Animal Bioscience

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Prediction equations for digestible and metabolizable energy concentrations in feed ingredients and diets for pigs based on chemical composition

  • Sung, Jung Yeol (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Konkuk University) ;
  • Kim, Beob Gyun (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Konkuk University)
  • Received : 2020.05.02
  • Accepted : 2020.07.13
  • Published : 2021.02.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The objectives were to develop prediction equations for digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) of feed ingredients and diets for pigs based on chemical composition and to evaluate the accuracy of the equations using in vivo data. Methods: A total of 734 data points from 81 experiments were employed to develop prediction equations for DE and ME in feed ingredients and diets. The CORR procedure of SAS was used to determine correlation coefficients between chemical components and energy concentrations and the REG procedure was used to generate prediction equations. Developed equations were tested for the accuracy according to the regression analysis using in vivo data. Results: The DE and ME in feed ingredients and diets were most negatively correlated with acid detergent fiber or neutral detergent fiber (NDF; r = -0.46 to r = -0.67; p<0.05). Three prediction equations for feed ingredients reflected in vivo data well as follows: DE = 728+0.76×gross energy (GE)-25.18×NDF (R2 = 0.64); ME = 965+0.66×GE-24.62×NDF (R2 = 0.60); ME = 1,133+0.65×GE-29.05×ash-23.17×NDF (R2 = 0.67). Conclusion: In conclusion, the equations suggested in the current study would predict energy concentration in feed ingredients and diets.

Keywords

References

  1. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. 11th ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press; 2012.
  2. Kil DY, Kim BG, Stein HH. Feed energy evaluation for growing pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2013;26:1205-17. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2013.r.02
  3. Noblet J, Perez JM. Prediction of digestibility of nutrients and energy values of pig diets from chemical analysis. J Anim Sci 1993;71:3389-98. https://doi.org/10.2527/1993.71123389x
  4. Adedokun SA, Adeola O. Metabolizable energy value of meat and bone meal for pigs. J Anim Sci 2005;83:2519-26. https://doi.org/10.2527/2005.83112519x
  5. Pedersen C, Boersma MG, Stein HH. Digestibility of energy and phosphorus in ten samples of distillers dried grains with solubles fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2007;85:1168-76. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-252
  6. Kerr BJ, Jha R, Urriola PE, Shurson GC. Nutrient composition, digestible and metabolizable energy content, and prediction of energy for animal protein byproducts in finishing pig diets. J Anim Sci 2017;95:2614-26. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016.1165
  7. Just A, Jorgensen H, Fernandez JA. Prediction of metabolizable energy for pigs on the basis of crude nutrients in the feeds. Livest Prod Sci 1984;11:105-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/03016226(84)90012-5
  8. Bulang M, Rodehutscord M. Development of equations for predicting metabolisable energy concentrations in compound feeds for pigs. Arch Anim Nutr 2009;63:442-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450390903217317
  9. Noblet J, Jaguelin-Peyraud Y. Prediction of digestibility of organic matter and energy in the growing pig from an in vitro method. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007;134:211-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.07.008
  10. Park CS, Son AR, Kim BG. Prediction of gross energy and digestible energy in copra meal, palm kernel meal, and cassava root fed to pigs. J Anim Sci 2012;90:221-3. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.53954
  11. Choi H, Sung JY, Kim BG. Neutral detergent fiber rather than other dietary fiber types as an independent variable increases the accuracy of prediction equation for digestible energy in feeds for growing pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2020;33:615-22. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.19.0103
  12. Sauvant D, Perez JM, Tran G. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed materials: pigs, poultry, cattle, sheep, goats, rabbits, horses and fish. 2nd ed. Wageningen, Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers; 2004.
  13. Son AR, Ji SY, Kim BG. Digestible and metabolizable energy concentrations in copra meal, palm kernel meal, and cassava root fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2012;90:140-2. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.53822
  14. Kwon WB, Kim BG. Effects of supplemental beta-mannanase on digestible energy and metabolizable energy contents of copra expellers and palm kernel expellers fed to pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2015;28:1014-9. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0275
  15. Park CS, Son AR, Kil DY, Kim BG. Digestible and metabolizable energy in corn grains from different origins for growing pigs. Anim Sci J 2015;86:415-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12315
  16. Son AR, Park CS, Kim BG. Determination and prediction of digestible and metabolizable energy concentrations in byproduct feed ingredients fed to growing pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2017;30:546-53. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.16.0607
  17. Jo H, Kim BG. A high correlation between conventional and mini pigs in feed energy utilization. J Anim Sci 2018;96(Suppl 3):75. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky404.165
  18. Son AR, Kim BG. Energy concentration and phosphorus digestibility in single-cell protein and fish meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2016;94:328-31. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-9798
  19. Kim BG, Kil DY, Zhang Y, Stein HH. Concentrations of analyzed or reactive lysine, but not crude protein, may predict the concentration of digestible lysine in distillers dried grains with solubles fed to pigs. J Anim Sci 2012;90:3798-808. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4692
  20. Zhang F, Adeola O. Techniques for evaluating digestibility of energy, amino acids, phosphorus, and calcium in feed ingredients for pigs. Anim Nutr 2017;3:344-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2017.06.008
  21. Anderson PV, Kerr BJ, Weber TE, Ziemer CJ, Shurson GC. Determination and prediction of digestible and metabolizable energy from chemical analysis of corn coproducts fed to finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 2012;90:1242-54. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3605
  22. Kerr BJ, Dozier WA, III, Shurson GC. Effects of reduced-oil corn distillers dried grains with solubles composition on digestible and metabolizable energy value and prediction in growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2013;91:3231-43. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6252
  23. Sung JY, Kim BG. Prediction models for apparent and standardized total tract digestible phosphorus in swine diets. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2019;255:114224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114224
  24. Cromwell GL, Brendemuhl JH, Chiba LI, et al. Variability in mixing efficiency and laboratory analyses of a common diet mixed at 25 experiment stations. J Anim Sci 2003;81:48491. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.812484x
  25. Morgan CA, Whittemore CT, Phillips P, Crooks P. The prediction of the energy value of compounded pig foods from chemical analysis. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1987;17:81-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(87)90007-1
  26. Moughan PJ, Dong GZ, Pearson G, Wilkinson BHP. Protein quality in blood meal: II. The effect of processing on in vivo nitrogen digestibility in rats, protein solubility and FDNB-available lysine. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1999;79:309-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(99)00028-0
  27. Zijlstra RT, de Lange CFM, Patience JF. Nutritional value of wheat for growing pigs: chemical composition and digestible energy content. Can J Anim Sci 1999;79:187-94. https://doi.org/10.4141/A98-103

Cited by

  1. Protein and energy concentrations of meat meal and meat and bone meal fed to pigs based on in vitro assays vol.7, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2020.07.007
  2. Novel Two-Slope Equations to Predict Amino Acid Concentrations Using Crude Protein Concentration in Soybean Meal vol.11, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11040280
  3. Evaluation of an equation for predicting metabolisable energy concentration in compound feeds for pigs vol.75, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039x.2021.1947066