Research Article

Effects of Broiler by-Product-Based Concentrate on Feed Conversion Ratio, Weight Difference and Meat Quality of Bali Local Pigs

I. N. T. Ariana1*, G. A. M. Kristina Dewi2, N. L. P. Sriyani1, I. N. S. Miwada3, T. I. A. S. Ardani4

1Laboratory of Animal Production, Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia; 2Laboratory of Poultry Production, Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia; 3Laboratory of Animal Products Tecnology, Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia; 4Faculty of Technology and Health Sciences, Bali Dwipa University, Bali, Indonesia.

Received | January 06, 2025; Accepted | February 12, 2025; Published | March 05, 2025

*Correspondence | I. N. T. Ariana, Laboratory of Animal Production, Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Ariana INT, Dewi GAMK, Sriyani NLP, Miwada INS, Ardani TIAS (2025). Effects of broiler by-product-based concentrate on feed conversion ratio, weight difference and meat quality of bali local pigs. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 13(4): 782-790.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2025/13.4.782.790

ISSN (Online) | 2307-8316; ISSN (Print) | 2309-3331

Copyright: 2025 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

INTRODUCTION

Bali local pigs are indigenous to the province of Bali, Indonesia, and are classified as lard-type pigs. They have long been raised by the Balinese people as a side business, for utilizing leftover household feed, and as ceremonial livestock (Sudiastra and Budaarsa, 2021; Sumardani et al., 2022; Sabat et al., 2024; Dalle et al., 2024). Bali local pigs require approximately 12 months to reach a body weight of up to 80 kg, whereas purebred or improved pigs can reach a weight of 80–110 kg in just 5–6 months (Candradiarta et al., 2021; Ariana et al., 2023a). Research to enhance the performance, productivity, feed intake, feed conversion ratio (FCR), and blood profiles of pigs through the use of agricultural waste and other feed alternatives has been conducted (Pierozan et al., 2020; Wibawa and Sumadi, 2019; Cuibi et al., 2021; Mahardika et al., 2023; Ariana et al., 2023b; Loan and Phuong, 2024). Efforts to increase the productivity of Bali local pigs, particularly in achieving optimal body weight and meat quality according to their genetic potential, have included the use of commercial concentrate mixtures in their rations (Candradiarta et al., 2021; Dalle et al., 2024). However, feed costs account for 70%–80% of the total cost of pig farming (Ariana et al., 2023a; Vasyl et al., 2024), which presents a significant challenge due to the high price of commercial concentrates and the limited availability of affordable alternative feed sources with comparable nutritional content (Mahardika et al., 2023; Ariana et al., 2023a). Broiler chicken farming generates by- products such as rejected chickens, physically disabled and dead chickens, and litter mixed with spilled feed around the feeding area. These by-products if are not handled properly they will cause serious environmental problems. If processed and handled well, it has great potential as a source of feed concentrate due to safe and their favorable nutritional content (Oka et al., 2023; Ariana et al., 2023b). Research has shown that physical processing, such as grinding into flour, sun-drying, oven-drying, or fermentation, can enhance the nutritional value and safety of broiler by-products for use in animal feed. The resulting product, referred to as Chicken Waste Protein Concentrate flour, contains 39.70% crude protein and a metabolic energy (ME) value of 5110 kcal/kg (Oka et al., 2023). Protein concentrates from chicken farm waste good for use as mixed ration for monogastric animals (pigs) and has been trialled and can maintain the performance and blood profile of landrace pigs (Ariana et al., 2023a, b), and the performance and primal cut of Bali local pigs (Ariana et al., 2023c). The problem of high price of commercial concentrates and the limited sources of alternative concentrates in Bali local pig farms, there is no research on the potential and benefits of concentrates based on broiler farm by-products (BBBC), so it is necessary to try BBBC on Bali local pigs. This research needs to be tried and is the first to try BBBC on Bali local pigs with the aim of evaluating its effect on FCR, weight loss during the time before slaughter (with 12 hours of fasting), and the quality of Bali pig meat.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted for 55 days at the Teaching Farm of the Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Udayana University, using 20 castrated males Bali local pigs in the grower phase. The pigs had an average body weight of 14.39 ± 0.79 kg. Each pig was housed in an individual cage, with feed management tailored to intake, treatment, and the ergonomic needs of Bali local pigs in the grower phase.

Longissimus Dorsi Meat Samples

Meat quality tests were conducted using samples from the longissimus dorsi muscle. A total of 40 meat samples, representing 4 treatments with 10 replicates each, were analyzed. The physical properties of the meat evaluated included water-holding capacity (WHC), drip loss (DL), cooking loss (CL), and pH value. Testing the pH value followed the Ockerman’s method (Soeparno, 2015), which involved dissolving 5 g of a meat sample in 45 ml of distilled water for 2 minutes. The pH meter electrode was then immersed in the solution until a stable reading was obtained. The percentage of WHC was calculated using the formula from Lorenzo et al. (2015) and Soeparno (2015):

Where;

WLc: Weight of cooked sample lost after centrifugation (% of the initial weight of the fresh meat sample).

