Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:24:01.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of biofuel co-products in pig diets on the excretory patterns of N and C and on the subsequent ammonia and methane emissions from pig effluent

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2010

G. Jarret ,
J. Martinez  and
J.-Y. Dourmad
G. Jarret
Affiliation:
CEMAGREF, Environmental management and biological treatment of waste research unit, F-35044 Rennes, France Université Européenne de Bretagne, F-35000 Rennes, France
J. Martinez
Affiliation:
CEMAGREF, Environmental management and biological treatment of waste research unit, F-35044 Rennes, France Université Européenne de Bretagne, F-35000 Rennes, France
J.-Y. Dourmad*
Affiliation:
INRA Agrocampus Ouest, UMR1079 Systèmes d’Élevage, Nutrition Animale et Humaine, F-35590 Saint Gilles, France
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the effects of incorporation into pig diets of 20% of different co-products from the biofuel industries, which are rich in fibre, on animal growth performance, on nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) excretions, and on the subsequent ammonia volatilisation and methane production during the storage of slurry. Five experimental diets mainly based on wheat and soyabean meal were formulated: two control diets, a control high-protein (CHP) diet with 17.5% of crude protein (CP) and a control low-protein (CLP) diet with 14.0% of CP and three experimental diets with 20% of (i) dried distiller’s grain with solubles (DDGS), (ii) sugar beet pulp (SBP) or (iii) fatty rapeseed meal (FRM). The animals used (20 castrated males) were housed individually in metabolism cages and fed one of the five diets (i.e. four pigs per diet). Urine and faeces were collected separately from each pig in order to measure nutrient digestibility and the excretory patterns of N and C. For each diet, ammonia volatilisation was measured from samples of slurry subsequently produced, over a 16-day storage period in a laboratory pilot scale system. The ultimate methane potential (B0, expressed in litres CH4/kg organic matter (OM)) was measured from the same slurry, for each diet, in anaerobic storage conditions over 100 days. The addition of sources of fibres to the diet decreased (P < 0.05) the animal growth performance by 13% and increased (P < 0.05) the amount of faeces excreted by 100%, whereas the amount of urine was not affected. For the high-fibre diets, there was a shift of N partitioning from urine to faeces, resulting in a much higher faecal N excretion (10 v. 5 g N/pig per day). Concurrently, the fibre enrichment in diets significantly increased (P < 0.05) the C content of the faeces by 68%. Ammonia emission from slurry was significantly reduced (P < 0.05) by 19% to 33% for the high-fibre diets, compared to the CHP diet. Ammonia emission was also reduced (P < 0.05) by 33% for the CLP compared to the CHP diet. B0 values ranged from 428 to 484 l CH4/kg OM. When these are expressed per pig and per day, the B0 from slurry was, on average, 70 l for the two control diets, and 121, 91 and 130 l for the slurry originating from the DDGS, SBP and FRM diets, respectively.

Keywords

ammoniaproteinfibremethanepigco-products
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , 23 February 2011 , pp. 622 - 631
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

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

Aarnink, AJA, Verstegen, MWA 2007. Nutrition, key factor to reduce environmental load from pig production. Livestock Science 109, 194–203.Google Scholar
Association of official Analytical Chemists 1990. Official methods of analysis, 15th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Bach Knudsen, KE, Hansen, I 1991. Gastrointestinal implications in pigs of wheat and oat fractions. British Journal of Nutrition 65, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bureau Interprofessionnel d’Études Analytiques 1976. Recueil des méthodes d’analyse des communautés européennes, BIPEA Gennevilliers, France 140p.Google Scholar
Calvert, CC 1988. Fiber utilization in swine. In Swine nutrition (ed. ER Miller, DW Ulrey and AJ Lewis), pp. 285–296. Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Canh, TT, Verstegen, MWA, Aarnink, AJA, Schrama, JW 1997. Influence of dietary factors on nitrogen partitioning and composition of urine and feces of fattening pigs. Journal of Animal Science 75, 700–706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canh, TT, Sutton, AL, Aarnink, AJA, Verstegen, MWA, Schrama, JW, Bakker, GCM 1998. Dietary carbohydrates alter the fecal composition and pH and the ammonia emission from slurry of growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 76, 1887–1895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cherbut, C, Albina, E, Champ, M, Doublier, JL, Lecannu, G 1990. Action of guar gums on the viscosity of digestive contents and on the gastrointestinal motor function in pigs. Digestion 46, 205–213.Google Scholar
Directive 2003/30/CE du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 8 mai 2003 visant à promouvoir l’utilisation de biocarburants ou autres carburants renouvelables dans les transports (JO L 123 du 17.5.2003, p. 42).Google Scholar
European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals 1994. Ammonia emission to air in Western Europe. Technical Report no. 62. ECETOC, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
EEC 1972. Analytical determination of starch. Official Journal of European Communities L123/7, 7.Google Scholar
Egron, G, Tabbi, L, Guilbeaud, M, Chevalier, M, Cadore, JL 1996. Influence du taux et de la nature des fibres alimentaires dans l’alimentation du chien I. Modification fécales et biochimiques. Revue de Médicine Vétérinaire 147, 215–222.Google Scholar
FAO 1998. Carbohydrates in human nutrition, a Joint FAO/WHO expert consultation. FAO Food and Nutrition, Paper 66, Rome.Google Scholar
Grieshop, CM, Reese, DE, Fahey, GC 2001. Non starch polysaccharides and oligosaccharides in swine nutrition. In Swine nutrition (ed. AJ Lewis and LL Southern), pp. 107–130. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
Hansen, KH, Angelidaki, I, Ahring, BK 1998. Anaerobic digestion of swine manure: inhibition by ammonia. Water Research 32, 5–12.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, AG, Chen, YR, Varel, VH 1981. Theoretical aspects of anaerobic fermentation: state of the art. In Livestock waste: a renewable resource. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on livestock wastes, pp. 86–91. ASAE, St Joseph, MI, USA.Google Scholar
Husted, S 1994. Seasonal variation in methane emission from stored slurry and solid manures. Journal of Environmental Quality 23, 585–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
INRA-AFZ 2004. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed materials for livestock production (ed. D Sauvant, JM Perez, G Tran.), INRA, Paris, France.Google Scholar
IPCC 1997. The international panel on climate change, Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: reference manual. Revised 1996. IPCC Guidelines.Google Scholar
Johnston, LJ, Noll, S, Renteria, A, Shurson, J 2003. Feeding by-products high concentration of fibre to non-ruminants. In Proceeding of 3rd National alternative Feeds Symposium Western Regional Coordinating Committee, November, 2003. Third National Symposium on alternative Feeds for Livestock and Poultry, Kansas City, MO, USA, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Kass, ML, Van Soest, PJ, Pond, WG, Lewis, B, McDowell, RE 1980. Utilization of dietary fiber from alfalfa by growing swine. I. Apparent digestibility of diets components in specific segments of the gastrointestinal tract. Journal of Animal Science 50, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, YY, Sasaki, H, Yamashita, K, Seki, K, Kamigochi, I 2002. High-rate methane fermentation of lipid-rich food wastes by a high-solids codigestion process. Water Science and Technology 45, 143–150.Google Scholar
Low, AG 1985. Role of dietary fiber in pig diets. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. W Haresign and DJA Cole), pp. 87–112. Butterworths, London, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massé, DI, Croteau, F, Massé, L, Bergeron, R, Bolduc, J, Ramonet, Y, Meunier-Salaun, MC, Robert, S 2003. Effect of dietary fiber incorporation on the characteristics of pregnant sows slurry. Canadian Biosystems Engeneering 45, 6.7–6.12.Google Scholar
Mroz, Z, Moeser, AJ, Vreman, M, van Diepen, JTM, van Kempen, T, Canh, TT, Jongbloed, AW 2000. Effects of dietary carbohydrates and buffering capacity on nutrient digestibility and manure characteristics in finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 78, 3096–3106.Google Scholar
Mroz, Z, Jongbloed, AW, Beers, S, Kemme, PA, de Jong, L, van Berkum, AK, van der Lee, RA 1993. Preliminary studies on excretory patterns of nitrogen and anaerobic deterioration of faecal protein from pigs fed various carbohydrates. In Nitrogen flow in pig production and environmental consequences (ed. MWA Verstegen, LA den Hartog, GJM van Kempen and JHM Metz), pp. 247–252. EAAP Publication 69, Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Noblet, J, Perez, JM 1993. Prediction digestibility of nutrients and energy values of diets from chemical analysis. Journal of Animal Science 71, 3096–3106.Google Scholar
Noblet, J, Le Goff, G 2001. Effect of dietary fibre on the energy value of feeds for pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 90, 35–52.Google Scholar
Peu, P, Béline, F, Martinez, J 2004. Volatile fatty acids analysis from pig slurry using high-performance liquid chromatography. International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 84, 1017–1022.Google Scholar
Portejoie, S, Dourmad, JY, Martinez, J, Lebreton, Y 2004. Effect of lowering dietary crude protein on nitrogen excretion, slurry composition and ammonia emission from fattening pigs. Livestock Production Science 91, 45–55.Google Scholar
Sommer, SG, Husted, S 1995. A simple-model of pH in slurry. Journal of Agricultural Science 124, 447–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steed, J, Hashimoto, AG 1994. Methane emissions from typical slurry management systems. Bioressource Technology 50, 123–130.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Wine, RH 1967. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. IV. Determination of plant cell-wall constituents. Journal Association of official Analytical Chemists 50, 50–59.Google Scholar
Vedrenne, F, Béline, F, Dabert, P, Bernet, N 2007. The effect of incubation conditions on the laboratory measurement of methane producing capacity of livestock wastes. Bioressource Technology 99, 146–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velthof, GL, Nelemans, JA, Oenema, O, Kuikman, PJ 2005. Gaseous nitrogen and carbon losses from pig slurry derived from different diets. Journal of Environement Quality 34, 698–706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vu, TKV, Prapaspongsa, T, Poulsen, HD, Jørgensen, H 2009. Prediction of manure nitrogen and carbon output from grower-finisher pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 151, 97–110.Google Scholar
Zeeman, G 1991. Mesophilic and psychrophilic digestion of liquid slurry. PhD thesis, Agricultural University Wageningen, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Zervas, S, Zijlstra, RT 2002. Effects of dietary protein and fermentable fibre on nitrogen excretion patterns and plasma urea in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 80, 3247–3256.Google Scholar