Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:02:36.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digestibility of fractionated green biomass as protein source for monogastric animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2019

L. Stødkilde Open the ORCID record for L. Stødkilde [Opens in a new window] ,
V. K. Damborg ,
H. Jørgensen ,
H. N. Lærke  and
S. K. Jensen
L. Stødkilde*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
V. K. Damborg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
H. Jørgensen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
H. N. Lærke
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
S. K. Jensen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé 20, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Globally, there is an increased demand for sustainable protein sources for animal feed. Grass and forage legumes have the yield potential to become such alternatives, but the protein needs to be separated from the fibres. Red clover, white clover, lucerne and perennial ryegrass were fractionated into a green juice and a fibrous pulp in a screw-press and protein was subsequently precipitated. The nitrogen (N) and amino acid composition of the produced fractions was analysed and the digestibility of dry matter (DM) and N was evaluated using a rat digestibility trial. The aim was to determine the effect of fractionation on composition and digestibility in order to evaluate the four plants as potential protein sources for monogastrics. Protein concentrates with CP concentrations of 240 to 388 g/kg DM and fibrous pulps with CP concentrations of 111 to 216 g/kg DM were produced. The sum of all analysed amino acids was highest in the protein concentrates corresponding to a low concentration of non-protein nitrogen ranging from 4.9% to 10.4%. Only small variations were seen in the amino acid compositions of the different plants and fractions. The concentration of the essential lysine and methionine in the protein concentrate ranged from 6.27 to 6.67 g/16 g N and 1.54 to 2.09 g/16 g N for lysine and methionine, respectively. For all plants species, total tract digestibility of DM and standardised N digestibility was significantly higher in the protein concentrates (60.8% to 76.5% and 75.4% to 85.0% for DM and N, respectively) compared to pulp (21.2% to 43.4% and 52.1% to 72.5% for DM and N, respectively). Digestibility of lucerne protein concentrate (76.5% and 85.0% for DM and N, respectively) was higher than of the unprocessed plant (39.6% and 74.9% for DM and N, respectively), whereas for red and white clover no difference was found. The amino acids methionine and cysteine were limiting for pigs and broilers in all fractions regardless of plant origin, and low scores were also found for lysine. The study demonstrated great potential of using green plants as a protein source for monogastrics because of high protein content, balanced amino acid composition and high digestibility of DM and N. The effects of processing and protein precipitation were pronounced in lucerne where significantly improved digestibility was observed in the protein concentrate. The results from the study provide valuable and enhanced knowledge to the production of alternative and sustainable protein sources for monogastric feed.

Keywords

monogastric nutritionlegumes and grassfractionationrat modeldigestibility
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 9 , September 2019 , pp. 1817 - 1825
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019 

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

Ameenuddin, S, Bird, HR, Pringle, DJ and Sunde, ML 1983a. Studies on the utilization of leaf protein concentrates as a protein source in poultry nutrition1. Poultry Science 62, 505–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameenuddin, S, Bird, HR, Sunde, ML and Koegel, RG 1983b. Effect of added methionine and lysine on the performance of chicks fed different alfalfa protein concentrates. Poultry Science 62, 1021–1024.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aviagen 2007. Ross 308: broiler nutrition specification. Retrieved 11 October 2018 from http://en.aviagen.com/assets/Tech_Center/Ross_Broiler/Ross308BroilerNutritionSpecs2014-EN.pdf.Google Scholar
Boland, MJ, Rae, AN, Vereijken, JM, Meuwissen, MPM, Fischer, ARH, van Boekel, MAJS, Rutherfurd, SM, Gruppen, H, Moughan, PJ and Hendriks, WH 2013. The future supply of animal-derived protein for human consumption. Trends in Food Science & Technology 29, 62–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, M and Sturrock, JW 1965. The yields of leaf protein extracted by large-scale processing of various crops. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 16, 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheeke, PR, Kinzell, JH, De Fremery, D and Kohler, GO 1977. Freeze-dried and commercially-prepared alfalfa protein concentrate evaluation with rats and swine. Journal of Animal Science 44, 772–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiesa, S and Gnansounou, E 2011. Protein extraction from biomass in a bioethanol refinery - possible dietary applications: use as animal feed and potential extension to human consumption. Bioresource Technology. 102, 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colas, D, Doumeng, C, Pontalier, PY and Rigal, L 2013. Twin-screw extrusion technology, an original solution for the extraction of proteins from alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Food and Bioproducts Processing 91, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damborg, VK, Stødkilde, L, Jensen, SK and Adamsen, APS 2015. Yield and amino acid composition of pulp and protein extracted and recovered from legumes and grass. In Proceedings of the 66th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Warsaw, Poland, pp. 262–262.Google Scholar
Damborg, VK, Stødkilde, L, Jensen, SK and Weisbjerg, MR 2018. Protein value and degradation characteristics of pulp fibre fractions from screw pressed grass, clover, and lucerne. Animal Feed Science and Technology 244, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davys, MNG and Pirie, NW 1965. A belt press for separating juices from fibrous pulps. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 10, 142–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duckworth, J and Woodham, AA 1961. Leaf protein concentrates. I. Effect of source of raw material and method of drying on protein value for chicks and rats. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmunds, B, Südekum, KH, Bennett, R, Schröder, A, Spiekers, H and Schwarz, FJ 2013. The amino acid composition of rumen-undegradable protein: a comparison between forages. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 4568–4577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eggum, BO 1969. Proteinkvaliteten i kunsttørrede græsmarksprodukter (in Danish). Ugeskrift for agronomer 114, 420.Google Scholar
Eppendorfer, WH 1977. Amino acid composition and nutritional value of italian ryegrass, red clover and lucerne as influenced by application and content of nitrogen. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 607–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission 1998. Commission Directive 98/64/EC of 3 September 1998, establishing Community methods of analysis for the determination of amino-acids, crude oils and fats, and olaquindox in feedingstuffs, and amending Directive 71/393/EEC. The Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
FAO Expert Consultation 2013. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition. Report of an FAO Expert Consultation. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper no 92 Rome, Italy, pp. 1–67. Retrieved 11 October 2018 from http://www.fao.org/ag/humannutrition/35978-02317b979a686a57aa4593304ffc17f06.pdf.Google Scholar
Hansen, B 1989. Determination of nitrogen as elementary N, an alternative to kjeldahl. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 39, 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernández, T, Martínez, C, Hernández, A and Urbano, G 1997. Protein quality of alfalfa protein concentrates obtained by freezing. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 45, 797–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houseman, RA 1976. The utilization of the products of green-crop fractionation by pigs and ruminants. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 35, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hove, EL, Lohrey, E, Urs, MK and Allison, RM 1974. The effect of lucerne-protein concentrate in the diet on growth, reproduction and body composition of rats. British Journal of Nutrition 31, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation 1991. Protein quality evaluation. Report of joint FAO/WHO expert consultation. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 51, Rome, Italy, pp. 1–66. Retrieved 11 October 2018 from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/38133/1/9251030979_eng.pdf .Google Scholar
Jørgensen, H, Brandt, K and Lauridsen, C 2008. Year rather than farming system influences protein utilization and energy value of vegetables when measured in a rat model. Nutrition Research 28, 866–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, MT, Kerr, BJ, Allard, JP, Rao, SK and Halley, JT 2000. Limiting amino acid responses in commercial broilers. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 9, 223–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liao, SF, Wang, T and Regmi, N 2015. Lysine nutrition in swine and the related monogastric animals: muscle protein biosynthesis and beyond. SpringerPlus 4, 147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mehta, BM and Deeth, HC 2016. Blocked lysine in dairy products: formation, occurrence, analysis, and nutritional implications. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 15, 206–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myer, RO, Cheeke, PR and Kennick, WH 1975. Utilization of alfalfa protein concentrate by swine. Journal of Animal Science 40, 885–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council 2012. Nutrient requirements of swine, 11th revised edition. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Pirie, NW 1966. Leaf protein as a human food. Science 152, 1701–1705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pirie, NW 1987. Leaf protein and its by-products in human and animal nutrition, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Santamaría-Fernández, M, Molinuevo-Salces, B, Kiel, P, Steenfeldt, S, Uellendahl, H and Lübeck, M 2017. Lactic acid fermentation for refining proteins from green crops and obtaining a high quality feed product for monogastric animals. Journal of Cleaner Production 162, 875–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, RH and Moore, KJ 2007. Growth and development of forage plants. Forages, the Science of Grassland Agriculture 2, 53–66.Google Scholar
Stødkilde, L, Damborg, VK, Jørgensen, H, Lærke, HN and Jensen, SK 2018. White clover fractions as protein source for monogastrics: dry matter digestibility and protein digestibility-corrected amino acid scores. Journal of the Science of Food And Agriculture 98, 2557–2563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, JP, Hong, SM, Yan, L, Cho, JH, Lee, HS and Kim, IH 2011. The evaluation of soybean meals from 3 major soybean-producing countries on productive performance and feeding value of pig diets. Journal of Animal Science 89, 2768–2773.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WWF International 2014. The growth of soy: impacts and solutions. Retrieved 11 October 2018 from http://awsassets.wwfdk.panda.org/downloads/wwf_soy_report_final_jan_19.pdf.Google Scholar