Nutritional value of rapeseed meal Karthik Masagounder, Kiran Doranalli, Markus Wiltafsky & Girish Channarayapatna, Evonik Industries, Singapore
Outline Introduction & Objectives Methods Results Nutrient content (Amino acid content / proximate / energy) Glucosinolates content & heat treatment Conclusion
Introduction Common species Species Brassica juncea Common name Indian mustard B. nigra Black mustard B. rapa / B. campestris Indian rape / Polish rapeseed / Brown/Yellow sarson B. napus Rapeseed /canola Mustard is more heat and drought tolerant than canola Canola: Canada + ola (Oil) 00-rapeseed (<30 µmol/g glucosinolate in meal; <2% erucic acid in oil)
Introduction Production of RSM vs. SBM, India 10000 1000 MT 8000 6000 4000 SBM RSM 2000 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year India is the third largest producer of RSM globally, after China & Canada
Introduction Price trend of RSM vs. SBM, India 40000 Price, INR / kg 30000 20000 SBM RSM 10000 0
Objectives Determine the content of essential amino acids (EAA) and proximate nutrients of Indian origin RSM samples collected during 2013. Estimate metabolisable energy (ME) content of RSM for poultry using prediction equation based on proximate nutrients Determine total glucosinolate contents of Indian RSM samples
Methods Amino acids NIR and wet chemistry (HPLC): n = 3073 samples Proximate nutrients NIR: n = 1743 samples Metabolic energy Rostagno equation; n = 1743 samples Glucosinolates wet chemistry (GC); n = 29 samples
Outline Introduction & Objectives Methods Results Nutrient content (Amino acid content / proximate / energy) Glucosinolates content & heat treatment Conclusion
CP & Amino acid levels 2013 vs. Book value Mean value RSM 88% DM 2013 (n = 3073) AMINODat 4.0 (n=28) CP 37.09 37.20 LYS 1.76 1.73 MET 0.69 0.68 M+C 1.64 1.64 THR 1.49 1.45 TRP 0.50 0.53 ARG 2.32 2.42 ILE 1.43 1.41 LEU 2.48 2.48 VAL 1.81 1.78 HIS 1.01 1.00 PHE 1.46 1.46
CP & Amino acid levels 2013 vs. Book value RSM, 88% DM 2013 (n = 3073) Range AMINODat 4.0 (n=28) 2013 (n = 3073) AMINODat 4.0 (n=28) CP 28.93-39.62 34.30-39.10 1.90 3.50 LYS 1.27-2.05 1.51-1.97 3.99 6.60 MET 0.52-0.76 0.62-0.73 3.78 4.30 M+C 1.31-1.76 1.45-1.75 2.66 4.50 THR 1.13-1.63 1.32-1.53 2.12 3.20 TRP 0.41-0.56 0.51-0.55 2.93 3.10 ARG 1.79-2.62 2.10-2.63 3.90 4.80 ILE 1.12-1.53 1.29-1.51 2.19 3.90 LEU 1.92-2.68 2.25-2.63 1.97 3.60 VAL 1.39-1.95 1.64-1.88 2.25 3.50 HIS 0.77-1.14 0.91-1.08 3.58 4.30 PHE 1.14-1.57 1.30-1.56 2.23 4.10 CV
CP-AA relationship Poor fit 2.2 y = 0.02x + 0.72 R² = 0.21 1.60 Thr % 1.9 Lys % 1.75 y = 0.04x + 0.33 R² = 0.15 1.6 1.3 1.45 1.30 1.15 1 28 31 34 CP % 37 40 1.00 25 28 1.8 y = 0.01x + 0.33 R² = 0.125 M+C % Met % 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 28 31 34 CP % 37 40 31 34 CP % 37 40 y = 0.05x - 0.02 R² = 0.52 1.6 1.4 1.2 28 31 34 CP % 37 40
AA is not always related to CP 38.0 37.5 CP Lys 1.78 1.77 1.76 CP, % 37.0 1.75 Lys, % 36.5 1.74 36.0 2010 2011 2012 2013 1.73
CP & Amino acid levels RSM vs. SBM 88% DM RSM (n= 3073) SBM (n=5660) CP 37.09 47.33 LYS 1.76 2.91 MET 0.69 0.62 M+C 1.64 1.29 THR 1.49 1.81 TRP 0.50 0.62 ARG 2.32 3.53 ILE 1.43 2.11 LEU 2.48 3.57 VAL 1.81 2.2 HIS 1.01 1.26 PHE 1.46 2.40
Amino acid content, SID basis Comparisons with other raw material SID, Met % 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.56 0.58 0.45 0.40 SID, M+C% 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.11 1.31 0.93 0.63 0.0 SBM RSM CSM MBM 0.4 SBM RSM CSM MBM SID, Lys % 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 2.62 1.41 1.02 1.58 SID, Thr % 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 1.54 1.09 0.95 SBM, n = 5660 RSM, n = 3073 CSM, n = 462 MBM, n = 626 0.81 0.4 0.4 0.0 SBM RSM CSM MBM 0.0 SBM RSM CSM MBM