WLC: Weight lost after cooking (% of the initial weight of the fresh meat).

TM: Total water content of the fresh meat sample, determined by measuring the weight lost after heating at 105°C for 18 hours.

Cooking loss (CL) was calculated as the weight difference between the meat before and after cooking, divided by the initial weight, and expressed as a percentage.

 

Table 1: Nutrient content of commercial concentrate (CP.152 for grower pig fase), and BBBC.

Nutrient (%)	water	ash	CP	Fat	CF	Ca	P	ME K. cal/kg
CC*)	12.0 max	20.0 max	37.0 min	3.0 min	8.0 max	3.0-5.0	1.2-2.0	3654,0
BBBC**)	11.3	10.4	39.7	4.8	8.4	5.2	1.2	5110,0

 

Note: CC: Concentrate comersial for grower pig fase, BBBC: Broiler By-product-Based Concentrate; * Charoen Pokphand Company (2024), **) Oka et al. (2023).

 

Broiler By-product-Based Concentrate (BBBC)

Broiler by-product-based concentrate (BBBC) is a by-product of broiler chicken farming is a protein-rich feed concentrate (Table 1) made from rejected broiler chicken meal and litter meal, mixed with feed spills. In detail, the rejected chickens is cut into small pieces, ground, and ov-en-dried at 70°C for 48 hours. After drying, the meat was ground into meat flour. Litter flour was produced by collecting litter, drying it in the sun until air-dried, and then grinding it into fine litter-powder. To enhance the nutritional value and safety of the feed as a ration com-ponent, the concentrate was fermented using an EM-4 fermenter (Figure 2). The composi-tion of 100 kg of BBBC flour included 66.67 kg (two parts) of litter flour and 33.33 kg (one part) of rejected chicken meat flour. The commercial concentrate used in this study was produced by Charoen Pokphand Indonesia Company, under the product code CP-152 (Char-oen, 2024). This concentrate served as a protein source for pig rations during the grower phase. The nutritional content of CP-152 and BBBC concentrates is shown in Table 1. (Oka et al., 2023).

 

 

Research Design

The study employed a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) (4x5x1) with four treatments, each repeated five times, resulting in the use of 20 Bali local pigs in the grower phase. The pigs had an average body weight of 14.39 ± 0.79 kg. The treatments were as follows:

 

Table 2: Composition of research rations.

Material	Treatment (%)
	T0 (control)	T1	T2	T3
Concentrate Comersial	24*)	16	8	0
BBBC	0	8	16	24
Rice bran	35	35	35	35
Corn	40	40	40	40
Mineral-10	1	1	1	1
Total	100	100	100	100

 

*) Recommended use of commercial concentrates in grower pig rations (animal feed factory, Charoen Pokphand, 2024).

 

• Treatment T0: Ration containing 24% commercial concentrate + 0% BBBC.
• Treatment T1: Ration containing 16% commercial concentrate + 8% BBBC.
• Treatment T2: Ration containing 8% commercial concentrate + 16% BBBC.
• Treatment T3: Ration containing 0% commercial concentrate + 24% BBBC.

The composition and content of the treatment rations are as in Table 2, 3 and Table 4.

 

Table 3: Nutritional content of Bali local pig rations (according to treatment).

No	Nutrient	Units			Treatment*)		Standard**)
			T0	T1	T2	T3
1	Dry mater	%	86.71	87.73	85.59	86.77	-
2	Water content	%	13.29	12.27	14.41	13.86	Max. 14,00
3	Ash	%	6.31	7.12	7.31	7.78	Max. 8,00
4	Crude protein	%	18.86	17.78	17.41	18.56	Min. 15,00
5	Crude fiber	%	6.01	6.87	6.65	7.00	Max. 7,00
6	Crude fat	%	4.61	5.52	5.97	5.78	Max. 7,00
7	TDN	%	84.32	71.61	67.76	79.76	-
8	Metabolise energy ME	Kcal/kg	3027.2	3149.1	3126.3	3354.11	Min. 2900

 

Note: *) Results of Proximate Analysis at Lab. Nutrition and Animal Food, Fapet. udayana University. **) Badan Standarisasi Nasional (SNI). 01-3914-2006 (standard ration for growing pigs).

 

Research Parameters

The research parameters are, final body weight (FBW) namely the body weight obtained at the end of the research, additional body weight (WG) namely the difference between body weight at the end of the study and body weight the beginning of the research, feed consumption (FC) namely the amount of feed consumed during the research, weight during the research, slaughter weight (SW) is the body weight before the pig is slaughtered and 12 hours of fasting, the weight difference (WD=FBW-SW) is the difference between final body weight and slaughter weight after fasting for 12 hours, meat quality (physical and chemical meat) of local Bali pigs in the grower phase as measured by the Ocherman method (Soeparno, 2015; Lorenzo et al., 2015).

 

Table 4: The effect of commercial concentrate substitution with BBBC on FCR and weight difference(WD) of Bali local pigs.

Parameter (kg)	Treatment
	T0	T1	T2	T3	SEM
IBW	14.92a	14,17a	14,01a	14,45a	0,19
FBW	42,90a	43,06a	42,92a	43,19a	0,35
WG (FBW-IBW))	28,92a	28,89a	28,91a	28,74a	0,45
FC	95,84a	98,24a	99,12a	98,14a	0,65
FCR	3,31a	3,40 a	3,42a	3,41a	0,11
SW	38,55a	39,14a	38,79a	38,95a	0,43
WD (FBW-SW) (kg)	4,35a	3,92a	4,13a	4,24a	0,15
WD(FBW-SW) (%)	10,35a	9,10a	9,62a	9,82a	0.15

 

Note: IBW: Initial Body Weight, FBW: Final Body Weight, WG: Weight Gain, FC: Feed Consumption, SW: Slaughter Weight, FCR: Feed Conversion Ratio, WD: Weigh Defference; SEM: Standard Error of the Treatment Means.

 

Statistical Analysis

The research results were analyzed using analysis of variance (one way ANOVA), and if there were significant differences between the treatments (P<0.05), it would be followed by Duncan’s multiple range test at the 95% confidence level (Steel and Torrie, 2017). The analysis procedure usesed SPSS program version 23.0.

Ethical Approval

The study received ethical approval from the Animal Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Udayana University, Bali. The animal ethics approval certificate number is B/174/UN14.2.9/PT.01.04/2024.

RESULTS

FCR and Weight Deffrence

Feed conversion ratio (FCR) is a key indicator of livestock productivity and efficiency in feed utilization. FCR is calculated as the ratio of feed consumed to weight gain achieved during the maintenance period (Pierozan et al., 2016; Pratama et al., 2022). Weight defference (WD) refers to the difference between the final body weight (FBW) at the end of the maintenance period and the slaughter weight (SW) after a 12-hour fasting period.

The effect of substituting commercial concentrate with broiler by-product-based concentrate (BBBC) is presented in Table 4. Substitution 8%, 16%, and 24% BBBC in treatment groups T1, T2, and T3, respectively, did not significantly affect the final body weight (FBW) of Bali local pigs compared to the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). Similarly, no significant differences were observed in weight gain (WG) and feed consumption (FC) among the treatment groups (T1, T2, and T3) and the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). Regarding the feed conversion ratio (FCR), there were no significant differences among the treatment groups (T1, T2, and T3) or between the treatment groups and the control group (T0) (P > 0.05).

Substitutions of 8%, 16%, and 24% BBBC resulted in Bali local pig slaughter weights that were almost identical across treatments (T1, T2, T3) and comparable to the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). The weight difference (WD), calculated as FBW - SW, was 4.35 kg or 10.35% in the control group. In groups T1, T2, and T3, the weight differences were 9.10%, 9.62%, and 9.82%, respectively (P > 0.05). Statistically, the WD values for all treatment groups were similar to the control group (P > 0.05).

Physical Quality of Meat

The physical quality of Bali local pig meat was assessed based on meat pH value, drip loss (DL), cooking loss (CL), and water holding capacity (WHC) (Table 5) (Soeparno, 2015; Ariana et al., 2023b). Substitution of commercial concentrate with 8%, 16%, and 24% BBBC (T1, T2, T3) resulted in similar pH values among the treatment groups, which were also comparable to the control group (T0) (P > 0.05).

 

Table 5: The effect of commercial concentrate substitution with BBBC on meat physical quality of Bali local pigs.

Fhysical quality (%)	Treatment				SEM
	T0	T1	T2	T3
pH	5,75a*)	5,68a	5,55 a	5,51 a	0,03
Drip Loss	10,81b	10,79b	12,77a	11,93a	0,14
Cooking Loss	36,01b	36,36b	40,02a	40,12a	0,15
Water Holding Capasity	35,51a	35,37a	32,98b	33,34b	0,49

 

Note: *)Values with superscripts on the same row are not significantly different (P>0.05); SEM: Standard Error of the Treatment Means.

 

Substitution 8% BBBC (T1) resulted in a drip loss (DL) of 10.79%, which was not statistically different from the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). However, substitutions of 16% and 24% BBBC (T2 and T3) caused an increase in DL, which was significantly higher than the control group (P < 0.05). A similar pattern was observed with cooking loss (CL). Substitutions of 16% and 24% BBBC caused a significant increase in CL (T2: 40,02% and T3: 40,12%) and a corresponding decrease in water holding capacity (WHC, T2: 32,98% and T3: 33,34%) compared to the control group (P < 0.05) Table 5. In general, the effect of BBBC substitution on FCR, WD, and physical quality of Bali local pig meat is as shown in Table 7 and Figure 1.

Chemical Quality of Meat

The chemical quality of Bali pig meat was evaluated based on parameters such as water content, fat content, protein content, and ash content (Table 6). Substitutions of 8%, 16%, and 24% BBBC (T1, T2, T3) resulted in similar water content across treatments, which was also comparable to the water content of the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). A similar trend was observed for ash content, where no significant changes were found among the treatment groups (T1, T2, T3) compared to the control group (P > 0.05). Substitution with 8% BBBC (T1) resulted in a meat fat content of 4.28%, which was lower than that of the control group, though not significantly (P > 0.05). However, increasing the substitution to 16% and 24% BBBC (T2: 5,45%, T3: 5,89%) significantly increased the fat content of the meat, making it higher than the fat content of the control group (P < 0.05).

 

Table 6: The effect of commercial concentrate substitution with BBBC on the meat chemical quality of Bali local pigs.

Chemical quality (%)	Treatment				SEM
	T0	T1	T2	T3
Water	68,70a*)	69,68a	69,80a	69,11 a	0,49
Fat	4,55 b	4,28b	5,45 a	5,89 a	0,15
Protein	23,84 a	23,22a	22,32b	22,12 b	0,17
Ash	2,91 a	2,82a	2,45 a	2,88 a	0,07

 

Note: *) Values with superscripts on the same row are not significantly different (P>0.05). SEM: Standard Error of the Treatment Means.

 

Table 7: The effect of commercial concentrate substitution with BBBC on FCR, WD, and Physical quality of Bali local pig meat (%).

	FCR	WD	DL	CL	WHC
T0	3,31a	10,35a	10,81b	36,01b	35,51a
T1	3,4a	9,1a	10,79b	36,36b	35,37a
T2	3,42a	9,62a	12,77a	40,02a	32,98b
T3	3,41a	9,82a	11,93a	40,12a	33,34b
SEM	0,11	0,43	0,14	0,15	0,49

 

Note: *) Values with superscripts on the same colomn are not significantly different (P>0.05). SEM: Standard Error of the Treatment Means.

 

The protein content of meat in the T1 group was 23.22%, which was almost the same as that of the control group (P > 0.05). However, as the substitution level of commercial concentrate to 16% and 24% BBBC the protein content of the meat decreased significantly (T2: 22,32%,T3: 22,12%), becoming notably lower than that of the control group (T0) (P < 0.05) Table 6. In general, the effect of BBBC substitution on FCR, WD, and physical quality of Bali local pig meat is as shown in Table 7 and Figure 1.

DISCUSSION

FCR and Weight Difference

Substitution with BBBC did not significantly affect the weight gain parameters of Bali local pigs (FBW-IBW) in treatment groups T1, T2, and T3, and these were statistically comparable to the control group (T0) (P > 0.05) (Table 4). This outcome can be attributed to the similar nutritional content in each treatment, particularly in crude protein, crude fat, and ration energy (ME). The high-quality nutritional content of the rations, meeting the pigs’ standard dietary requirements, resulted in comparable weight gains across treatments during the grower phase (P > 0.05).

The crude protein content in the treatments was as follows: T0: 18.86%, T1: 17.78%, T2: 17.41%, and T3: 18.56%. These values exceed the minimum protein requirement for pigs in the growth phase, which is 15.00% (BSN, 2006). Similarly, the crude fat content was below the maximum permissible limit (7%), and the Metabolizable Energy (ME) values exceeded the minimum requirement (2900 Kcal/kg) (BSN, 2006). These findings align with Wibawa and Sumadi (2019); Huu Van et al. (2023), who reported that protein content, especially essential amino acids in the diet, positively impacts weight gain, FCR and performance. Additionally, the use of 24% basal concentrate derived from chicken farm waste in Landrace pig diets significantly increased weight loss during a 12-hour fasting period before slaughter (P < 0.05) (Ariana et al., 2023c). Micro-mineral supplementation in basal diets has also been shown to enhance final body weight, increase weight gain, and reduce FCR (Partama, 2019; Hong et al., 2023). The crude fiber content in the treatment rations, which remained below the maximum allowable limit (7%) (BSN, 2006), may explain the lack of significant effects of BBBC substitution in all treatment groups. Crude fiber, particularly lignocellulosic fiber, can increase villi height and intestinal length, thereby enhancing weight gain and reducing FCR (Agostini et al., 2014; Ardana et al., 2024).

Conversely, Ariana et al. (2023a) reported that substituting 100% commercial concentrate with 100% chicken farm waste concentrate significantly reduced performance parameters in Landrace pigs. This discrepancy may be due to breed differences, as Bali local pigs are indigenous to Bali Province and are adapted to lower-quality feed (Sudiastra and Budaarsa, 2021). Breed differences can influence up to 30% of livestock production (Soeparno, 2015; Marek et al., 2022). In this study, all treatments involved the same breed, sex, age, and cage management, which contributed to statistically non-significant differences (P>0.05) in weight gain and other performance parameters. This aligns with findings from Agostini et al. (2014) and Douglas et al. (2015), who emphasized that livestock and management factors are critical determinants of performance, FCR, and growth in grower- finisher pigs.

Feed consumption is significantly influenced by the palatability and nutritional composition of the ration, particularly the energy-to-protein ratio (ME/CP) (Soeparno, 2015). The rations used in this study had ME/CP ratio exceeding the minimum standard required for pigs in the grower phase (Table 3). The increased feed consumption observed in groups T1 and T2 may be attributed to their lower protein content and higher crude fiber content (P > 0.05). Feed consumption or intake is closely related to the protein and crude fiber content in the diet (Cuibi et al., 2021). When dietary nutritional content is lower, pigs tend to consume more feed to meet their physiological needs. This condition can lead to increased daily feed consumption, subsequently affecting the FCR value and overall pig production. Feed intake and FCR are key production indicators in grower-finisher pigs (Silva et al., 2017).

Almost the same feed consumption and weight gain among treatment groups T0, T1, T2, and T3 (P > 0.05) (Table 4) resulted in no statistically significant differences in feed conversion ratio between treatments (P > 0.05). FCR is determined by the amount of feed intake (FC) and the weight gain (achieved during the study (Silva et al., 2017). Other factors, such as the uniform environment, cage conditions, feed form, and cage density across all treatments, contributed to the lack of statistical significance in FCR values among the groups (Table 4).

This observation aligns with the findings of Pierozan et al. (2016) and Pierozan et al. (2020), who reported that daily feed intake and FCR in growing pigs are influenced by pig welfare, cage density, feed form, and feeding location. They also noted that a cage density of up to 20 pigs per pen and poor pig welfare can negatively affect FCR. Moreover, livestock management plays a crucial role in determining the performance and growth of pigs during the grower-finisher phase (Agostini et al., 2014; Douglas et al., 2015; Mierlo et al., 2021). The balance of amino acids, micro-mineral intake and the dietary combination of UFA-containing sources and natural antioxidants in basal rations has been shown to increase weight gain and reduce FCR and to improve the quantity and quality of the pork (Wibawa and Sumadi, 2019; Partama, 2019; Ardana et al., 2024; Nguyen et al., 2024).

The weight difference (WD), calculated as FBW - SW, was 4.35 kg or 10.35% weight loss during 12 hours of fasting until the pigs were weighed before slaughter (SW) in the control group. Substitution in groups T1, T2, and T3 had no statistically significant effect on WD, with values comparable to the control group T0 (P > 0.05). This consistency can be attributed to the uniform livestock factors, housing, feed form, and feeding methods across all treatments.

Substitution 8% BBBC (T1) resulted in a drip loss (DL) of 10.79%, which was not statistically different from the control group (T0) (P > 0.05). However, substitutions of 16% and 24% BBBC (T2 and T3) caused an increase in DL, which was significantly higher than the control group (P < 0.05). A similar pattern was observed with cooking loss (CL). Substitutions of 16% and 24% BBBC caused a significant increase in CL (T2: 40,02% and T3: 40,12%) and a corresponding decrease in water holding capacity (WHC, T2: 32,98% and T3: 33,34%) compared to the control group (P < 0.05) Table 5. In general, the effect of BBBC substitution on FCR, WD, and physical quality of Bali local pig meat is as shown in Table 7 and Figure 1.

