Biofuel co-products as livestock feed - Opportunities and challenges

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Co-products from biofuel production for farm animals – an EU perspective 221co-products can be considered as valuable protein sourcesfor farm animals. Their CP concentration varies between300 and 400 g/kg DM. Land use scenarios using wheatfor biofuel or using wheat and soybean meal to matchanimal feed value of DDGS have been evaluated by Pinkney(2009). The most effective way to utilize the DGS resultingfrom biofuel production in large plants is feeding this lowDM material (80 g DM/kg) to farm animals. As it is unrealisticto distribute large amounts of DGS in the vicinity ofthe biofuel plant and due to its short shelf-life, it becomesnecessary to dry the material in order to preserve the coproduct.Therefore, additional energy expenditures andGHG emissions must be considered in any assessment ofecobalances (carbon footprint, life-cycle assessment) of theco-products or the whole biofuel production chain.To date, no definite regulations exist in order to classifyemissions of the main product and the co-product (Bockischet al., 2000; Flachowsky et al., 2011). When operating ona causation principle, the producer or the responsible partyshould be accountable for all emissions. However, dryingof DGS is only of interest if the products will be utilized asfeedstuffs for animals, and thus emissions associated withprocessing of co-products are not of interest or necessity forbiofuel producing companies.KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND FUTURE RESEARCHNEEDSEven though, much research has already been conductedin the utilization of bio-ethanol and biodiesel co-productsfor animal nutrition, there are important aspects that needfurther consideration. Dose-response studies are requiredfor all co-products covered in this chapter, in order to evaluatethe exact mode of action as well as the appropriateinclusion level in diets of farm animals. More precisely, thismeans that methanol must be removed from glycerine asfar as technically possible, since separation or purificationof glycerine can be fluctuating depending on the plant andthe applied process. Rapeseed products fed to pigs andpoultry should contain as little glucosinolate as possible.This might be achieved through the breeding process, whilethe antinutritive impact of the remaining glucosinolatesmay be compensated for by iodine addition.Further attention should also be paid to the influence ofprocessing conditions on composition and nutritive valueof co-products, depending on raw materials. In particular,rapeseed cake needs further consideration and more reliabledata because variations in the processing conditionsresult in very varying chemical composition, particularlyregarding crude fat and CP content. This leads to difficultiesin predicting the feeding value of rapeseed cake forall categories of farm animals, and could also affect storagestability. Therefore, the value of rapeseed cake wouldbenefit from a standardization of compo sition. Similarly,standardization of processing would be desirable, usingconstant proportions of raw materials for the productionof distillers grain.Future research should also focus on measuring additionalexpenditures of the processing of co-products inorder to be able to evaluate the carbon footprint and toidentify GHG reduction potentials. Factors like harvesting,pressing, drying, conservation and transportation shouldbe accounted for in the same way as animal emissions andmanure management, since focusing on single factors doesnot provide an assessment that reflects the complexity ofthis subject.CONCLUSIONSThe results of a number of experiments with lactating dairycows and fattening bulls suggest that distillers grain as themain protein source could support high productive performance.Trials with grower-finisher pigs suggest that DDGS upto 200 g/kg diet do not influence growth performanceand fattening and slaughtering variables. Similarly, layingintensity of hens as well as egg quality and health were notaffected by inclusion levels ranging from 150 g/kg to 300 g/kg diet. Trials with broilers suggest that diets that containmore than 100 g/kg DDGS may lower performance. Hence,it is recommended to add non-starch polysaccharide (NSP)-degrading enzymes (e.g. xylanase or xylanase mixed withother enzymes) to poultry diets rich in DDGS.Table 16 summarizes current German recommendationsfor rapeseed products in diets for cattle and pigs.Pigs would particularly benefit from breeding or productionprogress in further reduction of glucosinolate levels,whereas in cattle, a safer quality assessment of the rapeseedcake is needed.The chapter reviewed also the use of glycerine as aco-product from biodiesel production, as well as rapeseedproducts such as rapeseed meal and cake for farm animals.For the benefit of fail-safe usage of glycerine in diets forall farm animals, methanol should be removed as far astechnically possible. Glycerine at different purities mayhelp to stabilize the hygienic quality of pelleted compoundTABLE 16Practical recommendations for daily amounts or dietaryconcentrations (as-fed basis for dry diets) of rapeseedproducts for cattle, pigs and poultryAnimal categoryRapeseed meal, solventextractedRapeseed cake,mechanically extractedDairy cow Maximum 4 kg 1.5–2.0 kgBeef cattle Maximum 1.2 kg 1 kgFattening pigs Maximum 100 g/kg 70–100 g/kgSows 50–100 g/kg 50–100 g/kgPiglets Maximum 50 g/kg 50–100 g/kgBroiler 50–150 g/kg 50–100 g/kgLaying hens 0–100 g/kg 0–50 g/kgSources: Weiß, 2007; Jeroch, Jankowski and Schöne, 2008.