Proximate nutrients RSM vs. SBM SBM (n = 5617) RSM (n = 1743) Moisture % 12 12 CP % 47.30 ± 0.72 37.01 ± 0.71 Crude Fat % 1.92 ± 0.54 2.76 ± 0.34 Ash % 7.19 ± 0.50 6.98 ± 0.32 Crude Fiber % 5.25 ± 1.16 10.45 ± 0.43 NFE % 26.34 ± 1.28 30.77 ± 0.86
Metabolizable Energy, poultry RSM vs. others 3500 ME, kcal / kg 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 2293 1743 2699 2843 0 SBM RSM CSM MBM
Antinutritional factors Glucosinolates Erucic acid Tannins Phytic acid Sinapine
Glucosinolates 140 different Glucosinolates 27 are known in rapeseed Plant: Part of the defence system Animals: Interfere with iodine uptake and the sythesis of Thyroid hormones T3 and T4, leading to hypothyroidism and enlargement of the thyroid gland (goitre). growth retardation impaired liver and kidney functions impaired reproductive activity
RSM vs. Mustard meal Glucosinolate content Glucosinolates (g/kg) RSM (n = 29) Mustard meal ( n =13) Gluconasturtiin 0.146 0.159 Glucoraphanin 0.055 0.194 Progoitrin 0.093 0.068 Glucotropaeolin 0.003 0.003 Glucobrassicin 0.003 0.046 Sinigrin 3.618 2.950 Epiprogoitrin 0.012 0.012 Glucoiberin 0.170 0.021 Glucoerucin 0.012 0.032 Gluconapin 15.995 20.303 Sum of glucosinolates, 20.10 23.78 Glucosinolate, g / kg 40 30 20 10 0 Rapeseed meal Mustard meal 0 10 20 30 40 mmol/kg 43.32 51.25
RSM: Glucosinolate content 40 35 Glucoinolate, g / kg 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Canada China Europe India 0 20 40 60 80
RSM in broiler diets
RSM in broiler diets 2100 Weight gain, g RTC yield 750 Weight gain, g 1900 1700 740 730 720 710 Ready-to-cook yield, g 1500 1-21/22-42 d SBM (40/34%) MOC_low (25/21%) MOC_low (54/47%) MOC_high (22/19%) MOC_high (44/38%) 700 FCR 1.76 1.73 1.71 1.8 1.91 Rama Rao et al. 2004
Glucosinolates can be destroyed via heating Toasting has the biggest impact on Glucosinolate levels In this example desolventization/toasting causes about 2/3 of the total reduction! Spragg and Mailer, 2007; AOF/Pork CRC report
LCA s of AA s Porcessing is needed to reduce the Glucosinolates. Can we overdo it?
Toasting is the most harmfull process step Wayne, PhD-Thesis, 2001 Effect of processing rapeseed to rapeseed meal on amino acids 4 2 0-2 -4 2 1 1 0 0 0-6 -6-8 -10-12 0-1 -3-1 0 Flaked Cooked -5-9 -4-8 -9 Change in % relative to Flaked rapeseed Expelled Extracted Desolventized/toasted Dried -14 Arg Cys Lys -13
Linear loss of total Lys, Cys and Arg in RSM due to heating at 110 C RSM: Lys Lys, % 1.85 1.80 1.75 1.70 1.65 1.60 1.55 1.50 y = -0.0042x + 1.8018 R² = 0.9591 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time, min 110 C Linear (110 C) RSM: Cys RSM: Arg Cys, % 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.70 0.68 0.66 0.64 y = -0.0015x + 0.7495 R² = 0.9389 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Arg, % 2.05 2.00 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.75 y = -0.0035x + 1.989 R² = 0.9148 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time, min Time, min 110 C Linear (110 C) 110 C Linear (110 C)
Legal constraints for glucosinolates in Europe Rapeseed meal (88% DM): max 4.00 g/kg = 8.6 mmol/kg Finished Feed (88% DM): Piglets: Pig + Poultry: max 0.15 g/kg = 0.32 mmol/kg max 0.50 g/kg = 1.07 mmol/kg Max dietary inclusion rate of 00-RSM Piglets Pig+Poultry 3.75 % 12.50 % Max dietary inclusion rate of Indian-RSM (20 g/kg) Piglets Pig+Poultry 0.75 % 2.50 %
Summary RSM vs. SBM: Cheaper and higher Met (0.07%) & M+C (0.35%) levels Higher crude fiber (5%) and Lower CP (10%) & ME (550 kcal/kg: 2300 v 1750) Poor relationship between CP and EAA regression equation not possible High glucosinoate contents RSM: 20 g/kg Mustard meal: 23.78 g/kg Heat processing helps reduce glucosinolate content, but overprocessing reduces Lys, Arg and Cys - A balance between Glucosinolates and heat-damage needs to be found Inclusion rate of RSM as per European regulation, 2.5%