Effect of mono component protease on digestibility of full fat soy for broilers

577 views

Published on

The research shows the apparent and the true amino acid digestibility of full fat soy with and without protease (RONOZYME ProAct) supplementation.

Join the Feed Enzyme discussion on Linked in: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=4738175&trk=anet_ug_hm&goback=%25

Follow us on Twitter: @DSMFeedTweet
Or speak to an expert: @Jobsorbara

Published in: Health & Medicine, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
577
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Para esta presentación vamos a hablar un poco de cómo varían en cantidad and en calidad los substractos presentes el las feeds de pollo and que están sujetos al ataque de las diferentes enzymes exogenas.
    Y como la edad, capacidad fisiológica de digestión and el consumo del alimento afectan las respuestas enzimáticas.
  • Para esta presentación vamos a hablar un poco de cómo varían en cantidad and en calidad los substractos presentes el las feeds de pollo and que están sujetos al ataque de las diferentes enzymes exogenas.
    Y como la edad, capacidad fisiológica de digestión and el consumo del alimento afectan las respuestas enzimáticas.
  • Para esta presentación vamos a hablar un poco de cómo varían en cantidad and en calidad los substractos presentes el las feeds de pollo and que están sujetos al ataque de las diferentes enzymes exogenas.
    Y como la edad, capacidad fisiológica de digestión and el consumo del alimento afectan las respuestas enzimáticas.
  • Effect of mono component protease on digestibility of full fat soy for broilers

