Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:59:16.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In situ ruminal degradation of amino acids and in vitro protein digestibility of undegraded CP of dried distillers’ grains with solubles from European ethanol plants*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2013

E. Westreicher-Kristen ,
H. Steingass  and
M. Rodehutscord
E. Westreicher-Kristen
Affiliation:
Institut für Tierernährung, Universität Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70599, Germany
H. Steingass
Affiliation:
Institut für Tierernährung, Universität Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70599, Germany
M. Rodehutscord*
Affiliation:
Institut für Tierernährung, Universität Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70599, Germany
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to compare the in situ ruminal degradation of CP and amino acids (AAs) of dried distillers’ grains with solubles (DDGS), and to estimate intestinal digestibility (ID) of undegradable crude protein (UDP) with the in vitro pepsin–pancreatin solubility of CP (PPS), using either DDGS samples (DDGS-s) or DDGS residues (DDGS-r) obtained after 16 h ruminal incubation. Thirteen samples originating from wheat, corn, barley and blends were studied. Lysine and methionine content of DDGS-s varied from 1.4 to 4.0 and 1.3 to 2.0 g/16 g N, respectively. The milk protein score (MPS) of DDGS-s was low and ranged from 0.36 to 0.51, and lysine and isoleucine were estimated to be the most limiting AAs in DDGS-s and DDGS-r. DDGS-r contained slightly more essential AAs (EAAs) than did the DDGS-s. Rumen degradation after 16 h varied from 44% to 94% for CP, from 39% to 90% for lysine and from 35% to 92% for methionine. Linear regressions showed that the ruminal degradation of individual AAs can be predicted from CP degradation. The PPS of DDGS-s was higher than that of DDGS-r and it varied from 70% to 89% and from 47% to 81%, respectively. There was no significant correlation between the PPS of DDGS-s and PPS of DDGS-r (R2=0.31). The estimated intestinally absorbable dietary protein (IADP) averaged 21%. Moderate correlation was found between the crude fibre (CF) content and PPS of DDGS-r (R2=0.43). This study suggests an overestimation of the contribution of UDP of DDGS to digestible protein supply in the duodenum in some currently used protein evaluation systems. More research is required and recommended to assess the intestinal digestibility of AAs from DDGS.

Keywords

rumenpepsin–pancreatin solubilityintestinal digestibilityDDGSlysine
Type
Nutrition
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 12 , December 2013 , pp. 1901 - 1909
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2013 

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.)

Footnotes

*

Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Society of Nutrition Physiology, Göttingen, Germany, March 20 to 22, 2012: Westreicher, E., Steingaß, H., Rodehutscord, M. (2012): In situ ruminal degradation of crude protein and amino acids and in vitro protein digestibility of undegraded protein in DDGS. Proc Soc Nutr Physiol 21: 99.

References

Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC) 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. An Advisory Manual Prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on Response to Nutrients. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Boisen, S and Fernández, JA 1995. Prediction of the apparent ileal digestibility of protein and amino acids in feedstuffs and feed mixtures for pigs by in vitro analyses. Animal Feed Science and Technology 51, 29–43.Google Scholar
Boucher, SE, Calsamiglia, S, Parsons, CM, Stein, HH, Stern, MD, Erickson, PS, Utterback, PL and Schwab, CG 2009a. Intestinal digestibility of amino acids in rumen-undegraded protein estimated using a precision-fed cecectomized rooster bioassay: II. Distillers dried grains with solubles and fish meal. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 6056–6067.Google Scholar
Boucher, SE, Calsamiglia, S, Parsons, CM, Stern, MD, Ruiz Moreno, M, Vásquez-Añon, M and Schwab, CG 2009b. In vitro digestibility of individual amino acids in rumen-undegraded protein: the modified three-step procedure and the immobilized digestive enzyme assay. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 3939–3950.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calsamiglia, S and Stern, MD 1995. A three-step in vitro procedure for estimating intestinal digestion of protein in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 73, 1459–1465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cao, ZJ, Anderson, JL and Kalscheur, KF 2009. Ruminal degradation and intestinal digestibility of dried or wet distillers grains with increasing concentrations of condensed distillers solubles. Journal of Animal Science 87, 3013–3019.Google Scholar
Carvalho, LPF, Melo, DSP, Pereira, CRM, Rodrigues, MAM, Cabrita, ARJ and Fonseca, AJM 2005. Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility, N degradability and enzymatic intestinal digestibility of five protein supplements. Animal Feed Science and Technology 119, 171–178.Google Scholar
Chrenková, M, Ceresnaková, Z, Formelová, Z, Poláciková, M, Mlyneková, Z and Fl’ak, P 2012. Chemical and nutritional characteristics of different types of DDGS for ruminants. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 21, 425–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Classen, HL, Newkirk, RW and Maenz, DD 2004. Effects of conventional and novel processing on the feed value of canola meal for poultry. Proceedings of Australian Poultry Science Symposium 16, 1–8.Google Scholar
Cozannet, P, Primot, Y, Gady, C, Métayer, JP, Lessire, M, Skiba, F and Noblet, J 2011. Standardised amino acid digestibility of wheat distillers’ dried grains with solubles in force-fed cockerels. British Poultry Science 52, 72–81.Google Scholar
Cozannet, P, Primot, Y, Gady, C, Métayer, JP, Callu, P, Lessire, M, Skiba, F and Noblet, J 2010. Ileal digestibility of amino acids in wheat distillers dried grains with solubles for pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 158, 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crooker, BA, Clark, JH, Shanks, RD and Fahey, GC 1987. Effects of ruminal exposure on the amino acid profile of feeds. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67, 1143–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csapó, J, Csapó-Kiss, Z, Csordás, E, Martin, TG, Folestad, S, Tivesten, A and Némethy, S 1995. Rapid method for the determination of diaminopimelic acid using ion exchange column chromatography. Analytical Letters 28, 2049–2061.Google Scholar
CVB 2012. Chemical compositions and nutritional values of feed materials. Product Board Animal Feed, Zoetermeer, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Erasmus, LJ, Botha, PM and Cruywagen, CW 1994. Amino acid profile and intestinal digestibility in dairy cows of rumen-undegradable protein from various feedstuffs. Journal of Dairy Science 77, 541–551.Google Scholar
Fontaine, J, Zimmer, U, Moughan, PJ and Rutherfurd, SM 2007. Effect of heat damage in an autoclave on the reactive lysine contents of soy products and corn distillers grains with solubles. Use of the results to check on lysine damage in common qualities of these ingredients. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55, 10737–10743.Google Scholar
Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie (GfE) 2001. Empfehlungen zur Energie- und Nährstoffversorgung der Milchkühe und Aufzuchtrindern. DLG-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
Han, J and Liu, K 2010. Changes in composition and amino acid profile during dry grind ethanol processing from corn and estimation of yeast contribution toward DDGS proteins. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 58, 3430–3437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kajikawa, H, Miyazawa, K, Yanase, A, Tanabe, Y, Tsuchida, Y, Mitsumoto, Y, Kozato, Y and Mitsumori, M 2012. Variation in chemical composition of corn dried distillers grains with solubles in relation to in situ protein degradation profiles in the rumen. Animal Science Journal 83, 299–304.Google Scholar
Kleinschmit, DH, Anderson, JL, Schingoethe, DJ, Kalscheur, KF and Hippen, AR 2007. Ruminal and intestinal degradability of distillers grains plus solubles varies by source. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2909–2918.Google Scholar
Lanzas, C, Broderick, GA and Fox, DG 2008. Improved protein fractionation schemes for formulating rations with the Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 4881–4891.Google Scholar
Li, C, Li, JQ, Yang, WZ and Beauchemin, KA 2012. Ruminal and intestinal amino acid digestion of distiller’s grain vary with grain source and milling process. Animal Feed Science and Technology 175, 121–130.Google Scholar
Licitra, G, Hernandez, TM and van Soest, PJ 1996. Standardization of procedures for nitrogen fractionation of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 57, 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maiga, HA, Schingoethe, DJ and Henson, JE 1996. Ruminal degradation, amino acid composition, and intestinal digestibility of the residual components of five protein supplements. Journal of Dairy Science 79, 1647–1653.Google Scholar
Mauron, J 1981. The maillard reaction in food; a critical review from the nutritional standpoint. Progress in Food and Nutrition Science 5, 5–35.Google Scholar
Mjoun, K, Kalscheur, KF, Hippen, AR and Shingoethe, DJ 2010. Ruminal degradability and intestinal digestibility of protein and amino acids in soybean and corn distillers grains products. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 4144–4154.Google Scholar
Nakamura, T, Klopfenstein, TJ and Britton, RA 1994. Evaluation of acid detergent insoluble nitrogen as an indicator of protein quality in non forage proteins. Journal of Animal Science 72, 1043–1048.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
O’Mara, FP, Murphy, JJ and Rath, M 1997. The amino acid composition of protein feedstuffs before and after ruminal incubation and after subsequent passage through the intestines of dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 75, 1941–1949.Google Scholar
Puchala, P, Piór, H and Kulasek, GW 1992. Determination of diaminopimelic acid in biological materials using high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography 623, 63–67.Google Scholar
Rodehutscord, M, Kapocius, M, Timmler, R and Dieckmann, A 2004. Linear regression approach to study amino acid digestibility in broiler chicken. British Poultry Science 45, 85–92.Google Scholar
Rubio, LA 2003. Determination of diaminopimelic acid in rat feces by high-performance liquid chromatography using the Pico Tag method. Journal of Chromatography 784, 125–129.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Perez, JM and Tran, G 2004. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed materials: pigs, poultry, cattle, sheep, goats, rabbits, horses, fish, 2nd revised edition. Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Schingoethe, DJ 1996. Balancing the amino acid needs of the dairy cow. Animal Feed Science and Technology 60, 153–160.Google Scholar
Spiehs, MJ, Whitney, MH and Shurson, GC 2002. Nutrient database for distiller’s dried grains with solubles produced from new ethanol plants in Minnesota and South Dakota. Journal of Animal Science 80, 2639–2645.Google Scholar
Stein, HH, Gibson, ML, Pedersen, C and Boersma, MG 2006. Amino acid and energy digestibility in ten samples of distillers dried grains with solubles fed to growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84, 853–860.Google Scholar
Steingass, H, Kneer, G, Wischer, G and Rodehutscord, M 2013. Variation of in situ degradation of crude protein and amino acids and in vitro digestibility of undegraded feed protein in rapeseed meals. Animal 7, 1119–1127.Google Scholar
Storm, E and Ørskov, ER 1983. The nutritive value of rumen microorganisms in ruminants. 1. Large-scale isolation and chemical composition of rumen microorganisms. British Journal of Nutrition 50, 463–470.Google Scholar
Verband Deutscher Landwirtschaftlicher Untersuchungs- und Forschungsanstalten (VDLUFA) 2006. Handbuch der Landwirtschaftlichen Versuchs- und Untersuchungsmethodik (VDLUFA-Methodenbuch), Bd. III Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. VDLUFA-Verlag, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
Waghorn, GC and Baldwin, RL 1984. Model of metabolite flux within mammary gland of the lactating cow. Journal of Dairy Science 67, 531–544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weisbjerg, MR, Hvelplund, T, Hellberg, S, Olsson, S and Sanne, S 1996. Effective rumen degradability and intestinal digestibility of individual amino acids in different concentrates determined in situ. Animal Feed Science and Technology 62, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westreicher-Kristen, E, Steingass, H and Rodehutscord, M 2012. Variations in chemical composition and in vitro and in situ ruminal degradation characteristics of dried distillers’ grains with solubles from European ethanol plants. Archives of Animal Nutrition 66, 458–472.Google Scholar
Widyaratne, GP and Zijlstra, RT 2007. Nutritional value of wheat and corn distillers dried grain with solubles: Digestibility and digestible contents of energy, amino acids and phosphorus, nutrient excretion and growth performance of grower-finisher pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 87, 103–114.Google Scholar
Woods, VB, Moloney, AP, Calsamiglia, S and O’Mara, FP 2003. The nutritive value of concentrate feedstuffs for ruminant animals Part III. Small intestinal digestibility as measured by in vitro or mobile bag techniques. Animal Feed Science and Technology 110, 145–157.Google Scholar