Research Article

Apple Cider Vinegar Supplementation: Effects on Abdominal Fat and Growth Performance in Local Crossbred Chickens

Dian Septinova1*, Juli Agustina Jahara2, Muhammad Ramadhan2, Rizki Ananda2, Syahrio Tantalo2, Khaira Nova1

1Department of Animal Husbandry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lampung, Jl. Prof. Dr. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1, Bandar Lampung, 35145, Indonesia; 2Department of Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lampung, Prof. Soemantri Brojonegoro Street No 1 Gedung Meneng, Bandar Lampung, Lampung Province, Indonesia 35145.

Received | September 20, 2025; Accepted | January 06, 2025; Published | February 09, 2026

*Correspondence | Dian Septinova, Department of Animal Husbandry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lampung, Jl. Prof. Dr. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1, Bandar Lampung, 35145, Indonesia; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Septinova D, Jahara JA, Ramadhan M, Ananda R, Tantalo S, Nova K (2026). Apple cider vinegar supplementation: Effects on abdominal fat and growth performance in local crossbred chickens. J. Anim. Health Prod. 14(1): 297-304.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.jahp/2026/14.1.297.304

ISSN (Online) | 2308-2801

Copyright: 2026 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

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

INTRODUCTION

Native chickens are valued for their distinctive flavor and meat texture, which are considered superior by some consumers compared with broiler chickens (Purba et al., 2020). However, their main limitation is low feed efficiency, resulting in high production cost and less competitive market prices (Iskandar et al., 2022). To address these limitations, a local crossbred chicken strain (LCC) was developed, called the ULU chicken, a cross between a Pelung male and a Hubbard female. Local crossbred chickens have the potential to be an alternative to native chickens with faster growth while still maintaining local characteristics. However, as a new strain, LCCs still face challenges in feed efficiency and relatively high production costs, making their implementation on a large scale less than optimal.

Supplementation with natural feed additives, such as organic acids, can enhance feed efficiency and LCC growth performance. Studies have shown that organic acids enhance poultry performance, health status, and nutrition absorption (Ashayerizadeh et al., 2025; Abdulkareem et al., 2023; Okoye and Paraloo, 2019). One potential source of natural organic acids is apple cider vinegar (ACV).

Apple cider vinegar which is the result of fermenting apple juice at a low pH (2--3) (Jahantigh et al., 2021). Apple cider vinegar has antibacterial and antioxidant properties (Hayajneh et al., 2018) and contains various active compounds such as organic acids (acetic, citric, formic, lactic, malic, and succinic), polyphenols, flavonoids, minerals, and vitamins (Naziroğlu et al., 2014). Administering ACV has been shown to improve digestive function, reduce body fat levels, regulate blood pressure, strengthen the immune system, and improve the growth performance of broiler chickens (Jahantigh et al., 2021; Hayajneh et al., 2018). In poultry production, excessive abdominal fat is undesirable because it reduces carcass yields, increases production cost, and decreases consumer preference for leaner meat. Therefore, strategies that can lower abdominal fat without compromising growth performance are beneficial for both producers and consumers.

While ACV has been tested extensively in commercial broilers, scientific information regarding its application in LCC such as ULU is still scarce. Given that local chickens and their crosses often exhibit different physiological responses and are generally more resilient and adaptable to environmental stressors, it is important to validate whether ACV supplementation provides similar benefits in this unique genetic background. Furthermore, determining an optimal low dose is essential because excessive or continuous ACV administration may negatively affect liver function (Abatan et al., 2023).

Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the effect of different ACV doses in drinking water on the growth performance, carcass yield, and abdominal fat deposition of LCC. The findings are expected to provide novel insights into the nutritional management of this newly developed strain and contribute to the development of sustainable feeding strategies that meet both consumer demand for leaner meat and producer goals for better feed efficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experimental animals and maintenance

The experiment was conducted for 7 weeks from November 2023 to January 2024 at the Teaching Farm, Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Lampung. A total of 200 days old LCC, derived from a Pelung male and a Hubbard broiler female, were used.

