Soybean Meal An Excellent Protein Source for Poultry Feeds

7/30/2019 Soybean Meal An Excellent Protein Source for Poultry Feeds

1/16

So yb ean M eal

A n Ex c e l len t Pro te in So u rce

fo r Po u l t ry Feed sD a rw i n G . B ri tz m a n , Ph . D .


2/16

1

I . Soy bean M ea l -An Idea l Pro te in Sou rce fo r Pou l t ry

Soybeans have been used as a p ro te i n /am ino ac id source i n hum an d ie ts fo r m ore than 500 0 years. I n the

earl y 190 0 s soybeans w ere i n t roduc ed i n to the U n i ted Sta tes p r im ar i l y fo r t he i r o i l con ten t . I t w as

even tua l l y d i scovered tha t the m ea l by -p rodu c t w as a va luab le i ng red ien t fo r l i vestock and pou l t ry w hen i t

w as pro per ly pro cessed. As ear ly as 19 17 , i t w as dem on st ra ted that raw soyb eans fed to rats w ere

nu t r i t i ona l l y i n fe ri o r t o p roper l y hea ted soybeans .

Since that tim e, soybean m eal has becom e the mo st im por tant sou rce of protein for poul try and oth er l ivestockthrough out the w orld. I t is the standard against w hich other protein sources are co m pared. I t has also beco m e

the protein source that determ ines the price of proteins for l ivestock feeding throu ghou t the wo rld.

Soybean p rod uc t i on i nc reased g l oba l l y by 4 ,017 ,141 m et ri c tons pe r year f rom 19 88 to 1998 . In 1998 o ne

hun dred f i ft y seven m i l l i o n m et ri c tons o f soybeans w ere p rodu ced i n the w or l d . Soyb ean mea l p roduc t i on

i n 1 9 9 8 w a s 1 0 1 m i l l i o n m e tr i c to n s.

In the U n i ted Sta tes soyb ean m ea l i s the p r im ary source o f supp lementa l p ro te i n i n pou l t ry , sw ine and o the r

l i vestock d i e ts. I n 1998 13 .28 m i l l i on m et ri c tons o f soybean m ea l were used i n po u l t ry d i e ts. In m any o f

the feed fo rm u las fo r pou l t ry and sw ine , soybean m ea l i s the on l y source o f supp lementa l p ro te i n . Pou l t ry

consum e 52 .9% o f the soybean m ea l u t i l i zed i n the U n i ted Sta tes.

Soybean m ea l i s an exce l l en t cho i ce as a supp lementa l p ro te i n source fo r pou l t ry fo r a num ber o f reasons

i n c l u d i n g t h e fo l l o w i n g :

1 . Soybean m ea l con ta i ns a h i gh l eve l o f p ro te i n i n com par i son to o the r p l an t p ro te i n sources.

4 4 % w i th h u l l s

4 6 . 5 % t o 5 0 % w i th o u t h u l ls

2. Soybean meal has an excel lent prof i le o f essent ia l amino ac ids as wel l as o ther nut r ients inc lud ing

po tassium and the v i tam in s cho l i ne , fo l i c ac i d , r i bo f l av i n , n i ac i n , pan to then i c ac i d and th i am ine .

Th i s i s show n i n Tab le 1 .

Table 1: Major Nutrients in Regular and Dehulled Soybean Meal*

Regu lar M eal D eh u l l ed M eal

D ry M atter 8 8 .2 8 8 .4

Pro tei n 4 4 .0 4 7 .5

Eth er Ex trac t 0 .8 1 .0

C ru d e Fib er 7 .0 3 .9

M eth i o n in e 0 .6 2 0 .6 7

C y sti n e 0 .6 6 0 .7 2

Lysin e 2 .6 9 2 .9 0

Try p to p h an 0 .7 4 0 .7 4

Th reo n i n e 1 .7 2 1 .8 7Ph en y lal an in e 2 .1 6 2 .3 4

Ty ro sin e 1 .9 1 1 .9 5

Val i n e 2 .0 7 2 .2 2

A rgin i n e 3 .1 4 3 .4 8

H isti d i n e 1 .1 7 1 .2 8

Leu c in e 3 .3 9 3 .7 4

Iso leu c in e 1 .9 6 2 .1 2

M etab o l i z ab le En ergy , Kc al ./Kg. 2 2 3 0 2 4 4 0

C h o l i n e, M g./Kg. 2 7 9 4 2 7 3 1

C al c i u m , % 0 .2 9 0 .2 7N o n Ph y tate Ph o s., % 0 .2 7 0 .2 7

Po tassi u m , % 2 .0 0 1 .9 8

*N u t r i en t Requ i remen t s o f Pou l t ry , N i n t h Rev i sed Ed i ti on , 19 94


3/16

2

Table 2: The Digestibility for Limiting Amino Acids in Poultry Diets*

Lysin e M eth io n in e C y sti n e

%

Blo o d M eal 8 6 9 1 7 6

C an o la M eal 8 0 9 0 7 5

C o c o n u t M eal 5 8 8 3 4 8C o rn G lu ten M eal 8 8 9 7 8 6

C o tto n seed M eal 6 7 7 3 7 3

Feath er M eal 6 6 7 6 5 9

Fi sh M eal 8 8 9 2 7 3

M eat M eal 7 9 8 5 5 8

Pean u t M eal 8 3 8 8 7 8

Po u l try b y -p ro d u c t M eal 8 3 8 8 7 8

So y b ean M eal D eh u l l ed 9 1 9 2 8 2

Sesam e M eal 8 8 9 4 8 2

Su n fl o w er M eal D eh u l l ed 8 4 9 3 7 8

* N u t r i en t Requ i rem en t s o f Pou l t ry , N i n t h Rev i sed Ed i t i on , 1994

Table 3: A Comparison of Soybean Meal with Other Protein Sources as a Source of Lysine *

Pro tei n So u rc e Pro tei n Lysin e %

% %

Plant Prote ins

So yb ean m eal 4 4 2 .9 0 1 0 0

So y b ean m eal 4 6 .5 3 .0 1 1 0 4

So y Pro tei n C o n c en trate 6 6 4 .2 0 1 4 5

So y Pro tei n Iso l ate 9 2 5 .2 0 1 7 9

A l fal fa M eal 1 7 0 .8 0 2 8

C an o la M eal 3 8 2 .2 7 2 7

C o rn G lu ten M eal 4 2 .1 0 .7 8 5 8

Su n fl o w er M eal 4 5 .5 1 .6 8 5 8

C o tto n seed M eal 4 1 1 .5 1 5 2

W h eat B ran 1 5 0 .5 6 1 9W h eat G lu ten , Sp ray D r i ed 7 4 1 .3 0 4 4

W h eat M id d l i n gs 1 6 0 .6 8 2 4

Yeast, B rew ers D r i ed 4 5 3 .2 3 111

An ima l P ro te i ns

Egg Pro tei n , Sp ray D r i ed 4 8 3 .3 0 11 4

Fi sh M eal 6 0 4 .7 5 1 6 4

Bl o o d M eal , Sp ray D r i ed 8 6 8 .0 2 2 7 7

Fi sh So lu b l es, D ri ed 5 4 1 .7 3 6 0

Po rc i n e Plasm a, Sp ray D r i ed 7 0 6 .1 0 2 1 0

M eat an d Bo n e M eal 5 0 2 .8 0 9 7Sk i m M i l k , D ri ed 3 3 2 .5 4 8 7

W h ey , D r i ed 1 2 0 .9 7 3 3

* Kansas St a te U n i ve rsi t y An i m a l Sc i ence D epar tm en t


4/16

3 . The am ino ac ids i n soyb ean m ea l a re h i gh l y d i gest i b l e . A com par i son o f t he d i gest i b i l i t y w i th o the r

pro te in sou rces is presented in Table 2 . Soyb ean m eal has the h ighes t l ys ine d igest ib i l i ty (91% ) of any

on the com m on ly ava i l ab le p ro te i n sources. I t a l so ranks h i gh i n m e th ion ine , cyst i ne and th reon in e

d igest i b i l i t y . M e th i on ine i s the f i r st l im i t i ng am ino ac id i n m ost pou l t ry d i e ts.

In addi t ion, the var ia t ion in d iges t ib i l i ty i s less for soybean meal as compared to o ther o i l seed meals .

Soyb ean m eal s re la t i ve va lue as a l ysine sou rce com pared to o th er prote in suppl em ents i s sho w n in

Ta bl e 3 .

4. Soy bean m eal has an excel lent l ys ine to prote in ra tio . Th is i s sho w n in Table 4 .

5 . Soyb ean meal i s a pa la tab le sou rce of sup plem enta l pro te in . I t do es no t adversely im pact the

pa la tab i l i t y o f ra ti ons fo r pou l t ry o r any o the r t ype o f l i v estock .

6 . W h e n p r o p e r l y p r o c e sse d , so y b e a n m e al c o n t a i n s n o t o x i n s o r an t i n u t ri t i o n al f ac t o r s w h i c h a f fe c t

pou l t ry and o the r l i vestock pe r fo rm ance .

7 . Com pared to o the r p l an t p ro te i n sources, soybean m ea l has a l ow con ten t o f f i be r and a h i gh l eve l o f

energy.

44% soybean mea l con ta i ns approx imate l y 7% f i be r

Dehu l l ed soybean mea l con ta i ns f rom 3 .3 to 3 .5% f i be r

8. Soyb ean m eal can serve as the so le source of supplem enta l prote in for a l l types of po ul t ry a t an any stageo f g row th o r p roduc t i on . I n mo st pou l t ry d i e ts soybean m eal p rov i des 80% o f the d i e ta ry am ino ac ids .

9 . There i s an i nc reasing l y abund an t supp l y o f soyb ean mea l ava i l ab le to mo st o f the w or l d .

10 . G eneral l y soybean m ea l i s a com pet i ti ve l y p r i ced source o f p ro te i n .

11. The qu al i ty o f soyb ean meal i s re la t i ve ly cons istent com pared to o ther prote in sou rces.

I I. Soyb ean M eal Q ua l i t y

Soyb eans are rela t i ve ly co ns istent in qu al i ty . Therefore, the qual i ty o f the soyb ean m eal i s a f fec ted m ostly

by the p rocessing , hand l i n g and s to rage p rocedures i n p roduc ing and t ranspor t i ng the m ea l . Fac to rs

a f fec ted i nc l u de the fo l l ow ing :

Pro tei n - the prote in con tent o f regular (44 % ) soyb ean m eal w i l l be af fec ted by the am oun t o f fore ign

m ater ia l in the beans or the amo unt o f soy h u l l s added back to the m eal in the processing pro cedure.Soyb eans grow n in the nor thern reg ion s of the U ni ted States tend to be s l ight l y low er in prote in

co ntent. Th ere are also season al effects o n the pro tein co ntent of the soy bean s. These factors w i l l

a f fec t the prote in c ontent o f d ehul led soybean m eal and are the reason s for the var iances in prote in

guarantees for dehul led soyb ean meal . Those guarantees w i l l vary from 4 6.5% to 50% p rote in .

Table 4: Lysine to Protein Ratios for Various Feed Ingredients

In gred ien t C ru d e Pro tei n Ly sin e Ly sin e/Pro tei n

% %

C o rn 8 .3 0 .2 6 3 .1 3So rgh u m grain 9 .2 0 .2 2 2 .3 9

Bar l ey 1 0 .5 0 .3 6 3 .4 2

So y b ean m eal 4 7 .5 3 .0 2 6 .3 6

Fi sh m eal 6 2 .9 4 .8 1 7 .6 4

Su n fl o w er m eal 4 2 .2 0 .8 2 1 .9 4

C o tto n seed m eal 4 1 .4 1 .7 2 4 .1 5

Sesam e m eal 4 2 .6 1 .0 1 2 .3 7

C an o la m eal 3 5 .6 2 .0 8 5 .8 4

M eat m eal 5 4 .0 3 .0 7 5 .2 7

Req u i rem en t, 1 4 d ay o l d b ro i l er 2 3 .0 1 .1 0 4 .7 8


5/16

4

Fat - the o i l co ntent o f soyb ean m eal i s a f fec ted by the so lvent ex t rac t ion p rocess. I f the ex t rac t ion

pro cess is inc om plete, the residu al o i l w i l l be h igh . The o i l add s to the energy va lue of the soyb ean

m ea l , how ever , i f t he m ea l i s to be s to red fo r a pe r i od o f t im e the re i s a r i sk o f ranc id i t y w i th h i gher

o i l l eve l s. Fo r tha t reason , a max im um o f 1% o i l i n the soyb ean mea l i s p re fer red . The m in im um

guaran tee i s fo r 0 .1% . M ost m ea l s w i l l con ta i n abou t 0 .5% .

Fiber - t he fi be r con ten t o f t he soybean m ea l com es p r im ar i l y f rom the hu l l s tha t a re added back to

the meal dur ing process ing. Fore ign mater ia ls in the soybean can a lso add to the f iber content o f the

m ea l . F i be r, o f cou rse , d i l u tes the metabo l i zab le energy con ten t o f the soybean m ea l . M ax im umf ibe r guaran tees fo r 44% and d ehu l l ed soybean m ea l a re 7 and 3 .3 to 3 .5% , respec t i ve l y.

M o i st u r e - t he m ax im um m o istu re i n the mea l shou ld be 12% . H igher l eve l s o f mo i stu re can resu l t i n

t h e d ev e l o p m e n t o f m o l d s w i t h i n th e m e al w h e n st o r ed u n d e r w a r m t em p e r at u r e c o n d i t i o n s. H i g h er

m o i s tu re con ten t a l so d i l u tes the nu t r i t i ona l va l ue o f t he soybean m ea l .

An t i -nu t r i ti ona l f ac to rs - raw soyb eans con ta i n na tu ra l tox i n s fo r pou l t ry . T ryps in and ch ym ot rypsin

i nh ib i to rs- the mo st p rob lem at i c an ti -nu t r i t i ona l f ac to r i s a t r ypsin i nh ib i to r . The t rypsin i n h ib i to rs

d i srup t p ro te i n d i gest i on . They a f fec t pou l t ry by i nc reasing the si ze o f t he panc reas by 5 0 to 1 00% .

This has adverse ef fec ts on b i rd grow th and egg prod uct io n.

O ther tox i n s i nc l ud e com pou nds such as phy tohaemag lu t i n i ns (l ec t i ns). These tox i ns i n te r fe r w i th

the no rm a l absorp t i on o f panc rea ti c am y lase the reby a l l ow ing the enzym e to be qu i ck l y e l im in a tedin the feces. These com po un ds are of less im po rtance than the t rypsin in h ib i tors .

