“…Swine producers have increasingly turned to DDGS as their economical alternative, with diets formulated up to 30% by weight showing little impact on pig performance (Duttlinger et al, 2012; Salyer et al, 2012) or meat quality (McClelland et al, 2012; Shurson et al, 2012b) compared with pigs fed a CSBM‐based diet. In general, diets containing DDGS have a higher fiber and sulfur contents than diets containing only CSBM (Kerr et al, 2008; Zhang, 2010), both of which are known to affect nutrient excretion (Kerr, 2003; Andersen et al, 2012) and to lower fat digestibility (Degen et al, 2007; Kil et al, 2010). Increased fiber in diets fed to ruminants and monogastrics has been shown to increase methanogeneic activity (Jarret et al, 2011a; Klevenhusen et al, 2011), whereas the higher sulfur levels in DDGS diets may increase emissions of reduced sulfur compounds, increasing their odor impact (Blanes‐Vidal et al, 2009a; Feilberg et al, 2010; Trabue et al, 2011).…”