Corn Processing Co-products Manual
A REVIEW OF CURRENT RESEARCH ON DISTILLERS GRAINS AND CORN GLUTEN
|
| A joint project of the Nebraska Corn Board and the University of Nebraska Lincoln Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources Agricultural Research Division Cooperative Extension Division |
 |
| Brought to you by Nebraska corn producers through their corn checkoff dollars expanding demand for Nebraska corn and value-added corn products. |
|
| Previous Chapter
| Table of Contents
| Next Chapter
|
|
CORN DISTILLERS DRIED GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES FOR SWINE
Phillip S. Miller, Jessika Uden and Duane E. Reese
Department of Animal Science
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
|
INTRODUCTION
Previous sections have highlighted the dramatic increase in corn usage for ethanol production.This augmented production of corn for ethanol production has resulted in the production of a variety of co-products, e.g., corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). Conventionally, the majority of these co-products have been incorporated in ruminant diets (see the Beef Cattle and Dairy Cattle reviews); however, interest has been generated regarding the potential of using products from drycorn milling for use in swine diets (Knott and Shurson, 2004; Shurson et al., 2004).
Although the focus of this review will be linked to nutrient composition and pig performance related to dry-milling co-products (i.e., DDGS), extrapolations to wet-milling co-products may be plausible inasmuch as newer wet milling applications can be adapted towards using starch for both the production of sweeteners and ethanol.
DISTILLERS DRIED GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES
The dry milling process is reviewed in the Beef Cattle section (see chapter 2). Although the vast majority of co-products generated during ethanol production are marketed and fed as high-moisture feeds, the focus herein will be on dried co-products (DDGS). A designation is made between "newer generation" DDGS (produced from plants built since 1990) and DDGS produced from plants built prior to 1990. Distillers dried grains with solubles produced from older and newer plants differ significantly in nutrient composition and availability. A number of these differences will be highlighted in subsequent sections of this review. Readers are encouraged to consult (University of Minnesota, 2005; Shurson et al., 2004; Spiehs et al., 2002) for critical work and reviews describing nutrient composition and pig performance associated with DDGS.
DDGS NUTRIENT COMPOSITION, VARIABILITY, AND AVAILABILITY
Ethanol production has expanded greatly during the past 10 years. Currently, there are more than 60 ethanol plants in Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota. Other sections in this publication have highlighted the variability in nutrient content of DDGS produced at Midwest plants; however, it is important to review the variability of DDGS relative to the impact on diet formulation and nutrient utilization in swine.Table 1 shows the variability in amino acid content from DDGS samples acquired from 10 drymilling plants located in Nebraska, South Dakota, and Iowa.
The protein quality relative to the ratios of essential amino acids (lysine, methionine, threonine, and tryptophan) in DDGS is similar to corn (relative to lysine; Table 1).Thus, the quality of protein in DDGS is not superior to that in corn; albeit, the concentration of protein and amino acids is increased.This presents a dilemma to the nutritionist/ producer inasmuch as in order to maintain appropriate amino acid concentrations and ratios using DDGS, total protein concentration will be increased (unless an upper limit on DDGS inclusion is set).
The variation in DDGS nutrient composition must also be considered within the context of nutrient availability. The majority of studies examining nutrient availability in DDGS have focused on amino acids and phosphorus. Table 2 shows amino acid standard ileal digestibilities adapted from Stein et al., 2005.
Large variation exists for ileal digestibilites of amino acids from DDGS.This finding is consistent with the findings of Fastinger and Mahan (2005) that indicated that lysine true ileal digestibilites of DDGS acquired from five different plants ranged from 67 to 75%. Actual agronomic and production parameters related to the variability in amino acid digestibility remain unquantified. Potential factors related to the variability in DDGS amino acid digestibility may include: genetic variation among corn samples, quantity of solubles added back to distillers grains, and drying temperature and duration prior to distribution. Excessive heat can reduce amino acid availability and has been associated with "older generation" ethanol plants.
It is clear that amino acid deficiencies could arise if DDGS composition is not adjusted for the variation in digestibility. In addition, depending on crystalline amino acid, soybean meal, corn, and DDGS costs, diets formulated may promote nutrient excretion and increase diet cost. Therefore, it is important to not only consider the maximum amount of DDGS in the diet, but also compositional variation related to lysine (nutrient) values.
The energy concentration of DDGS is assumed to be  corn. Metabolizable and digestible energy values for DDGS are estimated from digestibility/metabolizability studies and(or) chemical composition. Digestible and metabolizable energy values for corn and DDGS are presented in Table 3. Metabolizable energy values for DDGS are  compared to corn. In addition, significant variation exists for DDGS energy values between and within studies.
Stein et al. (2005) reported an average ME for DDGS of 3,378 kcal/kg; however, the range of values determined from metabolism trials was 3,058 to 3,738 kcal/kg.These reported energy values are significantly greater than values previously reported for older generation DDGS (see NRC, 1988). The increased NDF in DDGS is offset by the increased oil concentration and does not appear to limit inclusion in the diet on DE or ME basis; however, studies that show a reduction in growth performance, with little to no change in feed intake, suggest that energy values may be overestimated for DDGS. Results from work conducted by Hastad et al. (2004) indicate that DE and ME values estimated from metabolism trials (3,800 and 3, 642 kcal/ kg, respectively) were 6 to 15% greater than estimates determined directly from growth performance data.The discrepancy between values estimated from metabolism and growth studies was attributed to differences in feed intake. Individually-fed pigs used in metabolism studies typically consume more feed than pigs reared in research grouphousing situations or production units.
The phosphorus concentration in DDGS is considerably greater than corn (.89 versus .28%; Shurson et al., 2004). In addition, the relative bioavailability of P in DDGS appears to be high (90%). Accordingly, available P in DDGS can be calculated as high as .80%. Stein et al. (2005) estimated that total tract digestibility of P from DDGS was only 55%. The phosphorus bioavailability estimates for DDGS are made relative to a standard source, e.g., dicalcium phosphate. It is assumed that the availability of P from dicalcium phosphate is 100%. Studies have shown that the total tract digestibility of P from dicalcium phosphate is approximately 70% (Jongbloed and Kemme, 1990).Therefore, correcting P % in DDGS using relative bioavailability may overestimate P available to the pig and increase P excretion.
DDGS AND GROWTH/ REPRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE
Corn distillers dried grains with solubles can be used effectively in nursery, growing-finishing, gestation, and lactation diets.The majority of nursery, growing-finishing, and lactation studies have used DDGS inclusion percentages < 30%; however, gestation studies (diets) have included up to 50% DDGS. Subsequent reference to maximum DDGS inclusion percentages are provided in the context of performance criteria and not evaluated using economic models.A number of studies cited in this review were presented as proceedings and(or) meeting abstracts.The reader is encouraged to review the literature cited section.
NURSERY PIGS
Whitney and coworkers (2004) conducted two nursery experiments using diets formulated with 0 to 25% DDGS. Experiments were similar in design; however, the second experiment used pigs that weighed less (7.10 and 5.26 kg, respectively) than the previous study. The inclusion of up to 25% DDGS had no effect on ADFI,ADG, and ADG/ADFI throughout a three-phase nursery regimen (first experiment). In the second experiment, lighter pigs had reduced (P < .05) ADFI during phase 2, and for overall nursery period (P < .09). The cause for the reduced feed intake in the second experiment could not be determined. Palatability of diets containing > 25% DDGS may have been a factor. Therefore, DDGS incorporation in nursery diets for pigs weighing less than 7 kg is cautioned. Diets used in the aforementioned study were formulated to be isolysinic (1.34%); however, analyzed dietary CP was increased 25% from the 0 to 25% DDGS diets.Therefore, it is assumed that N excretion would be significantly increased for pigs consuming the 25% DDGS diet.
GROWING-FINISHING PIGS
Results documenting the effects of DDGS inclusion on growing-finishing pig performance vary. Again, studies conducted with older generation DDGS will not be cited in this review. University of Minnesota researchers (Whitney et al., 2001) conducted a study to investigate the effects of including 0, 10, 20, and 30% DDGS on growth performance (28 to 115 kg; 5-phase growing-finishing sequence). Average daily gain and ADG/ADFI tended to be reduced for pigs consuming diets with greater than 10% DDGS. There was a linear decrease (P < .03) in dressing percentage with increasing dietary DDGS concentration. Hastad and coworkers (2005) conducted several experiments with growing (19 to 27 kg) pigs to determine the effects of DDGS on feed intake and diet palatability. The inclusion of 30% DDGS reduced (P < .05) ADFI compared to the corn-soybean control. Results from the palatability study showed that pigs preferred corn-soybean meal diets to diets containing DDGS.
Because DDGS contains 10 to 12% lipid, caution should be taken when formulating finishing diets. Excessive intake of lipid (corn oil) can contribute to soft fat (high iodine no.).Therefore, it has been recommended that DDGS inclusion be limited to < 20% (Shurson et al., 2004).
Cook et al. (2004) conducted a farrow-to-finish study that used diets containing 0 to 30% DDGS. No overall effects of DDGS on ADG, ADFI and feed efficiency were observed. Mortality rate decreased linearly (P < .05) from 6.0% (0% DDGS) to 1.6% (30% DDGS). However, a linear decrease (77.3 to 75.6% P < .05) in carcass yield was reported. Clearly, these observations heighten the importance that factors of economic importance must be considered in addition to standard growth and carcass measurements when assessing the value of DDGS. Not all studies have shown reduced performance using as much as 30% dietary DDGS. DeDecker et al. (2005) showed that ADG, feed efficiency, and carcass composition were not different among DDGS treatments (0, 10, 20, 30% DDGS).
Because DDGS contains 10 to 12% lipid, caution should be taken when formulating finishing diets. Excessive intake of lipid (corn oil) can contribute to "soft" fat (high iodine no.).Therefore, it has been recommended that DDGS inclusion be limited to < 20% (Shurson et al., 2004).
GESTATION AND LACTATION
Typically, maximum DDGS inclusion percentages for gestation diets are greater than for other classes of swine (up to 50%). Studies investigating the incorporation for DDGS in lactation diets have not usually exceeded 20%. Also, maximum inclusion percentages for DDGS in gestation and lactation diets have often been limited by the experimental design (i.e., recommendations were made at the highest DDGS inclusion percentage used in the experiment). Relatively few studies investigating the role of DDGS in gestation/lactation diets have been published during the past 10 years.
Monegue and Cromwell (1995) examined the effects of feeding 0, 40 or 80% DDGS during gestation. Subsequently, all sows were fed corn-soybean meal diets (with ad libitum access ) during a 28-d lactation. No differences (P > .20) among treatments were observed for farrowing rate or litter performance; however, litter size (born and weaned) was numerically reduced for sows fed diets containing 80% DDGS during gestation.
Wilson and coworkers (2003) studied the interaction between DDGS feeding during gestation and lactation (two parities). Dietary treatments were setup as; 0 or 50% DDGS during gestation, and(or) 0 or 20% DDGS during lactation. Pooled among treatment combinations, no differences (P > .10) were observed for gestation weight gain, litter, or lactation performance between sows fed 0 and 50% DDGS during gestation. Interestingly, sows fed 0% DDGS during gestation and lactation, weaned fewer pigs during parity 2. Other dietary effects appeared transitory and were not observed during the second gestation/lactation cycle. It appears that DDGS consumption during gestation might benefit DDGS utilization during lactation. Sows that received gestation diets that contained 0% DDGS during gestation and 20% DDGS during lactation had reduced (P < .01) ADFI for the first 7 d postpartum. Again, the effects were only observed during the first gestation/lactation cycle.
Hill et al. (2005) conducted an experiment that explored the effects of beet pulp and DDGS inclusion in sow lactation diets. Dietary treatments were comprised of: 1) 5% beet pulp, or 2) 15% DDGS. Sows had ad libitum access to diets (1.2% lysine, .90% Ca, and .84% P) that were provided during an 18-d lactation period. Dietary treatment did not effect lactation performance. Fecal grab samples taken on d 7, 14, and 18 of lactation indicated that P excretion was reduced (d 14; P < .02) for DDGS vs beet pulp diets.
DDGS AND PIG HEALTH
Very little research has been conducted to define the relationship between dietary DDGS and swine health. Nonstarch-polysaccharides and oligosaccharides have been demonstrated to have beneficial effects on swine health (see Grieshop et al., 2001). Because DDGS contains as much as 45% NDF (DM basis), it has been investigated as a potential mediator of pig health. Spiehs et al. (2005) conducted a growing-finishing study to determine if a Salmonella challenge could be ameliorated by feeding diets containing 50% DDGS.Treatments were: 1) 5- phase control diet sequence, 2) control + polyclonal antibody, and 3) control + 50% DDGS. Unfortunately, inoculation with salmonella typhimuerium did not elicit an immunological response (create an infection) and no treatment effects were detected.
Two studies were conducted by Whitney et al. (2003) to examine the interaction between DDGS and lawsonia intracellaris (causative bacteria of proliferative ileitis) in nursery pigs.These two studies differed in terms of the severity of the lawsonia intracellaris dosage. Challenged pigs received 1.5 x 109 lawsonia intracellaris in Exp. 1 and 50% of the dosage in Exp. 2. The ileitis challenge successfully increased the number of proliferative lesions in both experiments; however, DDGS (10% of the diet, as-fed basis) was only effective at reducing lesions (similar to antimicrobial treatment) in Exp. 2. Therefore, it appears that scenarios where a low-to moderate-ileitis challenge is presented, DDGS (> 10%) may facilitate a reduction in proliferative ileitis.
SUMARY
SUMMARY The nutrient composition and availability in DDGS is variable. Irrespective of this inherent variability, DDGS is a good dietary source of energy, amino acids, and phosphorus for growing-finishing and reproducing swine. Readers are encouraged to evaluate the effects of DDGS on production criteria presented in this review in conjuction with economic factors associated with diet formulation and production systems.
REFERENCES
Cook, D., N. Paton, and M. Gibson. 2005. Effect of dietary level of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) on growth performance, mortality, and carcass characteristics of growfinish barrows and gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 1):335.
DeDecker, J.M., M. Ellis, B.F.Wolter, J. Spencer, D.M.Webel, C R. Bertelsen, and B.A. Peterson. 2005. Effects of dietary level of distillers dried grains with solubles and fat on the growth performance of growing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 2):79.
Fastinger, N.D. and D.C. Mahan. 2005. Apparent and true ileal amino acid and energy digestibility and weanling pig performance of five sources of distillers dried grains with solubles. J. Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 2):54.
Grieshop, C.M., D.E. Reese, and G.C. Fahey, Jr. 2001. Nonstarch polysaccharides and oligosaccharides in swine Nutrition. Pgs 107-130. In: Swine Nutrition. Eds: A.J. and L.L. Southern. CRC Press.
Hastad, C.W. J.L. Nelssen, R.D. Goodband, M.D.Tokach, S.S. Dritz, J.M. DeRouchey, and N.Z.Frantz. 2005. Effects of dried distillers grains with solubles on feed preference in growing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 2):73.
Hill, G.M., J.E. Link, M.J. Rincker, K.D. Roberson, D.L. Kirkpatrick, and M. L. Gibson. 2005. Corn dried distillers grains with solubles in sow lactation diets. J. Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 2):82
Jongbloed,A.W., and P.A. Kemme. 1990.Apparent digestible phosphorus in the feeding of pigs in relation to availability, requirement and environment. 1. Digestible phosphorus in feedstuffs from plant and animal origin. Neth. J.Agric. Sci. 38: 567-575.
Knott, J.S. and G.C. Shurson. 2004. Nutritional value of yeast co-products from ethanol production for young pigs. Proc., 65th Minnesota Nutrition Conference, St. Paul,MN. Sep. 21-22. pp.142-159.
Monegue, H. J. and G. L. Cromwell. 1995. High dietary levels of corn co-products for gestating sows. J.Anim. Sci. 73(Suppl. 1):86.
NRC. 1988. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. 9th ed. National Academy Press,Washington, DC.
NRC. 1998. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. 10th ed. National Academy Press,Washington, DC.
Shurson, G., M. Spiehs, and M.Whitney. 2004.The use of maize distillers dried grains with solubles in pig diets. Pig News and Information 25 (2):75N-83N.
Spiehs, M.J., M.H.Whitney, and G.C. Shurson. 2002. Nutrient database for distillers dried grains with solubles produced from new ethanol plants in Minnesota and South Dakota. J. Anim. Sci. 80:2639-2645.
Spiehs, M.J., G. Shurson, L. Johnston, and K. Seifert. 2005 Evaluation of corn distillers dried grains with solubles and a polyclonal antibody on growth performanceand the ability of pigs to resist an infection from Salmonella Typhimurium. J.Anim. Sci. 83(Suppl. 2):62.
Stein, H.H, C. Pedersen, and M.G. Boersma. 2005. Energy and nutrient digestibility in dried distillers grain with solubles by growing pigs., J. Anim. Sci.83(Suppl. 2):79.
University of Minnesota. 2005. DDGS web site http://www.ddgs.umn.edu).
Whitney, M.H., G.C. Shurson, L.J. Johnston, D.Wulf, and B. Shanks. 2001. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of pigs fed increasing levels of distillers dried grains with solubles . J. Anim. Sci. 79(Suppl.):108.
Whitney, M.H. and G.C. Shurson. 2004. Growth performance of nursery pigs fed diets containing increasing levels of corn distillers dried grains with solubles originating from a modern Midwestern ethanol plant. J. Anim Sci. 82:122-128.
Whitney, M.H, G.C. Shurson, R.M. Guedes, C.J. Gebhart, and N.L.Winkleman. 2003. Effect of corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) and/or antimicrobial regimen on the ability of growing pigs to resist a Lawsonia intracellularis challenge. J. Anim. Sci. 81(Suppl. 2):44.
Wilson, J.A., M.H.Whitney, G.C. Shurson, and S.K. Baidoo. 2003. Effects of adding distillers dried grains with solubles DDGS) to gestation and lactation diets on reproductive performance and nutrient balance. J. Anim. Sci. 81(Suppl. 1).
|
|
For more information on corn distillers dried grains with solubles for swine, contact: Dr. Phillip Miller • University of Nebraska-Lincoln • Department of Animal Science Room 206 • Lincoln, NE 68583-0908 • 402-472-6421
Download PDF version of this manual, or
Date published: January, 2005
|
