Nutritive value of expeller/cold-pressed canola meal and pre-pressed solvent-extracted carinata meal for broiler chicken.

A study was conducted to evaluate standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids (AA) and nitrogen-corrected apparent metabolizable energy (AMEn) values of pre-pressed solvent-extracted carinata meal (SE-carinata meal) and expeller/cold-pressed canola meal (ECP-canola meal) for broilers. Two hundred and forty broiler chicks were divided into 40 groups of 6 birds/group and fed 4 diets in a completely randomized design (10 groups/diet) from 14 to 21 d of age. The diets were cornstarch-based containing SE-carinata meal, ECP-canola meal, or pre-pressed solvent-extracted canola meal (SE-canola meal; reference feedstuff) as the sole protein source, and N-free diet. Digestibility of AA and N retention for feedstuffs was determined by the direct method, whereas energy retention of feedstuffs was determined by difference from the N-free diet. On DM basis, SE-canola meal, ECP-canola meal, and SE-carinata meal contained 43, 36, and 50% CP; 2.60, 2.21, and 1.82% Lys; 32, 29, and 27% neutral detergent fiber, and 1.1, 15.3, and 0.88% ether extract, respectively. On DM basis, the AMEn value was lowest (P < 0.05) for SE-carinata meal (1,295 kcal/kg), intermediate (P < 0.05) for SE-canola meal (1,608 kcal/kg), and greatest (P < 0.05) for ECP-canola meal (1,994 kcal/kg). The SID values of indispensable AA for ECP-canola meal were greater (P < 0.05) than those for SE-canola meal or SE-carinata meal. The SID values of all indispensable AA (except Gly, Lys, and Trp) for SE-carinata meal were greater (P < 0.05) than those for SE-canola meal. The SE-canola meal and SE-carinata meal did not differ in SID of Gly and Trp; however, SE-carinata meal had lower (P < 0.05) SID of Lys than SE-canola meal. The results indicate that ECP-canola meal fed in this study could be a good source of AA and energy for broilers. Results also indicate that SE-carinata meal fed in this study could be an attractive AA source for broiler diet, but could benefit from Lys fortification due it its low SID Lys value.

Effects of supplementing processed straw during late gestation on sow physiology, lactation feed intake, and offspring body weight and carcass quality1.

This study investigated the effects of supplementing late gestation sow diets with processed or unprocessed oat or wheat straw on physiology, early lactation feed intake, and offspring performance. One hundred fifty gestating sows were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 dietary treatments (30 sows per diet) from day 86 of gestation until farrowing. Treatments, arranged as a 2 × 2 factorial plus a control, were a standard gestation diet (control) or control supplemented with 10% wheat or oat straw, processed or unprocessed. Sows were fed a standard lactation diet postfarrowing. The processed straws were produced by high-pressure compaction at 80 °C. On day 101 of gestation (day 15 of the trial), blood samples were collected from a subset of sows (n = 8 per treatment) through ear vein catheters and analyzed for insulin, insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), prolactin, glucose, and urea concentrations. Fecal samples were collected on days 103 to 104 of gestation to determine nutrient digestibility, and feeding motivation was investigated on day 104. Litter characteristics and sow feed intake were recorded for 7 d postfarrowing. Three piglets per litter were selected at weaning, fed standard diets, and followed to market. Treatment had no effect on feeding motivation, piglet characteristics at birth, estimated milk production, and offspring BW at market or carcass quality. Processed straw improved DM digestibility and energy content and the effect was greater with oat straw (straw × processing effect, P < 0.05). Pre- and postprandial glucose concentrations tended to decrease (P < 0.10) with processing of wheat, but not oat straw, and this effect was more apparent in the preprandial samples. Preprandial prolactin concentration increased with oat but decreased with wheat straw, whereas postprandial IGF-1 and prolactin concentration increased with processing of wheat, but not oat straw (straw × processing, P < 0.05). Sow lactation feed intake improved (P < 0.05) with oat straw supplementation relative to wheat straw. Piglet weaning weight increased (P < 0.05) with oat straw supplementation and processing improved (P < 0.05) nursery exit BW. However, straw supplementation, regardless of processing, had no effect on offspring BW at market or carcass quality. Overall, oat straw supplementation had a greater impact on sow physiology and provided benefits for sows in late gestation, and there was some indication that further benefits could be obtained through mild processing.

Supplementation with live yeast increases rate and extent of in vitro fermentation of nondigested feed ingredients by fecal microbiota.

Two studies were conducted to investigate the effect of live yeast (LY) on the in vitro fermentation characteristics of wheat, barley, corn, soybean meal (SBM), canola meal, and distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). In Study 1, LY yeast was added directly to in vitro fermentations inoculated with feces from lactating sows, whereas as in study 2, feces collected from lactating sows fed LY as a daily supplement was used. Selected feedstuffs were digested and the residue added to separate replicated (n = 3) fermentation reactions. Study 1 was conducted in two blocks, whereas study 2 was conducted using feces collected after a period of 3 (Exp. 1) or 4 wk (Exp. 2) of LY supplementation. Accumulated gas produced over 72 h was modeled for each substrate and the kinetics parameters compared between LY and control groups. The molar ratio of the volatile fatty acids (VFAs) produced in vitro were also compared at 12 and 72 h of incubation. In study 1, in vitro addition of yeast increased (P < 0.001) the rate of gas production (Rmax). However, a yeast × substrate effect (P < 0.05) observed for total gas accumulated (A), time to half asymptote (B), and time required to reach maximum rate of fermentation (Tmax) suggested that yeast-mediated increases in extent and rate of fermentation varied by substrate. Greater total gas production was observed only for corn and SBM, associated with greater B and Tmax. Supplementation with LY appeared to increase A and Rmax although with variation between experiments and substrates. In Exp. 1, LY decreased (P < 0.05) B and Tmax. However, a yeast × substrate effect (P < 0.05) was observed for only A (for wheat, barley, corn, and corn DDGS) and Rmax (wheat, barley, corn, and wheat DDGS). In Exp. 2, LY increased (P < 0.0001) A and decreased B. However, an interaction (P < 0.05) with substrates was observed for Rmax (except SBM) and Tmax. With exception of the DDGS samples, LY supplementation increased (P < 0.05) VFA production at 12 and 72 h of incubation. Yeast increased (P < 0.05) the molar ratios of acetic acid and branch-chain fatty acids at 12 h of incubation; however, this response was more variable by substrate at 72 h. In conclusion, LY supplementation increased the rate and extent of in vitro fermentation of a variety of substrates prepared from common feedstuffs. Greater effects were observed when LY was fed to sows than added directly in vitro, suggesting effects on fermentation were not mediated directly.