<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd"><article xml:lang="en" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="issn">2615-790X</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Tropical Animal Science Journal</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>Trop. Anim. Sci. J.</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2615-790X</issn><issn pub-type="ppub">2615-787X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Faculty of Animal Science, IPB University</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Indonesia</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2026.49.6.522</article-id><title-group><article-title>Growth Performance, Gut Development, and Microbial Balance of Ducks Supplemented with Encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> Extract</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1178-4635</contrib-id><name><surname>Mangisah</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2445-0543</contrib-id><name><surname>Sugiharto</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5634-6965</contrib-id><name><surname>Krismiyanto</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4384-2691</contrib-id><name><surname>Shihah</surname><given-names>H. D.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9920-516X</contrib-id><name><surname>Anjani</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref rid="AFF-2" ref-type="aff"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4212-8806</contrib-id><name><surname>Sapsuha</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-3"></xref></contrib></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="editor"><name><surname>Wiryawan</surname><given-names>Prof. Dr. Komang G</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="EDITOR-AFF-1"></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="AFF-1"><institution content-type="dept">Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Animal and Agricultural Sciences</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Universitas Diponegoro</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/056bjta22</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="ID">Indonesia</country></aff><aff id="AFF-2"><institution content-type="dept">Doctoral Students in Animal Sciences</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Universitas Diponegoro</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/056bjta22</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="ID">Indonesia</country></aff><aff id="AFF-3"><institution content-type="dept">Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Universitas Khairun</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/02azr0g93</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="ID">Indonesia</country></aff><aff id="EDITOR-AFF-1">Tropical Animal Science Journal</aff><pub-date iso-8601-date="2026-9-3" publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub"><day>3</day><month>9</month><year>2026</year></pub-date><pub-date date-type="collection" iso-8601-date="2026-9-3" publication-format="electronic"><day>3</day><month>9</month><year>2026</year></pub-date><volume>49</volume><issue>6</issue><issue-title>Tropical Animal Science Journal (Issue in progress)</issue-title><fpage>522</fpage><lpage>530</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2026-3-13"><day>13</day><month>3</month><year>2026</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright (c) 2026 Tropical Animal Science Journal</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2026</copyright-year><copyright-holder>Tropical Animal Science Journal</copyright-holder><license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" license-type="open-access"><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/</ali:license_ref><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.Authors submitting manuscripts should understand and agree that copyright of manuscripts of the article shall be assigned/transferred to Tropical Animal Science Journal. The statement to release the copyright to Tropical Animal Science Journal is stated in Form A. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA) where Authors and Readers can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, but they must give appropriate credit (cite to the article or content), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journal.ipb.ac.id/tasj/article/view/72185" xlink:title="Growth Performance, Gut Development, and Microbial Balance of Ducks Supplemented with Encapsulated Centella asiatica Extract">Growth Performance, Gut Development, and Microbial Balance of Ducks Supplemented with Encapsulated Centella asiatica Extract</self-uri><abstract><p>This study evaluated the effects of encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract on growth performance, intestinal development, and intestinal microbial in ducks. A total of 240 two-day-old male Tegal ducks with an initial body weight of 42.5 ± 2.3 g were divided into four treatments with six replications. The treatments were T0, basal diet without encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1, basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2, basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; and T3, basal diet + 0.6% ECAE. The measured variables included intestinal segment weight, length, pH, percentage of live weight, lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and coliform populations, villus height, crypt depth, feed consumption, body weight, feed conversion ratio (FCR), and carcass percentage. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance, followed by Duncan’s test at the 5% significance level. The results showed that ECAE significantly increased jejunal length and decreased ileal and cecal pH at 21 days of age (p&lt;0.05). It also increased intestinal length, weight, and the percentage of intestinal segments of live weight at 35 days of age (p&lt;0.05). The LAB population increased significantly in T2 and T3 (p&lt;0.05). Villus height and crypt depth also increased significantly (p&lt;0.05). Body weight gain and final body weight increased significantly in T1, while the FCR decreased (p&lt;0.05). In conclusion, ECAE at all levels (0.2%, 0.4%, and 0.6%) positively affected growth performance, intestinal development, and intestinal microbial in ducks, with the most pronounced improvement in intestinal and microbial parameters observed at 0.6% level and in growth performance parameters (body weight and FCR) at 0.2% level.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Centella asiatica</kwd><kwd>duck meat</kwd><kwd>encapsulated</kwd><kwd>lactic acid bacteria</kwd><kwd>carcass</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>File created by JATS Editor</meta-name><meta-value><ext-link xlink:title="JATS Editor" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://jatseditor.com">JATS Editor</ext-link></meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>issue-created-year</meta-name><meta-value>2026</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec><title>INTRODUCTION</title><p>Ducks have strong potential as an economical source of animal protein to meet public demand for meat. In Indonesia, local duck farming also plays a strategic role in rural development by providing employment opportunities and supporting the local economy. This potential encourages duck farmers to keep improving feed efficiency while maximizing productivity. The use of antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) is known to enhance poultry growth, but uncontrolled use in livestock farming can leave harmful residues in animal products. Because of these negative effects, AGP use has been banned in both developed and developing countries <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-6">(Anggriawan et al., 2024)</xref>; <xref rid="BIBR-33" ref-type="bibr">(Nduku et al., 2025)</xref>. This ban has encouraged research on safe alternative materials <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-13">(Buonaiuto et al., 2025)</xref>. </p><p>Natural feed additives, such as phytobiotics, can be used as alternatives to AGPs while still supporting the production of safe animal products <xref rid="BIBR-15" ref-type="bibr">(El-Sabrout et al., 2026)</xref>. The use of phytobiotics from local herbs has been widely explored as a sustainable option in the post-antibiotic era <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-45">(Sugiharto, 2021)</xref>. <italic>Centella asiatica</italic>, locally known as pegagan, is recognized as an herbal medicinal plant containing bioactive compounds with antimicrobial, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory properties that may improve growth performance and health <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-34">(Nemauluma et al., 2024)</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-47">(Urban et al., 2025)</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-21">(Hein et al., 2025)</xref>. Centella asiatica contains bioactive components, such as flavonoids, triterpenoids, centellosides, and antioxidants, that can modulate metabolic pathways, immune responses, and gut microbiota composition <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-26">(Khursheed et al., 2024)</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-52">(Zeng et al., 2025)</xref>. </p><p>Supplementation with natural feed additives in ducks has been shown to improve performance and intestinal profiles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-23">(Iriyanti et al., 2018)</xref>, as well as increase egg production and quality <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-24">(Ismoyowati et al., 2022)</xref>. Previous studies on <italic>C. asiatica</italic> showed positive effects on blood profiles and gut bacteria in laying hens<xref rid="BIBR-4" ref-type="bibr">(Ajibade et al., 2023)</xref>, while 4% <italic>C. asiatica</italic> leaf meal in broiler diets improved feed utilization, carcass quality, and growth performance <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-3">(Ajayi et al., 2020)</xref>. <xref rid="BIBR-16" ref-type="bibr">(Falasifah et al., 2018)</xref> also stated that supplementation with 5% cinnamon bark flour and 10% pegagan leaf powder increased the growth rate of quail. Furthermore, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-41">(Rusli et al., 2025)</xref> have stated that <italic>C. asiatica</italic> demonstrates significant promise for utilization in poultry farming, primarily due to its capacity as an antibacterial agent. </p><p>Direct supplementation with herbal extracts often faces challenges, such as limited bioavailability and susceptibility to degradation in the upper gastrointestinal tract <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-14">(Duque-Soto et al., 2024)</xref>. Encapsulation is expected to protect bioactive compounds from harsh digestive conditions, improve stability and bioavailability in the gut, support controlled release, and enhance their effectiveness on gut health and growth performance <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-20">(Grgić et al., 2020)</xref>. Previous studies have shown that encapsulation is an innovation that can improve the bioavailability and stability of herbal additives in host animals. For example, encapsulated cinnamaldehyde improved meat quality and gut health in broilers <xref rid="BIBR-50" ref-type="bibr">(Yang et al., 2021)</xref>; encapsulated cardamom waste extract supported digestive tract health in broilers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-5">(Alfonia et al., 2026)</xref>; 0.3% encapsulated combination of dahlia extract and <italic>Bacillus subtilis</italic> improved broiler performance, while the best result based on IOFC was found at the 0.2% level <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-7">(Anjani et al., 2025)</xref>; and encapsulated essential oil up to 1,000 mg/kg basal diet had a positive effect on growth performance and intestinal health in ducks <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-11">(Bao et al., 2023)</xref>. Although the beneficial effects of the encapsulation nature extract have been documented in broilers, laying hens, and quail, information on its application in encapsulated form in ducks remains scarce, despite ducks being an economically important poultry species with distinct 80-digestive physiology. This gap underscores the novelty of evaluating encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract specifically in duck production.  Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the use of encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract on growth performance, intestinal development, and intestinal microbial in Indonesian local ducks.</p></sec><sec><title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</title><sec><title>Ethical Approval </title><p>The research procedures in this study were approved by the Animal Research Ethics Committee, Faculty of Animal Husbandry and Agriculture, Universitas Diponegoro (Approval No. 61-08/A-16/KEP-FPP).</p></sec><sec><title>Preparation of <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> Extract</title><p><italic>Centella asiatica</italic> used in this study was obtained from plantations around Semarang City, Central Java, Indonesia. Fresh, high-quality leaves that were not wilted or rotten were selected, cleaned of dirt, and washed thoroughly with running water. The leaves were dried at 50 °C to reduce moisture content and prevent fungal growth. The dried leaves were ground using a blender at medium speed and sieved through a 0.3 mm mesh to reduce particle size and increase the surface area for extraction. Extraction was performed by soaking the powder in 96% ethanol at a 1:10 (w/v) ratio in a closed, light-protected container for 48 hours with occasional stirring. The extract was separated from the residue using filter paper. The residue was then added to the rotary evaporator to remove the leftover ethanol <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-5">(Alfonia et al., 2026)</xref>. <italic>C. asiatica</italic> contains 1.46% lipid, 13.81% protein, 15.45% ash, 12.08% moisture <xref rid="BIBR-27" ref-type="bibr">(Kumar &amp; Kumar, 2022)</xref>. It also contains other compounds, including antioxidant activity of 15,360%, total anthocyanin content of 14,369 mg TA/100 g, total flavonoid content of 104,358 mg QE/100 g, and total phenolic content of 24,215 mg GAE/100 g <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-25">(Kauser-Ul-Alam et al., 2025)</xref>. </p></sec><sec><title>The Encapsulation Process</title><p>Encapsulation began with the preparation of maltodextrin as a coating agent according to <xref rid="BIBR-2" ref-type="bibr">(Agusetyaningsih et al., 2022)</xref>. First, maltodextrin was weighed and dissolved in distilled water at a 1:10 ratio. Second, <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract was weighed and dissolved in distilled water at a 1:5 ratio. Both solutions were mixed and stirred until homogeneous using a magnetic stirrer. The encapsulated material was dried using a freeze dryer. The freeze-drying method works by freezing the material at an extremely low temperature of around -40 oC, followed by pressure reduction to remove water through sublimation <xref rid="BIBR-48" ref-type="bibr">(Uwineza &amp; Zhang, 2026)</xref>. </p></sec><sec><title>Experimental Animal and Diet</title><p>The experiment was conducted at the Nutrition and Feed Science Laboratory, Faculty of Animal and Agricultural Sciences, Diponegoro University, Semarang. A total of 240 male ducks with an initial body weight of 42.5 ± 2.3 g were used in this study. The ducks were obtained from a small-scale hatchery in Tegal, Central Java, Indonesia. Rearing lasted 35 days in elevated slatted bamboo-floor pens. The adaptation period was week 1 (days 1 to 7), and the treatment period was weeks 2 to 5 (days 8 to 35). The encapsulated treatments were given in the morning and mixed into the feed. Drinking water was provided ad libitum. The experimental diets were formulated based on the guidelines of the National Research Council (1994), as shown in <xref rid="table-4" ref-type="table">Table 1.</xref></p><table-wrap id="table-4" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>Composition and nutritional content of the experimental diet for ducks</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Ingredient</th><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">Composition (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Ground yellow corn</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">45.0</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Rice bran</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">22.0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Dried leftover rice</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">7.0</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Soybean meal </td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">18.0</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Fish meal</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.0</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Premix</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.0</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Total</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">100.00</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Nutritional content </td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1"></td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Metabolizable energy (kcal/kg) *</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2915.06</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Crude protein</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">19.04</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Crude fiber</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">4.03</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Crude fat</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.64</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Calcium (Ca)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.55</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Total Phosphorus (P)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.82</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Lysine </td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.85</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Methionine </td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.36</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Methionine+cystine</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.68</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: *Metabolizable energy was calculated based on the Bolton (1967) formula as follows: 40.81 {0.87 [crude protein + 2.25 crude fat + nitrogen free extract] + 2.5}. The proximate analysis was conducted at the Laboratory of Nutrition and Feed Science, Faculty of Animal and Agricultural Sciences, Diponegoro University, Semarang. </p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title>Variables Measured</title><p><bold>Gut weight and length</bold>. Digestive organs were collected at 21 and 35 days of age through a standard duck slaughtering procedure, which involved cutting the carotid artery, jugular vein, trachea, and esophagus <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-22">(Hoque et al., 2025)</xref>. The digestive organs were then removed and separated into their segments, namely the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, and caecum. Digestive organ weights were measured using an analytical balance. Organ lengths were measured with a measuring tape. The values were calculated as relative length and weight <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-10">(Assis et al., 2021)</xref>. Organ percentage was calculated as follows: </p><p>Organ percentage = organ weight / live weight x 100%</p><p><bold>Gut microbiota</bold>. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and coliform populations were determined using the total plate count (TPC) method. Digesta samples were incubated at 37 oC for 24 hours for coliform and 48 hours for LAB. Colonies were counted according to bacterial type <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-9">(Ashayerizadeh et al., 2024)</xref>. </p><p><bold>Villus height and crypt depth</bold>. Villus height and crypt depth were measured from ± 3 cm samples of small intestinal sections, including the duodenum, jejunum, and ileum. Samples were fixed in 10% formalin, processed, stained with hematoxylin-eosin (HE), and examined under a microscope <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-46">(Umami et al., 2023)</xref>. </p><p><bold>Growth performance</bold>. Feed consumption, body weight gain, and feed conversion ratio were recorded throughout the rearing period. At 35 days, the final body weight was measured. Ducks were then slaughtered, and carcass weight was recorded. Carcass percentage was calculated following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-46">(Umami et al., 2023)</xref>: </p><p>Carcass percentage = carcass weight / live weight x 100%</p></sec><sec><title>Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis</title><p>The present study used a completely randomized design with 4 treatments and 6 replications, with 10 birds in each replicate. The dietary treatments were T0, basal diet without encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1, basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2, basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; and T3, basal diet + 0.6% ECAE. The data were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance at a 5% significance level. When the treatment showed a significant effect, Duncan’s multiple range test was used to determine differences among treatments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-44">(Steel &amp; Torrie, 1995)</xref>. </p></sec></sec><sec><title>RESULTS</title><sec><title>Gut Development</title><p>The gut development parameters are shown in <xref rid="table-1" ref-type="table">Table 2.</xref> At 21 days of age, most organ weight, length, and percentage of live weight values showed no significant differences (p&gt;0.05). Only the jejunum length was significantly affected (p&lt;0.05), with T0 and T3 showing longer values than T2, while T1 was intermediate. pH values of the gut (duodenum, jejunum, ileum, and caecum) were not significantly different by the treatment (p&gt;0.05), with no differential differences between treatments. Results at 35 days of age, more parameters were significantly influenced by the treatments (p&lt;0.05), particularly duodenum weight, length, and percentage, jejunum length, caecum weight, and partly caecum percentage.</p><table-wrap id="table-1" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>Gut development of ducks supplemented with encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract</p></caption><table rules="all" frame="box"><thead><tr><th valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Variables</th><th colspan="1" valign="middle" align="center">T0</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">T1</th><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="middle">T2</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">T3</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">SEM</th><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="middle">p value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="7">21 days old</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">W duodenum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.87</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.15</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">4.13</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">3.98</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.179</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.224</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">W jejunum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">4.62</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">4.90</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">4.92</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">5.00</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.401</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.990</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">W ileum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.38</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.10</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">5.57</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.32</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.340</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.148</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">W caecum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.82</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">1.58</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.88</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.53</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.090</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.461</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">L duodenum (cm/kg)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">34.60</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">30.73</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">33.65</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">32.20</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.720</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.254</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">L jejunum (cm/kg)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">49.42ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">46.77<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">39.58<sup>b</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">48.65<sup>a</sup></td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">1.419</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0,044</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">L ileum (cm/kg)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">65.93</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">59.85</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">65.33</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">62.42</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.134</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.205</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">P duodenum (%)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.66</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.61</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.82</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.76</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.036</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.152</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">P jejunum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.81</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.95</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.97</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.92</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.076</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.890</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">P ileum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.25</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.18</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.11</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.38</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.053</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.314</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">P caecum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.31</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.31</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.38</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.30</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.020</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.467</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">pH duodenum</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.37</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.38</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.28</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.29</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.033</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.607</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">pH jejunum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.35</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.41</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.23</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.40</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.044</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.494</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">pH ileum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.37ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.85ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.62<sup>ab</sup></td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">6.50ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.060</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.019</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">pH caecum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.34ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.71ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.43<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.41<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.058</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.103</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="7">35 days old</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">W duodenum (%)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.45ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">4.08ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">4.27ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.87ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.192</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.008</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">W jejunum (%)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.55</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.95</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.77</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.78</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.316</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.791</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">W ileum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">10.55</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">10.65</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">12.00</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">10.58</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.452</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.639</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">W caecum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.43ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.92ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">2.32 <sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.93ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.083</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.043</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">L duodenum (cm/kg)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">36.32ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">34.17ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">27.32ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">24.88ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.417</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.004</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">L jejunum (cm/kg)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">53.35 ab</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">46.88ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">63.22ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">62.07ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">2.345</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.031</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">L ileum (cm/kg)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">61.95</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">61.02</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">56.30</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">59.78</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.872</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.753</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">P duodenum (%)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.67ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.52ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.53ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.48ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.023</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.014</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">P jejunum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.93</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.89</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.95</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.96</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.034</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.912</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">P ileum (%)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.31</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.37</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.47</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">1.30</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.054</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.658</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">P caecum (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.30ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.25<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.29<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.24ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.010</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.086</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">pH duodenum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.30</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.19</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.01</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.29</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.064</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.365</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">pH jejunum</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.16</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.14</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.01</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.00</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.030</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.139</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">pH ileum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.09</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.97</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.06</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.01</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.049</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.873</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">pH caecum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.04</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.08</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.98</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.81</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.050</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.235</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: <sup>ab</sup>Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (p&lt;0.05). T0: basal diet without encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1: basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2: basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; T3: basal diet + 0.6% ECAE; W: weight; L: length; P: percentag.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table-5" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 3</label><caption><p> Lactic acid bacteria and <italic>coliform</italic> populations in the gut of ducks supplemented with encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica </italic>extract</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Variables</th><th align="center" colspan="4" valign="middle">Treatments</th><th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">SEM</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2">p value</th></tr><tr><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">T0</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">T1</th><th colspan="1" valign="middle" align="center">T2</th><th colspan="1" valign="middle" align="center">T3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">LAB (log CFU/g)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">11.94<sup> b</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">11.98<sup> b</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">13.59<sup> a</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">13.21<sup> a</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.184</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.000</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1"><italic>Coliform (log CFU/g)</italic></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.09</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.38</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.03</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">4,79</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.583</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.708</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: <sup>ab</sup>Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (p&lt;0.05). T0: basal diet without encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1: basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2: basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; T3: basal diet + 0.6% ECAE; LAB: lactic acid bacte</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title>Microbial Population </title><p>Encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica </italic>had no significant effect on <italic>coliform</italic> population (p&gt;0.05), although a