Vitamin compositions of the plants
The vitamins analysis of the extracts showed that the plant contained the following vitamins: vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin B1, vitamin B2, vitamin B3, vitamin B6 and vitamin B12 in different proportions, as presented in Table 1. There were significant differences (p < 0.05) observed across the extracts for each of vitamin E, vitamin C, vitamin D and vitamin B3. The vitamin A content of the aqueous extract was not significantly different (p > 0.05) from that of the ethanol extract.
Again, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were noticed in the extracts for vitamin B1, and vitamin B6 respectively. Furthermore, it was observed that the vitamin C content of the aqueous was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that of the ethanol extract. On the other hand, the ethanol extract was high in vitamin A, vitamin E and vitamin D compared to the levels of these vitamins in the aqueous extract.
Table 1
Vitamin composition of leaf-extracts of J. secunda
|
J. secunda (Aqueous)
|
J. secunda (Ethanol)
|
SEM
|
P
|
Vitamin A (µg/g)
|
72.756a
|
73.644a
|
0.2780
|
0.013
|
Vitamin E (µg/g)
|
29.725b
|
68.206a
|
0.3495
|
0.000
|
Vitamin C (µg/g)
|
88.115a
|
87.096b
|
0.2229
|
0.002
|
Vitamin D (µg/g)
|
24.026b
|
38.362a
|
0.2831
|
0.000
|
Vitamin B1 (mg/g)
|
0.158a
|
0.168a
|
0.0397
|
0.807
|
Vitamin B2 (mg/g)
|
0.1587b
|
0.213a
|
0.0113
|
0.001
|
Vitamin B3 (mg/g)
|
3.5868b
|
4.392a
|
0.2111
|
0.005
|
Vitamin B6 (mg/g)
|
0.625 a
|
0.595a
|
0.0979
|
0.767
|
Vitamin B12 (mg/g)
|
0.163a
|
0.047b
|
0.0356
|
0.012
|
Different letters indicate significant difference across the row (p < 0.05), where a > b
Mineral compositions of the plant
The results of the mineral compositions of the extracts are shown in Table 2. The study showed that calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, phosphorus, iron, arsenic, zinc, copper, selenium and molybdenum were present in both the ethanol and aqueous extracts of the plant. Manganese and cobalt were also present in aqueous extract but not in the ethanol extract of the plant. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed across the leaf-extracts for magnesium, sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, molybdenium, arsenic, selenium, cobalt, manganese and copper contents of the plant.
Table 2
Mineral composition of the leaf-extracts of J. secunda
Parameters
|
J. secunda (aqueous)
|
J. secunda (ethanol)
|
SEM
|
P
|
Copper (mg/g)
|
0.135b
|
0.147a
|
0.0029
|
0.004
|
Magnesium (mg/g)
|
5.337b
|
5.612a
|
0.0318
|
0.000
|
Sodium (mg/g)
|
2.289b
|
3.920a
|
0.0047
|
0.000
|
Potassium (mg/g)
|
8.888b
|
9.071a
|
0.0314
|
0.000
|
Molybdenum (mg/g)
|
0.043a
|
0.028b
|
0.0026
|
0.000
|
Calcium (mg/g)
|
0.473b
|
8.084a
|
0.0242
|
0.000
|
Iron (mg/g)
|
5.183a
|
5.002b
|
0.0411
|
0.002
|
Selenium (mg/g)
|
0.642a
|
0.488b
|
0.0090
|
0.000
|
Phosphorus (mg/g)
|
0.001b
|
0.006a
|
0.0017
|
0.000
|
Zinc (mg/g)
|
1.989a
|
1.442b
|
0.0407
|
0.000
|
Cobalt (mg/g)
|
0.117a
|
NIL
|
0.0017
|
0.000
|
Manganese (mg/g)
|
0.206a
|
NIL
|
0.0030
|
0.000
|
Nickel (mg/g)
|
0.007a
|
0.001b
|
0.0010
|
0.001
|
Arsenic (mg/g)
|
0.0833a
|
0.062b
|
0.0016
|
0.000
|
Different letters indicate significant difference across the row (p < 0.05), where a>b.
