Stocking Density and Farm Profitability in Broiler Chickens

Sandro Cerrate, PhD

Credinser LLC, Madison, Alabama

Published: May 14, 2020

     Calculating a proper stocking density will determine the maximum farm profitability in broiler chickens. Choosing the stocking density implies to know the impacts on live performance, and its interrelations with the environment and dietary nutrients. Abundant studies about stocking density run under non-commercial conditions might not indicate the best reliable information to know the farm profitability. As a result, few studies are reliable for commercial purposes. Poultry managers should consider the following points for finding the best economic stocking density: (a) stocking density on live performance, (b) stocking density on farm profitability, (c) dietary energy and amino acids, (d) dietary antioxidants, and (e) additives for replacing antibiotics.

a) Stocking density on live performance

     The stocking density is expressed better in terms of kilograms of body weight per meter square instead of the numbers of birds per meter square because it considers the age and genetic progress. Broiler chickens at high stocking density reduce the body weight and decrease the feed intake slightly. Therefore, the feed convention, adjusted to similar body weight, is elevated as stocking density increases. Moreover, as compared to low stocking density, birds at high stocking density present less breast meat yield1-4, lower feathering covering5, more skin scratches6-8, and higher footpad dermatitis6-8, and generate more heat output9 and litter moisture6-8. Besides, because crowding birds drink more water10 might impact on litter moisture and footpad dermatitis negatively.

     On the other hand, under non-commercial conditions, the stocking density does not affect the mortality statistically. However, a consistent trend indicates that birds with less space died more. Supported this pattern, the broiler chickens in a crowded flock diminish the immunoglobulin affecting the immune system negatively11,12. Even more, broiler chickens under heat stress might die more at increased stocking densities13. Pooling studies1,5-7,11,12,14-26 from 20 to 756 birds per pen and associating the mortality and stocking density (kg/m2) show that birds die by 1.3% more when stocking density augments by 10 kg/m2:

Mortality (%) = 0.47 + 0.126[stocking density, kg/m2]; n = 59; P-value = 0.002

     Linear relationships between stocking density and feed conversion, adjusted to similar body weight, reveal that increasing the stocking density by 10 kg/m2 rises the feed conversion by 0.11 hundredths or 11 points. From 49 studies1-8,10-12,14-51 run by JMP, the slopes between stocking density and feed conversion fitted normal distribution: average = 0.011, standard error = 0.0028, lower confidence interval at 95% = 0.0058, upper confidence interval at 95% = 0.0170. From the 56 slopes, 13 slopes only displayed negative values meaning that the feed conversion decreases as stocking density augments. These opposite trends were due to proper trial variation or probably because birds were reared in battery cages by small number of birds per cage29,40, the feeder space was not a limiting factor4,24, or female presented negative slopes as a contrast to ones from males23.

     From the above slopes and mortality equation, feed conversion and mortality rates, adjusted to 3% of mortality at 33 kg/m2, elevate as stocking density increases (Figure 1). The bird’s competition to reach the feed might hamper them to eat freely, opting for drinking water more instead of eating. Although in the above studies, birds ate with a minimum of 1.7 cm of circular feeder per bird, thus this feeder space did not influence the feed conversion negatively52. Still, more studies are needed to know the best feeder space with current broiler chickens.

Figure 1. Stocking density on feed conversion and mortality.

Stocking density on feed conversion and mortality

Note: Feed conversion = 0.0114x[Kg/m2] + 1.12; Mortality adjusted to 3% at 33 kg/m2 = (0.47 + 0.126x[kg/m2])/(0.47 + 0.126×33)x3.

b) Stocking density on farm profitability

     The stocking density varies by regions, countries, and management conditions. Moreover, the European Union Council Directive 2007/43/EC set limits to 33 kg/m2 from June 2010 onwards. In contrast, many European countries produce the highest profitability above 33 kg/m2. For example, farm profitability was the highest at 48 kg/m2 of stocking density53. In this study, the farm profitability was positive above 46 kg/m2 of stocking density without reaching the plateau at 48 kg/m2. Similar to this condition, in other countries, high stocking densities are operating in closed ventilated houses frequently.

