Production of DDGS. The Value of Corn Distiller s Dried Grains with Solubles in Swine Feeding Programs. What is New Generation DDGS?

Transcription

1 The Value of Corn Distiller s Dried Grains with Solubles in Swine Feeding Programs Dr. Jerry Shurson Department of Animal Science University of Minnesota What is New Generation? Co-product of the dry-milling fuel ethanol industry Corn - Midwestern US Wheat - Canada Sorghum - Great Plains US Barley North Dakota Rye - Europe Production of Yeasts and enzymes are used to ferment the starch fraction of corn Ethanol and carbon dioxide are produced Distiller s grains and distiller s solubles are the residues remaining after fermentation These fractions are blended and dried to produce distiller s dried grains with solubles () Corn Corn Dry-Milling Process Overview Corn Cleaning alpha amylase enzyme Hammermill Mix Slurry Liquefaction Dist illat ion CO2 Cooker Fermentation Yeast and Glucoam ylase Enzyme w hole stillage Ethyl Alcohol Centrifuge thin stillage Evaporator coarse solids Rotary Dryer Distillers Wet Grains Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles Cond. Distillers Solubles Feed Industry Co-products

2 Dry-Milling Average Ethanol Yield Per Bushel of Corn M ap of U.S. Ethanol Plants * BELLINGHAM * RED DEER * OLYMPIA *LANIGAN * GREAT FALLS *MINNEDOSA WALHALLA * GRAFTON * * TEMISCAMING Ethanol CO2 2.7 gallons 18 lbs 18 lbs * RANCHO CUCAM ONGA * CORONA * CALDWELL * BURLEY * LITTLE FALLS M ORRIS * * MELROSE ABERDEEN BENSON * * * ST. PAUL * TIVERTON * BUFFALO LAKE M ARSHALL * * WINTHROP HURON * BINGHAM LAKE * * DUNDAS * PLOVER * CLAREMONT WINNEBAGO * ALBERT LEA * * PRESTON * CHATHAM LUVERNE * SCOTLAND * HOPKINTON * * LENA TORRINGTON * CEDAR RAPIDS * BLAIRSTOWN * * CLINTON * SOUTH BEND COLUM BUS * * BLAIR * M USCATINE SUTHERLAND * AURORA * EDDYVILLE * * YORK * HAM BURG * PEORIA HASTINGS * * PEKIN * GOLDEN * DECATUR ATCHISON * * MACON * LOUISVILLE * LEOTI * GARDEN CITY * COLWICH PORTALES * LOUDON * * JENNINGS * EDINBURG Source: Bryan & Bryan Inc. September 1999 Slide courtesy of Ms. Kelly Davis, CVEC, Benson, MN Why is there so much interest in feeding to swine? New Generation is high in digestible nutrients Economical partial replacement for: corn soybean meal dicalcium phosphate Increasing production and supply Unique properties reduce P excretion in manure increase litter size weaned/sow gut health benefits? Frequently Asked Questions about Feeding to Pigs How much will I save in feed costs if I use? Are there any other benefits of using? How Much Will I Save in Feed Cost by Using New Generation? New Generation is Nutritionally Different Compared to Other Grain Co-products It depends on: Nutrient values of your source Energy - most expensive nutrient Total and digestible amino acids 2 nd most expensive Total and available phosphorus 3 rd most expensive price relative to prices of: Corn Soybean meal Dicalcium phosphate Level of used in the diet Diet formulation method

3 Comparison of Nutrient Composition of New Generation, Corn Gluten feed, Corn Gluten Meal, Corn Germ Meal, and Brewer s Dried Grains (nutrient values on 100% dry matter basis) Comparison of Energy Values for (88% Dry Matter Basis) Protein, % Fat, % (UM) Corn Gluten Feed (NRC) Corn Gluten Meal (NRC) Corn Germ Meal (Feedstuffs) Brewer s Dried Grains (NRC) Calculated Trial avg. Old Calculated NRC (1998) NDF, % DE, kcal/kg ME, kcal/kg Lys, % No data No data DE, kcal/lb Met, % Thr, % Trp, % ME, kcal/lb Ca, % Available P, % Corn: DE (kcal/lb) = 1580, ME (kcal/lb) = 1534 (NRC, 1998) Comparison of Amino Acid Composition of (88% dry matter basis) Comparison of Apparent Ileal Digestible Amino Acid Composition of (88% dry matter basis) Lysine, % Methionine, % Threonine, % Tryptophan, % Valine, % Arginine, % Histidine, % Leucine, % Isoleucine, % 0.75 (17.3) 0.63 (13.6) 0.99 (6.4) 0.22 (6.7) 1.32 (7.2) 1.06 (9.1) 0.67 (7.8) 3.12 (6.4) 0.99 (8.7) Old 0.47 (26.5) 0.44 (4.5) 0.86 (7.3) 0.17 (19.8) 1.22 (2.3) 0.81 (18.7) 0.54 (15.2) 2.61 (12.4) 0.88 (9.1) (NRC, 1998) Lysine, % Methionine, % Threonine, % Tryptophan, % Valine, % Arginine, % Histidine, % Leucine, % Isoleucine, % Old (NRC, 1998) Phenylalanine, % 1.29 (6.6) 1.12 (8.1) 1.27 Phenylalanine, % Values in ( ) are CV s among plants Economics is Partly Dependent on Total and Digestible Amino Acid Levels in Lysine is the most variable of all amino acid levels in new generation Lowest = 0.63% Highest = 0.90% Average = 0.75% Old generation Average = 0.47% How Does Lysine Level Affect the Economic Value of? In a 10% diet: (0.80% lysine) vs. (0.66% lysine) will save $0.31/ton of complete feed Low lysine (0.66%) is worth $83.45/ton vs. high lysine (0.80%) at $86.55/ton $3.10/ton difference in value Price assumptions: corn = $2.00/bu, = $85/ton, soybean meal 44% = $165/ton, dicalcium phosphate = $12.50/cwt, limestone = $1.75/cwt, salt = $6.90/cwt, L-lysine HCl = $1.00/lb, VTM premix = $117/cwt

4 Comparison of Phosphorus Level and Relative Availability of (88% dry matter basis) Old NRC (1998) Corn NRC (1998) The Use of in Swine Diets Total P, % P Availability, % No data Available P, % 0.70 No data and Phytase are a Key Part of Manure Phosphorus Management Diet Composition and Cost Comparison from Adding 376 lbs/ton of and Phytase Adding 20% to a corn-soy diet and formulating on an available P basis can reduce manure P by > 12% Ingredient Corn, lbs Soybean meal 44%, lbs Corn-SBM-3 lbs Lysine lbs + Phytase , lbs 376 Adding phytase to a corn-soy diet increases P bioavailability from 15% to > 45% Dicalcium phosphate, lbs Limestone, lbs Salt, lbs Lowering dietary P, adding 20% & phytase can reduce manure P excretion by 40 to 50% L-lysine HCl, lbs VTM premix, lbs Phytase, 225 FTU/lb TOTAL, lbs Total Cost, $ Difference, $ Formulation Methods for Diets Containing Cost Savings Depends on Diet Formulation Method Used Total vs digestible amino acid basis Maximum inclusion rate = 10% if formulating on a total amino acid basis Much higher inclusion rates (>10%) if diets are formulated using digestible amino acids Total vs available phosphorus basis Formulating diets on an available P basis increases economic benefit and reduces P content of manure

5 Comparison of Formulating Diets on a Total Lysine and P Basis vs. Digestible Lysine and Available P Basis Why is Feed Cost Savings Higher When Formulating Diets on a Total Amino Acid and Phosphorus Basis? Ingredient Corn, lbs Soybean meal 44%, lbs, lbs Dical. phosphate, lbs Limestone, lbs Salt, lbs L-lysine HCl, lbs VTM premix, lbs TOTAL, lbs Total Cost, $ Typical Corn-SBM- Lysine Diet % Total Lysine Total P % Digestible Lysine Available P Formulating on a total lysine and P basis replaces: 15 lbs less corn ($36/lb) 17 lbs more soybean meal 44% ($95/lb) 2 lbs less dicalcium phosphate ($0.15/lb) compared to formulating on a digestible amino acid and available phosphorus basis Difference, $ corn = $2.00/bu, = $85/ton, soybean meal 44% = $190/ton, dicalcium phosphate = $15.00/cwt, limestone = $1.75/cwt, salt = $6.90/cwt, L-lysine HCl = $1.00/lb, VTM premix = $1.17/lb Quick Calculation of Feed Cost Savings Feeding New Generation to Sows Thumb rule: Additions/2000 lbs diet lbs x $/lb = $ + 3 lbs limestone x $/lb = $ TOTAL ADDITIONS (A) $ Subtractions/2000 lbs diet lbs corn x $/lb = $ - 20 lbs SBM (44%) x $/lb = $ - 6 lbs dical. phos. x $/lb = $ TOTAL SUBTRACTIONS (S) $ (S A) = Feed cost savings/ton by adding 10% to the diet Feeding High Levels of Appears to Increase Litter Size Weaned Effect of Feeding a 50% Diet on Sow Weight Gain During Gestation (Reproductive Cycle 1) Weight gain (kg) (P >.22) MSE Control Dietary treatment

6 Effect of Feeding a 0 or 50% Gestation Diet and 0 or 20% Lactation Diets on Pigs Weaned/Litter Effect of Dietary Treatment Combination on ADFI of Sows During Lactation Number of Pigs Control/Control a x a y a y a y Control/ /Control Dietary treatment / Cycle 1 Cycle 2 a,b,x,y Different superscripts indicate significant difference (P <.10). Feed Intake, lb/day Control/Control a xy b x a y a xy Control/ /Control Dietary Treatment / Cycle 1 Cycle 2 a,b,x,y Different superscripts indicate significant difference (P <.10). Feeding New Generation to Grow-Finish Pigs Fat Quality Characteristics of Market Pigs Fed Corn-Soy Diets Containing 0 to 30% 0 % 10% 20% 30% Belly thickness, cm 3.15 a 3.00 a,b 2.84 a,b 2.71 b Belly firmness score, degrees 27.3 a 24.4 a,b 25.1 a,b 21.3 b Adjusted belly firmness score, degrees 25.9 a 23.8 a,b 25.4 a,b 22.4 b Iodine number 66.8 a 68.6 b 70.6 c 72.0 c Means within a row lacking common superscripts differ (P <.05). Maximum Inclusion Rates of New Generation in Swine Diets (Based Upon University of Minnesota Performance Trials) Nursery pigs (>15 lbs) Up to 25 % Grow-finish pigs Up to 20% (higher levels may reduce pork fat quality) Gestating sows Up to 50% Lactating sows Up to 20% Assumptions: no mycotoxins and formulate on a digestible amino acid and available phosphorus basis FAQ - Nutrition What nutrient values do I use? What can be done to provide a more consistent, less variable product? Product differentiation Customer uses a single source Develop quality specifications Standardize production procedures Is there a quick test available for determining amino acid digestibility of? How is different from other grain coproducts?

7 FAQ - Safety What is the risk of mycotoxins? Are there any antibiotic residues present in? Should I be concerned about the relatively high sulfur content in? FAQ - Quality Is color a good indicator of quality and nutrient digestibility? How do we know which suppliers provide high quality? Are there quality standards for? How do I know if the product I m buying is really? Low Quality, Less Digestible High Quality, Highly Digestible FAQ Preservation and Stability How long can be stored without degradation of quality? Mycotoxins Rancidity Do antioxidants need to be added to preserve? Are mold inhibitors added to? Can flowability agents be added to improve handling? How do you handle and store wet DDG? FAQ Feed Manufacturing Can be pelleted? Can diets containing be pelleted? What is the flowability of in various types of storage structures? Why is there variation in particle size among plants? What is the bulk density of?

8 Reasons Why Some Potential Customers Don t Want to Use Believe that has a low energy value Concerns about the risk of mycotoxin contamination Concerns about soft pork fat in pork carcasses Difficult to pellet high fat diets containing > 5% Litter size improvements from feeding diets supplemented with omega 3 fatty acids may not occur due to altering the ratio of omega 3:omega 6 fatty acid when is added to sow diets Do not want to reduce the phosphorus content of manure Are There Any Other Benefits of Feeding? Manure management decreases P excretion in manure increases N excretion in manure minimized by using synthetic amino acids no apparent effect on reducing NH 3, H 2 S, or odor emissions Increased litter size weaned Improved gut health (e.g. ileitis)? U of M Web Site We have developed a web site featuring: * research summaries - swine, poultry, dairy, & beef - quality * presentations given * links to other related web sites * international audiences Acknowledgements University of Minnesota Research Team Dr. Sam Baidoo Dr. Lee Johnston Dr. Connie Gebhart Dr. Nate Winkleman Mark Whitney Mindy Spiehs Jenny Wilson Jeff Knott Roberto Guedes Antonio Renteria Acknowledgements Research Funding Midwest Association Minnesota Corn Growers Association Minnesota Pork Producers Association Alpharma Illinois Corn Growers Association CAMAS, Inc.