Gorlov IF, Kalinina NV, Struk EA, Slozhenkina MI, Abramov SV, Drobiazko OYu.

Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2025. Vol. 108. No. 4. Р. 234-246.

doi:10.33284/2658-3135-108-4-234

Original article

Productivity and hatching qualities of eggs after phytoprebiotic feed additive “Quercetinolact” used in the diet of laying hens

 

Ivan F Gorlov1, Natalya V Kalinina2, Evgenia A Struk3, Marina I Slozhenkina4,

Sergey V Abramov5, Olga Yu Drobyazko6

1,2,3,4,5,6Volga Region Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, Volgograd, Russia

1niimmp@mail.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8683-8159

2niimmp@mail.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2094-6154

3niimmp@mail.ru, https:// orcid.org/0000-0001-7456-1933

4niimmp@mail.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9542-5893

5niimmp@mail.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9445-4577

6niimmp@mail.ru, https:// orcid.org/0000-0002-2163-6839

Abstract. The article presents the results of studies on the effect of the new phytoprebiotic additive Quercetinolact of different amounts 0.25; 0.50 and 0.75% in the diet of laying hens on their economic, biological and incubation indicators. The experiment was conducted on 4 groups of laying hens of the Hisex Brown cross (control and three experimental) with 100 heads in each, aged from 20 to 35 weeks. Addition of the new phytoadditive to the feed of laying hens resulted in an improvement in the physiological condition, immune status of the laying hens, an increase in their productivity and gross egg collection during the experiment by 2.7-5.2%, which in total amounted to 994 pieces, and an improvement in the incubation indicators of eggs. The hatchery of chickens increased in the 1st experimental group by 3.6%, in the II and III by 4.4%, the level of incubation defects decreased by the same amount. Hatchability increased in experimental groups I and II by 3.3% and in III by 4.1% due to a reduction in incubation waste of the “unfertilized” category. In the structure of low quality hatching eggs the number of defects in the category "false infertility" decreased by 2.5 times. The amount of waste in the category "infertility" decreased by 0.7-1.5%, and 0.7% less defects were detected in the "blood ring" column, which indicates a decrease in the level of endogenous contamination of eggs using the new phytoadditive and confirms the effectiveness of its use in feeding the breeding herd. The best performance of layers was achieved with the inclusion of Quercetinolactate in the amount of 0.5% in the diet structure.

Keywords: layers, diet, phytoprebiotic supplement Quercetinolact, productivity, egg production, incubation parameters, incubation waste

Acknowledgments: the study was performed within the framework of the state assignment of the State Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products (No 125020701763-0).

For citation: Gorlov IF, Kalinina NV, Struk EA, Slozhenkina MI, Abramov SV, Drobiazko OYu. Productivity and hatching qualities of eggs after phytoprebiotic feed additive “Quercetinolact” used in the diet of laying hens. Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2025;108(4):234-246. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.33284/2658-3135-108-4-234

References

 

  1. Ross Technical Manual. Review of Incubation Methodology. 2009:48 p. [Internet] URL:  https://en.aviagen.com/assets/Tech_Center/BB_Foreign_Language_Docs/RUS_TechDocs/ Ross-Tech-Investigating -Hatchery-Practice_RUS.pdf (cited: 27.07.2025).
  2. Dyadichkina LF, Pozdnyakova NS, Melekhina TA, Tsilinskaya TV, Gura IV, Shevyakov AN, Khrebtova EV, Rebrakova TM, Silaeva AV. Biological Control during Incubation of Poultry Eggs: Methodological Guidelines. 3rd ed., revised and enlarged. Sergiev-Posad: All-Russian Research and Technological Institute of Poultry Farming, Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences; 2014:171 p.
  3. Kuzmina NN, Petrov OYu, Drobot GP, Aleksandrova JA, Kozak SS. Effect of antioxidant "Dihydroquercetin" on the microstructural characteristics of muscle tissues in broilers. Poultry Farming. 2022;12:52-57. doi: 33845/0033-3239-2022-71-12-52-57
  4. Gorlov IF, Slozhenkina MI, Mosolov AA, Shakhbazova OP, Radzhabov RG. The effect of the feed additive "Lactuvet-I" on the egg productivity of quails. Bulletin of Don State Agrarian University. 2022;3(45):84-92.
  5. Khalimbekov ZA, Malakhova LS, Griga OE, Dzhafarov NМО. Influence of the feed additives "Laktomin" and "Laktuvet" on milk yield of goats. Agricultural Journal. 2022;1(15):78-84. doi: 25930/2687-1254/010.1.15.2022
  6. Gorlov IF, Kalinina NV, Slozhenkina MI, Komarova ZB, Rudkovskaya AV, Natyrov AK, Dolzhanov PB, Berezina OA. The influence of a new phytoprebiotic feed additive on economic and biological indicators of broiler chickens. Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2023;106(4):178-190. https://doi.org/10.33284/2658-3135-106-4-178
  7. Dorokhin NA. Influence of  temperature regimes and initial mass of eggs on shrinkage during incubation. Izvestia Orenburg State Agrarian University. 2021;3(89):322-326. doi: 10.37670/2073-0853-2021-89-3-322-326
  8. Duskaev GK, Kvan OV, Sizentsov YaA. The use of phytobiotics in feeding broilers (review). Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2023;106(1):167-182. doi: 10.33284/2658-3135-106-1-167
  9. Zykov SA. Current Trends in Poultry Farming Development. Effective Animal Husbandry. 2019;4(152):51-54.
  10. Kolokol’nikova TN, Lazarets LN, Radchenko MN, Pontan’kova EP, Borisenko SV. How to preserve the quality of hatching eggs during storage? Bulletin of Omsk State Agrarian University. 2019;2(34):81-88.
  11. Kotarev VI, Denisenko LI. The influence of the probiotic additive «Profort» on the indices of the internal organs of young laying hens. Scientific notes of the educational institution "Vitebsk Order of the Badge of Honor" State Academy of Veterinary Medicine". 2020;56(4):35-38.
  12. Kuzmina TN, Zotov AA. Innovative incubation technologies for poultry eggs with automatic control of the main critical parameters: scientific and analytical overview. Moscow: Rosinformagrotekh; 2019:92 p.
  13. Notova SV, Kazakova TV, Marshinskaya OV. The efficiency of probiotics in combination with biocoordination compounds on egg-production of birds. Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2023;106(1):156-166. doi: 10.33284/2658-3135-106-1-156
  14. Okolelova TM, Engashev SV, Salgereev SM. Stress and its prevention in industrial poultry farming. Effective Animal Husbandry. 2021;3(169):112-115.
  15. Sedova YuG. Galina Bobyleva: “There will be no decrease in production volumes for either poultry meat or eggs in Russian Federation. Agrarian Science. 2022;4:8.
  16. Omarov MO, Slesareva OA, Osmanova SO, Abilov BN. Improving feed conversion. Animal Husbandry of Russia. 2019;9:7-9. doi: 10.25701/ZZR.2019.51.64.001
  17. Sharvadze RL, Penzin AA.  The  effect  of  dihydroquercetin  on  the  growth  and  development  of  replacement  laying  Far Eastern Agrarian Bulletin. 2022;16(4):84-92. doi: 10.22450/199996837_2022_4_84
  18. Komarova ZB, Kalinina NV, Slozhenkina MI, Struk EA. Efficiency of influence of prebiotic feed additive on productivity, antioxidant protection and immunological status of hens. Agrarian and Food Innovations. 2023;1(21):42-52. doi: 10.31208/2618-7353-2023-21-42-52
  19. Khan S, Moore RJ, Stanley D, Chousalkar KK. The gut microbiota of laying hens and its manipulation with prebiotics and probiotics to enhance gut health and food safety. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2020;86(13):600-620. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00600-20
  20. Pirgozliev VR, Mansbridge SC, Westbrook CA, et al. Feeding dihydroquercetin and vitamin E to broiler chickens reared at standard and high ambient temperatures. Archives of Animal Nutrition. 2020;74(6):496-511. doi: 10.1080/1745039X.2020.1820807

Information about the authors:

Ivan F Gorlov, Dr Sci. (Agriculture), Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Scientific Director, Volga Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia, tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

Natalya V Kalinina, Cand. Sci. (Biology), Senior Research Fellow, Volga Region Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia, tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

Evgenia A Struk, Cand. Sci. (Biology), Laboratory Assistant-Researcher, Volga Region Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia, tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

Marina I Slozhenkina, Dr Sci. (Biology), Professor, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director, Volga Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia,  tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

Sergey V Abramov, Сand. Sci. (Veterinary), Postgraduate student, Volga Region Research Institute for the Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia, tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

Olga Yu Drobyazko, laboratory research assistant, Volga Region Research Institute for Production and Processing of Meat and Dairy Products, 6 St. named after Marshal Rokossovsky, Volgograd, Volgograd region, 400066, Russia, tel.: 8 (844) 239-10-48.

The article was submitted 05.09.2025; approved after reviewing 05.11.2025; accepted for publication 15.12.2025.

Download