Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T11:10:37.969Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The digestion and utilization of amino acids of heat-treated fish meal by growing/finishing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. Wiseman ,
S. Jagger ,
D. J. A. Cole  and
W. Haresign
J. Wiseman
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough LE12 5RD
S. Jagger
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough LE12 5RD
D. J. A. Cole
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough LE12 5RD
W. Haresign
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough LE12 5RD
Get access

Abstract

A batch offish meal was (a) untreated, (b) heated to 130°C and (c) heated to 160°C under controlled conditions.

In trial 1, these materials were incorporated into a diet based on barley meal (278·7 g/kg), wheat starch (412·5 g/kg), maize meal (245·3 g/kg) and tallow (33·5 g/kg) at a rate of inclusion of 100 g/kg. Diets contained a vitamin/mineral pre-mix together with the inert marker titanium dioxide and were given to four pigs fitted with simple T-piece Heal cannulas over four time periods each of which lasted for 6 days and which allowed the determination of faecal and Heal apparent digestibilities of nitrogen and amino acids. The results indicated that over-heating fish meal results in a reduction in both Heal and faecal apparent digestibility although, as there was no effect of treatment on the quantity of nitrogen absorbed from the large intestine, the two measurements were directly related. Heal and faecal apparent digestibilities for individual amino acids were not the same as data for nitrogen and, accordingly, the latter cannot be used to predict the two former.

In trial 2, the three fish meal samples were included in diets formulated on the basis of total, faecal and Heal apparent digestible amino acids. The nine diets were given to pigs over the live-weight range 27·5 to 52·5 kg. Giving diets formulated on the basis of both faecal and Heal apparent digestible amino acids resulted in improved performance compared with giving diets based on total amino acids when the diets containing fish meal heated to 160°C, but performance achieved with diets containing untreated fish meal was still higher.

Heal apparent digestible amino acids from heat-treated fish meal are not completely available to the pig, and it is suggested that care needs to be taken in equating digestibility with subsequent availability. There appears to be no advantage of using Heal rather than faecal, apparent digestible amino acid values in texms of accuracy of diet formulation.

