Effect of amino acid deficiency on precaecal amino acid digestibility in broiler chickens.

In this study, we determined whether deficient dietary amino acid (AA) concentrations influence the precaecal (pc) AA digestibility when determined using the regression approach. We mixed two basal diets. Basal diet 1 was deficient in essential AAs, whereas adequate AA concentrations were ensured in basal diet 2 by adding free AAs. Rapeseed cake and full-fat soya beans as test ingredients were included in the basal diets at levels of 100 and 200, and 150 and 300 g/kg, respectively, at the expense of maize starch. Each diet was tested with six replicates of 10 broiler chickens each. The feed intake of the chickens that were fed diets based on basal diet 2 was similar, whereas the feed intake of the chickens that were fed diets based on basal diet 1 differed considerably. The numerical differences in pc AA digestibility determined with basal diet 1 or 2 ranged from 2.6 percentage points to 20.8 percentage points in rapeseed cake and from 0.5 percentage points to 15.2 percentage points in soya beans. Across all measured AAs, the average differences were 10.1 percentage points and 5.4 percentage points in rapeseed cake and soya beans, respectively. The differences in the estimated pc AA digestibility between the basal diets were probably caused by different basal endogenous AA losses in the digesta between treatments as a consequence of different feed intake. Adequate AA concentrations and test ingredient levels that are specifically adjusted to avoid a negative effect on feed intake are recommended for future studies.

Influence of feed provisioning prior to digesta sampling on precaecal amino acid digestibility in broiler chickens.

A regression approach was applied to determine the influence of feed provisioning prior to digesta sampling on precaecal (pc) amino acid (AA) digestibility in broiler chickens. Soybean meal was used as an example test ingredient. Five feed-provisioning protocols were investigated, four with restricted provision and one with ad libitum provision. When provision was restricted, feed was provided for 30 min after a withdrawal period of 12 h. Digesta were sampled 1, 2, 4 and 6 h after feeding commenced. A diet containing 300 g maize starch/kg was prepared. Half or all the maize starch was replaced with soybean meal in two other diets. Average pc digestibility of all determined AA in the soybean meal was 86% for the 4 and 6-h protocols and 66% and 60% for the 2 and 1-h protocols, respectively. Average pc AA digestibility of soybean meal was 76% for ad libitum feed provision. Feed provisioning also influenced the determined variance. Variance in digestibility ranked in magnitude 1 h > ad libitum > 2 h > 6 h > 4 h for all AA. Owing to the considerable influence of feed-provisioning protocols found in this study, comparisons of pc AA digestibility between studies applying different protocols prior to digesta sampling must be treated with caution. Digestibility experiments aimed at providing estimates for practical feed formulation should use feed-provisioning procedures similar to those used in practice.

Studies on the intestine section to be sampled in broiler studies on precaecal amino acid digestibility.

Measurements of precaecal amino acid digestibility with digesta sampled from slaughtered animals may be affected by the chosen length of the sampled section. The length needs standardization, therefore, when digestibility is understood to be a measure of feedstuff potential. It was our objective to study the change in the net disappearance of amino acids from the lower small intestine of broiler chicken. The section between Meckel's diverticulum and 2 cm anterior of the ileo-caeco-colonic junction was cut into three subsections of equal length: proximal, medial, and terminal. The contents of each subsection were pooled within the birds of each pen (12 in Experiment 1 and 10 in Experiment 2). TiO2 was used as an indigestible marker. Prior to digesta sampling, broilers had been fed the experimental diets for seven days. In Experiment 1, two diets with either soybean meal or a mix of soybean meal and peas as the main protein sources were used. Each diet was allocated to eight pens and feeding commenced on day 14 of age. Net disappearance was significantly affected by diet only in regard to aspartic acid and methionine. No significant interaction between diet and subsection occurred. Net disappearance was significantly affected by subsection for all amino acids. It ranged from 74-92% for individual amino acids without significant differences in the medial and terminal subsections. Net disappearance was, however, between 3% and 9% lower in the proximal subsection. In Experiment 2, diets contained soybean meal as the main protein source and were given to 18 pens from day 22 of age. Again, the effect of subsection on net disappearance was significant for all amino acids. Net disappearance was significantly lower in the proximal than in the middle subsection, and differences ranged from 5-10%. Significant differences in the net disappearance were also found for most of the amino acids between the middle and the terminal subsection ranging from 2-4%. In conclusion, when precaecal amino acid digestibility should be used as a measure for a protein source's potential, digesta sampling should not consider the proximal third of the section between Meckel's diverticulum and the end of the ileum.