Biofuel co-products as livestock feed - Opportunities and challenges

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Feeding biofuel co-products to dairy cattle 121TABLE 4Composition of dried distillers grain with solubles (DDGS), wet distillers grain with solubles (WDGS), modified wet distillersgrain with solubles (MWDGS) and condensed distillers solubles (CDS)DDGS (1989) (1) DDGS (2001) (2) DDGS (3) WDGS (4) MWDGS (5) CDS (6)Nutrients (% of DM)DM (% as is) 92 90.2 88.1 ± 6.18 33.4 ± 12.98 48.3 31.9CP 25 29.7 31.2 ± 4.3 30.1 ± 9.4 28.2 20.2SP (% of CP) — — 16.7 ± 7.1 22.4 ± 14.6 16.1 63.8ADICP — 5.0 4.4 ± 2.1 3.7 ± 2.1 1.3 0.6NDICP — 8.6 9.5 ± 2.9 8.3 ± 3.6 1.9 1.8NDF 44 38.8 34.0 ± 4.7 31.2 ± 8.9 24.4 4.0ADF 18 19.7 16.8 ± 3.5 15.4 ± 5.2 8.6 1.9Lignin 4 4.3 5.1 ± 1.7 4.8 ± 1.6 5.3 0.4Starch — — 5.3 ± 4.1 5.5 ± 8.5 7.3 5.3Crude fat 10.3 10.0 12.6 ± 3.2 12.7 ± 3.8 12.0 17.9Ash 4.8 5.2 5.9 ± 1.1 5.5 ± 1.6 5.9 9.6Ca 0.15 0.22 0.08 ± 0.19 0.08 ± 0.17 0.06 0.10P 0.71 0.83 0.88 ± 0.17 0.85 ± 0.18 0.88 1.55Mg 0.18 0.33 0.32 ± 0.07 0.32 ± 0.09 0.41 0.68K 0.44 1.10 1.05 ± 0.26 0.99 ± 0.30 1.25 2.23Na 0.57 0.30 0.19 ± 0.20 0.17 ± 0.13 0.36 0.36S 0.33 0.44 0.64 ± 0.18 0.58 ± 0.15 0.79 1.07TDN 88 79.5 83.0 ± 5.0 84.8 ± 5.1 — 101.9Energy parameters (Mcal/kg)NEL 2.04 1.97 2.06 2.10 — 2.58NEM 2.18 2.07 2.17 2.22 — 2.78NEG 1.50 1.41 1.49 1.53 — 1.99Notes: Nutrients: DM = dry matter; NDF = neutral-detergent fibre; ADF = acid-detergent fibre; CP = crude protein; SP = soluble protein; ADICP =acid-detergent-insoluble CP; NDICP = neutral-detergent-insoluble CP; TDN = total digestible nutrient. Energy parameters: NEM = net energy formaintenance; NEG = net energy for gain; and NEL = net energy for lactation. Data are reported as mean ± the standard deviation.Sources: (1) NRC, 1989. (2) NRC, 2001. (3) Analysed by Dairy One Forage Lab (http://www.dairyone.com) from May 2000 to April 2011. Number ofsamples from 2501 to 6702 depending on nutrient analysed. (4) Analysed by Dairy One Forage Lab (http://www.dairyone.com) from May 2000 to April2011. Number of samples of WDGS from 1035 to 2206 depending on nutrient analysed. (5) MWGS analysis is from two samples evaluated at SouthDakota State University. (6) Analysed by Dairy One Forage Lab (http://www.dairyone.com) from May 2000 to April 2011. Number of samples of CDSfrom 103 to 757 depending on nutrient analysed.the concentration of digestible lysine as this amino acid isvery sensitive to high temperatures (Boucher et al., 2009). Itshould be noted that the type of grain and the amount ofsolubles added back to distillers grain can also create darkerproducts without necessarily reducing amino acid availability.Recently, Mjoun et al. (2010b) evaluated the intestinaldigestibility of protein of four distillers grain products(conventional DDGS, reduced-fat DDGS, high-protein DDGand MWDGS) and found that, while these products wereslightly less digestible than soybean products (92.4 and97.7 percent, respectively), their digestibility values weregreater than the 80 percent RUP digestibility used in feedformulation models such as NRC (2001). Intestinal digestibilityof the essential amino acids exceeded 92 percentacross all feedstuffs, with the exception of lysine, where distillersgrain were less (84.6 percent) compared with soybeanfeedstuffs (97.3 percent) (Mjoun et al., 2010b).Neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) concentrations in maizeDDGS are often between 30 and 40 percent of DM, butcan vary considerably between individual ethanol plants.Some newer DDGS samples have been reported to haveconcentrations of NDF considerably lower than NRC values(NRC, 2001; Robinson, Karges and Gibson, 2008).Although DDGS contains a considerable amount of NDF,this fibre should not be considered a source of physicallyeffectivefibre in diets. Because the maize is ground priorto fermentation to produce ethanol, the resulting DDGShas very small particle size (Kleinschmit et al., 2007a).Replacing forage fibre with non-forage fibre provided byDDGS can create unfavourable fermentation in the rumenand potentially result in milk fat depression (Cyriac et al.,2005). While fibre provided by DDGS is a good source ofenergy, it should not replace forage fibre in diets of highproducing dairy cows.Maximizing the fermentation of starch to ethanol isalways the goal of ethanol production; however, there isusually some starch remaining in distillers grain. Duringthe 1980s and 1990s, starch in DDGS was determined tobe 10–15 percent (Belyea et al., 1989; Batajoo and Shaver,1998). Most samples from newer fuel ethanol plantscontained 4–6 percent starch, with some samples greaterthan 8 percent (Mjoun et al., 2010b). Improved processesto ferment starch to ethanol is most likely the reason fordecreased starch concentrations in DDGS.
