Effects of Different Starch Source Diets on Growth Performance, Slaughter Performance, Meat Quality and Serum Biochemical Indices of Meat Rabbits

WANG Yujia; ZHOU Siyuan; JIANG Haotian; LIU Jiayuan; CHEN Baojiang

doi:10.12418/CJAN2024.223

2024 , Vol. 36 >Issue 4: 2594 - 2602

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2024.223

RESEARCH PAPER

Effects of Different Starch Source Diets on Growth Performance, Slaughter Performance, Meat Quality and Serum Biochemical Indices of Meat Rabbits

WANG Yujia ,
ZHOU Siyuan ,
JIANG Haotian ,
LIU Jiayuan ,
CHEN Baojiang

Expand

College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, China

*professor, E-mail: chenbaojiang@vip.sina.com

Received date: 2023-11-02

Online published: 2024-04-15

Fold

Abstract

This experiment aimed to investigate the effects of different starch source diets on growth performance, slaughter performance, meat quality and serum biochemical indices of meat rabbits. A total of 160 Ira meat rabbits at 35 days of age, weaned at the same time and with similar body condition, were randomly divided into 4 groups with 8 replicates per group and 5 rabbits per replicate, half male and half female in each group. The experimental groups were designated as the corn group, wheat group, tapioca group and sweet potato group. Each respective group was fed a experimental diet in which corn, wheat, tapioca, or sweet potato served as the sole source of starch, while ensuring that the energy and nitrogen content of each experimental diet remained consistent. The pre-trial phase spanned a duration of 7 days, while the experimental phase extended over a period of 28 days. The results showed as follows: 1) there were no significant differences in feed to gain ratio, diarrhea frequency and mortality rate among all groups (P>0.05). The corn group exhibited a significantly greater average daily gain compared with both the sweet potato group (P<0.01) and the tapioca group (P<0.05). The corn group exhibited a significantly higher average daily feed intake compared with both the tapioca group (P<0.01) and the sweet potato group (P<0.05). The average daily gain and average daily feed intake of the wheat group were significantly higher than those of the tapioca group and sweet potato group (P<0.01). 2) There were no significant differences in semi-eviscerated weight, eviscerated weight, semi-eviscerated rate and eviscerated rate among groups (P>0.05). 3) There were no significant differences in meat color, pH (45 min, 24 h and 48 h), cooking loss, drip loss (24 and 48 h) and shear force among all groups (P>0.05). 4) The serum aspartate aminotransferase activity of the sweet potato group was significantly lower than that of the wheat group (P<0.05). In conclusion, under the conditions of this experiment, corn or wheat starch as dietary starch source can improve the growth performance of meat rabbits than tapioca and sweet potato starch, and different starch sources have no obvious adverse effects on slaughter performance, meat quality and serum biochemical indices.

Key words： starch; meat rabbits; growth performance; serum biochemical indices; meat quality

Cite this article

WANG Yujia , ZHOU Siyuan , JIANG Haotian , LIU Jiayuan , CHEN Baojiang . Effects of Different Starch Source Diets on Growth Performance, Slaughter Performance, Meat Quality and Serum Biochemical Indices of Meat Rabbits[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024 , 36(4) : 2594 -2602 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2024.223

淀粉是饲粮中最重要的供能物质,具有功能性和营养性^[1],其天然来源广泛,主要包括谷物类、块茎类和豆类^[2]。淀粉来源不同,其结构和组成存在差异,因此在动物机体内表现出不同的消化特性,从而影响机体对淀粉的消化及对能量、葡萄糖和氨基酸等其他营养物质的利用,进而影响机体生长发育和消化代谢^[3]。直链淀粉和支链淀粉是天然淀粉的2种主要存在形式,一般支链淀粉较直链淀粉消化速度快,在肠道中易被快速消化吸收^[4]。根据消化速度的不同,淀粉还可分为快速消化淀粉、慢速消化淀粉和抗性淀粉^[5]。快速消化淀粉和慢速消化淀粉均可在小肠被完全消化,而抗性淀粉不能在小肠被消化吸收,被视为膳食纤维,可作为盲肠发酵底物,产生挥发性脂肪酸,进一步被消化吸收^[6]。因此,不同淀粉来源饲粮由于其所含不同类型淀粉的含量及比例不同,对机体的营养代谢反应也不尽相同。淀粉水解产生葡萄糖,是血糖和胰岛素的重要影响因素。Telles等^[7]分别使用碎米、小麦粒和青香蕉粉来替代饲粮中的玉米粒,发现断奶仔猪血糖未因淀粉源的改变发生显著改变。王璇^[8]给肉仔鸡饲喂不同淀粉源(玉米、小麦、木薯和高粱)饲粮,结果发现血糖达到峰值时间不同。研究发现,当直链淀粉含量逐渐增加,消化速度由快速变为缓慢,回肠钠/葡萄糖协同转运蛋白1(SGLT1)mRNA丰度呈线性增加,而结肠SGLT1 mRNA丰度有二次下降的趋势,对葡萄糖利用效率产生了影响^[9]。Wang等^[10]发现,在仔猪脂多糖应激模型中,淀粉直支比可以调节小肠中葡萄糖和氨基酸转运蛋白的表达,从而改变氨基酸的保存和葡萄糖的利用率。目前,关于饲粮中淀粉的研究主要集中在猪、鸡等动物上,在肉兔上的相关研究较少,缺乏基础数据。因此,本试验通过研究不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔生长性能、屠宰性能、肉品质和血清生化指标的影响,为淀粉在肉兔养殖中的精准供应提供理论参考。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验材料

本试验所用玉米、小麦、木薯、甘薯均为市购,参照《肉兔营养需要量》(NY/T 4049—2021)来制定饲料配方并配制所需试验饲粮,其组成及营养水平见表1。

表1 试验饲粮组成及营养水平(风干基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of experimental diets (air-dry basis)

项目 Items	玉米组 Corn group	小麦组 Wheat group	木薯组 Tapioca group	甘薯组 Sweet potato group
原料 Ingredients/%
玉米 Corn	15.20
小麦 Wheat		14.90
木薯 Tapioca			14.60
甘薯 Sweet potato				15.30
豆粕 Soybean meal	15.00	13.30	17.00	16.40
苜蓿草粉 Alfalfa meal	32.00	32.20	31.70	31.60
豆皮 Soybean husk	32.00	32.00	31.70	31.70
预混料 Premix¹⁾	4.00	4.00	4.00	4.00
豆油 Soybean oil	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
膨润土 Bentonite	0.80	2.60
合计 Total	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00
营养水平 Nutrient levels²⁾
消化能 DE/(MJ/kg)	10.10	10.02	10.05	10.09
粗蛋白质 CP/%	17.33	17.35	17.38	17.35
粗纤维 CF/%	20.24	21.70	20.04	21.17
粗脂肪 EE/%	2.29	2.28	2.28	2.29
中性洗涤纤维 NDF/%	40.47	41.64	40.98	39.98
酸性洗涤纤维 ADF/%	27.53	27.85	27.14	27.11
酸性洗涤木质素 ADL/%	5.07	5.13	5.12	5.27
钙 Ca/%	0.63	0.68	0.61	0.64
总磷 TP/%	0.39	0.40	0.41	0.40
赖氨酸 Lys/%	0.86	0.85	0.88	0.87
蛋氨酸+胱氨酸 Met+Cys/%	0.46	0.46	0.45	0.45
粗灰分 Ash/%	10.15	10.99	9.03	9.42
总淀粉 Total starch/%	10.05	10.01	10.04	10.05
直链淀粉 Amylose/%	2.65	2.45	2.14	2.70
支链淀粉 Amylopectin/%	7.39	7.56	7.91	7.35
直/支链淀粉比Amylose/amylopectin ratio	0.36	0.32	0.27	0.37

1)预混料为每千克饲粮提供The premix provided the following per kg of diets:Fe 70 mg,Cu 20 mg,Zn 70 mg,Mn 10 mg,Co 0.15 mg,I 0.2 mg,Se 0.25 mg,VA 10 000 IU,VD 900 IU,VE 50 mg,VK 2 mg,VB₁ 2 mg,VB₂ 6 mg,VB₅ 50 mg,VB₆ 2 mg,VB₁₂ 0.02 mg,VB₃ 50 mg,胆碱 choline 1 000 mg,生物素 biotin 0.2 mg,NaCl 5 g。

2)消化能、直/支链淀粉比为计算值,其余营养水平均为实测值。DE and amylose/amylopectin ratio were calculated values, while the other nutrient levels were all measured values.

1.2 试验设计

选取160只体况健康、体重在(1.01±0.12) kg的35日龄断奶伊拉肉兔,随机分为4组,分别为玉米组、小麦组、木薯组和甘薯组,每组中公母各占1/2,每组8个重复,每个重复5只。饲养试验持续35 d,其中预试期7 d,正试期28 d。

1.3 饲养管理

在河北农业大学畜牧教学基地兔场进行饲养试验和消化试验。试验兔单笼饲养。试验期间保持自然的通风和光照条件,自由采食与饮水,每天08:00和18:00定时进行饲喂,并观察记录肉兔的采食、排便和饮水情况。

1.4 检测指标与方法

1.4.1 营养成分

饲粮消化能(DE)参照NY/T 4049—2021计算得出,粗蛋白质(CP)、粗纤维(CF)、粗脂肪(EE)、中性洗涤纤维(NDF)、酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)、酸性洗涤木质素(ADL)、钙(Ca)、总磷(TP)、粗灰分(Ash)、氨基酸含量分别参照GB/T 6432—2018、GB/T 6434—2022、GB/T 6433—2006、GB/T 20806—2022、NY/T 1459—2022、GB/T 20805—2006、GB/T 6436—2018、GB/T 6437—2018、GB/T 6438—2007、GB/T 18246—2000进行测定,总淀粉、直链淀粉和支链淀粉含量参照刘襄河等^[11]的方法进行测定。

1.4.2 生长性能

在正式试验开始和结束时,称量肉兔空腹12 h后的体重,并将其分别作为初始体重和终末体重进行记录,用于计算平均日增重(ADG)。同时,记录肉兔的采食量,以便计算平均日采食量(ADFI)和料重比(F/G)。在试验期间,观察并记录肉兔每天是否出现腹泻或死亡情况,并统计腹泻频率和死亡率。

腹泻频率(%)=[试验期内腹泻兔日只数/(试验兔总只数×试验天数)]×100;

死亡率(%)=(死亡试验兔只数/试验兔总只数)×100。

1.4.3 屠宰性能

试验结束当天进行从每组的每个重复中选择1只体重接近该组平均体重的试验兔进行屠宰,屠宰前称量并记录试验兔的活体重,禁食12 h后屠宰,称量半净膛重和全净膛重。半净膛重和全净膛重参照文献[12]中方法进行测定。根据如下公式计算出半净膛率和全净膛率:

半净膛率(%)=(半净膛重/宰前活重)×100;

全净膛率(%)=(全净膛重/宰前活重)×100。

1.4.4 肉品质

取屠宰后试验兔的背最长肌肉用于测定肉品质指标。使用Testo-205型pH测量仪对屠宰后45 min、24 h和48 h的肌肉进行pH测定;采用Iwave WR-18型精密色差仪对肉色进行测定;采用CLM-3B型肌肉嫩度仪对剪切力进行测定。

滴水损失:取背最长肌称重(m₁,g),使用回形针将肉样的一端固定,使其垂直放入自封袋中,通过吹气确保肉样周围不与袋壁接触,并将袋口封紧;然后将自封袋悬挂在4 ℃的冰箱中,24 h后再次称重(m₂,g)后放回袋中,继续悬挂24 h后称重(m₃,g),按照如下公式计算滴水损失。

24 h滴水损失(%)=[(m₁-m₂)/m₁]×100;

48 h滴水损失(%)=[(m₁-m₃)/m₁]×100。

蒸煮损失:取一定量背最长肌肉样品,将肉样煮前重量记为M₁(g),然后装入样品袋内后真空包装,水浴锅预先加热到80 ℃并保持恒温,肉样袋完全浸入水中蒸煮1 h,流水冷却30 min后将肉样取出,去除表面水分,称重,记为M₂(g),按照如下公式计算蒸煮损失。

蒸煮损失(%)=[(M₁-M₂)/M₁]×100。

1.4.5 血清生化指标

屠宰前,每只肉兔心脏采血15 mL,置于室温条件下倾斜静置30 min,使用离心机3 000 r/min离心10 min,将所离得的血清放置于-20 ℃冰箱中保存。使用全自动生化分析仪检测血清中白蛋白(ALB)、球蛋白(GLB)、总蛋白(TP)、尿素氮(UN)、低密度脂蛋白(LDL)、高密度脂蛋白(HDL)含量与谷丙转氨酶(ALT)、谷草转氨酶(AST)、碱性磷酸酶(AKP)活性。采用北京博锐长远科技有限公司生产的酶联免疫吸附检测(ELISA)试剂盒测定血清中葡萄糖(GLU)、总胆固醇(TC)、甘油三酯(TG)、胰岛素(INS)和胰高血糖素(GC)含量,严格按说明书中步骤进行测定。

1.5 数据统计与分析

死亡率使用Fisher确切概率法比较差异,其他试验数据以Excel 2021统计为基础进行整理,用SPSS 27.0软件中的单因素方差分析(one-way ANOVA)程序进行分析,用Duncan氏法进行组间多重比较。试验所得结果以“平均值±标准误”表示,P<0.05表示差异显著,P<0.01表示差异极显著。

2 结果

2.1 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔生长性能的影响

由表2可知,各组间F/G、腹泻频率和死亡率均无显著差异(P>0.05)。小麦组的终末体重显著高于木薯组和甘薯组(P<0.05)。小麦组的ADG和ADFI均极显著高于木薯组和甘薯组(P<0.01)。玉米组的ADG极显著高于甘薯组(P<0.01),显著高于木薯组(P<0.05),而ADFI极显著高于木薯组(P<0.01),显著高于甘薯组(P<0.05)。

表2 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔生长性能的影响

Table 2 Effects of different starch source diets on growth performance of meat rabbits

项目 Items	玉米组 Corn group	小麦组 Wheat group	木薯组 Tapioca group	甘薯组 Sweet potato group	P值 P-value
初始体重 Initial weight/g	1 007.70±17.29	1 007.65±11.45	1 007.65±26.67	1 007.65±12.64	1.000
终末体重 Final weight/g	1 951.48±20.41^ab	1 974.69±10.50^a	1 916.18±21.40^bc	1 883.38±21.54^c	0.011
平均日增重 ADG/g	33.51±0.45^ABa	34.43±0.53^Aa	31.81±0.36^BCb	30.85±0.72^Cb	<0.001
平均日采食量 ADFI/g	135.83±0.82^ABa	137.86±1.80^Aa	129.12±1.12^Cb	129.97±2.26^BCb	<0.001
料重比 F/G	4.10±0.05	4.05±0.06	4.04±0.06	4.29±0.12	0.109
腹泻频率 Diarrhea frequency/%	1.25±0.64	0.89±0.46	1.43±0.56	1.07±0.59	0.919
死亡率 Mortality rate/%	7.50	7.50	17.50	5.00	0.310

	同行数据肩标无字母或相同小写字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05),不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05),不同大写字母表示差异极显著(P<0.01)。下表同。
	In the same row, values with no letter or the same small letter superscripts mean no significant difference (P>0.05), while with different small letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.05), and with different capital letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.01). The same as below.

2.2 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

由表3可知,各组间半净膛重、全净膛重、半净膛率、全净膛率差异均不显著(P>0.05)。

表3 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

Table 3 Effects of different starch source diets on slaughter performance of meat rabbits

项目 Items	玉米组 Corn group	小麦组 Wheat group	木薯组 Tapioca group	甘薯组 Sweet potato group	P值 P-value
半净膛重 Semi-eviscerated weight/g	1 076.63±21.59	1 084.63±14.61	1 045.75±16.94	1 033.00±23.31	0.211
全净膛重 Eviscerated weight/g	980.25±20.71	981.25±14.78	936.71±14.02	930.25±22.22	0.112
半净膛率 Semi-eviscerated rate/%	51.86±0.65	52.66±0.61	52.32±0.40	51.41±1.00	0.618
全净膛率 Eviscerated rate/%	47.21±0.66	47.64±0.58	47.44±0.50	46.30±0.98	0.563

2.3 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔肉品质的影响

由表4可知,不同淀粉源饲粮对肉色、pH(45 min、24 h、48 h)、蒸煮损失、滴水损失(24、48 h)、剪切力均无显著影响(P>0.05)。

表4 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔肉品质的影响

Table 4 Effects of different starch source diets on meat quality of meat rabbits

项目 Items	玉米组 Corn group		小麦组 Wheat group	木薯组 Tapioca group	甘薯组 Sweet potato group	P值 P-value
亮度 L^*	31.70±0.38		33.21±0.53	31.24±0.48	33.71±1.25	0.127
红度 a^*	2.31±0.13		1.81±0.32	1.34±0.49	1.87±0.50	0.510
黄度 b^*	3.14±0.30		2.89±0.18	2.81±0.29	3.60±0.57	0.426
pH_{45 min}	6.92±0.11		7.00±0.06	7.00±0.09	7.07±0.09	0.670
pH_{24 h}	6.09±0.03		6.22±0.04	6.18±0.04	6.19±0.02	0.100
pH_{48 h}	6.11±0.03		6.23±0.03	6.17±0.03	6.26±0.06	0.080
蒸煮损失 Cooking loss/%	28.77±1.09		30.10±0.92	29.96±0.62	29.83±0.93	0.731
24 h滴水损失 24-hour drip loss/%	2.01±0.50		2.16±0.22	1.40±0.13	1.65±0.33	0.354
48 h滴水损失 48-hour drip loss/%		3.44±0.51	3.44±0.25	3.01±0.30	2.35±0.44	0.157
剪切力 Shear force/N		25.76±1.12	26.61±2.53	27.74±1.75	24.21±1.27	0.572

2.4 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔血清生化指标的影响

由表5可知,甘薯组血清AST活性显著低于小麦组(P<0.05);与其他组比较,木薯组血清INS含量有下降趋势(P=0.074);所测其他血清生化指标各组间均无显著差异(P>0.05)。

表5 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔血清生化指标的影响

Table 5 Effects of different starch source diets on serum biochemical indices of meat rabbits

项目 Items	玉米组 Corn group	小麦组 Wheat group	木薯组 Tapioca group	甘薯组 Sweet potato group	P值 P-value
白蛋白 ALB/(g/L)	43.32±1.54	41.88±1.37	42.56±1.28	39.68±1.78	0.382
球蛋白 GLB/(g/L)	13.62±1.14	12.12±0.38	11.34±0.58	12.74±1.15	0.343
总蛋白 TP/(g/L)	56.94±1.24	54.00±1.46	53.90±1.25	52.42±1.79	0.208
谷丙转氨酶 ALT/(U/L)	13.60±2.38	12.80±1.98	13.40±2.80	9.40±1.94	0.551
谷草转氨酶 AST/(U/L)	14.60±1.29^ab	20.00±5.81^a	14.40±1.29^ab	6.20±1.32^b	0.046
碱性磷酸酶 AKP/(U/L)	128.20±10.64	125.40±15.13	135.60±6.78	115.00±9.83	0.624
尿素氮 UN/(mmol/L)	4.46±0.34	5.04±0.54	5.44±0.50	4.42±0.15	0.274
高密度脂蛋白 HDL/(mmol/L)	0.71±0.07	0.60±0.06	0.58±0.06	0.65±0.08	0.614
低密度脂蛋白 LDL/(mmol/L)	0.57±0.09	0.50±0.08	0.54±0.07	0.39±0.04	0.328
葡萄糖 GLU/(mmol/L)	22.76±2.25	20.80±2.25	20.29±2.84	23.91±2.64	0.717
总胆固醇 TC/(mmol/L)	6.91±0.30	6.36±0.44	6.44±0.82	6.41±0.51	0.884
甘油三酯 TG/(mmol/L)	6.39±0.39	5.49±0.64	6.08±0.44	6.10±0.52	0.656
胰岛素 INS/(mU/L)	40.94±4.83	38.49±3.68	25.79±2.51	36.65±4.58	0.074
胰高血糖素 GC/(pg/mL)	293.34±39.52	256.01±45.28	261.40±31.50	244.60±34.61	0.825

3 讨论

3.1 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔生长性能的影响

采食量和日增重是生产中的重要指标,其高低决定了肉兔的生长性能和饲养成本。研究发现,在加工过程中淀粉类型会影响饲料制粒效果,导致饲料硬度、粉化率、容重等产生差异;马铃薯淀粉制成的颗粒饲料硬度最高,可以显著提高肉兔的ADFI^[13]。采食因子会受到淀粉消化特性的影响。胰高血糖素样肽-1(GLP-1)是肠内分泌细胞分泌的脑肠肽,可减缓胃排空,减少肠蠕动,抑制食欲^[14]。肽酪氨酸酪氨酸(PYY)由胃肠道的L细胞分泌,可直接抑制下丘脑饥饿回路,是能量摄入的重要调节剂^[15]。抗性淀粉在盲肠中转化为短链脂肪酸(SCFAs),SCFAs作为信号分子通过激活G蛋白偶联受体41(GPR41)/G蛋白偶联受体43(GPR43),诱导释放GLP-1和PYY,增加机体饱腹感^[16]。在本试验中,玉米组的ADFI极显著高于木薯组,显著高于甘薯组,小麦组的ADFI极显著高于木薯组和甘薯组,其原因可能是不同淀粉源饲粮的制粒效果不同,影响了适口性;同时,甘薯中抗性淀粉含量丰富,可以通过刺激厌食性肠道激素肽PYY和GLP-1分泌来降低食欲,进而降低采食量。

有研究发现,直链淀粉含量与淀粉消化速率呈负相关^[17],不同的消化速度往往也代表着能量供应方式的不同^[18]。王璇^[8]的研究结果表明,不同淀粉源饲粮对肉仔鸡的F/G无显著影响,但木薯组1~42日龄肉仔鸡的ADG显著下降。在本研究中,与饲喂玉米、小麦这2种谷物淀粉来源的饲粮相比,饲喂以木薯和甘薯为淀粉来源饲粮的肉兔ADG降低。这可能是由于木薯淀粉消化速度相对较快,造成木薯组肉兔盲肠能量供应不足,导致微生物可获得的能量减少,进而限制微生物生长和微生物蛋白的合成,影响营养物质的吸收效率,降低日增重。甘薯中抗性淀粉含量较高,抗性淀粉的发酵产物挥发性脂肪酸可为肠道中的微生物和肠上皮细胞提供能量,但其转化为保留能量的增量效率较低^[19-20],这可能是导致甘薯组肉兔体重增长速度缓慢的原因。

3.2 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

屠宰性能可以反映肉兔的产肉情况,屠宰率、半净膛率、全净膛率作为其关键指标,可以直观地反映畜禽的产肉能力。黄新新等^[21]研究发现,玉米、燕麦和大麦这3种不同谷物饲粮对断奶马驹的宰前活重和屠宰率无显著影响。陈涛等^[22]的研究显示,使用大薯替代10%和20%的基础饲粮对定安黑猪的屠宰性能无显著影响。在本研究中,各组间半净膛率、全净膛率无显著差异,与上述研究结果一致,这可能是淀粉添加量和利用效率共同作用的结果。

