Verification of Mungbean and Cowpea in Broiler Chicken Diets
Jacqueline Z. Gumiran | Cornelio P. Rollan Jr. | Glydeline J. Manuel | Arsenio P. Apostol Jr. | Cristine Maramag | Josef Arikha Bañares | Gerly Zulueta | Bryan Sibayan | Lovelyn A. Gaspar | Rose Mary Aquino | Narciso A. Edillo
Discipline: agricultural sciences
Abstract:
The study aimed to investigate the feasibility of
replacing the traditional soybean-based protein
source with alternative plant proteins, especially
mungbean and cowpea, in broiler diets to support
outscaling initiatives in Region 02. Soybean, the
prevalent protein source in broiler nutrition, poses
economic and environmental challenges. This
research addresses the growing need for sustainable
and cost-effective alternatives. The control group
received a conventional soybean-based diet, while
the experimental groups were provided with diets in
which soybean was totally replaced by mungbean
and cowpea. Key growth performance indicators,
such as broiler weight, feed conversion ratio, and
mortality rates, were monitored throughout the
study. The result revealed that soybean was
statistically significant among the two alternative
protein sources; however, broilers fed with
mungbean and cowpea-based diets demonstrated
satisfactory weight gain and feed conversion ratios,
with no apparent adverse effects on overall health.
This study’s findings support the feasibility of
reducing dependence on soybean by incorporating
mungbean and cowpea as alternative protein
sources in broiler diets for outscaling initiatives in
Region 02. These findings hold promise for achieving
sustainability and cost-efficiency in broiler
production, as well as diversifying agricultural practices. While soybeans may show more
significant results in terms of traditional metrics
such as growth performance indicators, mungbean
and cowpea typically had lower production costs
compared to soybean. They often require fewer
inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, which can
contribute to overall cost savings in cultivation.
Mungbean and cowpea, being potentially more
adaptable to local climates and conditions, can
reduce reliance on expensive imports.
References:
- Abd El-Hamid, A. A., El-Ghamry, A. A., El-Sayed, A. E., & El-Hindawy, M. M. (2007). Nutritional evaluation of mungbean seeds (Vigna radiata) in broiler diets. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds, 10(3), 495-505.
- Bureau of Animal Industry – Animal Feeds, Veterinary Drugs and Biologics Control Division. (2021). Soybean meal importation data – Soybean meal actual volume arrival: Nov MTD. [Unpublished internal report]. Bureau of Animal Industry.
- Cromwell, G. L. (1999). Soybean meal – The “gold standard”. The Farmer’s Pride, KPPA News, 11(20). Retrieved from https://www.feedipedia.org/node/674
- Defang, H. F., Teguia, A., Awah-Ndukum, J., Kenfack, A., Ngoula, F., & Metuge, F. (2008). Performance and carcass characteristics of broilers fed boiled cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and/or black common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) meal diets. African Journal of Biotechnology, 7(9), 1351-1356. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajb/article/view/58675
- Gonzales-Vega, J. C., et al. (2011). Roasting of grains to destroy protease inhibitors and reduce other anti-nutritional factors. Journal of Animal Science, 89(12), 3929-3939.
- Gu, H., & Patton, D. (2022, January 14). China 2021 soybean imports slip 3.8% on falling margins, weak demand. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/china-2021-soybean-imports-slip-38-vs-2020-customs-2022-01-14/
- Lewis, A. J., & Southern, L. L. (2001). Swine nutrition (2nd ed.). CRC Press. https://www.feedipedia.org/node/674
- Murugan, M., & Ragavan, A. (2017). Broiler Performance Efficiency Factor (BPEF) in commercial broiler production facilities with special reference to climate. Indian Veterinary Journal, 94, 11-14.
- Oil World. (2015). Oil World Annual 2015. ISTA Mielke GmbH.
- Philippine Society of Animal Nutritionists. (2003). PHILSAN Feed Reference Standard (3rd ed.).
- Philippine Statistics Authority. (2021). Crops statistics of the Philippines – National and regional: 2016-2020. Philippine Statistics Authority.
- Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Division – Department of Agriculture Field Office No. 02. (2021). Department of Agriculture, Regional Field Office No. 02.
- Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
ISSN 2815-2018 (Online)
ISSN 3082-3625 (Print)