Nutritive Value of Canola Meal: The Dietary Fibre Story Bogdan A. Slominski Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada 14 th International Rapeseed Congress, Saskatoon, July 2015
Outline Introduction Dietary fibre definition and components, Measurement and physiological effects. Canola fibre and efficiency of animal production Yellow-seeded canola, Dehulled canola meal, Effect of processing. Conclusions
Dietary Fibre The most widely accepted definition (Trowell et al., 1976): The remnants of plant cells resistant to hydrolysis by the alimentary enzymes of man. It is composed of cellulose, hemicellulose, oligosaccharides, pectins, gums, waxes and lignin
Components of Dietary Fibre Class Type Structural polysaccharides Cellulose, hemicellulose, pectins Structural non-carbohydrate Lignin, polyphenols Non-structural polysaccharides Mucilage, gums, resistant starch, inulin Protein/carbohydrate Glycoproteins, Maillard products Oligosaccharides Galacto- & fructooligosaccharides Other Cutin, waxes, minerals Fiber Fractions Water-soluble Water-insoluble
Non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) Corn: 7% Wheat: 9% Barley: 17% SBM: 15% CM: 18% Flax: 27% Diet: 10%
A Model of Cell Wall Architecture
Fibre Analysis Crude Fibre (CF) Two sequential boiling digestions with 1.25% H 2 SO 4 and 1.25% NaOH Acid Detergent Fibre (ADF) Boilig digestion with 2%CTAB (cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide) in 0.5M H 2 SO 4 Neutral Detergent Fibre (NDF) Boiling digestion with neutral detergent solution containing SDS (3%) and EDTA (1.9%) in ph 7 phosphate buffer in the presence of α-amylase
NSP Analysis Gas-Liquid Chromatography Sample DMSO, 100ºC Starch gelatinization Starch hydrolysis Enzymatic: ph 5.2, 45ºC Ethanol addition (80%) Precipitate Ethanol solubles Glucose, di- & oligosaccharides Acid hydrolysis 12M HCl (1h, 40ºC) 1M HCL (2 h, 100 ºC) Sugar derivatization (alditol acetates) GLC
Non-starch polysaccharide constituent sugars by GLC
Plant Cell Wall Polymers Feed Evaluation Fractions Hemicellulose Pectin NSP TDF Cellulose CF ADF NDF Lignin Glycoprotein CF-crude fiber; ADF-acid detergent fiber; NDF-neutral detergent fiber; NSP-non-starch polysaccharides; DF-dietary fiber (From Chesson, 1986; modified)
Total Dietary Fiber Methods Component measured AOAC gravimetric Uppsala UK GLC U of M GLCgravimetric gravimetric- GLC NSP X X X X Lignin X X X Cell wall protein X Resistant starch X X X Maillard products? x X
Total Dietary Fiber U of Manitoba Method Sample NSP NDF NDF residue NSP TDF = NDF + (sample NSP NSP of the NDF residue) Optional analyses: Lignin = NDF (NSP + protein + ash) NDF residue Protein, ash
Dietary Fibre: Efficiency of Animal Production Low nutrient density of high fiber feedstuffs Antinutritive effects of soluble NSP (i.e., β-glucan, arabinoxylan) Nutrient encapsulating effect of cell walls Impaired amino acid availability (i.e., Maillard products) Benefit from VFAs production
Contributions to the fibre content (%, fat-free basis) Seed Hull 16% = 16.8 + Embryo 84% 16.3 33.1
Pre-press Solvent Extraction Process
Pre-press Solvent Extraction Process Screenings/ Dockage
Pre-press Solvent Extraction Process Maillard Reaction Screenings/ Dockage
Molecular Events in Maillard Reaction Protein R - NH 2 + O H - HO - H- H- H C C - OH C - H C - OH C - OH CH 2 OH Glucose R-N= H - HO - H- H- H C C - OH C - H C - OH C - OH CH 2 OH Schiff base Amadori rearrangement R-NH - H - HO - H- H- CH 2 C = O C - H C - OH C - OH CH 2 OH (Furth, 1988) Advanced glycation end products
The effect of moist heat-treatment on protein damage in canola Canola meal samples were subjected to heat-treatment at: 95ºC 102ºC 105ºC 110ºC 126ºC Samples were analyzed for NDF, neutral detergent insoluble crude protein (NDICP), and digestible protein contents.
Effect of Heat Treatment on NDF and NDF Residual Protein (NDICP) Content of Canola Meal 45 % DM 35 25 NDF NDF residual protein (%) 15 25 20 15 10 5 0 90 102 105 110 120 126 Heating temperature ( C) NDICP 90 102 105 110 120 126 Heating temperature ( C) º
Dietary Fibre Content of Canola Meal (% DM) Component Mean* Range* Min. Max. Total dietary fiber 38.0 30.1 45.2 NSP 21.9 19.4 23.7 Lignin and polyphenols 10.7 7.7 12.8 Glycoprotein (NDICP) 5.4 2.7 9.6 *Represents 11 crushing plants, each providing 3 samples a year for 4 consecutive years
Development of low-fibre, yellowseeded B. napus canola Efforts to breed for yellowseed coat in canola were justified as a means to increase the oil content in the seed and to improve the meal quality.
