| The purpose of this test is to determine the aflatoxin B1(Aflatoxin B1, AFB1) in feed ingredientsof Hebei content and evaluation Add aflatoxin degrading enzyme (Aflatoxin-detoxinfizyme, ADTZ)beef cattle production performance, carcass quality,blood indices, serum liver enzyme activity, muscleand organ residues. Weight about250kg, healthy and disease-free growth and fattening stagesSimmental hybrid beef were selected, using single-factor test design, were randomly divided into fourgroups. Group Ⅰ is control group; aflatoxin B1test II group was fed the basal diet+0.05%decomposition enzymes (enzymes Ⅰ); decomposing enzyme test Ⅲ group was fed the basal diet+0.1%aflatoxin B1(enzyme Ⅰ); the group Ⅳ fed basal diet+0.1%aflatoxin degrading enzyme(enzyme II). The test results show that:（1）Parts of Hebei Province AFB1Determination: After sampling and testing, feed is higher thedegree of contamination of the aflatoxin toxin, all feed ingredients AFB1detection were rate of over95%, corn, cottonseed meal, soybean meal was100%. Almost all animal feed have different levels ofaflatoxin toxins pollution, concentrate and silage detection rate of100%. Of which the highest contentof silage.（2）Growth performance: After a90-day feeding trial, the experimental group than the controlgroup, the average daily gain increased to different degrees, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Test II, III, IV group average daily gain1001.1g/d,1068.9g/d and1057.1g/d, group Ⅰaverage daily gain of962.2g/d, test II, III, IV group than the test Ⅰgroup increased by4.04%,11.09%and9.86%, respectively. The feed to gain ratio test group than the control group decreased in varyingdegrees, test II, III, IV group of feed to gain ratio, respectively, lower than the control group,2.62%,8.22%and7.35%respectively.（3）Carcass quality: as ADTZ add, test group live weight, eye muscle area, carcass weight, meatweight and the control group was not significantly different (P>0.05). The the slaughter rate test groupthan the control group increased to some extent, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Isalmost no difference between the groups of meat percentage. For backfat thickness, meat color, fat colorwas less affected.（4）Apparent digestibility: the group Ⅰ protein digestibility minimum for70.76%,0.48%ingroup Ⅱ than group Ⅰ, the difference was not significant (P>0.05), group Ⅲ and Ⅳ wereincreased than group Ⅰ2.37%and2.42%, the difference was significant (P <0.05). The digestibility offat group Ⅰ minimum. Group Ⅱ were increased than group Ⅰ1.12%, difference not significantly(P>0.05), group Ⅲ and test Ⅳ group than group Ⅰ, respectively, to improve the2.30%and2.23%,difference is significantly (P <0.05) difference. Calcium, phosphorus, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber test group III and IV group than in the test group Ⅰ increased slightly, but thedifference was not significant (P>0.05).（5）Nutrition content of beef: Add ADTZ in the beef protein and fat content have increased invarying degrees, and calcium and phosphorus content remained largely unchanged. Group Ⅱ than theprotein content of the test Ⅰ group2.26%, difference not significant significantly (P>0.05), group Ⅲand Ⅳ group than the control group, respectively, to improve the6.23%and9.56%, but thedifferences were not significant significantly (P>0.05). The group Ⅱ fat content than the controlgroup increased9.1%, group Ⅲ and test IV group than in the control group were24.55%and20.91%,the difference was not significant (P>0.05).（6）The quality of beef: cooked meat rate of the test group increased, decreased rate of water loss.The group Ⅱ cooked meat rate than the control group increased by3.06%, the difference was notsignificant (P>0.05), the test group III and IV group than the control group, the rate of cooked meatincreased by3.29%and3.45%, the difference was not significant (P>0.05); close to the rate of waterloss and group Ⅰ group Ⅱ and group Ⅲ and test IV group than in the control group were4.56%and6.74%, the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Groups test the pH of the beef in45min,12h,24h,48h,72h when the difference was not significant. Shear force and drip loss difference between thetest group and test time was not significant (P>0.05).（7）Blood and liver-related enzyme activity: Determination of cattle blood biochemicalparameters were within the normal range fluctuations, the increase in serum total protein and albumin invarying degrees, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Serum aspartate aminotransferase andalanine aminotransferase were improved to varying degrees, the difference was not significant (P>0.05).For glutathione reductase, glutathione S-transferase and adenosine deaminase enzyme activity in theserum of each test group with the increase of the Add ADTZ has decreased to some extent, theseenzyme activity with liver with the ADTZ add a certain degree of increase.（8）Muscle and organ residues: this test in cattle muscle is not detected to aflatoxin residues. Eachexperimental group compared with the control group the aflatoxin residues of the toxin weresignificantly decreased, and the difference was significant (P <0.05). Than group Ⅰ, group Ⅱdecreased by44.87%, the test group III and IV group than in the group Ⅰ decreased by49.15%and53.85%; the group Ⅱ than group Ⅰ kidney aflatoxin the toxin residues decreased32.20%, test groupIII and IV group than group Ⅰ decreased by33.90%and39.83%, a significant difference (P <0.05).（9）Economic Benefit Analysis:0.34yuan increase profits group Ⅱ than group Ⅰ and groupⅢ increased profit of1.49yuan, the test group IV increase profits1.3million. |
PDF Full Text Request