Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:31:48.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effect of giving feeds containing soya-bean meal treated or extracted with ethanol on digestive processes in the prerurninant calf

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. W. Sissons
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, ReadingRG2 9AT
R. H. Smith
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, ReadingRG2 9AT
D. Hewitt
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, ReadingRG2 9AT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Preruminant calves, fitted with abomasal and re-entrant ileal cannulas, were given, at intervals of 2–3 d by infusion into the absomasum, a series of five single experimental feeds containing heated soyabean flour (product B) as the only protein source. The calves were sensitized in this way to a constituent in the soya beans and by the fifth feed showed a number of digestive disturbances. Further test feeds were then given in which heated soya-bean flour was sometimes replaced by soya-bean products prepared under laboratory or commercial conditions by treating I part fat-free raw soya-bean meal with either I part (product M) or 4 parts (product L) ethanol (750 ml/l) at 78–80° and evaporating the whole mixture to dryness, or by extracting I part meal with 4 parts aqueous ethanol under similar conditions (product K). Products M, L and K were heated with steam and finely ground. Feeds prepared from casein and from commerical ethanol-extracted concentrate (product D) were also examined.

2. Measurements were made of transit time through the small intestine, flow rate of ileal digesta, recovery of polyethylene glycol (a water-soluble marker added to the feed) and net nitrogen absorption up to the distal ileum. Compared to feeds based on casein, feeds containing products K, L or M showed some differences in digesta movement and N uptake, but much less disturbance than feeds containing product B. Products prepared by extracting soya-bean meal with ethanol appeared to be slightly superior to those prepared from meal treated with ethanol, but the differences were not significant.

3. Weanling rats were used to assess the nutritive value of soya-bean products by an N balance method. Digestibilities (mean 0.948) and biological values (mean 0.860) obtained for products B, D, K and L did not differ significantly.

4. Results confirmed that extracting soya-bean meal with hot aqueous ethanol improved its value for calf feeding and indicated that at least part of the effect was due to the destruction of a toxic constituent present in the soya bean which probably acted by inducing a gastrointestinal allergy.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1979

References

American Oil Chemists' Society (1965). Oficial and Tentative Methods, 3rd ed., Tentafive methods, Ba 11–65., Chicago: American Oil Chemists' Society.Google Scholar
Barratt, M. E. J., Strachan, P. J. & Porter, P. (1978). Clin. exp. Immunol. 31, 305.Google Scholar
Birk, Y. & Gertler, A. (1961). J. Nutr. 75, 379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Circle, S. J. & Smith, A. K. (1972). In Soybeans: Chemistry and Technology, Vol. 1. Proteins, p. 294 [Smith, A. K. and Circle, S. J., editors]. Connecticut: The Avi Pub. Company Inc.Google Scholar
Colvin, B. M. & Ramsey, H. A. (1968). J. Dairy Sci. 51, 898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colvin, B. M. & Ramsey, H. A. (1969). J. Dairy Sci. 52, 270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorrill, A. D. L. & Nicholson, J. W. G. (1969). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 49, 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorrill, A. D. L. & Nicholson, J. W. G. (1972). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 52, 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorrill, A. D. L. & Thomas, J. W. (1967). J. Nutr. 92, 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, K. M. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 125.Google Scholar
Henry, K. M. & Toothill, J. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kakade, M. L., Rackis, J. J., McCihee, J. E. & Puski, G. (1974). Cereal Chem. 51, 376.Google Scholar
Kapoor, A. C. & Gupta, Y. P. (1975). J. Fd Sci. 40, 1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilshaw, P. & Sissons, J. W. (1979 a). Res. vet. Sci. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Kilshaw, P. & Sissons, J. W. (1979 b). Res. vet. Sci. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Kwiatkowska, A. (1973). Prace i Materialy Zoorech. 3, 63.Google Scholar
Liener, I. E. (1973). In Proteins in Human Nutrition, p. 481 [Porter, J. W. G. and Rolls, B. A., editors]. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McGilliard, A. D., Bryant, A. B., Jacobson, N. L. & Foreman, C. F. (1970). Iowa State J. Sci. 45, 185.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. (19231924). J. biol. Chem. 58, 873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nitsan, Z., Volcani, R., Gordin, S. & Hadai, A. (1971). J. Dairy Sci. 54, 1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nitsan, Z., Volcani, R., Hasdai, A. & Gordin, S. (1972). J. Dairy Sci. 55, 811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obara, T. & Wantanabe, Y. (1971). Cereal Chem. 48, 523.Google Scholar
Ramsey, H. A. & Willard, T. R. (1975). J. Dairy Sci. 58, 436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolls, B. A., Hedge, S. N. & Coates, M. E. (1976). Lab. Anim. 10, 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siddons, R. C. (1968). Biochem. J. 108, 839.Google Scholar
Sissons, J. W. & Smith, R. H. (1976). Br. J. Nutr. 36, 421.Google Scholar
Sissons, J. W. & Smith, R. H. (1978). J. Physiol. 283, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1958). Nurure, Lond. 182, 260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1962). Eiochem. J. 83, 151.Google Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1964). J. Physiol. 172, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & Sissons, J. W. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 33, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Technicon Instruments Co. Ltd. (1967). Technicon Merhodology Sheet N-36, Basingstoke: Technicon Instruments Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, J. M., Weide, H. J. & Braas, C. C. (1969). Versl. landhouwk. Onderz. Ned. no. 732.Google Scholar