Biofuel co-products as livestock feed - Opportunities and challenges

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Hydrogen sulphide in cattle fed co-products of the ethanol industry 109unclear. In vitro studies evaluating the effect of monensinon H 2 S production have been inconclusive. Some researchersobserved no change in in vitro H 2 S production when5 mg/L monensin was added to rumen fluid cultures containing0.20–0.80 percent S (Quinn et al., 2009; Smith etal., 2010), whereas Kung, Bracht and Tavares (2000) foundan increase in in vitro H 2 S production with 5 mg/L monensinadded to rumen fluid containing 1.09 percent S. In vivo,however, monensin supplementation at 33 mg/kg of feed(approximately 6.6 mg/L of rumen fluid) tended to decreasepost-feeding ruminal H 2 S and S 2- concentrations when dietscontaining 0.5 percent S were fed (Felix et al., 2011).Inclusion of molybdate successfully inhibits H 2 S productionin vitro (Kung, Bracht and Tavares, 2000), butmolybdate binds copper and can result in decreased copperbio-availability in vivo (Loneragan et al., 1998). The use ofcopper salts in addition to molybdenum salts may increasecopper availability, while decreasing H 2 S production. Cross,Rust and Powers (2010), however, demonstrated that theaddition of 60 ppm copper and 6 ppm molybdenum didnot decrease in vivo H 2 S emissions when high-S diets werefed. Dietary manganous oxide also has been investigatedand may initially maintain higher ruminal pH, in cattle fedhigh-S diets, resulting in cumulative ruminal H 2 S concentrationin feedlot cattle (Kelzer et al., 2010). Ferric ions alsoshow promise as a strategy to decrease ruminal H 2 S production,potentially through competitive inhibition of ruminalsulphate reduction. Addition of 200, 300 or 400 mg iron/kg diet DM as ferric ammonium citrate to the diet of steersproduced a linear decrease in ruminal H 2 S concentrationwithout affecting DM intake or ruminal pH (Drewnoski,Doane and Hansen, 2011).Preliminary research has demonstrated that feedinghigh amounts of ammonium nitrate, molybdenum, orthe zeolite clinoptilolite, often decreased H 2 S concentrationin the rumen gas cap but did not improve feedlotperformance by steers consuming high-sulphate water(≥2000 ppm) in experiments conducted at Colorado StateUniversity (Wagner, 2008). Subsequent research, however,has demonstrated that clinoptilolite is ineffective at 2.5 or5.0 percent of the diet DM at preventing or amelioratingPEM, or reduced nutritional status in feedlot steers fed aforage diet (Cammack et al., 2010).KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND FUTURE RESEARCHNEEDSBecause some physiological roles of H 2 S have only recentlybeen elucidated, much information regarding the biochemistryand biology of H 2 S remains to be determined.The typical concentrations of H 2 S in the variety of tissueswhere it is synthesized needs to be determined so thatassociations with kinetic parameters of enzymes involvedwith synthetic and degradative pathways can be calculated.Moreover, nutritional and other environmental factors thatcontrol the concentration of H 2 S need to be studied toprovide basic information for determining the physiologicalfunctions of it as a metabolic signal molecule. Intracellularchemical regulators of synthetic and degradative reactionsremain to be defined. Much information also is needed onthe mechanism by which H 2 S binds to target molecules topromote its cellular and physiological effects.With regard to the livestock industry, substantial generalinformation is available on effects of excess sulphateand other sulphate-containing compounds on feed intake,efficiency of growth, and indicators of development of toxicitybecause of excess H 2 S production in the rumen. Muchresearch, however, is needed to characterize the role of dietcomposition, and other environmental strategies to mitigateH 2 S production in the rumen remain to be discovered.Moreover, better methods to diagnose, treat and preventPEM are needed.CONCLUSIONSHydrogen sulphide has been shown to be a signal moleculein animal tissues and thus to have physiological effectson cellular and tissue functions. The question remains ofwhether cellular concentrations of H 2 S are sufficient toexert the demonstrated effects. Metallo proteins and oxidizedcysteine residues of proteins are postulated to serveas the target molecules for H 2 S action in a cell. In fact, H 2 Sis suggested to be a third gasotransmitter in addition toNO and CO. Expansion of the maize ethanol industry and,to a lesser extent, the use of soybean for biodiesel production,has resulted in an unprecedented increase in costsof traditional feeds, leaving livestock producers searchingfor alternatives to maize and soybean. Maize ethanolco-products are exceptionally high in energy and proteinand are economical and practical alternative feedstuffs.Because S toxicity is now recognized as having a majorimpact on health and performance of ruminants, one mustconsider not only the reported sulphate content in theseco-products, but also the variability associated with batchesof feed among plants as well as variability within a plant. Inaddition to accounting for S in feedstuffs, the importanceof sulphate concentrations in water must also be recognized.For ruminants, total S intakes should not exceed0.40 percent of DM. For feedlot cattle consuming dietswith greater than 40 percent forage, total S intakes shouldnot exceed 0.50 percent of DM. Cattle will vary considerablyin their ability to handle excess S intake. Mild cases ofH 2 S toxicity may result in decreased average daily gain andfeed efficiency; severe cases of H 2 S toxicity may result inPEM, which can cause seizures, blindness and coma andmay eventually lead to death. For sulphide to have toxiceffects, it must bypass hepatic detoxification (oxidation tosulphate). Hepatic detoxification is bypassed when sulphide
110Biofuel co-products as livestock feed – Opportunities and challengesis absorbed through the rumen wall and hepatic oxidationsystems are potentially overwhelmed, or when eructatedH 2 S is absorbed through the lungs, effectively bypassinghepatic circulation. Cattle fed high-concentrate diets aremost susceptible and susceptibility is also increased whencattle are adapted to a high-concentrate diets and whendiets are highly variable in S content. Through analysis ofsulphate content and careful selection of feeds and batchesof feed with acceptable S concentrations, diets can beformulated to limit the impact of variation in feedstuff Sconcentration. In addition to management practices specificallydesigned to combat high S, such as antibiotic andmineral supplementation, normal management practicessuch as proper feed mixing and feed-bunk managementalso may assist in preventing negative effects because ofexcess S intake.BIBLIOGRAPHYAdams, R.S. 1975. Symposium: New concepts anddevelopments in trace element nutrition. Journal of DairyScience, 58(10): 1538–1548.Anderson, C.M. 1956. The metabolism of sulphur in therumen of sheep. New Zealand Journal of Science andTechnology, 37: 379–394.Beauchamp, R.O., Bus, J.S., Popp, J.A., Boreiko, C.J.& Andjelkovich, D.A. 1984. A critical review of theliterature on hydrogen sulfide toxicity. CRC Critical Reviewsin Toxicology, 13(1): 25–97.Bird, P.R. 1972. Sulphur metabolism and excretion studies inruminants. X. Sulphide toxicity in sheep. Australian Journalof Biological Science, 25: 1087–1098.Bird, P.R. & Hume, I.D. 1971. Sulphur metabolism andexcretion studies in ruminants. IV. Cysteine and sulphateeffects upon the flow of sulphur from the rumen andupon sulphur excretion by sheep. Australian Journal ofAgricultural Research, 22: 443–452.Bird, P.R. & Moir, R.J. 1971. Sulphur metabolism andexcretion studies in ruminants. I. The absorption of sulphatein sheep after intraruminal or intraduodenal infusions ofsodium sulphate. Australian Journal of Biological Science,24: 1319–1328.Bolsen, K.K., Woods, W. & Klopfenstein, T.J. 1973. Effectof methionine and ammonium sulfate upon performance ofruminants fed high corn rations. Journal of Animal Science,36: 1186–1190.Bouillaud, F. & Blachier, F. 2011. Mitochondria and sulfide:A very old story of poisoning, feeding and signaling?Antioxidants & Redox Signaling, 15(2): 379–391.Buckner, C.D., Wilken, M.F., Benton, J.R., Vanness, S.J.,Bremer, V.R., Klopfenstein, T.J., Kononoff, P.J. &Erickson, G.E. 2011. Nutrient variability for distillers grainsplus solubles and dry matter determination of ethanolby-products. Professional Animal Scientist, 27: 57–64.Bray, A.C. 1969. Sulphur metabolism in sheep. AustralianJournal of Agricultural Research, 20: 725–737.Brent, B.E. 1976. Relationship of acidosis to other feedlotailments. Journal of Animal Science, 43: 930–935.Brent, B.E. & Bartley, E.E. 1984. Thiamin and niacin in therumen. Journal of Animal Science, 59: 813–822.Bulgin, M.S., Stuart, S.D. & Mather, G. 1996. Elementalsulfur toxicosis in a flock of sheep. Journal of the AmericanVeterinary Medicine Association, 208: 1063–1065.Burrin, D.G. & Stoll, B. 2007. Emerging aspects of gut sulfuramino acid metabolism. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutritionand Metabolic Care, 10: 63–68.Cammack, K.M., Wright, C.L., Austin, K.J., Johnson, P.S.,Cockrum, R.R., Kessler, K.L. &. Olson, K.C. 2010. Effectsof high-sulfur water and clinoptilolite on health and growthperformance of steers fed forage-based diets. Journal ofAnimal Science, 88: 1777–1785.Cebra, C.K. & Cebra, M.L. 2004. Altered mentation caused bypolioencephalomalacia, hyper natremia, and lead poisoning.Veterinary Clinics of North America - Food Animal Practice,20(2): 287–302.Chalupa, W., Oltjen, R.R., Slyter, L.L. & Dinius, D.A. 1971.Sulphur deficiency and tolerance in bull calves. Journal ofAnimal Science, 33: 278.Coghlin, C.L. 1944. Hydrogen sulphide poisoning in cattle.Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine, 8: 111–113.Collman, J.P., Ghosh, S., Dey, A. & Decreau, R.A. 2009.Using a functional enzyme model to understand thechemistry behind hydrogen sulfide-induced hibernation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of theUSA, 106: 22090–22095.Cross, L.D., Rust, S.R. & Powers, W.J. 2010. Inclusion ofmolybdenum and copper with high distillers grain diets as astrategy to mitigate hydrogen sulfide emissions. Journal ofAnimal Science, 88(E. Suppl. 2): 511.Cummings, B.A., Gould, D.H., Caldwell, D.R. & Hamar,D.W. 1995. Ruminal microbial alterations associated withsulfide generation in steers with dietary sulfate-inducedpolioencephalomalacia. American Journal of VeterinaryResearch, 56: 1390–1395.Curtis, C.G., Bartholomew, T.C., Rose, F.A. & Dodgson,K.S. 1972. Detoxification of sodium 35 S-sulphide in the rat.Biochemical Pharmacology, 21: 2313–2321.de Oliveira, L.A., Jean-Blain, C., Dal Corso, V., Benard, V.,Durix, A. & Komisarczuk-Bony, S. 1996. Effect of highsulfur diet on rumen microbial activity and rumen thiaminestatus in sheep receiving a semi-synthetic, thiamine-freediet. Reproduction Nutrition Development 36(1): 31–42.de Oliveira, L.A., Jean-Blain, C., Komisarczuk-Bony, S.,Durix, A. & Durier, C. 1997. Microbial thiamin metabolismin the rumen simulating fermenter (RUSITEC): the effectof acidogenic conditions, a high sulfur level and addedthiamin. British Journal of Nutrition, 78(4): 599–613.