Keywords

amino acidsdigestibilityfish mealheat processingpigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , October 1991 , pp. 215 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Austic, R. E. 1983. The availability of amino acids as an attribute of feeds. In Feed information and animal production (ed. Robards, G. E. and Packham, R. G.), pp. 175–189. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Batterham, E. S., Anderson, L. M., Baigent, D. R., Darnell, R. E. and Taverner, M. R. 1990a. A comparison of the availability and ileal digestibility of Iysine in cottonseed and soya-bean meals for grower/finisher pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 64: 663–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batterham, E. S., Anderson, L. M., Baigent, D. R., Beech, S. A. and Elliott, R. 1990b. Utilization of ileal digestible amino acids by pigs: Iysine. British Journal of Nutrition 64: 679–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. and Booth, V. H. 1973. Damage to Iysine in food processing: its measurement and significance. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 43: 423–451.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A. 1979. Amino acid nutrition of the pig. In Recent advances in animal nutrition — 1978 (ed. Haresign, W. and Lewis, D.), pp. 59–72. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dvořàk, Z. and Vognarovà, I. 1965. Available Iysine in meat and meat products. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 16: 305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erbersdobler, H. 1973. The normal course of digestion of food proteins. In Proteins in human nutrition (ed. Porter, J. W. and Rolls, B. A.), pp. 453–467. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Erbersdobler, H., Gunsser, I. and Weber, G. 1970. Degradation of fructoselysine by the intestinal flora. Zentralblatt fur Veterinarmedizin 17: 573–575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finot, P. A. 1973. Non-enzymic browning. In Proteins in human nutrition (ed. Porter, J. W. G. and Rolls, B. A.), pp. 501–514. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Folk, J. E. 1956. The influence of the lysine-glucose reaction on enzymic digestion. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 64: 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, J. E. and Shorrock, C. 1971. Metabolism of heat damaged proteins in the rat. Influence of heat damage on the excretion of amino acids and peptides in the urine. British Journal of Nutrition 26: 311–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurrell, R. F. and Carpenter, K. J. 1976. An approach to the rapid measurement of ‘reactive Iysine’ in foods by dye binding. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 35: 23A–24A.Google Scholar
Jagger, S. 1987. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
Jagger, S., Wiseman, J., Cole, D. J. A. and Craigon, J. 1991. Evaluation of inert markers for the determination of apparent ileal and faecal digestibility values in the pig. British Journal of Nutrition In press.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, H., Fernandez, J. A. and Just, A. 1985. Relationship between ileal and faecal digestible nutrients in 96 diets for pigs. Proceedings of 3rd international seminar on digestive physiology in the pig (ed. Just, A., Jorgensen, H. and Fernandez, J. A.), pp. 352–355. Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, H., Sauer, W. C. and Thacker, P. A. 1984. Amino acid availabilities in soybean meal, sunflower meal, fish meal and meat and bone meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 58: 926–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, A. 1980. Ileal digestibility of protein: applied agents. In Current concepts of digestion and absorption in pigs (ed. Low, A. G. and Partridge, I. G.), pp. 66–77. Shinfield, England.Google Scholar
Kakade, M. L. and Liener, I. E. 1969. Improved method of available Iysine determinations. Analytical Biochemistry 27: 273–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenis, N. P. 1981. Towards an evaluation of dietary protein for pigs based upon digestible amino acids. European Association for Animal Production annual meeting, Zagreb, Yugoslavia, Paper NP21.Google Scholar
Lenis, N. P. 1983. Faecal amino acid digestibility in feedstuffs for pigs. Proceedings of 4th international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Clermont Ferrand, pp. 385–389. Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Low, A. G., Partridge, I. G., Keal, H. D. and Jones, A. R. 1982. A comparison of methods in vitro and in vivo of measuring amino acid digestibility in foodstuffs as predictors of pig growth and carcass composition. Animal Production 34: 403 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Moughan, P. J. and Smith, W. C. 1985. Determination and assessment of apparent ileal amino acid digestibility coefficients for the growing pig. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 28: 365–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melnick, D. and Oser, B. L. 1949. The influence of heat processing on the functional and nutritive properties of protein. Food Technology 3: 57–71.Google Scholar
Partridge, I. G., Low, A. G. and Matte, J. J. 1987. Doublelow rapeseed meal for pigs: ileal apparent digestibility of amino acids in diets containing various proportions of rapeseed meal, fish meal and soya-bean meal. Animal Production 44: 415–420.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C. and Ozimek, L. 1985. Digestion and absorption of protein: results and their practical application. Proceedings of 3rd international seminar on digestive physiology in the pig (ed. Just, A., Jorgensen, H. and Fernandez, J. A.), p. 317. Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C., Stothers, S. C. and Phillips, G. D. 1977. Apparent availabilities of amino acids in corn, wheat and barley for growing pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 57: 585–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanksley, T. D. and Knabe, D. A. 1984. Ileal digestibilities of amino acids in pig feeds and their use in formulating pig diets. In Recent advances in animal nutrition — 1984 (e.d. Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 75–95. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taverner, M. R., Curie, D. M. and Rayner, C. J. 1983. A comparison of the extent and site of energy and protein digestion of wheat, lupin and meat and bone meal by pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 34: 122–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valle-Riestra, J. and Barnes, R. H. 1970. Digestion of heatdamaged egg albumen by the rat. Journal of Nutrition 100: 873–882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yen, H. T., Cole, D. J. A. and Lewis, D. 1986. Amino acid requirements of growing pigs. 8. The response of pigs from 50 to 90 kg live weight to dietary ideal protein. Animal Production 43: 155–165.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T. 1973. Digestion and absorption of nitrogenous compounds in the large intestine of pigs. Rocznik Nauk Rolniczych Series B, 95: 85–89.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T., Buraczewska, L. and Horaczynski, H. 1978. Apparent digestibility of nitrogen and amino acids and utilisation of protein given orally or introduced into the large intestine of pigs. Rocznik Nauk Rolniczych Series B 99: 99–105.Google Scholar