Validation of prediction equations to estimate the energy values of feedstuffs for broilers: performance and carcass yield

Application of Apparent Metabolizable Energy versus Nitrogen-Corrected Apparent Metabolizable Energy in Poultry Feed Formulations: A Continuing Conundrum

Simple Summary

Despite some limitations, the metabolizable energy system has been extensively used for describing the available energy in ingredients and for formulating complete poultry feeds. Three methods, namely direct, difference (substitution), and regression, or modifications thereof, have been employed to measure the apparent metabolizable energy (AME) of feeds and ingredients for poultry. The AME of feed ingredients are often corrected for zero nitrogen (N) retention to estimate the N-corrected AME (AMEn). Although the need for N-retention corrections has been intensely debated and challenged ever since the advent of the AME system, no definitive conclusion has been reached and the majority of poultry diets today are formulated to meet the requirements for AMEn rather than AME. There is limited information on the effect of zero N-retention correction on the energy value of major protein sources. The aim of this investigation was to understand the consequences of correction to zero N retention to the energy values of samples of several protein sources differing in protein quality. Based on the data presented herein, correcting AME values to zero N retention for modern fast-growing broilers penalizes the energy value of all major protein sources and is of higher magnitude for ingredients with higher protein quality.

Abstract

In the present investigation, N retention, AME, and AMEn data from six energy evaluation assays, involving four protein sources (soybean meal, full-fat soybean, rapeseed meal and maize distiller’s dried grains with solubles [DDGS]), are reported. The correction for zero N retention, reduced the AME value of soybean meal samples from different origins from 9.9 to 17.8% with increasing N retention. The magnitude of AME penalization in full-fat soybean samples, imposed by zero N correction, increased from 1.90 to 9.64% with increasing N retention. The Δ AME (AME minus AMEn) in rapeseed meal samples increased from 0.70 to 1.09 MJ/kg as N-retention increased. In maize DDGS samples, the correction for zero N retention increased the magnitude of AME penalization from 5.44 to 8.21% with increasing N retention. For all protein sources, positive correlations (p < 0.001; r = 0.831 to 0.991) were observed between the N retention and Δ AME. The present data confirms that correcting AME values to zero N retention for modern broilers penalizes the energy value of protein sources and is of higher magnitude for ingredients with higher protein quality. Feed formulation based on uncorrected AME values could benefit least cost broiler feed formulations and merits further investigation.

Trends in feed evaluation for poultry with emphasis on in vitro techniques

Accurate knowledge of the actual nutritional value of individual feed ingredients and complete diets is critical for efficient and sustainable animal production. For this reason, feed evaluation has always been in the forefront of nutritional research. Feed evaluation for poultry involves several approaches that include chemical analysis, table values, prediction equations, near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy, in vivo data and in vitro digestion techniques. Among these, the use of animals (in vivo) is the most valuable to gain information on nutrient utilization and is more predictive of bird performance. However, in vivo methods are expensive, laborious and time-consuming. It is therefore important to establish in vitro methods that are reliable, rapid and practical to assess the nutritional quality of feed ingredients or complete diets. Accuracy of the technique is crucial, as poor prediction will have a negative impact on bird performance and, increase feed cost and environmental issues. In this review, the relevance and importance of feed evaluation in poultry nutrition will be highlighted and the various approaches to evaluate the feed value of feed ingredients or complete diets will be discussed. Trends in and practical limitations encountered in feed evaluation science, with emphasis on in vitro digestion techniques, will be discussed.

Nutrient Content of Different Wheat and Maize Varieties and Their Impact on Metabolizable Energy Content and Nitrogen Utilization by Broilers

Simple Summary

The current standard for the determination of the energy value of feed is to use regression equations; however, these equations are imprecise and may affect the correct estimation of energy for several reasons. First of all, these equations include the values of some raw components, such as crude protein, ether extracts, and N-free extracts, but not different forms of fiber, which in high concentration reduces the energy value of poultry feed. In addition, in the tables, there are average values for different feeds, which do not take into account differences between varieties of the same species, which, at least in case of grains may be much larger than differences between two different species. Another important aspect is that the concentration of various components, including antinutritional factors, affects their mutual use and thus the energy value of feed. This work was aimed at improving the precision of estimating the energy value of poultry feed by incorporating detergent and dietary fiber as well as additional nutrients such as starch and total sugars separately. In addition, the authors suggest considering the values characteristic of selected grain in the energy calculations rather than the mean values for the species, because it may improve the precision of the result.

Abstract

The study aimed to determine the effect of nutrients of wheat (nine cultivars) and maize (nine cultivars) grain on nitrogen balance and apparent metabolizable energy (AME_N) content for broiler chickens. In vivo digestibility and balance trials were carried out with 90 Ross 308 chickens (2 × 9 groups with 5 birds per group) aged from 42 to 49 days, separately for each cultivar. Considerable variation within each cereal species in fiber and non-fiber carbohydrate fractions and nutrient digestibility of grain were demonstrated. Additionally, regression equations were proposed which allow the estimation of AME_N content of wheat and maize grain varieties based on simple analytical procedures, including cell wall components, starch, and sugars. For practical purposes, these equations seem to be the best solution while reducing time, labor, and cost of analytical procedures.

Validation of Prediction Equations of Energy Values of a Single Ingredient or Their Combinations in Male Broilers

A set of prediction equations to estimate the nitrogen-corrected apparent metabolizable energy (AMEn) of individual ingredients and diets used in the poultry feed industry was evaluated. The AMEn values of three energy ingredients (maize, sorghum and defatted maize germ meal), four protein ingredients (soybean meal, maize gluten meal 60% crude protein, integral micronized soy and roasted whole soybean) and four diets (three containing four feedstuffs, complex diets, and one containing only corn-soybean meal, basal diet) were determined using a metabolism assay with male broilers from 1 to 7, 8 to 21, 22 to 35, and 36 to 42 days old. These values were compared to the AMEn values presented in the tables of energy composition or estimated by equation predictions based on chemical composition data of feedstuffs. In general, the equation predictions more precisely estimated the AMEn of feedstuffs when compared to the tables of energy composition. The equation AMEn (dry matter [DM] basis) = 4,164.187+51.006 ether extract (% in DM basis)–197.663 ash–35.689 crude fiber (% in DM basis)–20.593 neutral detergent fiber (% in DM basis) (R² = 0.75) was the most applicable for the prediction of the energy values of feedstuffs and diets used in the poultry feed industry.