Development of yellow-seeded B. napus canola YN90-1016 Low oil Low yield Rakow et al., 2010 YN97-262 Increased oil Increased yield YN01-429 Increased oil Increased yield True yellow color
Development of yellow-seeded B. napus canola 50 43.3 44.9 46.4 40 % DM 30 27.5 26.4 26.3 20 16.0 15.0 14.4 10 YN90-1016 YN97-262 YN01-429 Oil Protein Fibre
Development of canola-quality B. juncea mustard A species known for its pure yellow seed coat. Under Western Canadian conditions, B. juncea suffers less from heat and drought stress and matures earlier than B. napus. Such characteristics are the basis for high yields of oil and low chlorophyll content in the seed. Canola-quality: Glucosinolates < 30 µmol/g in the meal portion Erucic acid < 2% in the oil portion
POS Plant, Saskatoon, Canada Seed Processing 2012 crush B. napus, yellow B. napus, black B. juncea, yellow Bunge Canola Processing Plant, Altona, Canada
Meal Evaluation Chemical characterization AME n content (±Enzyme) Amino acid digestibility Growth performance studies
Chemical Composition of Canola Meals (% DM) 2010 and 2011 crush comparison Component B. napus black B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow Crude protein 41.1 c 43.4 b 47.2 a Ether extract 5.1 a 3.5 c 4.0 b Ash 8.5 a 7.3 c 8.0 b Carbohydrates Glucose + fructose 0.3 a 0.2 c 0.3 b Sucrose 6.6 c 10.1 a 8.0 b Oligosaccharides 3.1 a 2.8 b 3.1 a Dietary fiber fractions ADF 20.1 a 9.3 c 9.9 b NDF 25.2 a 19.0 b 18.5 b Total Fiber 35.0 a 29.8 b 28.9 c Glucosinolates (µmol/g) 7.9 c 14.6 a 12.6 b abc P<0.05
Dietary Fiber Components (% DM) Component B. napus black B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow Total dietary fiber 35.0 a 29.8 b 28.9 c NSP 21.7 b 22.8 a 20.4 c Glycoprotein (NDICP) 3.2 b 3.9 a 3.2 b Lignin and polyphenols 10.1 a 3.1 c 5.3 b abc P<0.05
AME n contents of B. napus and B. juncea meals (kcal/kg DM) Item B. napus black Broilers* B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow B. napus black Turkeys B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow AME n 1886 2028 1903 2088 2170 2276 AME n with enzyme 1955 2252 2246 2196 2264 2267 * Represent mean values from 3 AME n assays for B. napus black and B. juncea and mean values from 2 AME n assays for B. napus yellow
Dietary AME n and Enzyme* Supplementation in Poultry Kcal/kg DM 2400 2200 2000 1800 1600 1987 2076 2099 2258 2090 2257 1400 1200 B. napus black B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow Without Enzyme With Enzyme *Superzyme OM
Standardized ileal digestible amino acid contents (%) Amino acid B. napus black Broilers B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow B. napus black Turkeys B. napus yellow B. juncea yellow Arginine 2.22 c 2.43 b 2.99 a 2.15 c 2.37 b 2.83 a Lysine 1.83 b 2.06 a 1.82 b 1.74 b 1.85 a 1.55 c Threonine 1.39 c 1.48 b 1.64 a 1.32 b 1.42 a 1.46 a Methionine 0.73 b 0.64 c 0.75 a 0.63 a 0.59 b 0.62 ab abc P<0.05
Growth performance of broilers (1-36 d) Diet BWG (kg/bird) FCR 1 Control (wheat/sbm) 2.32 a 1.53 15% B. napus black 2.30 a 1.51 15% B. napus yellow 2.19 b 1.54 15% B. juncea yellow 2.31 a 1.50 1 kg feed/kg weight gain
Growth performance of turkeys (1-56 d) Diet BWG (kg/bird) FCR 1 Control (wheat/sbm) 3.90 1.71 20% B. napus black 3.75 1.73 20% B. napus yellow 3.91 1.69 20% B. juncea yellow 3.82 1.70 1 kg feed/kg weight gain
Conclusions It would appear that breeding for low-fiber canola would result in the quantitative changes as evidenced by increased oil, protein, and sucrose contents rather than qualitative changes due to decreased fiber content in the seed. All types of canola meal could effectively replace SBM in poultry rations.
Tail-end dehulling of canola meal using sieving technology One mean of improving the nutritive value of canola meal is dehulling. The use of sieves of 250, 355 and 600 µm resulted in the production of distinct fractions containing high levels of protein and amino acids and less fiber than that of the parent meal.
Tail-end dehulling of canola meal Parent meal Dehulled meal Fraction Fine 1
Composition of dehulled canola meal produced through sieving (%, as-is basis) Component Parent meal Dehulled meal Crude protein 36.9 42.0 Fat 3.8 5.2 Dietary fibre fractions Acid detergent fibre 17.0 9.6 Neutral detergent fibre 23.6 14.8 Total dietary fibre 30.0 21.4
Growth performance of broiler chickens Pre-starter phase; 1-10 d of age Diet Diet fiber content, % Body weight gain, g/bird FCR g feed/g gain Corn/SBM (control) 8.5 285.2 1.23 Canola meal 11.1 293.1 1.19 Dehulled canola meal 9.3 279.7 1.19
Growth performance of young pigs Pre-starter phase: 21-35 d of age Starter phase: 36-50 d of age Diet ADG g/day/pig Gain : Feed Phase 1 Phase 2 Overall Phase 1 Phase 2 Overall Final BW kg Corn/SBM (control) 371 348 b 359 0.80 0.47 b 0.58 b 16.9 Canola meal 346 410 ab 377 0.80 0.55 ab 0.63 ab 17.4 Dehulled canola meal 377 422 a 417 0.89 0.58 a 0.68 a 17.8
Conclusions High nutrient density of dehulled canola meal would allow for a significant replacement of SBM in the pre-starter diets. It would appear that most of canola fiber is simply a diluent and would have minimal effect on nutrient utilization.
The Effect of Processing on Meal Quality Maillard Reaction
Canadian Canola Crushing Plants Location Bunge: Fort Saskatchewan Bunge: Nipawin ADM: Cargill: Clavet Lloydminster JRI: Lethbridge LD and JRI: Yorkton Bunge: Harrowby Viterra: Ste. Agathe Bunge: Altona TRT-ETGO: Becancour Bunge: Hamilton ADM: Windsor
Chemical characteristics of canola meals from crushing plants across Canada 4 surveys 2011: Survey 1 2012: Survey 2 2013: Survey 3 2014: Survey 4 11 canola crushing plants 3 samples from each crushing plant per survey Analysed for DM, CP, total fiber and its fractions, fat, AA, sugars, P, and glucosinolate contents.
Dietary Fiber and Glucosinolate Contents 45 40 Dietary fiber % DM 35 30 12 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Glucosinolates umol/g DM 8 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2011 2012
Dietary Fiber and Glucosinolate Contents 45 Dietary fiber 40 % DM 35 30 12 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Glucosinolates umol/g DM 8 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2011 2012 2013 2014
Dietary Fiber vs. Neutral Detergent Insoluble Crude Protein (NDICP) Dietary Fiber (% DM) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 NDICP (% DM) R 2 = 0.80
Dietary Fiber vs. Neutral Detergent Insoluble Crude Protein (NDICP) Dietary Fiber (% DM) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 R 2 = 0.49 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 NDICP (% DM)
Standardized Ileal Digestible Amino Acid Contents Lysine Methionine Threonine 2 1.6 1.86 1.39 1.74 1.74 1.77 2 1.57 % DM 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.65 0.5 1.03 0.55 1.04 0.49 1 0.59 1.05 0.49 0.9 0 1 2 6 9 10 11 Canola Crushing Plant
Standardized Ileal Digestible Amino Acid Contents Lysine Methionine Threonine 2 1.6 1.84 1.67 1.8 1.79 1.96 1.73 1.61 % DM 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.63 1.34 0.47 0.98 0.56 1.07 0.45 1.02 0.55 1.04 0.5 0.94 0.46 0.94 1.3 0.38 0.74 0 1 2 6 9 10m 10p 11m 11p Canola Crushing Plant
SID Lysine vs. NDF Broiler chickens & Swine SID lysine (% DM) 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 R 2 = 0.281 1.2 26 28 30 32 34 NDF (% DM)
Dietary Fibre vs. SID Lysine 45 Dietary fiber 40 40.7 38.8 % DM 35 34.8 36.6 30 1 2 10 11 % DM 2.2 1.8 1.84 SID lysine 1.67 1.96 1.61 1.4 1 1 2 10 11
Summary Excessive heating during pre-press solvent extraction would result in reduced digestibility of some amino acids, particularly lysine. The fraction of fibre deriving from amino acids damage would be an indication of low meal quality.
Conclusions Canola meal fibre fractions and their effects: The good, the bad, and the ugly The good : NSP Beneficial for gut health Benefits from VFAs production and enzyme addition The bad : Polyphenols and lignin Not necessarily antinutritional Could be replaced by oil and protein The ugly : Maillard products Protein and lysine damage
Acknowledgements Thank you!