Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:39:10.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of protein quality of poultry feedingstuffs. 2. Fish meal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

S. S. Zombade ,
G. N. Lodhi  and
J. S. Ichhponani
S. S. Zombade
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004, India
G. N. Lodhi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004, India
J. S. Ichhponani
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The present study was made to evaluate the protein quality of 11 samples of fish meal (FM) covering a wide range of nutrient content to find a suitable laboratory method for predicting nutritive quality. The nutrient content of the samples ranged from 34 to 62% in crude protein, 28 to 48% in true protein and 0·99 to 2·87% in available lysine. The true protein content of FM was further partitioned into myogen, myosin and stroma proteins. The stroma protein accounted for 61% of total crude protein suggesting that a large portion of FM comprised scales, viscera, cartilage, bones and other inedible parts of fish (head, tail, etc.). Neither true protein nor its different fractions was found suitable to detect differences in protein quality of FM although there was an inverse relationship between stroma protein and nitrogen solubility.

Available lysine content and relative nutritive value (RNV) were found accurate and reliable laboratory tests for assessing the protein quality of FM. The linear equations to predict gross protein value (GPV) from available lysine content and RNV are

GPV = 11·2×% available lysine+34·5;

GPV = 0·55×RNV+51.

The correlation coefficients between biologically assayed and predicted GPV from available lysine and RNV were 0·71 and 0·62, respectively. The findings suggest that the screening of FM samples for their nutrient content is essential before compounding diets for different categories of chickens.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 94 , Issue 1 , February 1980 , pp. 111 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Anwar, A. (1967). Gross protein value and related laboratory techniques for protein evaluation. World's Poultry Science Journal 24, 226–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apandi, M., Atmadilaga, D. & Bird, H. B. (1974). Indonesian fish meals as poultry feed ingredients. Effects of species and spoilage. World's Poultry Science Journal 30, 176–182.Google Scholar
Association of Official Agrioultural Chemists (1965). Official Methods of Analysis, 10th ed.Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Bailey, K. (1948). Tropomyosin: a new asymmetric protein component of the muscle fibril. Biochemical Journal 43, 271–279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Booth, V. H. (1971). Problems in determination of FDNB – available lysine. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 22, 658–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyne, A. W., Carpenter, K. J. & Woodham, A. A. (1961). Progress report on an assessment of laboratory procedures suggested as indicator of protein quality in feedingstuffs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12, 832–848.Google Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. (1960). The estimation of the available lysine in animal-protein foods. Biochemical Journal 77, 604–610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaturvedi, D. K. (1969). Studies on the biological availability of fish meal protein for chicks. Ph.D thesis, Agra University, Agra, India.Google Scholar
Cuppett, S. L. & Soares, J. H. Jr (1972). The metabolizable energy values and digestibility of menhaden fish meal, fish solubles and fish oils. Poultry Science 51, 2078–2083.Google Scholar
Dassow, J., Patashnik, M. & Koury, B. (1970) Characteristics of Pacific hake (Merluccius products) that affect its suitability for food. United State Fish and Wildlife Service, Circular no. 332.Google Scholar
Duokworth, J., Woodham, A. A. & McDonald, I. (1961). The assessment of nutritive value in protein concentrates by the gross protein value method. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12, 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernell, W. R. & Rosen, G. D. (1956). Microbiological evaluation of protein quality with Tetrahymena pyriformis W. 1. Characteristics of growth of the organism and determination of relative nutritive value of intact protein. British Journal of Nutrition 10, 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, J. E. (1964). A microbiological method for assessing the nutritional value of proteins. 3. Further studies on the measurement of available amino acids. British Journal of Nutrition 18, 449–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henrotte, J. G. (1960). Contribution à l'étude des myogènes de carpe et de plie. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 39, 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jebsen, J. W. (1962). Proteins in fish muscle. In Fish in Nutrition (ed. Heen, E. and Krenze, R.), pp. 68–72. London: Fishery News (Books).Google Scholar
Kelley, M. & Potter, L. M. (1974). Determination of the efficiency of utilization of lysine and methionine in fish meal for turkeys. Poultry Science 53, 610–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lassen, S., Bacon, E. K. & Dunn, H. J. (1949). The relationship of nutritive value of condensed fish solubles to quality of raw materials. Poultry Science 28, 134–140.Google Scholar
Lyman, C. M., Chang, W. Y. & Couch, T. R. (1953). Evaluation of protein quality in cottonseed meals by chick growth and by a chemical index-method. Journal of Nutrition 49, 679–690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Potter, L. M., Pudelkiewiez, W. J., Webster, L. & Matterson, L. D. (1962). Metabolizable energy and digestibility evaluation of fish meal for chick. Poultry Science 41, 1745–1752.Google Scholar
Shorrock, C. (1976). An improved procedure for the assay of available lysine and methionine in feedingstuffs using Tetrahymena pyriformis W. British Journal of Nutrition 35, 333–341.Google Scholar
Stott, J. A., Smith, H. & Rosen, G. D. (1963). Microbiological evaluation of protein quality with Tetrahymena pyriformis W. A simplified assay procedure. British Journal of Nutrition 17, 227–233.Google Scholar
Zombade, S. S. (1973). Studies on the assessment of protein quality of fish meal and groundnut cake for chicks. M.V.Sc. & A.H. thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, India.Google Scholar
Zombade, S. S. (1977). Studies on the relationship between biological and laboratory methods of protein quality evaluation. Ph.D. thesis, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India.Google Scholar
Zombade, S. S., Lodhi, G. N. & Ichhponani, J. S. (1980). Evaluation of protein quality of poultry feedingstuffs. 1. Comparison of chick bioassays. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 105–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar