Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:35:47.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vitro prediction of standardised ileal crude protein and amino acid digestibilities in grain legumes for growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2010

D. Jezierny ,
R. Mosenthin ,
N. Sauer  and
M. Eklund
D. Jezierny
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany
R. Mosenthin*
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany
N. Sauer
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany
M. Eklund
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, University of Hohenheim, Emil-Wolff-Str. 10, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany
*
†E-mail: rhmosent@uni-hohenheim.de
Get access

Abstract

The study was conducted to validate in vitro prediction of standardised ileal digestibilities (SID) of crude protein (CP) and amino acids (AA) in grain legumes for growing pigs using six different cultivars of faba beans (Vicia faba), six different cultivars of field peas (Pisum sativum), and five different cultivars of lupins (Lupinus spp.). The SID for CP and AA were predicted from in vitro analysis by means of a two-step enzymatic method using pepsin and pancreatin incubations. In vitro predicted SID values of CP and AA were generally higher than the corresponding SID values measured in vivo. There were strong linear relationships (r2 = 0.73 for Lys to r2 = 0.91 for Cys and Trp) between in vivo and in vitro predicted SID values in the assay feed ingredients if grain legume species (i.e. faba beans, field peas and lupins) was included as a covariate in multiple linear regression analysis. However, to rapidly and accurately predict SID of CP and AA in individual batches of various feed ingredients, further studies are warranted.

Keywords

standardised ileal digestibilityin vitrograin legumesamino acidspigs
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 12 , December 2010 , pp. 1987 - 1996
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

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

American Oil Chemists’ Society 1997. Trypsin inhibitor activity (method BA 12-75). AOCS Press, Champaign, Illinois, USA.Google Scholar
AmiPig 2000. Ileal standardised digestibility of amino acids in feedstuffs for pigs. Association Francaise de Zootechnie, Ajinomoto Eurolysine, Aventis Animal Nutrition, INRA, ITCF, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Bach Knudsen, KE 1997. Carbohydrate and lignin contents of plant materials used in animal feeding. Animal Feed Science and Technology 67, 319–338.Google Scholar
Bastianelli, D, Grosjean, F, Peyronnet, C, Duparque, M, Régnier, JM 1998. Feeding value of pea (Pisum sativum, L.). 1. Chemical composition of different categories of pea. Animal Science 67, 609–619.Google Scholar
Boisen, S 1998. A new protein evaluation system for pig feeds and its practical application. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science, 48, 1–11.Google Scholar
Boisen, S 2007. In vitro analyses for predicting standardised ileal digestibility of protein and amino acids in actual batches of feedstuffs and diets for pigs. Livestock Science 109, 182–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boisen, S, Eggum, BO 1991. Critical evaluation of in vitro methods for estimating digestibility in simple-stomach animals. Nutrition Research Reviews 4, 141–162.Google Scholar
Boisen, S, Fernández, JA 1991. In vitro digestibility of energy and amino acids in pig feeds. Digestive physiology in pigs. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Digestive Physiology in Pigs (ed. MWA Verstegen, J Huisman and LA den Hartog), EAAP Publication 54, pp. 231–236. PUDOC, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Boisen, S, 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
Boisen, S, Moughan, PJ 1996a. Different expressions of dietary protein and amino acid digestibility in pig feeds and their application in protein evaluation: a theoretical approach. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 46, 165–172.Google Scholar
Boisen, S, Moughan, PJ 1996b. Dietary influences on endogenous ileal protein and amino acid loss in the pig – a review. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science 46, 154–164.Google Scholar
Clarke, EJ, Wiseman, J 2000. Developments in plant breeding for improved nutritional quality of soya beans I. Protein and amino acid content. Journal of Agricultural Science 134, 111–124.Google Scholar
Commission Directive 1998. Establishing community methods for the determination of amino-acids, crude oils and fats, and olanquindox in feeding stuff and amending Directive 71/393/EEC, annex part A. Determination of amino acids. Official Journal of the European Communities L 257, 14–23.Google Scholar
Commission Directive 2000. Establishing community methods of analysis for the determination of vitamin A, vitamin E and tryptophan in feeding stuff and amending Commission Directive 2000/45/EC, annex part C. Determination of tryptophan. Official Journal of the European Communities L 174, 32–50.Google Scholar
Cone, JW, van der Poel, AFB 1993. Prediction of apparent ileal protein digestibility in pigs with a two-step in vitro method. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 62, 393–400.Google Scholar
Degussa 2006. Amino Dat 3.0®. The amino acid composition of feedstuffs, 5th revised edition. Degussa AG, Feed Additives, Hanau, Germany.Google Scholar
Duc, G, Marget, P, Esnault, R, Le Guen, J, Bastianelli, D 1999. Genetic variability for feeding value of faba bean seeds (Vicia faba): comparative chemical composition of isogenics involving zero-tannin and zero-vicine genes. The Journal of Agricultural Science 133, 185–196.Google Scholar
GfE (Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie) 2008. Recommendations for the supply of energy and nutrients to pigs. DLG-Verlag, Frankfurt a. M., Germany.Google Scholar
Griffiths, DW 1981. The polyphenolic content and enzyme inhibitory activity of testas from bean (Vicia faba) and pea (Pisum spp.) varieties. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 32, 797–804.Google Scholar
Jansman, AJM 1993. Tannins in feedstuffs for simple stomached animals. Nutrition Research Reviews 6, 209–236.Google Scholar
Jansman, AJM, Smink, W, van Leeuwen, P, Rademacher, M 2002. Evaluation through literature data of the amount and amino acid composition of basal endogenous crude protein at the terminal ileum of pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 98, 49–60.Google Scholar
Jezierny, D 2009. In vivo and in vitro studies with growing pigs on standardised ileal amino acid digestibilities in grain legumes. PhD thesis, University of Hohenheim, ISBN 978-3-86955-178-4, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen, Germany.Google Scholar
Lallès, JP, Jansman, AJM 1998. Recent progress in the understanding of the mode of action and effects of antinutritional factors from legume seeds in non-ruminant farm animals. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop (ed. AJM Jansman, GD Hill, J Huisman and AFB van der Poel), EAAP Publication 93, pp. 219–232. Wageningen Pers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Llames, CR, Fontaine, J 1994. Determination of amino acids in feeds: collaborative study. Journal Association of Official Analytical Chemists International 77, 1362–1366.Google Scholar
Makkar, HPS, Blümmel, M, Borowy, NK, Becker, K 1993. Gravimetric determination of tannins and their correlations with chemical and protein precipitation methods. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 61, 161–165.Google Scholar
Makkar, HPS, Becker, K, Abel, H, Pawelzik, E 1997. Nutrient contents, rumen protein degradability and antinutritional factors in some colour- and white-flowering cultivars of Vicia faba beans. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 75, 511–520.Google Scholar
Marquardt, RR 1989. Dietary effects of tannins, vicine and convicine. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on “Antinutritional Factors (ANF) in Legume Seeds” (ed. J Huisman, AFB van der Poel and IE Liener), pp. 141–155. PUDOC, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Mekbungwan, A 2007. Application of tropical legumes for pig feed. Animal Science Journal 78, 342–350.Google Scholar
Monti, LM, Grillo, S 1983. Legume seed improvement for protein content and quality. Qualitas Plantarum Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 32, 253–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossé, J, Baudet, J 1983. Crude protein content and amino acid composition of seeds: variability and correlations. Qualitas Plantarum Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 32, 225–245.Google Scholar
Moughan, PJ 1999. In vitro techniques for the assessment of the nutritive value of feed grains for pigs: a review. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 50, 871–879.Google Scholar
Naumann, C, Bassler, R 1997. Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. In Handbuch der landwirtschaftlichen Versuchs- und Untersuchungsmethodik (Methodenbuch) (ed. C Naumann and R Bassler), 3rd edition. VDLUFA-Verlag, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
NRC 1998. Nutrient requirement of swine, 10th edition. National Academy Press, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
Petterson, DS 1998. Composition and food uses of lupins. In Lupins as crop plants: biology, production and utilization (ed. JS Gladstones, C Atkins and J Hamblin), pp. 353–384. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Salgado, P, Freire, JPB, Mourato, M, Cabral, F, Toullec, R, Lallès, JP 2002. Comparative effects of different legume protein sources in weaned piglets: nutrient digestibility, intestinal morphology and digestive enzymes. Livestock Production Science 74, 191–202.Google Scholar
SAS 2003. SAS/STAT. user’s guide, version 9.1. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Simon, A, Köhn, W 2004. Influence of variety and location on the crude protein content and amino acid composition of grain legumes. Proceedings of the Society of Nutrition Physiology 13, 42.Google Scholar
Smulikowska, S, Pastuszewska, B, Święch, E, Ochtabińska, A, Mieczkowska, A, Nguyen, CC, Buraczewska, L 2001. Tannin content affects negatively nutritive value of pea for monogastrics. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 10, 511–523.Google Scholar
Stein, HH, Fuller, MF, Moughan, PJ, Sève, B, Mosenthin, R, Jansman, AJM, Fernández, JA, de Lange, CFM 2007. Definition of apparent, true, and standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids in pigs. Livestock Production Science 109, 282–285.Google Scholar
Święch, E, Buraczewska, L, Taciak, M 2004. The effect of trypsin inhibitor level in soy products on in vitro and in vivo (pigs and rats) protein and amino acid digestibility. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Antinutritional Factors in Legume Seeds and Oilseeds (ed. M Muzquiz, GD Hill, C Cuadrado, MM Pedrosa and C Burbano), EAAP Publication 110, pp. 247–250. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 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
Zimmermann, B, Mosenthin, R 2002. Invasive techniques to study the processes of digestion and absorption of nutrients in pigs. In Biology of the intestine in growing animals (ed. R Zabielski, PC Gregory and B Westroem), vol. 1, pp. 625–656. Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar