Transcript Document

Non-Ruminant Animal Feed
Management Issues and
Practices
CNMP Core Curriculum
Feed Management – Section 6.3
CNMP Development
Core Training Curriculum
These course materials have been developed as a
cooperative effort between five land-grant universities
and The Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Copyright Information
Ames, Iowa 50011, (515) 294-4111.
Copyright © 1995-2006, Iowa State University
of Science and Technology. All rights reserved.
Objectives
• Review the digestion process and
excretion of N and P
• Become familiar with how the nutrient
requirements of swine and poultry vary
• Understand the issues related to feed
management with swine and poultry
• Provide you with strategies to
encourage producers on reducing
nutrient excretion
Supplemental Materials
• NRC Nutrient Requirements of Swine
• NRCS Nutrient Management Technical Note 3
• LPES Lesson No. 10 Reducing the Nutrient
Excretion and Odor of Pigs Through Nutritional
Means NRC Nutrient Requirements of Poultry
• NRCS Nutrient Management Technical Note 4
• LPES Lesson No. 11 Using Dietary and
Management Strategies to Reduce the Nutrient
Excretion of Poultry
Absorption
Feed
Saliva
Water
Enzymes
& Gastric
juices
urine
Lean tissue
development
feces
Stage of growth
• Lower protein contents in diets as pigs
and poultry mature
• Lower P content for animals later in
growth
• More P in diets for replacement animals
• More fiber (soy hulls; wheat mid; sugar
beet pulp) in gestation diets
• Increased energy (corn) in lactation diets
• Increased Ca content for layer diets
• Milk and by-products in weaning pig
diets
AA, peptides,
NH3
AA+peptides
Feed
NH3, MCP
Lean muscle
(protein)
CP+AA
urine
(urea)
feces
Overfeeding Nitrogen
• Difficult to balance amino acids in diets
with typical feed ingredients
• Variation in available amino acid content
of feeds
• Genetic potential of pigs vary
• Environmental stress (heat or cold
temperatures) can affect nitrogen
utilization
• Sufficient available energy is needed for
efficient N utilization
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation using synthetic amino acids
in their current pig rations?
• Are the rations reformulated when there are
different ingredient changes especially with
by-products?
• What is the laboratory analysis schedule for
the feed management plan?
Strategies for Swine
 Improving N
management
Synthetic amino
acids
Phase feeding
Split-sex feeding
 Improving P
management
Phytase; available P
Phase feeding
Split-sex feeding
Contributions of amino acids from corn and
SBM, relative to the requirement of a 88 lb pig
Corn (74.1% of diet) + Soybean meal (24.3%
of diet)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Corn
Arg His
Ile
SBM 48%
Leu Lys M+C P+T Thr Trp
Val
Contributions of amino acids from corn and
SBM, relative to the requirement of a 88 lb pig
Corn (84.1% of diet) + Soybean meal (12.9%
of diet) + Synthetic Lys, Met, Thr, Trp.
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Corn
Arg His
Ile
SBM 48%
Syn AA
Leu Lys M+C P+T Thr Trp Val
Dietary Effects on N Excretion*
Diet conc.
14% CP
12% CP +lys
10% CP + lys,
thr, meth, tryp
N intake, g/d
67
58
50
N dig & abs, g/d
60
51
43
N in feces, g/d
7
7
7
N retained, g/d
26
26
26
N in urine, g/d
34
25
17
N excreted, g/d
41
32
24
Reduction N, %
----
22
41
0.064
0.063
0.069
----
-$0.001
+$0.005
Diet cost, $/lb
Change in cost,
$//b
* Based upon 200 lb pig
Nitrogen Inputs From Feed
N from Feed
(lb/year)
Ratio
Corn-Soy
162,230
100
Corn-Soy
+ Lysine
140,845
86.8
Corn-Soy
+ 4 amino acids
120,489
74.2
Diets
4,000 Spaces; Feeder-Finish
Nitrogen Manipulation
• For 1% reduction in CP and AA
addition, reduce total N and ammonia
excretion by 8% - 10%
• Practical experience has shown must
adjust AA levels for sexes and
different genetic lines
Fiber Effects on Nitrogen
• Fiber addition -- shift in N excretion
pattern from urinary N to fecal N
• Fiber and low CP/syn. AA diet
reduced slurry pH, N excretion and
NH3 emissions
• Examples: Dietary soybean hull;
sugar beet pulp; wheat midds
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation currently grouping pigs
into separate sexes and feeding different
rations?
• Are rations changed at different stages
of growth (phase feeding) in the
production cycle?
Phase Feeding Impacts
• Reduce excessive
nutrient excretion
• Reduce feed costs
• Reduce land
application area
and odor potential
• Increase nutrient
efficiencies for
production
Phase-feeding diets are also cheaper, but the
extra hassle may outweigh the benefits
Diet cost per pig
$43
$42
$41
$40
$39
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Number of phases
Diet cost
obtained using
least-cost feed
formulation for a
varying number
of phases in the
feeding program.
PP+nPP
PP+nPP
Feed
PP+nPP+MP
Lean muscle
(protein)
PP+nPP
urine
(urea)
feces
Corn
0.32% P  .04
3515 samples
68% phytate
(61 to 85)
Phytate
The dietary P issue
• Because pigs and poultry can not digest
a major portion of the P (phytic P) in
typical feed grains, supplemental P is
added to the ration.
• As a result, total P is fed in excess of
animal need and excess P is excreted in
manure.
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation currently using the
enzyme, phytase, in the ration and
reducing the level of P in the ration?
• Are by-product feeds being used in the
ration?
Nutrition Approach
• Feed pigs only the P that they need.
– Reduce over feeding of P
– Formulate the diet on an “available P”
basis vs. “total P” basis
– Phase feeding for P as well as N
• Manipulate dietary P concentrations to
reduce total P excretion while maintaining
productivity.
– Supplement pig diets with phytase to
help animals break down phytic P
– If available, feed high available P (HAP)
corn or soybean to replace conventional
corn.
Dietary Effects on P Excretion*
Dietary P, P intake,
%
g/d
Retained
P, g/d
Excreted
P, g/d
Change,
%
0.70
21.0
4.8
16.2
+57
0.60
18.0
4.8
13.2
+32
0.50
15.0
4.7
10.3
0
0.40
(NRC)
12.0
4.5
7.5
-27
0.30
9.0
2.5
6.5
-37
0.30 +
Phytase
9.0
4.5
4.5
-56
* Based upon 200 lb pig
Phosphorus Strategies
• Phytase studies showed reduction of
P from 25 to 54%
• Phytase increased the availability of
N, Zn, Cu, Mn, Ca
• HAP corn has been shown to reduce
P excretion by 25 to 37%
Phosphorus Input From Feed
P from Feed
(lb/year)
Ratio
31,674
100
29,164
92
b. plus phytase
25,402
80
c. a+b
22,892
72.2
Diets
Corn-Soy
a. reduced safety
margin
4,000 Spaces; Feeder-Finish
Combination of Technologies
• Comparing a control diet to a reduced crude
protein diet with 5% soy hulls (fiber), HAP
corn, phytase and low sulfur minerals resulted
in:
– Growth and carcass qualities were the
same
– Reduced ammonium and total N in manure
by 28-31%
– Reduced P in the manure by 54%
– Reduced ammonia emissions by 50%
– Reduced hydrogen sulfide emission by 48%
Strategies for Poultry
 Nitrogen
management
Amino acids
Phase feeding
 Phosphorus
management
Available P
Phytase and
Vitamin D
Phase feeding
Tracking N in Broilers
Feed N = 100%
18.3%
51.1%
30.6%
Litter
Carcass
NH3-N
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation using synthetic amino
acids in their current poultry rations?
• Are the rations reformulated when there
are different ingredient changes?
• What is the laboratory analysis schedule
for the feed management plan?
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation currently grouping birds
into separate sexes and feeding different
rations?
• Are rations changed at different stages
of growth (phase feeding) in the
production cycle?
Nitrogen Strategies (poultry)
• Reduce CP and add synthetic AA
– Reducing CP (15% to 10%) reduced N
excretion 24% w/o affecting
performance
– N excretion reduction 10 to 27%
broilers; 30 to 35% in layers
• Must be careful that there is
sufficient nonessential AA and no AA
imbalances
• Phase feeding reduces N excretion
about 10%
Tracking P in Broilers
Feed P = 100%
44.8%
55.2%
Litter
Carcass
TSP Questions for Producer
• Is the operation currently using the
enzyme, phytase, in the ration and
reducing the level of P in the ration?
• Is the operation currently using vitamin
D3 in the ration?
• Are by-product feeds being used in the
ration?
Phase Feeding Impacts in
Poultry Feeding
• Phase feeding can reduce dietary nonphytate P levels by 5% (grower), 15%
(finisher) and 40% (withdrawal)
• Estimate a reduction of at least 10% litter
P with 4 phase program
Phosphorus Strategies
• Meet bird P requirements
• Select feed ingredients with a high
available P
• Use vitamin D
• Use phytase to reduce P excretion
(20 -25%)
Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion
in Broilers (g/bird)
27
12.1
14.9
Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)
Average weight = 5.0 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio (50 d of age)
Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion
in Broilers (g/bird)
27
23.3
12.1
14.9
11.2
Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)
Based on broiler nPP requirements, Angel et al, 2000
Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio
24% decrease
Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion
in Broilers (g/bird)
27
20.8
12.1
14.9
8.7
Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)
Based on broiler nPP requirements and use of
phytase, Angel et al, unpublished
Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio
42% decrease
Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion
in Broilers (g/bird)
27
19.5
12.1
14.9
7.4
Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)
Based on broiler nPP requirements, phytase and
25OHD3 Angel et al, 2000
Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio
50% decrease
Feed Waste:
An Expensive Loss
of Nutrients
• Presuming 5% feed waste on average:
– Responsible for 7.5% of N in manure.
– Similar contribution for copper, zinc, and P
– 35% of carbohydrates
•
Major source of odor
Feed Management to Improve Efficiency
• Diet formulation and management
– Evaluate diet content and reduce
unnecessary feed ingredients
– Implement a routine chemical feed
analysis program
– Apply stringent quality control feed
preparation and delivery to animals
– Minimize feed wastage and check water
– Implement phase feeding program
– Implement split-sex feeding program
Feed Management to Improve Efficiency
• Improve nutrient utilization
– Formulate feed based upon digestible
amino acids and available phosphorus
• Increasing digestibility (availability)
of nutrients
– choice of feed ingredients
– enzymes; synthetic feed ingredients
– feed processing technologies
– genetically modified feed ingredients (if
available)
Class Exercise (Monogastrics)
• 4,000 head pig grow-finisher operation
• What amount of phosphorus is generated by
the operation? Is it in excess of crop P205
removal?
• The P level in the grower diet is 0.50% and the
P in the finisher diet is 0.40%. However, if the
phytase enzyme is used, the P level in each
diet can be reduced by 0.10%.
• What amounts of P excretion can be reduced
by adding phytase to the pig’s diet?
Class Exercise (Monogastrics)
Formula to calculate the amount of P in
the diet
• Tons of feed X 2000 lbs./T = lbs of feed X
%P in the diet = lbs. of P fed
Formula to calculate the amount of P
excreted
• Lbs. of P fed X 80% excreted by pig = lbs.
of P excreted
Class Exercise (Monogastrics)
Grower diet:
• 1,200 T X 2000 lbs./T = 2,400,000 lbs. X .005 P =
12,000 lbs. P fed
Finisher diet:
• 2,270 T X 2000 lbs./T = 4,540,000 lbs. X .004 P =
18,160 lbs. P fed
Total:
• 12,000 lbs. P + 18,160 lbs. P = 30,160 lbs. P fed.
Excreted P:
• 30,160 lbs. P fed X .80 = 24,128 lbs. P excreted.
Conversion of P to P205 equivalent:
• 24,128 lbs. P excreted X 2.29 = 55,253 lbs. P205
excreted
• Since crop removal is estimated at 52,230 lbs. per
year, then there are 3,023 lbs. too much P205
excreted.
Class Exercise (Monogastrics)
Grower diet:
• 1,200 T feed X 2000 lbs./T = 2,400,000 lbs. X .004 P
= 9,600 lbs. P fed
Finisher diet:
• 2,270 T feed X 2000 lbs./T = 4,540,000 lbs. X .003 P
= 13,620 lbs. P fed
Total:
• 9,600 lbs. P fed grower diet + 13,620 lbs. P fed
finisher diet = 23,220 lbs. P fed.
Excreted P:
• 23,220 lbs. P fed X .80 = 18,576 lbs. P excreted.
Conversion of P to P205 equivalent:
• 18,576 lbs. P excreted X 2.29 = 42,539 lbs. P205
excreted
Class Exercise (Monogastrics)
Difference in P excretion
• 55,253 lbs. P2O5 excreted before phytase –
42,539 lbs. P2O5 excreted with phytase =
12,714 lbs. P2O5 less excreted
Reduction on acres needed
• 12,714 lbs. P2O5/ 65 lbs. P2O5 per acre =
195.6 acres less land needed for manure
production on a P basis.