Meat Quality

Physical quality of meat: The meat pH parameters in groups T0, T1, T2, and T3 ranged from 5.51 to 5.75 (P > 0.05), which falls within the normal pH range for pig meat (Soeparno, 2015) (Table 5). The decrease in pH observed in groups T2 (5.55) and T3 (5.51) significantly increased the DL (drip loss) and CL (cooking loss) values while decreasing the WHC (water-holding capacity) value (P< 0.05). The postmortem decline in muscle pH is primarily influenced by the rate of glycolysis and muscle glycogen reserves. Normal muscle pH ranges from 5.4 to 5.8 (Soeparno, 2015; Marek et al., 2022). Feed conversion (FC) in the T1, T2, and T3 treatment rations (Table 4) was higher than in the control ration (P > 0.05), which correlated with the physical quality of the meat (pH, DL, CL, WHC). A higher crude fiber (CF) content in the ration may cause an increase in the pH, DL, and CL of Bali local pig meat (Table 5). These findings align with observations by Soeparno (2015), who reported that the nutrient content of the ration and feed consumption can affect meat pH between 3 to 5 hours postmortem. They also noted that low sodium content in the ration or restricted feed availability can result in higher pork pH and increased feed consumption. Conversely, higher crude fiber content in the ration can reduce meat quality, as evidenced by greater cooking loss (CL) and elevated meat pH. The CL parameter for Bali pig meat remained within the normal range of 1.5–54.5% (Soeparno, 2015). Generally, factors pre-slaughter treatment and combination of UFA-containing sources and natural antioxidants in the pig ration can affect the physico-chemical properties and improve the quantity and quality of the pork (Povod et al., 2021; Nguyen et al., 2024).The relationship between physical quality parameters of Bali pig meat (pH, DL, CL, and WHC) (Table 5) is consistent with findings from Soeparno (2015), who stated that meat with high DL and CL values typically exhibits low WHC, and vice versa.

Such conditions are characteristic of lower-quality meat, as significant nutrient loss occurs during cooking. This is different from the research of Ariana et al. (2023b), that replacing up to 100 percent of commercial concentrate with concentrate based on broiler farm waste can increase pH, drip loss, cooking loss, and reduce the water holding capacity of landrace finisher pig meat. The difference in data is due to breed differences (Douglas et al., 2015; Sumardani et al., 2022).

Chemical quality of meat: The water and ash contents of the treatment groups T0, T1, T2, and T3 were not significantly different, indicating no effect from substituting commercial concentrate with 8%, 16%, and 24% BBBC (P > 0.05). The water content of Bali local pig meat (Table 6) remained within the normal range for meat, 68%–80% (Soeparno, 2015).

The fat content of the meat in groups T2 (5.45%) and T3 (5.89%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (T0) (Table 6) (P < 0.05). This can be attributed to the higher metabolizable energy (ME) of the T2 and T3 rations (ME: 3226 Kcal/kg and 3354 Kcal/kg, respectively) compared to T0 (3027 Kcal/kg). The high energy content in the ration contributed to the increased fat content of pig meat (Table 6), which in turn influenced the higher cooking loss (CL) of pig meat (Table 5). This observation aligns with Soeparno (2015), who noted that animals with higher body fat content produce meat with greater cooking loss (CL).

The protein content of Bali local pig meat in groups T2 (22.31%) and T3 (22.12%) was significantly lower than that in the control group (T0) (P < 0.05) (Table 6). This reduction corresponds to the lower WHC observed in T2 and T3 (Table 5). A decrease in WHC is associated with increased CL, as the release of water from meat carries nutrients and proteins, resulting in reduced protein content (Soeparno, 2015). Fat content in meat is inversely proportional to its protein and water content. The ability of meat proteins to bind water affects the meat’s water content, increasing drip loss (DL) and cooking loss (CL) (Soeparno, 2015). Pre-slaughter factors, including feed treatments, contribute to variations in meat quality (Povod et al., 2021). This is different from the research of Ariana et al. (2023b), that replacing up to 100 percent of commercial concentrate with concentrate based on broiler farm waste can reduce the chemical quality (water, protein, fat and ash content) of finisher phase landrace pig meat. The differences in data are due to breed differences (Douglas et al., 2015; Sumardani et al., 2022).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Substitution of commercial concentrate with 24% BBBC had no effect on FCR parameters, weight difference (FBW - SW), and pH, water content, ash content of Bali local pig meat, the same as the control. Substitution with 24% BBBC caused a decrease in the psycho-chemical value of Bali local pig meat. To maintain FCR values and minimise weight loss of Bali local pigs before slaughter, it is recommended to substitutute commercial concentrates with 24% BBBC. Farmers can substitute up to 8% BBBC without compromising meat quality. Future studies should investigate the long-term effects of BBBC on pig health and productivity.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors express their gratitude to the Dean of the Faculty of Animal Husbandry and the Rector of Udayana University forproviding financial assistance through research grant Number: B/1.177/UN14.4. A /PT.01.03/2024. We hope this financial support contributes meaningfully to the development of the institution, the Faculty of Animal Husbandry, and Udayana University.

NOVELTY STATEMENTS

This study is the first to evaluate the effect of substitution of commercial concentrate with broiler by-product-based concentrate (BBBC) on feed conversion ratio, body weight difference and meat quality of Bali local pig.

AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTIONS

I. N. T. Ariana, was fully responsible for conducting the research and writing the manuscript. G. A. M. Kristina Dewi processed the research data. N. L. P. Sriyani, collected the laboratory data. I. N. Sumerta Miwada and T. I. A. S. Ardani, edited the manuscript.

Data Availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current reserch available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

Ariana INT, Ardana IBK, Warmadewi DA, Putri BRT, Miwada NS (2023a). Replacement of commercial concentrates with 12% closed house waste concentrates making pigs performance remain optimal. J. Vet., 24: 320-327. https://doi.org/10.19087/jveteriner.2023.24.3.320

Ariana T, Djoko K, Bulkaini B, Sumerta M, Dewi AW, Rahayu TP (2023b). Effects of waste-based concentrates from broiler farm on physico- chemical qualities and blood profile of landrace pigs. J. Adv. Vet. Anim. Res., 10(4):579-586.

Ariana INT, INS Sutama, INS Miwada, NLP Sriyani, TIAS Ardani (2023c). Weight loss in slaughter weight and Primal Cut (PC) of Bali pigs in additional feed base from fermented broiler farm by- products. Int. J. Fauna Biol. Stud., 10(6): 28-32. https://doi.org/10.22271/23940522.2023.v10.i6a.995

Ardana IBK, I Ketut S, Anak AGJW, Anak AGOD (2024). Using Lignocellulose Fiber in Feed to Maintain Health and Improve the Growth of Post-Wean Piglets. Online J. Anim. Feed Res., 14: 234-242. https://doi.org/10.51227/ojafr.2024.28

Agostini PS, Fahey AG, Manzanilla EG, O’Doherty JV, de Blas C, Gasa J (2014). Management factors affecting mortality, feed intake and feed conversion ratio of grow-finishing pigs. Animals, 8(8): 1312–1318. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731113001912

BSN (Badan Standarisasi Nasional) (2006). Feed for growing pigs. SNI (Standar Nasional Indonesia). SNI 01-3914-2006.

Candradiarta, IPM, Sumadi IK, Mahardika DIG (2021). Effect of Mixed Supplementation of Amino Acids Lysin, Methionine, and Tryptophan in Low Quality Ration on Performance of Bali Pigs. Majalah Ilmiah Peternakan, 24 (1): 36-41. https://doi.org/10.24843/MIP.2021.v24.i01.p07

Charoen Pokphand Indonesia, Tbk (2024). Code: CP-152 (consentrate for grower fase pigs).

Cuibi H, Daiwen C, Gang T, Jun H, Ping Z, Jie Y, Xiangbing M, Zhiqing H, Hui Y, Quyuan W, Huifen W, Bing Y (2021). Effects of dietary plant essential oil supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and meat quality in finishing pigs. 29:1246-1257. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.13673

Dalle NS, Tukan HD, Nugraha EY, Ndau DWA (2024). The Effect of Using Noni Leaf Meal (Morinda Citrifolia) In Diet with Different Levels on Performance and IOFC Of Pigs. Majalah Ilmiah Peternakan, 27(1): 2024.

Douglas SL, Szyszka O, Stoddart K, Edwards SA, Kyriazakis I (2015). Animal and management factors influencing grower and finisher pig performance and efficiency in European systems: a meta-analysis. Animal, 9(7): 1210–1220. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115000269

Hong S, Zhongcang Q, Yifei W, Jiangwu T, Qi S, Jiahui L, Xiaohong Y (2023). Effects of fermented broccoli stem and leaf residue on growth performance, serum characteristics and meat quality of growing pigs. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr., 1-8.

Huu VN, Nguyen TM, Dinh VD, Phong VN, Long TN, Hoa LT, Thao LD, Tam VTM, Dung NM, Loi BV, Ba NX, Minh Thi TNM, Naoki N (2023). Commercial Concentrate Supplementation in Phan Rang Sheep Diets: Effects on Digestibility Traits, Growth and Carcass Performance. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci., 12(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2024/12.1.1.8

Loan HNVT, Phuong, DNY (2024). Effects Of Supplementing Cultured Cordyceps Militaris Mushroom Mycelia in The Pregnant Sow’s Diet on The Health and Performance of The Mothers and Their Suckling Piglets. Online J. Anim. Feed Res., 14(5): 339-346. https://doi.org/10.51227/ojafr.2024.39

Lorenzo, JM, Cittadini A, Munekata, PE, Dominguez R (2015). Meat Sci., 108.50 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.05.021

Mahardika IG, Anggreni LD, Dharmawan NS (2023). Hematology and Serum Biochemistry of Pigs Fed Purple Sweet Potato Waste. J. Vet., 24 (1): 32-39. https://doi.org/10.19087/jveteriner.2023.24.1.32

Marek K, Kaliniak-Dziura A, Prasow M, Domaradzki P, Litwińczuk A (2022). Meat quality – Genetic background and methods of its analysis. Czech J. Food Sci., 40 (1): 15–25 https://doi.org/10.17221/255/2020-CJFS.