Ambient temperature and relative humidity were recorded daily at 6:00 AM, 12:00 PM, and 10:00 PM Western Indonesian Time (WIB) and averaged weekly. The average temperature ranged from 24.57 to 31.70 °C, and relative humidity ranged from 66.54 to 86.88% during the experimental period (Table 1). Ambient temperature and relative humidity were measured using a digital thermohygrometer, placed at the center of the inner wall of the chicken house, approximately 160 cm above the floor. The chickens were fed commercial BR-11 feed produced by PT. Universal Agribisnisindo, commonly used by LCC breeders. Information on the feed’s nutrient composition was obtained from the product label and is presented in Table 2 as a reference for nutrient formulation. During the starter and grower phases of the LCC study period, farmers raising LCC followed common feeding practices by providing a single commercial feed (21% CP). Feed was offered ad libitum throughout the study.

The apple cider vinegar was added to drinking water between 7:00 AM and 12:00 PM WIB. The goal was to avoid the negative effects of continuous administration. The apple cider vinegar concentration (v/v) given refers to the number of liters of drinking water. Drinking water consumption was not measured, but the amount of drinking water given, whether with or without ACV, was based on the water requirements of local chickens.

 

Table 1: Average temperature and relative humidity during the study (Mean ± SD).

Week	Morning (6:00 AM WIB)		Noon (12:00 PM WIB)		Night (10:00 PM WIB)
	Temp (oC)	RH (%)	Temp (oC)	RH (%)	Temp (oC)	RH (%)
1	25.16 ± 0.75	83.02 ± 2.28	31.27 ± 1.12	67.67 ± 2.09	26.23 ± 1.01	85.27 ± 2.15
2	25.07 ± 0.81	84.33 ± 2.05	31.03 ± 1.67	68.33 ± 2.48	25.10 ± 1.12	86.63 ± 2.01
3	25.28 ± 1.11	84.33 ± 1.98	31.70 ± 0.97	66.81 ± 2.89	26.34 ± 1.90	83.33 ± 0.33
4	24.57 ± 1.13	86.88 ± 1.56	30.53 ± 2. 01	66.54 ± 2.56	24.67 ± 1.52	85.15 ± 0.73
5	25.42 ± 0.78	83.56 ± 2.01	30.27 ± 1.88	65.81 ± 1.89	26.37 ± 1.78	82.32 ± 1.20
6	24.76 ± 0.78	85.67 ± 2.32	30.41 ± 0.89	69.33 ± 2.01	25.27 ± 0.88	83.16 ± 2.22
7	24.81 ± 1.11	84.07 ± 1.15	30.03 ± 0.79	70.07 ± 2.52	26.43 ± 1.64	82.33 ± 2.51

 

RH: relative humidity; WIB: Western Indonesian Time

 

Table 2: Nutrient composition of research feed.

Nutriens	Quantity (%)
Water (%)	Max. 12
Crude protein (%)*	21
Crude fat (%)	Min. 5
Crude fiber (%)	Max. 5
Ash (%)	Max. 7
Calcium (%)	0.8 – 1.1
Phosphorus (%)	Min. 0.5
Lysine (%)	Min. 1.2
Methionine	Min. 0.45
Methionine + cystine (%)	Min. 0.8
Tryptophan (%)	Min. 0.19
Threonine (%)	Min. 0.75

 

Source: PT, Universal Agri Bisnisindo (2023). *Animal Feed Laboratory, Department of Animal Husbandry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lampung, (2023)

 

Dilute ACV solutions were prepared by measuring 2.5 mL, 5.0 mL, or 7.5 mL of ACV using a measuring cylinder and adding water to a total volume of 1 L to obtain concentrations of 0.25%, 0.50%, and 0.75%, respectively. The apple cider vinegar infused water was then fed to the chickens in 500 ml cylinders (1 L capacity) for each experimental plot.

Disease prevention measures carried out during the study were Newcastle (ND) and avian influenza (AI) vaccinations via injection on day 14 and infectious bursa (IBD) via eye drops on day 24. In addition, sanitation and biosecurity activities were also implemented routinely. During the study, no drugs were given to the chickens.

The apple cider vinegar used in this study was a commercial product manufactured by PT. BestHoney. This vinegar contains 4% acetic acid and a pH of 3.2. According to the manufacturer’s description, this vinegar also contains nutrients such as magnesium, iron, phosphorus, manganese, amino acids, and natural antioxidants.

Experimental design

The study used a completely randomized design (CRD) with four treatments of ACV concentration in drinking water, namely 0% (control), 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75% (v/v) per liter of drinking water. Each treatment consisted of five replications, and each replication consisted of 10 chickens as one experimental unit. Each experimental unit measures 1.0 m² and is placed in an open stage-style cage with a wooden slat floor.

Parameters

The parameters observed were (1) feed intake (g/bird), (2) body weight gain (g/bird), (3) feed conversion ratio, (4) body weight per week (g/bird), (5) carcass weight (g), (6) abdominal fat weight (g), and (7) giblet weight (g). Feed intake was measured once per week by recording the feed offered and the remaining feed in each pen, and weekly values were calculated as the difference. Body weight was weighed individually once a week using a digital scale with a precision of 0.01 g (± 0.5% error) and averaged. Feed intake and body weight gain were calculated on a phase basis and expressed as g/bird. Feed conversion ratio was calculated as the ratio of total feed intake to total body weight gain for each phase. For carcass weight observation, at 49 days of age, one rooster with a weight close to the average was selected from each experimental unit. After slaughtering using the halal/kosher neck-cutting method followed by complete bleeding, scalding, defeathering, and evisceration, carcass weight was recorded immediately after evisceration.

This study implemented chicken management and slaughter in accordance with animal welfare principles with official ethical clearance from the University of Lampung (No. 73204/UN26.14/2024). In addition to complying with national animal welfare regulations, the slaughter procedure also adhered to halal standards. Poultry were fasted for 6 hours with free access to water before slaughter.

Abdominal fat weight was obtained by weighing the fat collected around the gizzard, intestines, and stomach lining. The collected fat was then weighed using a digital scale with an accuracy of 0.01 g.

Data analysis

All data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) at a 5% significance level using Microsoft Excel 2016 software. The analysis followed the statistical model of a completely randomized design (CRD): Yij=μ+Ti+εij. Where Yij is response or observation value of the ith treatment and jth replication, µ is the overall mean, Ti is the effect of treatment i, εij is the experimental error, i is the ith treatment (1, 2, 3, 4), and j is the ith repetition (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). When significant differences were detected, means were compared using the least significance difference (LSD).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Feed intake

Table 3 shows that ACV supplementation in drinking water at levels of 0.25–0.75% had no significance effect (P > 0.05) on feed intake, either in the starter phase (weeks 1–4) or the grower phase (weeks 5–7). Feed intake ranged from 1149.78 ± 35.89 g/bird (0.25% ACV) to 1196.87 ± 25.94 g/bird (0.5% ACV) in the starter phase and between 1487.76 ± 71.25 g/bird (0.25% ACV) and 1566.07 ± 58.43 g/bird (0.5% ACV) in the grower phase. This feed intake is within the normal range for LCC.

 

Table 3: Local crossbred chickens performance with ACV administration (Mean ± SD).

