Evaluation of garlic and dandelion supplementation on the growth performance, carcass traits, and fatty acid composition of growing-finishing pigs

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Animal Feed Science and Technology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/anifeedsci

Evaluation of garlic and dandelion supplementation on the growth performance, carcass traits, and fatty acid composition of growingfinishing pigs ⁎

W. Samolińskaa, E.R. Grelaa, , E. Kowalczuk-Vasileva, B. Kiczorowskaa, R. Klebaniuka, E. Hanczakowskab a b

Institute of Animal Nutrition and Bromatology, University of Life Sciences, 13 Akademicka Street, 20-950 Lublin, Poland Department of Nutrition Physiology, National Research Institute of Animal Production, 1 Krakowska Street, 32-083 Balice, Poland

A R T IC LE I N F O

ABS TRA CT

Keywords: Pigs Phytobiotics Performance Carcass traits Fat quality Fatty acid

Garlic and dandelion contain bioactive constituents with multifarious properties including antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, immunomodulatory, and prebiotic activity, which exert a positive effect on the health and productivity of animals. Therefore, the study evaluated the effects of garlic or dandelion and their combination in diets on the performance, carcass traits, and fatty acid composition in some tissues and organs of fatteners. Four dietary treatments were designed: C - control fed conventional diet, G - supplemented with 5 g/kg diet of lyophilised garlic, D - supplemented with 50 g/kg diet of dandelion root powder and GD – receiving both phytobiotics (applied in the same amounts as in the G and D treatments). The experiment was performed on 80 crossbred pigs (25–115 kg of body weight) assigned into one of 4 dietary treatments with 5 replicate pens per treatment and 4 pigs per pen (2 gilts and 2 barrows). The 95day long experiment was divided into three phases over the growing-finishing period, with a specific diet for each phase. Improved performance, reduced content of fat and cholesterol levels in backfat, longissimus lumborum (LL) muscle, and liver were noted in the G and GD treatments, compared to the control treatment (P < 0.05). The GD treatment increased the loin eye area and lean meat yield (P < 0.05). The content of polyunsaturated fatty acids was increased in LL and backfat upon the addition of phytobiotics (P < 0.05). In the GD treatment, the fat of LL and liver exhibited a better n-6/n-3 ratio than the control (P < 0.05). The combined addition of garlic at a dose of 5 g/kg diet and dandelion at 50 g/kg was the most efficient in increasing the growth performance, carcass quality traits, and some indices of nutritional fat quality.

1. Introduction Besides the nutrient balance, an important element in animal nutrition is the use of phytobiotics, which contribute to high productivity and are simultaneously safe for animals, humans, and the environment (Grela and Kowalczuk, 2007; Cho et al., 2012;

Abbreviations: ADG, average daily gain; ADF, acid detergent fibre; ADL, acid detergent lignin; AI, atherogenic index; BW, body weight; FCR, feed conversion ratio; H/H, hypocholesterolemic/hypercholesterolemic ratio; LL, longissimus lumborum muscle; ME, metabolisable energy; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; NDF, neutral detergent fibre; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFA, saturated fatty acids; TI, thrombogenicity index ⁎ Corresponding author at: Institute of Animal Nutrition and Bromatology, University of Life Sciences, 13 Akademicka Street, 20-950 Lublin, Poland. E-mail address: [email protected] (E.R. Grela). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114316 Received 8 November 2018; Received in revised form 29 July 2019; Accepted 16 October 2019 0377-8401/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Please cite this article as: W. Samolińska, et al., Animal Feed Science and Technology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114316

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

Kiczorowska et al., 2016a, b; Al-Yasiry et al., 2017; Samolińska et al., 2018). Among them, garlic (Grela and Klebaniuk, 2007; Omojola et al., 2009) and dandelion (Trojanová et al., 2004; Yan et al., 2011a, 2012b) deserve attention. Garlic (Allium sativum L.) has been known for its beneficial anti-bacterial and antioxidant properties. It can be used in animal nutrition as a fresh, fermented, dried, or lyophilised component as well as garlic aqueous extracts or essential oils (Yan et al., 2011b, 2012a; Grela et al., 2013). Active compounds contained in garlic, e.g. alliin and allicin, exhibit primarily bacteriostatic or bactericidal activity against pathogenic bacterial strains in the gastrointestinal tract (Amagase et al., 2001). In turn, cysteine derivatives, such as S-allyl cysteine SAC, Sethyl cysteine SEC, and S-propyl cysteine SPC, stimulate immunomodulatory and immune processes (Amagase et al., 2001; Cullen et al., 2005). Garlic supplementation results in reduction of cholesterol in hepatocytes and triglyceride levels in blood, limitation of the formation and secretion of very low density lipoproteins (VLDL), and changes in the fatty acid profile of pigs' meat fat, which are beneficial for its dietary value (Grela et al., 2013). The positive or even therapeutic effects of nutrients and biologically active compounds contained in dandelion (Taraxacum officinale L.) roots on the organism of monogastric animals have been reported by many authors (Trojanová et al., 2004; Yan et al., 2011a, 2012b). Dandelion exhibits a prebiotic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-oxidative activity (Mir et al., 2012; Yarnell and Abascal, 2009). Oligosaccharides (inulin 15–40%) and other compounds contained therein promote intestinal development of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus, reduce Enterobacteriaceae populations, and may modulate lipid metabolism (Trojanova et al., 2004; Choi et al., 2010). This study was conducted to investigate the hypothesis that dietary supplementation of lyophilised garlic or dandelion root powder or their combination has beneficial effects on the performance, carcass traits, and fatty acid composition in chosen tissues of growing-finishing pigs. 2. Materials and methods All experimental procedures complied with the regulations of the Local Ethics Committee on Animal Experimentation of the University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Poland (No. 31/2010). The study was carried out in accordance with EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments (European Union, 2010). 2.1. Study design, dietary treatments, and animal management The experiment was carried out on 80 crossbred pigs (Polish Landrace x Large White) x Duroc with an initial weight of 25.0 ± 0.5 kg on the 74th day of life. The study was conducted as a randomised complete block design using the initial BW and gender as blocking factors. Pens (4 animals/each: 2 gilts + 2 barrows) within a block were randomly assigned to 1 of the 4 dietary treatments to create 5 replicates per treatment. The supplementation of the feed mixture with garlic and dandelion was an experimental factor. The levels of garlic and dandelion supplementation were chosen based on the results of our previous research and publications of other authors (Grela and Klebaniuk, 2007; Omojola et al., 2009; Yan et al., 2011a,b; 2012a,b; Grela et al., 2013). The market price of these additives is about EUR 6 per kilogram of dandelion and about EUR 8 per kilogram of garlic (GreenField, 2018). The garlic and dandelion were purchased at the Manufacture of Herbs and Organic Products “Gift of nature” (Grodzisk, Poland). The dietary treatments consisted of the control, which was not supplemented with phytobiotics (C), the G treatment supplemented with 5 g/kg diet of lyophilised garlic, the D treatment supplemented with 50 g/kg diet of dandelion root powder, and the GD treatment supplemented with a combination of both phytobiotics (at the same amounts as in the G and D treatments). Barley replaced the phytobiotics in the control diet. The experiment lasted for 95 days and was divided into three phases over the growing-finishing period, with a specific diet for each phase: starter at 74–102 days of life (25–50 kg of BW), grower at 103–137 days of life (51–80 kg of BW), and finisher at 138–169 days of life (81–115 kg of BW). The fatteners were fed ad libitum with iso-energetic and iso-nitrogenous diets. The dietary composition and analysis are presented in Table 1. The feed mixtures were balanced in terms of the content of ME, proteins, amino acids, mineral compounds, and vitamins (NRC, 2012). Each pen was equipped with a stainless steel self-feeder and a nipple drinker. The Pigs had free access to feed and drinking water throughout the experimental period. The hygienic conditions, i.e. the temperature, relative humidity, and cooling were the same for all the groups. 2.2. Growth performance The daily feed intake was noted in each pen (5 replicate pens per treatment). The individual BW of pigs was monitored by weighing the animals at the start of the experiment, when the feed was changed (at 102 and 137 day of fattening period for pigs with about 50 and 80 kg BW), and at 169 day of life (before slaughter). ADG and FCR were calculated separately for each period and for the entire fattening time. 2.3. Sample collection and chemical analyses Feed samples for analysis (0.5 kg) were collected twice: at the beginning and end of every fattening period. The samples were analysed for the content of dry matter (procedure 945.15; AOAC, 2006), ether extract (procedure 945.16; AOAC, 2006), crude protein (procedure 984.13; AOAC, 2006), crude ash (procedure 942.05; AOAC, 2006), calcium (procedure 968.08; AOAC, 2006), phosphorus (procedure 946.06; AOAC, 2006), methionine and lysine (procedure 994.12; AOAC, 2006). Crude fibre was determined 2

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

Table 1 Dietary ingredients (g/kg) and nutrient content of growing-finishing pig diets (g/kg, as-fed basis). Ingredients

Diets/ Fattening periods Starter (74-102 days of life, 25-50 BW, kg)

Grower (103-137 days of life, 51-80 BW, kg)

Finisher (138-169 days of life, 81-115 BW, kg)

C Diet composition Barley 549.0 Wheat 200.0 Fish meal 40.0 Soybean meal, 46% crude 162.0 protein Lyophilised garlic – Dandelion root powder – Soybean oil 20.0 Fodder chalk 6.0 Dicalcium phosphate 8.0 Sodium chloride 4.0 Vitamin-mineral premix1 10.0 L-lysine HCl 0.8 DL-methionine 0.2 Chemical composition (g/kg of feed) Dry matter 893.4 Crude ash 44.3 Crude protein 180.3 Crude fiber 39.6 NDF2 173.8 ADF 63.4 ADL 8.7 Ether extract 38.5 Lysine 9.6 Methionine 2.5 Calcium 6.6 Total phosphorus 5.3 ME (MJ/kg) 3 12.8

G

D

GD

C

G

D

GD

C

G

D

GD

544.0 200.0 40.0 162.0

499.0 200.0 40.0 162.0

494.0 200.0 40.0 162.0

751.0 100.0 – 100.0

746.0 100.0 – 100.0

701.0 100.0 – 100.0

696.0 100.0 – 100.0

802.0 100.0 – 50.0

797.0 100.0 – 50.0

752.0 100.0 – 50.0

747.0 100.0 – 50.0

5.0 – 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.8 0.2

– 50.0 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.8 0.2

5.0 50.0 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.8 0.2

– – 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

5.0 – 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

– 50.0 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

5.0 50.0 20.0 6.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

– – 20.0 5.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

5.0 – 20.0 5.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

– 50.0 20.0 5.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

5.0 50.0 20.0 5.0 8.0 4.0 10.0 0.9 0.1

893.5 44.2 180.5 39.5 173.5 63.3 8.6 38.8 9.6 2.5 6.6 5.3 12.8

893.8 44.4 180.3 40.7 174.8 64.1 8.9 38.9 9.5 2.5 6.7 5.5 12.7

893.9 44.4 180.7 40.6 175.2 64.0 8.9 38.9 9.5 2.5 6.7 5.4 12.7

892.5 43.1 154.5 42.3 191.6 64.2 9.6 37.3 7.6 2.0 5.2 4.7 12.6

892.8 43.1 154.6 42.1 191.4 64.1 9.5 37.5 7.6 2.0 5.1 4.7 12.6

892.4 43.2 154.3 43.1 194.3 65.2 9.8 38.2 7.5 2.0 5.3 4.8 12.5

892.9 43.2 154.4 43.2 194.2 65.1 9.7 38.1 7.5 2.0 5.3 4.8 12.5

892.6 41.6 135.4 45.2 194.5 65.5 9.9 38.5 6.2 1.7 4.6 4.1 12.6

892.5 41.6 135.6 45.1 195.9 65.4 9.9 38.7 6.2 1.7 4.6 4.1 12.6

893.4 41.7 135.3 45.9 196.8 67.2 10.1 39.1 6.1 1.6 4.7 4.2 12.5

893.5 41.7 135.2 46.1 197.1 67.3 10.1 39.3 6.1 1.6 4.7 4.2 12.5

C = control diet without supplementation, G = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet, D = diet supplemented with dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet, GD = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet; 1Added minerals and vitamins per kg of diet: 5 g Ca (CaCO3)/(Ca(H2PO4)/(CaI2); 1.3 g P (Ca(H2PO4)); 100 mg Fe (Fe(SO4) x 7H2O); 100 mg Zn (ZnO); 23 mg Cu (CuSO4 x 5H2O); 1.2 mg I (CaI2); 0.3 mg Se (Na2SeO3); 8000 IU vitamin A; 1000 IU vitamin D3; 60 mg vitamin E; 0.60 mg K; 4 mg riboflavin; 22 mg niacin; 15 mg pantothenic acid; 0.02 mg vitamin B12; 750 mg choline; 2NDF = neutral detergent fibre assayed without heat-stable amylase and expressed inclusive of residual ash; ADF = acid detergent fibre expressed inclusive of residual ash; ADL = acid detergent lignin determined by solubilisation of cellulose with sulphuric acid; 3ME - metabolisable energy according to the equation of Kirchgessner and Roth (1983).

according to procedure 978.10 (AOAC, 2006). The concentration of crude fibre was analysed using heat-stable α-amylase and sodium sulphite without correction for insoluble ash, as adapted for the Ankom Fiber Analyzer (Ankom Technology, Macedon, NY, USA). Neutral detergent fibre (assayed without heat-stable amylase and expressed inclusive of residual ash), acid detergent fibre (expressed inclusive of residual ash), and acid detergent lignin (assayed by solubilisation of cellulose with sulfuric acid) in the diets were determined with the ANKOM's proprietary 200 Filter Bag Technique using the Ankom 220 Fibre Analyzer (Ankom Technology, Macedon, NY, USA). The analyses were performed sequentially on the same sample in three replicates.

2.4. Measurements of carcass traits At the end of fattening, 40 pigs (one gilt and one barrow from each pen/10 replicate pigs per treatment) were slaughtered. The slaughter was conducted after 12-h fasting in accordance with the technology currently employed in meat industry, i.e. by electrical stunning. The right half-carcasses were subjected to shortened slaughter analysis in accordance with the methodology of the Polish Pig Performance Testing Station methodology (Różycki and Tyra, 2010). A vernier caliper with an accuracy of 0.1 mm was used to measure the backfat thickness at 5 points in compliance with the protocol of the Polish Pig Testing Station (over the shoulder, dorsal (between the last thoracic vertebrae and the first lumbar vertebrae), and at three points at the level of sacral vertebrae (rump I - over the cranial edge, rump II - in the midline, and rump III - the caudal edge of the gluteus medius muscle cross-section). The carcasses were conventionally chilled for 24 h in a chiller at 2–4 °C and the loin eye area was measured at level of the 10th rib. The loin eye area was determined by the height × width × 0.8, and the lean meat yield was calculated as follows (Różycki and Tyra, 2010): y = 1.745x1 + 0.836x2 + 0.157x3 – 1.884 where: y is the weight of meat of right half-carcass (kg); x1 is the weight of fatless ham (kg); x2 is the weight of the longissimus 3

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

muscle (kg); and x3 is the double width + height of the longissimus muscle (cm). The longissimus lumborum muscle and other tissues were collected on the next day after exsanguination (24 h after slaughter). At the slaughter operations, the heart and liver were weighed, and samples (backfat, LL, liver, and whole heart) were collected for laboratory evaluation. Samples of the LL muscle were taken from an area between the first four lumbar vertebrae (L1-L4). In turn, backfat samples were collected over the shoulder blade cutting out a lobe of 5 cm width and 10 cm length from a forequarter cut. Immediately after collection, the samples were stored at −20 °C. 2.5. Fatty acid and cholesterol analysis Total fat of the backfat, LL, liver, and heart was extracted for fatty acid analysis with a chloroform/methanol mixture according to the method proposed by Folch et al. (1957). Ester samples were analysed using a Varian 3800 gas chromatograph with a FID detector and a CP-Wax 52CBWCOT Fused Silica capillary column with 60-m length and an inner diameter of 0.25 mm. The initial temperature for the analysis was 120 °C for 5 min gradually increasing by 2 °C/min up to the final temperature of 210 °C. The temperature of both the injector and the detector was 260 °C. The hydrogen flow rate was 30 ml/min, air flow 300 ml/min, and helium flow 1.4 ml/min. The volume of the injected sample was 1 ml. The results of the percentage content of fatty acids in the sample were obtained using Star GC Workstation Version 6.30. Fatty acid methyl esters were identified via comparison against the retention times of 37 fatty acid methyl esters present in the standard mixture (F.A.M.E. Mix, C4-C24, No. 18919-1AMP, Sigma-Aldrich Poznań, Poland) analysed in the same conditions. The percentage of each fatty acid (FA) in the fat was calculated using the equation: % FA = [Ax/(AT−AIS)] × 100 where: Ax – surface area of the determined FA, AT – total surface area of the analysed FA, AIS – surface area of the internal standard The mean of three independent determinations was assumed as a quantitative result. The fatty acid content was expressed as a percentage share in the fat and grouped into SFA, MUFA, and PUFA(Sukhija and Palmquist, 1988). The cholesterol content in organs and tissues was estimated using the colorimetric method proposed by Rhee et al. (1982). Indices of fat nutritional quality, i.e. the atherogenic index and thrombogenicity index, were calculated according to equations proposed by Ulbricht and Southgate (1991): AI = [(4×C14:0)+C16:0]/[n-6 PUFA+n-3 PUFA + MUFA]; TI = [C14:0+C16:0+C18:0]/[(0.5×MUFA)+(0.5×n-6PUFA)+(3×n-3PUFA)+n-3/n-6 PUFA]. The hypocholesterolemic/hypercholesterolemic ratio was calculated according to Fernández et al. (2007). H/H = (C18:1+C18:2+C18:3+C20:3+C20:4+C20:5+C22:4+C22:5+C22:6)/(C14:0+C16:0).

2.6. Statistical analysis Data were analysed as a randomised complete block design using the Statistica software, version 13.1 (Dell Inc, 2016, software.dell.com). The data was checked for normality and homogeneity of variance by the Shapiro-Wilk and Brown-Forsythe test, respectively. The production parameters were analysed using the dietary treatment as a fixed effect and the block as a random effect; the pen served as an experimental unit. An individual pig served as an experimental unit for carcass traits, organ weight, fat and cholesterol content, and fatty acid composition in tissues and organs. In this case, the model included the fixed effects of dietary treatment, gender (gilts/barrows), and the associated interaction and the block as a random effect. To perform the statistical analysis, the Statistica Variance Estimation and Precision (VEPAC) module was applied to the data. Variance components in the model were assessed by estimation of the Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML). For post hoc analysis, Fisher's least significant difference (LSD) tests were used. The differences were considered significant at a level of P < 0.05. The tables illustrate the means, the standard error of the means (SEM), and the levels of significance (P value). 3. Results 3.1. Growth performance The supplementation of the fattener diets with the phytobiotics induced differences in BW, ADG, and FCR (P < 0.05) but not feed intake (Table 2). In comparison with the control, the highest daily gains in the starting and growing phases of fattening and throughout the fattening period were recorded in the GD treatment (P < 0.05). There was an increase in BW of the fatteners from this group at 102 and 137 days of age and at the end of the fattening period, in comparison with the control (by 3.62, 5.08 and 6.0 kg, 4

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

Table 2 Performance in growing-finishing pigs in the different fattening periods. Fattening periods1

Body weight (kg/period) At start2 Starting Growing Finishing Average daily gain (kg/day) Starting Growing Finishing Overall Feed intake (kg/day) Starting Growing Finishing Overall Feed conversion ratio (kg/kg) Starting Growing Finishing Overall

Dietary treatments

SEM

P value

C

G

D

GD

Treatment

25.46 48.21b 78.06b 106.4b

25.38 50.12ab 81.43ab 110.9ab

25.34 49.69ab 80.85ab 109.5ab

25.51 51.83a 83.14a 112.4a

0.43 1.03 1.18 1.03

0.458 0.023 0.036 0.029

0.813c 0.853b 0.886 0.852b

0.884ab 0.895a 0.921 0.900a

0.870b 0.890a 0.895 0.886ab

0.940a 0.895a 0.914 0.915a

15.5 18.7 19.5 16.4

0.011 0.026 0.128 0.035

2.11 2.68 3.16 2.67

2.13 2.69 3.18 2.68

2.12 2.69 3.17 2.68

2.14 2.68 3.19 2.69

0.10 0.09 0.12 0.09

0.464 0.553 0.351 0.667

2.60a 3.14 3.57 3.14a

2.41ab 3.01 3.45 2.98ab

2.44ab 3.02 3.54 3.03ab

2.28b 3.00 3.49 2.94b

0.15 0.16 0.13 0.12

0.013 0.142 0.185 0.042

Data are means of 5 replicate pens with four pigs per treatment; C = control diet without supplementation, G = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet, D = diet supplemented with dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet, GD = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet; a, b – means in the same rows with different letters differ significantly (P < 0.05); 1 fattening periods: starting (74–102 days of life), growing (103–137 days of life), finishing (138–169 days of life), and overall fattening period (74–169 days of life); 2 BW at the start of fattening (74 day of life) and at the end of individual fattening periods (at the starting period at 102 day of life, growing period at 137 day of life, finishing period at 169 day of life).

respectively) (P < 0.05). In the starting period of fattening and throughout the fattening period, the fatteners from the GD group exhibited a better FCR (P < 0.05). As compared to the control, the D treatment also increased ADG in the starting and growing phase of the fattening period (P < 0.05). Similarly, the G treatment increased the daily gains in the starting and growing phases of fattening (by 9%, and 5%, respectively) and throughout the fattening period, compared with the control (P < 0.05). 3.2. Carcass traits The GD treatment increased the loin eye area (by 7%, P = 0.032) and the lean meat yield (by 12%, P = 0.023) and simultaneously decreased the average backfat thickness (by 10%, P = 0.037) in comparison to the control treatment (Table 3). Supplementation of the diet only with lyophilised garlic (G treatment) also contributed to reduction of the backfat thickness, in particular that measured over the shoulder blade (by 7%, P = 0.029) and the backfat thickness at rump I and III (by 9%) (P < 0.05, Table 3). The supplementation of the fattener diets with phytobiotics did not influence the weight of the heart and kidney (P > 0.05), but the weight of the liver in the garlic-supplemented groups (G and GD) was higher than that in the control treatment (by 12% and 10%, respectively) (P = 0.025, Table 3). 3.3. Fat, cholesterol, and fatty acid contents in tissues Relative to the control, the content of fat in the backfat tissue was lower in groups G and GD (P = 0.045, Table 4). In turn, the changes in the cholesterol content in the analysed tissues and organs, except for the heart, were dependent on the supplemented phytobiotics. The highest reduction of the cholesterol content was noted in LL (by 25% and 30%, P = 0.011) and the backfat (by 13% and 14%, P = 0.020), and the lowest decrease was detected in the liver (by 9% and 8%, P = 0.039) in the G and GD treatments. The D treatment did not induce differences in the fat and cholesterol content in the tissues and organs of the pigs. The changes in the fat content suggest modifications in the qualitative composition of the backfat. The addition of phytobiotics (G, D, and GD treatments) decreased the SFA content in the backfat and increased the content of PUFA, including n-6 PUFA (P < 0.05). The GD treatments also increased n-3 PUFA (P = 0.012, Table 5). Fatty acids C 16:0 and C 18:0 (P < 0.05) exerted the greatest impact on the changes in total SFA, whereas the changes in the n-6 PUFA content were mostly influenced by fatty acids C 18:2 n-6 and C 20:4 n-6 (P < 0.05). The AI, TI, and H/H values were positively modified by the GD treatment (P < 0.05). The GD treatment improved the n-6/n-3 ratio (P = 0.038). Higher content of Σ n-3 PUFA was noted in the backfat of the gilts (P = 0.012). The introduction of the phytobiotics to the diet induced significant changes in the fatty acid composition in the LL fat. There was also an increased proportion of PUFA (P = 0.039), primarily those from the n-6 family (P = 0.035). The most favourable n-6/n-3 ratio was noted for the D and GD treatments (P = 0.047, Table 6). Fatty acids C 18:2 and C 20:4 (P < 0.05) exerted the greatest 5

6

86.91 8.21 46.8ab 48.92ab

2.95b 1.53b 1.68b 1.29ab 1.58b 1.52ab 1.81ab 328 168 1.93a

86.32 7.98 44.6b 45.67b

3.18a 1.65a 1.84a 1.35a 1.73a 1.64a 1.95a 326 163 1.72b

3.04ab 1.61ab 1.74ab 1.24ab 1.63ab 1.53ab 1.85ab 327 165 1.74b

86.43 8.17 45.9ab 48.34ab 2.89b 1.51b 1.63b 1.21b 1.56b 1.46b 1.76b 329 167 1.89a

87.78 8.27 47.8a 51.22a 3.12 1.63 1.83 1.32 1.72 1.62 1.91 327 162 1.70

86.11 8.01 44.7 46.12 3.24 1.67 1.85 1.38 1.74 1.66 1.98 325 164 1.74

86.52 7.95 44.5 45.21 2.93 1.50 1.66 1.27 1.57 1.50 1.79 329 165 1.91

86.81 8.25 46.9 49.11

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

2.97 1.56 1.70 1.31 1.59 1.53 1.83 327 171 1.95

87.01 8.17 46.7 48.73

Barrows

3.06 1.59 1.71 1.21 1.61 1.51 1.84 329 164 1.72

86.23 8.18 45.9 48.44

Gilts

D

3.03 1.63 1.77 1.27 1.65 1.56 1.86 325 166 1.76

86.63 8.16 45.9 48.24

Barrows

2.81 1.47 1.62 1.18 1.52 1.44 1.72 329 166 1.87

87.73 8.32 48.1 51.81

Gilts

GD

2.97 1.55 1.64 1.24 1.60 1.49 1.80 329 168 1.91

87.82 8.22 47.5 50.62

Barrows

0.08 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.06 0.06 11 8.5 0.13

1.2 0.14 0.8 0.7

SEM

0.029 0.038 0.021 0.012 0.019 0.026 0.037 0.602 0.756 0.025

0.737 0.489 0.032 0.023

Treatment

P value

0.192 0.063 0.226 0.075 0.364 0.306 0.077 0.216 0.194 0.105

0.521 0.797 0.402 0.593

Gender

0.540 0.399 0.792 0.341 0.309 0.655 0.265 0.535 0.312 0.705

0.865 0.792 0.250 0.391

Treatment x Gender

Data are means of 10 replicate pigs on treatment; C = control diet without supplementation, G = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet, D = diet supplemented with dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet, GD = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet; a, b – means in the same rows with different letters differ significantly (P < 0.05).

Cold dressing yield (kg) Meat of ham (kg) Loin eye area (cm2) Lean meat yield (kg) Backfat thickness (cm) shoulder midback rump I rump II rump III rump (3 measurements) average (5 measurements) Weight of heart (g) Weight of kidney (g) Weight of liver (kg)

Item

Table 3 Carcass traits and weight of some organs of pigs.

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

7 5.64 302.8b 3.51 123.4

5.87 317.4ab

3.59 132.1

3.60 137.3

5.77 328.2

2.48 63.21

83.29 115.5

3.62 138.1

5.85 334.4

2.54 65.61

83.39 120.9

3.51 127.7

5.62 299.3

2.38 45.34

81.27 100.9

3.57 128.7

5.76 305.1

2.40 49.96

81.37 105.7

Barrows

3.57 131.8

5.83 314.6

2.36 53.26

82.33 110.1

Gilts

D

3.61 132.4

5.91 320.2

2.46 55.44

82.39 112.5

Barrows

3.49 123.1

5.64 298.9

2.34 43.82

81.08 101.6

Gilts

GD

3.53 123.7

5.70 306.5

2.32 45.52

81.26 103.0

Barrows

0.11 12.06

0.17 10.15

0.13 5.71

1.89 4.26

SEM

0.613 0.119

0.524 0.039

0.098 0.011

0.045 0.020

Treatment

P value

0.457 0.384

0.305 0.142

0.363 0.259

0.293 0.189

Gender

0.725 0.589

0.515 0.275

0.675 0.720

0.366 0.415

Treatment x Gender

Data are means of 10 replicate pigs on treatment; C = control diet without supplementation, G = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet, D = diet supplemented with dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet, GD = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet; a, b – means in the same rows with different letters differ significantly (P < 0.05).

2.33 44.67b

81.17b 102.3b

2.41 54.35ab

82.36ab 111.3ab

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

Backfat 81.32b fat 83.34a cholesterol 118.2a 103.3b Longissimus lumborum muscle fat 2.51 2.39 cholesterol 64.41a 47.65b Liver fat 5.81 5.69 cholesterol 331.3a 302.2b Heart fat 3.61 3.54 cholesterol 137.8 128.2

Item

Table 4 Fat (g/100 g) and cholesterol (mg/100 g) content in some tissues and organs of pigs.

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

8 0.51b 1.28b 2.14a 15.44b

0.54ab 1.38ab 2.01ab 17.78a 0.58 1.50 1.86 15.56

0.09 1.46 26.32 0.35 2.11 0.18 0.21 16.54 36.15 2.16 12.31 0.81 0.23 0.59 0.08 0.21 44.82 41.57 13.41 0.81 12.60 0.60 1.53 1.83 16.51

0.09 1.51 26.42 0.33 2.05 0.18 0.21 16.72 35.91 2.12 12.15 0.75 0.25 0.59 0.06 0.17 45.17 41.21 13.13 0.75 12.38 0.53 1.38 2.02 15.98

0.07 1.29 25.21 0.39 2.01 0.12 0.20 15.74 37.23 2.07 13.27 0.85 0.19 0.69 0.09 0.22 42.62 42.59 14.43 0.85 13.58 0.55 1.42 1.98 17.32

0.08 1.35 25.49 0.39 1.97 0.12 0.19 15.92 37.01 2.05 13.05 0.77 0.19 0.65 0.09 0.20 43.15 42.26 14.11 0.77 13.34

Barrows

0.54 1.36 2.03 17.43

0.08 1.38 25.17 0.39 2.12 0.17 0.16 15.23 36.82 2.25 13.78 0.81 0.21 0.67 0.09 0.25 42.24 42.41 14.93 0.81 14.12

Gilts

D

0.55 1.40 1.98 18.16

0.09 1.44 25.49 0.37 1.96 0.18 0.15 15.39 36.56 2.21 13.66 0.77 0.22 0.68 0.08 0.24 42.80 41.93 14.75 0.77 13.98

Barrows

0.50 1.25 2.17 15.18

0.07 1.24 24.31 0.41 2.08 0.14 0.17 14.74 37.09 2.14 14.91 1.01 0.20 0.81 0.11 0.31 40.70 42.70 16.34 1.01 15.33

Gilts

GD

0.51 1.30 2.11 15.72

0.07 1.32 24.63 0.41 1.94 0.15 0.16 15.12 36.87 2.08 14.55 0.95 0.22 0.77 0.11 0.27 41.14 42.23 15.88 0.95 14.93

Barrows

0.01 0.02 0.02 0.86

0.01 0.01 1.03 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.84 2.10 0.05 0.84 0.02 0.01 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 1.30 1.96 0.95 0.02 0.98

SEM

0.047 0.023 0.026 0.038

0.633 0.221 0.027 0.133 0.792 0.091 0.122 0.043 0.331 0.270 0.036 0.012 0.094 0.126 0.173 0.045 0.022 0.259 0.045 0.012 0.018

Treatment

P value

0.089 0.059 0.075 0.107

0.094 0.085 0.195 0.204 0.273 0.092 0.812 0.191 0.245 0.451 0.204 0.056 0.172 0.104 0.731 0.059 0.071 0.083 0.079 0.046 0.056

Gender

0.147 0.331 0.298 0.301

0.493 0.282 0.214 0.298 0.615 0.205 0.350 0.346 0.417 0.490 0.349 0.163 0.226 0.344 0.681 0.181 0.276 0.312 0.191 0.106 0.166

Treatment x Gender

Data are means of 10 replicate pigs on treatment; C = control diet without supplementation, G = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet, D = diet supplemented with dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet, GD = diet supplemented with lyophilised garlic at 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg diet; a, b, c – means in the same rows with different letters differ significantly (P < 0.05); 1 the calculated n-6/n-3 ratio was a sum of [(C18:2 n-6, C20:2 n-6, C20:4 n-6)/(C18:3 n-3)].

0.07 1.28 24.47b 0.41 2.01 0.14 0.16 14.93b 36.98 2.11 14.73a 0.98a 0.21 0.79 0.11 0.29a 40.96b 42.46 16.11a 0.98a 15.13a

0.08 1.41 25.33b 0.38 2.04 0.17 0.15 15.31b 36.69 2.23 13.72b 0.79b 0.21 0.67 0.09 0.24b 42.34b 42.16 14.84b 0.79b 14.05b

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

C 12:0 0.09 0.08 C 14:0 1.48 1.32 25.35b C 16:0 26.37a C16:1 n-7 0.34 0.39 C16:1 n-9 2.08 1.99 C 17:0 0.18 0.12 C 17:1 0.21 0.19 C 18:0 16.63a 15.83ab C 18:1 n-9 36.03 37.12 C 18:1 n-7 2.14 2.06 c C 18:2 n-6 12.23 13.16bc b C 18:3 n-3 0.78 0.81b C 20:0 0.24 0.19 C 20:1 n-9 0.59 0.67 C 20:2 n-6 0.07 0.09 C 20:4 n-6 0.19c 0.21bc ΣSFA 44.81a 42.77b ΣMUFA 41.39 42.42 ΣPUFA 13.27c 14.27b b Σ n-3 PUFA 0.78 0.81b Σ n-6 PUFA 12.49c 13.46ab Indices of nutritional fat quality AI 0.59a 0.54ab TI 1.52a 1.40ab H/H 1.84b 2.00ab n-6/n-3 ratio1 16.01ab 16.62ab

Fatty acids

Table 5 Fatty acid composition (g/100 g total fatty acids) in pigs' backfat.

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

9

Note: See in Table 5.

0.03 1.28 25.71 0.24 3.41 0.08 0.14 13.61 44.14 3.79 5.58a 0.32 0.19 0.49b 0.22 0.64a 40.82 52.21 6.76a 0.32 6.44a 0.52 1.34 2.02 20.13b

0.04 1.26 25.36 0.23 3.38 0.11 0.15 13.79 44.03 3.93 5.69a 0.31 0.21 0.47b 0.17 0.61a 40.66 52.19 6.78a 0.31 6.47a

0.52 1.33 2.05 20.87b

0.52 1.35 2.06 22.20

0.04 1.35 24.66 0.23 3.29 0.09 0.17 14.11 44.17 3.95 4.72 0.25 0.24 0.61 0.19 0.53 41.40 52.42 5.69 0.25 5.44 0.53 1.40 2.01 22.05

0.04 1.41 24.98 0.21 3.21 0.08 0.16 14.47 43.87 3.83 4.50 0.24 0.24 0.57 0.19 0.49 41.22 51.85 5.42 0.24 5.18 0.52 1.29 2.14 22.12

0.03 1.25 24.32 0.24 3.39 0.08 0.17 13.52 44.31 3.95 5.64 0.29 0.18 0.53 0.21 0.57 39.98 52.59 6.71 0.29 6.42

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

C 12:0 0.04 0.03 C 14:0 1.38 1.28 C 16:0 25.82 25.41 C16:1 n-7 0.22 0.24 C16:1 n-9 3.25 3.31 C 17:0 0.09 0.08 C 17:1 0.16 0.17 C 18:0 14.24 13.65 C 18:1 n-9 44.02 44.26 C 18:1 n-7 3.89 3.91 C 18:2 n-6 4.61b 5.53a C 18:3 n-3 0.24 0.28 C 20:0 0.24 0.18 C 20:1 n-9 0.59a 0.52b C 20:2 n-6 0.19 0.21 C 20:4 n-6 0.51b 0.56ab ΣSFA 41.72 40.55 ΣMUFA 52.13 52.41 ΣPUFA 5.55b 6.58a Σ n-3 PUFA 0.24 0.28 Σ n-6 PUFA 5.31b 6.30a Indices of nutritional fat quality AI 0.54 0.52 TI 1.41 1.33 H/H 2.03 2.04 n-6/n-3 ratio1 22.13a 22.50a

Fatty acids

Table 6 Fatty acid composition (g/100 g total fatty acids) of longissimus lumborum muscles in pigs.

0.52 1.32 2.10 22.93

0.03 1.31 24.50 0.25 3.23 0.08 0.16 13.78 44.21 3.87 5.42 0.27 0.18 0.52 0.21 0.56 40.49 52.23 6.46 0.27 6.19

Barrows

0.51 1.28 2.15 19.18

0.04 1.25 24.25 0.24 3.39 0.11 0.16 13.65 44.15 3.97 5.71 0.34 0.21 0.48 0.17 0.64 40.05 52.39 6.86 0.34 6.52

Gilts

D

0.50 1.32 2.11 22.93

0.04 1.27 24.47 0.22 3.37 0.11 0.14 13.91 43.91 3.89 5.67 0.28 0.21 0.46 0.17 0.58 40.66 51.99 6.70 0.28 6.42

Barrows

0.50 1.32 2.12 19.67

0.03 1.24 24.53 0.24 3.49 0.08 0.15 13.53 44.27 3.85 5.64 0.33 0.19 0.51 0.21 0.66 40.11 52.51 6.84 0.33 6.51

Gilts

GD

0.51 1.34 2.07 20.55

0.04 1.32 24.89 0.24 3.33 0.09 0.14 13.69 44.01 3.73 5.52 0.31 0.19 0.47 0.23 0.62 40.52 51.92 6.68 0.31 6.37

Barrows

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.87

< 0.01 0.01 1.03 0.01 0.14 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.65 0.74 0.05 0.54 0.01 < 0.01 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 1.21 0.97 0.86 0.01 0.78

SEM

0.238 0.304 0.265 0.047

0.571 0.668 0.491 0.309 0.856 0.152 0.102 0.197 0.524 0.650 0.046 0.102 0.155 0.031 0.095 0.027 0.303 0.271 0.039 0.102 0.035

Treatment

P value

0.157 0.294 0.298 0.208

0.421 0.215 0.431 0.178 0.412 0.936 0.487 0.115 0.385 0.159 0.279 0.101 0.389 0.296 0.197 0.116 0.099 0.314 0.047 0.101 0.046

Gender

0.625 0.726 0.785 0.255

0.723 0.685 0.788 0.471 0.761 0.671 0.422 0.483 0.515 0.632 0.390 0.285 0.499 0.291 0.573 0.199 0.280 0.520 0.107 0.285 0.168

Treatment x Gender

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

10

Note: See in Table 5.

0.04 0.28 16.15 0.71 1.33 1.11 0.21 23.05 15.23 2.02 15.67 0.75a 0.03 0.28 0.13 18.16 39.55 19.78 34.71 0.75a 33.96 0.32 1.35b 3.15 45.28c

0.06 0.30 16.54 0.73 1.28 1.03 0.19 24.31 14.98 1.88 15.16 0.59b 0.04 0.24 0.11 17.75 41.25 19.30 33.61 0.59b 33.02

0.34 1.47a 2.99 55.97b

0.34 1.48 2.96 55.69

0.06 0.29 16.68 0.73 1.31 1.02 0.18 24.39 15.05 1.87 15.12 0.59 0.04 0.23 0.11 17.63 41.48 19.37 33.45 0.59 32.86 0.35 1.54 2.85 60.94

0.06 0.33 17.02 0.71 1.27 1.04 0.18 24.59 14.83 1.83 14.80 0.53 0.04 0.19 0.11 17.39 42.08 19.01 32.83 0.53 32.30 0.31 1.39 3.18 46.70

0.05 0.27 15.93 0.72 1.33 1.03 0.19 23.93 15.25 2.01 15.41 0.72 0.03 0.26 0.13 18.09 40.24 19.76 34.35 0.72 33.63

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

C 12:0 0.06 0.05 C 14:0 0.31 0.29 C 16:0 16.85 16.04 C16:1 n-7 0.72 0.71 C16:1 n-9 1.29 1.32 C 17:0 1.03 1.06 C 17:1 0.18 0.18 C 18:0 24.49 24.04 C 18:1 n-9 14.94 15.16 C 18:1 n-7 1.85 1.98 C 18:2 n-6 14.96 15.32 C 18:3 n-3 0.56b 0.69ab C 20:0 0.04 0.03 C 20:1 n-9 0.21 0.25 C 20:2 n-6 0.11 0.12 C 20:4 n-6 17.51 18.02 ΣSFA 41.75 40.45 ΣMUFA 19.19 19.60 ΣPUFA 33.14 34.15 Σ n-3 PUFA 0.56b 0.69ab Σ n-6 PUFA 32.58 33.46 Indices of nutritional fat quality AI 0.35 0.32 TI 1.51a 1.41ab H/H 2.90 3.13 n-6/n-3 ratio1 58.18a 48.49c

Fatty acids

Table 7 Fatty acid composition (g/100 g total fatty acids) in pigs' liver.

0.33 1.43 3.09 50.44

0.05 0.31 16.15 0.70 1.31 1.09 0.18 24.15 15.07 1.95 15.23 0.66 0.03 0.24 0.11 17.95 41.08 19.45 33.95 0.66 33.29

Barrows

0.33 1.44 3.06 54.48

0.06 0.31 16.23 0.74 1.29 1.01 0.20 24.18 15.07 1.89 15.31 0.61 0.04 0.25 0.12 17.81 41.30 19.44 33.85 0.61 33.24

Gilts

D

0.34 1.50 2.92 57.56

0.07 0.29 16.85 0.72 1.27 1.05 0.18 24.44 14.89 1.87 15.01 0.57 0.04 0.23 0.11 17.69 41.74 19.16 33.38 0.57 32.81

Barrows

0.31 1.32 3.24 42.34

0.04 0.27 15.91 0.69 1.35 1.09 0.23 22.81 15.33 2.06 15.89 0.81 0.03 0.29 0.14 18.27 39.25 19.95 35.11 0.81 34.30

Gilts

GD

0.33 1.39 3.08 48.74

0.05 0.29 16.39 0.73 1.31 1.13 0.19 23.29 15.14 1.98 15.45 0.69 0.03 0.27 0.13 18.05 40.18 19.62 34.32 0.69 33.63

Barrows

0.01 0.02 0.02 1.36

< 0.01 0.01 0.53 0.01 0.07 0.01 < 0.01 0.53 0.48 0.03 0.54 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.81 1.14 0.69 0.48 0.01 0.57

SEM

0.475 0.029 0.123 0.017

0.325 0.253 0.239 0.430 0.553 0.326 0.530 0.204 0.328 0.424 0.472 0.025 0.166 0.193 0.324 0.751 0.768 0.514 0.287 0.025 0.419

Treatment

P value

0.895 0.129 0.263 0.197

0.257 0.299 0.187 0.201 0.446 0.185 0.925 0.083 0.104 0.203 0.218 0.364 0.187 0.273 0.094 0.225 0.092 0.195 0.072 0.364 0.185

Gender

0.802 0.236 0.230 0.441

0.283 0.413 0.522 0.525 0.365 0.259 0.645 0.481 0.532 0.505 0.482 0.315 0.350 0.427 0.625 0.526 0.674 0.515 0.651 0.315 0.439

Treatment x Gender

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

11

Note: See in Table 5.

0.04 0.51 20.15 0.81 1.34 0.19 0.11 14.85 25.98 2.08 21.02 0.61 0.03 0.25 0.14 10.88 35.58 30.57 32.65 0.61 32.04 0.35 1.07 2.93 52.52

0.05 0.53 20.31 0.83 1.33 0.22 0.12 14.78 25.74 1.95 21.09 0.56 0.04 0.21 0.11 10.75 35.71 30.18 32.51 0.56 31.95

0.36 1.09 2.88 57.05

0.36 1.09 2.85 57.16

0.05 0.57 20.59 0.85 1.41 0.24 0.13 14.82 25.78 1.99 21.17 0.56 0.05 0.22 0.13 10.71 36.32 30.38 32.57 0.56 32.01 0.38 1.13 2.77 60.71

0.05 0.61 20.93 0.83 1.35 0.24 0.11 15.02 25.68 1.95 20.95 0.52 0.05 0.22 0.11 10.51 36.90 30.14 32.09 0.52 31.57 0.34 1.04 3.02 56.14

0.05 0.51 19.74 0.82 1.34 0.20 0.11 14.52 25.99 2.09 21.46 0.58 0.04 0.24 0.11 10.99 35.06 30.59 33.14 0.58 32.56

Gilts

Gilts

Barrows

G

GD

C

D

C

G

Gender

Dietary treatments

C 12:0 0.05 0.05 C 14:0 0.59 0.51 C 16:0 20.76 19.88 C16:1 n-7 0.84 0.81 C16:1 n-9 1.38 1.32 C 17:0 0.24 0.21 C 17:1 0.12 0.11 C 18:0 14.92 14.64 C 18:1 n-9 25.73 25.94 C 18:1 n-7 1.97 2.05 C 18:2 n-6 21.06 21.39 C 18:3 n-3 0.54 0.56 C 20:0 0.05 0.04 C 20:1 n-9 0.22 0.23 C 20:2 n-6 0.12 0.11 C 20:4 n-6 10.61 10.89 ΣSFA 36.37 35.12 ΣMUFA 30.26 30.46 ΣPUFA 32.33 32.95 Σ n-3 PUFA 0.54 0.56 Σ n-6 PUFA 31.79 32.39 Indices of nutritional fat quality AI 0.37 0.35 TI 1.11 1.06 H/H 2.81 2.98 n-6/n-3 ratio1 58.87 57.84

Fatty acids

Table 8 Fatty acid composition (g/100 g total fatty acids) in pigs' heart.

0.35 1.07 2.95 59.67

0.05 0.51 20.02 0.80 1.30 0.21 0.11 14.76 25.89 2.01 21.32 0.54 0.04 0.22 0.11 10.79 35.59 30.33 32.76 0.54 32.22

Barrows

0.35 1.07 2.93 56.40

0.05 0.51 20.13 0.84 1.37 0.22 0.12 14.71 25.82 1.96 21.22 0.57 0.04 0.22 0.12 10.81 35.66 30.33 32.72 0.57 32.15

Gilts

D

0.36 1.10 2.84 57.73

0.06 0.54 20.49 0.82 1.29 0.22 0.12 14.85 25.66 1.94 20.96 0.55 0.05 0.21 0.1 10.69 36.21 30.04 32.30 0.55 31.75

Barrows

0.35 1.05 2.97 51.27

0.04 0.49 20.02 0.83 1.39 0.18 0.12 14.55 26.07 2.11 21.11 0.63 0.03 0.26 0.16 11.03 35.31 30.78 32.93 0.63 32.30

Gilts

GD

0.36 1.09 2.89 53.86

0.04 0.53 20.28 0.79 1.29 0.19 0.11 15.15 25.89 2.05 20.93 0.59 0.03 0.24 0.12 10.73 36.22 30.37 32.37 0.59 31.78

Barrows

0.01 0.01 0.02 1.20

< 0.01 0.01 0.64 0.02 0.05 0.01 < 0.01 0.68 0.57 0.03 0.67 0.02 < 0.01 0.012 < 0.01 0.73 1.13 0.47 1.22 0.02 0.54

SEM

0.267 0.214 0.268 0.101

0.605 0.518 0.449 0.544 0.627 0.256 0.460 0.469 0.558 0.311 0.334 0.112 0.445 0.357 0.239 0.304 0.521 0.416 0.380 0.112 0.214

Treatment

P value

0.874 0.423 0.217 0.105

0.874 0.423 0.517 0.525 0.497 0.285 0.396 0.581 0.611 0.721 0.495 0.312 0.914 0.395 0.921 0.415 0.254 0.317 0.267 0.312 0.101

Gender

0.415 0.540 0.635 0.241

0.605 0.392 0.540 0.706 0.683 0.292 0.549 0.446 0.550 0.374 0.355 0.332 0.752 0.497 0.801 0.805 0.585 0.753 0.445 0.332 0.508

Treatment x Gender

W. Samolińska, et al.

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

impact on the changes in the total PUFA and in the proportion of n-6 PUFA. Additionally, the G, D, and GD treatments contributed to a decrease in the level of C 20:1 n-9 (P = 0.031). In comparison with the barrows, the gilts were characterised by a higher Σ PUFA (P = 0.047) and Σ n-6 PUFA (P = 0.046) in the LL fat. The GD treatment induced the greatest modifications in the fatty acid content in the fat of fatteners’ livers (Table 7). The highest level of n-3 PUFA noted in the GD group (P = 0.025) was also reflected in the improvement of the TI of the health quality of fat (P = 0.029). All phytobiotic treatments (G, D, and GD) reduced the n-6/n-3 ratio in the liver fat (P = 0.017). The content of fatty acids in the heart fat was the least susceptible to the action of the phytobiotics (Table 8). 4. Discussion The ban on the use of antibiotic growth promoters in the EU countries requires searching for alternative and effective feed additives in animal nutrition (Cho et al., 2012; Yu et al., 2017; Al-Yasiry et al., 2017). Among many biotics available, probiotics, prebiotics, eubiotics, and phytobiotics deserve attention (Grela and Kowalczuk, 2007). They can contribute to stabilisation of gastrointestinal bacterial flora and improve the productivity and quality of animal products (Kiczorowska et al., 2016b; Yan et al., 2011a,b; 2012a,b; Van der Aar et al., 2017). The forms of additives chosen in the experiment, i.e. lyophilised garlic and powdered dandelion root, were used to ensure optimal stability of the bioactive compounds of both additives. The process of lyophilisation of garlic allows maintenance of higher amounts of alliin, i.e. a precursor of allicin, than the drying process (Ratti et al., 2007). In turn, dandelion roots are most often dried and used in this form, as their main component - inulin (up to 45%) is less stable during processes involving high temperatures, low pH, or a combination of these two factors, as well as conditions favouring Maillard reactions, which can potentially reduce the prebiotic activity of inulin (Charalampopoulos and Rastall, 2012). In the present study, lyophilised garlic, dandelion root powder, or a mixture thereof were applied in the feed for fatteners weighing from 25 to 115 kg. The animal performance was substantially improved in the groups receiving the phytobiotic treatments especially in the first stages of fattening. In comparison with the control treatment, the weight gains and the FCR were improved by the addition of garlic alone or in combination with dandelion. Higher production performance induced by garlic supplementation was reported by Yan et al. (2011b), who noted an increased value of ADG and an improved gain/feed ratio in fatteners receiving 2 g/kg of fermented garlic powder to the diet. In turn, Cullen et al. (2005) noted that inclusion of garlic (1 g or 10 g/kg) to the diets of grower-finisher pigs reduced feed intake and improved FCR but had no effect on improvement of ADG. The antimicrobial action of garlic organosulfur compounds is widely known (Cullen et al., 2005; Grela and Klebaniuk, 2007). It probably enhances the activities of pancreatic enzymes and provides a microenvironment for better utilisation of nutrients (Ramakrishma et al., 2003). Such a positive effect on ADG and FCR might be one of the causes of the increased digestibility of nutrients (Cullen et al., 2005; Yan et al., 2011b, 2012a). In the present study, the addition of garlic as well as the garlic and dandelion combination to the diet of growing-finishing pigs clearly improved some carcass traits. In the available literature, Cullen et al. (2005) reported only an inconsiderable effect of addition of garlic (1 g or 10 g/kg) in pigs' diet on improvement of the carcass feed conversion ratio. The inulin and garlic extract addition in drinking water administered to pigs in investigations conducted by Grela et al. (2013) resulted in higher carcass meatiness, including ham percentage and loin eye, and the lowest backfat thickness. Similarly, the combined GD treatment in this study increased the loin eye area and the lean meat yield and decreased the backfat thickness. In turn, the use of garlic only reduced the latter parameter. Omojola et al. (2009) reported that increasing levels of garlic in the diet of pigs (0.50, 1.00, and 1.50%) decreased the backfat thickness. This is probably associated with the ability of garlic to prevent the biosynthesis of lipid and reduce fat lay down (Konjufca et al., 1997; Omojola et al., 2009). The addition of garlic to the feed mixtures increased the liver weight in the G and GD treatments, in comparison with the control. Such an effect of garlic has also been reported by other researchers. Grela et al. (2013) noted that animals that received inulin and garlic extracts had by approx. 34% higher liver weight compared to the control, which was associated with the presence of organosulfur compounds in garlic. It should be noted that this effect in the present study was lower when the combination of garlic and dandelion was applied, which may be related to the hepatoprotective activity of the latter. Dandelion enhances bile secretion and improves liver enzymes and functions (Trojanová et al., 2004; Tabassum et al., 2010; Mir et al., 2012). There are only a few literature reports on the effect of dandelion roots on production performance in pigs. Yan et al. (2011a) found that inclusion of a dandelion leaf extract (1 g/kg) increased ADG and average daily feed intake as well as nitrogen digestibility, compared to the control treatment. In another study conducted by Yan et al. (2012b), inclusion of dandelion (1 g/kg) in diet improved pigs’ growth performance, feed efficiency, and energy digestibility similarly to antibiotic treatment. In the present study, the dandelion root powder inclusion to the pigs’ diet improved ADG in the starting (74–102 days) and growing (103–137 days) fattening period, in comparison with the control. The weight gains noted throughout the fattening period did not differ from those in the control treatments. The growth promoting effect of the D treatment reported in this study was not dependent on an increase in the feed intake, which did not differ significantly from the control treatments. Therefore, the positive effect of the dandelion addition on the growth performance in the growing-finishing pigs may be associated with its effect on gut health and nutrient utilisation (Yan et al., 2011a; 2012b). Trojanová et al. (2004) suggested that dandelion could be used as a prebiotic. Dandelion roots contain high quantities of non-digestible oligofructans, which are utilised by bifidobacteria. The dandelion root used in the present study is primarily considered a gastrointestinal remedy supporting digestive and liver function (Mir et al., 2012). The addition of garlic (G and GD treatments) in swine nutrition yielded meat with a favourable dietary value through reduction of its cholesterol content as well as the cholesterol and fat content in the backfat. A similar effect was reported by Omojola et al. (2009), who found that an increase in the garlic level (0.5%, 1%, and 1.5% of the diet) lowered total cholesterol in muscles. Similarly, Grela et al. (2013) noted a significantly lower cholesterol level in the longissimus muscle upon garlic supplementation. The present study also demonstrated a reducing effect of garlic on backfat, LL, and liver cholesterol levels. The decline in the cholesterol content 12

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

induced by garlic may be related to the reduced liver synthesis of the compound. Saponins contained in garlic may inhibit the key enzymes in the cholesterol and lipid biosynthesis pathways (Konjufca et al., 1997; Amagase et al., 2001). Dandelion also plays a role in reducing cholesterol levels in the blood by intensification of bile secretion, which may be related to the presence of many bioactive compounds, e.g. alkaloids, glycosides, phenolic compounds, flavonoids, and tannins (Mir et al., 2013; Choi et al., 2010). However, the addition of the dandelion root alone (D treatments) did not modify the cholesterol and fat levels in the analysed tissues and organs, which was also revealed in the investigations carried out by Oh et al. (2007). Many studies have reported a possibility of modifying the fatty acid profile in meat with the use of phytobiotic additives (Valenzuela-Grijalva et al., 2017). The administration of the phytobiotic additives (G, D, and GD treatments) exerted an effect on the fatty acid composition in the backfat, LL, and liver fat. The additives increased the proportion of PUFA, including n-3 or n-6 PUFA, in these tissues and reduced the SFA levels in the backfat. Pigs are monogastric animals classified as homolipoid organisms (Shorland, 1950), which indicates that their fatty acid composition reflects the fatty acid composition of their diet. Therefore, feed components used in pig nutrition exert different modifying effects on the fatty acid composition in pig tissues. Dietary manipulation of fatty acid profiles of pork (e.g. inclusion of seed oils or fish oils in a diet) in order to increase its nutritional and dietary values can also lead to unwanted changes. An increased proportion of PUFA in fat can decrease the oxidative stability of pork meat and pork products (Kouba et al., 2003). Increasing the proportion of PUFA in the fatty acid profile of pork tissues may also induce deterioration of its technological quality ("soft fat"). The formation of soft subcutaneous fat begins when the share of C 18: 2 exceeds 15% of total FA (Wood, 1984). In our research, there was no effect of the phytobiotics and their combination on an excessive increase of the C 18: 2 content in fat. Unfortunately, typical nutritional practices applied in intensive swine production contribute to a high n-6 to n-3 PUFA ratio. There are many reports confirming the modifying and concurrently different effects of feed fat on the n-6/n-3 ratio. This was observed by Mitchaothai et al. (2007), who evaluated the effect of dietary beef tallow (5%) versus sunflower oil (5%) on the fatty acid composition in various pig tissues. In all tissues and organs, the ratios of n-6/n-3 and C 18:2 n-6/C 18:3 n-3 were about two to three times higher for pigs fed the sunflower oil diet than for those fed the beef tallow diet. The n-6/n-3 ratio in the backfat was estimated at approximately 9.5 for the beef tallow diet and circa 25 for the sunflower oil diet. Similar changes were observed in the loin and liver. In the present study, we applied feed mixtures based on standard components used worldwide, and the n-6/n-3 ratio in the analysed organs and tissues was relatively high. However, the diet comprised barley, post-extraction soybean meal, or soybean oil, i.e. components that do not contain large amounts of n-3 fatty acids and do not reduce the n-6/n-3 ratio significantly. The phytobiotic additives applied increased the dietary fat indices. The garlic and dandelion combination had the greatest positive effect on the n-6/n-3 ratio, H/H ratio, TI, and AI in the analysed tissues and organs. The use of dandelion alone lowered the n-6/ n-3 ratio in the LL and liver as well. This is in line with the findings reported by Choi et al. (2010), who confirmed that dandelion roots protected against oxidative stress-linked atherosclerosis and decreased AI. Therefore, from a scientific and dietary point of view, it would be worth evaluating the possible beneficial efficacy of both additives introduced to a diet with a modified fatty acid profile or a diet with increased n-3 fatty acid content. 5. Conclusion In conclusion, the supplementation of the lyophilised garlic and its combined administration with dandelion root powder enhances growth performance, especially at the beginning of fattening, and improves carcass traits and the fatty acid composition. The additives also exerted beneficial effects on the cholesterol content in the meat, backfat, and liver and reduced the atherogenic indices in the fat. The results of this study indicate that the combined addition of lyophilised garlic at a dose of 5 g/kg diet and dandelion root powder at 50 g/kg was the most efficient in increasing the growth performance, carcass quality traits, and some indices of nutritional fat quality. Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. References Al-Yasiry, A., Kiczorowska, B., Samolińska, W., Kowalczuk-Vasilev, E., Kowalczyk-Pecka, D., 2017. The effect of Boswellia serrata resin diet supplementation on production, hematological, biochemical and immunological parameters in broiler chickens. Animal 11 (11), 1890–1898. Amagase, H., Petesch, B.L., Matsuura, H., Kausuga, S., Itakura, Y., 2001. Intake of garlic and its bioactive components. J. Nutr. 131, 955–962. AOAC, 2006. Official Methods of Analysis, 18th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, AOAC International, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. Charalampopoulos, D., Rastall, R.A., 2012. Prebiotics in food. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 23, 187–191. Cho, J.H., Zhang, S., Kim, I.H., 2012. Effects of anti-diarrhoeal herbs on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and meat quality in pigs. Asian-australas. J. Anim. Sci. 25, 1595–1604. Choi, U.K., Lee, O.H., Yim, J.H., Cho, C.W., Rhee, Y.K., Lim, S.I., Kim, Y.C., 2010. Hypolipidemic and antioxidant effects of dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) root and leaf on cholesterol-fed rabbits. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 11, 67–78. Cullen, S.P., Monahan, F.J., Callan, J.J., O’Doherty, J.V., 2005. The effect of dietary garlic and rosemary on grower-finisher pig performance and sensory characteristics of pork. Irish J. Agr. Food. Res. 44, 57–67. Dell Inc, 2016. Dell Statistica (data Analysis Software System), Version 13. software.dell.com. (Accessed 2018 January 1). . European Union, 2010. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union, of 22 September 2010. On the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Off. J. Eur. Union L 276, 33–79. Fernández, M., Ordóñez, J.A., Cambero, I., Santos, C., Pin, C., de la Hoz, L., 2007. Fatty acid compositions of selected varieties of Spanish dry ham related to their

