Comparison of calculated and experimentally determined SID of CP and AA in complex diets differing in AA contents for grower finisher pigs |
| |
| Authors: | K. Büsing A. Berk S. Müller S. Kieckhäven K. Krüger A. Zeyner |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Chair of Nutrition Physiology and Animal Nutrition, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany;2. Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Institute of Animal Nutrition, Braunschweig, Germany;3. Thuringian State Institute for Agriculture, Regional Office Bad Salzungen, Bad Salzungen, Germany;4. Evonik Industries AG, Isernhagen, Germany;5. Institute for Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Group Animal Nutrition, Martin Luther University Halle‐Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | In practice, the content of standardized ileal digestible AA in complex feeds for pigs is calculated on the basis of tabulated values for individual feedstuffs. It comes into question, however, whether this truly reflects an accurate content based upon the estimate made for the individual feedstuffs. The objective of this study was to compare standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of crude protein (CP) and selected AA in complex feeds for grower and finisher pigs either calculated or experimentally determined. Six diets with increasing AA levels were prepared for grower (BW from 30 to 70 kg) and finisher (BW from 70 to 120 kg) feed. Crystalline L‐lys, DL‐met and L‐thr were added to both diets, L‐trp and L‐val only to the grower feed. SID of both CP and AA was calculated from feed tables and experimentally determined in six adult minipigs (MINILEWE) with ileorectal anastomosis. With increasing AA levels, experimentally determined SID of supplemented AA increased (p < 0.05), but SID of CP (p ≥ 0.05) was not affected. In both grower and finisher feed, calculated and experimentally determined SID of CP, Met, Cys, Trp, Ile and Tyr differed by more than 2% units, but those of Lys and His only in the finisher feed. Yet this effect was not directly consistent. The margin of error following estimation of SID of AA via tabulated values for individual feedstuffs, however, seems to be acceptable for practical use. |
| |
| Keywords: | ileorectal anastomosis minipig pre‐caecal digestibility |
|
|
