The Impact of Feeding Corn DDGS and Phytase on Manure Phosphorus Management in Pork Production Dr. Jerry Shurson Department of Animal Science University of Minnesota
Quantity of Manure Excreted Annually By Livestock and Poultry in the U.S. 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 Source: Cromwell (22) Manure (Million Tons) Beef Dairy Sheep Swine Poultry Total
% Phosphorus in Livestock and Poultry Manure 3 2.5 2 1.5 1.5 Beef Dairy Sheep Swine Poultry % P Source: Cromwell (22)
Annual Amounts of Phosphorus Excreted in Livestock and Poultry Manure in the U.S. 2 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 P Excretion (1 Tons) Beef Dairy Sheep Swine Poultry Total Source: Cromwell (22)
Phosphorus in Swine Manure Swine manure has a N:P ratio of 3:1 Lower than needed by crops grown (e.g. corn 6:1) When manure is applied to meet the N needs of the crop: Excess P is applied Excess P in soil has potential for leaching and runoff that contributes to eutrophication of surface water
Chemical Forms of Phosphorus In Manure Phosphorus compounds in manure vary in: Solubility Availability for plant uptake Absorption potential in soils Manure P composition is affected by: Age of the animal Diet Amount and type of bedding material Storage method
Phosphorus in Soil Soils contain between 1 to 3 ppm P Soluble P Reactive P Stable P Form is available for plant uptake Predominantly orthophosphates Found in fresh organic material Converted over time to soluble P Largest portion of soil P Crystalline compounds with very low solubility Stable organic compounds that are not available to plants
Lbs. of P 2 O 5 per Lb. of Animal Wt./Yr.25.2.15.1.5 Nursery Grower Finisher Sow & Litter Gestation Swine Source: Estimating Manure Nutrients from Livestock and Poultry. NebGuide G1334, 1997.
Total and Available P Requirement (g/day ) of Growing Pigs (NRC, 1998) 14 12 1 8 6 4 Total Avail. 2 6.6-11 lbs 11-22 lbs 22-44 lbs 44-11 lbs 11-176 lbs 176-265 lbs
Total and Available P Requirement (% of diet) of Growing Pigs (NRC, 1998).7.6.5.4.3.2 Total % Available %.1 6.6-11 lbs 11-22 lbs 22-44 lbs 44-11 lbs 11-176 lbs 176-265 lbs
Nutritional Methods to Reduce Manure Phosphorus Use ingredients that are high in digestible or bioavailable P Minimize safety margin for P when formulating diets Add phytase to the diet Maintain a 1:1 to 1.5:1 calcium-to-phosphorus ratio when formulating diets Minimize feed wastage
Comparison of Total P Concentration and P Bioavailability Between Corn, Soybean Meal (47.5%) and DDGS for Swine.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.1 Corn Soybean Meal DDGS Total P, % Available P, %
Potential for Reducing P Excretion in Manure From 175 Lb Pigs 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 27% 54% 66% P intake, g/d P retained, g/d P excreted, g/d 2 Current.5% NRC.4% Phytase.3% DDGS + Phytase Source: Adapted from G.L. Cromwell, Feedstuffs, October 7, 1991.
Potential for Reducing P Excretion in Manure By Feeding Swine Grower Diets Containing 1 or 2% DDGS 14 12 1 8 6 4 2-6% -12% Corn-SBM 1% DDGS 2% DDGS Total P, lbs/ton Available P, lbs/ton Manure P, lbs/ton Source: Adapted from G.L. Cromwell, Feedstuffs, October 7, 1991.
Phosphorus Balance in the Pig (Feed Intake x % P in Diet) (Amt. Feces Excreted x % P in Feces) + (Amt. Urine Excreted x % P in Urine) Amount of P Consumed Amount of P Excreted = Amount of P Retained
Effect of DDGS Level and Diet Formulation Method on Manure Phosphorus Excretion in Nursery Pigs (23 lbs.) Diet Composition Formulation Method 1. Corn-Soybean meal Total P/Available P 2. 1% DDGS Total P 3. 1% DDGS Available P 4. 2% DDGS Total P 5. 2% DDGS Available P
Percentage of Corn, Soybean Meal, and DDGS in Experimental Diets 7 6 5 4 3 2 Corn SBM DDGS 1 CS-Total 1% D-T 1% D-A 2% D-T 2% D-A
Percentage of Dicalcium Phosphate and Limestone in Experimental Diets 1.2 1.8.6.4 Dicalcium P Limestone.2 CS-Total 1% D-T 1% D-A 2% D-T 2% D-A
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Feed Intake of Nursery Pigs (g/day) 6 5 4 3 2 % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS 1 Feed Intake, g/d
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Daily Fecal Excretion (g/d) 7 6 5 a b c 4 3 2 1 + 15% + 3% Feces excreted, g/d % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS a,b,c Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Dry Matter Digestibility (%) 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a b c - 2.2% - 5.1% DM Digestibility, % % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS a,b,c Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Fecal Phosphorus Concentration (%) 2.5 a b 2 1.5 1.5 c - 15.5 % - 34.1 % % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS Fecal P Concentration, % a,b,c Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Daily Fecal Phosphorus Excretion (g/day) 1.2 1.8.6.4.2-2.% - 5.9% Daily Fecal P Excretion, g/d % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Daily Urine P Excretion (g/day) 1.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.1 Daily Urine P Excretion, g/d % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Total P Excreted as a % of Phosphorus Intake 4 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 x Total P Excreted as a % of P Intake x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15). y -.8% - 8.2% % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on Phosphorus Retention (g/day) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.8.6.4.2 x P Retention, g/d y + 2.5% + 9.7% % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15).
Effect of Dietary Level of DDGS on P Retained as a % of P Intake 7 6 5 x y 4 3 2 1 +.5% + 5.% P Retained as a % of P Intake % DDGS 1% DDGS 2% DDGS x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15).
Effect of Diet Formulation Method on Daily Phosphorus Intake (g/day) 3 2.5 2 a b 1.5 1.5-1.7% Total P Available P Daily P Intake, g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Diet Formulation Method on Fecal Phosphorus Concentration (%) 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.8.6.4.2 a b - 5.7% Fecal P Concentration, % Total P Available P a,b,c Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Diet Formulation Method on Daily Total Phosphorus Excretion (g/day) 1.2 1.8.6.4.2-5.8% Total P Excreted, g/d Total P Available P
Effects of Adding 1 or 2% DDGS to Nursery Diets on % Total, Soluble and Particulate P in Swine Manure.12 a,x a,x.1.8.6.4.2 y b y b Corn-SBM 1% DDGS-TP 1% DDGS-AP 2% DDGS-TP 2% DDGS-AP Total P Particulate P Soluble P a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15).
Summary For every 1% DDGS added to the nursery diet: dry matter digestibility 2.2% daily fecal excretion 15% fecal P concentration 16% daily P excretion 2 to 4%?? theoretical maximum is 6%
Summary Formulating nursery diets on an available P basis vs. total P basis: daily total P intake by 11% fecal P concentration by 6% May daily fecal excretion by 6%
Conclusions Adding DDGS to nursery diets has a small effect on reducing manure P excretion not as much as mathematically possible because of reduced DM digestibility Adding 2% DDGS to a nursery diet and formulating on an available P basis will result in the greatest reduction in manure P.
Conclusions Using a P bioavailability coefficient of 9% for DDGS appears to reasonable when formulating DDGS diets for swine. Adding DDGS to nursery diets and formulating on an available P basis has minimal effects on the amount of soluble and particulate P excreted.
Effect of Adding 2% DDGS and Phytase, at Different Ca:Available P Ratios on Manure Phosphorus Excretion in Nursery Pigs. Diet Composition 1. Corn-SBM 2:1 Ca:Available P ratio 2. Corn-SBM 2.5:1 3. Corn-SBM 3:1 4. 2% DDGS + phytase 2:1 5. 2% DDGS + phytase 2.5:1 6. 2% DDGS + phytase 3:1
Percentage of Corn, Soybean Meal, and DDGS in Experimental Diets 7 6 5 4 3 2 Corn SBM DDGS 1 C-SBM 2:1 C-SBM 2.5:1 C-SBM 3:1 2%DP 2:1 2%DP 2.5:1 2%DP 3:1
Percentage of Dicalcium Phosphate and Limestone in Experimental Diets 1.4 1.2 1.8.6.4 Dical Lime.2 C-SBM 2:1 C-SBM 2.5:1 C-SBM 3:1 2%DP 2:1 2%DP 2.5:1 2%DP 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Feed Intake of Nursery Pigs (g/day) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1 Feed Intake, g/d
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Dietary Phosphorus Concentration (%).7 a a a.6.5.4.3.2.1 b b b Feed Phosphorus Concentration, % CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Phosphorus Intake (g/d) 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1.5 a a a b b b Daily Phosphorus Intake, g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Fecal Excretion (g/d) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a a x Feces Excreted, g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15). x b,y CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Dry Matter Digestibility (%) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a a x x b,y Dry Matter Digestibility, % a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15). CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Fecal Phosphorus Concentration (%) 3 a a a 2.5 2 1.5 1.5 b b b CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1 Fecal Phosphorus Concentration, % a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Fecal Phosphorus Excretion (g/d) 2 a a a 1.8 1.6 1.4 b b CSB 2:1 b 1.2 CSB 2.5:1 1.8.6.4 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1.2 Daily Fecal Phosphorus Excretion, g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Phosphorus Digestibility (%) 7 b b b 6 a a a 5 4 3 2 1 CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1 Phosphorus Digestibility, % a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Urinary Phosphorus Excretion (g/d).5.45.4.35.3.25.2.15.1.5 a b b b b b Daily Urinary Phosphorus Excretion, g/d CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1 a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Total Phosphorus Excretion (g/d) 2 a a a 1.8 1.6 1.4 b b CSB 2:1 1.2 1.8.6.4 b CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1.2 Daily Total Phosphorus Excretion. g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5).
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Daily Phosphorus Retention (g/d) 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.8.6.4.2 a a a,x Daily Phosphorus Retention, g/d a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15). b y CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1
Effect of Feeding Corn-SBM Diets Without Phytase vs. Corn- SBM-2% DDGS Diets With Phytase at Different Ca:Avail P Ratios on Percentage of P Intake Retained (%) 7 6 a a a b,x b,y b,y 5 4 3 2 1 CSB 2:1 CSB 2.5:1 CSB 3:1 2% D 2:1 2% D 2.5:1 2% D 3:1 % of Phosphorus Intake Retained a,b Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.5). x,y Means with different superscripts are significantly different (P <.15).
Summary Adding 2% DDGS and phytase to swine diets: diet P concentration daily P intake fecal P concentration fecal and total P excretion P digestibility % of P intake retained by the pig
Summary Calcium:Available P ratio: No effect on DM digestibility 3:1 tended to have fecal P excreted than 2:1 No effect on fecal P concentration P digestibility tended to be for 2:1 vs. 2.5:1 and 3:1 No effect on P retention
Conclusion Adding 2% DDGS + phytase to nursery pig diets: reduces manure P excretion by 36% improves P retention compared to feeding a corn-soybean meal diet without DDGS and phytase Ca:Available P ratio is of little concern as long as it is between 2:1 to 3:1
Acknowledgements This study was funded by the: Iowa Corn Growers Association