Mierlo KV, Louise Baert L, Bracquené E, De Tavernier J, Geeraerd A (2021). The Influence of Farm Characteristics and Feed Compositions on the Environmental Impact of Pig Production in Flanders: Productivity, Energy Use and Protein Choices Are Key. Sustainability, 13: 11623. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111623

Nguyen HT, Nguyen CK, Ngo DB, Dang ATN (2024). Pork Quality Improvement Through Dietary Supplementation of Ingredients Enriched with Unsaturated Fatty Acid and Natural Antioxidants: New Research Trend. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci., 12 (9): 1716-1730. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2024/12.9.1716.1730

Oka AA, Ariana INT, Ardani DTIAS (2023). Nutritional Content and Microbial Profile of Fermented Broiler Farm Waste Flour. Majalah Ilmiah Peternakan, 26 (3): 181-186. https://doi.org/10.24843/MIP.2023.v26.i03.p07

Partama IBG (2019). Inclusion of dietary multi-mineral-vitamin (“Pignox”) on growth performance in weaned piglet. Int. J. Fauna Biol. Stud., 6(5): 18-22.

Pierozan CR, Agostini, PS, Gasa J, Novais, AK, Dias, CP, Santos RSK, Pereira Jr, M, Nagi JG, Alves JB, Silva CA (2016). Factors affecting the daily feed intake and feed conversion ratio of pigs in grow-finishing units: the case of a company. Porcine Health Manage., 2:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-016-0023-4

Pierozan CR, Dias CP, Temple D, Manteca X, da Silva CA (2020). Welfare indicators associated with feed conversion ratio and daily feed intake of growing-finishing pigs. Anim. Prod. Sci., https://doi.org/10.1071/AN19647

Pratama IMK, Ardana IBK, Budiasa K (2022). Substitution Of Starter Pig Feed with Corn and Soil Worm Flour on its Performance and Economic Value. Buletin Veteriner Udayana, 14: 608-615. https://doi.org/10.24843/bulvet.2022.v14.i06.p02

Povod M, Mykhalko O, Kyselov O, Opara V, Andreychuk V, Samokhina Y (2021). Effects of various pre-slaughter weights on the physico-chemical qualities of pig meat. J. Adv. Vet. Anim. Res., 8: 521–533. https://doi.org/10.5455/javar.2021.h542

Sabat DM, Haryadi FT, Ngadiyono N (2024). Multidimensional Analyses of Motivations for Pig Farming by the Residents of Kupang, Nusa Tenggara Timur, Indonesia. J. Veteriner, 25: 13-20. https://doi.org/10.19087/jveteriner.2024.25.1.13

Silva CA, Novais AK, Santos RKS, Pierozan CR, Agostini PS, Gasó JG (2017). Influuence of production factors on feed intake and feed conversion ratio of grow-finishing pigs. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, 38(2): 997-1007. https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2017v38n2p997

Soeparno (2015). Ilmu dan Teknologi Daging. Edisi Revisi Cetakan ke enam. Gajah Mada University Press. Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Sudiastra IW, Budaarsa DK (2021). Existence of Bali Pig Through the Usaba Sumbu in Desa Adat Timbrah, Karangasem District. Majalah Ilmiah Peternakan, 1: 42-49.

Sumardani NLG, Budaarsa K, Puger AW (2022). Improved Reproductive Performance of Sows Through Weaning Adjustment for Piglets. J. Veteriner, 23(430): 1:64-69. https://doi.org/10.19087/jveteriner.2022.23.1.64

Steel RGD, Torrie JH (2017). Prinsip dan Prosedur Statistika. Penterjemah Bambang Sumantri. Gramedia Pustaka, Jakarta, Indonesia.

Vasyl V, Povod M, Mykhalko O, Verbelchuk T, Verbelchuk S, Koberniuk V, Lavryniuk O, Shcherbatiuk N (2024). the efficiency of pigs from different genetic origins under industrial conditions in Ukraine. J. Anim. Feed Res., 14: 225-233.

Wibawa AAP, Sumadi DIK (2019). The Effect of Essential Amino Acids Use in Corn-Pollard Base Rations on Bali Pigs Performance. Majalah Ilmiah Peternakan 22(3): 104-107.

Widyasari NNAW, Mahardika IG, Dharmawan NS (2021). Haematological and biochemical blood parameters. of bali pigs before weaning raised under traditional and conventional rearing systems. J. Vet., 22: 352-359. https://doi.org/10.19087/jveteriner.22.3.352