SOURCES AND AVIZYME ON CHICK

Transcription

1 02000 Applied Poultry Science, Inc EFFECT OF VARIOUS SOYBEAN MEAL SOURCES AND AVIZYME ON CHICK GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND ILEAL DIGESTIBLE ENERGY MICHELE W DOUGLAS and CARL M. PARSONS' Department of Animal Sciences, 284 Animal Science Laboratoy, 1207 West Greg0 y Drive, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL Phone: (217) FAX: (217) MICHAEL R BEDFORD FinnFeeds International Ltd., Box 777, Marlborough, Wiltshire, UK SN8 IXN Primary Audience: Nutritionists, Broiler Producers DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM It is well accepted that U.S. soybean meal (SBM) is a high quality and generally Consistent feed ingredient for poultry. However, the 1 To whom correspondence should be addressed nutritional quality of SBM is not as uniform or predictable in many other parts of the world [l, 21. Much of the latter variation is probably due to differences in the varieties grown and types of processing methods and conditions.

2 Research Report DOUGLAS et al. 75 Although SBM is an excellent feed ingredient for poultry, there is still potential for improvement in its nutritional value. The digestibility of the drymatter and energyinsbm by poultry is very low [3], and 10 to 15% of the amino acids (AA) are indigestible [4]. One possible means of improving the digestibility of SBM is the use of enzymes. Dietary enzymes are widely used in barley-, rye-, and wheat-based diets [SI. Zanella et ul. [6] reported that a mixture of enzymes was effective in improving the nutritional value of corn-sbm diets for broilers. However, it seems that the enzyme response in corn-sbm diets is sometimes variable and the reason for the variability is unclear [A. One possible source of variation may be type of SBM. Perhaps dietary enzymes are more effective in increasing the digestibility of some SBM than others. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine whether the response of an enzyme supplement (Avizyme) [8] in corn- SBM diets for broilers is influenced by SBM source. MATERIALS AND METHODS INGREDIENT ANALYSES 'helve SBM were obtained from various commercial sources in the U.S. and several other countries (Table 1). SBM 2,3,6,9, and 12 were from five different countries; the others were of U.S origin. All SBM samples were analyzed for dry matter (DM) and crude protein (CP) according to the procedures of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists [9]. Concentrations of AA in the SBM were determined using ion-exchange chromatography following hydrolysis in 6 N HCl for 22 hr at 110 C [lo]. Analyses of methionine and cystine were conducted following performic acid oxidation by the method of Moore [ll], except that samples were diluted with water and lyophilized to remove excess performic acid. The CP content of the SBM varied from 41 to 50%. The AA levels varied in accordance with the CP (Table 1). Protein solubility of the SBM was determined by the procedure described by Araba and Dale [l2] and Parsons et al. [13] and varied from 71 to 83% (Table 1). CHICK ASSAYS One-wk-old commercial male broiler chicks resulting from the cross of Ross x Hi Y, Avian X Avian, Peterson X Hubbard, and Avian X Avian were used in Chick Assays 1-4, respectively. Chicks were housed in thermostatically controlled starter batteries with raised wire floors in an environmentally regulated room. Feed and water were supplied ad libitum and light was provided 24 hr daily. The chicks were fed a 24% CP corn- SBM pretest diet during the first 7 days posthatching. Following an overnight fast, the chicks were weighed, wing-banded, and allotted to dietary treatments as described by Sasse and Baker [ 141. The four chick assays were conducted to evaluate growth performance and ileal digestible energy (DE) of chicks fed corn-sbm diets containing 37.28% of the test SBM with or without the addition of 0.10% Awe. The same sample or source of corn was used in all diets in all chick assays. The basal diet was formulated using NRC [4] table values to provide 22.5% CP, 3080 kcal TM%/kg, 0.90% Met + Cys, 1.0% Ca, and 0.45% nonphytate P and to meet or exceed all other NRC [4] nutrient requirements (Table 2). The energy content of the diet was intentionally formulated to be lower than the NRC [4] reference value of 3200 kcal TME,/kg to make the diets more sensitive to improvements in energy utilization by Awe. The A w e product evaluated was A w e 1500, which was included in diets at 0.1%. Avizyme 1500 contains 800 U/g xylanase, 6OOO U/g protease, and 2OOO U/g amylase. The level of DL-methionine was adjusted as needed for the various test SBM to provide 0.90% methionine and cystine based on AA analysis of the SBM (Table 1). The dietary CP level and levels of AA other than Met + Cys were allowed to fluctuate with SBM source. Treatment 1 in each chick assay consisted of a corn-sbm reference diet that contained the same sample of corn and SBM in all chick assays. This dietary treatment was included so that the results of the four chick assays could be standardized and comparisons made across all assays. Celite, a feed marker, was added to each diet at a level of 1.50% as a source of acid insoluble ash (AIA). Three different test SBM were evaluated with and without enzyme in each chick assay and the

3 JAPR 76 METABOLISM AND NUTRITION COMPONENT Dry matter Crude protein SAMPLE NUMBER YO seven diets were fed to six groups of five male chicks from 8 to 21 days posthatching. ILEAL DIGESTIBLE ENERGY ANALYSIS Ileal DE was chosen for evaluation because Zanella et d. [6] reported that this parameter was most sensitive to the effects of Avizyme At the conclusion of each chick assay, small intestine contents of each bird between the vitelline diverticulum and the ileal-cecal junction were collected by gentle manipulation. Due to the small amount of intestinal contents, two groups of five birds within a treatment were pooled together for analysis to yield three replicate groups per treatment. Feed and intestinal contents were analyzed for GE, N, and DM according to the procedures of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists [9]. Ileal DE was estimated using AIA as a marker. Feed and intestinal contents were subjected to the AIA procedure of McCarthy et uz. [15]. The ratio of AIA in the feed to that in the intestinal contents was then calculated, and ileal DE values were calculated using GE, N, and DM values of the feed and intestinal contents. STANDARDIZATION OF GROWTH AND ENERGY DATA Standardization of data was performed so that growth performance and ileal DE could be compared among the four chick assays. Data were standardized by dividing the mean weight gain (582 g), gain:feed (0.696), or ileal DE value (3.076 kcal/g) for the corn-sbm reference diet for all four chick assays by the respective value for each chick assay. That factor was then multiplied by the individual

4 DOUGLAS et al. Research Report - 77 TABLE 2. Composition of the basal corn-soybean INGREDIENT ~~ Ground corn Soybean meal Soybean oil Dicalcium phosphate Ground limestone Salt Vitamin mixb Trace minerals mix' Choline-CI (60%) DL-Met elited Cornstarch TM% (kcavkg) Crude Protein Ca Nonphytate P I.vs LEVEL VO Met+& I 0.90 I k g 1.35 Thr 0.84 *L,evels of all ingredients exce t DL-Met were kept constant in all diets. The level ofdlmet was adjusted in each diet to provide 0.90% Met+% based on amino acid analysis of the saybean meals. BProvided r kg of diet: vitamin A (as retinyl A acetate), & IU; cholecalciferol (as activated animal sterol), 1000 IU; vitamin E as DL-cz-two he@ acetate), 11 IU; vitamin B12,6,01 mg; ribokavin, 4.41 mg; d-pantothenic acid, 10 mg; niacin, 22 m& menadione sodium bisulfite, 2.33 mg. 'Provided as m kg of diet: manganese, 75 (from manganese oxide ; iron, 75 (from iron sulfat); zine, 75 (from zinc oxide f ; copper, 5 (from co per sulfate ; iodine, 0.35 (from eth lene diamine dl%ydroiodide]; selenium, 0.2 (from sojum selenite). Delite COT., Lompoc, CA values were calculated using NRC [4] table values exce t for analyzed CP and amino acids for the soybean me&. SBM treatment value in each chick assay to obtain the standardized value. STATISTICAL, ANALYSIS Data from all chick assays were subjected to ANOVA for completely randomized designs using SAS [16]. Statistical si@cance differences among treatments was assessed using the least signifcant difference test [lq. The combined standardized data for all four chick assays were analyzed as a 12 x 2 factorial with SBM source and enzyme level as main effects. In addition, linear correlations were computed for change in ileal DE due to enzyme vs. GE, CP, KOH protein solubility, and ileal DE without enzyme in an attempt to identify SBM characteristics that would predict enzyme response. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In Chick Assay 1 (Table 3), weight gains were similar for SBM 1 through 3 and the corn-sbm reference diet both with and without the addition of Avizyme (P>.OS). Gakfeed was similar for SBM 1 and 2 in comparison with the corn-sbm reference diet (P >.OS). However, gakfeed was significantly lower (P <.05) for chicks fed SBM 3 than for those fed SBM 1 or the corn-sbm reference diet. A w e had no effect on gakfeed ratios for any of the three SBM. Ileal DE was significantly higher (P <.OS) for the corn-sbm reference diet than for SBM 1 and 2 without AVizyme addition. With AVizyme addition, there was a significant improvement (P <.OS) in the ileal DE of SBM 1 and SBM 2 but not SBM 3. In Chick Assay 2 (Table 3), there was no signifcant difference (P >.OS) in weight gain, gain:feed, or ileal DE for the corn-sbm reference diet or diets containing SBM 4, 5, or 6. There was also no effect of A w e on any of the three parameters. In Chick Assay 3 (Table 4), weight gains and two of three gain:feed values were si@- cantly lower (P <.OS) for SBM 7, 8, and 9 in comparison with the corn-sbm reference diet, and there was no significant effect (P>.O5) of Avizyme. Ileal DE was similar (P >.OS) for the corn-sbm reference diet and diets containing SBM 7 and 8. Avizyme addition to the SBM 9 diet increased ileal DE (P c.os) to a level greater than that for the corn-sbm reference diet (P <.OS), whereas no effect of Avizyme was observed in the diets containing SBM 7 or 8. In Chick Assay 4 (Table 4), weight gains were similar (P >.OS) for the corn-sbm reference diet and diets containing SBM 10,11, and 12 without the addition of Avizyme. Addition of I of Avizyme resulted in a sidcant decrease

5 78 JAPR METABOLISM AND NUTRITION DIETARY TREATMENTS WEIGHT GAIN GAINFEED ILEAL DIGESI'IBLE ENERGY -E +E -E +E -E +E %leans of six pups of fm male chicks from 8 to 21 days posthatching; average initial weight for Chick Assay 1 was 102 g; average initial weight for Chick Assay 2 was 99 g. a-e Means within a parameter and chick assay with no common superscript differ significantly (P <.OS). TABLE 4. Growth performance of chicks and ileal digestible energy of corn-soybean meal (SBM) diets containing various SBM and without (-E) or with (+E) AvizymeA addition (Chick Assays 3 and 4)' DIETARY WEIGHT GAIN GAINFEED ILEAL DIGESI'IBLE TREATMENTS ENERGY -E +E -E +E -E +E

6 ' ' DOUGLAS et al. Research Report 79 (P<.05) in weight gain for the SBM 11 diet, with no effect in the SBM 10 or 12 diets. Gain:feed was generally lower for the test SBM diets in comparison with the corn-sbm reference diet. Avizyme increased gain:feed of chicks fed the SBM 10 diet but decreased gain:feed for chicks fed the SBM 11 diet. Avizyme resulted in a significant improvement (P <.OS) in the ileal DE of SBM 12 diet but a decrease for the SBM 11 diet. There was no si@cant effect of A w e (P >.05) on ileal DE for the SBM 10 diet. When the data for the four chick assays were standardized to the corn-sbm reference diet and combined for analysis, there was no significant effect of Avizyme addition on weight gain or gain:feed for any of the SBM (P >.OS) (Table 5). However, SBM source did significantly (Pc.OS) affect weight gain and gakfeed of chicks. Ileal DE was also influ- I DIETARY TREATMENTS CornSBM 4 enced by SBM source (P<.OS) with values varying from to kca4g DM. These results support the reports by Irish and Balnave [l] and Dudley-Cash [2] that SBM quality can vary, particularly in different parts of the world. Addition of Avizyme resulted in a s&icant improvement in ileal DE of the SBM diets (P<.OS), in agreement with the results of Zanella et ai. [6]. Moreover, there was a significant interaction (P <.05) between SBM source and Avizyme for ileal DE. Thus, A w e increased the ileal DE of some SBM sources more than others. Correlations between change in ileal DE due to enzymes and CP, GE, KOH protein solubility, and ileal DE without enzyme revealed no significant correlations except for ileal DE of the SBM without enzyme. The correlation coefficient for the latter was -0.62, which indicated that Avizyme increased the ileal DE of low DE SBM more WEIGHT GAIN GAINFEED ILEAL DIGESIlBLE ENERGY I -E I +E I I CornSBM 5 I I I I CornSBM 8 CornSBM 9 I 533 -E I +E 1 -E I +E kcavgdm CornSBM 1 I 565 I I I I CornSBM 2 I 562 I 555 I I I I CornSBM 3 I I I Corn-SBM 6 I 573 I 575 I I I I Corn-SBM 7 I 528 I 524 I I I I Corn-SBM 10 I 552 I 575 Corn-SBM CornSBM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 574 I I I I Pooled SEM I ~ ain effect - Sovbean meal I 0.01 I 0.01 I o.ooo1 I I Main effect - Enzvme I 0.47 I 0.94 I I I Interaction I 0.18 I 0.48 I I *PinnFeeds International Ltd., Marlborough, Wiltshire, UK

7 80 JAPR METABOLISM AND NUTRITION than high DE SBM. Thus, part of the variation often observed for enzyme response in corn- SBM diets may be due to the energy digestibility of the SBM, with diets containing low digestible SBM responding more than diets containing high digestible SBM. The results of this study indicated that chick growth performance was greatly influenced by SBM source and that Avizyme addition resulted in an overall improvement in ileal DE of SBM, which varied among SBM sources. CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS 1. The nutritional quality and value of SBM can vary among U.S. and international sources. 2. Enzyme addition (Avkyme) was most effective in improving ileal digestible energy in SBM that contained lower digestible energy. 1. Irish, G.G. and D. Balnave, Poor performance of broilers fed diets containing soyabean meal as the sole protein concentrate. Aut. J. Agnc. Res. 44: Dudlev-Casb. W.W M ean meal aualitv varies wideb in many paks of thd world. Feedstuffs 69(5): Pierson, EEM., LM. Potter, and RD. Brown, Jr., Amino acid digestibility of dehulled soybean meal by adult turkeys. Poultry Sci. 59: National Research Council, Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. 5. Bedford, M.R and AJ. Morgan, The use of enzymes in poultry diets. World s Poultry Sci. J Zanella, I., N.K. Sakomura, F.G. Silversides, A. FiqueIrdo, and M. Pack., Effect of enzyme supplementation of broiler diets based on corn and soybeans. Poultry Sci Bedford, M.R., FinnFeeds International Ltd., Box m, Marlborough, Wiltshire, UK SN8 1XN. Personal communication. 8. FinnFeeds International, Box 777, Marlborough, Wiltshire, UK SNS 1XN. 9. Association of OMcial Analytical Chemisls, Official Methods of Analysis. 13th Edition. Assn. Offic. Anal. Chem., Washington, DC. 10. Spackman, D.H., W.H. Skin, and S. Moore, Automatic recording apparatus for use in the chromatography of amino acids. Analytical Chem. 30: REFERENCES AND NOTES 11. Moore, S., On the determination of cystine as cysteic acid. J. Biol. Chem Arab4 M. and N.M. Dale, Evaluation of protein solubility as an indicator of over processing of soybean meal. Poultry Sci. 69: Parsons, CM., K Hashimoto, KJ. Wedekind, and D.H. Baker, Soybean protein solubility in potassium hydroxide: An io test of in a protein quality. J. him. Sci Sasse, C.E and D.H. Baker, Availability of sulfur amino acids in corn and corn uten meal for growing chicks. J. Anim. Sci !? McCaruly, J.F.,F.X Aherne, andd.b. Okai, Use of HCI insoluble ash as an index material for determinin a arent digestibilitywith pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 54:lOf-lB. 16. SAS Instilute, SAS User s Guide: Statistics. Version 6,4th Edition. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. 17. Steel, RG.D. and J.H. Torrie, Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical A roach. 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., Newvork, NY. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A reciation is ressed to FinnFeeds International Ltd.,!8arlborough,? iltshire, UK for their support of this study.