Evaluation of collection method and diet effects on apparent digestibility and energy values of swine diets1

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of collection method and diet on estimating digestibility values. In Exp. 1, 24 barrows were fed either a cornsoybean meal diet (CSBM) or CSBM with 20% dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS). Fecal collections were based on exact timing (Day collection) or marker-tomarker collection (MM) methods during a 4-d period. Diets contained 0.5% of titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ) for estimating digestibility using the index method. In Exp. 2, the effects of collection method and basal diet on determination of DDGS digestibility were studied using 24 barrows. Diets were CSBM (basal 1), barley-canola meal diet (BCM; basal 2), and 20% of basal 1 or basal 2 replaced by DDGS (total 1 and total 2). Day and MM methods were administered for each individual pig by separate collections and measurements of feces. In Exp. 1, Day and MM methods were not different (P > 0.10) on estimation of digestibility values, except that ME values tended to be greater (0.05 < P < 0.10) when estimated using Day vs. MM methods; whereas, digestibility estimates and dietary energy values were about 0.5% and 20 kcal/kg lower (P < 0.05) estimated using the index vs. total collection (Day and MM) methods. In Exp. 2, digestibility estimates of diets and DDGS were not different (P > 0.10) calculated using Day and MM methods.The average DE and ME (kcal/kg, as-fed) of DDGS were 4,035 and 3,704, respectively estimated using basal 1, which were not different (P > 0.10) from using basal 2 (4,081 and 3,651, respectively). In conclusion, digestibility values of a complex diet and DDGS are not different when estimated by Day or MM method. When corn-soybean meal based diets are fed, digestibility estimates are lower using the index method compared to the total collection method. Additionally, basal diets may not affect DDGS digestibility estimates.

Nutritional value of Brazilian distillers dried grains with solubles for pigs as determined by different methods

“…The variations between 338 and 478 kcal kg -1 for DE and ME, respectively, between the methods used in the present study are close to the 261 to 678 kcal kg -1 for DE and 244 to 620 kcal kg -1 for ME observed by Gutierrez et al (2014) and Anderson et al (2012). Li et al (2016) also recorded a lower energy digestibility in diets containing DDGS as determined by the marker method in comparison with total collection.…”

“…As a result, fecal output increased with a reduction of DM digestibility (Widyaratne and Zijlstra, 2007). Reductions in DM digestibility as a function of an increase in DDGS in pig diets were also reported by Agyekum et al (2016), Wang et al (2016), Li et al (2016), and Wahlstrom et al (2013), who included up to 300, 200, 200, and 300 g kg After starch is removed in the ethanol production process, the organic matter present in DDGS will be closely linked to the protein, oil, and fiber fractions. Therefore, the higher NDF concentrations observed in DDGS in relation to corn end up negatively influencing the organic matter digestibility, which was observed in the current study.…”

Effect of Supplementing Saccharomyces cerevisiae into Low Quality Local-Based Feeds on Performance and Nutrient Digestibility of Late Starter Local Pigs

“…Data collection for digestibility calculation was according to the method described by Li [8]. Feces were collected during the last two weeks (the 7th and 8th week) of the feeding trial.…”

“…Feces were collected during the last two weeks (the 7th and 8th week) of the feeding trial. Feed intake was timed, limited (based on daily requirement) and constantly monitored until the amount of daily intake and feces remained relatively constant (not fluctuating) during continuous 7 d at the 6th week before the collection period [8]. Feces were collected daily during 14 d. Fresh weight of daily feces was recorded and sundried until their weight constant, then 10% of collectively sundried feces were sampled and sent to laboratory for nutrient analysis.…”

“…Feces were collected daily during 14 d. Fresh weight of daily feces was recorded and sundried until their weight constant, then 10% of collectively sundried feces were sampled and sent to laboratory for nutrient analysis. Both CP and CF digestibility values (%) were calculated according to the method described by Li [8], using the following Eq. …”