Table of Contents
Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences
ISSN: 2276-7770
Vol. 15(1), pp. 17-22, 2025
Copyright ©2025, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
https://gjournals.org/GJAS
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15580/gjas.2025.1.031325036
Department of Animal Science, Rivers State University,
Nkpolu-Oroworukwo, P.M.B. 5080, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria.
& Department of Animal Science, Niger Delta University,
Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa State, Nigeria.
Type: Research
Full Text: PDF, PHP, EPUB, MP3
DOI: 10.15580/gjas.2025.1.031325036
Accepted: 15/03/2025
Published: 28/03/2025
Okachi Victor Wesley
E-mail: vwestleyc@ gmail.com
Phone: +234 8032382202
Poultry farming is a critical component of the global agricultural sector, providing an essential source of high-quality protein through meat and eggs. Poultry production, particularly broiler farming, is one of the most widespread and economically significant enterprises worldwide, contributing to food security and socio-economic development, especially in developing countries (Alders, 2005; Kawu 2023). Chickens are the most commonly raised poultry species, with broilers specifically bred for rapid growth, reaching marketable weight within 8–9 weeks under optimal management conditions (Akinsammi, 1994; Gayathry et al., 2022).
Despite the profitability of broiler production, the industry faces several challenges, including the high cost of feed and inefficiencies in feed conversion (Abbas, 2013). To enhance productivity, antibiotics have been widely used as growth promoters and for disease prevention. Commonly used antibiotics include virginiamycin, salinomycin, bacitracin, and tetracycline (Thomke & Elwinger, 1998; Phillips et al., 2004; Ghimire et al., 2023). However, concerns about antibiotic residues in poultry meat, the development of antimicrobial resistance, and potential health risks to consumers have led to strict regulations, including the ban on antibiotic growth promoters in the European Union (Butaye et al., 2000; Catala et al., 2008; Kawu. 2023). These concerns have driven the search for safer and more sustainable alternatives to antibiotics in poultry production.
Phytobiotics, which are plant-derived feed additives, have emerged as a promising alternative to antibiotics in animal nutrition. Momordica charantia (bitter melon) is a plant with significant medicinal and nutritional properties. It is rich in bioactive compounds such as flavonoids, saponins, alkaloids, and triterpenes, which exhibit antimicrobial, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory effects (Bakare et al., 2010; Oliveira et al., 2018). The plant is traditionally used in both human and animal medicine for its potential health benefits, including its hypoglycemic, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial properties. In poultry production, Momordica charantia has been explored as a natural growth promoter and an alternative to synthetic antibiotics.
Given the increasing demand for antibiotic-free poultry products and the rising cost of conventional feed ingredients, this study aims to evaluate the potential of Momordica charantia as a phytogenic feed additive. The research specifically investigates the effect of aqueous leaf extract of Momordica charantia on growth performance, organ weight, and carcass characteristics of broilers. The findings from this study could contribute to the development of sustainable poultry feeding strategies, reducing dependence on synthetic antibiotics while enhancing productivity and profitability for poultry farmers.
Experimental Site
This study was conducted at the poultry unit of the Agricultural Teaching and Research Farm, Faculty of Agriculture, Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Amassoma, Bayelsa State, Nigeria.
Experimental Birds and Duration of Study
A total of 150-day-old Arbor Acre broiler chicks were purchased from CHI Farms Limited, Ibadan, Nigeria. The experiment lasted for eight weeks, including a one-week acclimatization period.
Experimental Design
The birds were randomly assigned to five treatment groups in a completely randomized design (CRD), with three replicates per treatment and ten birds per replicate.
Acclimatization Period
The birds underwent a one-week pre-experimental acclimatization period, during which they were provided with New Hope starter mash and clean drinking water ad libitum to help them adapt to their new environment.
Collection of Plant Material
Fresh Momordica charantia leaves were harvested from the Niger Delta University Teaching and Research Farm and surrounding areas in Amassoma Community.
Preparation of Aqueous Extract of Momordica charantia
The aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf (AEOMCL) was prepared following a standardized protocol to ensure consistency in concentration and quality. Fresh leaves of Momordica charantia were harvested, washed thoroughly with clean water to remove dirt, dust, and other contaminants, as described by Oboh et al. (2010) and Bakare et al. (2010).
The extract was prepared at two different concentrations:
20% w/v AEOMCL: 200 g of Momordica charantia leaves were weighed and blended using an electric blender.
40% w/v AEOMCL: 400 g of Momordica charantia leaves were similarly processed.
The blended leaf samples were soaked in 1 liter of clean water at room temperature (approximately 25–27°C) for 12 hours to allow for proper extraction of bioactive compounds, following the methodology described by Kumar et al. (2017). The mixture was then filtered through fine linen to remove solid residues, obtaining a clear aqueous extract.
The prepared extracts were stored in clean plastic containers and kept under refrigeration to prevent microbial contamination and maintain stability until use, as recommended by Dike and Aguiyi (2015).
Administration of Extract
The extract was administered orally via drinking water based on the birds’ daily water requirement. The daily water intake per bird was estimated as 0.00528 L. The experimental treatments were:
T1 (Control): Vaccine only
T2: 20% AEOMCL + vaccine
T3: 20% AEOMCL
T4: 40% AEOMCL + vaccine
T5: 40% AEOMCL
Management of Experimental Birds
The birds were raised on a deep litter system using wood shavings as bedding material. Pens were disinfected three weeks before bird arrival, and a day before arrival, the brooding pen was preheated using a stove. Upon arrival, birds were given Glucose-D as an anti-stress measure. Feed and AEOMCL were provided ad libitum, and routine vaccinations (Lasota and Gumboro) were administered according to standard poultry management practices.
Data Collection
Water Intake (mL)
Daily water intake per treatment was determined by subtracting the leftover water from the initial quantity provided:
Water Intake = Initial Water Given – Leftover Water
Carcass Characteristics
At the end of the experiment, three birds per replicate were randomly selected for slaughter. Live weight was recorded before slaughter using a digital scale. After slaughtering via a killing cone, the birds were defeathered and partitioned, and carcass components (wings, thighs, breast, shank, and head) were weighed.
Organ Weight Examination
Three birds per replicate were randomly selected for organ weight assessment. Live and bled weights were recorded, followed by evisceration. The weights of internal organs (spleen, kidney, liver, heart, lungs, and gizzard) were measured using a digital scale.
Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) in MINITAB Version 16, based on a completely randomized design. Means were separated using Tukey’s test at a 5% significance level (p < 0.05).
Effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf on performance of broiler birds
The effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf on performance of broiler birds is shown in Table 1. The result showed that Average Final Weight, Average Weight Gain and Average Daily Weight Gain were significantly different (p<0.05) while Average Initial Weight, Average Feed Intake, Feed Conversion Ratio, Feed Efficiency Ratio, Average Water Intake and Average Daily Water Intake were not significantly different (p>0.05).
The result revealed that Average final weight had the highest significant difference (p<0.05) in Treatment 1 (0%) and the least significant difference (p>0.05) in treatment 5 (40%). Result also showed that average weight gain had the highest significant difference (p<0.05) in treatment 1 and 2 (0% and 20%) respectively. While the least significant difference (p>0.05) was recorded in treatment 5 (40%). Average daily weight gain had the highest significant difference in treatment 1 and 2 (0% and 20%) respectively. And the least significant difference (p>0.05) in treatment 5 (40%).
Effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf on carcass yield of broiler birds
The effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of M. charantia leaf on carcass yield of broiler birds is shown in Table 2. The results revealed that there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in live weight, bled weight, carcass weight, thigh, shank, wing, head and breast weight across all treatment.
Effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf on organ weight of broiler birds
The effect of graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf on organ of broiler birds is shown in Table 3. The results showed that there was no significant difference for all parameters (lungs, liver, Gizzard filled, Gizzard empty, heart, kidney and spleen) recorded across treatments.
Means that do not share the same letter are significantly different.
MCALE: Momordica charantia aqueous leaf extract (T1 (0%) – Control, T2 (20%) – 20%MCALE+ Vaccine, T3 (20%) – 20% MCALE, T4 (40%) – 40% MCALE+ Vaccine, T5 (40%) – 40% MCALE)
Table 2: Carcass Yield of Broiler Birds Administered Graded Doses of Aqueous Extract of Momordica Charantia Leaf
Means that share the same letter are not significantly different
MCALE: Momordica charantia aqueous leaf extract (T1 (0%) – Control, T2 (20%) – 20% MCALE+ Vaccine, T3 (20%) – 20% MCALE, T4 (40%) – 40% MCALE+ Vaccine, T5 (40%) – 40% MCALE)
Table 3: Organ weight of broiler birds administered graded doses of aqueous extract of Momordica charantia leaf
Means that share the same letter are not significantly different (P>0.05)
This study evaluated the effects of graded doses of aqueous Momordica charantia leaf extract (AEOMCL) on the performance, carcass characteristics, and organ weights of broiler birds. The findings revealed significant effects on growth performance but no significant impact on carcass yield or organ weight.
Growth Performance
The results indicated a significant decline (p < 0.05) in Average Final Weight (AFW), Average Weight Gain (AWG), and Average Daily Weight Gain (ADWG) across the treatment groups. Birds in the control group (T1, 0% AEOMCL) had the highest AFW (3.02 kg), while birds in T5 (40% AEOMCL without vaccine) recorded the lowest AFW (2.75 kg). This reduction in weight could be attributed to the presence of tannins in Momordica charantia, which have been reported to bind proteins and impair growth in broilers (Medugu et al., 2012; Hassan et al., 2003). Similarly, Hagerman et al. (2011) noted that tannins negatively affect dry matter intake and weight gain in poultry. However, contrary to this finding, Zuhra et al. (2018) reported that supplementing drinking water with 3% Momordica charantia extract improved broiler body weight. Additionally, Guler et al. (2023) observed no significant effects of Momordica charantia supplementation (0.15–0.45 g/kg) on broiler performance.
The decline in AWG across treatment groups was notable, with T1 (2.77 kg) and T2 (2.73 kg) exhibiting the highest gains, while T5 recorded the lowest. This supports previous findings that higher tannin concentrations negatively affect protein utilization and growth performance in poultry (Medugu et al., 2012). Furthermore, ADWG was similar across T1–T4 (0.05 kg) but significantly lower in T5 (0.04 kg), reinforcing the negative impact of higher AEOMCL doses.
Conversely, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed in Average Initial Weight, Average Feed Intake, Feed Conversion Ratio, Feed Efficiency Ratio, Average Water Intake, or Average Daily Water Intake among the treatment groups. This finding differs from Guler et al. (2023), who reported a significant decline in feed intake in broilers supplemented with Momordica charantia extract.
The analysis of carcass yield parameters, including Live Weight, Bled Weight, Carcass Weight, Thigh, Shank, Wing, Breast, and Head, showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) among treatments. This suggests that Momordica charantia supplementation had no adverse effects on carcass composition. Similar findings were reported by Guan et al. (2023), who observed no significant impact of dietary Momordica charantia on carcass quality in pigs.
Organ Weight
The evaluation of organ weights (Lungs, Liver, Gizzard Filled, Gizzard Empty, Heart, Kidney, and Spleen) also revealed no significant differences (p > 0.05) across treatments. This indicates that AEOMCL did not impair organ function or cause hypertrophy in broilers. These findings align with Kawu (2023), who also reported no significant effect of Momordica charantia supplementation on broiler organ weights.
This study demonstrated that while lower doses of Momordica charantia leaf extract had minimal effects on broiler growth performance, higher doses (40%) negatively impacted weight gain, likely due to tannin content. However, AEOMCL did not significantly alter feed and water intake, carcass characteristics, or organ weights. These results suggest that Momordica charantia can be used as a feed additive at lower concentrations but should be limited to avoid growth suppression in broilers. Further research is recommended to explore optimal inclusion levels that maximize benefits while minimizing anti-nutritional effects.
Abbas, T. E. (2013). The use of Moringa oleifera in poultry diets. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 37(6), 492-496.
Akinsammi, O. (1994). Growth performance of broiler chickens under different management systems. Nigerian Journal of Animal Production, 21(1), 44-49.
Alders, R. (2010). La culture familiale; in levier pour améliorer les revenus des éleveurs pauvres au sud du Sénégal. In B. Faye & G. Duteurtre (Eds.), L’élevage, richesse des pauvres (pp. 191). Paris: Éditions QUAD.
Alders, R. (2005). Poultry for profit and pleasure (Diversification Booklet No. 3). Rome: Agricultural Support Systems Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Bakare, R., Magbagbeola, O., & Okunowo, O. J. (2010). Nutritional and chemical evaluation of Momordica charantia . Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 4(21), 2189-2193.
Butaye, P. K., Van Demme, L. A., Devriese, L., Van Demme, M., Baels, F., & Haesebrouk, F. (2000). In vitro susceptibility of Enterococcus faecium isolated from food to growth-promoting and therapeutic antibiotics. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 54(3), 181-187.
Catala-Gregori, P., Mallet, S., Travel, A., & Lessire, M. (2008). Efficiency of a prebiotic and a plant extract alone or in combination on broiler performance and intestinal physiology. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 88(4), 623-629.
Dike, I. P., & Aguiyi, J. C. (2015). Phytochemical and antimicrobial studies of Momordica charantia leaf extract. African Journal of Biotechnology, 14(30), 2371-2376.
Gayathry, K. S., & John, J. A. (2022). A comprehensive review on bitter gourd (Momordica charantia L.) as a gold mine of functional bioactive components for therapeutic foods. Food Production, Processing and Nutrition, 4(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43014-022-00089-x
Ghimire, S., Chhetri, B. P., & Shrestha, J. (2023). Efficacy of different organic and inorganic nutrient sources on the growth and yield of bitter gourd (Momordica charantia L.). Heliyon, 9(11), e22135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22135
Guan, X., Santos, R. R., Koopmans, S. J., & Molist, F. (2023). Effects of the inclusion of dietary bitter gourd (Momordica charantia ) on the performance and carcass characteristics of pigs: Potential application in the feed chain. Animals, 13(13), 2159. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13132159
Güler Yenice, M., Atserver, M., Kara, A., Ozkanlar, S., Urcar Gelen, S., & Gedikli, S. (2023). Effect of dietary Momordica charantia supplementation on broiler performance, blood parameters, meat quality, and intestinal morphology. Journal, 12(1), 61-67.
Hagerman, A. E., & Butler, L. G. (1991). Tannins and lignins. In G. A. Rosenthal & M. R. Benbenbautm (Eds.), Herbivores: Their interactions with secondary plant metabolites (pp. 355-388). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Elzubeir, I. A., El Tinay, A. H., & Hassan, I. A. (2003). Growth and apparent absorption of minerals in broiler chicks fed diets with low or high tannin contents. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 35(2), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022833820757
Kawu, Y. U. (2023). Evaluation of dietary bitter melon (Momordica charantia ) leaf powder as an alternative to antibiotic growth promoters on haematology, serum biochemistry, carcass, and organ indices of broiler chickens. Nigerian Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 6(1), 40-51.
Kumar, K. P., Bhowmik, D., Chiranjib, B., & Tiwari, P. (2017). Traditional and medicinal uses of Momordica charantia. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(5), 136-143.
Medugu, C. I., Saleh, B., Igwebuike, J. U., & Ndirmbita, R. L. (2012). Strategies to improve the utilization of tannin-rich feed materials by poultry. International Journal of Poultry Science, 11, 417-426.
Oboh, G., Akinyemi, A. J., & Ademiluyi, A. O. (2010). Antioxidant and inhibitory effect of Momordica charantia on Fe²⁺-induced lipid peroxidation in rat’s brain. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease, 3(2), 77-84.
Oliveira, M. S., Almeida, W. F., Wariss, F., Carvalho Junior, R., Bezerra, F., Araújo, M. E., & Ferreira, G. (2018). Phytochemical profile and biological activities of Momordica charantia L. (Cucurbitaceae): A review. African Journal of Biotechnology, 17(26), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2017.16374
Philips, I., Mark, C., Tony, C., G. D. Brad, R. J. Christian, & Nightingale, C. (2004). Does the use of antibiotics in food animals pose a risk to human health? A critical review of published data. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 53(1), 28 52. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkh533
Thomke, S., & Elwinger, K. (1998). Growth promotants in feeding pigs and poultry. I. Growth and feed efficiency responses to antibiotic growth promotants. Annales de Zootechnie, 47(2), 85-97.
Thomke, S., & Elwinger, K. (1998). Growth promotants in feeding pigs and poultry: Model of action of antibiotic growth promotants. Annales de Zootechnie, 47, 153-167
Kpun, IP; Okachi, VW; Boleigha, RR (2025). Effect of Aqueous Extract of Momordica charantia Leaf on Growth Performance, Organ Weight and Carcass Characteristics of Broilers. Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 15(1): 17-22, https://doi.org/10.15580/gjas.2025.1.031325036.
Download [485.74 KB]
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Post Comment