U rease i s on l y im por tan t i n m ono gast r i c nu t r i t i on as a gu ide fo r m easur i ng the adequacy o f

pro cessing. I t i s, ho w ever , o f conc ern in rum inan t feeds that con ta in urea. The urease w i l l beg in to

b r e ak d o w n t h e u r e a w h e n i t c o m e s i n c o n t a c t w i t h i t .

A l l e rgen i c fac to rs-G l yc i n i n and Be ta -cong l yc i n i n reduce nu t r i en t absorp t i on d ue to the i r ef fec t on

the in tegr i ty o f the mic ro-v i l l i o f the smal l in tes t ine.

L i pase and l i poxy genase- resu l t i n pe rox ida t i on and the beany f l avo r o f soybean m ea l .

H exane-th is i s the so lv ent used to ex t rac t the o i l f rom the soyb eans. Inadequ ate rem oval o f the

hexan e af ter the ex t rac t ion p rocess w i l l resu l t in l i ver dam age in po ul t ry . G enera l l y excessivehexane is not a prob lem as processors make every e f for t to recover i t f rom the meal because of cos t

and safety c on siderat ion s.

Fo rtu n ately, the ant i -nu tr i t ional co m po und s in soybeans are heat sensi tive and can be d estroyed b y prop er

pro cessing (toast ing) of the soyb eans durin g the produ ct ion of the soyb ean meal . The factors invo lved in p roper

pro cessing and m ethods to evaluate the adequacy o f processing w i l l be discussed in sect ion I I I of this repo rt .

Part ic le s ize - t he m ea l shou ld be h om ogenous , free f l ow ing , w i thou t co arse pa r t i c l es o r excessi ve

f ines. Co arse par t i c les w i l l resu l t in po ul t ry be in g ab le to se lec t the soyb ean m eal from no n pe l le ted

(mash) feed. Th is w i l l resu l t in un balan ced d ie ts and is no t des i rab le . Ex t rem ely f ine soyb ean meal

w i l l resu l t i n excessi ve du st du r i ng the feed m anu fac tu r i ng p rocess and w hen the soybean m ea l i s

used in m eal (mash) feeds.The A m er i can Feed Indu st ry Assoc ia t i on recom m ends the fo l l o w ing p a r ti c l e si zes:

95 -10 0% th rough U .S. Standard Sieve N o . 10

40-60 % th rough U .S. Standard Sieve N o . 20

M a x i m u m o f 6 . 0 % t h r o u g h U . S. Si e v e N o . 8 0

F l o w a b i l i t y -soyb ean m ea l i s an i ng red ien t tha t does no t f l ow w e l l i n feed m i l l b i n s and a l so tends to

cake o r b r i dge . There fo re , an t i cak ing and f l ow enhancers a re o f ten added to the m ea l . L imes tone

(c a l c iu m c a rb o n a t e) i s f re q u e n tl y u se d . A m a x i m u m o f 0 . 5 % i s r ec o m m e n d e d .

O ther Phys ica l Prop er t ies -The Am er i can Feed Indu st ry Assoc ia t i on h as a l so recom m ended the

fo l l ow ing ph ysi ca l p rop er ti es:

The co lo r to b e l i gh t tan to a l i gh t b row nThe odo r to be f resh , no t sou r , mu sty o r bu rned

The tas te to be b land, f ree of any beany or burned tas te

The bu l k d ensi t y from 16 .4 to 18 .2 kg . pe r cub i c foo t


6/16

5

I II . Eva lu a t ing Soy bean M ea l Q ua l i ty

There are a num ber o f me thod s fo r evalua t i ng soybean m ea l qua l i t y . These i nc l ud e the fo l l ow ing :

Visual O bservat ion - representat i ve samples of soybean meal sh ipments should be examined to

de te rm ine i f t he re a re any obv io us con tam ina tes. The mea l m ay have becom e con tamin a ted w i th

o the r g rai ns such as co rn d u r i ng sh ipm ent and sto rage . Th i s wo u ld , o f co u rse , be obv io us to the

naked eye . I f such c on tam ina t i on w ere g rea t enough i t w ou ld d i l u te the nu t r i en t con ten t o f the

m e a l .

An alyses for Prote in , Fiber and M ois ture -S ince soybean meal i s used as a feed ingred ient pr imar i l y

to p rov i d e p ro te i n and am ino ac id s, i t i s im por tan t to de term ine tha t i t con ta i ns the m in im um leve l

o f prote in that has been guaranteed.

Soyb ean mea l i s i nc l ud ed i n feed fo rm u las to p rov i de p ro te i n H ow ever , soyb ean mea l a l so p rov id es

som e energy . A labora to ry assay fo r f i be r w ou ld d e term ine i f t he c rude fi be r l evel s a re be low the

m ax im um guaran tees. I f above guaran tee , the energy va lues fo r the soybean m ea l w ou ld p robab l y

be less than tab le va lu es. Th is i s a lso t rue for m ois ture. There is a lso the r i sk o f m old ing and c ak ing

i f m o i stu re con ten ts a re above 12% and tem pera tu re con d i t i ons a re ri gh t .

These p rocedures deal p r im ar i l y w i th the qua l i t y o f t he soyb eans f rom w h i ch the soyb ean m ea l has been

prod uced o r the hand l i ng o f the mea l du r i ng sh ipm ent . The fo l l ow ing p rocedures dea l w i th the p rocessing

o f the soybeans to p roduc e soybean m ea l .

H eat Processing - i t has been w el l do cum ented that soyb ean m ust be heat processed to des troy the

an t i nu t r i ti ona l f ac to rs w h i ch w ere d i scussed i n Sec t i on I I o f t h i s repor t . The degree to w h i ch the

soyb eans are heated is ex t remely sens i ti ve. I f the soyb eans are not adeq uate ly heated, the

ant inu t r i t iona l fac tors w i l l not be dest royed and the amin o ac id d igest ib i l i ty i s negat ive ly a ffec ted.

I f the soybeans are excessive ly h eated, the ant in ut r i t ion a l fac tors are dest royed and am ino ac id

d iges tib i l i ty i s again n egative ly a f fec ted.

The e f fec t o f i nadequa te hea t p rocessing on the amin o ac id d i gest i b i l i t y o f soybean m ea l i s show n i n

Tab le 5 . The hea t p rocessing w as accom p l i shed by au toc l av i ng raw soybeans at 121 d egrees Cen t i g rade

and 1 5 p si . These da ta show tha t the d i gest i b i l i t y o f l y si ne , m e th ion ine , cyst i ne and th reon ine w asinc reased as the length o f autoc lav in g increased. Th is w as a lso t rue for the oth er essent ia l am ino ac ids .

