Author : Manit Tewarugpitug

Summary : One hundred and eighty day-old Pekin ducklings of Cherry Valley strain with 50:50 sex ratio were randomly distributed in five treatments, three for probiotic groups, one group each with chemobiotic supplement (sulfadimethoxine -ormetoprim) as positive control, and without probiotic or chemobiotic in the diet as negative control, respectively. The probiotic controls were as follows: Probiotic A (L. acidophilus and S. faecium), Probiotic B (Lactobacillus sp.), Probiotic C (L. acidophilus plus S. faecium plus amylase, protease, and potassium). The different preparations were mixed with water and diets following the manufacturers' recommended dosage and frequency of administration. The treatments were assigned in a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with three replications per treatment. A basic diet was prepared and fed to all treatment groups housed on combination bamboo slat-litter floor pens. Formulated feeds contained the following crude protein level: duck starter ration, 24.11 percent; duck grower, 20.10 percent; and duck finisher ration, 17.00 percent. The use of probiotic and chemobiotic diets at any stage did not have significant effects on the feed intake, body weight gain, mortality, and feed conversion effeciency of ducks. Similar results were noted on the dressing percentage, cut up parts of the carcass except on the thighs plus drumsticks and giblets among male and female ducks. However, significant differences were observed on the cost of feeds per kilogram (P29.16 vs. P24. 75, US$1 = P25.50) and income over feed cost (P33.22 vs. P21.01) owing to the excessive cost of non-additive supplements.