병아리 사료에서 일반대사에너지와 순대사에너지의 이론적 정확성 비교를 위한 실험

Feeding Trials to Compare Theoretical Accuracy between Apparent and True Metabolizable Energy Systems in Chick Diets

True metabolizable energy(TME) is believed a better indicator for animal performance than apparent metabolizable energy (AME) for excluding the endogenous energy losses from excreta, However few researches have been conducted to compare superiority of any energy systems through practical animal feeding tests. Present study was to compare the energy systems in young chicks in terms of predictability of energy intake for the birds performances including body energy retention and of methodological accuracy by evaluating reproducibility and additi-vity of energy values of feed ingredients and compound diets. Five ingredients such as yellow corn wheat soybean meal fish meal and wheat bran were measured for their various biological energy values. in the first feeding trial chicks were restric-ted-fed the basal diet at 80, 60 and 40% on weight basis of the amount of feed ingested by chicks fed ad libitum the same diet. chicks in the second trial were also restricted-fed diets at levels of 80, 70, 60 and 50% on energy basis of the amount consumed by the basak duet group fed ad libitum The diets in the latter trial were however composed of differeent formulations from the basal diet. One-week-old Single Comb White Leghorn male chicks were individually alloted in a cage on 10 cages/treatment basis and fed the diets for 14 days. Individual carcass energy was measured after the feeding trials. Coefficients of variation of energy measurements were lesser for nitrogen-corrected AME and TME(AMEn & TMEn respectively) than AME and TME values suggesting taht reprodu-cibility of energy determinations by former systems could be better than the latters. The coeffi-cients for AME and TME were almkost of the same values. Additivity obtained by the rations between the calculated values and catual measurements appeared quite satisfactory for all the energy systems. Those of AME and TME however were relatively better than the other systems. Regression coefficient ${r}^2$ between energy intake by various systems and chick performances appeared higher for TME, AMEn and TMEn than AME implying that the former systems could provide better predictability for body weight gain and energy retention than the AME. The ${r}^2$ values for TME and AMEn particularly for body weight gain were on the average 0.967 and 0.960 respectively. In conclusion TME or AMEn can be recommended as choice for dietary energy system in terms of performance predictability of the birds and of procedural convenience for the measurements.