Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T02:51:56.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The nutritive value of extruded and raw peas for growing and finishing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

J.V. O’Doherty  and
U. Keady
J.V. O’Doherty
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, University College Dublin, Lyons Research Farm, Newcastle, Co. Dublin, Ireland
U. Keady
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, University College Dublin, Lyons Research Farm, Newcastle, Co. Dublin, Ireland
Get access

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to determine the nutritive value of extruded or raw peas (Pisum sativum as an energy and protein supplement for pigs of 33 to 100 kg live weight. Experiment 1 determined the effects of extrusion on the nutrient apparent digestibility of peas when included at 200 g and 400 g/kg in the diet. In experiment 2, performance was determined in individually fed pigs (no. = 70) offered diets ad libitum including a control (no peas, T1), 200 g/kg raw peas (T2), 400 g/kg raw peas (T3), 200 g/kg extruded peas (T4), 400g/kg extruded peas (T5). The peas were extruded at 120°С for 30 s. All diets were formulated to have similar concentrations of digestible energy (DE) and total lysine. There was a significant interaction effect (P < 0·05) between level of peas and extrusion on the digestibility of the organic matter (OM), nitrogen (N), energy and the DE content of the peas. The inclusion of 400 g/kg raw peas led to a lower estimated digestibility of OM (P < 0·001), N (P < 0·001), gross energy (P < 0·05) and DE content (P < 0·05) of the peas compared with the 200 g/kg peas. However, there was no difference (P > 0·05) between the digestibility of the 200 and 400 g/kg peas when the peas were extruded. In experiment 2, there was a significant interaction (P < 0·05) between the level of peas in the diet and extrusion. As the level of raw peas increased from 200 to 400g/kg, growth rate decreased (P < 0·01) and food conversion ratio (FCR) increased (P < 0·01). However, as the level of extruded peas was increased from 200 to 400g/ kg, there was no difference in either growth rate or FCR. It is concluded that extrusion of peas improved the nutrient digestibility and improved overall gain and FCR of the pigs.

Keywords

extrusionpeaspigs
Type
Non-ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Information
Animal Science , Volume 70 , Issue 2 , April 2000 , pp. 265 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1980. Official methods of analysis, 13th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Barroga, C. F., Laurena, A. C. and Mendoza, M. T. 1985. Polyphenols in mung bean (Vigna radiata (L) Wilczek): determination and removal. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 33:1006–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengala Freire, J., Aumaitre, A., Peiniau, J. and Lebreton, Y. 1991. Apparent ileal digestibility of starch and galactosides from peas by early weaned pigs: effect of extrusion. In Digestive physiology in pigs (ed. Verstegan, M. W. A.), pp. 395–400. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bertrand, D., Delort-Laval, J., Melcion, J. P. and Valdebouze, P. 1982. Influence de ľextrusion et de ľinfranisation sur les facteurs antinutritionnels et la valeur alimentaire du pois (Pisum sativum). Sciences des Aliments 2: 197–202.Google Scholar
Camire, M.E., Camire, A. and Krumhar, K.. 1990. Chemical and nutritional changes in foods during extrusion. Food Science and Nutrition 29: 35–56.Google Scholar
Cheftel, J. C. 1989. Extrusion cooking and food safety. In Extrusion cookin. (ed. Mercier, C.), pp. 435–461. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St Paul, MN.Google Scholar
Christison, G. I. and Parra de Solano, N. M. 1982. Utilisation of protein from peas, barley, buttermilk powder and soyabean meal by eaľly weaned pigs. Canadian journal of Annual Science 62: 899–905.Google Scholar
Close, W. H. 1994. Feeding new genotypes: establishing amino acid/energy requirements. In Principle? of pig scienc. (ed Cole, D. J. A., Wiseman, J. and Varley, M.A.), pp 123–140 Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Food, Ireland. 1994. Pig carcass dressing specification. SI 216. Department of Agriculture and Food.Google Scholar
Dierick, N. A., Vervneke, I. J., Decuypere, J. A. and Henderickx, H. K. 1988. De nutritionele waarde en de in vitro voorspelbaarheid van ileale en fecale eiwitverteerbaarheden in de varkensvoeding-literaruurstudie. Landbouwtijdschrift 3: 627–647.Google Scholar
Edwards, S. A., Rogers-Lewis, D. S. and Fairbairn, C. B. 1987. The effects of pea variety and inclusion rate in the diet on the performance of finishing pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 108: 383–388.Google Scholar
Fadel, J. G., Newman, C. W., Newman, R. K. and Graham, H. 1988. Effects of extrusion cooking of barley on ileal and faecal digestibilities of dietary components in peas. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68: 891–897.Google Scholar
Gatel, F. and Grosjean, F. 1990. Composition and nutritive value of peas for pigs: a review of European results. Livestock Production Science 26:155–175.Google Scholar
Gatel, F., Grosjean, F. and Castaing, J. 1989. Utilisation per le porc charcutier de regimes a teneur élevée en pois de printemps. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 21: 69–74.Google Scholar
Graham, H. and Amani, P. 1987. Whole crop peas. 2. Digestion of early and late harvested crops in the gastrointestinal tract of pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 17: 33–43.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. 1985. Combining peas for animal feed. In The pea crop (ed. Hebblethwaite, P.D. and Dawkins, T.C.K.), pp. 453–462. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F., Bourdon, D., Kiener, T., Castaing, J. and Gatel, F. 1991. Valeur alimentaire pour les porcs des pois francais et importees. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 23: 53–60.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. and Castaing, J. 1983. Recherché de la valeur alimentaire du pois d’hiver pour la porc charcutier: influence de al cuisson-extrusion, de la durée du conservation et du le supplementation en tryptophans. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 15: 335–346.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. and Gatel, F. 1986. Peas for pigs. Pig News and Information 7: 443–448.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. and Gatel, F. 1989. Feeding value of Pisum sativum for pigs 1. Influence of technology. 2. Influence of genotype (trypsin inhibitor activity). In Recent advances of research in antinutritional factors in legume seeds (ed. Huisman, J., van der Poel, A. F. B. and Liener, I. E.), pp. 239–242. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Hendriks, W. H., Moughan, P. J., Boer, H. and Poel, A. F. B.|van der. 1994. Effects of extrusion on the dye-binding, flourodinitrobenzene-reactive and total lysine content of soyabean meal and peas. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48: 99–109.Google Scholar
Hlodversson, R. 1987. The nutritive value of white and dark flowered cultivais of pea for growing-finishing pigs. Ajiimal Feed Science mid Technology 17: 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwaki, K., Nimura, N., Hiraga, Y., Kinoshita, T., Takeda, K. and Ogura, H. 1987. Amino acid analysis b v re versed-phase high-performance liquid chromatrographv. Journal of Chromatograph}/ 407: 273–279.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. T., Cox, R. P. and Jensen, B. B. 1995 Microbial production of skatoie in the hind gut of pigs given different diets and its relation to skatoie deposition in backfat. Animal Science 61: 293–304.Google Scholar
Kakade, M. L., Rackis, J. J., McGhee, J. E. and Puski, G. 1974. Determination of trypsin inhibitor activity of soy products: a collaborative analysis of an improved procedure. Cereal Chemistry 51: 376–382.Google Scholar
Leterme, P., Beckers, Y. and Thewis, A. 1989. Inter and intravarietal variability of the trypsin inhibitors of peas and this influence on apparent digestibility of crude proteins by growing pigs. In Recent advances of research in antinutritional factors in legume seeds (ed. Huisman, J., van der Poel, A. F. B. and Liener, I. E.), pp. 121–124. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Leterme, P., Beckers, Y. and Thewis, A. 1990. Trypsin inhibitors in peas: varietal effect and influence on digestibility of crude protein by growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Teclinology 29: 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lund, S. and Hakansson, J. 1986. Nutritional and growth studies with pea crop meals and peas for growing-finishing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 16:119–128.Google Scholar
Lundstrom, K., Malfors, B., Stern, S., Rydhmer, L., Eliasson-Selling, L., Mortensen, A. B. and Mortensen, H. P. 1994. Skatoie level in pigs selected for high lean tissue growth rates on different dietary protein levels. Livestock Production Science 38: 125–132.Google Scholar
Madsen, A., Osterballe, R., Mortensen, H. P., Bejerholm, C. and Barton-Gade, P. A. 1990. The influence of feeds on meat quality of growing pigs. Report 673. National Institute of Animal Science, Denmark.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feedingstuffs regulations 1991. Statutory instrument no. 2840, 9.76. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Myer, R. O. and Froseth, J. A. 1993. Evaluation of two methods of heat processing for improving the nutritional value of peas for swine. In Recent advances of research in antinutritional factors in legume seeds (ed. Poel, A. F. B. van der, Huisman, J. and Saini, H.S.), European Association for Animal Production publication no. 70, pp. 441–445. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Pond, W. G. 1987. Thoughts on fibre utilisation in swine. Journal of Animal Science 65: 497–499.Google Scholar
Saini, H. S. 1989. Legume seed oligosaccarides. In Recent advances of research in antinutritional factors in legume seeds. (ed. Huisman, J., Poel, A. F. B.van der and Liener, I. E.), pp. 329–341. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user’s guide, version 5.16. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary NC.Google Scholar
Thomke, S. 1986. Swedish experiments on energy density in pig diets and with domestically grown protein feedstuffs. A review. World Review of Animal Production 22: 89–95.Google Scholar
Union Nationale Interprofessionnelle des Plantes riches en Proteines — Institute Technique des Céréales et Fourrages. 1995. Peas : utilisation in animal feeding. Institut Technique des Céréales et Fourrages, Paris.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. and Lewis, B.A.. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583-3597.Google Scholar
Zuilichem, D.J.van and Poel, A. F. B. van der. 1989. Effect of HTST treatment of Visum sativum on the inactivation of antinutritional factors. In Recent advances of research in antinutritional factors in legume seeds (ed. Huisman, J., van der Poel, A. F. B. and Liener, I. E.), pp. 263–267. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar