4.1 Article

Energy and nutrient digestibility in a hulless low-phytate phosphorus barley fed to finishing pigs

Journal

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Volume 90, Issue 3, Pages 393-399

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.4141/CJAS10019

Keywords

Barley; low-phytate barley; nutrient digestibility; phytate P; pigs

Funding

  1. Manitoba Rural Adaptation Council
  2. Manitoba Pork Council
  3. Canadian Wheat Board
  4. Canadian International Grains Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ige, D. V., Kiarie, E., Akinremi, O. O., Rossnagel, B., Flatten, D. and Nyachoti, C. M. 2010. Energy and nutrient digestibility in a hulless low-phytate phosphorus barley fed to finishing pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 90: 393-399. Six-ileal cannulated finishing barrows were used to determine energy and nutrient digestibility in a sample of a hulless low-phytate (LP) barley cultivar. A sample of regular hulled (RH) barley was also included for comparison. Two diets containing 96.5% of either LP or RH barley, 2.5% trace minerals and vitamins and 1% indigestible marker (Celite) were fed in a two-period change-over design. Each experimental period lasted 9 d; a 5-d acclimatization period followed by 2 d of fecal and 2 d of ileal digesta collection. Standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids (AA) was calculated using published values for ileal endogenous AA losses from our laboratory. Total phosphorus (as is) was similar in LP and RH; however, LP had lower phytate phosphorus (0.6 vs. 2.3, g kg(-1)) than RH. Apparent digestibility of phosphorus was higher (P <0.01) for LP barley than RH at both ilea! (45 vs. 24%) and faecal (55 vs. 32%) levels. Compared with RH, LP had higher (P <0.05) DE and SID contents of all indispensable AA except Phe. In summary, a hulless low-phytate barley sample fed to finishing pigs had higher digestible phosphorus, energy and AA contents than regular hulled barley, indicating that use of hulless low-phytate barley in swine diets may have ecological benefit.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available