decreasing trend was observed at higher doses. However, it had a highly significant effect (p&lt;0.01) on the lactic acid bacteria population, with T2 and T3 markedly higher than T0 and T1. </p></sec><sec><title>Intestinal Villi and Crypt Depth </title><p>Supplementation with encapsulated<italic> C. asiatica</italic> significantly affected intestinal structure, particularly in treatments T1, T2, and T3 compared to T0 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-2">Table 4</xref>). Villus height and the V/C ratio in the duodenum showed significant differences, with T0 showing higher values than T1, T2, and T3 (p&lt;0.05). However, crypt depth in the duodenum was not significantly affected by the treatments (p&gt;0.05). In the jejunum, treatment T3 had a significant effect on both villus height and crypt depth, while the V/C ratio in T2 was not significantly different from that in T3. For villus height and the V/C ratio in the ileum, T2 and T3 showed significant differences compared to T1 and T0 (p&lt;0.01). Ileal crypt depth in T1 and T0 was also significantly different from that in T2 and T3. </p><table-wrap id="table-2" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 4</label><caption><p>Villus height and crypt depth of ducks supplemented with encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="left">Variables</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="4">Treatments</th><th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">SEM</th><th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">p value</th></tr><tr><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">T0</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">T1</th><th colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">T2</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">T3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Villus height, duodenum (µm)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">771.64ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">607.07ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">642.89ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">605.41ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">20.217</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.002</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Crypt depth, duodenum (µm)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">118.96</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">148.51</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">160.39</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">120.08</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.307</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.097</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">V/C ratio, duodenum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">6.49ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">4.09ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">4.01ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.04ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.315</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.003</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Villus height, jejunum (µm)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">488.15ᵈ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">699.79ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">652.71<sup>c</sup></td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">856.57ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">30.658</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Crypt depth, jejunum (µm)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">122.89ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">124.88ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">79.10ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">105.76ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">5.363</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.001</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">V/C ratio, jejunum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.97ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.60ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">8.25ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">8.10ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.489</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Villus height, ileum (µm)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">409.93ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">296.60<sup>c</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">651.63ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">648.10ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">35.611</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.005</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Crypt depth, ileum (µm)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">135.16ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">92.96ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">129.92ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">88.88ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.530</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">V/C ratio, ileum</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.03c</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">3.19c</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">5.02ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.29ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.437</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.000</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: <sup>abc</sup>Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (p&lt;0.05). T0: basal diet without encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1: basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2: basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; T3: basal diet + 0.6% ECAE</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title>Duck Growth Performance  </title><p>Based on <xref ref-type="table" rid="table-3">Table 5</xref>, supplementation with encapsulated<italic> C. asiatica</italic> extract had a significant effect (p&lt;0.001) on body weight gain, final body weight, and feed conversion ratio (FCR). However, it had no significant effect on feed intake, carcass weight, or carcass percentage (p&gt;0.05).</p><p>The best results for body weight gain and final body weight were observed in treatment T1, along with the lowest FCR value. Treatment T3 also performed well and was not significantly different from T1 in several parameters, while T0 (control) showed lower weight gain and higher FCR. </p><table-wrap id="table-3" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 5</label><caption><p>Growth performance of ducks supplemented with encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="2">Variables</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="4">Treatments</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2">SEM</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2">p value</th></tr><tr><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">T0</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">T1</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">T2</th><th colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">T3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Feed intake (g)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2625.07</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2625.46</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2625.98</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">2625.90</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.174</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.222</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Body weight gain (g)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">770.83c</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">806.92ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">778.83<sup> ab</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">786.46ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">3.538</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Feed conversion ratio</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">3.41ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.25c</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.37 <sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">3.34ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.015</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Final body weight (g)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">829.83ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">863.92ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">838.83ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">842.46ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.392</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.000</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Carcass weight (g)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">526.12</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">533.01</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">534.18</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">534.11</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.385</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.828</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Carcass percentage (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">64.45</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">68.17</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">65.71</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">65.80</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.062</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.625</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: <sup>abc</sup>Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (p&lt;0.05). T0: basal diet without encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE); T1: basal diet + 0.2% ECAE; T2: basal diet + 0.4% ECAE; T3: basal diet + 0.6% ECAE</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec></sec><sec><title>DISCUSSION</title><p>The addition of ECAE to the diet affected digestive organ development (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-1">Table 2</xref>), with more significant effects observed at 35 days of age than at 21 days of age. At 21 days of age, the results showed no significant differences in almost all variables, including weight, length, and organ percentage, except for jejunum length. In contrast, at 35 days of age, several parameters differed significantly among treatments. This condition may occur because, at 21 days of age, the digestive system of ducks is still immature and gut microbiota are still in a rapid growth phase. As a result, the response to ECAE treatments as phytobiotics may remain limited. The effect on growth and intestinal morphology becomes more evident in the finisher phase (22 to 42 days) than in the starter phase (1 to 21 days), which may explain why the response to feed additives was not significant during the earlier stage <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-1">(Abdelli et al., 2021)</xref>. This finding aligns with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-37">(Obianwuna et al., 2024)</xref>, who stated that livestock responses to treatments depend on the duration and dosage of administration. </p><p>Supplementation with encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract influenced gut development in 35-day-old ducks. Encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract (ECAE) supports the growth and regeneration of intestinal epithelial cells through the modulation of gut microbiota. This modulation increases the production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-18">(Ge et al., 2023)</xref>. The mechanism begins with the antibacterial properties of triterpenoid compounds in <italic>C. asiatica</italic>. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-40">(Ramli et al., 2020)</xref>, triterpenoid compounds can inhibit microbial growth by damaging microbial cell membranes and cell walls. These compounds selectively inhibit the growth of pathogens such as <italic>coliform</italic>, without disrupting beneficial bacteria. As a result, beneficial bacteria, such as lactic acid bacteria, can proliferate more effectively. The dominant lactic acid bacteria then ferment undigested feed and ECAE components, producing SCFAs, including acetate, butyrate, and propionate. Although SCFA levels were not measured in this study, butyrate is well known as an energy source for mitochondria in intestinal epithelial cells, promotes cell proliferation, and improves gut barrier function <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-28">(Liu et al., 2021)</xref>. In addition, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-53">(Zhang et al., 2019)</xref> stated that stem cells in the intestinal crypt proliferate and differentiate into functional epithelial cells to replace old or damaged cells, resulting in higher and wider villus structures. </p><p>An interesting finding at 35 days was that duodenum weight, length, and percentage, as well as caecum weight, showed significant effects in the control treatment (T0). This condition suggests that smaller digestive organs can still function optimally in nutrient absorption, as supported by the body weight gain data in <xref rid="table-3" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>, where ECAE treatment produced a significant increase. Furthermore, digestive organ length and weight in this study are presented in relative terms, where the calculations are influenced by live weight. Consequently, higher body weight may lead to lower relative values for organ weight and length. This explains why the control treatment had lower body weight, while the relative weight and length of the digestive organs were higher. <xref rid="BIBR-49" ref-type="bibr">(Wang et al., 2016)</xref> reported that broilers with lower body weight gain in the control group had higher relative intestinal weight than broilers with higher body weight gain in the treatment group. Differences in intestinal length values that were significant in absolute terms may become non-significant when presented as relative values or as a percentage of the organ relative to total live weight <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-19">(Gorenz et al., 2024)</xref>. </p><p>The effect of encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract on gastrointestinal organ development may result from the main mechanisms of its bioactive compounds, such as flavonoids, centellosides, antioxidants, and triterpenoids <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-42">(Sabaragamuwa et al., 2018)</xref>. These compounds can modulate metabolic pathways and gut microbiota, thereby supporting more efficient organ development. The encapsulation used in this study enhanced the stability and bioavailability of these compounds in the digestive tract. This finding aligns with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-32">(Natsir et al., 2019)</xref>, who showed that feed additives administered in encapsulated form produced better results than those given in non-encapsulated form. It is also supported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-8">(Ardiansah et al., 2020)</xref>, who found that supplementation in encapsulated form resulted in better relative carcass performance, along with higher and wider villi, compared to the powdered form. </p><p>Supplementation with ECAE in feed significantly increased the population of gut lactic acid bacteria (LAB) in ducks. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table-5">Table 3</xref> shows that administration at the 0.4% (T2) and 0.6% (T3) levels resulted in higher LAB populations than the other treatments. The addition of ECAE can support LAB growth. Several references have reported antibacterial and antioxidant activities from the bioactive compounds in<italic> C. asiatica</italic>, which can modulate the composition of the gut microbiota <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-41">(Rusli et al., 2025)</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-26">(Khursheed et al., 2024)</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-52">(Zeng et al., 2025)</xref>. These compounds work by selectively inhibiting the growth of pathogenic bacteria while promoting the proliferation of beneficial microbes, thereby restoring microbiota homeostasis and preventing dysbiosis. Supplementation with prebiotics, probiotics, or other phytogenic feed additives can modify microbial balance and encourage eubiosis <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-43">(Salahi et al., 2025)</xref>. This observation is supported by previous research on the use of probiotics and organic acids, which were shown to suppress <italic>Campylobacter</italic> proliferation in broiler chickens <xref rid="BIBR-30" ref-type="bibr">(Mortada et al., 2020)</xref>. </p><p>The statistical results for T0 and T1 showed no significant difference, whereas T2 and T3 showed significant effects. This outcome may be related to the treatment levels. At the low dose of 0.2%, the microbiota was not significantly modulated because the concentration of bioactive compounds in <italic>C. asiatica</italic> may not have reached the required threshold. Meanwhile, at the 0.4% and 0.6% levels, the bioactive compound content was sufficiently high to produce selective antimicrobial effects by suppressing pathogens while stimulating the growth of lactic acid bacteria. Triterpenoids and flavonoids can disrupt the cell membranes of pathogenic bacteria, thereby inhibiting their growth, while lactic acid bacteria continue to thrive. Bioactive compounds, such as flavonoids, alkaloids, phenols, saponins, and tannins in plants, can act as antibacterial agents against pathogens <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-1">(Abdelli et al., 2021)</xref>. This condition supports the continuous production of short-chain fatty acids <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-17">(Fusco et al., 2023)</xref>, creating an acidic environment that is favorable for LAB. </p><p>The addition of ECAE significantly altered the morphology of the small intestine. Supplementation at 0.6% resulted in higher villi in the jejunum and ileum compared to the 0.2% and 0.4% levels. The villus-to-crypt (V/C) ratio also increased significantly in the jejunum and ileum at the 0.6% supplementation level. These results indicate an increase in the absorption surface area, along with faster epithelial regeneration <xref rid="BIBR-35" ref-type="bibr">(Nguyen et al., 2021)</xref>. These improvements were likely supported by the antimicrobial, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory mechanisms of <italic>C. asiatica</italic>, which can reduce oxidative stress and inflammation in the intestinal mucosa <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-34">(Nemauluma et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-47">(Urban et al., 2025)</xref>. Flavonoids in <italic>C. asiatica</italic> can stimulate mucus secretion, leading to better villus protection and enhanced growth of beneficial bacteria <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-39">(Prihambodo et al., 2020)</xref>. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-41">(Rusli et al., 2025)</xref> reported that flavonoids in <italic>C. asiatica</italic> leaves have proven antibacterial and antioxidant properties, which significantly improve small intestine health and function, particularly in the nutrient absorption process. The beneficial effects of this improvement include increased villus height and crypt depth. The elongation of villi and deepening of intestinal crypts accelerate epithelial cell turnover and enhance the intestinal absorption capacity. </p><p>Encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica </italic>is highly effective in improving villus morphology, even at low doses. The application of encapsulation to plant bioactive substances, such as essential oils or extracts, protects these substances from external factors and degradation, thereby supporting the long-term stability of the active ingredients<xref rid="BIBR-51" ref-type="bibr">(Zabot et al., 2022)</xref>. This view is consistent with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-29">(Ma’rifah et al., 2025)</xref>, who reported that the addition of encapsulated starfruit extract to broiler chicken rations improved intestinal morphology, as shown by increased villus height and deeper small intestinal crypts. </p><p>Improvements in gut development, microbial balance, and intestinal morphology led to a significant increase in growth performance. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table-3">Table 5</xref> shows the best results at the 0.2% ECAE administration level, where final body weight and body weight gain increased while FCR decreased. These results indicate that the lowest ECAE level improved feed nutrient utilization through more efficient digestive organs, healthier microbiota, and a larger intestinal absorption surface area. This is supported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-3">(Ajayi et al., 2020)</xref>, who reported an increase in daily and final body weight, along with a decrease in FCR, after the addition of <italic>C. asiatica</italic> leaf extract. Similarly, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-4">(Ajibade et al., 2023)</xref> reported improvements in health and productivity in chickens supplemented with<italic> C. asiatica</italic>.</p><p>The growth performance parameters show that T2, overall, was able to improve growth and feed efficiency without affecting feed intake or carcass yield. This can be seen from the increase in body weight gain and final body weight, while the feed conversion ratio (FCR) decreased, indicating greater efficiency. These findings suggest that the addition of encapsulated C. asiatica extract (ECAE) supports better nutrient utilization while maintaining good growth performance in ducks. The findings are consistent with previous research showing that phytobiotic supplementation can increase final body weight and feed efficiency in Alabio meat ducks as an alternative to antibiotics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-12">(Biyatmoko et al., 2021)</xref>. Overall, these results suggest that <italic>C. asiatica</italic> can be used as a natural growth promoter-based additive. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-38">(Ogunka-Nnoka et al., 2020)</xref> stated that<italic> C. asiatica</italic> contains various bioactive compounds, such as flavonoids, phenolics, polyphenols, alkaloids, and phytic acid. These components can serve as natural feed additives for poultry. </p><p>The addition of encapsulated <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract showed progressive improvements according to the treatment levels. Thus, supplementation with <italic>C. asiatica</italic> extract promotes more productive development from the duodenum to the jejunum and ileum, resulting in an intestine with better nutrient absorption capacity than the control treatment. This condition ultimately leads to better growth performance and feed efficiency. </p></sec><sec><title>CONCLUSION</title><p>Supplementation with encapsulated <italic>Centella asiatica</italic> extract at all levels (0.2%, 0.4%, and 0.6%) positively affected digestive organ development, intestinal morphology, gut microbial balance, and growth performance, with 0.6% encapsulated<italic> C. asiatica </italic>extract as the best supplementation level.</p></sec><sec><title>CONFLICT OF INTEREST</title><p>The authors declare no conflict of interest related to personal relationships, financial interests, or other organizations or individuals connected to the material used and discussed in this manuscript. </p></sec><sec><title>ACKNOWLEDGMENT </title><p>The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM Undip) in the International Publication Research contract number: 222-462/UN7.D2/IV/2025.</p></sec><sec><title>DECLARATION OF GENERATIVE AI AND AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGIES IN THE WRITING PROCESS </title><p>The authors state that generative AI tools were used solely to improve readability and language clarity under human oversight. The authors retain full responsibility for the scientific content, data analysis, and interpretation. </p></sec></body><back><sec sec-type="how-to-cite"><title>How to Cite</title><p>Mangisah, I., Sugiharto, S., Krismiyanto, L., Shihah, H. D., Anjani, L., &amp; Sapsuha, Y. (2026). Growth Performance, Gut Development, and Microbial Balance of Ducks Supplemented with Encapsulated Centella asiatica Extract. <italic>Tropical Animal Science Journal</italic>, <italic>49</italic>(6), 522. https://doi.org/10.5398/tasj.2026.49.6.522</p></sec><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="BIBR-1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Phytogenic feed additives in poultry: achievements, prospective and challenges</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>11</volume><issue>12</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abdelli</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Solà-Oriol</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pérez</surname><given-names>J.F.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>26</lpage><page-range>1-26</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani11123471</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of encapsulated Cosmos caudatus leaf extract on the physiological conditions, immune competency, and antioxidative status of broilers at high stocking density</article-title><source>Annals of Animal Science</source><volume>22</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Agusetyaningsih</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Widiastuti</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wahyuni</surname><given-names>H.I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yudiarti</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Murwani</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sartono</surname><given-names>T.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sugiharto</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><fpage>653</fpage><lpage>662</lpage><page-range>653-662</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2478/aoas-2021-0043</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Efficiency of Centella asiatica (Gotu kola) leaf meal as feed additive in broiler chicken diet</article-title><source>Nigerian Journal of Animal Production</source><volume>47</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ajayi</surname><given-names>O.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Olumide</surname><given-names>M.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chioma</surname><given-names>G.O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ayodele</surname><given-names>A.D.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>123</fpage><lpage>130</lpage><page-range>123-130</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.51791/njap.v47i1.199</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of Centella asiatica as feed additive on blood profile, egg quality and gut microbial contents of ISA brown laying birds</article-title><source>Aceh Journal of Animal Science</source><volume>8</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ajibade</surname><given-names>O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Grace</surname><given-names>O.T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Martha</surname><given-names>D.O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Adeyinka</surname><given-names>O.A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><fpage>87</fpage><lpage>94</lpage><page-range>87-94</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.13170/ajas.8.3.31598</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Encapsulated cardamom waste extract (Amomum compactum) supplementation improves health and performance of broiler chickens</article-title><source>Tropical Animal Science Journal</source><volume>49</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alfonia</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ismadi</surname><given-names>V.D.Y.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Krismiyanto</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2026</year><fpage>63</fpage><lpage>70</lpage><page-range>63-70</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2026.49.1.63</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The role of probiotics as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters in enhancing poultry performance</article-title><source>Journal of Animal Health and Production</source><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Anggriawan</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Widya</surname><given-names>P.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sri</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Muhammad</surname><given-names>A.A.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Diyah</surname><given-names>A.C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><fpage>610</fpage><lpage>620</lpage><page-range>610-620</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17582/journal.jahp/2024/12..4.610.620</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-7"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Intestinal morphology, protein digestibility, and broiler performance fed encapsulated dahlia tuber extract and Bacillus subtilis</article-title><source>Tropical Animal Science Journal</source><volume>48</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Anjani</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yunianto</surname><given-names>V.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Suthama</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Krismiyanto</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>338</fpage><lpage>346</lpage><page-range>338-346</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2025.48.4.338</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Dietary supplementation of powdered and encapsulated probiotic: In vivo study on relative carcass, giblet weight and intestinal morphometry of local duck</article-title><source>Acta Scientiarum Animal Sciences</source><volume>42</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ardiansah</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sholiha</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sjofjan</surname><given-names>O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>8</lpage><page-range>1-8</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4025/actascianimsci.v42i1.47140</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>An investigation into the influence of fermented cottonseed meal on the productive performance, egg quality, and gut health in laying hens</article-title><source>Poultry Science</source><volume>103</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ashayerizadeh</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jazi</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rezvani</surname><given-names>M.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mohebodini</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Soumeh</surname><given-names>E.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Abdollahi</surname><given-names>M.R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>13</lpage><page-range>1-13</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.psj.2024.103574</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-10"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Relative weight and length of digestive tract and intestinal histomorphometric measurements of slow-growing broilers of different genotypes</article-title><source>Semina: Ciências Agrárias</source><volume>42</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Assis</surname><given-names>S.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Leandro</surname><given-names>N.S.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arnhold</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Café</surname><given-names>M.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Carvalho</surname><given-names>F.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Stringhini</surname><given-names>J.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Santos</surname><given-names>R.R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><fpage>319</fpage><lpage>334</lpage><page-range>319-334</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5433/1679-0359.2021v42n1p319</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Encapsulated essential oils improve growth performance of meat ducks by enhancing intestinal morphology, barrier function, antioxidant capacity and the cecal microbiota</article-title><source>Antionxidants</source><volume>12</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bao</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xue</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tu</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cao</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>253</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/antiox12020253</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The phytobiotic effect of herbs as a growth promoter on the performance and digestibility of alabio meat ducks</article-title><source>Livestock Research for Rural Development</source><volume>33</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Biyatmoko</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Juhairiyah</surname><given-names>Prasetio</given-names></name><name><surname>B.</surname><given-names>Santoso</given-names></name><name><surname>U.</surname></name><name><surname>Rostini</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://lrrd.cipav.org.co/lrrd33/5/3362tinti.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="5">5</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-13"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Bioactive feed additives in animal nutrition: bridging innovation, health, and sustainability</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>12</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Buonaiuto</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Danese</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>El-Sabrout</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yildirim</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>1727126</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2025.1727126</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Evaluation of olive leaf phenolic compounds’ gastrointestinal stability based on co-administration and microencapsulation with non-digestible carbohydrates</article-title><source>Nutrients</source><volume>16</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Duque-Soto</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Leyva-Jiménez</surname><given-names>F.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Quirantes-Piné</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>López-Bascón</surname><given-names>M.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lozano-Sánchez</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Borrás-Linares</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>93</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/nu16010093</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Phytogenics, fermented ingredients, bee products, insect additives, and byproducts as promising dietary supplements for poultry</article-title><source>Annals of Animal Science</source><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>El-Sabrout</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ahmad</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Buonaiuto</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2026</year><fpage>253</fpage><lpage>276</lpage><page-range>253-276</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2478/aoas-2025-0049</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Pegagan and cinnamon bark flours as a feed supplement for quail grotwh rate (Cortunix cortunix</article-title><source>Journal of Physics: Conference Series</source><volume>1025</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Falasifah</surname><given-names>Sunarno</given-names></name><name><surname>S.</surname><given-names>Djaelani</given-names></name><name><surname>A.</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahadian</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>10</lpage><page-range>1-10</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/1742-6596/1025/1/012047</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Short-chain fatty-acid-producing bacteria: key components of the human gut microbiota</article-title><source>Nutrients</source><volume>15</volume><issue>9</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fusco</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lorenzo</surname><given-names>M.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cintoni</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Porcari</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rinninella</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kaitsas</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lener</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mele</surname><given-names>M.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gasbarrini</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Collado</surname><given-names>M.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cammarota</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ianiro</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>2211</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/nu15092211</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Plant essential oils improve growth performance by increasing antioxidative capacity, enhancing intestinal barrier function, and modulating gut microbiota in Muscovy ducks</article-title><source>Poultry Science</source><volume>102</volume><issue>8</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ge</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Luo</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lv</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yu</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>102813</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.psj.2023.102813</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Organ growth and fermentation profiles of broilers differing in body growth rate</article-title><source>Poultry science</source><volume>103</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gorenz</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oelschlager</surname><given-names>M.