    1. 1. EFFECT OF A MONO COMPONENT PROTEASE ON TRUE AMINO ACID DIGESTIBILITY OF FULL FAT SOY FOR BROILER CHICKENS USING DIFFERENT METHODS. R. K. G. Messias1, L. F. T. Albino1, J. O. B. Sorbara2*, H. S. Rostagno1 Universidade Federal de Viçosa - Brazil 2 DSM Nutritional Products - Brazil 1
    2. 2. Introduction • Poultry Science Meeting 2009 – Several abstracts presented Improvement (% Control) •Protease to enhance the amino acid utilization of different raw ingredients by broilers. 115% 110% 105% 100% Asp Glu Ser Corn Gly His Arg Thr Soy Bean Meal Ala Pro Tyr Full Fat Soy Val Met Cys Ile Meat Bone Meal Leu Phe Lys
    3. 3. Introduction • Poultry Science Meeting 2009 – Several abstracts presented •Protease to enhance the amino acid utilization of different raw ingredients by broilers. – Conclusions: • The mono-component protease used was enable to improve de AA digestibility of different ingredients between 2 and 15% dependent of individual AA. – Discussion: • The response was based on Total Apparent AA digestibility • Today the raw materials are evaluated by True Ileal AA digestibility • Would the response of this mono-component protease be different if the True Ileal AA digestibility method was used? • How different methods can effect the enzyme response?
    4. 4. Objectives • Compare the Apparent and True Ileal Amino Acid Digestibility of the Full Fat Soy with and without the protease supplementation. • Compare the effect of different methods on the Full Fat Soy Amino Acid Digestibility in broiler chickens.
    5. 5. Materials & Methods • Experimental Period • Metabolism Trial – 336 Male Cobb – Experimental Design • 8 treatments • 6 replicates of 7 birds each Tr. – 12 to 18 d old adaptation period – 19 to 21 d old total excreta collection – At 22 d old euthanized by cervical dislocation to collect the ileal digesta Tr. Without Protease With Protease 1 Protein Free Diet (PFD) 5 Protein Free Diet 2 Protein Free Diet + Full Fat Soy 6 Protein Free Diet + Full Fat Soy 3 Basal Diet + Starch 7 Basal Diet + Starch 4 Basal Diet + Full Fat Soy 8 Basal Diet + Full Fat Soy
    6. 6. Materials & Methods • Diets Composition Ingredients/ Diets Starch Full-fat soy (FFS) Basal diet Sugar Corn Soybean meal Soybean oil Dicalcium fosfate Limestone Salt Corn cob L-lysine HCl 99% DL-methionine, 99% L-threonine, 98% Mineral premix1 Vitamin premix2 Choline chloride Antioxidant (BHT) Acid-insoluble ash (CeliteTM) Total Crude protein PFD 78.01 5.00 5.00 2.10 1.00 0.45 4.00 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.01 1.00 100.0 0.00 PFD + FFS 48.01 30.00 5.00 5.00 2.10 1.00 0.45 4.00 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.01 1.00 100.0 11.10 Basal + Starch Basal + FFS 30.00 30.00 70.00 70.00 100.0 100.0 14.70 25.80 Basal 57.13 36.00 2.00 1.85 0.90 0.45 0.11 0.23 0.04 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.01 1.00 100.0 21.00
    7. 7. Materials & Methods • Full Fat Soy Composition (analyzed) Nutrient % CP 35.95 Fat 19.1 Solubility in KOH 77.87 Urease, % 0.04 Energy, Kcal 5168 DM, % 88.31 Amino Acids (%) Aspartic Acid Glutamic Acid Ser+Gly Histidine Arginine Threonine Alanine Proline Tyrosine Valine Methionine Cystine Isoleucine Leucine Phenylalanine Lysine Total amino acids FFS 2010 4.04 6.61 3.78 0.98 2.94 1.5 1.57 2.05 1.44 1.51 0.55 0.4 1.57 2.9 2 2.11 35.92
    8. 8. Materials & Methods Comparative Full Fat Soy Composition • Bertechini et al., (2009) • Messias et al., (2010) Amino Acids (%) Aspartic Acid Glutamic Acid Ser+Gly Histidine Arginine Threonine Alanine Proline Tyrosine Valine Methionine Cystine Isoleucine Leucine Phenylalanine Lysine Total amino acids FFS 2009 4.01 6.23 3.29 0.91 2.58 1.27 1.53 1.69 1.43 1.61 0.62 0.56 1.58 2.67 1.75 2.41 34.51 FFS 2010 4.04 6.61 3.78 0.98 2.94 1.5 1.57 2.05 1.44 1.51 0.55 0.4 1.57 2.9 2 2.11 35.92 Dif (%) 0.7% 6.1% 14.9% 7.7% 14.0% 18.1% 2.6% 21.3% 0.7% -6.2% -11.3% -28.6% -0.6% 8.6% 14.3% -12.4% 4.1%
    9. 9. Materials & Methods • Analyses – Samples were freeze-dried – Dry Matter – Crude Protein – Acid-Insoluble Ash (AIA) – Amino Acids analyzed by HPLC • Calculations: Indigestility Factor (IF) – IF1= [AIA] in the test diet [AIA] in the sample – IF2 = [AIA] in PFD [AIA] in the sample Ileal Digestibility Coefficient (IDC) Apparent IDC = (AA% in the diet – [amino acid % in the digesta x IF1]) x 100 AA % in the diet True IDC = (%AA in the diet – ([%AA in the digesta x IF1] – [endogenous AA x IF2]) x 100 AA % in the diet
    10. 10. Materials & Methods • Product Specifications – Mono component protease with 75000 PROT/g originated from Nocardiopsis prasina and produced by the bacteria Bacillus licheniformis (RONOZYME ProAct, DSM) – Dose 15000 PROT/kg = 200 ppm – One ProAct activity unit (PROT) is the amount of enzyme that releases 1 µmol of p-nitroaniline from 1 mM substrate (Suc-AlaAla-Pro-Phe-pNA) per minute at pH 9.0 and 37 °C.
    11. 11. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Asp 79,1 88,5 ** 2,6 112 Glu 83,3 90,3 ** 2,2 108 Ala 80,5 86,3 ** 4,2 107 Pro 81,9 88,5 ** 3,1 108 Tyr 82,9 89,4 ** 3,1 108 Cys 70,3 81 ** 8,3 115
    12. 12. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Val 83,8 85,5 ns 4,3 102 His 81,5 88,5 ** 2,6 107 Arg 88,2 92,1 ** 1,8 104 Ile 84,6 86,9 0,08 3,6 103 Leu 87,4 86,9 ns 3,6 99 Phe 83,6 88,0 ** 2,9 105
    13. 13. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Lys 86,4 89 ** 2,3 103 Met 89,4 92,4 ** 2,6 103 Met+Cys 79,9 86,7 ** 5,4 109 Thr 78,4 83,9 ** 5,3 107 Sum 82,3 90,1 ** 2,7 109 CP 87,1 90,3 ** 3,7 104
    14. 14. Results • Effect of Method on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease PFD Basal Diet ANOVA CV(%) Dif (BD/PFD x 100) 1 Asp1 93,6 74,0 ** 2,6 79 Glu1 95,7 78,0 ** 2,2 82 Enzyme vs. Method Interaction (P< 0,05) Ala 92,7 74,1 ** 4,2 80 Pro 95,5 74,9 ** 3,1 78 Tyr 94,8 77,4 ** 3,1 82 Cys 89,7 61,6 ** 8,3 69
    15. 15. Results • Effect of Method on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease PFD Basal Diet ANOVA CV(%) Dif (BD/PFD x 100) 1 Val 93,9 75,4 ** 4,3 80 His 95,1 75 ** 2,6 79 Enzyme vs. Method Interaction (P< 0,05) Arg 1 97,4 83 ** 1,8 85 Ile 94 77,5 ** 3,6 82 Leu 95,4 78,9 ** 3,6 83 Phe 95,2 76,3 ** 2,9 80
    16. 16. Results • Effect of Method on Full Fat Soy True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease PFD Basal Diet ANOVA CV(%) Dif (BD/PFD x 100) Lys 94,6 80,8 ** 2,3 85 Met 96 85,8 ** 2,6 89 Met+Cys Thr 92,9 90,2 73,7 72 ** ** 5,4 5,3 79 80 Sum 95,1 77,2 ** 2,7 81 CP 92,9 84,6 ** 3,7 91
    17. 17. Results • Overall response of mono component protease on the Full Fat Soy Digestibility by different AA digestibility methods and Apparent and True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient Apparent AA Dig using BD True AA Dig using PFD Method True AA Dig using BD 120% 115% 110% 105% Le u Ph e Ly s Ile 100% A sp G lu Se r G ly H is A rg Th r A la Pr o Ty r Va l M +C Improvement (% Control) Apparent AA Dig using PFD Method
    18. 18. Results • Overall response of mono component protease on the Full Fat Soy Digestibility by different AA digestibility methods and Apparent and True Ileal AA digestibility coefficient Apparent AA Dig using BD True AA Dig using PFD Method Improvement (% Control) Apparent AA Dig using PFD Method True AA Dig using BD 120% 115% 110% 105% 100% His Arg Thr Val M+C Ile Leu Phe Lys
    19. 19. Discussion • Comparing responses from Prof. Bertechini et al., (2009) and Messias et al., (2010) 2009 - Apparent AA Dig using BD 2010 - Apparent AA Dig using PFD Method 2010 - Apparent AA Dig using BD 2010 - True AA Dig using PFD Method 120% 115% 110% 105% Le u Ph e Ly s Ile 100% As p G lu Se r G ly Hi s Ar g Th r Al a Pr o Ty r Va l M +C Improvement (% Control) 2010 - True AA Dig using BD
    20. 20. Discussion • Comparing responses from Prof. Bertechini et al., (2009) and Messias et al., (2010) 2009 - Apparent AA Dig using BD 2010 - Apparent AA Dig using PFD Method 2010 - Apparent AA Dig using BD 2010 - True AA Dig using PFD Method Improvement (% Control) 2010 - True AA Dig using BD 120% 115% 110% 105% 100% His Arg Thr Val M+C Ile Leu Phe Lys
    21. 21. Conclusions • These methods did not affect the protease response on Full Fat Soy amino acid digestibility. • Even when using different methods or Apparent vs True amino acid digestibility the protease response on full fat soy was similar.
    22. 22. Thank you for your attention !!!
    23. 23. Back-up
    24. 24. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy Apparent Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Asp 76,4 84,5 ** 2,6 111 Glu 79 84,6 ** 2,3 107 Ala 71,5 75,6 ** 4,5 106 Pro 71,4 76,4 ** 3,3 107 Tyr 76,4 78,5 0,07 3,4 103 Cys 48,8 59,5 ** 10,3 122
    25. 25. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy Apparent Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Val 70 73,4 0,02 4,7 105 His 76,8 81,5 ** 2,7 106 Arg 81,9 86 ** 1,9 105 Ile 76,9 78,4 ns 3,8 102 Leu 80,4 79,5 ns 3,8 99 Phe 75,9 79,9 ** 3,1 105
    26. 26. Results • Effect of Mono Component Protease on Full Fat Soy Apparent Ileal AA digestibility coefficient. Protease Without With ANOVA CV(%) Improvement (% Control) Lys 82,5 84,0 0,086 2,34 102 Met 80,7 85,0 ** 2,7 105 Met+Cys 64,7 72,2 ** 6,5 112 Thr 63,2 69,8 ** 6,0 110 Sum 74,8 79,6 ** 3,0 106 CP 80,7 83,0 0,11 4,0 103
    27. 27. Visit us on: •DSM Animal Nutrition and H

    ×