × 45 cm) wire cage. The cages were equipped with a nipple drinker and trough feeders. The bird house was provided with programmable lighting and adequate ventilation. The lighting program at the start of the trial was 14 h of light and was increased by 15 min each week to 17 h of light. The diets and water were provided ad libitum throughout the experiment. Each experimental diet was formulated to meet nutrient recommendation of Hi-sex Brown management guide which met or exceed the NRC (1994) recommendations. Experimental diets were isocaloric (2800 kcal of ME/kg) and isonitrogenous (18% CP). The duration of the experiment was 22 weeks (between 20 and 42 weeks of age). The diets were arranged in a 2 × 5 factorial design, with the variable being broken faba bean substituted for soybean meal at five levels (0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%, respectively) and enzyme (Galozyme) supplementation at two levels (0 and 250 mg/kg, respectively). The diets were fed as a mash. Ingredients and diet analysis, according to the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 2006) procedures, are reported in Table 1. The exogenous cellulolytic enzyme was purchased from a feed additives company (MultiVita Animal Nutrition® Co., Egypt) and added at 250 mg/kg diet being supplied with beta-glucanase 2300 U/g, xylanase 20,000 U/g, cellulase-complex 3000 U/g, alpha-amylase 400 U/g, protease 200 U/g.

Table 1.

Ingredients and experimental diets of laying hens.

Dietary treatments
0 25 50 75 100
Ingredients, %
 Corn 60.58 59.76 58.81 58.24 57.00
 Soybean meal (44%) 22.00 16.50 11.00 5.50 0.00
 Faba beans (30%)1 00.00 5.50 11.00 16.50 22.00
 Gluten meal (62%) 5.01 6.20 7.40 8.73 10.07
 Limestone 8.17 8.20 8.30 8.32 8.35
 Di-calcium 1.82 1.82 1.75 1.70 1.63
 Layer premix2 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
 Salt 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
 l-Lysine HCL 0.01 0.08 0.11 0.15 0.18
 Dl-methionine 0.09 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17
 Vegetable oil 1.72 1.20 0.78 0.10 0.00
Nutrient composition, %3
 Crude protein 18.00 18.01 18.00 18.00 18.00
 ME, kcal/kg 2851 2851 2854 2849 2872
 Ca 3.63 3.64 3.65 3.63 3.61
 Non-phytate P 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45
 Lysine 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
 Met + Cys 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
 Crude fiber 3.08 3.06 3.19 3.31 3.43
 Threonine 0.65 0.76 0.88 0.99 1.10
 Linoleic acid 2.28 1.40 1.38 1.36 1.34
 Ether extract 2.60 2.70 2.80 2.92 3.01
Nutrient composition, %4
 DM 89.16 89.00 88.79 88.70 88.68
 OM 79.52 95.10 95.54 95.05 95.41
 CP 17.97 18.08 17.71 17.78 18.01
 EE 2.25 4.54 4.40 3.84 3.96
 CF 2.79 3.12 3.09 2.96 2.90
 Ash 2.48 4.90 4.46 4.45 4.59
 Cost per ton5 2793 2803 2802 2781 2807
Open in a new tab
1

Chemical composition of faba bean (%): dry matter 87; crude protein 30; crude fat 2.7; crude fiber 9.3; ash 3.70; Ca 0.10; P 0.46.

2

Contained per kg: vit. A, 8000 IU; vit. D3, 1300 ICU, vit. E 5 mg; vit. K, 2 mg; vit. B1, 0.7 mg; vit. B2, 3 mg; vit. B6, 1.5 mg, vit. B12, 7 mg; Biotin 0.1 mg; Pantothenic acid, 6 g; Niacin, 20 g; Folic acid, 1 mg; Manganese, 60 mg; Zinc, 50 mg; Copper, 6 mg; Iodine, 1 mg; Selenium, 0.5 mg; Cobalt, 1 mg.

3

Calculated according to NRC (1994).

4

Chemical analysis according to AOAC (2006).

5

Calculated according to the price of feed ingredients when the experiment was started.

2.2. Data collection and egg parameters

Laying hens’ body weight (BW) was registered at the start and end of the feeding trial. The BW changes (BWC) were calculated accordingly. Feed consumption (FC) was recorded weekly and adjusted for mortalities, while feed conversion ratio (FCR) was calculated as the egg mass (EM) value divided by the amount of feed consumed. Eggs were daily collected and egg production was calculated on a hen-day basis. Egg weight (EW) and egg number were recorded daily to calculate the egg mass (egg number × egg weight).