Table 5: Effect of Under Processing on Amino Acid Digestibility of Raw Soybeans

% D igest i b i l i t y

A u to c l av e Tim e M i n u tes Ly sin e M eth io n in e C yst i n e Th reo n in e

0 7 3 6 5 6 7 6 4

9 7 8 7 0 7 0 6 8

1 8 8 7 8 6 8 3 8 2

Table 6: Effect of Over Processing Soybean Meal on Amino AcidAnalytical Values and Digestibility

% D igest i b i l i t y

A u to c lav e Tim e M in u tes Ly sin e M eth i o n in e C y sti n e Th reo n in e

0 9 1 8 2 8 6 8 4

2 0 7 8 6 9 8 6 8 6

4 0 6 9 6 2 8 3 8 0

An a l y t i cal Va lues

0 3 .2 7 0 .7 0 0 .7 1 1 .8 9

2 0 2 .9 5 0 .6 6 0 .7 1 1 .9 2

4 0 2 .7 6 0 .6 3 0 .7 1 1 .8 7


7/16

6

The ef fec t o f over pro cessing on soybean m eal i s sho w n in Table 6 . These data dem on st ra te that both the

ana l y t i ca l val ues and d i gest i b i l i t y o f l y si ne and cys ti ne w ere reduced by p ro l on ged hea ti ng . H ow ever,

m eth ion ine and th reon ine w ere no t sim i l a r l y a ffec ted . I t i s know n tha t l y si ne i s a f fec ted by the M a i l l a rd

reac t i on w h i ch b i nds the f ree am ino g roups o f t he l y si ne w i th the carbony l g roups i n ca rbohy dra tes and

reduc ing sugars and rend ers the lysine un avai lab le . The pro cess by w hic h cys t ine is inac t iv ated by

overp rocessing i s no t know n.

The fac t that soybean meal qual i ty i s very sens i t i ve to process ing procedure makes i t very important to have

qua l i t y evalua t i on p rocedures. N o doub t the m os t re l i ab l e m ethod o f qua l i t y evalua t i on w ou ld b e to condu c ti n v i vo d igest i b i l i t y f eed ing t r i al s. H ow ever , such t r i a l s a re t ime con sum ing , cost l y and sub jec t t o b i o l o g i ca l

var ia t ion . For tunate ly , there are labo ratory proced ures that are mo re rap id an d are usefu l in eva lu at ing

processing adequacy . A br i e f desc r i p t i on o f f ou r me thods i s p resen ted i n Tab le 7 .

Th e U rease Assay - t h i s has been the mo st com m on ly used l abora to ry p rocedure by the com m erc ia l feed

ind us try in th e U ni ted States to determ ine i f the soyb ean m eal has been ad equate ly h eated to dest roy

the ant inu t r i t iona l fac tors . The enzy m e urease is used as a determi nate because i t i s des troyed by h eat

at a ra te sim i lar to the t ryp sin i nh ib i tors. The u rease assay is a sim pler and less cos t ly labo ratory

pro cedu re than is the t rypsin in h ib i tor assay . The urease proced ure m easures the pH r ise in an

amm on ia so lu t i on . Fo r raw soybeans the r i se i s abou t 2 .0 pH un i t s. The desi red pH r i se fo r p roper l y

pro cessed soyb ean m eal i s betw een 0.05 to 0 .2 un i ts. Som e research has sho w n that a r i se o f 0 .5 pH

un i ts i s acceptab l e for bro i lers, turkeys and sw ine. Sat isfac tory resu l ts have a lso b een ob ta ined w i th

soyb ean m eal that had a 0 r i se in pH un i ts. The urease assay is an ef fec t i ve measure to d etermin e that

soybean m ea l has been adequa te l y hea ted to d est roy the an t i nu t r i t i ona l f ac to rs. H ow ever , i t does no t

determine i f the soybean meal has been overheated and lys ine has been rendered undiges t ib le .

K O H P ro c e d u r e - t h i s p rocedu re w as p ropo sed by A raba and D a le at t he Un i ve rsi t y o f Georg ia i n 19 90 .

This procedure is used to determine i f soybean meal has been overheated.

Prote in D ispers ib i l i ty Index (PD I) - th is procedure has recent ly rece ived cons iderab le in teres t and is

be in g researched b y D r. Car l Parson s at the U niv ersi ty o f I l l i n o is .

N i t rogen W ater So lub i l i t y Index - t h i s p rocedu re has rece i ved ve ry l i t t l e a t ten t i on i n p ou l t ry and an im a l

nu t r i t i on .

Table 7: Methods for Determining Processing Adequacy of Soybean Meal

U rease A ssay

1 . M i x 0 . 2 g o f SB M w i t h 1 0 m l . o f u re a so l u t i o n

2 . Pu t i n 30 C w a ter ba th fo r 30 m inu tes

3 . D e te rm i n e p H

4. Ca l cu la te pH i nc rease (f i na l pH - i n i t i a l pH )

K O H Pr o c ed u r e

1 . M i x 1 .5 g o f SB M w i th 7 5 m l o f 0 .2 % K O H f o r 2 0 m i n u te s

2. Cent r i fuge or f i l te r

3 . M easure so lub le N i t rogen

Prote in D ispers ib i l i ty Index (PD I)

1 . M i x 8 g o f SB M w i t h 1 5 0 m l o f w a te r

2 . B l en d a t 8 5 0 0 r p m f o r 1 0 m i n u t es

3 . Cen t r i f uge o r f i l t er and m easure so lub le N i t rogen

N i t rogen W ater So lub i l i t y Index

1 . M i x 5 g o f SB M w i t h 2 0 m l o f w a te r

2. St i r a t 120 rpm for 120 minutes at 30 C

3 . Cen t r i f uge o r f i l t er and m easure so lub le N i t rogen


8/16

7

The app l i ca t i on o f t he u rease and KO H p ro te i n so lub i l i t y t ests i s show n i n Tab le 8 . As the p rocessing t im e o f

raw soybeans w as i nc reased f rom 0 to 1 8 m inu tes, t he w e igh t ga in o f ch i cks i nc reased and the p H change

dem ons tra ted tha t the u rease had b een dest royed and p ro te i n so lub i l i t y dec reased . H ow ever , t he l a tte r tw o

w ere very e r rat i c and i nco nsi sten t i n chang ing . Th i s exper imen t dem ons tra ted tha t the KO H p ro te i n so lub i l i t y

assay is not e f fec t i ve in determin ing that soybean meal has been inadequate ly heated.

An o the r exper imen t i s show n i n Tab le 9 . demo nst rat i ng the ef fec t o f ove rp rocessing o f soyb ean m ea l . As

processing t im e i nc reased f rom 0 to 80 m inu tes a t 120 degrees and 1 5 p si , ch i ck g row th dec reased , feed

ef f i c iency decreased, pH decreased and pro te in so lu b i l i ty decreased. The so lu b i l i ty o f the prote in dec reased

f rom 8 6% a t 0 t ime o f au toc l av i ng to 40 .8% a t 80 m inu tes o f au toc l av i ng . Th i s exper imen t dem ons tra ted tha t

the urease test i s no t e f fec t i ve in determ in in g w hether or not the soyb ean meal has been overp rocessed. A

pro te i n so lub i l i t y o f 70 to 85% i s cons ide red accep tab le .

In an unp ub l i shed research t r i al b y Engram and co -w orke rs, t h ree o f t he m ethods o f p rocessing eva lua t i on w ere

ut i l i z ed. These resu l ts are presented in Table 10 . These data sho w that 18 m inu tes of autoc lav i ng raw soy beans

w ere requ i red to m ax im ize the grow th o f ch i cks . D ur i ng th i s t ime the KO H p ro te i n so lub i l i t y d i d no t change ,

no r d i d the u rease i ndex . H ow ever , t he Pro te i n D i spersi b i l i t y I ndex (PD I ) dec reased as au toc l av i ng t ime

inc reased i n d i ca t i ng tha t th i s m e thod m ay be m ore sensi t i ve to un derp rocessing than the o the r tw o p rocedu res.

Table 8: Effect of Autoclaving Raw Soybeans on Chick Growth, Urease Index

and KOH Protein SolubilityA u to c lave Ti m e C h i c k G ro w th U rease In d ex KO H Pro tei n

M in u tes gram s/c h i ck p H C h an ge So lu b i l i ty %

EXPERIM EN T # 1

0 9 8 2 .2 8 7

3 11 3 2 .2 8 9

6 1 2 0 2 .1 9 1

9 1 2 4 1 .9 9 1

1 2 1 4 3 0 .2 8 7

1 5 1 5 0 0 .0 8 5

1 8 1 5 1 0 .1 7 6

SBM 1 5 8 0 .2 7 7

EXPERIM EN T # 2

0 1 2 2 2 .5 9 3

6 1 2 4 2 .4 8 6

1 2 1 5 2 1 .4 9 0

1 5 1 5 3 0 .1 9 0

1 8 1 5 5 0 .0 9 0

2 1 1 5 6 0 .0 7 4

SBM 1 5 6 0 .1 7 4

Table 9: Effect of Autoclaving Soybean Meal on Chick Growth, Urease Indexand KOH Protein Solubility

A u to c lav e Tim e C h i ck G ro w th * Feed KO H Pro tei n U rease p H

M in u tes gram s/c h i ck Effi c i en c y So lu b i l i ty % C h an ge0 4 5 0 a 1 .7 9 8 6 .0 0 .0 3

5 4 4 5 a 1 .8 7 7 6 .3 0 .0 2

1 0 4 2 4 a 1 .8 3 7 4 .0 0 .0 0

2 0 3 9 3 b 1 .8 9 6 5 .4 0 .0 0

4 0 3 1 6 c 2 .0 4 4 8 .1 0 .0 0

8 0 2 1 9 d 2 .5 5 4 0 .8 0 .0 0

* To 18 d ays o f age a, b , c , d Are not s ign i f i cant ly d i f ferent


9/16

8

The par t i c le size of the soyb ean meal sam ples af fec ts pro te in so lu b i l i ty . Th is i s sho w n in Table 11 . Solu b i l i ty

decreases m arkedly as par t i c le size of the sam ple be in g tested inc reases. Therefore, i t i s im po rtant thatlabo rator ies gr ind the soybean m eal to cons istent par t i c le size to ob ta in repeatab le resu l ts w hen u t i l i z in g th is

assay p roced ure.

These exper im ents dem on st ra te that there

is no on e per fec t sys tem of eva lu at ing

soybean process ing adequacy . The

pro te i n so lub i l i t y i n KO H test i s a method

to de te rm ine i f soybean m ea l has been

overp rocessed. I t i s no t usefu l to

de te rm ine i f t he m ea l i n un derp rocessed .

The urease assay is useful to determine i f

the soybean meal i s underprocessed but i t

i s no t use fu l i n d e term in i ng i f t he m ea l

has been overpro cessed. The m ore

recent ly used prote in d ispers ib i l i ty index

m ay be the m ost sens i ti ve assay . The

n i t rogen w a ter so lub i l i t y i ndex h as no t

been f requent ly used.

Perhaps the best approach w ou ld be to

com b ine a cou p le o f t he p rocedu res.

The urease test cou ld be used to determ ine that the soyb ean m eal had been heated enou gh to dest roy the

an t i nu t r i t i ona l f ac to rs. The value shou ld be be low 0 .5 (be low 0 .3 p re fe rred ). The PD I system w ou ld then beused to de te rm ine tha t the soybean m ea l had no t been overp rocessed . A PDI va lue be tw een 35 to 45% w ou ld

be preferred.

As p rev ious l y m en t i oned , the p r im ary e f fec t o f ove rhea t i ng soybean m ea l i s to render to l y si ne and cyst i ne

unava i l ab le . The negat i ve ef fec t on ch i ck g row th can be overcom e by the add i t i on o f l y si ne to the dam aged

soyb ean m eal . The resu l ts o f exper im ents dem on st ra t ing th is are presented in Tabl es 12 an d 13 . Based on the

da ta p resen ted i n Tab le 12 , the add i t i on o f 0 .0033 % L- l ysi ne fo r eve ry 10 po in t dec rease i n p ro te i n so lub i l i t y

w i l l n egate the ef fec t o f the overpro cessing.

For tuna te l y , U n i ted States com m erc ia l soybean p rocessing p l an ts have exce l l en t con t ro l s i n p l ace fo r

pro cessing soyb ean m eal . Therefore, soyb ean m eal com ing f rom these p lants i s rare ly i f ever over or und er

processed.

Table 10: Effect of Autoclaving Raw Soybean Flakes on Chick Growth and Assay Values

A u to c lave T im e C h ic k G ro w th KO H Pro tei n U rease p H Pro tei n D i sp ersi b i l i ty

M in u tes gram s/c h i c k So lu b i l i ty % C h an ge In d ex

0 1 7 8 c 9 7 2 .4 7 6

6 1 8 0 c 9 3 2 .2 6 3

1 2 1 8 9 b 9 3 2 .1 6 3

1 8 2 0 4 a 9 4 1 .8 4 7

2 4 2 0 7 a 8 1 0 .2 3 0

3 0 2 0 5 a 8 1 0 .3 3 2

3 6 2 0 7 a 7 8 0 .1 2 4

8 0 2 0 5 a 0 .1

SBM 7 8 0 .1

a, b , c , Are not s ign i f i cant ly d i f ferent

Table 11: Effect of Particle Size on Protein Solubility ofDehulled Soybean Meal *

M ean Parti c l e Si z e Pro tei n So lu b i l i ty

M ic ro M eters %

1 8 4 9 0

2 5 1 8 3

2 9 9 8 2

5 5 6 7 9

5 9 9 7 7

7 0 7 7 6

8 3 1 7 4

9 3 9 7 0

* I n 0 . 2% Po t assi um H ydrox i d e So l u t i on


10/16

9

IV . U t i l i z i ng Soyb ean M eal i n Pou l t r y Feeds

A com par i son o f soybean m ea l s f rom d i f fe ren t coun t r i es w as repor ted by D r . Rober t Sw ick i n 19 95 . The resu l t s

o f t h i s com par i son a re show n i n Tab le 14 . D r . Sw ick dem ons tra ted tha t d i f fe rences do ex i s t be tw een soybean

sou rces in the i r ab i l i ty to sup po r t bro i ler grow th and feed eff i c ienc y.

Table 12: Amino Acid Additions on the Performance of Broilers Fed Overheated Soybean Meal

Treatm en t Bo d y W eigh t gram s Feed Effi c i en c y

C o n tro l (PS 8 2 % ) 3 8 2 b 1 . 4 5 b

O v erh eated (PS 2 8 % ) 2 4 6 a 1 . 9 7 a

O H + Lysi n e 3 5 8 b 1 .55 b

O H + M eth io n i n e 2 5 3 a 1 .98 a

O H + Th reo n in e 2 3 7 a 1 . 9 4 aO H + Lys + M et 3 5 5 b 1 . 6 6 b

O H + Ly s + Th r 3 4 8 b 1 .60 b

O H + Ly s + M et + Th r 3 4 7 b 1 . 6 6 b

O H + M et + Th r 2 2 7 a 1 . 8 4 a

a, b M eans wi th d i f ferent sup erscr ip ts are sign i f i can t ly d i f ferent a t (P


11/16

10

D r . Sw ick h as a l so show n tha t f i sh m ea l i n b ro i l e r d i e t s can be rep laced b y fu l l f a t soyb ean m ea l i n b ro i l e r

d ie ts. The resu l ts o f th is research are sho w n in Tabl e 15. D r . Sw ick s ta ted that f i sh m eal can be rep laced

w i thou t a f fec t i ng b ro i l e r p e r fo rm ance i f i t i s rep laced o n an equa l nu t r i en t bas i s.

Tab les 16 , 1 7 , and 18 con ta i n the

nu t r i t iona l suggest ion s of the U .S. Research

C o u n c i l f o r i m m a tu r e l e gh o r n t yp e

ch i ckens , b ro i l e rs and l eghorn t ype l ay i ng

hens. These w ere taken f rom the N u t r i en tRequi rem ents o f Poul t ry , N in th Rev ised

Ed i t i on , 199 4 .

As p rev iousl y m en t i oned i n th i s repor t ,

soybean m ea l i s the p r im ary source o f

supp lementa l p ro te i n i n pou l t ry d i e ts i n the

U ni ted States. In bro i l er feeds, deh ul led soybean m eal i s used. In egg pro du ct ion feeds e i ther regular (44 % )

soybean o r d ehu l l ed soybean m ea l i s used .

Exam p le fo rm u las fo r b ro i l e r s ta r te r , b ro i l e r g row er , b ro i l e r w i thd raw a l and an egg p roduc t i on l aye r feeds a re

p resen ted i n the fo l l ow ing pages. Fo rm u las a re p resen ted w i th 44% and dehu l l ed soybean mea l . A l so

presen ted a re v i t am in and t race m ine ra l recom m ended add i t i ons to these feeds.

Table 15: Replacement of Fish Meal in Broiler Dietswith Fullfat Soybean Meal *

5 % Fi sh M eal Fu l l fat So y b ean M eal

G ain KG 1 .6 8 4 1 .7 4 0

FC R 1 .9 6 0 1 9 5 0

* Repor t ed a t Pou l t ry Sc i ence M ee ti ng by D r . Rober t Sw i ck and Saksi t

Sr inongkute

Table 16: Nutrient Requirements of Immature Leghorn-Type Chickens as Percentagesor Units per Kilogram of Diet

\ V h i te .Eg g - La y i n g Str ai n s B ro w n Egg - La y i n g Str ai n s

0 to 6 6 to 1 2 1 2 to 1 5 1 5 W eek s 0 to 6 6 to 1 2 1 2 to 1 8 1 8 W eek sW eek s W eek s W eek s To Fi rst Egg W eek s W eek s Veek s to Fi rst Egg

4 5 0 ga 9 8 0 ga 1 ,3 7 5 ga 1 ,4 7 5a 5 0 0 ga 1 ,1 0 0 ga 1 ,5 0 0 ga 1 ,6 0 0 ga

N u tr ie nt U n i t 2 ,8 5 0 b 2 ,8 5 0 b 2 ,9 0 0 b 2 ,9 0 0b 2 ,8 0 0 b 2 ,8 0 0 b 2 ,8 5 0 b 2 ,8 5 0b

Pro te in and am ino ac ids

Crude p ro te in

c

% 1 8 .0 0 1 6 .0 0 1 5 .0 0 1 7 .0 01 7 .0 0 1 5 .0 0 1 4 .0 0 1 6 .0 0

A rgi n i n e % 1 .0 0 0 .8 3 0 .6 7 0 .7 5 0 .9 4 0 .7 8 0 .6 2 0 .7 2

G l y c i n e + ser i n e % 0 .7 0 0 .5 8 0 ;4 7 0 .5 3 0 .6 6 0 .5 4 0 .4 4 0 .5 0

H i sti d i n e % 0 .2 6 0 .2 2 0 .1 7 0 .2 0 0 .2 5 0 .2 1 0 .1 6 0 .1 8

Iso l eu c i n e % 0 .6 0 0 .5 0 0 .4 0 0 .4 5 0 .5 7 0 .4 7 0 .3 7 0 .4 2

Leu c i n e % 1 .1 0 0 .5 5 0 .7 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0 0 .8 0 0 .6 5 0 .7 5

Ly si n e % 0 .8 5 0 .6 0 0 .4 5 0 .5 2 0 .8 0 0 .5 6 0 .4 2 0 .4 9

M eth i o n in e % 0 .3 0 0 .2 5 0 .2 0 0 .2 2 0 .2 8 0 .2 3 0 .1 9 0 .2 1

M eth ion i ne +C y sti n e % 0 .6 2 0 .5 2 0 .4 2 0 .4 7 0 .5 9 0 .4 9 0 .3 9 0 .4 4

Ph en y l al an i n e % 0 .5 4 4 .5 0 0 .3 6 0 .4 0 0 .5 1 0 .4 2 0 .3 4 0 .3 8

Pheny la lan ine +ty ro si n e % 1 .0 0 0 .8 3 0 .6 7 0 .7 5 0 .9 4 0 .7 8 0 .6 3 0 .7 0

Th reo n i n e % 0 .6 8 0 .5 7 0 .3 7 0 .4 7 0 .6 4 0 .5 3 0 .3 5 0 .4 4

Tryp to p h an % 0 .1 7 0 .1 4 0 .11 0 .1 2 0 .1 6 0 .1 3 0 .1 0 0 .11

Val in e % 0 .6 2 0 .5 2 0 .4 1 0 .4 6 0 .5 9 0 .4 9 0 .3 8 0 .4 3

Fat

Li n o lei c ac id % 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0

M a c r o m in e r a l s

C a l c i u m d % 0 .9 0 0 .5 0 0 .5 0 2 .0 0 0 .9 0 0 .8 0 0 .8 0 1 .8 0

N on phy ta tep h o sp h o ru s % 0 .4 0 0 .3 5 0 .3 0 0 .3 2 0 .4 0 0 .3 5 0 .3 0 0 .3 5

Po tassi u m % 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 So d i u m % 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5

C h l o r i n e % 0 .1 5 0 .1 2 0 .1 2 0 .1 5 0 .1 2 0 .1 1 0 .11 0 .1 1

M agn esi u m M G 6 0 0 .0 0 5 0 0 .0 0 4 0 0 .0 0 4 0 0 .0 0 5 7 0 .0 0 4 7 0 .0 0 3 7 0 .0 0 3 7 0 .0 0


12/16

Trace minera ls

M an gan ese m g 6 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 3 0 .0 5 6 .0 2 8 .0 2 8 .0 2 8 .0

Z i n c m g 4 0 .0 0 3 5 .0 0 3 5 .0 3 5 .0 3 8 .0 3 3 .0 3 3 .0 3 3 .0

Iro n m g 8 0 .0 0 6 0 .0 0 6 0 .0 6 0 .0 7 5 .0 5 6 .0 5 6 .0 5 6 .0 C o p p er m g 5.00 4 .0 0 4 .0 4 .0 5 .0 4 .0 4 .0 4 .0

Io d i n e m g 0 .3 5 2 5 .0 0 0 .3 5 0 .3 5 0 .3 3 0 .3 3 0 .3 3 0 .3 3

Sel en i u m m g 0 .1 5 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 4 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 0