3.3 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔肉品质的影响

肉品质是一种综合性状评价指标,包括了pH、肉色、滴水损失、剪切力和蒸煮损失等多个方面,用于反映肉质优劣程度^[23]。研究表明,饲粮中淀粉成分的不同可能会影响动物体内葡萄糖代谢通路,这种影响会对肌肉中的脂肪酸合成、糖原生成和蛋白质转化速率产生作用,进而对动物的肉品质造成影响^[24]。徐学安等^[25]使用籼米和糯米配制不同直/支链淀粉比(0.12、0.23、0.34、0.45)饲粮饲喂仔鹅,仔鹅胸肌pH和肉色差异不显著,但胸肌中的亚油酸和花生四烯酸含量受到显著影响。Su等^[26]的研究结果表明,玉米和大麦较青贮玉米可以改善湘西黄牛肉的肌内脂肪含量、肉色,降低剪切力和失水率。Piao等^[27]饲喂秦川牛不同直/支链淀粉比饲粮,结果表明对牛肉的pH、肉色、蒸煮损失、剪切力、持水力均无显著影响。Yu等^[28]使用木薯淀粉、玉米淀粉和豌豆淀粉作为饲粮中淀粉源饲喂杜长大猪时,含有较多直链淀粉的豌豆淀粉改善了猪肉质量。但在本试验中,不同淀粉源并未对肉兔的肉品质造成显著影响,这可能是由于肉兔饲粮中淀粉原料较其他畜种饲粮的添加量低,从而对肉品质未产生明显影响。

3.4 不同淀粉源饲粮对肉兔血清生化指标的影响

动物的代谢是一个处于不断变化的动态平衡状态,血清生化指标能在一定程度上反映动物机体营养代谢情况和营养物质的积累水平。血清ALB、GLB和UN含量可反映血清中蛋白质代谢情况以及营养水平^[29]。本试验中,各组血清TP、ALB、GLB和UN含量差异均不显著。ALT、AST和AKP的活性一般用于评估动物机体肝脏功能状态和损伤情况^[30]。在本试验中,小麦组血清AST活性较甘薯组有所升高,但仍在正常范围内。血清TC和TG、HDL和LDL含量是反映血脂情况的重要指标^[31]。淀粉消化速度的差异对餐后血糖水平造成波动,继而INS和GC相互拮抗,共同维持血糖平稳^[32-33]。Gao等^[34]的研究结果表明,摄入低直/支链淀粉比的饲粮会导致更强的胰岛素反应并上调成脂基因的表达。余苗等^[35]的研究结果表明,豌豆淀粉组的血清GLU、TG和TC含量明显低于木薯淀粉组,而在玉米淀粉组中,以上各项指标与木薯淀粉组和豌豆淀粉组相比不存在显著差异。谢晨^[36]研究发现,育肥猪血清GLU含量、ALT和AST活性受饲粮中不同淀粉类型的影响。但在本试验中,各组间血清GLU、TC、TG含量均无显著差异,表明在本试验中不同淀粉源饲粮没有改变肉兔的基本代谢,不影响肉兔的健康。

4 结论

在本试验条件下,与木薯和甘薯相比,以玉米或小麦作为饲粮中的淀粉源可提高肉兔的生长性能,但不同淀粉源不影响肉兔的屠宰性能、肉品质和血清生化指标。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within

[1]	BELLO-PEREZ L A, FLORES-SILVA P C. Interaction between starch and dietary compounds:new findings and perspectives to produce functional foods[J]. Food Research International, 2023, 172:113182. DOI

[2]	MIAO M, HAMAKER B R. Food matrix effects for modulating starch bioavailability[J]. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology, 2021, 12:169-191. DOI PMID

[3]	TOSIF M M, BAINS A, SADH P K, et al. Loquat seed starch-emerging source of non-conventional starch:structure,properties,and novel applications[J]. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2023, 244:125230. DOI

[4]	赵米雪, 包亚莉, 刘培玲. 淀粉颗粒微观精细结构研究进展[J]. 食品科学, 2018, 39(11):284-294. DOI ZHAO M X, BAO Y L, LIU P L. Progress in research on fine microstructure of starch granules[J]. Food Science, 2018, 39(11):284-294. (in Chinese) DOI

[5]	ENGLYST H N, ANDERSON V, CUMMINGS J H. Starch and non-starch polysaccharides in some cereal foods[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 1983, 34(12):1434-1440. DOI PMID

[6]	WEN J J, LI M Z, HU J L, et al. Resistant starches and gut microbiota[J]. Food Chemistry, 2022, 387:132895. DOI

[7]	TELLES F G, SALEH M A D, DE PAULA V R C, et al. Pig diets formulated with different sources of starch based in vitro kinetics of starch digestion[J]. Livestock Science, 2023, 268:105149. DOI

[8]	王璇. 淀粉源对肉仔鸡生产性能、血液生化及肠道生理的影响[D].硕士学位论文. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2021. WANG X. Effects of starch sources on growth performance,blood biochemistry and intestinal physiology of broilers[D].Master’s Thesis. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2021. (in Chinese)

[9]	WOODWARD A D, REGMI P R, GÄNZLE M G, et al. Slowly digestible starch influences mRNA abundance of glucose and short-chain fatty acid transporters in the porcine distal intestinal tract[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 90(Suppl 4):80-82. DOI

[10]	WANG M, YANG C, WANG Q Y, et al. Effects of dietary amylose-amylopectin ratio on growth performance and intestinal digestive and absorptive function in weaned piglet response to lipopolysaccharide[J]. Animals, 2022, 12(14):1833. DOI

[11]

刘襄河, 郑丽璇, 郑丽, 等. 双波长法测定常用淀粉原料中直链淀粉、支链淀粉及总淀粉含量[J]. 广东农业科学, 2013, 40(18):97-100.

LIU

X H

, ZHENG

L X

, ZHENG

, et al. Determination of amylose and amylopectin in the commonly used starch materials by dual-wavelength spectrophotometry[J]. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 40(18):97-100. (in Chinese)

[12]	李福昌. 兔生产学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社,2009:249-251. LI F C. Rabbit production[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press,2009:249-251. (in Chinese)

[13]	李岫怡. 淀粉来源对肉兔颗粒饲料加工特性、生产性能和盲肠菌群的影响[D].硕士学位论文. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2019. LI X Y. Effects of the starch source on pellet processing characteristics,production performance and cecal microflora of meat rabbits[D].Master’s Thesis. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2019. (in Chinese)

[14]	WACHSMUTH H R, WENINGER S N, DUCA F A. Role of the gut-brain axis in energy and glucose metabolism[J]. Experimental & Molecular Medicine, 2022, 54(4):377-392.

[15]	CHERBUT C, FERRIER L, ROZÉ C, et al. Short-chain fatty acids modify colonic motility through nerves and polypeptide YY release in the rat[J]. The American Journal of Physiology, 1998, 275(6):G1415-G1422.

[16]

熊秋迎, 邹海虹, 王雨豪, 等. 黄连温胆汤调控SCFAs-GPR41/43-GLP1信号通路干预2型糖尿病模型大鼠的作用机制[J/OL]. 中药药理与临床:1-15 [2023-11-01]. https://doi.org/10.13412/j.cnki.zyyl.20230712.006DOI:10.13412/j.cnki.zyyl.20230712.006.

XIONG

Q Y

, ZOU

H H

, WANG

Y H

, et al. Mechanism and intervention effect of Huanglian Wendan Tang on type 2 diabetes mellitus in rats by regulating SCFAs-GPR41/43-GLP1 signaling pathway[J/OL]. Pharmacology and Clinics of Chinese Materia Medica:1-15 [2023-11-01]. https://doi.org/10.13412/j.cnki.zyyl.20230712.006DOI:10.13412/j.cnki.zyyl.20230712.006. (in Chinese)

[17]	MA J, YANG T, YANG M, et al. Effects of dietary amylose/amylopectin ratio and amylase on growth performance,energy and starch digestibility,and digestive enzymes in broilers[J]. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2020, 104(3):928-935. DOI

[18]	BOJARCZUK A, SKAPSKA S, MOUSAVI KHANEGHAH A, et al. Health benefits of resistant starch:a review of the literature[J]. Journal of Functional Foods, 2022, 93:105094. DOI

[19]	GAO X Q, YU B, YU J, et al. Effects of different starch structures on energy metabolism in pigs[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2023, 14(1):105. DOI PMID

[20]	FOUHSE J M, GÄNZLE M G, REGMI P R, et al. High amylose starch with low in vitro digestibility stimulates hindgut fermentation and has a bifidogenic effect in weaned pigs[J]. The Journal of Nutrition, 2015, 145(11):2464-2470. DOI

[21]

黄新新, 李佳豪, 臧长江, 等. 不同谷物来源淀粉对断奶马驹屠宰性能、脏器指数及消化道发育的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2022, 58(3):128-132.

HUANG

X X

, LI

J H

, ZANG

C J

, et al. Effects of different grain sources of starch on slaughter performance,organ index and digestive tract development of weaned foals[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 58(3):128-132. (in Chinese)

[22]	陈涛, 梁梦迪, 黄东益, 等. 大薯饲粮对定安黑猪屠宰性能和肉用品质的影响[J]. 饲料工业, 2015, 36(23):29-33. CHEN T, LIANG M D, HUANG D Y, et al. Effect of slaughter performance and meat quality of Ding’an black pigs by feeding Dioscorea alata L. diet[J]. Feed Industry, 2015, 36(23):29-33. (in Chinese)

[23]	NUTAUTAITĖ M, RACEVIČIŪTĖ-STUPELIENĖ A, POCKEVIČIUS A, et al. Sensory evaluation of rabbit meat from individuals fed functional and more sustainable diets enriched with freshwater Cladophora glomerata macroalgal biomass[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(13):2179. DOI

[24]

杨芷, 徐晨, 林君, 等. 不同淀粉源饲粮对仔鹅生长性能、屠宰性能及胸肌肉品质、脂肪酸含量和肌纤维特性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(12):7828-7838.

