Animal Bioscience

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

DOI QR Code

Chemical composition of barley and co-products from barley, corn, and wheat produced in South-East Asia or Australia

  • Natalia S. Fanelli (Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois) ;
  • Leidy J. Torres-Mendoza (Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois) ;
  • Jerubella J. Abelilla (DSM Nutritional Products) ;
  • Hans H. Stein (Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois)
  • Received : 2023.05.25
  • Accepted : 2023.07.21
  • Published : 2024.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: A study was conducted to determine the chemical composition of barley and co-products from barley, corn, and wheat produced in South-East Asia or Australia, and to test the hypothesis that production area or production methods can impact the chemical composition of wheat co-products. Methods: Samples included seven barley grains, two malt barley rootlets, one corn gluten feed, one corn gluten meal, one corn bran, eight wheat brans, one wheat mill mix, and four wheat pollards. All samples were analyzed for dry matter, gross energy, nitrogen, amino acids (AA), acid hydrolyzed ether extract, ash, minerals, starch, and insoluble dietary fiber and soluble dietary fiber. Malt barley rootlets and wheat co-products were also analyzed for sugars. Results: Chemical composition of barley, malt barley rootlets, and corn co-products were in general similar across countries. Wheat pollard had greater (p<0.05) concentrations of tryptophan, magnesium, and potassium compared with wheat bran, whereas wheat bran had greater (p<0.05) concentration of copper than wheat pollard. There were no differences in chemical composition between wheat bran produced in Australia and wheat bran produced in Thailand. Conclusion: Intact barley contains more starch, but fewer AA, than grain co-products. There were only few differences in the composition of wheat bran and wheat pollard, indicating that the two ingredients are similar, but with different names. However, corn gluten meal contains more protein and less fiber than corn bran.

Keywords

References

  1. United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA-FAS). Livestock and products annual. Canberra, Australia: Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN); 2018. Report No: AS1820.
  2. Devendra C. Perspectives on animal production systems in Asia. Livest Sci 2007;106:1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.005
  3. Heuze V, Tran G, Noziere P, et al. Barley grain [Internet]. Feedipedia, a programme by INRAE, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO; 2016 [cited 2022 Feb 18]. Available from: https://www.feedipedia.org/node/227 
  4. Premier Atlas, Premier Nutrition Products. Ingredients matrix. Rugeley Staffs, UK: AB Agro Ltd; 2019.
  5. Hegazi SM, Ghali Y, Foda MS, Youssef A. Nutritive value of barley rootlets, a by-product of malting. J Sci Food Agric 1975;26:1077-81. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740260805
  6. Almeida FN, Petersen GI, Stein HH. Digestibility of amino acids in corn, corn coproducts, and bakery meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2011;89:4109-15. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4143
  7. AAFCO. American Association of Feed Control Officials [Internet]. Association of American Feed Control Officials Official Publication; 2021 [cited 2022 Feb 3]. Available from: https://www.aafco.org/
  8. Heuze V, Tran G, Renaudeau D, Lessire M, Lebas F. Wheat grain [Internet]. Feedipedia, a programme by INRAE, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO; 2015 [cited 2022 Feb 15]. Available from: https://www.feedipedia.org/node/223
  9. Rhodes L, Broderick A. Bioconversion of nitrogen supplemented wheat pollard and bran by filamentous fungi. Biol Wastes 1989;30:101-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0269-7483(89)90064-5
  10. Nortey TN, Patience JF, Sands JS, Trottier NL, Zijlstra RT. Effects of xylanase supplementation on the apparent digestibility and digestible content of energy, amino acids, phosphorus, and calcium in wheat and wheat by-products from dry milling fed to grower pigs. J Anim Sci 2008;86:3450-64. https://doi. org/10.2527/jas.2007-0472
  11. Official methods of analysis of AOAC International Association of Official, Analytical Chemists. 21th ed. Rockville, MD, USA: AOAC Int.; 2019.
  12. U.S., Environmental Protection Agency. Acid digestion of sediments, sludges, and soils. Washington, DC, USA: U.S EPA; 2000.
  13. McGhee ML, Stein HH. Apparent and standardized ileal digestibility of AA and starch in hybrid rye, barley, wheat, and corn fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2018;96:3319-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky206
  14. Committee on Nutrient Requirements of Swine, National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of swine. 11th ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press; 2012.
  15. Rodehutscord M, Ruckert C, Maurer HP, et al. Variation in chemical composition and physical characteristics of cereal grains from different genotypes. Arch Anim Nutr 2016;70: 87-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2015.1133111
  16. Rostagno HS, Teixeira Albino LF, Hannas MI, et al. Brazilian tables for poultry and swine. 4th ed. Vicosa, MG, Brazil: Feedstuff composition and nutritional requirements; 2017.
  17. Woods VB, O'mara FP, Moloney AP. The nutritive value of concentrate feedstuffs for ruminant animals: Part I: In situ ruminal degradability of dry matter and organic matter. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2003;110:111-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(03)00220-7
  18. Heuze V, Tran G, Sauvant D, Renaudeau D, Lessire M, Lebas F. Corn gluten meal [Internet]. Feedipedia, a programme by INRAE, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO; 2018 [cited 2022 Mar 30]. Available from: https://www.feedipedia.org/node/715
  19. Rojas OJ, Liu Y, Stein HH. Phosphorus digestibility and concentration of digestible and metabolizable energy in corn, corn coproducts, and bakery meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2013;91:5326-35. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6324
  20. Rosenfelder P, Eklund M, Mosenthin R. Nutritive value of wheat and wheat by-products in pig nutrition: a review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2013;185:107-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2013.07.011
  21. Jaworski NW, Liu DW, Li DF, Stein HH. Wheat bran reduces concentrations of digestible, metabolizable, and net energy in diets fed to pigs, but energy values in wheat bran determined by the difference procedure are not different from values estimated from a linear regression procedure. J Anim Sci 2016;94:3012-21. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016-0352
  22. Jha R, Regmi P, Wang L, Pharazyn A, Zijlstra RT. Nutrient profile and energy digestibility of wheat co-products from flour milling differ in growing pigs. West Hog J 2012;46:e8.
  23. Casas GA, Rodriguez DA, Stein HH. Nutrient composition and digestibility of energy and nutrients in wheat middlings and red dog fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2018;96:215-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skx010
  24. Navarro DMDL, Bruininx EMAM, de Jong L, Stein HH. Analysis for low-molecular-weight carbohydrates are needed to account for all energy contributing nutrients in some feed ingredients, but physical characteristics do not predict in vitro digestibility of dry matter. J Anim Sci 2018;96:532-44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky010
  25. United States Department of Agriculture Economics, Statistics and Market Information System (USDA-ESMIS). Grain: World Markets and Trade [Internet]. Foreign Agricultural Service; 2022 [cited 2022 Apr 1]. Available from: https://downloads. usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/zs25x844t/9593vz755/v979w611p/grain.pdf
  26. Kim BG, Wulf DM, Maddock RJ, et al. Effects of dietary barley on growth performance, carcass traits and pork quality of finishing pigs. Rev Colom Cienc Pecua 2014;27:102-13.
  27. Laurinen P, Valaja J, Nasi M, Smeds K. Effects of different expander processing conditions on the nutritive value of barley and wheat by-products in pig diets. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1998;74:213-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(98)00182-5
  28. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Declining Crop Prices, Rising Production and Exports Highlight U.S. Agricultural Projections to 2032; 2023 [cited 2023 Apr 7]. Available from: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/
  29. United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA-FAS). World agricultural production briefs - South East Asia [Internet]. International Production Assessment Division (IPAD); 2022 [cited 2022 Apr 4]. Available from: https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/pecad_stories. aspx?regionid=seasia&ftype=prodbriefs
  30. Liu Y, Song M, Almeida FN, Tilton SL, Cecava MJ, Stein HH. Energy concentration and amino acid digestibility in corn and corn coproducts from the wet-milling industry fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2014;92:4557-65. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-6747
  31. 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