Fat so lub le v i t am i ns

A IU 1 5 0 0 .0 0 1 5 0 0 .0 0 1 5 0 0 .0 15 0 0 .0 1 ,4 20 .0 1 ,4 20 .0 1 ,4 20 .0 1 ,4 20 .0

D 3 IC U 2 0 0 .0 0 2 0 0 .0 0 2 0 0 .0 3 0 0 .0 1 9 0 .0 1 9 0 .0 1 9 0 .0 2 8 0 .0

E IU 1 0 .0 0 5 .0 0 5 .0 5 .0 9 .5 4 .7 4 .7 4 .7

K m g 0.5 0 0 .5 0 0 .5 0 .5 0 .4 7 0 .4 7 0 .4 7 0 .4 7

W ater so lub le v i t am ins

Ri b o fl av i n m g 3 .6 0 1 .8 0 1 .8 2 .2 3 .4 1 .7 1 .7 1 .7

Pa nt ot he ni c a ci d m g 1 0 .0 0 1 0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .0 9 .4 9 .4 9 .4 9 .4

N i ac i n m g 2 7 .0 0 11 .0 0 11 .0 11 .0 2 6 .0 1 0 .3 1 0 .3 1 0 .3 B1 2 m g 0 .0 0 9 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 9 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 3 0 .0 0 3

C h o l i n e m g 1 3 0 0 .0 9 0 0 .0 0 5 0 0 .0 5 0 0 .0 1 2 2 5 .0 8 5 0 .0 4 7 0 .0 4 7 0 .0

Bi o ti n m g 0 .1 5 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 4 0 .0 9 0 .0 9 0 .0 9

Fo Ii c ac i d m g 0 .5 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 0 .5 2 0 .2 3 0 .2 3 0 .2 3 Th i am i n m g 1 .0 1 .0 0 0 .8 0 0 .8 1 .0 1 .0 0 .8 0 .8

Py r id o x i n e m g 3 .0 3 .0 0 3 .0 0 3 .0 2 .8 2 .8 2 .8 2 .8

N ote: W here experim ental data are lacking, values typeset in bold i tal ics represent an estimat e based on values obtained for

other ages or r elated species

a F i na l bod y w e i gh t .b These are typ ic a l d ie tary energy con cent rat ions for d ie ts based m ain ly o n co rn and soyb ean m eal , expressed in kc a l M En/k g d i et .c Ch i ckens do no t have a requ i remen t f o r c rud e p ro t e i n pe r se . There , how ever , shou l d h e su ff i c i en t c rude p ro t e i n t o ensu re an

adequate n i t rogen supply for synthes is o f non essent ia l amino ac ids. Suggested requi rements for crude prote in are typ ica l o f

t hose de ri ved w i t h co rn -soybean m ea l d i e t s, and l eve l s can be reduced som ew ha t w hen svn t he ti c am i no ac i ds are used .d The ca l c i um requ i remen t m ay be i nc reased w hen d i e t s con t a i n h i gh l eve l s o f phy t a t e phosphorus (N e l son . 19 84) .

Table 17: Nutrient Requirements of Broilers as Percentages or Units per Kilogram of Diet(90 Percent Dry Matter)

0 t o 3 W e ek sa 3 t o 6 W e ek sa 6 t o 9 W e ek sa

N u tr i en t U n i t 3 ,2 0 0 b 3 , 2 0 0 b 3 , 2 0 0 b

Pro te i n and amin o ac ids

Crude p ro te i n c % 2 3 .0 0 2 0 .0 0 1 8 .0 0

A rgin i n e % 1 .2 5 1 .1 0 1 .0 0G ly c i n e + ser i n e % 1 .2 5 1 .1 4 0 .9 7

H isti d i n e % 0 .3 5 0 .3 2 0 .2 7

Iso l eu c in e % 0 .8 0 0 .7 3 0 .6 2

Leu c i n e % 1 .2 0 1 .0 9 0 .9 3

Ly sin e % 1 .1 0 1 .0 0 0 .8 5

M eth io n i n e % 0 .5 0 0 .3 8 0 .3 2

M eth io n in e + c y sti n e % 0 .9 0 0 .7 2 0 .6 0

Ph en y lan an in e % 0 .7 2 0 .6 5 0 .5 6

Ph en y lal an in e + ty ro si n e % 1 .3 4 1 .2 2 1 .0 4

Pro l i n e % 0 .6 0 0 .5 5 0 .4 6 Th reo n i n e % 0 .8 0 0 .7 4 0 .6 8

Try p to p h an % 0 .2 0 0 .1 8 0 .1 6

Val i n e % 0 .9 0 0 . 8 2 0 . 7 0


13/16

12

N ote: W here exper iem enta l data are lack ing, va lues typeset in bo ld i ta l i cs represent an est im ate based on va lues obta ined for

o ther ages or re la ted speciesa The 0 - t o 3 - , 3 - t o 6 - , and 6 - t o 8 -w eek i n t e rval s fo r nu t r i en t requ i remen t s are based on ch rono l ogy f o r w h i ch research da t a were

avai lab le ; ho w ever, these nu t r ient requi rem ents are of ten im plem ented at you nger age in terva ls or on a weigh t -of - feed bas is.b These are typ i ca l d ie tary energy con cent rat ions, expressed in kc a l M En/k g d i et . D i ff er en t en er gy v al u es m ay b e ap p ro p r i at e

depend i n g on l o ca l i ng red i en t p r i ces and ava i l ab i l i t y .c Bro i lers ch ickens do n ot have a requ i remen t for crud e prote in per se. There, how ever, shou ld be suf f i c ient crude prote in to ensure

an adequ ate n i t rogen supply for synthesis o f non essent ia l am ino ac id s. Suggested requi rem ents for cru de pro te in are typ ica l o f

t hose de r i ved w i t h co rn -soybean m eal d i e ts, and l eve l s can b e reduced somew ha t w hen syn t he ti c am i n o ac i ds a re used .d The ca l c i um requ i remen t m ay be i nc reased w hen d i e t s con t a i n h i gh l eve l s o f phy t a te phosphorus (N e l son . 198 4) .

Fa t

Lin o l ei c ac i d % 1 .0 0 1 .0 0 1 .0 0

M a c ro m i n e r al s

C a l c i u m d % 1 .0 0 0 .9 0 0 .8 0

C h lo r i n e % 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .1 2

M agn esiu m m g 6 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 0

N o n p h y tate p h o sp h o ru s % 0 .4 5 0 .3 5 0 .3 0

Po tassiu m % 0 .3 0 0 .3 0 0 .8 0

So d iu m % 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .1 2

Traceminera ls

C o p p er m g 8 8 8

Io d i n e m g 0 . 3 5 0 .3 5 0 .3 5

Iro n m g 8 0 8 0 8 0

M an gan ese m g 6 0 6 0 6 0

Selen iu m m g 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5

Z in c m g 4 0 4 0 4 0

Fat so lub le v i t am in s

A IU 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 0

D IC U 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0

E IU 1 0 1 0 1 0

K m g 0 .5 0 0 .5 0 0 .5 0


B1 2 m g 0 .0 1 0 .0 1 0 .0 0 7

Bio t i n m g 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 . 1 2

C h o l i n e m g 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 5 0

Fo lac in m g 0 .5 5 0 .5 5 0 .50

N iac in m g 3 5 3 0 2 5

Pan to th en i c ac i d m g 1 0 1 0 1 0

Py ri d o x in e m g 3 .5 3 .5 3 .0

Rib o fl av i n m g 3 .6 3 .6 3

Th iam i n m g 1 .8 0 1 .8 0 1 .8 0


14/16

13

Table18: Nutrient Requirements of Leghorn-Type Laying Hens as Percentages or Units perKilogram of Diet (90 percent Dry Matter)