122Biofuel co-products as livestock feed – Opportunities and challengesOne concern of nutritionists is that the concentration offat in distillers grain can vary greatly, and potentially exceed12 percent, which is much greater than values reported inNRC (2001). The fat in DDGS is high in unsaturated fattyacids, predominantly linoleic acid (C18:2), reflecting thecomposition of maize oil (Elliot et al., 1993). Dried or wetdistillers grain that contain greater proportions of CDSresult in greater concentrations of fat in the final product(Cao, Anderson and Kalscheur, 2009). Also, the method ofanalysis can significantly affect the crude fat value (Cao,Anderson and Kalscheur, 2009). A recent study that evaluatedmethods for crude fat analysis recommended the useof petroleum ether when analysing DDGS (Thiex, 2009).High concentrations of unsaturated fatty acids are aconcern when including DDGS in diets for lactating dairycows because the presence of unsaturated fatty acids canincrease incomplete bio hydro genation in the rumen, whichhas been related to observed milk fat depression. However,if diets are formulated to provide sufficient amounts ofphysically-effective fibre, increasing the concentration ofpolyunsaturated fatty acids will not necessarily result in milkfat depression (Ranathunga et al., 2010).Environmental concerns regarding excessivephosphorus (P) has increased the awareness of phosphorusconcentrations in DDGS. Most DDGS contain between 0.65and 0.95 percent P and this value increases with the amountof CDS added to the distillers grain with no solubles (Table 4).Even though DDGS protein is relatively undegraded in therumen, phosphorus has been shown to be highly available(Mjoun et al., 2008). Fortunately, high producing dairy cowsoften need some supplemental P, therefore inclusion ofDDGS can replace more expensive inorganic sources. Thegreatest concern of feeding DDGS will be in regions of theUnited States where soils are already high in P. In order tominimize excess P in manure, diets should be formulatedclose to the animal’s requirement (NRC, 2001). The othermineral that can be highly variable is sulphur (S). Althoughan average S concentration in DDGS is about 0.64 percent(Table 4), it has exceeded 1.0 percent in some samples.Distillers grain products with greater concentrations of CDSoften contain greater S concentrations (Cao, Anderson andKalscheur, 2009). Though rarely reported in dairy cattle,excessive S concentrations in feed and water can result incentral nervous system disorders, which can lead to poorperformance or death.Distillers grain available today usually contain moreenergy than indicated by the NRC reference values. Birkelo,Brouk and Schingoethe (2004) determined the energy valueof WDG for lactating cows. In this study, digestible energy,metabolizable energy and NEL of WDG were 4.09, 3.36,and 2.27 Mcal/kg, respectively, which were 7 to 11 percent,and 10 to 15 percent higher than previously published valuesreported in NRC (1989) and NRC (2001) (Table 4). Thesehigher energy values are probably attributable to increasedfat concentration, as well as greater digestible fibre measuredin DGS products than assumed by NRC (2001).Amino acid composition of distillers grain fromdifferent grainsTables 5 and 6 show the essential amino acid (EAA) compositionof cereal grains and distillers grain obtained fromthem as a percent of the CP (values for rye distillers graincould not be found at the time of writing). The extent ofheating during drying affects the availability of the aminoacids in the co-products. Lysine is particularly affectedbecause of the greater exposure and susceptibility to theMaillard reaction of the epsilon amino group of this aminoacid. These effects were corroborated experimentally withgreater total amino acid concentration (particularly lysine)in wet compared with dried distillers grain derived fromboth barley (Weis et al., 1989) and maize (Kleinschmit etal., 2007a).The amino acid composition of milk protein can be usedas an indicator of the ideal dietary amino acid balance for theTABLE 5Amino acid composition (% of CP) of different cereal grainsTMP Maize Sorghum Wheat Barley Triticale RyeArginine 3.6 4.7 4.0 5.1 4.8 5.4 5.0Histidine 2.7 2.9 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.1Isoleucine 5.9 3.7 4.2 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.4Leucine 9.7 12.5 13.6 6.8 6.8 6.4 6.0Lysine 8.1 3.0 2.3 2.9 3.8 4.0 3.9Methionine 2.6 2.1 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.6Phenylalanine 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.7 4.9 4.3 4.4Threonine 4.6 3.7 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4Valine 6.6 5.0 5.4 4.4 5.1 4.9 4.8Total EAA 48.7 42.5 41.9 34.5 36.3 42.3 34.6MPS 0.37 0.28 0.36 0.47 0.49 0.48Notes and sources: Unless otherwise indicated, data are adapted from INRA, 2004. TMP = Total milk protein. Adapted from Jacobson, Van Horn andSniffen, 1970. Total EAA = Total essential amino acids. MPS = Milk protein score (concentration of first AA in protein supplement / AA concentration inmilk protein) from Schingoethe, 1996.
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:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90: 70Biofuel 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 139: 120Biofuel co-products as livestock
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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?