Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-28T08:01:38.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the effects of raw and heated soya-bean meal in diets for germ-free and conventional chicks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Marie E. Coates ,
D. Hewitt  and
P. Golob
Marie E. Coates
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
D. Hewitt
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
P. Golob
Affiliation:
Brunel University, London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Chicks were reared to 3 weeks in a germ-free or conventional environment on diets containing 50% raw or heated soya-bean meal. Body-weights and pancreas weights were determined and the proteolytic and amylolytic enzymes in the pancreas were measured. In one experiment the contents of the intestinal tract were analysed for their content of nitrogenous compounds.

2. The growth of chicks given raw soya was depressed below that of controls given heated soya, and the growth depression was significantly greater in the conventional compared with the germ-free environment.

3. The pancreases of chicks given raw soya were significantly larger than those given heated soya. The degree of enlargement was similar in both environments. The concentration of α-amylase was lower in the enlarged pancreases, but the total amount per pancreas was similar to that in the normal pancreases. Conversely, the concentration of proteolytic enzymes was the same or greater in the enlarged pancreases, which had significantly greater total content of proteases than did the normal pancreases.

4. There was evidence of impaired protein digestion in the birds given the raw soya diets. Their gut contents contained larger amounts of insoluble matter, with higher nitrogen content, and the soluble fraction contained more nitrogen present as ‘protein’, with correspondingly less ‘peptide’ and ‘amino acid’, than did similar samples from birds given heated soya. No differences were observed in this respect between germ-free and conventional birds.

5. It was concluded that the gut microflora exacerbated the growth-depressing effect on chicks of raw soya meal. Possible explanations are advanced.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 1970 , pp. 213 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1970

References

Applegarth, A., Furuta, F. & Lepkovsky, S. (1964). Poult. Sci. 43, 733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, R. H., Kwong, E. & Fiala, G. (1965). J. Nutr. 85, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birk, Y. (1961). Biochim. biophys. Acta 54, 378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braham, J. E., Bird, H. R. & Baumann, C. A. (1959). J. Nutr. 67, 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernick, S. S., Lepkovsky, S. & Chaikoff, I. L. (1948). Am. J. Physiol. 155, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coates, M. E., Fuller, R., Harrison, G. F., Lev, M. & Suffolk, S. F. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dollar, A. M. (1959). Biochemical studies of nutrition in the ruminant. PhD Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Ford, J. E. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, F. & Yudkin, J. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jayne-Williams, D. J. & Coates, M. E (1969). In International Encyclopaedia of Food and Nutrition. Vol. 17, Part I, p. 241. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Kakade, M. L., Barton, T. L., Schaible, P. J. & Evans, R. J. (1967). Poult. Sci. 46, 1578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunitz, M. (1947). J. gen. Physiol. 30, 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liener, I. E. (1962). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 11, 281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linerode, P. A., Waibel, P. E. & Pomeroy, B. S. (1961). J. Nutr. 75, 427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, W. S. & Coates, M. E. (1966). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 25, iv.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, S. & Stein, W. H. (1954). J. biol. Chem. 211, 907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, N. (1944). J. biol. Chem. 153, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwert, G. W. & Takenaka, Y. (1955). Biochim. biophys. Acta 16, 570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somogyi, M. (1952). J. biol. Chem. 195, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spatz, M., McDaniel, E. G. & Laqueur, G. L. (1966). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 121, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar