Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of inclusion level and amino acid supplementation on energy values of soybean oil determined with difference or regression methods in growing pigs

  • Wang, Qiuyun (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Agriculture Feed Industry Centre, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Huang, Chengfei (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Agriculture Feed Industry Centre, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Liu, Mei (Milk and Dairy Product Inspection Center of the Ministry of Agriculture) ;
  • Liu, Ling (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Agriculture Feed Industry Centre, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Zhang, Shuai (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Agriculture Feed Industry Centre, China Agricultural University)
  • Received : 2018.12.04
  • Accepted : 2019.03.07
  • Published : 2020.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of inclusion level and amino acid (AA) supplementation on energy values of soybean oil (SO) as determined by difference method or regression method when fed to growing pigs. Methods: Thirty-six barrows (initial body weight: 28.0±1.3 kg) were randomly assigned to one of 6 dietary treatments, which included 2 control diets formulated using a basal diet with or without AA supplementation, and 4 experimental diets with 5% or 10% SO addition in the 2 control diets, respectively. All pigs were individually housed in metabolism crates for 19 d, and during the last 5 d, total urine and feces production were collected. The nutrient digestibility in diets and the digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) values of SO were determined using the difference method and the regression method, respectively. Results: Our results showed that there were no interaction effects (p>0.05) between AA supplementation and SO inclusion levels on energy values of SO and dietary nutrient digestibility. The DE and ME values of SO determined by the difference method were not affected (p>0.05) by AA supplementation, however, the ME value of SO increased (p<0.05) as the inclusion level of SO increased. Moreover, the energy values of SO determined using the regression method were close to those determined using difference method with 10% SO inclusion, but were greater than those obtained using difference method with 5% SO inclusion. Conclusion: We concluded that the DE and ME values of SO increased with the inclusion level but were not affected by AA supplementation in the range of 0% to 10%. The difference method can substitute for the regression method to determine the DE and ME values of SO when the inclusion level is 10%, but not at 5% inclusion level.

Keywords

References

  1. Wiseman J, Cole DJA, Hardy B. The dietary energy values of soya-bean oil, tallow and their blends for growing/finishing pigs. Anim Sci 1990;50:513-8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000 3356100005006
  2. Powles J, Wiseman J, Cole DJA, Jagger S. Prediction of the apparent digestible energy value of fats given to pigs. Anim Sci 1995;61:149-54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S13577298000 13631
  3. Cervantes-Pahm SK, Stein HH. Effect of dietary soybean oil and soybean protein concentration on the concentration of digestible amino acids in soybean products fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2008;86:1841-9. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0721
  4. Adedokun SA, Pescatore AJ, Ford MJ, Jacob JP, Helmbrecht A. Examining the effect of dietary electrolyte balance, energy source, and length of feeding of nitrogen-free diets on ileal endogenous amino acid losses in broilers. Poult Sci 2017;96:3351-60. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pex159
  5. Niyazov SA, Kalnitsky BD. Effects of low-protein diets with different levels of essential amino acids and metabolizable energy on productivity and metabolic processes in pigs. Russ Agric Sci 2018;44:75-9. https://doi.org/10.3103/S1068367 418010135
  6. Gous RM, Faulkner AS, Swatson HK. The effect of dietary energy:protein ratio, protein quality and food allocation on the efficiency of utilisation of protein by broiler chickens. Br Poult Sci 2018;59:100-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668. 2017.1390211
  7. Niyazov SA, Kalnitsky BD. Productivity and nitrogen metabolism in pigs fed low-protein diets with various levels of essential amino acids. Russ Agric Sci 2014;40:470-4. https://doi.org/10.3103/S1068367414060184
  8. Sauvant D, Perez JM, Tran G. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed materials: pig, poultry, sheep, goats, rabbits, horses, fish. Paris, France: Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands and INRA; 2004.
  9. Su YB, Bi XH, Ma XK, et al. Determination and prediction of the digestible and metabolizable energy content of lipid sources fed to growing pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2015 209:119-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2015.07.004
  10. Rosero DS, Odle J, Arellano C, Boyd RD, Van HE. Development of prediction equations to estimate the apparent digestible energy content of lipids when fed to lactating sows. J Anim Sci 2015;93:1165-76. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8402
  11. Committee on Nutrient Requirements of Swine, National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of swine. 11th ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press; 2012.
  12. Allee GL, Hines RH. Influence of fat level and calorie: protein ratio on performance and carcass composition of young pigs. In: Swine day; 1972 Nov 2; Manhattan, KS, USA. Manhattan, KS, USA: Kansas State University, Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service; 1972. p. 29-32.
  13. Kronfeld DS. Dietary fat affects heat production and other variables of equine performance, under hot and humid conditions. Equine Vet J Suppl 1996;28:24-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.1996.tb05028.x
  14. Kil DY, Sauber TE, Jones DB, Stein HH. Effect of the form of dietary fat and the concentration of dietary neutral detergent fiber on ileal and total tract endogenous losses and apparent and true digestibility of fat by growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2010;88:2959-67. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2216
  15. Su YB, She Y, Huang Q, et al. The effect of inclusion level of soybean oil and palm oil on their digestible and metabolizable energy content determined with the difference and regression method when fed to growing pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2015;28:1751-9. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.14.0498
  16. Zhao JB, Shi CX, Li ZC, et al. Effects of supplementary amino acids on available energy of soybean meal determined by difference and regression methods fed to growing pigs. Anim Sci J 2018;89:404-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12940
  17. Wiseman J, Cole DJA. The digestible and metabolizable energy of two fat blends for growing pigs as influenced by level of inclusion. Anim Sci 1987;45:117-22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100036709
  18. Jorgensen H, Fernandez JA. Chemical composition and energy value of different fat sources for growing pigs. Acta Agric Scand A Anim Sci 2000;50:129-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/090647000750014250
  19. Adeola O. Digestion and balance techniques in pigs. In: Lewis AJ, Southern LL, editors. Swine nutrition. 2nd ed. New York, USA: CRC Press; 2001. p. 903-16.
  20. Sukhija PS, Palmquist DL. Rapid method for determination of total fatty acid content and composition of feedstuffs and feces. J Agric Food Chem 1988;36:1202-6. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf00084a019
  21. AOCS. Official methods and recommended practices of the American Oil Chemists' Society, 6th edn. Urbana IL, USA: AOCS; 2011.
  22. Mireia O, Gemma V, Jordi E, et al. Determination of the iodine value of biodiesel using 1H NMR with 1,4-dioxane as an internal standard. Fuel 2010;89:3489-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2010.06.016
  23. AOAC. Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 18th edn. Washington DC, USA: AOAC International; 2005.
  24. Jaworski NW, Liu DW, Li DF, Stein HH. Wheat bran reduces concentrations of digestible, metabolizable, and net energy in diets fed to pigs, but energy values in wheat bran determined by the difference procedure are not different from values estimated from a linear regression procedure. J Anim Sci 2016;94:3012-21. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016-0352
  25. Mateos GG, Sell JL, Eastwood JA. Rate of food passage (transit time) as influenced by level of supplemental fat. Poult Sci 1982;61:94-100. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0610094
  26. Jorgensen H, Jensen SK, Eggum BO. The influence of rapeseed oil on digestibility, energy metabolism and tissue fatty acid composition in pigs. Acta Agric Scand A Anim Sci 1996;46:65-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064709609415854
  27. Coble KF, Burnett DD, Derouchey JM, et al. Effect of diet type and added copper on growth performance, carcass characteristics, energy digestibility, gut morphology, and mucosal mRNA expression of finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 2018;96:3288-301. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky196
  28. Kerr BJ, Weber TE, Dozier WA, Kidd MT. Digestible and metabolizable energy content of crude glycerin originating from different sources in nursery pigs. J Anim Sci 2009;87:4042-9. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1676
  29. Villamide MJ. Methods of energy evaluation of feed ingredients for rabbits and their accuracy. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1996;57:211-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(95)00 855-1