4.7 Article

Nutritional evaluation of soybean meals varying in oligosaccharide content

期刊

POULTRY SCIENCE
卷 79, 期 8, 页码 1127-1131

出版社

POULTRY SCIENCE ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.1093/ps/79.8.1127

关键词

soybean meal; oligosaccharides; true metabolizable energy; cecectomized rooster

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three conventional soybean meals (CSBM) and five low-oligosaccharide soybean meals (LOSBM) were evaluated. Meals were prepared by solvent-extracting flakes from generic soybean lines and soybean lines genetically modified to contain varying oligosaccharide content. The mean raffinose, stachyose, and galactinol levels in the CSBM were 0.58, 3.23, and 0%, respectively. The mean (range) raffinose, stachyose, and galactinol levels in the LOSBM were 0.08 (0.03 to 0.17%), 0.42 (0.04 to 1.08%), and 0.104 (0 to 0.24%), respectively. The, crude fiber, fat, and ash contents of all SBM were similar, whereas the CP and sucrose contents of the LOSBM were slightly higher than the CSBM. The effect of SBM type on digesta passage rate, dry matter digestibility, and TMEN was assessed in conventional and cecectomized roosters using a precision-fed rooster assay (8 x 2 factorial design). Quantitative collection of excreta for 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, and 48 h postfeeding indicated little or no effect of SBM type on digesta passage rate. The dry matter digestibility and TMEN values for the SBM were lower for cecectomized roosters compared with conventional roosters (P < 0.05), and there was no significant SBM x bird type interaction. The mean TMEN values (kcal/kg DM) for the CSBM and LOSBM were 2,739 and 2,931, respectively, which was a difference of 7% (P < 0.05). The two LOSBM with the lowest total raffinose, stachyose, and galactinol levels (0.07% and 0.25%) had average TMEN values that were 9.8% (P < 0.05) higher than their respective genetic controls. Digestibilities of raffinose and stachyose were much higher (P < 0.05) in conventional roosters than in cecectomized roosters. The results of this study indicated that the TMEN of LOSBM was higher than that of CSBM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据