DOI

YANG

, XU

, LIN

, et al. Effects of different starch source diets on growth performance,slaughter performance and breast muscle quality,fatty acid contents and muscle fiber characteristic of goslings[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(12):7828-7838. (in Chinese)

DOI

[25]

徐学安, 杨海明, 孙庆雨, 等. 饲粮不同直/支链淀粉比对29-70日龄仔鹅生长性能、屠宰性能、肉品质和脂质代谢的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022, 34(8):5084-5093.

DOI

X A

, YANG

H M

, SUN

Q Y

, et al. Effects of dietary different amylose/amylopectin ratios on growth performance,slaughter performance,meat quality and lipid metabolism of goslings aged from 29 to 70 days[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2022, 34(8):5084-5093. (in Chinese)

[26]	SU M C, CHEN D, ZHOU J, et al. Effects of different dietary carbohydrate sources on the meat quality and flavor substances of Xiangxi yellow cattle[J]. Animals, 2022, 12(9):1136. DOI

[27]	PIAO M Y, HU F M, KONG F L, et al. Effects of dietary amylose to amylopectin ratio on growth performance,carcass quality characteristics and meat fatty acids in Chinese Qinchuan cattle[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2021, 20(12):3256-3269. DOI

[28]	YU M, LI Z M, RONG T, et al. Different dietary starch sources alter the carcass traits,meat quality,and the profile of muscle amino acid and fatty acid in finishing pigs[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2020, 11:78. DOI

[29]

秦娜娜, 章澳, 邝良德, 等. 饲粮中添加不同比例甘蔗梢对肉兔生长性能、血清生化指标和肉品质的影响[J/OL]. 动物营养学报:1-9 [2023-11-01]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5461.S.20231120.1321.032.html

QIN

N N

, ZHANG

, KUANG

L D

, et al. Effects of diets with different proportions of sugarcane tops on growth performance,serum biochemical indices and meat quality of meat rabbits[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition:1-9 [2023-11-01]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5461.S.20231120.1321.032.htmlin Chinese)

[30]

张峰硕, 马博妍, 吴振岭, 等. 小麦替代部分玉米对藏羊生长性能、表观消化率和血清生化指标的影响[J/OL]. 中国粮油学报:1-12 [2023-11-01]. https://doi.org/10.20048/j.cnki.issn.1003-0174.000658DOI:10.20048/j.cnki.issn.1003-0174.000658.

ZHANG

F S

, MA

B Y

, WU

Z L

, et al. Effect of wheat substitution for some maize on growth performance,apparent digestibility and serum biochemical parameters in Tibetan sheep[J/OL]. Journal of the Chinese Cereals and Oil:1-12 [2023-11-01]. https://doi.org/10.20048/j.cnki.issn.1003-0174.000658DOI:10.20048/j.cnki.issn.1003-0174.000658. (in Chinese)

[31]

周帅帅, 刘家言, 赵鹏宇, 等. 槲皮万寿菊素对产蛋后期蛋鸡生产性能、蛋品质、抗氧化和脂质沉积的影响[J]. 中国饲料, 2023(21):27-35.

ZHOU

S S

, LIU

J Y

, ZHAO

P Y

, et al. Effects of quercetagetin on production performance,egg quality,antioxidation and lipid deposition in laying hens during the late laying stage[J]. China Feed, 2023(21):27-35. (in Chinese).

[32]	昌捷, 徐慧君. 种猪营养中胰岛素调控的意义及策略[J]. 今日养猪业, 2023(1):103-105. CHANG J, XU H J. Significance and strategy of insulin regulation in breeding pig nutrition[J]. Pigs Today, 2023(1):103-105. (in Chinese)

[33]	陈梅翠, 杜红珍, 李增宁. 藜麦对血糖调节机制的研究进展[J]. 肿瘤代谢与营养电子杂志, 2021, 8(3):240-244. CHEN M C, DU H Z, LI Z N. An overview of the effect of quinoa on regulating blood glucose and its mechanism[J]. Electronic Journal of Metabolism and Nutrition of Cancer, 2021, 8(3):240-244. (in Chinese)

[34]	GAO X Q, YU B, YU J, et al. Effects of dietary starch structure on growth performance,serum glucose-insulin response,and intestinal health in weaned piglets[J]. Animals, 2020, 10(3):543. DOI

[35]

余苗, 李贞明, 崔艺燕, 等. 不同淀粉类型饲粮对育肥猪营养物质表观消化率、血清生化指标、结肠黏膜免疫和微生物的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(10):5519-5533.

DOI