D i et ar y C o n c en t ra ti o n s R eq u i r ed A m o u n t s Re q u i re d p e r H e n D a il y

b y W h ite-Egg Lay ers at D i fferen t (m g o r IU )

Feed In takes

W h i t e- eg g b r e ed e r s W h i te - eg g l a y er s B r o w n - e gg l a y er s

at 1 00 g o f feed at 1 00 g o f feed at 1 10 g o f feed

N u t r i en t U n i t 8 0 a, b 1 0 0 a, b 1 2 0 a, b pe r hen da i l y b p er h en d ai l y p er h en d ai l y c

Pro te in and am ino ac id s

Crude p ro te in d % 1 8 .8 1 5 .0 1 2 .5 1 5 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 1 6 5 0 0

A rg i n i n ee % 0 .8 8 0 .7 0 0 .5 8 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 7 0

H i sti d i n e % 0 .2 1 0 .1 7 0 .1 4 1 7 0 1 7 0 1 9 0

Iso l eu c i n e % 0 .8 1 0 .6 5 0 .5 4 6 5 0 6 5 0 7 1 5

Leu c i n e % 1 .0 3 0 .8 2 0 .6 8 8 2 0 8 2 0 9 0 0

Lv sin e % 0 .8 6 0 .6 9 0 .5 8 6 9 0 6 9 0 7 6 0

M eth i o n i n e % 0 .3 8 0 .3 0 0 .2 5 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 0

M e th ion ine +

C ysti n e % 0 .7 3 0 .5 8 0 .4 8 5 8 0 5 8 0 6 4 5

Ph en y l al an i n e % 0 ,5 9 0 .4 7 0 .3 9 4 7 0 4 7 0 5 2 0 Ph e n yl a la n i ne - t y ro si n e % 1 .0 4 0 .8 3 0 .6 9 8 3 0 8 3 0 9 1 0

Th reo n i n e % 0 .5 9 0 .4 7 0 .3 9 4 7 0 4 7 0 5 2 0

Try p to p h an % 0 ,2 0 0 .1 6 0 .1 3 1 6 0 1 6 0 1 7 5

Val i n e % 0 .8 8 0 .7 0 0 .5 8 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 7 0

Fat

Li n o l ei c ac i d % 1 .2 5 1 .0 0 .8 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

M a c r o m in e r a l s

C a l c i u m f % 4 .0 6 3 .2 5 2 .7 1 3 2 5 0 3 2 5 0 3 6 0 0

C h l o r i d e % 0 .1 6 0 .1 3 0 .11 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 4 5

M agn esi u m m g 6 2 5 5 0 0 4 2 0 5 0 5 0 5 5N onph y ta te ph ospho rusg % 0 .3 1 0 .2 5 0 .2 1 2 5 0 2 5 0 2 7 5

Po tassi u m % 0 .1 9 0 .1 5 0 .1 3 1 5 0 1 5 0 1 6 5

So d i u m % 0 .1 9 0 .1 5 0 .1 3 1 5 0 1 5 0 1 6 5

Trace minera ls

C o p p er m g ? ? ? ? ? ?

Io d i n e m g 0 .0 4 4 0 .0 3 5 0 .0 2 9 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 0 4 0 . 0 0 4

Iro n m g 5 6 4 5 3 8 6 .0 4 .5 5 .0

M an gan ese m g 2 5 2 0 1 7 2 .0 2 .0 2 .2

Sel en i u m m g 0 .0 8 0 .0 6 0 .0 5 0 .0 0 6 0 .0 0 6 0 . 0 0 6

Z i n c m g 4 4 3 5 2 9 4 .5 3 .5 3 .9

Fat so lub le v i t am in sA IU 3 7 5 0 3 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 0

D 3 IU 3 7 5 3 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 3 0 3 3

E IU 6 5 4 1 .0 0 .5 0 .5 5

K m g 0 .6 0 .5 0 .4 0 .1 0 .0 5 0 .0 5 5


B1 2 m g 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 8 0 .0 0 0 4 0 .0 0 0 4

Bi o ti n m g 0 .1 3 0 .1 0 0 .0 8 0 .0 1 0 .0 1 0 .0 11

C h o l i n e m g 1 3 1 0 1 0 5 0 8 7 5 1 0 5 1 0 5 1 1 5

Fo l ac in m g 0 .3 1 0 .2 5 0 .2 1 0 .0 3 5 0 .0 2 5 0 . 0 2 8

N i ac i n m g 1 2 .5 1 0 .0 8 .3 1 .0 1 .0 1 .1

Pan to th en ic ac i d m g 2 .5 2 .0 1 .7 0 .7 0 .2 0 0 . 2 2 Py r i d o x i n e m g 3 .1 2 .5 2 .1 0 .4 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 8

Ri b o fl av i n m g 3 .1 2 .5 2 .1 0 .3 6 0 .2 5 0 .2 8

Th i am i n m g 0 .8 8 0 .7 0 0 .6 0 0 .0 7 0 .0 7 0 .0 8


15/16

14

N ote: W here exper im enta l data are lack ing, va lues typeset in bo ld i ta l i cs represent an est imate based on va lues obta ined for o ther

ages or re la ted species

a Grams feed in take per hen dai l y .b Based on d i e t a ry M En conc en t rat i ons o f app rox i m a t el y 29 00 k ca l / kg and assum ed ra t e o f egg p roduc t i on o f 90 pe rcen t (90

eggs per 10 0 h ens dai l y ) .c I ta l i c i zed va l ues a re based on t hose f rom w h i t e -egg l aye rs bu t w ere i nc reased 10 pe rcen t because o f l a rge body w e i gh t and

possib ly m ore egg m ass per day.d Lay i ng hens do n o t have a requ i remen t f o r c rude p ro t e i n pe r se . H ow ever , t he re shou l d be su f f i c i en t c rude p ro t e i n t o ensu re

an adequ ate supply o f nonessent ia l amin o ac ids. Suggested requi rem ents for crud e prote in are typ ic a l o f tho se der ived w i th co rn -soybean m ea l d i e t s, and l eve l s can b e reduced somew ha t w hen syn t he ti c am i no ac i ds a re used .

e I ta l i c i zed am i n o ac i ds va l ues f o r w h i t e -egg- l ay i ng ch i c kens were est i ma t ed by us i ng M ode l B (H urw i t z and Borns t ei n , 197 3) ,

assum i ng a body w e i gh t o f 1800 g and 47 g o f egg mass pe r day .f The requ i remen t m ay be h i ghe r f o r max i m um eggshe l l t h i ckness.g The requ i remen t m ay be h i ghe r i n ve ry ho t t emp era tu res.


16/16

A m er ican Soyb ean A ssoc i a tionwww.asa -eu rope .o rg

Rue du Lux em bou rg 16b , 1000 B ruxe l l es - Belg iqueTe l .: + 3 2 2 5 4 8 9 3 8 0 Fa x : + 3 2 2 5 0 2 6 8 6 6 e -m a i l : so y a b ru @a tt gl o b a l .n e t

Soybean Meal An Excellent Protein Source for Poultry Feeds

Documents

Transcript of Soybean Meal An Excellent Protein Source for Poultry Feeds