Figure 2: Variation in the apparent metabolisable energy content, expressed in %, for old broilers (>21 days) of the five major lipid groups tested in the Lipid Evaluation Test compared to literature (∆)


“ … it is important to evaluate the cost of


fats and oils per kcal with the fi nal goal of improving feed formulation accuracy … “


In extreme situations, energy diluting factors were found up to 62% (animal fat). On average, processed lipids like animal fat, poultry oil and acid oils contain higher MIU values compared to vegetable oils.


When the energy values are corrected for the diluting factor MIU In Figure 2, the apparent metabolisable energy for old broilers


(> 21 days) from literature data has been introduced along with the variation of energy values observed in the Lipid Evaluation Test for five major lipid sources. The variation is expressed in percent compared to the lowest energy value obtained in the test per lipid source. It shows a huge variability in energy value among the different types of lipids. More importantly, however, variations within the same lipid group are present from a modest 3% in sunflower oil up to as mush as 40% for acid oils. Energy values for younger birds, broilers less than 21 days of


age, show even a more extreme variation. For acid oils, the difference in energy value in young broilers went up to 92%. It is clear they are most sensitive group towards the chemical structure of the lipid.


Energy diluting factors Due to non-ideal processing, transportation, storage and handling of lipids components such as moisture, impurities and unsaponifiables (MIU) become a part of the lipid. These parameters do not provide any contribution to the nutritional value of the lipid. By consequence, the energy values need to be corrected for these diluting factors. The results of the field survey, presented in Figure 3, showed a heterogeneous spread of MIU for the five major lipid groups tested.


Figure 3: Variation in the energy diluting components, moisture, impurities and unsaponifiables of the five major lipid groups tested in the Lipid Evaluation Test


an increase in variation is noticed. For example, for acid oils, an initial spread in energy values of 40% was present; when the correction is made for energy diluting components MIU, a total variation of more than 170% is observed. In the extreme case of animal fats, a variation of 230% was present.


Figure 4: Variation in the apparent metabolisable energy content corrected for MIU, expressed in %, for old broilers (>21 days) of the five major lipid groups tested in the Lipid Evaluation Test is compared to literature (∆).


Extreme cases of 54% moisture (animal fat) and 12% impurities


(acid oil) were across the sample pool. The unsaponifiable fraction brings the largest contribution to the MIU factor in general, especially in processed lipids like animal fats, poultry oil and industrial by- product acid oils. As a result, the MIU factor increased the variation on apparent metabolisable energy massively. The Lipid Evaluation Test gives insight in the large variation


present between different lipid sources. The compiled data helps to fully understand the huge variability in nutritional and oxidative quality of fats and oils. This will help animal nutrition specialists to estimate more precisely the metabolisable energy content of lipids which becomes indispensable for the precision of feed formulation, allowing feed producers to accomplish the performance goals that the modern genetics of animals make possible. References available upon request. from Ester.Bolsens@kemin.com


Further information is available at www.kemin.com/cls FEED COMPOUNDER MAY/JUNE 2019 PAGE 25


AME (kcal. kg -1)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68