Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:26:20.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

By-products from cereal, sugar beet and potato processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

W. P. Barber  and
C. R. Lonsdale
W. P. Barber
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ADAS, Feed Evaluation Unit, Drayton EHF, Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon, CV379RQ
C. R. Lonsdale
Affiliation:
Kenneth Wilson Holdings Limited, Morwick Hall, York Road, Leeds, LS15 4NB
Get access

Extract

From just five industries in the United Kingdom — brewing, distilling, milling, sugar extraction and potato processing — at least 2.7 × 106 mega joules (MJ) of metabolizable energy (ME) and 4 × 105 tonnes of crude protein (CP) are available annually to livestock farming as by-products. This is equivalent to 1.6 × 106 tonnes of barley and 4.7 × 105 tonnes of soya bean meal, although in some cases nutrient density may differ somewhat from that found in barley or soya.

A large proportion of the by-products available is already used in animal feeds, either djrectly by the farmer or through inclusion in compound feeds which are then used as components of balanced rations.

The materials available are potentially alternative feedstuffs to conventional forages or concentrates. As such they will only form part of a balanced ration and it is in this context that their relative value and usefulness can be judged. In many investigations there has been a tendency to consider particular by-products in isolation and as a consequence any nutrient imbalance has been highlighted to the detriment of the material as an alternative feed. Very few straight feedstuffs contain ratios of nutrients balanced for particular levels of animal production and invariably rations for livestock consist of blends of different materials. Whilst extremes of nutrient imbalance may be identified in individual by-products they are, none the less, wholly suited to blending with other by-products or feeds of contrasting nutrient content in order to produce a completely balanced ration.

Type
Research Article
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 3: By-Products and Wastes in Animal Feeding , 1980 , pp. 61 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Production 1980

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1976. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 4. Composition of British Feedingstuffs. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E. 1972. A comparative study of the feeding value of dried sugar beet pulp for milk production. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 78: 371–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ES, A. J. H. van, Nijkamp, H. H. and Vogt, J. E. 1971. The net energy content of dried sugar beet pulp and of sucrose when fed to lactating dairy cows. Ned. J. Agric. Sci. 19: 48–56.Google Scholar
Karalazos, A. and Swan, H. 1976. Molasses and its by-products. In Feed energy sources for Livestock, (ed. Swan, H. and Lewis, D.) Butterworths, London. 29–46.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1975. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Tech. Bull. No. 33. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Ronning, M. and Bath, D. L. 1962. Relative milk production value of barley, dried beet pulp, molassed dried beet pulp and concentrated steffen filtrate beet pulp. J. Dairy Sci. 45: 854–857.Google Scholar