2.3. Egg quality criteria

Eggs were examined for interior and exterior quality. Egg components were monthly measured using three eggs from each treatment replicate. Eggs were weighed, then egg length and width were determined before breaking. The egg was carefully broken on a glass plate (35 × 25 cm) to measure both internal and external egg quality characteristics. Yolks were separated from albumen. Egg shells were cleaned of any adhering albumen. Albumen weight was calculated by subtracting the weight of yolk and shell from the whole egg weight. Egg shape index was computed as the ratio of egg width to the length (Awosanya et al., 1998). Yolk index was calculated according to Funk et al. (1958), as average yolk height divided by yolk diameter (mm) following removal of the yolk from the albumen. The Haugh unit was calculated as: Haugh units (%) = 100 × log (H + 7.57 − 1.7 W0.37, where H is the height of the albumen and W is the weight of the egg) according the formula proposed by Card and Nesheim (1972). The eggs were examined for shell quality by shell thickness (with shell membrane) of the eggs was measured by micrometer. Shell thickness was a mean value of measurements at 3 locations on the eggs (air cell, equator, and sharp end).

2.4. Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using the general liner model procedure in SPSS (version, 21). A 5 × 2 factorial design was used to analyze data of performance as a response to five levels of faba bean and two concentrations of enzyme. Differences among groups means were detected using two way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Duncan’s multiple range test was applied to separate means (Duncan, 1995). Statements of statistical significance were based on probability of (P < 0.05). The model used was: Yij = μ + Di + Aj + DAij + eij, where: Yij = an observation, μ = the overall mean, Di = fixed effect of FB levels, Aj = fixed effect of enzyme concentrations, DAij = fixed effect of interaction between FB and enzyme levels and eij = random error associated to each observation.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Chemical composition of faba bean

The chemical composition of FB used in the experiment is shown in Table 1. Results of proximate analysis for FB yielded values of 87% for dry matter (DM), 30% for crude protein (CP), 2.7 for ether extract (EE), 9.3% for crude fiber (CF), 3.70% for ash, 0.10% for Ca and 0.46% for total P (TP). The CP value 30% of FB was similar to the value recorded by Koivunen et al. (2014) and higher than that recorded 24% according to NRC (1994). This means that the protein content of SBM is 1.5 fold of that FB content. The DM, CP, EE, Ca and TP contents of SBM were clearly higher than FB (NRC, 1994), while the CF content of FB was higher than SBM. The EE content in FB obtained in the present study (2.7%) was approximately the same of those recorded by Koivunen et al. (2014) and higher than that reported by NRC (1994). Overall, reliable values of the nutrient content of feed constituents are vital to create more accurate diet formulations however, several factors affect the physical and nutritional characteristics of FB causing variability.

3.2. Hens productive performance

The effects of different dietary FB levels and enzyme supplementation on final BW and changes are shown in Table 2. There was a positive relationship (P < 0.05) between FB inclusion and BW indices of Hisex hens when compared to the control treatment. These results are in line with findings of Brufau et al. (1998), Perez-Maldonado et al. (1999) who found that addition of FB into the diet significantly affected BW of chicks. In a previous study, Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010) did not observe improvements in BW change resulting from increased processed FB inclusion in the hens’ diet. In the current study, enzyme mixture supplementation significantly (P < 0.05) increased the final BW and change. These results disagreed with data obtained by Ghazalah et al. (2011) who stated that enzyme addition to layer diet had no effect on BW gain. No significant interaction between FB levels and enzyme supplementation was noticed for BW traits.

Table 2.

Live body weight and body weight change of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Body weight (g)
Initial Final Change
FB1 (%)
0 1662 1864b 201c
25 1668 1992ab 323ab
50 1670 1978ab 306b
75 1672 2031ab 361ab
100 1668 2080a 412a



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 1667 1967b 300b
250 1670 2012a 342a



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 1661 1843 181c
250 1662 1884 222c
25 0 1668 1912 244c
250 1669 2073 403a
50 0 1668 2024 355b
250 1672 2038 366b
75 0 1668 1997 329bc
250 1675 1959 283c
100 0 1667 2057 389b
250 1670 2104 434a



SEM 2 1.99 70.05 69.37



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.051 <0.001 0.041
Enzyme 0.148 0.028 0.048
FB1 × enzyme 0.572 0.504 0.043
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Table 3 summarizes the effect of treatments on feed consumption (FC). The FC was influenced (P < 0.05) by FB throughout the experimental period. The FC of hens was increased with increasing FB level up to 50% as alternative protein source, while the high levels (75% or 100%) of FB recorded the worst value of FC during the periods 28–32, 32–36, 36–42 and 20–42 weeks of age, respectively. This observation was expected, because FB contains relatively high contents of ANF, which are a primary contributor of performance retardation (Nalle et al. 2010).