Phytochemical compositions of the plants
The results of the phytochemical contents of the extracts are shown in Table 3. It was observed that flavanones, flavan-3-ol, flavones, tannins, phenols, oxalate, sapogenin, kaempferol, steroids, epicatechin, epihendrine, naringenin, and lunamarin were contained in the aqueous and ethanol extracts of the plant in different proportions.
The results further showed that phytate was contained in aqueous extract but not in the ethanol extract of J. secunda. It was observed that these phytochemicals: flavones, phenols, sapogenin, tannins, anthocyanin, steroids, and quinine were not significantly different (p > 0.05) across the extracts. Again, the result showed that the aqueous leaf-extract of J. secunda contained significantly higher (p < 0.05) values of flavan-3-ol, flavonones, phenols, sapogenin, phytate and steroids compared to the ethanol extracts of the plant
Table 3
Phytochemical composition of the leaf-extracts of J. secunda
|
J. secunda (Aqueous)
|
J. secunda (Ethanol)
|
SEM
|
P
|
Flavan-3-ol (µg/ml)
|
20.796a
|
13.879b
|
0.1867
|
0.000
|
Flavone (µg/ml)
|
5.97b
|
17.880a
|
0.2108
|
0.000
|
Flavonones (µg/ml)
|
12.672a
|
11.293b
|
0.3090
|
0.002
|
Phenol (µg/ml)
|
18.763a
|
9.359b
|
0.1907
|
0.000
|
Oxalate (µg/ml)
|
6.655b
|
7.728a
|
0.2955
|
0.007
|
Sapogenin (µg/ml)
|
24.195a
|
11.407b
|
0.3176
|
0.000
|
Phytate (µg/ml)
|
11.234a
|
NIL
|
0.2506
|
0.000
|
Tannins (µg/ml)
|
13.665b
|
34.041a
|
0.3196
|
0.000
|
Kaempferol (µg/ml)
|
17.0724b
|
28.596a
|
0.2621
|
0.000
|
Proanthocyanin (µg/ml)
|
7.963a
|
7.412a
|
0.1671
|
0.070
|
Anthocyanin (µg/ml)
|
NIL
|
17.605a
|
0.0939
|
0.000
|
Steroids (µg/ml)
|
8.815a
|
4.259b
|
0.2587
|
0.000
|
Epicatechin (µg/ml)
|
3.784 a
|
2.832b
|
0.4013
|
0.045
|
Catechin (µg/ml)
|
25.538a
|
NIL
|
0.2415
|
0.000
|
Epihendrine (µg/ml)
|
6.629b
|
9.393a
|
0.3990
|
0.000
|
Ribalinidine (µg/ml)
|
15.748b
|
18.990a
|
0.2832
|
0.000
|
Naringenin (µg/ml)
|
20.521a
|
6.802b
|
0.2124
|
0.000
|
Naringin (µg/ml)
|
4.160a
|
NIL
|
0.2147
|
0.000
|
Rutin (µg/ml)
|
11.492b
|
14.434a
|
0.3783
|
0.000
|
Lunamarin (µg/ml)
|
10.275b
|
12.223a
|
0.2092
|
0.000
|
Quinine (µg/ml)
|
12.230a
|
4.663b
|
0.1878
|
0.000
|
Spartein (µg/ml)
|
NIL
|
3.751a
|
0.2387
|
0.000
|
Different letters indicate significant difference across the row (p < 0.05), where a > b > c > d
Acute toxicity test
Oral administration of 2.0 g/l of the leaf-extracts and equal volume of distilled water produced no death or any sign of toxicity after 48 h.
Carcass yield and meat quality
The chickens had weight gain values that were dependent on the dose of the extracts administered. The weight gain of the groups given aqueous extracts increased with increasing concentrations, whereas, that of the groups fed ethanol extracts increased with decreasing concentrations as shown in Figure 1. The group fed 0.75 g/l aqueous of J. secunda leaf-extract had the highest weight gain value of 3.0177 ± 0.1155. The least weight gain was observed at the negative control group which had a value of 2.0847 ± 0.1158 that was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the weight gain values obtained from other groups.