     A poultry model calculated the farm profitability across different stocking density by the following variables: 2.3 kg of target sell weight, a chicken house with 1000 m2, 4 points of feed conversion equals to 1 day, 14 days of empty house, 1.2 $ per kilo of meat composite price, 0.33 $ /kilo of feed, and the feed cost represents 70% of total cost. With the assumption of 4 points of feed conversion, adjusted to similar body weight (FCadj), equals to 1 day and 14 days of an empty house, the model calculated the cycles per year as follows:

Cycles per year = [27.111x(FCadj) – 5.0651 + 14 days]/365

     In Figure 2, the farm profitability in broiler chickens plateaued at 50 kg/m2 following a diminishing return after this density, while the cycles per year decline linearly as stocking density elevates. This stocking density might change when birds died more due to heat stress conditions. Because the model assumes several conditions in this simulation, the poultry manager should calculate the best economic stocking density adjusted to their environment and management conditions without compromise the welfare and mortality. For instance, if poultry farmers sell chickens as carcass processing mainly, the calculation should include the breast meat yield. In this scenario, the model did not include the breast meat variable because the reduction of breast meat by stocking density was not significant with current information, even though producing a negative trend (-0.06 %/ kg/m2).

Figure 2. Farm profitability and cycles per year.

Farm profitability and cycles per year

Note: Profit, $/house/year = body weight per year x 1.2 – feed intake per year x 0.33/0.7. Body weight per year = cycles per year x 2.3 x ((100-mortality)/100))x[stocking density]x1000 m2/2.3. Feed intake per year = cycles per year x feed conversion x 2.3 x ((100-mortality)/100))x[stocking density]x1000 m2/2.3.

c) Dietary energy and amino acids

     Because the high stocking density yields the best farm profitability, the nutrients working at bird crowding conditions will assure the highest profitability. To illustrate, chickens fed vegetable oils under summer conditions produced better feed conversion in birds with less floor space. In this research, the dietary sunflower oil increased from 0 to 2.5%, and energy rose from 3208 to 3366 kcal/kg, while the dietary amino acids were held constant46. On the other hand, in birds under normal environmental conditions, the interaction between stocking density and dietary energy on live performance was not observed54.

     Birds fed more dietary protein enhanced better the body weight gain at 22 kg/m2 than those at 34 kg/m2, 28. In this study, adding protein levels originated from soybean meal and fish oil might generate more bird heat output, and not help in reducing the overall heat from the chicken farm. In contrast, two studies revealed that adding more dietary digestible tryptophan from 0.16% to 0.24% or 0.32% during the grower period resulted in better feed conversion at high stocking density than those at low stocking density (Figure 3). These researches suggest that the tryptophan requirement boosts by 50% or 100% in chickens reared with less floor space17,36, and the synthesis of serotonin from tryptophan might alleviate potential stress factors.

Figure 3. Dietary tryptophan and stocking density on feed conversion.

Dietary tryptophan and stocking density on feed conversion

Note: From Goo et al. 2019b17; dTryp = digestible tryptophan; feed conversion adjusted to similar body weight.

d) Dietary antioxidants

     Chickens under crowding conditions deplete their antioxidant defense mechanisms. For instance, crowding flocks produce more free radicals due to reduced glutathione peroxidase activity and increased malondialdehyde levels9. To overcome this oxidative stress, adding 300 mg of alpha-lipoic acid per kg of feed boosted the antioxidant ability and feed conversion at 48 kg/m2 of stocking density12 (Figure 4). How does lipoic acid provoke those benefits? The lipoic acid plays as a coenzyme catalyzing oxidative decarboxylation of pyruvate, alpha-ketoglutarate, and branched-chain alpha-ketoacids, resulting in low redox potential and neutralizing reactive oxygen species55. More studies using chickens under commercial floor conditions and feeding lipoic acid at both low and high stocking density will add more value to this additive for calculating the farm profitability at high stocking density.

Figure 4. Dietary alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) on feed conversion.

