4.3 Article

Effects of dehulling, steam-cooking and microwave-irradiation on digestive value of white lupin (Lupinus albus) seed meal for rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)

Journal

ARCHIVES OF ANIMAL NUTRITION
Volume 69, Issue 2, Pages 143-157

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1745039X.2015.1009613

Keywords

Lupinus albus; digestibility; processing; protein feeds; Atlantic salmon; rainbow trout

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A digestibility trial was conducted to assess the effect of dehulling, steam-cooking and microwave-irradiation on the apparent digestibility of nutrients in white lupin (Lupinus albus) seed meal when fed to rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Six ingredients, whole lupin seed meal (LSM), dehulled LSM, dehulled LSM steam-cooked for 15 or 45min (SC15 and SC45, respectively) and LSM microwave-irradiated at 375 or 750W (MW375 and MW750, respectively), were evaluated for digestibility of dry matter, crude protein (CP), lipids, nitrogen-free extractives (NFE) and gross energy (GE). The diet-substitution approach was used (70% reference diet + 30% test ingredient). Faeces from each tank were collected using a settlement column. Dehulled LSM showed higher levels of proximate components (except for NFE and crude fibre), GE and phosphorus in comparison to whole LSM. Furthermore, SC15, SC45, MW375 and MW750 showed slight variations of chemical composition in comparison to dehulled LSM. Results from the digestibility trial indicated that dehulled LSM, SC15, SC45 and MW375 are suitable processing methods for the improvement of nutrients' apparent digestibility coefficient (ADC) in whole LSM. MW750 showed a lower ADC of nutrients (except for CP and lipids for rainbow trout) in comparison with MW350 for rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon, suggesting a heat damage of the ingredient when microwave-irradiation exceeded 350W.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available