Page 1 and 2:
BIOFUEL CO-PRODUCTS AS LIVESTOCK FE
Page 3:
Recommended citationFAO. 2012. Biof
Page 6 and 7:
vco-products to swine - Feeding cru
Page 8 and 9:
viiCHAPTER 22Use of Pongamia glabra
Page 10 and 11:
ixPrefaceHumans are faced with majo
Page 13 and 14:
xiiCBMCBSCCDSCCKCDOCDSCFCFBCFRCGECI
Page 15 and 16:
xivHCHOHClHCNHisH-JPKMHMCHPDDGHPDDG
Page 17 and 18:
xviPPbPCVPDPEMPFADPhePJPKCPKEPKMPKO
Page 19 and 20:
xviiiWBPWCGFWDGWDGSWDGSHWPCWTWWWNSK
Page 21 and 22:
2Biofuel co-products as livestock f
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
10Biofuel co-products as livestock
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 54 and 55:
35Chapter 3Impact of United States
Page 56 and 57:
Impact of United States biofuels co
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78: Impact of United States biofuels co
Page 81 and 82: 62Biofuel co-products as livestock
Page 120 and 121: 101Chapter 6Hydrogen sulphide: synt
Page 122 and 123: Hydrogen sulphide in cattle fed co-
Page 132: Hydrogen sulphide in cattle fed co-
Page 174 and 175: 155Chapter 8Utilization of crude gl
Page 176 and 177: Utilization of crude glycerin in be
Page 178 and 179:
Utilization of crude glycerin in be
Page 180:
Utilization of crude glycerin in be
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 228 and 229:
209Chapter 11Co-products from biofu
Page 230 and 231:
Co-products from biofuel production
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 294 and 295:
275Chapter 15Sustainable and compet
Page 296 and 297:
Sustainable and competitive use of
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
291Chapter 16Scope for utilizing su
Page 312 and 313:
Scope for utilizing sugar cane baga
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
303Chapter 17Camelina sativa in pou
Page 324 and 325:
Camelina sativa in poultry diets: o
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
311Chapter 18Utilization of lipid c
Page 332 and 333:
Utilization of lipid co-products of
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 370 and 371:
351Chapter 21Use of detoxified jatr
Page 372 and 373:
Use of detoxified jatropha kernel m
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Page 380 and 381:
Page 382 and 383:
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
Page 388 and 389:
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
379Chapter 22Use of Pongamia glabra
Page 400 and 401:
Use of Pongamia glabra (karanj) and
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
Page 414 and 415:
Page 416 and 417:
Page 418 and 419:
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
403Chapter 23Co-products of the Uni
Page 424 and 425:
Co-products of the United States bi
Page 426 and 427:
Page 428 and 429:
Page 430 and 431:
Page 432 and 433:
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
Page 465 and 466:
Page 467 and 468:
Page 469 and 470:
Page 471 and 472:
Page 473 and 474:
Page 475 and 476:
Page 477 and 478:
Page 479 and 480:
Page 481 and 482:
Page 483 and 484:
Page 486 and 487:
467Chapter 26An assessment of the p
Page 488 and 489:
An assessment of the potential dema
Page 490 and 491:
Page 492 and 493:
Page 494 and 495:
Page 496 and 497:
Page 498 and 499:
Page 500 and 501:
Page 502 and 503:
483Chapter 27Biofuels: their co-pro
Page 504 and 505:
Biofuels: their co-products and wat
Page 506 and 507:
Page 508 and 509:
Page 510 and 511:
Page 512 and 513:
Page 514 and 515:
Page 516 and 517:
Page 518 and 519:
Page 520 and 521:
501Chapter 28Utilization of co-prod
Page 522 and 523:
Utilization of co-products of the b
Page 524 and 525:
Page 526 and 527:
Page 528 and 529:
Page 530 and 531:
Page 532 and 533:
Page 534 and 535:
Page 536 and 537:
Page 538 and 539:
Page 540 and 541:
Page 542 and 543:
523Contributing authorsSouheila Abb
Page 544 and 545:
Contributing authors 525for the Fee
Page 546 and 547:
Contributing authors 527Friederike
Page 548 and 549:
Contributing authors 529Sustainable
Page 550 and 551:
Contributing authors 531During the
Page 552:
Contributing authors 533(Hons.) and
show all

Biofuel co-products as livestock feed - Opportunities and challenges

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?