Feeds and Feeding week 12 notes
Feeds and Feeding week 12 notes ANSC 3232
Popular in Feeds and Feeding
Popular in Animal Science and Zoology
This 38 page Class Notes was uploaded by Dragon Note on Thursday April 14, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to ANSC 3232 at University of Missouri - Columbia taught by Dr. Meyer in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 19 views. For similar materials see Feeds and Feeding in Animal Science and Zoology at University of Missouri - Columbia.
Reviews for Feeds and Feeding week 12 notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/14/16
11: Ethanol Co-products AN SCI 3232 Dr. Meyer • Come out in the last decade • DDGS, wet DGS, CCDS • Co product- what is in it?> nutrients, any concerns associated? Total Feed Costs for U.S. Livestock Operations 50 45 40 35 30 B25lions 20 15 10 5 0 1991992199319919951991997199199920020012002003200200520020072002009 Data from USDA/NASS U S TOTAL CORN SUPPLY AND PRICE Crop Year Bil. Bushels $ Per Bushel 16 7.25 15 6.50 14 5.75 13 5.00 Supply 12 4.25 Price 11 3.50 10 2.75 9 2.00 8 1.25 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 G-NP-13 Livestock Marketing Information Center 11/09/11 Data Source: USDA-NASS, Compiled & Forecasts by LMIC Feb 2012, USDA Agricultural Projections to 2021 USDA-NASS From corn Starch fermentation products > ferm standardized Wet +h20 Less heat damege Variable CCDS H2O http://www.icminc.com/ethanol/production_process/diagram/ Corn – remaining starch Corn vs. DDGS Nutrient Composition 80 70 60 90-95% starch 50 Decrease available energy for all species 40 Fiber- digestible corn Better AA profile Good for ruminants 30 3x DDGS %20utrient (DM basis) Increased energy from fat 3x 10 0 CP Starch NDF Fat More phosphorous in DDGS Increased fat High energy High level of variability Monogastrics> less energy than corn Ruminants>~ energy as corn DDGS Feeding Concerns • Sulfur – increased in DDGS • Concentration from corn • Cleaning solvents • High DDGS > 30% leads to polio • Mycotoxins • Typical in corn • Concentrated in DDGS • Variable quality • Diet formulation • Plant to plant variation • Excess N and P when replacing corn • High P in Phytate • Nutrient management issue DDGS Feeding Recommendations ruminants • Beef cattle- Feedlot • Up to 40% DMI in DDGS – no negative effect when replacing SBM and some corn • Beef cattle- Cow or heifer • Supplement protein in addition to forage • Supplement energy in addition to forage • DDGS alone or in a mix DDGS Feeding Recommendations • Dairy Cattle- Lactating cow • Up to 20% DMI without any impact • 20-30%: milk yield steady or may increase • Over 30%: milk protein decreases • Effects on milk fat are variable components • Dairy cattle- Heifer • Limited research DDGS Feeding Recommendations • Swine – fiber is an issue • Up to 30% for nursery (> 7 kg), grow-finish, and lactating sows • Up to 50% for gestating sows – highest of non ruminants • Higher in fiber • This assumes diets are balanced for digestible AA • Lysine added • Over 20% softens pork fat – finishing hogs DDGS Feeding Recommendations • Poultry – lower in ruminants and swine • 5 to 8%: starter broilers and turkeys • 12 to 15%: layers and growing-finishing broilers, ducks, and turkeys • Can be up to 25% if digestible AA are balanced for the source-specific DDGS • Aquaculture – fish • Up to 10% generally • 20 to 30% with crystalline AA DDGS Feeding Recommendations • Sheep and Goats • Limited research, but similar to cattle • Different tolerance for sulfur toxicity • Horses, rabbits, and dogs (hindgut fermenters) • Limited research • Most likely up to 20% Added notes for the exam • When Lysine is present balance that in place of CP • Do not use the 2:1 Ca:P ratio unless told to • Ruminants can handle more DDGS while monogastrics can handle more fiber • Understand reasons fro why you would limit DDGS in each species Lab 09: Feed Processing AN SCI 3232 Dr. Meyer Feed processing • Alter • nutrient availability • feed palatability • Delivery practical • Storage • etc. Cold methods • Grinding • Dry-rolling • Temper-rolling • Reconstitution • High-moisture Hot methods • Steam-rolling Increase surface area(SA) • Steam-flaking • Pelleting mixing • Extruding • Roasting Grinding • Reduces particle size> increase SA> more area for digestion • Increase digestability, breaking fiber coat • Most common processing method/pelleting • Creates dusty, less uniform product – different sizes, very fine • Many types of equipment • Hammer mill • Grind size is important – species, feed dependent • reduced size improves efficiency of non-ruminants(swine and poultry), but increases dust and gastric ulcers • small particle size can cause bloat in ruminants Hammer mill http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUbcndrCnI Cracking/rolling • Larger particle size than grinding • More consistant- less variation in particle size • Less dust, less fine/ small particles • Usually with a roller mill Roller mill No straining screen Rolling • Dry-rolling = cracking, no heat, no water • Temper-rolling: wet • Adding moisture • Reduces the fines – keeping more starch together Steam-rolling / Flaking • Increases surface area and breaks seed coat • Without decreasing particle size • Rolling does not alter starch, but flaking does (increased time with steam 3-5(roll) vs. 15-30(flake) (mins) • Flaking allows gelatinization rolled flaked Steam-flaking/rolling Add water and heat ant same time (steam) Roller mill Why reduce particle size? Increase surface area • Digestibility – increase • Increase SA> more area to digestive enzymes • Passage rate – rate of feed moving through the GIT • Decreased digestibility> decreased passage rate • Increased too much decreases digestibility • Density • Take up less space • Decrease particle size – density more similar to other ground corn and SBM Why use heat? • Drying – remove water • Increase stability/ shelf life • Transport • storage • May improve protein utilization – maillard reactions • Increase RUP • Gelatinization of starch (Dry-rolling vs. steam) • Total tract digestability • Corn: 75% vs. 85% • Sorghum: 52 vs. 78% High-moisture ensiling Cereal grains - high moisture corn • Harvested at 25-30% moisture and ensiled (acetate fermentation(microbial)) - anaerobic • Used with corn primarily • Higher energy compared to whole shelled corn Extrusion/pelleting • Grinds feed by forcing through a tapered, spiral screw (produces heat) • Usually pet and human foods – kibble, cocoa puffs • Grind feeds, mix • Add water • For shape – stay together Extruding Pelleting • Feedstuffs are ground finely to form a meal and mix • Meal is steamed and forced through a die • Why? • Prevent animals from sorting feeds • Increase consistency of nutrients • Every bite = same nutrients • Increase density (eg Soyhulls) • Carrier of additives, premixes, etc. PelletingChanged in size based on species and feed Pellet integrity and quality Crumble decreases integrity Pellet binder Is feed processing economical? Species and feed specific • Benefits • Increase digestibility (SA) • Increase consistency (pelleting) • Improve handling • Storage, feed, equipment, mix • Costs • $ • Time/labor • Dependence on above and equipment • Negative changes • Decreased digestability • Increase dust
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'