     Vitamin E is another nutrient with antioxidant properties that might impact positively in chickens with less floor space. For example, in broiler chickens fed more vitamin E from 15 to 115 IU/kg, the feed conversion improved by 14 points at 30 kg/m2,42. Though the 15 IU of vitamin E per kilo is higher than the values from NRC (1994)56, this value is lower than recommended by primary breeding companies (> 50 IU of vitamin E/kg), thereby the extra addition of vitamin E at high stocking density remain as a question mark. In this manuscript, the mortality was not affected by adding vitamin E but the immune systems were fortified, suggesting benefits if chickens are growing at crowding conditions.

e) Additives for replacing antibiotics

     In nowadays, the use of additives for replacing antibiotics has expanded in broiler chickens. In particular, chickens fed probiotics show positive results at high stocking density20,45. Similarly, birds fed a combination of probiotic and prebiotic improved the feed conversion by 10 points at 38 kg/m2 of stocking density20. In the latter study, chickens given this feed increased the villus height of the small intestine and diminished stress indicators such as corticosterone and heterophil/lymphocyte ratio. Furthermore, chickens fed this combination, between mannan-oligosaccharides and Bacillus, promoted benefic bacterial in the gastrointestinal tract by increasing the Lactobacillus sp. and reducing Escherichia coli to levels similar to those at low stocking density.

     Chickens fed herbal extract boosted the feed conversion by 9 points at 24 kg/m2 of stocking density and by only 5 points at 10 kg/m2,48 (Figure 5). The low stocking densities used in this study are not a reliable indicator for a commercial purpose. Testing more trials using either herbal extract or essential oils might assure more confidence in using this kind of additives at higher stocking density. According to this, overcrowding broiler chickens fed essential oils declined corticosterone levels57. The addition of organic acid and vitamin above requirements strengthens the live performance in overcrowding chickens. As an example, broiler chickens fed butyrate sodium (500 ppm) and niacin (50 ppm) resulted in 15 points better in feed conversion at 48 kg/m2. However, this trial was run in a battery cage and using only one stocking density58, thus testing on the floor, low, and high stocking density will display more alternatives for commercial purposes.

Figure 5. Dietary herbal extract on feed conversion.

Dietary herbal extract on feed conversion


  • Higher stocking density yields increased feed conversion and mortality in broiler chickens. Further, crowding birds display poor footpad dermatitis, skin scratchers, and feathering covering.
  • Fifty kg/m2 generates the maximum farm profitability under this model condition, but lower stocking densities might result in the highest profit at heat stress or specific commercial chicken houses.
  • Using vegetable oils under heat stress might ameliorate the negative effect of crowding chicken flocks. Further, the addition of dietary tryptophan over the current requirement provides benefits under high stocking density.
  • Dietary antioxidants such as lipoic acid and vitamin E are alternatives for boosting the live performance in chickens with less floor space.
  • Organic acids, prebiotics, probiotics, and essential oils demonstrate positive results in crowding chicken flocks.

The author declares that this article was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Every attempt has been made to ensure that the material in this article is accurate, true, correct, and relevant at the time of writing. However, the author accepts no liability for any omissions, damage, loss, or financial consequences of using this article.

  1. Uzum, M. H., and H. D. Oral Toplu. 2013. Effects of stocking density and feed restriction on performance, carcass, meat quality characteristics and some stress parameters in broilers under heat stress. Revue de Medecine Veterinaire. 164:546-554.
  2. Sun, Z. W., L. Yan, J. P. Zhao, H. Lin, and Y. M. Guo. 2013. Increasing dietary vitamin D3 improves the walking ability and welfare status of broiler chickens reared at high stocking densities. Poult. Sci. 92:3071-3079.
  3. Cengiz, O., B. H. Koksal, O. Tatlı, O. Sevim, U. Ahsan, A. G. Uner, P. A. Ulutaş, D. Beyaz, S. Buyukyoruk, A. Yakan, and A. G. Onol. 2015. Effect of dietary probiotic and high stocking density on the performance, carcass yield, gut microflora, and stress indicators of broilers. Poult. Sci. 94:2395-2403.
  4. Li, X. M., M. H. Zhang, D. M. Liu, J. H. Feng, D. D. Ma, Q. X. Liu, Y. Zhou, X. J. Wang, and S. Xing. 2019a. Effects of stocking density on growth performance, growth regulatory factors, and endocrine hormones in broilers under appropriate environments. Poult. Sci. 98:6611-6617.
  5. Toghyani, M., S. Heidari, and A. Emadinia. 2016. Effect of stocking density and dietary sulfur amino acids on welfare indices of broiler chicks. J. Adv. Agric. Technol. 3:124-127.
  6. Dozier III, W. A., J. P. Thaxton, S. L. Branton, G. W. Morgan, D. M. Miles, W. B. Roush, B. D. Lott, and Y. Vizzier-Thaxton. 2005. Stocking density effects on growth performance and processing yields of heavy broilers. Poult. Sci. 84:1332-1338.
  7. Dozier III, W. A., J. P. Thaxton, J. L. Purswell, H. A. Olanrewaju, S. L. Branton, and W. B. Roush. 2006. Stocking density effects on male broilers grown to 1.8 kilograms of body weight. Poult. Sci. 85:344-351.
  8. Ly, K., 2018. Effect of bedding materials and stocking density on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and contact dermatitis in broiler chickens. PhD Diss. Prince of Songkla Univ. Thailand.
  9. Simsek G., B. Dalkilic, M. Ciftci and A. Yuce. 2009. The Influences of different stocking densities on some welfare indicators, lipid peroxidation (MDA) and antioxidant enzyme activities (GSH, GSH-Px, CAT) in broiler chickens. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 8:1568-1572.
  10. Feddes, J. J., E. J. Emmanuel, and M. J. Zuidhoft. 2002. Broiler performance, body weight variance, feed and water intake, and carcass quality at different stocking densities. Poult. Sci. 81:774-779.
  11. Astaneh, I. Y., M. Chamani, S. N. Mousavi, A. A. Sadeghi, and M. A. Afshar. 2018. Effects of stocking density on performance and immunity in Ross 308 Broiler Chickens. Kafkas Univ. Vet. Fak. Derg. 24:483-489.
  12. Li, W., F. Wei, B. Xu, Q. Sun, W. Deng, H. Ma, J. Bai, and S. Li. 2019b. Effect of stocking density and alpha-lipoic acid on the growth performance, physiological and oxidative stress and immune response of broilers. Asian-Australas J. Anim. Sci. 32:1914-1922.
  13. Pettit-Riley, R. and I. Estevez. 2001. Effects of density on perching behavior of broiler chickens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 71:127-140.
  14. Ventura, B. A., F. Siewerdt, and I. Estevez. 2010. Effects of barrier perches and density on broiler leg health, fear, and performance. Poult. Sci. 89:1574-1583.
  15. Shakeri, M., I. Zulkifli, A. F. Soleimani, E. L. O’Reilly, P. D. Eckersall, A. A. Anna, S. Kumari, and F. F. J. Abdullah. 2014. Response to dietary supplementation of L-glutamine and L-glutamate in broiler chickens reared at different stocking densities under hot, humid tropical conditions. Poult. Sci. 93:2700-2708.
  16. Farhadi, D., and S. M. Hosseini. 2016. Evaluation of growth performance, carcass characteristics, litter quality and foot lesions of broilers reared under high stocking densities. Iran J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 6:187-194.
  17. Goo, D., J. H. Kim, G. H. Park, J. B. Delos Reyes, and D. Y. Kil. 2019b. Effect of stocking density and dietary tryptophan on growth performance and intestinal barrier function in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 98:4504-4508.
  18. Skrbic, Z., Z. Pavlovski, M. Lukić, V. Petričević, M. Đukić-Stojčić, and D. Žikić. 2011. The effect of stocking density on individual broiler welfare parameters: 2. Different broiler stocking densities. Biotechnol. Anim. Husbandry. 27:17-24.
  19. Adeyemo, G. O., O. O. Fashola, and T. I. Ademulegun. 2016. Effect of stocking density on the performance, carcass yield and meat composition of broiler chickens. Br. Biotechnol. J. 14:1-7.
  20. Kridtayopas, C., C. Rakangtong, C., Bunchasak, and W. Loongyai. 2019. Effect of prebiotic and synbiotic supplementation in diet on growth performance, small intestinal morphology, stress, and bacterial population under high stocking density condition of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 98:4595-4605.
  21. Marewad, R. D., M. V. Dhumal, and M. G. Nikam. 2016. Studies on different stocking densities on performance and economics of broiler chicken. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Res. 6:359-370.
  22. Puron, D., R. Santamaria, J. C. Segura, and J. L. Alamilla. Broiler performance at different stocking densities. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 4:55-60.
  23. Bilgili, S. F., and J. B. Hess. 1995. Placement density influences broiler carcass grade and meat yields. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 4:384-389.
  24. Cravener, T. L., W. B. Roush, and M. M. Mashaly. 1992. Broiler production under varying population densities. Poult. Sci. 71:427-433.
  25. Proudfoot, F.G., 1973. Response of broilers to variations in waterer, feeder, and floor space under continuous and intermittent photoperiods. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 53:349-354.
  26. Farhadi, D., S. M. Hosseini, and B. T. Dezfuli. 2016. Effect of house type on growth performance, litter quality and incidence of foot lesions in broiler chickens reared in varying stocking density. J. BioSci. Biotech. 5:69-78.
  27. Beloor, J., H. K. Kang, Y. J. Kim, V. K. Subramani, I. S. Jang, S. H. Sohn, and Yang Soo Moon. 2010. The effect of stocking density on stress related genes and telomeric length in broiler chickens. Asian-Australas J. Anim. Sci. 23:437-443.
  28. Houshmand, M., K. Azhar, I. Zulkifli, M. H. Bejo, and A. Kamyab. 2012. Effects of prebiotic, protein level, and stocking density on performance, immunity, and stress indicators of broilers. Poult. Sci. 91:393-401.
  29. Najafi, P., I. Zulkifli, N. A. Jajuli, A. S. Farjam, S. K. Ramiah, A. A. Amir, E. O’Reily, and D. Eckersall. 2015. Environmental temperature and stocking density effects on acute phase proteins, heat shock protein 70, circulating corticosterone and performance in broiler chickens. Int. J. Biometeorol. 59:1577-1583.
  30. Azzam, M. M. M., and M. R. El-Gogary. 2015. Effects of dietary threonine levels and stocking density on the performance, metabolic status and immunity of broiler chickens. Asian J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 10:215-225.
  31. Goo, D., J. H. Kim, H. S. Choi, G. H. Park, G. P. Han, and D. Y. Kil. 2019a. Effect of stocking density and sex on growth performance, meat quality, and intestinal barrier function in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 98:1153-1160.
  32. Chegini, S., A. Kiani, B. Parizadian Kavan, and H. Rokni. 2019. Effects of propolis and stocking density on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and immune system of heat-stressed broilers. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 18:868-876.
  33. Ali, A. H. H. 2013.Productive performance and immune response as affected by broiler stocking density. Egypt. Poult. Sci. J. 33:795-804.
  34. Zuowei, S., L. Yan, L. Yuan, H. Jiao, Z. Song, Y. Guo, and H. Lin. 2011. Stocking density affects the growth performance of broilers in a sex-dependent fashion. Poult. Sci. 90:1406-1415.
  35. Sirri, F., G. Minelli, E. Folegatti, S. Lolli, and A. Meluzzi. 2017. Foot dermatitis and productive traits in broiler chickens kept with different stocking densities, litter types and light regimen. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 6:734-736.
  36. Wang, B., Z. Min, J. Yuan, B. Zhang, and Y. Guo. 2014. Effects of dietary tryptophan and stocking density on the performance, meat quality, and metabolic status of broilers. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechno. 5:44.
  37. Vargas-Galicia, A. J., E. Sosa-Montes, L. T. Rodríguez-Ortega, A. Pro-Martinez, C. A. Ruiz-Feria, F. González-Cerón, J. Gallegos-Sánchez, J., Arreola-Enríquez, and J. Bautista-Ortega. Effect of litter material and stocking density on bone and tendon strength, and productive performance in broilers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 97:673-682.
  38. Lallo, C. H., M. Williams, M., Campbell, and D. W. Palmer. 2012. The effect of stocking density on the performance and economic implications for broilers grown to 42 days in open sided house in Trinidad. Trop. Agric. Trinidad. 89:170.
  39. Khosravinia, H. 2015. Effect of dietary supplementation of medium-chain fatty acids on growth performance and prevalence of carcass defects in broiler chickens raised in different stocking densities. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 24:1-9.
  40. El-Gogary, M. R. and M. Azzam. 2014. Effects of dietary tryptophan levels and stocking density during the growing‐finishing phase on broiler performance and immunity. Asian J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 9:568-577.
  41. Abouelenien, F. A., F. Khalf-Alla, T. Mousa Balabel, S. El-Midany, and M. A. E. L. Nasser. 2016. Effect of stocking density and bird age on air ammonia, performance and blood parameters of broilers. World Vet. J. 6:130-136.
  42. Desoky, A. A., 2018. Growth performance and immune response of broiler chickens reared under high stocking density and vitamin E supplementation. Egypt. Poult. Sci. J. 38:607-620.
  43. Cengiz, O., B. H. Köksal, O. Tatlı, E. Kuter, U. Ahsan, G. Güven, O. Sevim, S. F. Bilgili, and A. G. Onol. 2018. Supplemental boric acid does not prevent the development of footpad dermatitis in broilers subjected to high stocking density. Poult. Sci. 97:4342-4350.
  44. Heidari, S., and M. Toghyani. 2018. Effect of Stocking Density and Methionine Levels on Growth Performance and Immunity of Broiler Chicks. Iran. J. Appl. Anim. Sci. 8:483-489.
  45. Mahmoud, R. M., and T. K. El-Rayes. 2016. Effect of stocking density and probiotic supplementation on broiler performance. J. Anim. Poult. Prod. 7:491-497.
  46. Rabie, M. H., E. S. H. Abo-Egla, F. S. A. Ismail, and S. K. Sherif. 2013. Effect of dietary sunflower oil on growth performance of broiler chicks kept at two cage densities during summer season. J. Anim. Poult. Prod. 4:395-409.
  47. Casteel, E. T., J. L. Wilson, R. J. Buhr, and J. E. Sander. 1994. The influence of extended posthatch holding time and placement density on broiler performance. Poult. Sci. 73:1679-1684.
  48. Choi, H-S., K-H. Kim, S-H. Park, I-I., Nam, S-G. Hwang, and K-T. Nam. 2010. Effects of dietary supplementation of oriental herb extract on growth performance and proliferation of splenocytes under high density stocking condition in broiler chickens. Korean J. Org. Agric. 18:387-399.
  49. Abudabos, A. M., E. M. Samara, E. O. S. Hussein, M. Q. Al-Ghadi, and R. M. Al-Atiyat. Impacts of stocking density on the performance and welfare of broiler chickens. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2:66-71.
  50. Sekeroglu, A., M. Sarica, M. S. Gulay, and M. Duman. 2011. Effect of stocking density on chick performance, internal organ weights and blood parameters in broilers. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 0:246-250.
  51. Kayula, M. 2004. The performance of Cobb 500 broilers under varying stocking densities. Thesis. Univ. Zambia. Zambia.
  52. Malone, G. W., G. W. Chaloupka, J. W. Merkley, and L. H. Littlefield. 1980. The effect of feeder space and light treatment on broiler performance. Poult. Sci. 59:2697-2702.
  53. Verspecht, A., F. Vanhonacker, W. Verbeke, J. Zoons, and G. Van Huylenbroeck. 2011. Economic impact of decreasing stocking densities in broiler production in Belgium. Poult. Sci. 90:1844-1851.
  54. Goldflus, F., J. Ariki, S. N. Kronka, N. K. Sakomura, and V. M. B. Moraes. 1997. Effects of stocking density and energy of the diet on the performance of broilers. R. Bras. Zootec. 26:310-315.
  55. Bilska A, and L. Wlodek. 2005. Lipoic acid – the drug of the future?. Pharmacol. Rep. 57:570‐577.
  56. 1994. National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of domestic animals. Nutrient requirements of poultry, 9th revised Edition, National Academy Press. Washington, DC., USA.
  57. Hosseini, S. M., H. Farhangfar, and R. Nourmohammadi. 2018. Effects of a blend of essential oils and overcrowding stress on the growth performance, meat quality and heat shock protein gene expression of broilers. Br. Poult. Sci. 59:92-99.
  58. Wu, Y., Y. Wang, D. Yin, W. Wu, X. Sun, Y. Zhang, X. Guo, J. Chen, and J. Yuan. 2019. Effect of supplementation of nicotinamide and sodium butyrate on the growth performance, liver mitochondrial function and gut microbiota of broilers at high stocking density. Food Funct. 10:7081-7090.

Leave a Reply