Table 3.

Feed consumption of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Feed intake (g/d)
20–24 weeks 24–28 weeks 28–32 weeks 32–36 weeks 36–42 weeks 20–42 weeks
FB1(%)
0 103.08a 110.42a 105.01ab 106.36ab 107.71ab 106.52a
25 100.30ab 110.38a 108.44ab 107.46ab 107.95ab 106.90a
50 95.58b 109.13a 111.65a 110.96a 111.30a 107.72a
75 88.43c 96.45b 102.83b 99.96b 101.39b 97.81b
100 86.64c 86.91c 89.98c 81.35c 85.66c 86.11c



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 91.98b 102.04 103.31 99.47 101.86 99.73
250 97.63a 103.28 103.85 102.96 103.74 102.29



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 106.81a 115.93a 109.56 111.15 112.74 111.24a
250 99.34b 104.91bc 100.46 101.57 102.68 101.79ab
25 0 97.85b 107.51b 109.55 105.95 107.75 105.72ab
250 102.74ab 113.26ab 107.32 108.97 108.15 108.09a
50 0 89.78c 108.39b 108.81 112.32 110.56 105.97ab
250 101.39ab 109.87b 114.49 109.60 112.04 109.47a
75 0 85.27d 93.59d 99.75 93.33 96.54 93.70c
250 91.60c 99.31c 105.90 106.58 106.24 101.93b
100 0 80.20d 84.77f 88.87 74.60 81.73 82.14d
250 93.08c 89.05e 91.10 88.09 89.60 90.19c



SEM 2 3.27 2.23 3.63 4.56 3.85 2.94



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Enzyme 0.011 0.387 0.814 0.236 0.447 0.179
FB1 × enzyme 0.033 0.003 0.220 0.069 0.115 0.034
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Previous data regarding the effects of dietary FB on FC of laying hens are consistent. In a study, Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010) showed that FB inclusion at 24% in the diets significantly affected feed intake. On the other hand, Fru-Nji et al. (2007) reported that dietary FB at different inclusion levels had no significant effect on intake of hens.

Supplemental dietary enzyme mixture (250 mg/kg diet) led to improvement in FC at all studied periods (P < 0.05). This improvement in FC with exogenous enzyme supplementation compared to control diet could be attributed to some stimulators and compounds enhancing ingestion, digestion and absorption of certain nutrients in diet. There were no differences in FC due to the interaction between FB inclusion and enzyme addition through 28–32, 32–36 and 36–42 weeks old (P < 0.05). While, during periods 20–24, 24–28 and 20–42 weeks of age, FC was influenced by the interaction-effect. The highest amount of FC was achieved by hens that consumed the control diet without enzyme supplementation, but lower amount of FC was recorded when fed diet containing 100% FB with no enzyme supplementation.

Results from this study showed that inclusion of 25% or 50% FB instead of SBM in laying hen diets had no adverse effects on FCR. These results are in agreement with those reported by Fru-Nji et al. (2007) elucidating that FCR was significantly increased by FB inclusion. Indeed, Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010) stated that inclusion of the alternative protein source as FB at level of 24% in the laying hen diets significantly influenced feed intake without any negative impact on feed efficiency compared to a control diet.

There were no effects of enzyme supplementation or the interaction between FB inclusion and enzyme addition on FCR during the experiment (Table 4). Previous results regarding the effects of dietary enzyme on FCR are inconsistent. However, it could be stated that enzyme mixture supplementation to layer diets has been found to improve performance including FCR (Benabdeljelil and Arbaoui, 1994).

Table 4.