13

Animal Feed Science and Technology xxx (xxxx) xxxx

W. Samolińska, et al.

nutritional implications. Food Chem. 101, 107–112. Folch, J., Less, M., Stanley, G.H.S., 1957. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. J. Biol. Chem. 226, 497–509. Grela, E.R., Klebaniuk, R., 2007. Chemical composition of garlic preparation and its utilization in piglet diets. Vet. Med. 63, 792–795. Grela, E.R., Kowalczuk, E., 2007. Herbs in animal feeding. Herba Pol. 53, 361–366. Grela, E.R., Pietrzak, K., Sobolewska, S., Witkowski, P., 2013. Effect of inulin and garlic supplementation in pig diets. Ann. Anim. Sci. 13, 63–71. GreenField, 2018. GreenField – Innovative Natural Food Ingredients. [online] Available at: https://greenfield.eu.com/ (Accessed 16 Sep. 2018). . Kiczorowska, B., Samolińska, W., Al-Yasiry, A.R.M., Kowalczyk-Pecka, D., 2016a. Effect of supplementation of mixtures for broiler chickens with Boswellia serrata on the condition of the gastrointestinal tract and rearing efficiency. Ann. Anim. Sci. 16, 835–849. Kiczorowska, B., Samolińska, W., Al-Yasiry, A.R.M., Kiczorowski, P., Winiarska-Mieczan, A., 2016b. The natural feed additives as immunostimulants in monogastric animal nutrition – a review. Ann. Anim. Sci. 17, 1–21. Kirchgessner, M., Roth, F.X., 1983. Schätzgleichungen zur Ermittlung des energetischen Futterwertes von Mischfuttermitteln für Schweine. J. Anim. Physiol. Nutr. 50, 270–275. Konjufca, V.H., Pesti, G.M., Bakalli, R.I., 1997. Modulation of cholesterol levels in broiler meat by dietary garlic and copper. Poult. Sci. 76, 1264–1271. Kouba, M., Enser, M., Whittington, F.M., Nute, G.R., Wood, J.D., 2003. Effect of high-linolenic acid diet on lipogenic enzyme activities, fatty acid composition, and meat quality in the growing pig. J. Anim. Sci. 81, 1967–1979. Mir, M.A., Sawhney, S.S., Jassal, M.M.S., 2012. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of phytochemicals of Taraxacum officinale. Wudpecker J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2, 1–5. Mitchaothai, J., Yuangklang, C., Wittayakun, S., Vasupen, K., Wongsutthavas, S., Srenanul, P., Hovenier, R., Everts, H., Beynen, A.C., 2007. Effect of dietary fat type on meat quality and fatty acid composition of various tissues in growing–finishing swine. Meat Sci. 76, 95–101. NRC, Nutrient Requirement of Swine, 2012. 11th edn. The National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA. Oh, J.I., Kim, G.M., Ko, S.Y., Bae, I.H., Lee, S.S., Yang, C.J., 2007. Effect of dietary dandelion (Taraxzcum coreanum) and dandelion fermented probiotics on productivity and meat quality of broilers. Korean J. Poult. Sci. 34, 319–327. Omojola, A.B., Fagbuaro, S.S., Ayeni, A.A., 2009. Cholesterol content, physical and sensory properties of pork from pigs fed varying levels of dietary garlic (Allium sativum). World Appl. Sci. J. 6, 971–975. Ramakrishma, R.R., Platel, K., Srinivasan, K., 2003. In vitro influence of spices and spice - active principle on digestive enzymes of rat pancreas and small intestine. Nahrung 47, 408–412. Ratti, C., Araya-Farias, M., Mendez-Lagunas, L., Makhlouf, J., 2007. Drying of garlic (Allium sativum) and its effect on allicin retention. Drying Technol. 25 (2), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/07373930601120100. Rhee, K.S., Dutson, T.R., Smith, G.C., 1982. Effect of changes in intermuscular and subcutaneous fat levels on cholesterol content of raw and cooked beef steaks. J. Food Sci. 47, 1638–1642. Różycki, M., Tyra, M., 2010. Methodology for Tested Fattening and Slaughter Value at Pig Testing Station (SKURTCh). (in Polish) 28. Crakow, IZ PIB, Poland, pp. 93–117. Samolińska, W., Kowalczuk-Vasilev, E., Grela, E.R., 2018. Comparative effect of different dietary inulin sources and probiotics on growth performance and blood characteristics in growing–finishing pigs. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 72 (5), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2018.1505147. Shorland, F.B., 1950. Effect of the dietary fat on the composition of the depot fats of animals. Nature 165 766-766. Sukhija, P.S., Palmquist, D.L., 1988. Rapid method for determination of total fatty acid content and composition of feedstuffs and feces. J. Agric. Food Chem. 36, 1202–1206. Tabassum, N., Shah, M.Y., Qazi, M.A., 2010. Prophlactic activity of extract of Taraxacum officinale against hepatocellular injury induced in mice. Pharmacology online 2, 344–352. Trojanová, I., Rada, V., Kokoska, L., Vlková, E., 2004. The bifidogenic effect of Taraxacum officinale root. Fitoterapia 75, 760–763. Ulbricht, T.L.V., Southgate, D.A.T., 1991. Coronary disease seven dietary factors. Lancet 338, 985–992. Valenzuela-Grijalva, N.V., Pinelli-Saavedra, A., Muhlia-Almazan, A., Domínguez-Díaz, D., González-Río, H., 2017. Dietary inclusion effects of phytochemicals as growth promoters in animal production. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 59 (8), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40781-017-0133-9. Van der Aar, P.J., Molist, F., van der Klis, J.D., 2017. The central role of intestinal health on the effect of feed additives on feed intake in swine and poultry. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 233, 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2016.07.019. Wood, J.D., 1984. Fat deposition and the quality of fat tissue in meat animals. In: Wiseman, J. (Ed.), Fats in Animal Nutrition. Butterworths, London, pp. 407–435. Yan, L., Meng, O.W., Kim, L.H., 2011a. The effects of dietary Houttuynia cordata and Taraxacum officinale extract powder on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics and meat quality in finishing pigs. Livest. Sci. 141, 188–193. Yan, L., Meng, Q.W., Ao, X., Zhou, T.X., Yoo, J.S., Kim, H.J., Kim, I.H., 2011b. Effects of fermented garlic powder supplementation on growth performance, blood characteristics and meat quality in finishing pigs fed low-nutrient-density diets. Livest. Sci. 137, 255–259. Yan, L., Meng, Q.W., Kim, I.H., 2012a. Effects of fermented garlic powder supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics and meat quality in growing-finishing pigs. Anim. Sci. J. 83, 411–417. Yan, L., Zhang, Z.F., Park, J.C., Kim, I.H., 2012b. Evaluation of Houttuynia cordata and Taraxacum officinale on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics, and fecal microbial shedding in diet for weaning pigs. Asian-australas. J. Anim. Sci. 25, 1439–1444. Yarnell, E., Abascal, K., 2009. Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale and T. mongolicum). Integr. Med. 8, 35–38. Yu, Q.P., Feng, D.Y., Xia, M.H., He, X.J., Liu, Y.H., Tan, H.Z., Zou, S.G., Ou, H.X., Zheng, T., Cao, Y., Wu, X.J., Zheng, X.Q., Wu, F., Zuo, J.J., 2017. Effects of a traditional Chinese medicine formula supplementation on growth performance, carcass characteristics, meat quality and fatty acid profiles of finishing pigs. Livest. Sci. 202, 135–142.

14