Different sources of soy protein concentrate affect performance results in weaned piglets
By Diana Siebert, CJ Europe GmbH
Soybean meal (SBM) is a widely used protein source in practical pig diets. However, SBM also contains antinutritional factors (ANF) which may limit its usage in weaning piglets. Important ANF’s are e. g. protease inhibitors including trypsin-inhibitors, saponins, allergens, isoflavones and oligosaccharides (especially raffinose and stachyose). These substances may reduce the nutrient availability and contribute to impaired gastrointestinal and metabolic performance. Some of the ANF’s in soybean are heat-labile (e. g. most trypsin-
inhibitors), consequently the heat treatment which is normally applied to soybeans is an effective way to decrease the amount of heat-labile substances and to increase the nutritional value of soybeans. However, heat stable ANF´s (e. g. oligosaccharides) will remain in heat-treated soybeans. The remaining substances can impair the performance of animals and also have a negative impact on the digestibility values of the feed. Soy protein concentrate (SPC) is processed through ethanol
extraction, leading to a significant reduction of trypsin-inhibitors and oligosaccharides as compared to soybean meal (SBM). Oliveira and Stein, 2016, compared standardised ileal digestibility (SID) of crude protein (CP) and amino acids (AA) between SBM and SPC in piglets [1]. They confirmed a significantly better digestibility of isoleucine (Ile), phenylalanine (Phe), leucine (Leu) and a numerically increased digestibility of the most other AA for SPC [1]. In another study, SPC had better digestibility values in comparison to classical SBM. SPC also partially or fully substituted animal proteins (fishmeal and spray- dried plasma, respectively) [2]. Several SPCs are available on the market. In a study, we
investigated commercially available sources of SPC and their effect on the performance of animals as compared to a control treatment fed with conventional SBM. 384 piglets [topig x pietrain] (6.30 ± 1.11 kg bodyweight) were randomly allocated to 4 dietary treatments (8 replicates each). The control diet (T1) consisted of corn, barley, wheat, whey powder, potato protein and soybean meal. In the experimental groups, soybean meal was replaced at rates of 5 % against one of three different commercially available SPCs (T2, T3 and T4). Diets
PAGE 38 SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2021 FEED COMPOUNDER
were formulated to provide the same energy and crude protein supply (Table 1). The total trial duration was divided into a weaner period (0 – 14 d), starter 1 (15 – 29 d) and starter 2 (30 – 41 d). Statistical analysis was done by SPSS, using the GLM procedure (Tukey test, p=<0.05). The piglets which received one of the SPC diets (T2-4) showed
an improved final bodyweight in comparison to the diet based on SBM (T1). Numerically the highest body weights at the end of the trial were observed in T4 (Figure 1). Feed conversion ratio did not vary significantly between treatments.
Figure 1: Final bodyweight [kg] at day 41 of the trial
Especially after weaning, feed intake is seen as crucial for
piglet’s performance and overall development. An interesting result of this study is that different SPCs lead to different feed intake in piglets
Figure 2: Average daily feed intake [g/d], Starter 2 period
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