Feed conversion ratio of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Feed conversion ratio (g feed/g egg)
20–24 weeks 24–28 weeks 28–32 weeks 32–36 weeks 36–42 weeks 20–42 weeks
FB1(%)
0 1.97 1.73 1.58c 1.58b 1.64b 1.70b
25 2.08 1.64 1.61c 1.58b 1.60b 1.70b
50 1.87 1.65 1.71bc 1.67b 1.69b 1.72b
75 2.02 1.88 1.87b 1.86a 1.89a 1.90a
100 1.88 1.81 2.11a 1.90a 1.91a 1.92a



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 1.94 1.76 1.75 1.67 1.73 1.77
250 1.99 1.73 1.80 1.77 1.76 1.81



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 1.99 1.73 1.63 1.63 1.68 1.73
250 1.95 1.73 1.53 1.54 1.61 1.67
25 0 2.15 1.59 1.62 1.58 1.59 1.70
250 2.01 1.70 1.59 1.58 1.60 1.70
50 0 1.75 1.67 1.68 1.71 1.70 1.71
250 1.98 1.64 1.73 1.64 1.68 1.73
75 0 1.96 2.02 1.74 1.73 1.85 1.86
250 2.09 1.73 2.01 1.98 1.92 1.95
100 0 1.86 1.79 2.07 1.69 1.81 1.84
250 1.91 1.84 2.16 2.12 2.01 2.01



SEM 2 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.276 0.105 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001
Enzyme 0.503 0.623 0.325 0.080 0.402 0.328
Faba bean × enzyme 0.519 0.337 0.277 0.082 0.392 0.497
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

In Table 5, Table 6, Table 7 are reported the effect of diets containing different levels of FB on egg production parameters in laying hens. In general, the EW, EN and EM were significantly (P < 0.05) influenced by FB inclusion in diets during all of experimental periods, except for EN and EM at 20–24 weeks of age. Compared to the control diet, the EW, EN and EM of birds receiving dietary FB up to 50% were not statistically influenced (P > 0.05). Hens consuming 25% FB diet had marginally higher EW, EN and EM than those fed with control or 50% FB diets. The 75% or 100% inclusion of FB significantly decreased EW, EN and EM (P < 0.05) compared to other treatments. The EW, EN and EM values in our study were in accordance with findings obtained by Olaboro et al. (1981) and more recently by Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010). According to Fru-Nji et al. (2007) the reduction in EN and EM production with increasing dietary FB may be attributed to ANF in FB content, and may be due to the deficient indispensable amino acid (such lysine, threonine and sulfur amino acids) content of the FB. In this study, lysine and methionine were supplied to achieve the balance and nutrient requirements of hens. The variation in chemical composition of the tested diets seemed not to be related to EW and EM losses. Moreover, we assumed that the reduction in EW, EN and EM values observed between the low levels (25% and 50%) and the high levels (75% and 100%) of FB was mainly due to ANF (vicine and convicine) and may be due to different amounts of dietary linoleic acid content. The depression in EN which is observed with 75% or 100% FB instead of soybean might be due to a reduction in the yolk fraction. On the other hand, increases in layer body weight were negatively correlated with egg production parameters (EN and EM). Stability of BW in layers receiving diets supplemented with FB could be considered a favorable factor in increasing productive performance as noticed by Aydin et al. (2008).

Table 5.

Egg weight of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Egg weight (g)
20–24 weeks 24–28 weeks 28–32 weeks 32–36 weeks 36–42 weeks 20–42 weeks
FB1(%)
0 64.08a 70.15a 69.96b 71.40a 70.51ab 69.22a
25 64.04a 70.63a 71.48a 71.77a 71.29a 69.84a
50 64.21a 69.88a 69.69b 70.43a 70.00b 68.84a
75 61.32b 65.50b 66.79c 65.68b 65.99c 65.06b
100 61.48b 65.73b 63.07d 62.02c 63.61d 63.18c



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 63.19 67.86 68.02 67.88 67.92 66.97
250 62.87 68.90 68.37 68.64 68.64 67.48



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 64.79 72.06a 70.07a 71.43a 71.18a 69.91a
250 63.37 68.24ab 69.85a 71.38a 69.83a 68.54a
25 0 64.30 69.74a 70.82a 69.85ab 70.14a 68.97a
250 63.79 71.51a 72.15a 73.69a 72.45a 70.72a
50 0 64.08 68.13ab 69.28a 69.79ab 69.07a 68.07a
250 64.34 71.64a 70.10a 71.06a 70.93a 69.61a
75 0 61.85 63.79c 67.06b 65.06b 65.30b 64.61b
250 60.79 67.21bc 66.52b 66.31bc 66.68b 65.50b
100 0 60.93 65.58c 62.88c 63.27c 63.91b 63.32b
250 62.03 65.89c 63.26c 60.78c 63.31b 63.05b



SEM 2 0.83 0.81 0.64 0.84 0.58 0.54



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Enzyme 0.544 0.052 0.397 0.166 0.061 0.151
FB1 × enzyme 0.566 <0.001 0.614 0.014 0.013 0.040
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Table 6.

