Dr. Brian Richert - Alternative Feed Ingredients: Real Options or Just a Nice Idea?

1,372 views

Published on

Alternative Feed Ingredients: Real Options or Just a Nice Idea? - Dr. Brian Richert, Associate Professor of Animal Sciences, Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, from the 2012 Minnesota Pork Congress, January 18-19, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Dr. Brian Richert - Alternative Feed Ingredients: Real Options or Just a Nice Idea?

  1. 1. Alternative feed ingredients – real options or just a nice idea? Dr. Brian Richert Department of Animal Sciences
  2. 2. Background <ul><li>Biofuels: Is it the savior? </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce Dependency on Foreign Oil </li></ul><ul><li>Improve the Environment </li></ul><ul><li>Reinvest in rural America </li></ul><ul><li>Decrease Government subsidies to Farmers due to higher grain prices </li></ul>
  3. 3. U.S. Corn Utilization Source: Nicolle Rager Fuller, National Science Foundation, 2005 2010 – 37% 2010 – 12.5 Bil. Bu 2010 – 13% 2010 – 34% 2010 – 13%
  4. 4. Energy and Amino Acid Sources
  5. 5. <ul><li>Pigs don’t require corn & SBM </li></ul><ul><li>Corn-SBM diets typically provide the “best” nutrition at the lowest cost </li></ul><ul><li>In times of high corn and SBM prices, producers can make $ using alternate feed ingredients </li></ul>Ingredient Substitutions
  6. 6. Is the nutrient composition suited to swine feeding? <ul><li>Check composition tables & lab analyses </li></ul><ul><li>Are the nutrients available to the pig? If not, why bother feeding it? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there a palatability issue? </li></ul><ul><li>Potential for nutrient imbalances </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ca-P or Amino Acids? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mycotoxins or other anti-nutritional factors </li></ul>
  7. 7. Are there added costs of utilizing the by-product? <ul><li>Added transportation </li></ul><ul><li>Storage </li></ul><ul><li>Processing equipment </li></ul><ul><li>Facility modifications </li></ul><ul><li>Additional labor </li></ul><ul><li>Feed wastage </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced facility & equipment life </li></ul><ul><li>More mgnt time </li></ul><ul><li>Manure problems </li></ul><ul><li>Increased health risk </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced performance due to product variability </li></ul>
  8. 8. Energy Replacement Options for Corn Prices from USDA and Feedstuffs March, 2011 Ingredient $/ton ME / lb Cost/1000 ME Corn 240-250 1550 0.0790 Sorghum 228-233 1515 0.0759 Wheat-feed grade 300-325 1455 0.1074 Wheat Midds 166-174 1370 0.0620 Barley 196 1322 0.0741 Oats 256 1230 0.1041 Pulverized Oats 140-145 1230 0.0578 Soybean hulls 145-190 1064 0.0775 DDGS 195-210 1560 0.0657 Corn Gluten feed 142-160 1180 0.0636 Hominy Feed 180-190 1455 0.0636 Bakery By-product 260-280 1680 0.0804 Choice White Grease 880-920 3608 0.1247
  9. 9. Energy Replacement Options for Corn Prices from USDA and Feedstuffs Jan.2-Jan.13, 2012 Ingredient $/ton ME / lb Cost/1000 ME Corn 206-216 1550 0.0671 Sorghum 204-218 1515 0.0696 Wheat-feed grade 202-215 1455 0.0716 Wheat Midds 145-175 1370 0.0584 Barley 219 1322 0.0741 Oats 212 1230 0.0862 Pulverized Oats 138-145 1230 0.0575 Soybean hulls 150-205 1064 0.0705 DDGS 175-190 1560 0.0593 Corn Gluten feed 145-190 1180 0.0742 Hominy Feed 195-205 1455 0.0687 Bakery By-product 260-280 1680 0.0804 Choice White Grease 800-860 3608 0.1109
  10. 10. Digestible Lysine Replacement Options for Corn Prices from USDA and Feedstuffs Nov. 30-Dec. 2, 2011 Ingredient $/ton dLys , % Cost / lb Lys Corn 206-216 .203 51.72 Sorghum 204-218 .178 59.27 Wheat-feed grade 202-215 .275 37.57 Wheat Midds 145-175 .507 15.78 Barley 219 .324 33.80 Oats 212 .304 34.87 Pulverized Oats 138-145 .304 23.19 Soybean hulls 150-205 .419 20.80 DDGS 175-190 .484 19.11 Corn Gluten feed 145-190 .416 21.03 Hominy Feed 195-205 .247 40.49 Bakery By-product 260-280 .208 64.90 SBM, 48% 295-315 2.718 5.61
  11. 11. How much Alternative Feed Ingredients to Use? <ul><li>It depends! </li></ul><ul><li>Stage of Production / Age of Pig </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Carcass implications </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is your ingredient costs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>$4-4.50 or $6-7 corn </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is your environmental status? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can you use more manure N and P? </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Low Quality, Less Digestible DDGS High Quality, Highly Digestible DDGS Effect of Processing Method on DDGS Quality
  13. 13. DDGS Nutrition Options <ul><li>Energy </li></ul><ul><li>Amino Acids (Protein) </li></ul><ul><li>Phosphorus </li></ul>
  14. 14. Variations in Distillers Dried Grains w/solubles from 36 New Generation Plants <ul><li>Swine Digestibility </li></ul><ul><li>Protein 63.5 – 84.3% - 72.8 Avg. </li></ul><ul><li>Lysine 43.9 – 77.9% - 62.3 Avg. </li></ul><ul><li>Threonine 61.9 – 82.5% - 70.7 Avg. </li></ul><ul><li>Tryptophan 54.2 – 80.1% - 69.9 Avg. </li></ul><ul><li>Methionine 73.7 – 89.2% - 81.9 Avg. </li></ul><ul><li>Phosphorus </li></ul><ul><ul><li>.77 - .90% Tot.P vs Corn at .28% Tot.P (15% Dig.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>35-85% Digestible; Avg. 59% </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Stein, 2007 </li></ul>
  15. 15. Quick Check on AA Availability <ul><li>Use the ratio of total lysine to CP of 2.80 </li></ul><ul><li>Example: DDGS has 0.83% Lys and 30% CP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>0.83 / 0.30 = 2.76 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>0.83 / 0.28 = 2.96 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>0.78 / 0.30 = 2.60 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>As CP goes up so should analyzable lysine </li></ul>
  16. 16. Gain P = 0.57 Feed Intake P = 0.05 G:F P = 0.70 Whitney and Shurson, 2004 20 or 25% DDGS Gain = 1.5 lb lighter after 2 weeks Consumed 2 lb less Feed
  17. 17. Gain P < 0.01 Feed Intake P < 0.01 F:G P = 0.79 a ab a b b a a b ab b Gaines et al. 2006 30 or 40% DDGS Gain = 1.5 lb lighter after 2 weeks Consumed 2 lb less Feed
  18. 18. Feeding DDGS to Finisher Pigs
  19. 19. Increasing levels of DDGS on Grower pig ADG Percent Distillers Linneen et al., 2007; KSU lb/d DDGS, P < 0.06 SE=0.033
  20. 20. Increasing levels of DDGS on Grow-Finish pig ADG Percent Distillers Diets balanced on an Avail. AA Basis Linneen et al., 2005, KSU lb/d DDGS linear, P < 0.10 DDGS linear, P < 0.01 Fu et al., 2004, Univ. of Missouri lb/d
  21. 21. Effect on Carcass Weight Diet, P = 0.04 - 6.0 lbs - 6.5 lbs - 9.5 lbs Fu et al. 2003 a ab ab b
  22. 22. Increasing levels of DDGS on Finishing pig Variability Percent Distillers Whitney et al., 2006 CV, % DDGS, P < 0.02 SE=0.74
  23. 23. 40% DDGS and 5% Fat <ul><li>40% DDGS decreased ADG 11% (2.27 vs 2.04 lb/d), ADFI 6.3%, FE 4.3% in Exp. 1 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>40% DDGS decreased Carcass Wt 19.2 lb over a 69 day feeding period. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Decreased ADG 6.2% (1.80 vs 1.69 lb/d), ADFI 4%, FE 2.3% and 10 lb carcass wt. in Exp. 2 over 70 days. </li></ul><ul><li>Added Beef Tallow , Palm oil, coconut, or stearic fat could not restore growth </li></ul>Feoli, et al., 2008
  24. 24. 60% DDGS in GF Bergstrom et al., 2010 20% DDGS 60% DDGS P< B G B G DDGS D 0-78 ADG 1.96 1.91 1.85 1.83 0.001 ADFI 5.22 4.89 5.17 4.84 NS FG 2.67 2.56 2.79 2.64 0.001 BW, lb 233.4 226.8 223.4 221.2 0.001 Jowl IV 69.9 72.5 80.7 83.8 0.001 Switch 60% to 20% d 78-99 ADG 2.40 2.30 2.54 2.47 0.01 Final BW 281.7 273.5 275.9 271.3 0.02 Carcass Wt 210.3 203.1 204.7 199.6 0.01 Jowl IV 71.1 74.4 80.2 82.2 0.05
  25. 25. Sow Research <ul><li>Hill et al., 2005 (Lactation) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>15% DDGS vs 5% BP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No effect on Lactation performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Slight reduction in fecal P </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Urinary P? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Univ. of Kentucky (1995) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can go as high as 40% DDGS in Gestation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>80% DDGS decreased litter size by about 1 pig </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can go as high as 80% CGF in Gestation </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Sow Research <ul><li>Univ. of Minn. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can go as high as 50% in Gestation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sows eat slowly at 50%, but will consume allotment </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>20% in Lactation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Warning – need to start Gestation DDGS before Lactation or Lactation FI will be Decreased </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Up to 30% DDGS or HP DDGS, No prefeeding DDGS in Gestation - 2010 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High DDGS feeding can lead to discounts on cull sows due to poor fat quality </li></ul></ul>
  27. 27. DDGS and Pork Quality <ul><li>Processing/Handling issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fat firmness (IV values increase to 75-80) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shelf-life </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Export marketing- decrease in marbling score and increase in fat separation from the lean </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased problems with processed products </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Potential human health issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>n-6:n-3 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>n-6 increases drastically (doubles) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fatty acid composition – high linoleic (18:2) </li></ul></ul>
  28. 28. Impact of DDGS on Iodine Value <ul><li>Increase in IV for each 10% DDGS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Backfat - 2.4 units </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Jowl - 1.6 units </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Belly - 3.0 units </li></ul></ul>KSU Summary, 11/2007
  29. 29. Different Levels of DDGS on Belly Quality 0%, no Added Fat 30% DDGS 20% DDGS 10% DDGS 0% DDGS + ~ 3% Added Fat (CWG)
  30. 31. Iodine Value P < 0.0001 62.54 c ± 0.607 71.15 b ± 0.600 79.64 a ± 0.600
  31. 32. Bacon Slice Yield 1 n=40 per dietary treatment 2 Means followed by different superscripts differ, P<0.01 Dietary treatment Percent relative change from dietary treatment 1,2 SE Corn-SBM Control 0.0 a ---- 25% DDGS -2.95 a 2.64 25% DDGS + 5.3% RG -18.46 b 2.64
  32. 33. Consumer Purchase Intent Corn-SBM Control 25% DDGS 25% DDGS + 5.3% RG Uncooked bacon Would purchase 70.68 72.18 47.32 Might or might not purchase 21.05 20.30 29.46 Would not purchase 8.27 7.52 23.21 Cooked bacon Would purchase 68.65 67.67 50.45 Might or might not purchase 24.63 24.81 28.83 Would not purchase 6.72 7.52 20.72
  33. 34. Increasing levels of DDGS on Pork Quality abc Means within a row are significantly different (P < 0.05). xy Means within a column are significantly different (P < 0.05). Weimer et al., 2007 Cont. NF Cont. + ~ 3% CWG 10% 20% 30% Belly bending, % Barrows 100 ax 96 ax 91 ax 59 bx 49 bx Gilts 80 ax 82 ax 67 aby 44 bcy 27 cy %BF – loin Separation 25.0 16.7 66.7 75.0 91.7
  34. 35. Can the Belly and Loin problems be fixed? <ul><li>Withdrawal Programs? </li></ul><ul><li>3-4 or 6-8 week DDGS withdrawal </li></ul><ul><li>Interaction with Ractopamine feeding? </li></ul><ul><li>Increased Tallow feeding 4 or 8 weeks? </li></ul><ul><li>Combinations of withdrawal, Fats, CLA? </li></ul>
  35. 36. Effect of 30% DDGS withdrawal time on dressing percent JBS United 2007
  36. 37. Impact of 25% DDGS Withdrawal and Ractopamine Purdue University 2007 DDGS 0 0 25 25 25-4 25-4 RAC - + - + - + Mkt Wt. 267.4 285.4 260.4 274.6 270.5 280.9 Yield, % 74.7 75.5 74.4 75.3 74.3 75.9 Carcass Wt. 199.7 215.4 193.5 206.8 200.2 213.2
  37. 38. Sows and Brat Quality
  38. 39. Taste Panel Evaluation <ul><li>Consumer Preference on Fresh Bratwurst Purchase </li></ul>P<0.016 Gestation DDGS Lactation DDGS Purchase Undecided Would not purchase 0 0 80.49 12.20 7.32 15 71.43 23.81 4.76 30 68.29 24.39 7.32 15 0 73.17 21.95 4.88 15 65.00 30.00 5.00 30 65.85 29.27 4.88 30 0 52.50 27.50 20.00 15 53.84 20.51 25.64 30 42.50 45.00 12.50
  39. 40. Possible Sow Body Fat Changes <ul><li>Assume sows are 65 IV points, sold two weeks after farrowing. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fed 20% DDGS, now 71.4 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fed 30% DDGS, now 74.6 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fed 40% DDGS, now 77.8 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fed 50% DDGS, now 81.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Long Term use of DGGS may create a change in CWG FA profiles – reflective of the DDGS fed to slaughter animals! </li></ul>
  40. 43. Other Economic concerns <ul><li>IF PERFORMANCE IS REDUCED </li></ul><ul><li>What is time worth? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Need time to put on more weight </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3 lbs in nursery, 10-25 lb GF </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1-2 more weeks – extra $0.70-$1.50 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Another 6.5 lb/d feed = 40-100 lb more feed (at 0.11/lb = $4.40-11 more feed) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OR 4-15 lb less carcass X $0.75 = $3.00 - $11.25 less Income / pig </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How much feed cost did you save? </li></ul></ul>
  41. 44. How much DDGS to Use? <ul><li>It depends! </li></ul><ul><li>Stage of Production / Age of Pig </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Carcass implications </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is your ingredient costs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>$4-4.50 or $6-7 corn </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is your environmental status? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can you use more manure N and P? </li></ul></ul>
  42. 45. Recommended Use of DDGS in Swine Diets My Maximum Use Recommendations Nursery – 0, 5, 10, 20% Grow-finish – 30, 40, 40, 10% Lactation – 25% Gestation – 50% Increased Lysine use Decreased Threonine, Methionine Dical or Monocal My Optimal Use Recommendations Nursery – 0, 0, 7.5, 15% Grow-finish – 20, 25, 25, 0% Lactation – 10% Gestation – 30%
  43. 46. Increasing Wheat Midds in Nursery pig diets De Jong et al., 2011 Wheat midds replaced about 1.2% SBM and 3.8% Corn for every 5% inclusion Corn Soy –Control 0% WM 5% WM 10% WM 20% WM Linear P< 26-52 lb ADG, lb 1.27 1.25 1.25 1.21 0.05 ADFI, lb 2.08 2.08 1.99 1.97 0.004 F/G 1.64 1.66 1.60 1.63 0.36 D 21 wt, lb 52.90 52.43 52.25 51.53 0.01 Bulk Density lb/bu 53.09 50.69 47.80 43.18
  44. 47. Increasing wheat midds in Grow-finish pig diets Light midds – 18-20 lb/cu ft; Heavy midds – 22-24 lb/cu ft Cromwell, 1997 Wheat midds (%): 0 10 20 40 60 Light or clean midds Daily gain, lb 1.81 1.78 1.72 1.70 1.59 Daily feed, lb 5.93 6.12 5.99 5.99 5.85 Feed:gain 3.27 3.42 3.49 3.54 3.70 Heavy or starchy midds Daily gain, lb 1.83 1.76 1.83 1.72 1.65 Daily feed, lb 5.99 5.81 5.94 5.72 6.17 Feed:gain 3.27 3.29 3.25 3.35 3.74
  45. 48. 20% DDGS and increasing Wheat Midds in Grow-finish Barnes et al., 2010 Corn Soy -Control DDGS + 0% WM DDGS + 10% WM DDGS + 20% WM Linear P< 100-295 lb ADG, lb 2.32 2.29 2.22 2.19 0.01 F/G 3.00 3.06 3.09 3.11 0.01 HCWT 220.7 216.3 210 206.4 0.01
  46. 49. Increasing DDGS and increasing Wheat Midds in Grow-finish Barnes et al., 2011 No effect of 4,000 units xylanase to improve growth performance Corn Soy –Control + 2.4% CWG 15% DDGS +6.25% WM +1.2%CWG 30% DDGS +12.5% WM Linear P< 106-270 lb ADG, lb 2.22 2.17 2.12 0.001 F/G 2.86 2.91 3.01 0.001 HCWT 201.3 196.9 192.5 0.001 Yield, % 73.4 73.0 72.4 0.01 Bulk Density -8.2% -16.3%
  47. 50. Hominy Feed in Grow-finish Potter et al., 2010 Hominy is the corn bran, germ, and some starch from corn grits/flour industry CP=9.5%, Fat = 4.5%, CF = 2.8% Hominy 0 12.5% 25% 37.5% Linear P< D0-84 ADG, lb 2.24 2.13 2.11 2.05 0.01 ADFI, lb 6.32 5.90 5.91 5.72 0.01 F/G 2.82 2.78 2.80 2.78 0.35 D0 Wt., lb 79.4 78.8 79.4 79.6 0.68 D84 Wt., lb 268.2 257.8 258.9 253.3 0.01
  48. 51. Soyhulls in Finishing pig diets Bowers et al., 2000 Soyhulls 0 3 6 9 9 + 4% Fat Signif. Wk 0-4 ADG, lb 2.05 2.19 1.85 1.92 2.14 L 0.04 G:F .310 .326 .310 .306 .337 Q.10 Wk 4-8 ADG, lb 2.02 1.98 1.93 1.90 1.97 L 0.10 G:F .279 .274 .271 .252 .275 L 0.03 Wk 0-8 ADG, lb 2.03 2.08 1.89 1.91 2.05 L 0.01 G:F .294 .295 .288 .276 .302 L 0.02
  49. 52. Extrusion of Corn, Sorghum, Wheat or Barley for finishing pigs Hancock et al., 1992 Corn Sorghum Wheat Barley Grd Ext Grd Ext Grd Ext Grd Ext ADG,lb 2.22 2.22 2.19 2.13 2.12 2.09 1.97 1.95 ADFI, lb 6.58 6.29 6.83 6.05 6.80 6.34 6.54 6.30 F/G 2.96 2.83 3.12 2.84 3.21 3.03 3.32 3.23 F/G % Improv. 4.4 9.0 5.6 2.7 DM Dig 86.7 91.4 88.8 90.2 86.0 85.9 75.9 82.4 N Dig 81.8 88.0 79.7 84.4 85.4 85.4 70.5 78.8
  50. 53. Enzyme Use with By-products <ul><li>Match enzyme to substrate </li></ul><ul><li>Increase energy and or AA digestibility </li></ul><ul><li>Denature anti-nutritional factors </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Xylanase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Glucanase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mannanase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Galactosidases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Amylase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Proteases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cellulase and Hemi-cellulases </li></ul></ul>
  51. 54. Recommend Inclusion rates of alternative feed stuffs <ul><li>Range based on composition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Energy (lipid and fiber limits) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Amino acids </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost of the nutrients </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Feed Flowability and processing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bulk density – deliver only 20 or 21 tons vs 25 tons? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistency – eg. Low or high fat DDGS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lowest in Nursery </li></ul></ul>
  52. 55. Adding Feed Ingredients to the Mill <ul><li>Space / Electrical </li></ul><ul><li>Feed System capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>35 ton tank - $10,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Product availability? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sourcing through marketers or nutritionists </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Product fit? </li></ul><ul><li>Return on investment </li></ul>
  53. 57. Economics of Swine Nutrition <ul><li>Cost per ton of feed </li></ul><ul><li>Cost per unit of lysine </li></ul><ul><li>Cost per unit of digestible lysine </li></ul><ul><li>Cost per unit of digestible energy </li></ul><ul><li>Total feed cost per pig marketed </li></ul><ul><li>Cost per lb of gain </li></ul><ul><li>Cost per lb carcass sold </li></ul><ul><li>For Every 0.01 improvement in F:G will decrease total feed costs by $0.28-0.30/pig </li></ul>Boyd, 2008
  54. 58. Thank you!
  55. 59. Questions?
  56. 60. Swine Nutrient Excretion Issues with DDGS <ul><li>N excretion increases 15-200+% </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ammonia emissions? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>P can be managed by decreases MCP/DCP </li></ul><ul><li>Increased DM excretion/Increased solids? Increased Sludge? </li></ul><ul><li>Crust formation? Flies? Ammonia? </li></ul><ul><li>Increased Sulfur – Hydrogen sulfide Emissions? </li></ul>
  57. 61. New Fractionation Processes will change DDGS and it’s nutritional value <ul><li>Degerming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Press the oil to human or Bio-diesel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduces oil and may reduce P </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Dehulling </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduces fiber </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Seperation post-fermentation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fiber and/or oil removed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Syrup levels used and fractioning or recycling </li></ul>
  58. 62. Comparison of Conventional DDGS and Fractionated Products Conventional Fractionation Process Ethanol 2.8 gal 2.8 gal DDGS 17 lb 7 lb Germ --- 4 lb Fiber/ hull --- 4 lb Corn Oil (2 lb) 2 lb
  59. 63. Dakota Gold Products <ul><li>Distillers wet Grains </li></ul><ul><li>Dakota Gold - DDGS </li></ul><ul><li>Dakota Gold – HP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Endosperm fraction </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Corn Germ Dehydrated </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Germ fraction </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Dakota Bran </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fiber plus solubles in a wet cake, dry or pellet </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Modified Distillers Grain </li></ul><ul><li>Corn Condensed Distillers Solubles </li></ul><ul><li>Using BPX ™ and BFrac ™ Technologies </li></ul>
  60. 64. Dakota Gold Product Profiles (As Fed) a Corn ME = 1505 b only 52% DM DDGS DDGS-HP Corn Germ Dakota Bran b SBM, 48% CP CP 26.6 41.0 15.6 13.7 47.5 Lys 0.89 1.19 0.82 ? 3.02 M+C 1.25 1.81 0.74 ? 1.41 Thre 1.01 1.63 0.57 ? 1.85 Tryp 0.28 0.36 0.20 ? 0.68 Fat 9.7 3.0 17.8 8.1 0.5 Fiber 6.1 6.9 5.1 ??? 3.4 ME a 1647 1695 1844 ??? 1533 Phos 0.79 0.37 1.40 0.61 0.69
  61. 67. Rapid Lab Tests for Quality <ul><li>Stein, Pahm, and Pedersen, 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>One-Step pepsin digest – R 2 = 0.52 </li></ul><ul><li>Two-Step pepsin-pancreatin digest – R 2 = 0.79 </li></ul><ul><li>Color – R 2 = 0.53-0.67 </li></ul><ul><li>KOH Solubility – R 2 = 0.47 </li></ul><ul><li>Furosine – R 2 =0.71 </li></ul><ul><li>Reactive lysine – R 2 = 0.66 </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA Value (Novus) vs. True Lys Dig. (Poultry) – R 2 = 0.88 </li></ul><ul><li>Urriola et al., 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>Include Color, ADF, NDF, Hemicell., Starch (tot, insol, and sol.), Part. Size, Sol CP, CP, Insol CP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dig. CP R 2 =.78-.80 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dig. Lys R 2 = .57-.44 </li></ul></ul>
  62. 68. SBM vs DDGS <ul><li>DDGS contains 57% of the protein of SBM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(27.3/47.5) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>DDGS contains 28% of the total lysine of SBM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(.84/3.02) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>DDGS contains 20% of the available lysine </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(.52/2.57) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>This is why it replaces a greater percentage of Corn in the diet than SBM in monogastric diets (65 Corn:22 SBM:11 Fat) + Lysine </li></ul>
  63. 69. Replacement ratio strategies with DDGS + Lysine <ul><li>65 Corn : 22 SBM : 11 Fat : 1 Dical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>PU </li></ul></ul><ul><li>57.0 Corn : 42.5 SBM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Univ. ILL </li></ul></ul><ul><li>88.5 Corn : 10 SBM : 3 Dical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Univ. of Missouri </li></ul></ul><ul><li>It comes down to the quality of DDGS and AA availability! </li></ul>

×