Figure 1.
Femur break force was significantly greater in birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (228.35±16.22) compared to birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin (177.15±14.22) or controls (170.03±11.18; p<0.01).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 2.
Maximum force sustained by femurs during testing was significantly greater in birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (233.17±16.41) compared to controls (180.13±11.33) or birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin (184.55±13.97; p<0.05).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Table 1.
Femur Physical and Strength Properties.
Table 2.
Tibia Physical and Strength Properties.
Table 3.
Egg and Shell Weights.
Figure 3.
Tibias were significantly longer in birds treated with low (114.36±0.87), medium (115.48±0.51), or high (115.55±0.69) concentrations of melatonin compared to those from control birds (106.41±3.55; p<0.01).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 4.
Median tibia thickness at the break was significantly greater in birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (0.70±0.06) compared to those from birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin (0.47±0.06; p<0.05).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 5.
Tibia break force was significantly greater in birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (244.03±14.19) compared to those from birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin 203.37±11.21) or those from controls (173.00±13.21; p<0.01).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 6.
Maximum force sustained by tibias was significantly greater in birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (251.09±13.51) compared to those from birds treated with medium concentrations of melatonin (207.40±8.26) or controls (182.97±12.16; p<0.001), and significantly greater in birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin (225.13±8.86) compared to those from control birds (p<0.001).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 7.
Weight of medullary bone was significantly affected by treatment (p<0.001), but no Tukey's post-hoc test pairwise comparison between controls (0.25±0.03), birds treated with low (0.20±0.01), medium, (0.16±0.00), or high (0.25±0.01) concentrations of melatonin was significant.
Figure 8.
Total egg weight was significantly greater in birds treated with low (63.69±0.37), medium (63.58±0.26), or high (63.04±0.34) concentrations of melatonin compared to those laid by control birds (61.67±0.36; p<0.001).
Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 9.
Egg shell weight was significantly greater when laid by control birds (7.90±0.05) compared to birds treated with low (5.51±0.04), medium (5.44±0.03), or high concentrations of melatonin (5.36±0.04; p<0.001).
Egg shell weight was significantly greater when laid by birds treated with low concentrations of melatonin compared to eggs laid by birds treated with high concentrations of melatonin (p<0.001). Groups sharing a letter are not significantly different.
Figure 10.
Egg content weight was significantly greater when laid by birds treated with low (58.18±0.35), medium (58.14±0.24), or high concentrations of melatonin (57.68±0.31) compared to those laid by control birds (53.77±0.34; p<0.001).
Figure 11.
Melatonin levels in plasma from control (A), low melatonin (B), medium melatonin (C) and high melatonin (D) treated birds.
Melatonin levels were rhythmic in control (p<0.02), low (p<0.02) and medium birds (p<0.05), but non-rhythmic after high melatonin treatment.