Egg number of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Egg number per month
20–24 weeks 24–28 weeks 28–32 weeks 32–36 weeks 36–42 weeks 20–42 weeks
FB1(%)
0 24.43 27.25a 28.39a 28.11a 27.82a 27.20a
25 23.22 28.55a 28.26a 28.33a 28.41a 27.35a
50 23.94 28.25a 28.08a 28.12a 28.16a 27.31a
75 21.55 24.00b 24.78b 24.59b 24.39b 23.86b
100 22.50 22.05c 20.50c 20.89c 21.28c 21.44c



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 22.63 25.94 26.27 26.18 26.10 25.42
250 23.62 26.10 25.74 25.83 25.92 25.44



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 24.84 27.86ab 28.68a 28.47a 28.27a 27.62a
250 24.02 26.64ab 28.11a 27.74a 27.37a 26.78a
25 0 22.00 29.11a 28.56a 28.69a 28.83a 27.44a
250 24.44 28.00a 27.97a 27.98a 27.98a 27.27a
50 0 24.00 28.50a 27.90a 28.05a 28.20a 27.33a
250 23.89 28.00a 28.26a 28.20a 28.13a 27.30a
75 0 21.11 22.33bc 25.70b 24.86b 24.01b 23.60b
250 22.00 25.67b 23.87b 24.32b 24.77b 24.12b
100 0 21.22 21.89c 20.51c 20.85c 21.19c 21.13c
250 23.77 22.22c 20.50c 20.93c 21.36c 21.76c



SEM 2 1.42 0.88 0.96 0.86 0.80 0.82



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.298 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Enzyme 0.281 0.766 0.398 0.523 0.728 0.967
FB1 × enzyme 0.699 0.045 0.040 0.039 0.048 0.046
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Table 7.

Egg mass of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Items Egg mass (g)
20–24 weeks 24–28 weeks 28–32 weeks 32–36 weeks 36–42 weeks 20–42 weeks
FB1(%)
0 1566 1913a 1986a 2007a 1962a 1887a
25 1493 2016a 2020a 2033a 2025a 1917a
50 1538 1973a 1957a 1980a 1971a 1884a
75 1321 1578b 1654b 1617b 1611b 1556b
100 1385 1451b 1293c 1294c 1353c 1355c



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 1432 1769 1795 1787 1782 1713
250 1488 1803 1769 1785 1787 1726



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 1609 2007a 2009a 2034a 2012a 1934a
250 1522 1818b 1963a 1980a 1911a 1839a
25 0 1417 2030a 2022a 2005a 2022a 1899a
250 1569 2003a 2018a 2061a 2027a 1936a
50 0 1538 1942b 1933a 1957a 1947a 1863a
250 1537 2005a 1981a 2003a 1995a 1904a
75 0 1305 1431d 1725b 1622b 1573b 1531b
250 1336 1725c 1584b 1613b 1650b 1582b
100 0 1293 1436d 1289c 1320c 1355c 1338c
250 1477 1465d 1297c 1270c 1352c 1372c



SEM 2 100 68.94 63.63 62.40 58.73 58.14



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.099 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Enzyme 0.383 0.444 0.511 0.956 0.889 0.721
FB1 × enzyme 0.651 0.026 0.028 0.036 0.040 0.045
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Magoda and Gous (2011) stated that egg production parameters were unaffected by the different levels of FB in the layer diets. As the FB inclusion level increased, egg weight decreased (Mateos and Puchal, 1982, Perez-Maldonado et al., 1999). The use of FB in poultry diets is restricted due to its content of ANF (Crepon et al. 2010). Heat treatments are recommended to allow a maximum inclusion FB level in laying hen diets (Marquardt and Campbell 1973). Crepon et al. (2010) observed that the use of raw FB with a high ANFs (mainly vicine and convicine) content cannot exceed 7% of the diet, but it is possible to include FB at 20% if the FB used has a low ANF content.

Irrespective of FB inclusion in the layer diets, egg production parameters were not influenced by enzyme mixture supplementation during all of experimental periods, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7. Values of EM were similar (P = 0.721) for all bird treatment groups at 1713 g in birds fed on the control diet and 1726 g in birds fed on the diet supplemented with 250 mg enzyme/kg diet during the whole period. The same effect as EM was noticed on EW and EN. These results partially agree with Ghazalah et al. (2011) who reported that enzyme supplementation had no significant affect on egg weight. Conversely, enzyme addition significantly improved egg production by 2.4% and egg mass by 2.9%.

Egg production criteria were significantly (P < 0.05) influenced by the interaction between FB levels and enzyme supplementation during all experimental periods vs. 20–24 weeks of age. The highest values of EW, EN and EM were achieved by the hens that consumed diets containing 0%, 25% or 50% FB with or without enzyme addition; while, the birds fed diets containing 75% or 100% FB recorded the lowest values of egg production parameters.

3.3. Egg quality criteria

The effect of different dietary levels of FB and enzyme supplementation and their interaction on egg quality of laying hens are reported in Table 8. The main effect of FB levels replacing SBM statistically (P < 0.05) affected yolk%, shell%, yolk index, yolk:albumen ratio, shell thickness and egg shape index. The results of the current study are consistent with those of Laudadio and Tufarelli (2010) who found that dietary FB inclusion had no negative influence on Haugh unit scores as well as on albumen percent. Egg shape index was reduced when FB were incorporated over 75% instead of SBM into the layer diets (76.04 vs. 79.92, respectively; P < 0.001). The highest values of yolk and shell percentages as well as shell thickness and yolk:albumen ratios were achieved by 50% of FB diet compared to the other diets.

Table 8.

Egg quality criteria of laying hens as affected by faba bean levels and enzyme supplementation during the experimental periods.

Item Albumen% Yolk% Shell% Haugh unit Yolk index Yolk:albumin ratio Shell thickness (mm) Egg shape index
FB1(%)
0 65.99 20.97c 13.03a 85.34 49.80a 0.319c 0.355a 79.92a
25 65.06 22.29bc 11.44b 96.53 47.80b 0.343bc 0.352a 80.63a
50 64.31 26.63a 12.73a 95.04 48.44ab 0.414a 0.358a 80.26a
75 66.45 23.33b 12.35ab 95.56 47.40b 0.355b 0.337b 76.04b
100 65.27 23.06b 11.65b 97.26 48.56ab 0.353b 0.333b 77.24b



Enzyme (mg/kg diet)
0 65.67 23.94a 12.71a 92.70b 49.01a 0.366a 0.343 79.62a
250 65.17 22.57b 11.77b 95.19a 47.79b 0.348b 0.351 78.01b



FB1 × enzyme
0 0 63.82 22.27c 13.86a 85.34d 49.76 0.350c 0.355b 81.82a
250 68.16 19.66d 12.17ab 85.35d 49.85 0.288f 0.355b 78.02b
25 0 65.16 23.73c 11.10b 94.39a 48.04 0.363c 0.338c 81.10a
250 64.97 20.86d 11.78b 98.67a 47.57 0.323d 0.366a 80.17a
50 0 65.25 28.26a 13.89a 91.51c 49.15 0.433a 0.370a 80.25a
250 63.37 25.01b 11.61b 98.56a 47.74 0.395b 0.346bc 80.27a
75 0 67.43 23.23c 13.63a 97.22a 48.87 0.353c 0.330c 76.85bc
250 65.48 23.44c 11.07b 93.89b 45.93 0.358c 0.345bc 75.23c
100 0 66.68 22.23c 11.08b 95.04b 49.24 0.330c 0.323c 78.11b
250 63.87 23.89c 12.23ab 99.48a 47.89 0.375bc 0.343bc 76.37bc



SEM2 2.29 0.66 0.442 0.70 0.77 0.01 0.007 0.51



Two-way ANOVA P-value3
FB1 0.899 <0.001 0.004 <0.001 0.044 <0.001 0.002 <0.001
Enzyme 0.743 0.003 0.002 <0.001 0.019 0.023 0.066 <0.001
FB1 × enzyme 0.547 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 0.372 0.001 0.004 0.013
Open in a new tab

Means in the same column within each classification bearing different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05 or 0.01).