It was also observed that the groups that were given 0.75 g/l aqueous extract had weight gain values that were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the groups fed 0.50 g/l aqueous extract. It was further observed that the weight gain values of the groups given 0.75 g/l and 0.50 g/l aqueous extract were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the weight gain values of other groups. The weight gain values of the groups fed the extracts were not significantly different from the values of the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The specific growth rate values obtained, were dependent on the dose of the extracts administered. The groups given aqueous extracts had specific growth rate values that increased with increasing concentrations, whereas, the groups fed ethanol extracts gave specific growth rate values that increased with decreasing concentrations. The group fed 0.75 g/l aqueous leaf-extract of J. secunda had the highest specific growth rate value of 7.39 ± 0.067. The least SGR was observed at the negative control group which had a value of 6.75 ± 0.110 that was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the specific growth rate obtained from other groups. Also, it was observed that the groups that were given 0.75 g/l and 0.50 g/l aqueous extracts had SGR that were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the groups fed with ethanol extracts. The specific growth rate values of the groups fed aqueous extracts were not significantly different from the SGR of the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The highest drip loss observed after the experiment was 5.0 ± 0.8824 % for the negative control group. This value was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained for the other groups. No drip loss was recorded for the groups fed aqueous leaf-extracts and the groups fed commercial growth promoters. Again, groups fed ethanol extracts had drip losses that were higher than those observed for the groups fed aqueous extracts. Nevertheless, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed in the drip losses of all the test groups.
The cooking losses observed from the study were dependent on the dose of the extracts administered. The groups given aqueous leaf-extracts had cooking loss values that increased with decreasing concentrations, whereas, the groups fed ethanol extracts gave cooking loss values that increased with increasing concentrations. It was observed from the study that none of the groups had up to 50 % cooking loss. The negative control group had the highest cooking loss value of 45.0110 ± 1.1492 % which was significantly higher than the cooking losses obtained in other groups. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) observed in the cooking loss values of the test groups.
Blood protein
The total protein values of the groups increased with reducing concentration of the leaf-extracts as presented in Figure 2. The least TP value was observed at the negative control group with a value of 19.32 ± 0.877 g/l, which was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the values observed for the other groups. Again, the results showed that the groups fed 0.25 g/l aqueous leaf-extracts of the plant, had total protein values that were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained for the groups fed commercial growth promoters. Also, it was observed that the groups fed aqueous extracts gave TP values that were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained in the groups fed ethanol extracts.
The highest albumin value of 4.265 ± 0.064 g/l was obtained at the group fed 0.25 g/l aqueous extracts of J. secunda. This value was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the albumin values of the other groups. The negative control group gave the least albumin value of 1.39 ± 0.071 g/l, which was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the values for the groups fed aqueous leaf-extracts of the plants, and the groups fed commercial growth promoters. Again, the results showed that the groups fed aqueous extracts of the plants had significantly higher (p < 0.05) albumin values compared to the groups fed ethanol leaf-extracts.
The groups fed 0.25 g/l aqueous leaf-extracts J. secunda, with a globulin value of 40.715 ± 0.163 g/l, was observed to have the highest globulin value. The least globulin value was observed at the negative control group with a value of 17.93 ± 0.806 g/l that was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the values obtained for other groups. Again, the results showed that the groups fed 0.25 g/l and 0.50 g/l aqueous extracts of J. secunda, had globulin values that were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
Hematological indices
It was observed that the hemoglobin values decreased with decreasing concentrations as presented in Figure 3. The highest hemoglobin values were obtained at the group fed 0.75 g/l aqueous extract of J. secunda with a value of 9.17 ± 0.707 g/l. The negative control group gave the least hemoglobin value of 6.165 ± 0.233 g/l which was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than the values obtained in the groups fed aqueous extract, and the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
Again, the groups fed aqueous extract had significantly higher (p < 0.05) hemoglobin values compared to the groups fed ethanol extract of the plant. Similarly, the hemoglobin values of groups fed aqueous extract were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the hemoglobin values of the groups fed commercial growth promoters, whereas the groups fed ethanol extract gave hemoglobin values that were significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the values obtained for the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The highest RBC values were obtained at groups fed 0.75 g/l ethanol leaf-extract of J. secunda and 0.75 g/l aqueous leaf-extract of J. secunda, with values of 7.85 ± 0.778 x109/l and 6.7 ± 0.283 x109/l respectively which were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from each other. Again, the negative control group gave the least RBC value of 2.05 ± 0.212 x109/l which was significantly different (p < 0.05) from the values obtained in the groups fed the extracts.
The highest value of WBC was obtained at the negative control group with an WBC count of 18.5 ± 0.707 which was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained in the groups fed aqueous extracts and the groups fed albiovit. Again, it was observed that the groups fed 0.75 g/l and 0.50 g/l aqueous extracts had significantly lower (p < 0.05) WBC count when compared to the groups fed ethanol extracts. Similarly, the groups fed commercial growth promoters gave WBC values that were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the values obtained in the groups fed ethanol leaf-extracts and the groups fed 0.25 g/l aqueous extracts.
The highest PCV was obtained at the group fed 0.75 g/l aqueous extract of J. secunda (27.5 ± 0.707). The negative control group gave a PCV of 15 ± 0.001 that was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the values obtained in the other groups. Again, the groups fed aqueous extracts had PCV that were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained in the groups fed ethanol extracts. Whereas, the PCV of groups fed aqueous extracts were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the PCV of the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The negative control group had the highest neutrophil value of 10 ± 0.001 which was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained in the groups fed aqueous extracts and the groups fed commercial growth promoters. The group fed 0.25 g/l aqueous extract of J. secunda had the least neutrophil values observed in the study. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) observed in the neutrophil values of the groups fed aqueous extracts, the groups fed ethanol extracts, and the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The various treatment groups gave eosinophil values that were dependent on the dose of the leaf-extracts administered. The groups given aqueous extracts had eosinophil values that increased with decreasing concentrations, whereas, the groups fed ethanol extracts gave eosinophil values that increased with increasing concentrations. It was observed that the negative control group had the highest eosinophil value of 5.0 ± 0.001 which was significantly different (p < 0.05) from the values obtained in the other groups. Moreover, it was observed that the eosinophil values of groups fed aqueous extracts were not significantly different (p > 0.05) from the values of the groups fed ethanol extracts and the groups fed commercial growth promoters.
The various treatment groups gave lymphocyte values that were dependent on the dose of the extracts administered as it increased with the decreasing concentrations of the aqueous extract, but decreased with the decreasing concentration of the ethanol extract. It was observed that the negative control group had the highest lymphocyte value of 5.0 ± 0.001 which was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the values obtained for the other groups. Again, the lymphocyte values of the groups given aqueous extracts were not significantly different (p < 0.05) from the lymphocyte values of the groups fed commercial growth promoters and the groups fed ethanol extracts.
Again, Table 4 shows that all the blood components measured were affected by the extracts administered to the chickens. A component plot of blood parameters in rotated space (Figure 4) show that all the data appear normal and no extreme outliers were apparent.
Table 4
Communalities (principal component analysis) of blood parameters.
|
Initial
|
Extraction
|
Hb
|
1.000
|
.891
|
RBC
|
1.000
|
.922
|
WBC
|
1.000
|
.890
|
Neutrophil
|
1.000
|
.787
|
Eosinophil
|
1.000
|
.838
|
Mesophil
|
1.000
|
.928
|
PCV
|
1.000
|
.956
|
Lymphocyte
|
1.000
|
.821
|
Total protein
|
1.000
|
.963
|
Globulin
|
1.000
|
.952
|
Albumin
|
1.000
|
.911
|
Variables having high communalities (r2 value, -say more than 0.70) contributes more to measuring the underlying principle components (factors). Hence, by implication, all parameters having r2 ≥ 0.7 is said to have been highly affected by the treatment across the groups.