Parameters	ACV Doses
	0.0%	0.25%	0.5%	0.75%
Feed intake (g/bird)
Starter (1 –4 weeks)	1184.20 ± 96.45	1149.78 ± 35.89	1196.87 ±25.94	1168.54 ± 58.42
Grower (5 –7 weeks)	1495.83 ± 69.90	1487.76 ± 71.25	1566.07 ± 58.43	1506.10 ± 90.55
Body weight gain (g/bird)
Starter (1 –4 weeks)	402.78 ± 34.62	384.44 ± 38.62	400.88 ± 55.07	381.30 ± 34.41
Grower (5 –7 weeks)	455.68 ± 67.97	528.00 ± 22.04	465.90 ± 33.01	539.00 ± 67.17
Feed conversion
Starter (1 –4 weeks)	2.95 ± 0.27	3.01 ± 0.37	3.04 ± 0.50	3.08 ± 0.31
Grower (5 –7 weeks)	3.36 ± 0.66b	2.82 ± 0.10a	3.37 ± 0.24b	2.83 ± 0.31a
Body weight (g/bird)
Week 1	94.72 ± 6.83	101.96 ± 2.76	103.32 ± 3.11	103.50 ±3.99
Week 2	212.80 ± 10.88	216.40 ± 16.28	224.90 ± 17.13	220.20 ± 6.82
Week 3	341.40 ± 19.62	339.2 ± 22.52	347.2 ± 20.19	341.3 ± 16.91
Week 4	466.10 ± 31.43	486.40 ± 40.08	504.20 ± 45.73	484.80 ± 32.51
Week 5	610.40 ± 43.25	652.10 ± 40.90	682.70 ± 43.94	685.90 ± 30.28
Week 6	840.50 ± 13.21	800.10 ± 68.93	843.90 ± 74.19	851.60 ± 54.12
Week 7	953.18 ± 46.21	1014.40 ± 55.83	970.10 ± 65.00	1023.80 ± 70.27

 

Note: Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (P < 0.05). ACV: apple cider vinegar.

 

The insignificant difference in feed intake indicates that moderate ACV supplementation does not reduce feed palatability, thus reducing feed intake. Apple cider vinegar has a strong sour taste. Using ACV at high doses can suppress appetite (Ibrahim et al., 2023). In this study, LCC were able to tolerate the sour taste of ACV. This finding indicates that LCC have good adaptability to changes in drinking water composition, a trait previously associated with their superior resistance to dietary and environmental stressors compared to commercial broilers (Nangoi and Karisoh, 2018).

Although ACV has been shown to lower intestinal pH and alter enzyme activity in broilers (Galli et al., 2021), thereby increasing feed intake, these effects were less pronounced in LCC, resulting in more consistent nutrient intake across treatments. Consistency in feed intake is beneficial in production systems because it ensures predictable growth patterns and avoids economic losses due to reduced intake. These results align with those of Ashayerizadeh et al. (2025) and Sun et al. (2022), who reported no significant effect of ACV on broiler feed intake. Furthermore, Allahdo et al. (2018) added that the decrease in intake only occurred at higher ACV concentrations. In local KUB chickens, Septinova et al. (2024) also reported that the negative effect of citric acid on feed inteka was temporary and only occurred in the early weeks of growth. Overall, our findings indicate that intermittent ACV supplementation at 0.25- 0.75% is safe and does not negatively impact feed intake.

The absence of significant differences in feed intake among treatments suggests that the ACV concentrations used (0.25-0.75%) did not reduce water palatability. However, as water intake was not directly measured in this study, future research should include this parameter to better quantify the actual amount of ACV consumed per bird.

Body weight gain

Body weight gain (BWG) of LCC ranged from 381.30 to 402.78 g/bird during the starter phase (weeks 1–4) and 455.68 to 539 g/bird during the grower phase (weeks 5–7). The body weight gain off chickens supplemented with 0.25 - 0.75% ACV was not significantly different (P > 0.05) from the control (Table 3). Although not statistically significant, chickens receiving ACV tended to exhibit slightly higher BWG.

The non-significant difference in BWG indicates that low levels of ACV do not impair growth performance and may even support normal growth by maintaining gut health and efficient nutrient absorption. ACV can lower gastrointestinal pH, increase the population of beneficial Lactobacillus spp., and enhance proteolytic enzyme activity, which theoretically improves nutrient utilization (Adil et al., 2011; Dai et al., 2020).

The slow growth rate and high genetic variability of LCC (Iskandar et al., 2022) may be the reasons for the non-significant difference in BWG. This finding aligns with Jahantigh et al. (2021), who reported that ACV supplementation did not significantly improve broiler growth at the same dose range, but differs from Tasharofi et al. (2017), who found that date vinegar increased weight gain at a higher rate. These results confirm that intermittent ACV supplementation is safe and does not interfere with BWG. Longer supplementation periods, higher doses, or combined use with other additives (e.g., probiotics or enzymes) may be necessary to achieve a more significant effect.

Although feed intake and BWG were not significantly affected, ACV supplementation significantly (P < 0.5) affected feed conversion during the grower phase. Chickens receiving 0.25% and 0.75% ACV had lower feed conversion ratios than the control. This indicates increased feed utilization efficiency, which may be related to improved digestive function and nutrient absorption during later growth stages.

Body weight

Table 3 shows that the body weight of the LCC increased progressively from week 1 to week 7 in all groups. The body weight of the birds was not significantly different (P > 0.05) between treatments. However, the birds receiving ACV tended to have higher final body weights compared to the control group. At week 7, the highest final body weight was recorded in the 0.75% ACV group (1023.8 ± 70.27 g/bird), followed by the 0.25% ACV group (1014.4 ± 55.83 g/bird), while the control group had the lowest weight (953.2 ± 46.21 g/bird).

These findings align with Lilly et al. (2011), who reported that administering 0.5% ACV did not cause significant changes in body weight in broiler chickens. However, administering a higher level of ACV (2%) significantly increased final weight (Jahantigh et al., 2021). These differences in results may be related to chicken genotype, dosage, and management conditions, as slow-growing LCC may require longer supplementation to produce a measurable response.

Importantly, the results of this study indicate that intermittent administration of ACV at doses of 0.25 to 0.75% is safe because it does not reduce the final body weight of LCC in either the starter or grower phases. According to a report by Septinova et al. (2025), continuous administration of citric acid to drinking water significantly reduced the final body weight of local KUB chickens in the starter phase. Based on these results, further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of ACV use on LCC over a longer period and to evaluate its interaction with other factors. Nutrients such as fiber or high stocking density can enhance the effect of ACV as a growth promoter (Yudiarti et al., 2020; Ibrahim et al., 2023).

Carcass weight

In this study, the carcass weight of local free-range chickens ranged from 610.8 g to 691.8 g. ACV supplementation did not have a significant effect (P > 0.05) on carcass weight. LCC carcass weights across all treatments were not significantly different (P > 0.05) (Table 4). These results are similar to previous studies by Şengül and Ibrahim (2024) and Allahdo et al. (2018).

Free-range chickens exhibit phenotypic variability and slow growth (Yunus et al., 2024), which may preclude the effects of ACV administration. A longer supplementation period may be necessary to observe significant changes in carcass weight. This is highly likely, as ACV can lower intestinal pH to support beneficial microbiota, increase enzymatic activity, and thus improve nutrient absorption and feed efficiency (Ibrahim et al., 2023; Adeleye et al., 2021).

Carcass is not only a biological indicator but also an economic determinant, directly influencing market value and consumer preference for leaner, meatier carcasses. Therefore, even modest increases in ACV supplementation can provide practical benefits to livestock farmers, particularly in reducing reliance on synthetic additives and supporting more sustainable production systems.

Abdominal fat weight

The results Table 4 show that ACV supplementation in drinking water significantly (P<0.05) reduced abdominal fat weight in ULU chickens. The most significant reduction was observed at the 0.25% ACV level, which resulted in the lowest abdominal fat weight, while the control group had the highest abdominal fat weight. These findings indicate that even relatively low doses of ACV can have a significant

 

Table 4: Carcass, giblet, and abdominal fat of LCC supplemented with ACV (Mean ± SD).

Parameters	ACV Doses
	0.0%	0.25%	0.5%	0.75%
Slaughter weight (g)	956.50 ± 26.32	975.86 ± 64.09	979.31 ± 39	981.80 ± 78.61
Carcass weight (g)	610.80 ± 60.83	660.40 ± 65.44	663.8 ± 77.37	691.80 ± 41.82
Abdominal fat weight (g)	20.76 ± 8.00c	12.58 ± 2.01a	14.50 ± 2.45ab	18.34 ± 3.79bc
Giblet weight (g)	56.00 ± 9.35	51.00 ± 7.45	53.40 ± 4.98	52.80 ± 4.97

 

Note: Different superscripts within the same row indicate significant differences (P < 0.05). ACV: apple cider vinegar.

 

effect on fat metabolism, highlighting its potential as a practical and low-cost intervention to modulate carcass composition in local crossbred chickens.

The reduction in abdominal fat seen in this study is similar to the findings of Ashayerizadeh et al. (2025) and Allahdo et al. (2018), who found that broiler chickens supplemented with 1% and 2% ACV in their drinking water experienced a reduction in abdominal fat. Apple cider vinegar contains acetic acid. This acetic acid can inhibit glycolysis and increase glycogenesis (Sabour et al., 2019). This subsequently reduces glucose availability for acetyl-CoA formation and lipogenesis (fat formation).

Apple cider vinegar may also exert prebiotic-like effects by modulating the gut microbiota, suppressing pathogenic bacteria, and improving gut barrier integrity. This improved gut function enhances nutrient absorption and energy utilization, which may further explain the observed reduction in abdominal fat deposition (Abd El-Hack et al., 2020). These findings emphasize that low-dose apple cider vinegar supplementation (especially 0.25%) is a promising nutritional strategy to improve carcass quality and reduce excess fat accumulation in LCCs without compromising growth performance.

At higher ACV doses (0.50–0.75%), abdominal fat weight tended to increase, but remained lower than abdominal fat in controls. This occurs because increased acidity can alter metabolic balance and increase digestive efficiency, resulting in greater nutrient and energy availability. When this additional energy is not fully directed toward tissue formation or growth, it is stored as increasing abdominal fat.

Giblet weight

The addition of ACV to drinking water had no significant effect (P > 0.05) on giblet weight of LCC. Average giblet weights ranged from 51.0 ± 7.4 g to 56.0 ± 9.3 g (Table 4). This result indicates that ACV supplementation at levels of 0.25–0.75% is physiologically safe, as it does not induce hypertrophy or atrophy of key visceral organs such as the liver, heart, and gizzard.

Maintaining normal giblet weight is important, as these organs play a crucial role in detoxification, nutrient metabolism, and digestion (Abdulkareem et al., 2023). The absence of significant differences suggests that ACV does not create excessive metabolic workload or toxic effects that could alter organ mass. Similar findings were reported by Ashayerizadeh et al. (2025), who found no effect of ACV supplementation on liver and heart weight in broiler chickens. This supports the conclusion that ACV is a safe feed additive for native chickens and can be used as part of a sustainable production strategy without risking organ health.

Conclusions And Recommendations

Supplementation of ACV in drinking water up to 0.75% did not significantly affect feed intake, body weight gain, feed conversion, final body weight, carcass weight, or giblet weight in LCC. However, ACV supplementation particularly at 0.25% significantly (P < 0.05) reduced abdominal fat weight and decrease feed conversion ratio during the grower phase, without adverse effect on growth performance or visceral organ development. These findings suggest that intermittent supplementation of ACV at low concentrations may improve feed efficiency and reduce abdominal fat deposition in LCC. Nevertheless, given the variability observed, further studies are required to confirm these effects and to evaluate their practical applicability.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank the Teaching Farm Team for the permission, support, and facilitation provided during the implementation of the research in the experimental pen.

NOVELTY STATEMENT

The novelty of this research lies in: (1) First-time application of ACV as a natural drinking-water additive in LCC (ULU chickens); (2) Clear evidence that low-dose ACV can significantly reduce abdominal fat while maintaining normal growth and organ function, supporting its use as a safe fat-modulating additive.

AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTIONS

All the authors contributed to the manuscript. DS designed the experiment and drafted the manuscript. JAJ, MR, and RA collected and tabulated the data. ST and KN critically revised and approved the manuscript.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technology statement

The authors declare that no Genrative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

Abatan MO, Adeleye OO, Akamo AJ, Abioja MO, Egbeyale LT, and Dosumu OA (2023). An implication of apple cider vinegar adminstration on the hematology, serum biochemistry, and liver histology of broiler chickens. Thai J. Agric. Sci., 56 (2): 61-73.

Abd El-Hack ME, Alagawany M, Arif M, Wahdan A, Saeed M, Arain MA, and Siyal FA (2020). Effect of organic acid supplementation on growth, carcass traits, and economic efficiency in poultry production. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 27(18), 22301–22312.

Abdulkareem ZA, Mohammed NI, Abdollahi A, Ahmed OR, Ghaffar OR, Khdir HA, Salam DA, Aziz SA, Mustafa MM, Mustafa WM, Abas ZA, Abid OI (2023). Effect of garlic, onion, and apple cider vinegar as a herbal mixture on performance and blood traits of broiler inoculated with chicken infectious anemia virus. Heliyon, 9 (7): e17768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17768

Adeleye OO, Abatan M, Dosumu OA, James AS, Adegoke AV, Mamidu MO, Sodipe OG, Olorunsogbon BF. and Sanwo KA (2021). Apple cider vinegar administration on carcass characteristics and meat quality of broiler chickens. J. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 53: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-021-02967-x

Adil S, Banday T, Bhat GA, Salahuddin M, Raquib M, and Shanaz S (2011). Response of broiler chicken to dietary supplementation of organic acids. J. Central Eur. Agric., 12 (3): 498-508. https://doi.org/10.5513/JCEA01/12.3.947

Allahdo P, Ghodraty JJ, Zarghi H, Saadatfar Z, Kermanshahi H, Dovom MRE (2018). Effect of probiotic and vinegar on growth performance, meat yields, immune responses, and small intestine morphology of broiler chickens. Ital. J. Anim. Sci., 17 (3): 675-685. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2018.1424570

Ashayerizadeh A, Shirazi MRJ, Maradi HR, Kazemi K, Akbarabadi ZK, and Jazi V (2025). Effect of drinking water supplemented with apple vinegar, essential oils, or colistin sulfate on growth performance, blood lipids, antioxidant status, internal morphology, and gut microflora of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 104(2): 104801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2025.104801

Dai D, Qiu K, Zhang HJ, Wu SG, Han YM, Wu YY, Qi GH, and Wang J (2020). Organic acids as alternatives for antibiotic growth promoters alter the intestinal structure and microbiota and improve the growth performance in broilers. Front. Microbiol., https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.618144

Galli GM, Aniecevski, Edemar, Petrolli, Tiago G, da Rosa G, Boiago, Marcel M, Sim˜oes, Claudia ADP, Wagner R, Copetti, Priscila M, Morsch, Vera M, Araujo, Denise N, Marcon H, Pagnussatt H, Santos, H´elio V, Mendes, Ricardo E, Loregian, Kalista E, and Da Silva, Aleksandro S (2021). Growth performance and meat quality of broilers fed with microencapsulated organic acids. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 271: 114706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2020.114706

Hayajneh FMF, Jalal M, zakaria H, and Adelqader A (2018). Anticoccidial effect of apple cider vinegar on broiler chicken: an organic treatment to measure anti-oxidant effect. Polish J. Vet. Sci., 21(2): 361-369. https://doi.org/10.24425/122605

Ibrahim AA, Ahmed SF, Galal MS (2023). Productive and physiological effect of probiotics and apple vinegar on broiler chicken under high stocking density. Egypt. Poult. Sci., 43(2): 419-432. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/850c/a0900d5e1552acf0250e1e1260d1846ceb71.pdf https://doi.org/10.21608/epsj.2023.307389

Iskandar S, Suryani E, Nurcahyo RW (2022). Development strategies of native chicken farming in rural areas: A case study in Indonesia. Trop. Anim. Sci. J., 45 (4), 415–423.

Jahantigh M, Kalantari H, Davari SA, Saadati D (2021). Effects of dietary vinegar on performance, immune response and small intestine histomorphology in 1- to 28-day broiler chickens. Vet. Med. Sci., 7(3): 766-772. https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.408

Lilly KGS , Shires LK, West BN, Beaman KR, Loop SA, Turk PJ, Bissonnette GK, Moritz JS (2011). Strategies to improve performance and reduce preslaughter Salmonella in organic broilers. Appl. Poult. Res., 20(3): 313-321. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2010-00245

Maruta H, Yoshimura Y, Araki A, Kimoto M, Takashi Y (2016). Activation of AMP-activated protein kinase and stimulation of energy metabolism by acetic acid in L6 myotube cells. PLoS One, pp. 0158055. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158055

Nangoy FJ and Karisoh LCH (2018). Pemberdayaan masyarakat pedesaan pada ayam kampung pasawungen di Desa Pahaleten Kecamatan Kakas Kabupaten Minahasa Provinsi Sulawesi Utara. J. LPPM Bidang Sains dan Teknol., 5(2), 57-66. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/lppmsains/article/view/24091

Nazıro˘glu M, Güler M, Ozgül C, Saydam G, Küçükayaz M, S¨ozbir E (2014). Apple cider vinegar modulates serum lipid profile, erythrocyte, kidney, and liver membrane oxidative stress in ovariectomized mice fed high cholesterol. J. Membr. Biol., 247(8): 667–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00232-014-9685-5

Okoye NF and Porolo SB (2019). The effect of apple cider vinegar on the lipid profile and electrolytes of wister rats. Adv. Biol. Biotechnol., 21: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2019/v21i330097

Purba R A, Suryani E, and Syamsu JA (2020). Consumer preferences and sensory evaluation of native chicken meat in Indonesia. Asian J. Agric. Biol., 8(3): 245–251.

Sabour S, Tabeidian SA, Sadeghi G (2019). Dietary organic acid and fiber source affect performance, intestinal morphology, immune response, and gut microflora in broilers. Anim. Nutr., 5(2): 156-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2018.07.004

Şengül O and Ibrahim AK (2024). The Effect on fattening performance and carcass characteristics of adding artichoke vinegar to the drinking water of broiler chickens. Arquivo Brasel. Med. Vet. Zoot., 76(1): 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-13058

Septinova D, Ridwan, Arnenda T, Sari MD, Riyanti R, Hartono M (2025). The effect of continuous administration of drinking water with citric acid on the performance, giblets and internal organs of KUB chickens (2–8 weeks of age). J. Anim. Health Prod., 13(1): 185-191. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.jahp/2025/13.1.185.191

Sun HY, Zhou HB, Liu Y, Wang Y, Zhao C, and Xu LM (2022). Comparison of organic acids supplementation on the growth performance, intestinal characteristics and cecal microflora in broilers fed corn–soybean meal diet. Anim. Biosci., 35(11): 1689–1697. https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.21.0448

Tasharofi S, Yazdanpanah, Goharrizi L, and Mohammadi F (2017). Effects of dietary supplementation of waste date’s vinegar on performance and improvement of digestive tract in broiler chickens. Vet. Res. Forum, 8: 127–132.

Yudiarti T, Isroli I, Yunianto VD (2020). Nutritive and antioxidative properties of some selected agro-industrial by-products fermented with the fungus Chrysonillia crassa as alternative feedstuffs for poultry. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 20 1524: 012145. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1524/1/012145

Yunus LMA, Suryatni NPF, Theedens JF (2024). The effect of the dose of bromelain enzyme administration on the linear size of the body of the first generation Ipb-D1 chickens. Anim. Agric., 2(2): 670-677. https://doi.org/10.59891/animacultura.v2i2.87