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jespersen</surname><given-names>J.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cao</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>A.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mackie</surname><given-names>R.I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dilger</surname><given-names>R.N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>103628</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.psj.2024.103628</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Role of the encapsulation in bioavailability of phenolic compounds</article-title><source>Antioxidants</source><volume>9</volume><issue>10</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grgić</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Šelo</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Planinić</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tišma</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bucić-Kojić</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><page-range>923</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/antiox9100923</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Centella asiatica: advances in extraction technologies, phytochemistry, and therapeutic applications</article-title><source>Life</source><volume>15</volume><issue>7</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hein</surname><given-names>Z.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gopalakrishna</surname><given-names>P.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kanuri</surname><given-names>A.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Thomas</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hussan</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Naik</surname><given-names>V.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shantakumari</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ramli</surname><given-names>M.D.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Moklas</surname><given-names>M.A.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nassir</surname><given-names>C.M.N.C.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vishnumukkala</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>1081</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/life15071081</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Comparative study on growth and carcass characteristics of three genotypes of duck for establishing a baseline population towards a meat type duck variety</article-title><source>Meat Research</source><volume>5</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hoque</surname><given-names>S.A.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jahan</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ferdous</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Islam</surname><given-names>M.M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>7</lpage><page-range>1-7</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.55002/mr.5.5.127</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Performance and intestinal profiles of Tegal duck fed ration supplemented with prebiotics</article-title><source>Tropical Animal Science Journal</source><volume>41</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Iriyanti</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hartoyo</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Suhermiyati</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><fpage>15</fpage><lpage>21</lpage><page-range>15-21</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2018.41.1.15</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Egg production, egg quality, and fatty acid profile of Indonesian local ducks fed with turmeric, curcuma, and probiotic supplementation</article-title><source>Tropical Animal Science Journal</source><volume>45</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ismoyowati</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Indrasanti</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ratriyanto</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><fpage>319</fpage><lpage>326</lpage><page-range>319-326</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2022.45.3.319</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Antioxidant and antimicrobial effects of Centella asiatica (Thankuni) aqueous and methanol extracts for quality and improved shelf life of poultry products</article-title><source>Journal of Food Processing and Preservation</source><volume>2025</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kauser-Ul-Alam</surname><given-names>Md</given-names></name><name><surname>Akther</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nahid</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Quader</surname><given-names>Md</given-names></name><name><surname>B.</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahman</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Siddiqui</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chakma</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahman</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>1928873</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/jfpp/1928873</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Ultrasound-assisted solvent extraction of phenolics, flavonoids, and major triterpenoids from Centella asiatica leaves: A comparative study</article-title><source>Ultrasonics Sonochemistry</source><volume>111</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Khursheed</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Anees</surname><given-names>A.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Muhammad</surname><given-names>N.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ahood</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Muhammad</surname><given-names>R.T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tawfiq</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Robert</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gulzar</surname><given-names>A.N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>107091</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ultsonch.2024.107091</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Proximate analysis and phytochemical extraction from Centella asiatica and its analysis by HPLC method</article-title><source>Journal of Academia and Industrial Research</source><volume>10</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>G.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>P.P.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><fpage>26</fpage><lpage>29</lpage><page-range>26-29</page-range><ext-link xlink:href="https://jairjp.com/volume10issue3.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Website link">Website link</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Biological function of short-chain fattys acids and its regulation on intestinal health of poultry</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>8</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Guo</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><page-range>736739</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2021.736739</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-29"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of encapsulated Averrhoa carambola L. leaf extract on the growth performance, haemato-biochemical parameters, gut health, and antioxidant activity in broiler chickens</article-title><source>Veterinary and Animal Science</source><volume>30</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ma’rifah</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Suprijatna</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sunarti</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mahfudz</surname><given-names>L.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kismiati</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sarjana</surname><given-names>T.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Muryani</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shihah</surname><given-names>H.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wahyuni</surname><given-names>N.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sugiharto</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>100504</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vas.2025.100504</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>In vivo and in vitro assessment of commercial probiotic and organic acid feed additives in broilers challenged with Campylobacter coli</article-title><source>Journal of Applied Poultry Research</source><volume>29</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mortada</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cosby</surname><given-names>D.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shanmugasundaram</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Selvaraj</surname><given-names>R.K.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>435</fpage><lpage>446</lpage><page-range>435-446</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.japr.2020.02.001</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-31"><element-citation publication-type="book"><article-title>Nutrient Requirements of Poultry</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Council</surname><given-names>National Research</given-names></name></person-group><year>1994</year><publisher-name>National Academy Press</publisher-name><edition>9th Revised</edition></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of either non-encapsulated or encapsulated acidifier-phytobiotic-probiotic on performance, intestinal characteristics and intestinal microflora of local hybrid ducks</article-title><source>Livestock Research for Rural Development</source><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Natsir</surname><given-names>M.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sjofjan</surname><given-names>O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Widodo</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ardiansah</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Widyastuti</surname><given-names>E.S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>5</lpage><page-range>1-5</page-range><ext-link xlink:href="https://lrrd.cipav.org.co/lrrd31/1/emhan31010.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="1">1</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Prospects for antibiotic-free poultry production in South Africa: An analysis of the enablers abd stumbling blocks</article-title><source>One Health</source><volume>21</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nduku</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Stempa</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lungu</surname><given-names>N.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ndobeni</surname><given-names>T.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mlambo</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>101144</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.onehlt.2025.101144</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Evidence-based literature on the benefits of using medicinal plants in broiler poultry production</article-title><source>Applied Ecology and Environmental Research</source><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nemauluma</surname><given-names>M.F.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gumede</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chitura</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><fpage>2425</fpage><lpage>2438</lpage><page-range>2425-2438</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15666/aeer/2203_24252438</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-35"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Relationship between the ratio of villous height: crypt depth and gut bacteria counts as well production parameters in broiler chickens</article-title><source>Journal of Agriculture and Development</source><volume>20</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nguyen</surname><given-names>D.T.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ngoc</surname><given-names>H.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vinh</surname><given-names>V.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Parra</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Forti</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hien</surname><given-names>T.L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>10</lpage><page-range>1-10</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.52997/jad.1.03.2021</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Bioactive compounds and bioactivities of Centella asiatica (L.) urban prepared by different drying methods and conditions</article-title><source>Drying Technology</source><volume>31</volume><issue>16</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Niamnuy</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Charoenchaitrakool</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mayachiew</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Devahastin</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><fpage>2007</fpage><lpage>2015</lpage><page-range>2007-2015</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/07373937.2013.839563</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-37"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Phytobiotics in poultry: revolutionizing broiler chicken nutrition with plant-derived gut health enhancers</article-title><source>Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology</source><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Obianwuna</surname><given-names>U.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oleforuh-Okoleh</surname><given-names>V.U.</given-names></name><name><surname>Onu</surname><given-names>P.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Qiu</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>169</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s40104-024-01101-9</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Nutrient and phytochemical composition of Centella asiatica leaves</article-title><source>Medical and Aromatic Plants</source><volume>9</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ogunka-Nnoka</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Igwe</surname><given-names>F.U.</given-names></name><name><surname>Agwu</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Peter</surname><given-names>O.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wolugbom</surname><given-names>P.H.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><page-range>346</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.35248/2167-0412.20.9.346</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of dietary flavonoids on performance, blood constituents, carcass composition and small intestinal morphology of broilers: a meta-analysis</article-title><source>Animal Bioscience</source><volume>34</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prihambodo</surname><given-names>T.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sholikin</surname><given-names>M.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Qomariyah</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jayanegara</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Batubara</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Utomo</surname><given-names>D.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nahrowi</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>434</fpage><lpage>442</lpage><page-range>434-442</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5713/ajas.20.0379</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>A review: antibacterial activities, antioxidant properties and toxicity profile of Centella asiatica</article-title><source>Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology</source><volume>7</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ramli</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xian</surname><given-names>W.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Abd Mutalib</surname><given-names>N.A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>39</fpage><lpage>47</lpage><page-range>39-47</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.37134/ejsmt.vol7.1.5.2020</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-41"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Evaluation of the phytochemical composition and antimicrobial properties of Centella asiatica leaf meal extract as a feed additive candidate for poultry</article-title><source>Archives of Razi Institute</source><volume>80</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rusli</surname><given-names>R.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Darmawan</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hidayat</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Krisnan</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>517</fpage><lpage>524</lpage><page-range>517-524</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.32592/ARI.2025.80.2.517</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Centella asiatica (Gotu kola) as a neuroprotectant and its potential role in healthy ageing</article-title><source>Trends in Food Science &amp; Technology</source><volume>79</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sabaragamuwa</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Perera</surname><given-names>C.O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Fedrizzi</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><fpage>88</fpage><lpage>97</lpage><page-range>88-97</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tifs.2018.07.024</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-43"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Gut dysbiosis: nutritional causes and risk prevention in poultry, with reference to other animals</article-title><source>South African Journal of Animal Science</source><volume>55</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Salahi</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Abd El-Ghany</surname><given-names>W.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Attia</surname><given-names>Y.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zabermawi</surname><given-names>N.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bovera</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tufarelli</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>32</fpage><lpage>63</lpage><page-range>32-63</page-range><ext-link xlink:href="https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-sajas_v55_n2_a1" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Ejc sajas v55 n2 a1">Ejc sajas v55 n2 a1</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-44"><element-citation publication-type="book"><article-title>Principles and Procedures of Statistics</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Steel</surname><given-names>R.G.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Torrie</surname><given-names>J.H.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1995</year><publisher-name>McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc</publisher-name></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-45"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Herbal supplements for sustainable broiler production during post antibiotic era in Indonesia – an overview</article-title><source>Livestock Research for Rural Development</source><volume>33</volume><issue>8</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sugiharto</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://lrrd.cipav.org.co/lrrd33/8/33103sgh_u.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="8">8</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of Cichorium intybus on production performance, carcass quality and blood lipid profile of hybrid duck</article-title><source>Animal Bioscience</source><volume>36</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Umami</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahayu</surname><given-names>E.R.V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Suhartanto</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Agus</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Suryanto</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahman</surname><given-names>M.M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><fpage>84</fpage><lpage>97</lpage><page-range>84-97</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5713/ab.22.0041</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-47"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Enhancing broiler chicken health and performance: the impact of phytobiotics on growth, gut microbiota, antioxidants, and immunity</article-title><source>Phytochemistry Reviews</source><volume>24</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Urban</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Karwan</surname><given-names>Y.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arkadiusz</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Damian</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Patrycja</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kamil</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Monika</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>2131</fpage><lpage>2145</lpage><page-range>2131-2145</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11101-024-09994-0</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-48"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Application of freeze-drying technology in the food industry: A review</article-title><source>Foods</source><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Uwineza</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2026</year><page-range>790</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/foods15040790</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-49"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of prebiotics, probiotics, and their combination on growth performance, small intestine morphology, and resident Lactobacillus of male broilers</article-title><source>Poultry Science</source><volume>95</volume><issue>6</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Farnell</surname><given-names>Y.Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Peebles</surname><given-names>E.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kiess</surname><given-names>A.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wamsley</surname><given-names>K.G.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhai</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2016</year><fpage>1332</fpage><lpage>1340</lpage><page-range>1332-1340</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps/pew030</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-50"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of encapsulated cinnamaldehyde on growth performance, intestinal digestive and absorptive functions, meat quality and gut microbiota in broiler chickens</article-title><source>Translational Animal Science</source><volume>5</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Diarra</surname><given-names>M.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodas-Gonzales</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lepp</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mogire</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gong</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>16</lpage><page-range>1-16</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/tas/txab099</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-51"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Encapsulation of bioactive compounds for food and agricultural applications</article-title><source>Polymers</source><volume>14</volume><issue>19</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zabot</surname><given-names>G.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodrigues</surname><given-names>F.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ody</surname><given-names>L.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tres</surname><given-names>M.V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Herrera</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Palacin</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Córdova-Ramos</surname><given-names>J.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Best</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Olivera-Montenegro</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>4194</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/polym14194194</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-52"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Biosynthesis and bioactivities of triterpenoids from Centella asiatica: Challenges and opportunities</article-title><source>Biotechnology Advances</source><volume>108541</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zeng</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Luo</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.biotechadv.2025.108541</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-53"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Cellular composition and differentiation signaling in chicken small intestinal epithelium</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>9</volume><issue>11</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><page-range>870</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani9110870</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>