222Biofuel co-products as livestock feed – Opportunities and challengesfeeds without compromising physical quality of pellets.Furthermore, glycerine is no direct competitor of propyleneglycol, since data on ruminal turnover suggest that glycerine,other than propylene glycol, should replace rapidlyfermentable carbohydrates. Mature cattle may consume upto 1 kg glycerine per day, while it may still be necessary toinvestigate if the sweet taste of glycerine may improve feedintake of diets with inferior palatability.In conclusion, glycerine can be used as a versatile feedstuff,in particular for ruminants, but further research isrequired to explore the full potential of glycerine in dairycows.Other rapeseed products for ruminants, such as rapeseedmeal, compare well with soybean meal for dairy cows.Recent research on rapeseed meal has shown that it canfully replace soybean meal within dairy cow diets when fedon an approximately iso nitro genous and isocaloric basis,i.e. without considering differences in ruminal degradationor amino acid pattern, or both. Moreover, milk and milkcomponent yields were similar for diets containing soybeanmeal or rapeseed meal.Nevertheless, rapeseed cake needs further consi de rationand more reliable data because variations in the processingconditions result in varying chemical composition, particularlyregarding the crude fat and protein content. Thesecircumstances currently lead to difficulties in predicting thefeeding value of rapeseed cake for all categories of farmanimals, and could also affect storage stability. Therefore,the value of rapeseed cake would benefit from standardizationof compo sitionBIBLIOGRAPHYAbo El-Nor, S., AbuGhazaleh, A.A., Potu, R.B., Hastings,D. & Khattab, M.S.A. 2010. Effects of differing levels ofglycerol on rumen fermentation and bacteria. Animal FeedScience and Technology, 162: 99–105.Abrams, S.M., Klopfenstein, T.J., Stock, R.A., Britton, R.A.& Nelson, M.L. 1983. Preservation of wet distillers grainsand its value as a protein source for growing ruminants.Journal of Animal Science, 57: 729–738.AFRC [Agricultural and Food Research Council]. 1993.Energy and Protein Requirements of Ruminants. CABInternational, Wallingford, UK.Aldai, N., Aalhus, J.L., Dugan, M.E.R., Robertson, W.M.,McAllister, T.A., Walter, L.J. & McKinnon, J.J. 2010.Comparison of wheat- versus corn-based dried distillers’grains with solubles on meat quality of feedlot cattle. MeatScience, 84: 569–577.Alert, H.J., Losand, B. & Priebe, R. 2007. EnergetischeBewertung von Roggenpressschlempe beim Wiederkäuer.p. 105 (Abstract), in: Kurzfassungen der Referate, 119thVDLUFA-Kongress, Göttingen, Germany, 18–21 September2007. VDLUFA-Verlag, Darmstadt, Germany.Anonymous. 1970. Council Directive 70/524/EEC of 23November 1970 Concerning Additives in Feeding-stuffs.Official Journal of the European Union, L., 270: 1–17.Askbrant, S. & Thomke, S. 1986. The nutritive valueof distilled grains with solubles from barley and wheatdetermined with laying hens. Journal of Animal Physiologyand Animal Nutrition, 56: 185–191.Becker, M. & Nehring, K. 1967. Handbuch der Futtermittel.Paul Parey, Hamburg, Germany.Belyea, R.L., Rausch, K.D. & Tumbleson, M.E. 2004.Composition of corn and distillers dried grains with solublesfrom dry grind ethanol processing. Bioresource Technology,94: 293–298.Bergner, H., Kijora, C., Ceresnakova, Z. & Szakács, J. 1995.In vitro Untersuchungen von Glycerol in der Fütterung vonGeflügeln und Schweinen. UFOP-Schriften, 17: 15–36.Berk, A. 2007. Erste Ergebnisse eines Schweinemastversuchesmit Nebenprodukten der Biokraftstoffherstellung. pp. 167–170, in: Forum angewandte Forschung. Fulda, Germany,28–29 March 2007. Verband der Landwirt schafts kammern,Bonn, Germany.Berk, A., Lebzien, P. & Flachowsky, G. 2008. Influence ofuse of co-products from biofuel production in feeds forgrowing-finishing pigs. In: Book of abstracts, 59th AnnualEAAP Meeting. Vilnius, Lithunia.Bockisch, F.-J., Ahlgrimm, H.-J., Böhme, H., Bramm, A.,Dämmgen, U., Flachowsky, G., Heinemeyr, O., Höppner,F., Murphy, D.P.L., Rogasik, J., Röver, M. & Sohler, S.2000. Bewertung von Verfahren der ökologischen undkonventionellen landwirtschaftlichen Produktion im Hinblickauf den Energieeinsatz und bestimmte Schadgasemissionen.Landbauforsch, Völkenrode, Sonderheft, 211, 206 p.Bodarski, R., Wertelecki, T., Bommer, F. & Gosiewski,S. 2005. The changes of metabolic status and lactationperformance in dairy cows under feeding TMR withglycerin (glycerol) supplement at periparturient period.Electronic Journal of the Polish Agricultural University,8: 245–256.Standards Commission for Straight Feeding Stuffs. 2011.Positive List for Straight Feeding Stuffs. 9th Edition. CentralCommittee of German Agriculture, Berlin. Available at: http://www.dlg.org/fileadmin/downloads/fachinfos/futtermittel/positivliste/positivlist_en_9.pdf Accessed 01 July 2011.Chidothe, T., Acamovic, T. & McDevitt, R.M. 2002. Theeffects of dietary brewers and distillers grains, with andwithout xylanase supplementation, on broiler performance.British Poultry Science, 43(5): s28–s29Chidothe, T., McDevitt, R.M. & Acamovic, T. 2002. Theeffect of enzyme supplementation on the nutritive valueof brewers and distillers grains for broiler chickens. BritishPoultry Science, 43(5): s30–s31.CONCAWE, EUCAR & JRC. 2007. Well-to-wheels analysis offuture automotive fuels and powertrains in the European
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:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 120 and 121:
101Chapter 6Hydrogen sulphide: synt
Page 122 and 123:
Hydrogen sulphide in cattle fed co-
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 174 and 175:
155Chapter 8Utilization of crude gl
Page 176 and 177:
Utilization of crude glycerin in be
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190: 170Biofuel co-products as livestock
Page 228 and 229: 209Chapter 11Co-products from biofu
Page 230 and 231: Co-products from biofuel production
Page 246: Co-products from biofuel production
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?