本试验旨在比较肉鸡玉米有效能值测定方法的差异。试验包括2种测定方法:套算法和强饲法。套算法试验选用704只(公母各占1/2)28日龄健康爱拔益加(AA)肉鸡,随机分为11组(每组8个重复,每个重复8只鸡):对照组饲喂基础饲粮,试验组饲喂10种不同品种玉米替代的试验饲粮(替代比例为40%),试验期7 d。强饲法试验选用健康成年肉种公鸡60只,随机分为5组(每组6个重复,每个重复2只鸡):试验鸡分别强饲10种不同品种玉米原料,采用48 h排空-强饲-48 h收集排泄物(GB/T 26437—2010)的操作程序。结果表明:1)强饲法测得的有效能值显著低于全收粪法、指示剂法和回肠末端食糜法(P<0.05);全收粪法、指示剂法和回肠末端食糜法所测得的有效能值无显著差异(P>0.05)。2)指示剂法与全收粪法和回肠末端食糜法在0.01水平(双侧)上显著相关,相关系数分别为0.777和0.952;全收粪法和回肠末端食糜法在0.05水平(双侧)上显著相关,相关系数为0.683。由此得出,强饲法测得的有效能值显著低于套算法,以套算法为基础的全收粪法、指示剂法和回肠末端食糜法所测得的有效能值无显著差异;指示剂法和回肠末端食糜法、指示剂法和全收粪法、全收粪法和回肠末端食糜法所测得的有效能值具有高度的相关性(相关系数分别0.952、0.777和0.683),强饲法与其他3种方法所测得的有效能值没有显著的相关性。

This experiment was investigated to evaluate available energy of corn in Arbor Acres (AA) broilers. The experiment included two determinate methods: substitution method and force-feeding method. Substitution method selected seven hundred and four 28-day-old healthy AA broilers (half female and half male), which were randomly assigned to 11 groups (8 replicates per group, 8 broilers per replicate): control group was fed basal diet, test groups were fed 10 different kinds of corn-substitute diet (the substitute proportion was 40%), the test lasted for 7 d. Force-feeding method selected sixty healthy adult breeder broilers as test animals, randomly assigned to 5 groups (6 replicates per group, 2 broilers per replicate):10 different kinds of corn were force feeding the broilers in each groups. Follow the 48 h fasting-force feeding-48 h excretion collection operation process (GB/T 26437—2010). The results showed as follows: 1) available energy measured by force-feeding was significantly lower than those of total collect method, indicator method and terminal ileal digesta method (P<0.05). The available energy measured by total collect method, indicator method and ileal digesta method had no significant difference (P>0.05). 2) Indicator method had significant correlations with total collect method and terminal ileal digesta method at 0.01 level (two-tailed), and the correlation coefficients were 0.777 and 0.952, respectively. Total collect method had significant correlation with terminal ileal digesta method at 0.05 level (two-tailed), and the correlation coefficient was 0.683. It is concluded that the available energy evaluated by force-feeding is significantly lower than substitution method, the available energy evaluated by total collect method, indicator method and terminal ileal digesta method based on substitution method had no significant difference. The available energy evaluated by indicator method and terminal ileal digesta method, indicator method and total collect method, total collect method and terminal ileal digesta method have significant correlations (the correlation coefficients are 0.952, 0.777 and 0.683, respectively), force-feeding method has no significant correlation when compared with other three kinds of methods.