1973
DOI: 10.3382/ps.0521970
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modification of the Illinois Reference Standard Amino Acid Mixture

Abstract: Based upon several recent studies involving reassessment of the essential amino acid requirements of the young chick, levels of dietary arginine, lysine, leucine, valine and glycine were decreased and proline and glutamic acid increased from those present in the Illinois Reference Standard (RS) amino acid mixture. Performance of chicks fed this modified amino acid mixture was as good as or better than that observed with the RS mixture and approached the performance level of chicks fed a practical-type 24% prot… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

1975
1975
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This extensive research during the 1960s and the 1970s culminated in several versions of the “chick AA requirement standard” for the first three weeks post-hatching [33-36]. Reference values were given in the Dean and Scott Standard [33], the Huston and Scott Reference Standard [34], the modified Sasse and Baker Reference Standard [35], and the Baker and Han’s Ideal Chick Protein [36] (Table 1). The common features shared by these different recommended standards of dietary AA requirements by chickens are that the diets included: (a) all EAA that are not synthesized by chickens; (b) several AA (cystine, glutamate, glycine, proline, and tyrosine) that are synthesized from either EAA or α-ketoglutarate plus ammonia by animals to various extents; and (c) no data on alanine, aspartate, asparagine, glutamine, or serine.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This extensive research during the 1960s and the 1970s culminated in several versions of the “chick AA requirement standard” for the first three weeks post-hatching [33-36]. Reference values were given in the Dean and Scott Standard [33], the Huston and Scott Reference Standard [34], the modified Sasse and Baker Reference Standard [35], and the Baker and Han’s Ideal Chick Protein [36] (Table 1). The common features shared by these different recommended standards of dietary AA requirements by chickens are that the diets included: (a) all EAA that are not synthesized by chickens; (b) several AA (cystine, glutamate, glycine, proline, and tyrosine) that are synthesized from either EAA or α-ketoglutarate plus ammonia by animals to various extents; and (c) no data on alanine, aspartate, asparagine, glutamine, or serine.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because the content of proline plus hydroxyproline in the body of chickens was not known at that time, the relatively small amount of proline in the recommended ideal protein was only arbitrarily set and could limit responses of the animals to dietary EAA in their maximal growth and production performance. In contrast, very large amounts of glutamate (e.g., 13 times the lysine value in the modified Sasse and Baker Reference Standard) [35] were used to presumably provide for the entire need for “nonspecific AA N”. However, key questions regarding whether glutamate fulfilled this role and whether excess glutamate might interfere with the transport, metabolism and utilization of other AA in chickens were not addressed by the Illinois investigators [33-36].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The optimal ratios of Leu, His, and Phe + Tyr with digestible Lys respectively for starter phase in the literature are 107%, 27%, 119% (Dean and Scott, 1965), 126%, 32%, 95% (Huston and Scott, 1968), 110%, 36%, 100% (Sasse and Baker, 1973), 109%, 36%, 100% (Baker and Han, 1994), and 107%, 36%, and 115% (Dorigam et al, 2013). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thirty-six chicks were divided into six groups of 6 chicks each. Three groups of chicks were fed 14.8% protein equivalent (PE) diets as described by Sasse and Baker (1973) containing either 1, 3, or 5% sodium bicarbonate (Table 1). Three groups of chicks were fed 44.6% PE diets with either 1, 3, or 5% sodium bicarbonate.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%