1

FB: faba bean.

2

SEM: standard error of the means.

3

Overall treatment P-value.

Data presented in Table 8 reveal that egg quality criteria were affected by enzyme supplementation except for albumin and shell thickness (P < 0.05). The highest rates of yolk and shell percent, yolk and egg shape index were obtained by birds fed the control diet without enzyme supplementation. On the other hand, Haugh unit scores and yolk:albumen ratio were increased with enzyme addition. Similar results were obtained by Ghazalah et al. (2011). Conversely, Deniz et al. (2013) noted that there was no effect of enzyme cocktail supplementation on Haugh unit score of laying hens during experiment.

Exterior and interior egg quality criteria were statistically affected by the interaction between FB levels and enzyme supplementation effect except for albumen percent and yolk index (Table 8; P < 0.05). Yolk and shell percent as well as yolk to albumin ration and shell thickness were higher for hens fed 50% FB without enzyme supplementation compared with hens fed the other diets. However, the diet containing 100% FB with 250 mg enzyme per kg diet resulted in an increase in Haugh unit score (99.48) compared with eggs from hens fed other diets (P < 0.05). Our results coincided with Robblee et al. (1977) who found that Haugh unit increased as the amount of FB in laying hen diets increased. The highest value of egg shape index was achieved by hens consuming the corn-soya diet compared to the other diets.

In conclusion, in view of our findings, it could be concluded that FB and enzyme supplementations could be included in laying hen diets at level less than 50% instead of SBM in order to improve egg productive performance, since higher FB levels can negatively affect egg production indices and egg quality.

Footnotes

Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.

References

  1. AOAC. 2006. Official Methods of Analysis Association. Off. Anal. Chem., 18th ed. Washington, DC.
  2. Awosanya B., Joseph J.K., Olaosebikan O.D. Effect of age of birds on shell quality and component yield of egg. Nig. J. Anim. Prod. 1998;25:68–70. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aydin R., Karaman M., Cicek T., Yardibi H. Black cumin (Nigella sativa L.) supplementation into the diet of the laying hen positively influences egg yield parameters, shell quality, and decreases egg cholesterol. Poult. Sci. 2008;87:2590–2595. doi: 10.3382/ps.2008-00097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Benabdeljelil K., Arbaoui M.I. Effects of enzyme supplementation of barley based diets on hen performance and egg quality. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 1994;48:325–334. [Google Scholar]
  5. Brufau J., Boros D., Marquardt R.R. Influence of growing season, tannin content and autoclave treatment on the nutritive value of near-isogenic lines of faba beans (Vicia faba L.) when fed to leghorn chicks. Br. Poult. Sci. 1998;39:97–105. doi: 10.1080/00071669889457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Card L.E., Nesheim M.C. 11th ed. Lea and Febiger; Philadelphia, PA: 1972. Poultry Production. [Google Scholar]
  7. Castanon J.I., Perez-Lanza C.J. Substitution of fixed amounts of soybean meal for field beans (Vicia faba), sweet lupins (Lupinus albus), cull peas (Pisum sativum) and vetches (Vicia sativa) in diets for high performance laying Leghorn hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 1990;31:173–180. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cazzato E., Laudadio V., Ceci E., Tufarelli V. Effect of sulphur fertilization on fatty acid composition of faba bean (Vicia faba L.), white lupin (Lupinus albus L.) and pea (Pisum sativum L.) grains. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2014;12:136–138. [Google Scholar]
  9. Crepon K., Marget P., Peyronnet C., Carrouee B., Arese P., Duc G. Nutritional value of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) seeds for feed and food. Field Crops Res. 2010;115:329–339. [Google Scholar]
  10. Deniz G., Gencoglu H., Gezen S.S., Turkmen I.I., Orman A., Kara C. Effects of feeding corn distiller’s dried grains with solubles with and without enzyme cocktail supplementation to laying hens on performance, egg quality, selected manure parameters, and feed cost. Livest. Sci. 2013;152:174–181. [Google Scholar]
  11. Duncan D.B. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics. 1955;11:1–42. [Google Scholar]
  12. Fru-Nji F., Niess E., Pfeffer E. Effect of graded replacement of soybean meal by faba beans (Vicia faba L.) or field peas (Pisum sativum L.) in rations for laying hens on egg production and quality. J. Poult. Sci. 2007;44:34–41. [Google Scholar]
  13. Funk E.M., Froning G., Grottes G., Forward R., Kinder J. Quality of eggs laid by caged layers. World Poult. Sci. J. 1958;15:207. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ghazalah A.A., Abd-Elsamee M.O., Moustafa E.S. Use of distillers dried grains with soluble (DDGS) as replacement for soybean meal in laying hen diets. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2011;10:505–513. [Google Scholar]
  15. Guillaume J., Bellec R. Use of field beans (Vicia faba L.) in diets for laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 1977;18:573–583. [Google Scholar]
  16. Jezierny D., Mosenthin R., Bauer E. The use of grain legumes as a protein source in pig nutrition: a review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010;157(111–128):2010. [Google Scholar]
  17. Koivunen E., Tuunainen P., Valkonen E., Rossow L., Valaja J. Use of faba beans (Vicia faba L.) in diets of laying hens. Agric. Food Sci. 2014;23:165–172. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kocher A., Choct M., Hughes R.J., Broz J. Effect of food enzymes on utilisation of lupin carbohydrates by broilers. Br. Poult. Sci. 2000;41:75–82. doi: 10.1080/00071660086448. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Laudadio V., Ceci E., Tufarelli V. Productive traits and meat fatty acid profile of broiler chickens fed diets containing micronized fava beans (Vicia faba L. var. minor) as the main protein source. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2011;20:12–20. [Google Scholar]
  20. Laudadio V., Tufarelli V. Dehulled-micronised lupin (Lupinus albus L. cv. Multitalia) as the main protein source for broilers: influence on growth performance, carcass traits and meat fatty acid composition. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011;91:2081–2087. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.4426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Laudadio V., Tufarelli V. Treated fava bean (Vicia faba var. minor) as substitute for soybean meal in diet of early phase laying hens: egg-laying performance and egg quality. Poult. Sci. 2010;89:2299–2303. doi: 10.3382/ps.2010-00868. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Magoda S.F., Gous R.M. Evaluation of dehulled faba bean (Vicia faba cv. Fiord) as a protein source for laying hens. South Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 2011;41:87–93. [Google Scholar]
  23. Marquardt R.R., Campbell L.D. Raw and autoclaved faba beans in chick diets. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1973;53:741–746. [Google Scholar]
  24. Mateos G.G., Puchal F. The nutritional value of broad beans for laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci. 1982;23:1–6. [Google Scholar]
  25. Moschini M., Masoero F., Prandini A., Fusconi G., Morlacchini M., Piva G. Raw pea (Pisum sativum), raw faba bean (Vicia faba var. minor) and raw lupin (Lupinus albus var. multitalia) as alternative protein sources in broiler diets. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2005;4:59–69. [Google Scholar]
  26. Nalle C.L., Ravindran V., Ravindran G. Nutritional value of faba beans (Vicia faba L.) for broilers: apparent metabolizable energy, ileal amino acid digestibility and production performance. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010;156:104–111. [Google Scholar]
  27. NRC . ninth ed. Natl. Acad. Press; Washington, DC: 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. [Google Scholar]
  28. Olaboro G., Campbell L.D., Marquardt R.R. Influence of faba bean fraction on egg weight among laying hens fed test diets for a short time period. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1981;61:751–755. [Google Scholar]
  29. Perella F., Mugnai C., Dal Bosco A., Sirri F., Cestola E., Castellini C. Faba bean (Vicia faba var. minor) as a protein source for organic chickens: performance and carcass characteristics. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2009;8:575–584. [Google Scholar]
  30. Perez-Maldonado R.A., Mannion P.F., Farrell D.J. Optimum inclusion of field peas, faba beans, chick peas and sweet lupins in poultry diets. I. Chemical composition and layer experiments. Br. Poult. Sci. 1999;40:667–673. doi: 10.1080/00071669987061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Ravindran V., Blair R. Feed resources for poultry production in Asia and the Pacific. II. Plant protein sources. World Poult. Sci. J. 1992;48:205–231. [Google Scholar]
  32. Robblee A.R., Clandinin D.R., Hardin R.T., Milne G.R., Darlington K. Studies on the use of faba beans in rations for laying hens. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1977;57:421–425. [Google Scholar]
  33. Trostle R. USDA Economic Research Service; Washington, DC: 2008. Global agricultural supply and demand: factors contributing to the recent increase in food commodity prices. A Report from the Economic Research Service. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES