Introduction: There is a decline in the quality and nutritive value of eggs in aged laying hens. Fruit pomaces with high nutritional and functional values have gained interest in poultry production to improve the performance., Methods: The performance, egg nutritive value, lipid metabolism, ovarian health, and cecal microbiota abundance were evaluated in aged laying hens (320 laying hens, 345-day-old) fed on a basal diet (control), and a basal diet inclusion of 0.25%, 0.5%, or 1.0% fermented Aronia melanocarpa pomace (FAMP) for eight weeks., Results: The results show that 0.5% FAMP reduced the saturated fatty acids (such as C16:0) and improved the healthy lipid indices in egg yolks by decreasing the atherogenicity index, thrombogenic index, and hypocholesterolemia/hypercholesterolemia ratio and increasing health promotion index and desirable fatty acids ( P < 0.05). Additionally, FAMP supplementation (0.25%-1.0%) increased ( P < 0.05) the ovarian follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and estrogen 2 levels, while 1.0% FAMP upregulated the HSD3B1 expression. The expression of VTG II and ApoVLDL II in the 0.25% and 0.5% FAMP groups, APOB in the 0.5% FAMP group, and ESR2 in the 1% FAMP group were upregulated ( P < 0.05) in the liver. The ovarian total antioxidant capacity was increased ( P < 0.05) by supplementation with 0.25%-1.0% FAMP. Dietary 0.5% and 1.0% FAMP downregulated ( P < 0.05) the Keap1 expression, while 1.0% FAMP upregulated ( P < 0.05) the Nrf2 expression in the ovary. Furthermore, 1.0% FAMP increased cecal acetate, butyrate, and valerate concentrations and Firmicutes while decreasing Proteobacteria ( P < 0.05)., Conclusion: Overall, FAMP improved the nutritive value of eggs in aged laying hens by improving the liver-blood-ovary function and cecal microbial and metabolite composition, which might help to enhance economic benefits., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 Li, Qin, Chen, Kong, Zhu, Azad, Cui, Lan and He.)