Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:06:13.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Formaldehyde treatment suppresses ruminal degradation of phytate in soyabean meal and rapeseed meal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Woong-Yeoul Park ,
Tohru Matsui ,
Chiaki Konishi ,
Sung-Won Kim ,
Fumiko Yano  and
Hideo Yano
Woong-Yeoul Park
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Biosciences Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502Japan
Tohru Matsui*
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Biosciences Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502Japan
Chiaki Konishi
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Biosciences Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502Japan
Sung-Won Kim
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Biosciences Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502Japan
Fumiko Yano
Affiliation:
Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science, Kinki University, Uchita, Wakayama, Japan
Hideo Yano
Affiliation:
Division of Applied Biosciences Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502Japan
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Tohru Matsui, fax +81 75 753 6344, email matsui@jkans.jkans.kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp
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.

Most of the P in oilseed meal is in the form of phytate P, and phytate forms complexes with protein. Phytate P has been considered to be absorbed easily in ruminants because of phytate degradation in the rumen. Treatment of oilseed meals with formaldehyde improves the nutritional value of protein through suppressing its ruminal degradation. The present experiment was conducted to study the effects of formaldehyde treatment on phytate degradation in the rumen. The ruminal degradation of phytate in formaldehyde-treated soyabean meal or rapeseed meal was determined by a nylon-bag technique in sheep. Soyabean meal and rapeseed meal were treated with formaldehyde at levels of 3, 5 or 10 g/kg. Treatment with formaldehyde suppressed phytate and protein degradation in both the oilseed meals. Compared with the regular soyabean meal, the regular rapeseed meal showed lower degradability of phytate in the rumen. These results suggest that treatment with formaldehyde suppresses ruminal degradation of phytate in oilseed meal. Thus, the absorption of P from oilseed meal is probably decreased by this treatment in ruminants.

Keywords

Phytate phosphorusOilseed mealFormaldehyde treatmentSheep
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 81 , Issue 6 , June 1999 , pp. 467 - 471
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1999

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1990) Official Methods of Analysis, 15th ed. Arlington, VA: AOAC.Google Scholar
Coombe, JB (1985) Rape and sunflower seed meals as supplements for sheep fed on oat straw. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 36, 717–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cromewell, GL & Coffey, RD (1991) Phosphorus - a key essential nutrient, yet a possible major pollutant - its central role in animal nutrition. In Biotechnology in the Feed Industry. Proceedings of Alltech 7th Annual Symposium, pp. 133–145 [Lyons, TP, editor]. Nicholasville, KY: Alltech Technical Publications.Google Scholar
Ellis, LC & Tillman, AD (1961) Utilization of phytin phosphorus in wheat bran by sheep. Journal of Animal Science 20, 606–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, I (1981) A revised model for the estimation of protein degradability in the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96, 251–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1988) Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 6th revised ed., pp. 81–88. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, TS, Daniels, LB, Hall, JR & Shields, LG (1976) Hydrolysis of natural phytate phosphorus in the digestive tract of calves. Journal of Animal Science 42, 1509–1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimuta, JF, Ely, DG & Boling, JA (1974) Ruminal bypass of dietary soybean protein treated with heat, formalin and tannic acid. Journal of Animal Science 39, 952–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, ER & McDonald, I (1979) The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raun, A, Cheng, E & Burroughs, W (1956) Phytate phosphorus hydrolysis and availability to rumen microorganisms. Agriculture and Food Chemistry 4, 869–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, NR, Sathe, SK & Salunkhe, DK (1982) Phytate in legumes and cereals. In Advances in Food Research, vol. 28, pp. 1–92 [Chichester, CO, Mark, EM and Stewart, GF, editors]. New York, NY and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Simons, PCM, Versteegh, HAJ, Jongbloed, AW, Kemme, PA, Slump, P, Bos, KD, Wolters, MGE, Beudeker, RF & Verschoor, GJ (1990) Improvement of phosphorus availability by microbial phytase in broilers and pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 64, 525–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spears, JW, Hatfield, EE & Clark, JH (1980) Influence of formaldehyde treatment of soybean meal on performance of growing steers and protein availability in the chick. Journal of Animal Science 50, 750–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, DF, Walter, AP & George, WI (1946) Protein–phytic acid relationship in peanuts and cottonseed. Journal of Biological Chemistry 164, 487–507.Google Scholar
Tombs, MP (1967) Protein bodies of the soybean. Plant Physiology 42, 797–813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weremko, D, Fandrejewski, H, Zebrowska, T, Han, InK, Kim, JH & Cho, WT (1997) Bioavailability of phosphorus in feeds of plant origin for pigs - a review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 10, 551–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yiu, SH, Altosaar, I & Fulcher, RG (1983) The effects of commercial processing on the structure and microchemical organization of rapeseed. Food Microstructure 2, 165–173.Google Scholar