Search
Author
Title
Vol.
Issue
Year
1st Page

Abstract

 

This article in

  1. Vol. 73 No. 8, p. 2364-2374
     
    Published:


 View
 Download
 Share

doi:10.2527/1995.7382364x

Determination of apparent ileal amino acid digestibility in barley and canola meal for pigs with the direct, difference, and regression methods.

  1. M Z Fan and
  2. W C Sauer
  1. Department of Animal Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Abstract

Three methods were evaluated for the determination of apparent ileal digestibility values of amino acids in feedstuffs with a low protein (barley, 10.2% CP) and a high protein content (canola meal, 38.2% CP). Five barrows, average initial BW 40 kg, were fitted with a simple T-cannula at the distal ileum and fed five diets according to a 5 x 5 Latin square design. Diet 1 contained 42.7% canola meal providing the sole source of dietary amino acids. Diets 2, 3, and 4 contained three graded levels of barley (22.5, 45.0, and 67.5%, respectively) and three graded levels of canola meal (36.6, 30.5, and 24.4%, respectively). Diet 5 contained 90.0% barley, which provided the sole source of dietary amino acids. With the exception of diet 5, the diets were formulated to contain 16% CP. Chromic oxide (.4%) was included as the digestibility marker. The pigs were fed twice daily, equal amounts, at 0800 and 2000. The dietary allowance was 1,800 g/d. Each experimental period comprised 8 d. Ileal digesta were collected for a total of 24 h during d 7 and 8 at 2-h intervals. Apparent ileal digestibility values of amino acids in barley were determined with the direct method from diet 5, with the difference method from diets 2, 3, and 4, and with the regression method from diets 1, 2, 3, and 4. Digestibility values of amino acids in canola meal were determined with the direct method from diet 1, with the difference method from diets 2, 3, and 4, and with the regression method from diets 1, 2, 3, and 4. There were no differences (P < .05) in the digestibility values in barley between the difference method when barley was included at 67.5% in the diet and the regression method. However, the digestibility values were lower (P < .05 or < .10) when these were determined with the direct method. There were no differences (P > .05) in the digestibility values of canola meal when these were determined with the direct method, the difference method, when canola meal was included at 36.6% in the diet, and the regression method. In conclusion, amino acid digestibility values in feedstuffs with a low protein content should be determined with the difference or regression methods rather than with the direct method. Amino acid digestibility values in feedstuffs with a high protein content can be determined with either method.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © .