- Email: [email protected]
Wheat-Soybean Meal Rations for Laying Hens
DIET AND CARCASS COMPOSITION
skin tissues of chicken broilers as influenced by dietary fats. Poultry Sci. 42: 1202-1207. Marion, J. E., J. G. Woodroof and R. E. Cook, 1965. Some physical and chemical properties of eggs from hens of five different stocks. Poultry Sci. 44: 529-534. Newell, G. W., J. L. Fry and R. H. Thayer, 1956. The effect of fat in the ration on fat deposition in broilers. Poultry Sci. 35: 1162-1163. Rand, N. T., F. A. Kummerow and H. M. Scott, 1957. The relationship of dietary protein, fat, and energy on the amount, composition and origin of chick carcass fat. Poultry Sci. 36: 1151. Spring, J. L., and W. S. Wilkinson, 1957. The influence of dietary protein and energy level on body composition of broilers. Poultry Sci. 36: 1159. Summers, J. D., S. J. Slinger and G. C. Ashton, 1965. The effect of dietary energy and protein on carcass composition with a note on a method for estimating carcass composition. Poultry Sci. 44: 501-509. Tarladgis, B. G., B. M. Watts, M. T. Younathan and L. Dugan, Jr., 1960. A distillation method for the quantitative determination of malonaldehyde in rancid foods. J. Amer. Oil Chemists' Soc. 37: 44-48.
Wheat-Soybean Meal Rations for Laying Hens J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON Department of Animal Science, The University of Manitoba, Winnipeg 19, Manitoba, Canada (Received for publication August 26, 1965) INTRODUCTION
T
HORNTON et al. (1957) and Waibel and Johnson (1961) have demonstrated that ration protein levels of 11 to 13 percent in corn-soybean meal rations will support a reasonable level of egg production when such rations are supplemented with certain amino acids. Bray (1960) and (1964) using corn-soybean meal laying rations found that low-protein rations supported satisfactory egg production and maintained desirable egg weights when properly supplemented with amino acids. Little information is available concern-
ing the efficacy of low-protein, wheat-soybean meal laying hen rations, with or without amino acid supplementation. March and Biely (1963) reported that the addition of lysine and methionine to diets containing 14% protein had a dramatic effect on egg weight. The diets used were composed primarily of wheat and soybean meal, and although the study was of relatively short duration, level of egg production was good. The data reported herein describe the use of low-protein, wheat-soybean meal rations for laying hens and the influence of
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Darrow, M. I., and E. O. Essary, 1955. Influence of fats in rations on storage equality of poultry, Poultry Sci. 34: 427-431. Donaldson, W. E., G. F. Combs and G. L. Romoser, 1956. Studies on energy levels in poultry rations. I. The effect of calorie-to-protein ratio of the ration on growth, nutrient utilization and body composition of chicks. Poultry Sci. 35: 1100-1105. Duncan, D. B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11: 1-42. Essary, E. O., and L. E. Dawson, 1965. Quality of fryer carcasses as related to protein and fat levels in the diet. I. Fat deposition and moisture pick-up during chilling. Poultry Sci. 44: 7-15. Essary, E. O., L. E. Dawson, E. L. Wisman and C. E. Holmes, 1965. Influence of different levels of fat and protein in broiler rations on live weight, dressing percentage and specific gravity of carcasses. Poultry Sci. 44: 304-305. Fraps, G. S., 1943. Relation of the protein, fat and energy of the rations to the composition of chickens. Poultry Sci. 22: 421-424. Harshaw, H. M., 1936. Effect of diet, range, and fattening on the physical and chemical composition of cockerels. J. Agri. Res. 53: 357-368. Marion, J. E., and J. G. Woodroof, 1963. The fatty acid composition of breast, thigh, and
247
248
J.
L.
SELL AND G.
C. HODGSON
TABLE 1.—The composition of the laying hen rations used in experiments 1 and 2 Experiment 1
Experiment 2
Ingredient Control Ground wheat Soybean meal (45% protein) M e a t meal (50% protein) Dehyd. alfalfa meal (17% protein) Dried dist. solubles (corn) Ground limestone Deflour. rock phos. Vitamin Premix 1 Mineral Premix 2 Animal tallow
75.5 7.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 6.5 1.5 1.0 0.5
— 100
Analysis Protein (chemical analysis, % ) Methionine (%) Lysine (%) Metabolizable energy (kcal./kg.) 1
16.80 0.26 0.63 2,930
Lo-protein 86.5 4.0
— — — 6.5 1.5 1.0 0.5
— 100 13.49 0.21 0.45 3,023
Control 71.5 8.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 5.5 1.5 1.0 0.5 4.0 100 17.18(17.63)3 0 . 2 6 ( 0.27) 0 . 6 6 ( 0 .68) 3,098
Hi-protein
Lo-protein
70.5 15.0
84.0 4.5
—. — — 5.5
— — — 5.5
2.5 1.0 0.5 5.0
2.5 1.0 0.5 2.0
100 16.22 (18.31) 0 . 2 7 ( 0.30) 0.69 ( 0.75) 3,175
100 13.44(16.38) 0.22 ( 0.26) 0.47 ( 0.55) 3,120
The vitamin premix contributed the following per kilogram of ration: vitamin A, 3573 I.U.; vitamin D3, 880 I.C.U.; vitamin B12,2 9.9 mg; riboflavin, 35 mg. and choline chloride, 176 mg. The mineral premix contributed the following per kilogram of ration: manganese, 110 mg.; zinc, 55 mg., and sodium chloride, 4 62 - S. . 3 Analysis figures under experiment 2 which are not in parentheses are applicable to part A of the experiment while those in parentheses indicate part E.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
lysine and/or methionine supplementation days and at the termination of the experion the performance of hens fed low-protein . ments. In experiment 1, a low-protein ration rations. was compared to a control ration (Table METHODS AND MATERIALS 1). The low-protein ration was supplementTwo experiments were conducted in suc- ed with 0.1% methionine hydroxy analogue cessive years using the same commercial (MHA) or 0.10% L-lysine, or both to form strain of Single Comb White Leghorn hens. 3 additional ration treatments. The wheat The stock was reared from hatch at the and soybean meal used throughout experiUniversity of Manitoba to 150 days of age, ment 1 were of single sources, thus miniat which time they were placed in individ- mizing changes in ration protein levels as ual cages. All hens were fed the same lay- influenced by changes in ingredient sources. ing hen ration until they attained 185 days Rations used in experiment 2 (Table 1) of age. The experiments were then initiated were similar to those used in experiment 1 by randomly assigning each ration treat- except that a low level of animal tallow was ment to groups of five hens. In experiment included in the low-protein ration to reduce 1, 20 hens were fed each ration treatment dustiness of the feed. The low-protein rawhile in experiment 2, 30 hens were used tion was supplemented with 0.10% DL-mefor each ration treatment. Both experi- thionine or 0.10% L-lysine, or both. A ments were of 308 days duration, the total "control" ration was used together with a period being divided into 11 equal parts. wheat-soybean meal ration containing a Feed and water were supplied ad libitum. protein level comparable to the control raFeed consumption and egg production were tion. The calculated analysis (chemical computed at the end of each 28-day inter- analysis in the case of protein) of the exval. All eggs layed for 3 consecutive days perimental rations are given in Table 1. at the end of every other 28-day period As in experiment 1, single sources of were weighed. Body weight data were col- wheat and soybean meal were set aside for lected at the beginning, at the end of 140 the entire experiment. However, a major
WHEAT-SOYBEAN
249
RATIONS
TABLE 2.—The influence of amino acid supplementation of low-protein, wheat-soybean rations for laying hens—experiment 1
Ration treatment
H.D.i egg production
(%)
Control Lo-protein Lo-protein+M4 Lo-protein-|-L Lo-protein-j-M+L
7 8 2abs bc
72.2 66.7° 77.4iab 81.6 a
Kg. feed/doz. eggs
Kg. feed/ kg. eggs
Average8 egg weight (g.)
Average3 change in body weight (g./hen)
1.85ab 1.90 1.93? 1.85b 1.80°
2.68 b 2.93 a 2.97? 2.72bb 2.59
58.9a 54.3b 55.5b 57.7" 59.2"
24 - 6 -23 0 5
Feed consumed
Protein Methionine consumed consumed
Lysine consumed
(g./hen/day) 121a 114ab 107b 119" 122a
20.2a 15.4b0 14.5° 16. l b 16.4b
0.31b 0.24° 0.34b 0.25b 0.38a
0.76a 0.52° 0.49? 0.66b 0.67b
1 2 3
Average mortality was 4% over the entire experiment and was not related to any particular ration treatment. Weighted mean egg weights over the entire 308-day experiment. Average change in body; weight per hen over the 308-day experiment. *6 M =0.10% added methionine hydroxy analogue and L=0.10% added L-lysine. Means not having the same 8uperscript letter are significantly different at P<0.05.
protein and lysine was also decreased by MELA supplementation while the consumption of methionine (including MHA) was significantly (P < 0.05) increased. Supplementation of the low-protein ration with 0.10% lysine significantly (P < 0.05) improved feed conversion and egg weight as compared to the unsupplemented ration. Simultaneously, egg production, RESULTS feed consumption and protein consumpExperiment 1. Hens fed the low-protein, tion were increased slightly. The addition wheat-soybean meal ration produced eggs of both MHA and lysine resulted in sigat a lower rate over the 308-day experi- nificant (P < 0.05) improvements in egg ment than hens fed the control ration production, feed conversion and egg weight (Table 2). The difference in egg produc- as compared with the low-protein ration. tion was not significant. Feed consump- In fact, the 13.5% protein ration with tion was also slightly less for the low- 0.1% MHA and 0.1% lysine supported a protein fed hens. There was a significant level and efficiency of egg production equal (P < 0.05) decrease in average weight of to that of the 16% protein control ration eggs produced by hens fed low-protein as even though average protein consumed per compared with the control ration and the hen per day was significantly (P < 0.05) amount of feed required per dozen or less. kilogram of eggs produced was significantly The change in body weight during the (P < 0.05) increased for the low-protein experiment was negligible and was influgroup. Concurrent with these results was enced very little by ration treatment. a significant (P < 0.05) decrease in protein, methionine (or its equivalent) and Experiment 2. The change in protein level lysine consumption. of the rations during the experiment necesThe addition of 0.10% MHA to the sitated reporting the results in 2 sections, low-protein ration slightly decreased egg as shown in Table 3. Part A covers exproduction and efficiency of egg produc- perimental period 1 through 4 during tion as compared with the unsupplemented which the low-protein wheat was used low-protein ration. The intake of feed, while part B includes periods 5 through
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
portion of the wheat was inadvertently used for another purpose and at the end of the fourth 28-day period, it was necessary to change wheat source. The second source of wheat contained a much higher level of protein than the initial source. Consequently, the protein content of all rations increased considerably as shown in Table 1.
250
J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON TABLE 3.—The influence of amino acid supplementation of wheat-soybean rations for laying hens—experiment 2
Ration treatment
H.D.' egg production
(%)
Kg. feed/ doz. eggs
Kg. feed/ kg. eggs
Average 2 egg weight (g.)
Average 3 change in body weight (g./hen)
Feed consumed
Protein consumed
Methionine Lysine consumed consumed
(g./hen/day)
P a r t A* 87. l a 83.4ab 80.2 b 73.7 . " 83.2ab 79.8 b
1.48 c! 1.50 ° 1.62 s b 1.56 b 1.58 b 1.55
2.21 b 2.27 b 2.51a 2.61" 2 . 4 7 aa 2.50
55. 7 a 55.6a 53.7ab 49.8 53.1 bo 51.5
Control _ Hi-protein Lo-protein Lo-protein+M Lo-protein-j-L Lo-protein+M + L
74. la 72.6a 73.4a 63.9 b 73.8*,. 69.3ab
1.75a 1.73a 1.80a 1.83a 1.79a 1.76"
2.49 b 2.45 b 2.65ab 2.83a 2 . 6 4 aa bb 2.71
5 8 . 6 aa 5 8 . 8a 56.8 b 54.0 s 5 6 . 5 ,b 54.0
381 376 213 -68 222 -5
107" 105 a 1 0 8 \b 96 109 a 103"
18.4 a 17.0 b 14.5 d e 12.9 ' 14.7 c d e 13.8
0.28 ° 0.28 °d 0.24 v 0.31 b Jd 0.24 a 0.33
0 . 7 1 "a 0.72 0.51 • 0.45 ^ d 0.62 fb 0.59
108 a bb o 104 110 a dJ 98 110 a o d 102
19.1" 19. I s 18.1 b 16.0 ° 18.1 b 16.6 °
0.29 b ° 0.31 0.29 b • 0.35 0.29 a ° 0.37
0.72 b 0.78» 0.61 d 0.53 ,. • 0.72 b 0.66 °
1 8 1
Average mortality over the entire experiment was 9 % and was not related to any ration treatment. Weighted mean egg weight over the respective intervals, parts A and B. Average change in body weight per hen over the entire 308-day experiment. < P a r t A includes the first four 28-day periods of experiment 2 while P a r t B includes the final seven 28-day periods. 6 M = 0 . 1 0 % added DL-methionine and L = 0 . 1 0 % added L-lysine. 6 Means not having the same superscript letter are significantly different at P < 0 . 0 5 .
11, the interval during which the high protein wheat was used. Comparison of the effects of feeding the high-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration with that of the control ration shows that there were no significant (P < 0.05) differences among any factors measured except protein consumption during part A. Protein consumption by hens fed the wheat-soybean meal ration was significantly (P < 0.05) less than when the control ration was fed. However, since the ingredients contributing protein to the ration differed, calculated methionine and lysine consumption was nearly the same. Essentially the same relative effects of these two ration treatments was observed during period B although the high-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration was slightly more efficient per unit of eggs produced. During part A, the low-protein ration caused a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in egg production and efficiency of production. Simultaneously, protein, methionine and lysine consumption were decreased as compared with the control and
high-protein, wheat-soybean meal rations. However, during part B when the ration protein level increased from 13.4% to 16.4%, no significant differences were observed in egg production or efficiency of production. Protein and lysine consumption was significantly (P < 0.05) less with the low-protein ration. Egg weight was considerably less for the low-protein group. When methionine was added to the low-protein ration, egg production decreased significantly (P < 0.05) during both parts A and B. Feed efficiency was reduced though not significantly while average egg weight, feed consumption and daily intake of protein and lysine were significantly (P < 0.05) decreased. The addition of 0.1% lysine did not significantly alter any production measurement as compared with the unsupplemented lowprotein ration. The addition of both methionine and lysine decreased egg production slightly and decreased egg weight and feed consumption significantly (P < 0.05) during part B. Concurrently, methionine
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Control Hi-protein Lo-protein Lo-protein+M5 Lo-protein+L Lo-protein -j-M -j-L
WHEAT-SOYBEAN RATIONS
and lysine intake per hen per day was increased significantly although protein intake was decreased. Hens fed rations not supplemented with methionine gained an average of 213 to 381 grams during the experiment. In contrast, when 0.1% methionine was included in the wheat-soybean ration (alone or in combination with 0.1% lysine) average body weight decreased. DISCUSSION
1
Sell, J. L. Unpublished data.
wheat-soybean meal ration was apparently not the most limiting factor for laying hens. In fact, the adverse effects observed when methionine or its analogue was added to the ration illustrate the influence of providing an excess of this amino acid in the diet. The predominant consequences of supplemental source of methionine were decreased feed and protein intake, reduced egg size and a lower level of egg production. In experiment 1, these effects were not observed when lysine was simultaneously added to the low-protein ration. This suggests that supplemental methionine was accentuating the lysine inadequacy of the low-protein ration and that supplemental lysine remedied the situation. The results of experiment 2 are not entirely consistent with those of experiment 1 in regard to effects of amino acid supplementation. Unfortunately, due to the change in ration protein level during the trial there is little basis for comparison between experiments. It is interesting to note that even when ration protein level of the "low-protein" rations of experiment 2 was 16.4%, the addition of 0.1% methionine, alone or in combination with lysine, exerted an adverse effect on laying hen performance. Based upon the data of experiment 1 and part A of experiment 2, a low-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration, supplemented with lysine, will support a satisfactory rate and efficiency of egg production provided that protein intake per hen per day averages about 16.5 grams or more. These data do not demonstrate the most effective level of supplemental lysine except that it appears to be somewhat less than 0.1% of the ration for a wheat-soybean ration. Although 0.1% methionine exerted an adverse effect when added alone, the additional response in experiment 1 of hens fed the lowprotein ration containing both added methionine (MHA) and lysine indicates that
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Previous studies at the University of Manitoba1 have demonstrated that rations for laying hens based primarily on wheat will support a level and efficiency of egg production comparable to that obtained with other grains. The data obtained in the experiments reported herein show that "simplified," wheat-soybean meal rations of low-protein content (13.5%) may also be satisfactory if protein quality is improved by proper amino acid supplementation. It was apparent in both experiments that lysine was the most limiting amino acid for egg production in wheat-soybean meal rations of low protein content. Johnson and Fisher (1958) estimated the lysine requirement of laying hens to be 0.50% of the ration. The low-protein rations used in the current study were calculated to contain about 0.45% lysine. Superficially, it would appear that the lysine level was approaching adequacy. However, Calhoun et al. (1960) reported that the availability of lysine from wheat protein was approximately 75% for the rat. If the same were true for the chicken, the total lysine available from a wheat-soybean meal ration would be relatively low as compared to the suggested requirement. Thus, a response to supplemental lysine, as was obtained, would be anticipated. The methionine level of the low-protein,
251
252
J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON
SUMMARY
The efficacy of wheat-soybean meal rations, with and without methionine hyroxy analogue (MHA) and lysine (L) supplementation for individually-caged Single Comb White Leghorn hens was studied. The average hen-day production through a 308-day experiment was 72.2% with a wheat-soybean ration containing 13.5% protein and 3,023 kcal. of metabolizable energy (M.E.)/kg. In comparison, hens fed a ration containing 16.5% protein and 2,930 kcal. M.E./kg. produced eggs at a rate of 78.2%. The inclusion of 0.1% MHA in the low-protein ration depressed egg production to 66.7% while 0.1% L or 0.1% L plus
0.1 MHA increased egg production to 77.4% and 81.6%, respectively. Feed required per dozen eggs or per kilogram of eggs was inversely related to level of egg production. Average egg weight was markedly reduced by the 13.5% protein ration as compared to the 16.5% protein ration. However, eggs produced by hens fed the 13.5% protein ration with L alone or in combination with MHA were nearly equal in weight to those of hens fed the 16.5% protein ration. Changes in body weight were negligible on all ration treatments. A second experiment was conducted using the same ration treatments except that 0.1% DL-methionine was used in place of MHA. Supplementing a wheat-soybean ration with M alone exerted an adverse effect on level of egg production, feed efficiency, egg weight and change in body weight. Adding 0.1% L to the low-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration, alone or in combination with M, failed to elicit a beneficial response in production characteristics as had been observed in experiment 1. ACKNOWLED GMENT The L-lysine used in this study was kindly supplied by Merck Sharp and Dohme International. The authors gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Messrs. S. Antonation and W. Guenter. REFERENCES Bray, D. J., 1960. Studies with corn-soya laying diets. 2. Optimum combinations of corn and soybean protein. Poultry Sci. 39: 1541-1546. Bray, D. J., 1964. Studies with corn-soya laying diets. 7. Limiting amino acids in a 60:40 blend of corn and soybean protein. Poultry Sci. 43: 396-401. Calhoun, W. K., F. N. Hepburn and W. B. Bradley. 1960. The availability of lysine in wheat, flour, bread and gluten. J. Nutrition, 70: 337347. Johnson, D. Jr., and H. Fisher. 1958. The amino acid requirement of laying hens. 3. Minimal requirement levels of essential amino acids:
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
the former may be the second most limiting amino acid in wheat-soybean meal rations, particularly in terms of obtaining eggs of satisfactory weight. Thornton et at. (19S7) and Waibel and Johnson (1961) have reported that methionine is the most limiting amino acid in corn-soybean meal laying rations containing 11% or more of protein. However, in the case of wheat-soybean meal rations of 13 to 14% protein, lysine appears to be the most limiting amino acid. This suggests a fundamental difference between the amino acid balance of wheat-soybean and cornsoybean rations. The methionine and lysine content of corn and wheat protein do not differ markedly. However, since wheat contains considerably more protein than corn, the proportion of protein supplied by wheat in a wheat-soybean meal ration is much higher than that supplied by corn in a corn-soybean meal ration of similar protein content. Thus, the relative amino acid composition of a wheat-soybean meal ration of low-protein content will generally reflect that of the wheat. On a calculated basis, such rations will not supply sufficient lysine to satisfy the laying hen requirement for optimum egg production.
WHEAT-SOYBEAN RATIONS techniques and development of diet. Brit. J. Nutrition, 12: 276-285. March, B. E., and J. Biely, 1963. Control of egg size in chickens through dietary amino acid balance. Nature, 200: 702-703. Thornton, P. A., L. G. Blaylock and R. E. Mor-
253
eng. 1957. Protein level as a factor in egg production. Poultry Sci. 36: 552-557. Waibel, P. E., and E. L. Johnson. 1961. Effect of low protein corn-soybean oil meal diets and amino acid supplementation on performance of laying hens. Poultry Sci. 40: 293-298.
Frying Chickens Purchased in Retail Markets in One Area 1. MICROBIOLOGICAL ASPECTS
(Received for publication August 26, 1965)
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
HE quality of dressed poultry in the market is obviously important in determining the acceptance of the product. One aspect of this quality is microbiological. Many studies have been conducted on changes during refrigerated storage of chickens, but these have usually been in a laboratory situation or made on birds held until spoiled. Dawson and Stadelman (1960) reviewed factors that influence the bacterial population of processed poultry. In the study reported here, selected microbiological aspects of ready-to-cook broiler-fryer-type chickens as purchased in retail stores were assessed over a period of one year. The stores in the sample purchased their supplies from both local and out-of-state processors. A range in sales volume was also considered in selecting the sample. Both whole and cut-up birds were included. Also studied were palatability characteristics and their relation to microbiological factors including proteolytic, lipolytic, and lipoxidative types. This phase will be reported in a subsequent paper.
Retail store sample. Information concerning the 38 retail markets in Lafayette and West Lafayette, Indiana, that sold poultry was obtained through interviews with the store or meat-department managers. The sample of 18 stores for the study was selected on the basis of these interviews. Included were stores selling a large volume of poultry per week, 1,200 lb. or more; medium, 250 to 1,000 lb.; and small, 175 lb. or less. Seven obtained birds from out-of-state, and 11 from 5 different processors in Indiana. Only two managers reported that they occasionally froze either whole or cut-up fryers to be sold later as fresh birds. From information received at the time of each purchase, as well as originally, none were selling antibiotic-treated carcasses. Most of the birds were packaged in plastic bags or covered tray packs before being put on refrigerated display.
T
Journal Paper No. 2468, Purdue Agricultural Experiment Station.
Purchases were made from each store once during each calendar season in 1963. One purchase lot consisted of two whole and two cut-up ready-to-cook fresh fryers for each of three seasons, and one of each type for the fourth. Information was obtained each time on the retailer's source of
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
MARGY WOODBURN, RODNEY HARRINGTON AND WILLIAM J. STADELMAN Departments of Foods and Nutrition and Animal Sciences, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana 47907
skin tissues of chicken broilers as influenced by dietary fats. Poultry Sci. 42: 1202-1207. Marion, J. E., J. G. Woodroof and R. E. Cook, 1965. Some physical and chemical properties of eggs from hens of five different stocks. Poultry Sci. 44: 529-534. Newell, G. W., J. L. Fry and R. H. Thayer, 1956. The effect of fat in the ration on fat deposition in broilers. Poultry Sci. 35: 1162-1163. Rand, N. T., F. A. Kummerow and H. M. Scott, 1957. The relationship of dietary protein, fat, and energy on the amount, composition and origin of chick carcass fat. Poultry Sci. 36: 1151. Spring, J. L., and W. S. Wilkinson, 1957. The influence of dietary protein and energy level on body composition of broilers. Poultry Sci. 36: 1159. Summers, J. D., S. J. Slinger and G. C. Ashton, 1965. The effect of dietary energy and protein on carcass composition with a note on a method for estimating carcass composition. Poultry Sci. 44: 501-509. Tarladgis, B. G., B. M. Watts, M. T. Younathan and L. Dugan, Jr., 1960. A distillation method for the quantitative determination of malonaldehyde in rancid foods. J. Amer. Oil Chemists' Soc. 37: 44-48.
Wheat-Soybean Meal Rations for Laying Hens J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON Department of Animal Science, The University of Manitoba, Winnipeg 19, Manitoba, Canada (Received for publication August 26, 1965) INTRODUCTION
T
HORNTON et al. (1957) and Waibel and Johnson (1961) have demonstrated that ration protein levels of 11 to 13 percent in corn-soybean meal rations will support a reasonable level of egg production when such rations are supplemented with certain amino acids. Bray (1960) and (1964) using corn-soybean meal laying rations found that low-protein rations supported satisfactory egg production and maintained desirable egg weights when properly supplemented with amino acids. Little information is available concern-
ing the efficacy of low-protein, wheat-soybean meal laying hen rations, with or without amino acid supplementation. March and Biely (1963) reported that the addition of lysine and methionine to diets containing 14% protein had a dramatic effect on egg weight. The diets used were composed primarily of wheat and soybean meal, and although the study was of relatively short duration, level of egg production was good. The data reported herein describe the use of low-protein, wheat-soybean meal rations for laying hens and the influence of
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Darrow, M. I., and E. O. Essary, 1955. Influence of fats in rations on storage equality of poultry, Poultry Sci. 34: 427-431. Donaldson, W. E., G. F. Combs and G. L. Romoser, 1956. Studies on energy levels in poultry rations. I. The effect of calorie-to-protein ratio of the ration on growth, nutrient utilization and body composition of chicks. Poultry Sci. 35: 1100-1105. Duncan, D. B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11: 1-42. Essary, E. O., and L. E. Dawson, 1965. Quality of fryer carcasses as related to protein and fat levels in the diet. I. Fat deposition and moisture pick-up during chilling. Poultry Sci. 44: 7-15. Essary, E. O., L. E. Dawson, E. L. Wisman and C. E. Holmes, 1965. Influence of different levels of fat and protein in broiler rations on live weight, dressing percentage and specific gravity of carcasses. Poultry Sci. 44: 304-305. Fraps, G. S., 1943. Relation of the protein, fat and energy of the rations to the composition of chickens. Poultry Sci. 22: 421-424. Harshaw, H. M., 1936. Effect of diet, range, and fattening on the physical and chemical composition of cockerels. J. Agri. Res. 53: 357-368. Marion, J. E., and J. G. Woodroof, 1963. The fatty acid composition of breast, thigh, and
247
248
J.
L.
SELL AND G.
C. HODGSON
TABLE 1.—The composition of the laying hen rations used in experiments 1 and 2 Experiment 1
Experiment 2
Ingredient Control Ground wheat Soybean meal (45% protein) M e a t meal (50% protein) Dehyd. alfalfa meal (17% protein) Dried dist. solubles (corn) Ground limestone Deflour. rock phos. Vitamin Premix 1 Mineral Premix 2 Animal tallow
75.5 7.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 6.5 1.5 1.0 0.5
— 100
Analysis Protein (chemical analysis, % ) Methionine (%) Lysine (%) Metabolizable energy (kcal./kg.) 1
16.80 0.26 0.63 2,930
Lo-protein 86.5 4.0
— — — 6.5 1.5 1.0 0.5
— 100 13.49 0.21 0.45 3,023
Control 71.5 8.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 5.5 1.5 1.0 0.5 4.0 100 17.18(17.63)3 0 . 2 6 ( 0.27) 0 . 6 6 ( 0 .68) 3,098
Hi-protein
Lo-protein
70.5 15.0
84.0 4.5
—. — — 5.5
— — — 5.5
2.5 1.0 0.5 5.0
2.5 1.0 0.5 2.0
100 16.22 (18.31) 0 . 2 7 ( 0.30) 0.69 ( 0.75) 3,175
100 13.44(16.38) 0.22 ( 0.26) 0.47 ( 0.55) 3,120
The vitamin premix contributed the following per kilogram of ration: vitamin A, 3573 I.U.; vitamin D3, 880 I.C.U.; vitamin B12,2 9.9 mg; riboflavin, 35 mg. and choline chloride, 176 mg. The mineral premix contributed the following per kilogram of ration: manganese, 110 mg.; zinc, 55 mg., and sodium chloride, 4 62 - S. . 3 Analysis figures under experiment 2 which are not in parentheses are applicable to part A of the experiment while those in parentheses indicate part E.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
lysine and/or methionine supplementation days and at the termination of the experion the performance of hens fed low-protein . ments. In experiment 1, a low-protein ration rations. was compared to a control ration (Table METHODS AND MATERIALS 1). The low-protein ration was supplementTwo experiments were conducted in suc- ed with 0.1% methionine hydroxy analogue cessive years using the same commercial (MHA) or 0.10% L-lysine, or both to form strain of Single Comb White Leghorn hens. 3 additional ration treatments. The wheat The stock was reared from hatch at the and soybean meal used throughout experiUniversity of Manitoba to 150 days of age, ment 1 were of single sources, thus miniat which time they were placed in individ- mizing changes in ration protein levels as ual cages. All hens were fed the same lay- influenced by changes in ingredient sources. ing hen ration until they attained 185 days Rations used in experiment 2 (Table 1) of age. The experiments were then initiated were similar to those used in experiment 1 by randomly assigning each ration treat- except that a low level of animal tallow was ment to groups of five hens. In experiment included in the low-protein ration to reduce 1, 20 hens were fed each ration treatment dustiness of the feed. The low-protein rawhile in experiment 2, 30 hens were used tion was supplemented with 0.10% DL-mefor each ration treatment. Both experi- thionine or 0.10% L-lysine, or both. A ments were of 308 days duration, the total "control" ration was used together with a period being divided into 11 equal parts. wheat-soybean meal ration containing a Feed and water were supplied ad libitum. protein level comparable to the control raFeed consumption and egg production were tion. The calculated analysis (chemical computed at the end of each 28-day inter- analysis in the case of protein) of the exval. All eggs layed for 3 consecutive days perimental rations are given in Table 1. at the end of every other 28-day period As in experiment 1, single sources of were weighed. Body weight data were col- wheat and soybean meal were set aside for lected at the beginning, at the end of 140 the entire experiment. However, a major
WHEAT-SOYBEAN
249
RATIONS
TABLE 2.—The influence of amino acid supplementation of low-protein, wheat-soybean rations for laying hens—experiment 1
Ration treatment
H.D.i egg production
(%)
Control Lo-protein Lo-protein+M4 Lo-protein-|-L Lo-protein-j-M+L
7 8 2abs bc
72.2 66.7° 77.4iab 81.6 a
Kg. feed/doz. eggs
Kg. feed/ kg. eggs
Average8 egg weight (g.)
Average3 change in body weight (g./hen)
1.85ab 1.90 1.93? 1.85b 1.80°
2.68 b 2.93 a 2.97? 2.72bb 2.59
58.9a 54.3b 55.5b 57.7" 59.2"
24 - 6 -23 0 5
Feed consumed
Protein Methionine consumed consumed
Lysine consumed
(g./hen/day) 121a 114ab 107b 119" 122a
20.2a 15.4b0 14.5° 16. l b 16.4b
0.31b 0.24° 0.34b 0.25b 0.38a
0.76a 0.52° 0.49? 0.66b 0.67b
1 2 3
Average mortality was 4% over the entire experiment and was not related to any particular ration treatment. Weighted mean egg weights over the entire 308-day experiment. Average change in body; weight per hen over the 308-day experiment. *6 M =0.10% added methionine hydroxy analogue and L=0.10% added L-lysine. Means not having the same 8uperscript letter are significantly different at P<0.05.
protein and lysine was also decreased by MELA supplementation while the consumption of methionine (including MHA) was significantly (P < 0.05) increased. Supplementation of the low-protein ration with 0.10% lysine significantly (P < 0.05) improved feed conversion and egg weight as compared to the unsupplemented ration. Simultaneously, egg production, RESULTS feed consumption and protein consumpExperiment 1. Hens fed the low-protein, tion were increased slightly. The addition wheat-soybean meal ration produced eggs of both MHA and lysine resulted in sigat a lower rate over the 308-day experi- nificant (P < 0.05) improvements in egg ment than hens fed the control ration production, feed conversion and egg weight (Table 2). The difference in egg produc- as compared with the low-protein ration. tion was not significant. Feed consump- In fact, the 13.5% protein ration with tion was also slightly less for the low- 0.1% MHA and 0.1% lysine supported a protein fed hens. There was a significant level and efficiency of egg production equal (P < 0.05) decrease in average weight of to that of the 16% protein control ration eggs produced by hens fed low-protein as even though average protein consumed per compared with the control ration and the hen per day was significantly (P < 0.05) amount of feed required per dozen or less. kilogram of eggs produced was significantly The change in body weight during the (P < 0.05) increased for the low-protein experiment was negligible and was influgroup. Concurrent with these results was enced very little by ration treatment. a significant (P < 0.05) decrease in protein, methionine (or its equivalent) and Experiment 2. The change in protein level lysine consumption. of the rations during the experiment necesThe addition of 0.10% MHA to the sitated reporting the results in 2 sections, low-protein ration slightly decreased egg as shown in Table 3. Part A covers exproduction and efficiency of egg produc- perimental period 1 through 4 during tion as compared with the unsupplemented which the low-protein wheat was used low-protein ration. The intake of feed, while part B includes periods 5 through
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
portion of the wheat was inadvertently used for another purpose and at the end of the fourth 28-day period, it was necessary to change wheat source. The second source of wheat contained a much higher level of protein than the initial source. Consequently, the protein content of all rations increased considerably as shown in Table 1.
250
J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON TABLE 3.—The influence of amino acid supplementation of wheat-soybean rations for laying hens—experiment 2
Ration treatment
H.D.' egg production
(%)
Kg. feed/ doz. eggs
Kg. feed/ kg. eggs
Average 2 egg weight (g.)
Average 3 change in body weight (g./hen)
Feed consumed
Protein consumed
Methionine Lysine consumed consumed
(g./hen/day)
P a r t A* 87. l a 83.4ab 80.2 b 73.7 . " 83.2ab 79.8 b
1.48 c! 1.50 ° 1.62 s b 1.56 b 1.58 b 1.55
2.21 b 2.27 b 2.51a 2.61" 2 . 4 7 aa 2.50
55. 7 a 55.6a 53.7ab 49.8 53.1 bo 51.5
Control _ Hi-protein Lo-protein Lo-protein+M Lo-protein-j-L Lo-protein+M + L
74. la 72.6a 73.4a 63.9 b 73.8*,. 69.3ab
1.75a 1.73a 1.80a 1.83a 1.79a 1.76"
2.49 b 2.45 b 2.65ab 2.83a 2 . 6 4 aa bb 2.71
5 8 . 6 aa 5 8 . 8a 56.8 b 54.0 s 5 6 . 5 ,b 54.0
381 376 213 -68 222 -5
107" 105 a 1 0 8 \b 96 109 a 103"
18.4 a 17.0 b 14.5 d e 12.9 ' 14.7 c d e 13.8
0.28 ° 0.28 °d 0.24 v 0.31 b Jd 0.24 a 0.33
0 . 7 1 "a 0.72 0.51 • 0.45 ^ d 0.62 fb 0.59
108 a bb o 104 110 a dJ 98 110 a o d 102
19.1" 19. I s 18.1 b 16.0 ° 18.1 b 16.6 °
0.29 b ° 0.31 0.29 b • 0.35 0.29 a ° 0.37
0.72 b 0.78» 0.61 d 0.53 ,. • 0.72 b 0.66 °
1 8 1
Average mortality over the entire experiment was 9 % and was not related to any ration treatment. Weighted mean egg weight over the respective intervals, parts A and B. Average change in body weight per hen over the entire 308-day experiment. < P a r t A includes the first four 28-day periods of experiment 2 while P a r t B includes the final seven 28-day periods. 6 M = 0 . 1 0 % added DL-methionine and L = 0 . 1 0 % added L-lysine. 6 Means not having the same superscript letter are significantly different at P < 0 . 0 5 .
11, the interval during which the high protein wheat was used. Comparison of the effects of feeding the high-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration with that of the control ration shows that there were no significant (P < 0.05) differences among any factors measured except protein consumption during part A. Protein consumption by hens fed the wheat-soybean meal ration was significantly (P < 0.05) less than when the control ration was fed. However, since the ingredients contributing protein to the ration differed, calculated methionine and lysine consumption was nearly the same. Essentially the same relative effects of these two ration treatments was observed during period B although the high-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration was slightly more efficient per unit of eggs produced. During part A, the low-protein ration caused a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in egg production and efficiency of production. Simultaneously, protein, methionine and lysine consumption were decreased as compared with the control and
high-protein, wheat-soybean meal rations. However, during part B when the ration protein level increased from 13.4% to 16.4%, no significant differences were observed in egg production or efficiency of production. Protein and lysine consumption was significantly (P < 0.05) less with the low-protein ration. Egg weight was considerably less for the low-protein group. When methionine was added to the low-protein ration, egg production decreased significantly (P < 0.05) during both parts A and B. Feed efficiency was reduced though not significantly while average egg weight, feed consumption and daily intake of protein and lysine were significantly (P < 0.05) decreased. The addition of 0.1% lysine did not significantly alter any production measurement as compared with the unsupplemented lowprotein ration. The addition of both methionine and lysine decreased egg production slightly and decreased egg weight and feed consumption significantly (P < 0.05) during part B. Concurrently, methionine
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Control Hi-protein Lo-protein Lo-protein+M5 Lo-protein+L Lo-protein -j-M -j-L
WHEAT-SOYBEAN RATIONS
and lysine intake per hen per day was increased significantly although protein intake was decreased. Hens fed rations not supplemented with methionine gained an average of 213 to 381 grams during the experiment. In contrast, when 0.1% methionine was included in the wheat-soybean ration (alone or in combination with 0.1% lysine) average body weight decreased. DISCUSSION
1
Sell, J. L. Unpublished data.
wheat-soybean meal ration was apparently not the most limiting factor for laying hens. In fact, the adverse effects observed when methionine or its analogue was added to the ration illustrate the influence of providing an excess of this amino acid in the diet. The predominant consequences of supplemental source of methionine were decreased feed and protein intake, reduced egg size and a lower level of egg production. In experiment 1, these effects were not observed when lysine was simultaneously added to the low-protein ration. This suggests that supplemental methionine was accentuating the lysine inadequacy of the low-protein ration and that supplemental lysine remedied the situation. The results of experiment 2 are not entirely consistent with those of experiment 1 in regard to effects of amino acid supplementation. Unfortunately, due to the change in ration protein level during the trial there is little basis for comparison between experiments. It is interesting to note that even when ration protein level of the "low-protein" rations of experiment 2 was 16.4%, the addition of 0.1% methionine, alone or in combination with lysine, exerted an adverse effect on laying hen performance. Based upon the data of experiment 1 and part A of experiment 2, a low-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration, supplemented with lysine, will support a satisfactory rate and efficiency of egg production provided that protein intake per hen per day averages about 16.5 grams or more. These data do not demonstrate the most effective level of supplemental lysine except that it appears to be somewhat less than 0.1% of the ration for a wheat-soybean ration. Although 0.1% methionine exerted an adverse effect when added alone, the additional response in experiment 1 of hens fed the lowprotein ration containing both added methionine (MHA) and lysine indicates that
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
Previous studies at the University of Manitoba1 have demonstrated that rations for laying hens based primarily on wheat will support a level and efficiency of egg production comparable to that obtained with other grains. The data obtained in the experiments reported herein show that "simplified," wheat-soybean meal rations of low-protein content (13.5%) may also be satisfactory if protein quality is improved by proper amino acid supplementation. It was apparent in both experiments that lysine was the most limiting amino acid for egg production in wheat-soybean meal rations of low protein content. Johnson and Fisher (1958) estimated the lysine requirement of laying hens to be 0.50% of the ration. The low-protein rations used in the current study were calculated to contain about 0.45% lysine. Superficially, it would appear that the lysine level was approaching adequacy. However, Calhoun et al. (1960) reported that the availability of lysine from wheat protein was approximately 75% for the rat. If the same were true for the chicken, the total lysine available from a wheat-soybean meal ration would be relatively low as compared to the suggested requirement. Thus, a response to supplemental lysine, as was obtained, would be anticipated. The methionine level of the low-protein,
251
252
J. L. SELL AND G. C. HODGSON
SUMMARY
The efficacy of wheat-soybean meal rations, with and without methionine hyroxy analogue (MHA) and lysine (L) supplementation for individually-caged Single Comb White Leghorn hens was studied. The average hen-day production through a 308-day experiment was 72.2% with a wheat-soybean ration containing 13.5% protein and 3,023 kcal. of metabolizable energy (M.E.)/kg. In comparison, hens fed a ration containing 16.5% protein and 2,930 kcal. M.E./kg. produced eggs at a rate of 78.2%. The inclusion of 0.1% MHA in the low-protein ration depressed egg production to 66.7% while 0.1% L or 0.1% L plus
0.1 MHA increased egg production to 77.4% and 81.6%, respectively. Feed required per dozen eggs or per kilogram of eggs was inversely related to level of egg production. Average egg weight was markedly reduced by the 13.5% protein ration as compared to the 16.5% protein ration. However, eggs produced by hens fed the 13.5% protein ration with L alone or in combination with MHA were nearly equal in weight to those of hens fed the 16.5% protein ration. Changes in body weight were negligible on all ration treatments. A second experiment was conducted using the same ration treatments except that 0.1% DL-methionine was used in place of MHA. Supplementing a wheat-soybean ration with M alone exerted an adverse effect on level of egg production, feed efficiency, egg weight and change in body weight. Adding 0.1% L to the low-protein, wheat-soybean meal ration, alone or in combination with M, failed to elicit a beneficial response in production characteristics as had been observed in experiment 1. ACKNOWLED GMENT The L-lysine used in this study was kindly supplied by Merck Sharp and Dohme International. The authors gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Messrs. S. Antonation and W. Guenter. REFERENCES Bray, D. J., 1960. Studies with corn-soya laying diets. 2. Optimum combinations of corn and soybean protein. Poultry Sci. 39: 1541-1546. Bray, D. J., 1964. Studies with corn-soya laying diets. 7. Limiting amino acids in a 60:40 blend of corn and soybean protein. Poultry Sci. 43: 396-401. Calhoun, W. K., F. N. Hepburn and W. B. Bradley. 1960. The availability of lysine in wheat, flour, bread and gluten. J. Nutrition, 70: 337347. Johnson, D. Jr., and H. Fisher. 1958. The amino acid requirement of laying hens. 3. Minimal requirement levels of essential amino acids:
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
the former may be the second most limiting amino acid in wheat-soybean meal rations, particularly in terms of obtaining eggs of satisfactory weight. Thornton et at. (19S7) and Waibel and Johnson (1961) have reported that methionine is the most limiting amino acid in corn-soybean meal laying rations containing 11% or more of protein. However, in the case of wheat-soybean meal rations of 13 to 14% protein, lysine appears to be the most limiting amino acid. This suggests a fundamental difference between the amino acid balance of wheat-soybean and cornsoybean rations. The methionine and lysine content of corn and wheat protein do not differ markedly. However, since wheat contains considerably more protein than corn, the proportion of protein supplied by wheat in a wheat-soybean meal ration is much higher than that supplied by corn in a corn-soybean meal ration of similar protein content. Thus, the relative amino acid composition of a wheat-soybean meal ration of low-protein content will generally reflect that of the wheat. On a calculated basis, such rations will not supply sufficient lysine to satisfy the laying hen requirement for optimum egg production.
WHEAT-SOYBEAN RATIONS techniques and development of diet. Brit. J. Nutrition, 12: 276-285. March, B. E., and J. Biely, 1963. Control of egg size in chickens through dietary amino acid balance. Nature, 200: 702-703. Thornton, P. A., L. G. Blaylock and R. E. Mor-
253
eng. 1957. Protein level as a factor in egg production. Poultry Sci. 36: 552-557. Waibel, P. E., and E. L. Johnson. 1961. Effect of low protein corn-soybean oil meal diets and amino acid supplementation on performance of laying hens. Poultry Sci. 40: 293-298.
Frying Chickens Purchased in Retail Markets in One Area 1. MICROBIOLOGICAL ASPECTS
(Received for publication August 26, 1965)
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
HE quality of dressed poultry in the market is obviously important in determining the acceptance of the product. One aspect of this quality is microbiological. Many studies have been conducted on changes during refrigerated storage of chickens, but these have usually been in a laboratory situation or made on birds held until spoiled. Dawson and Stadelman (1960) reviewed factors that influence the bacterial population of processed poultry. In the study reported here, selected microbiological aspects of ready-to-cook broiler-fryer-type chickens as purchased in retail stores were assessed over a period of one year. The stores in the sample purchased their supplies from both local and out-of-state processors. A range in sales volume was also considered in selecting the sample. Both whole and cut-up birds were included. Also studied were palatability characteristics and their relation to microbiological factors including proteolytic, lipolytic, and lipoxidative types. This phase will be reported in a subsequent paper.
Retail store sample. Information concerning the 38 retail markets in Lafayette and West Lafayette, Indiana, that sold poultry was obtained through interviews with the store or meat-department managers. The sample of 18 stores for the study was selected on the basis of these interviews. Included were stores selling a large volume of poultry per week, 1,200 lb. or more; medium, 250 to 1,000 lb.; and small, 175 lb. or less. Seven obtained birds from out-of-state, and 11 from 5 different processors in Indiana. Only two managers reported that they occasionally froze either whole or cut-up fryers to be sold later as fresh birds. From information received at the time of each purchase, as well as originally, none were selling antibiotic-treated carcasses. Most of the birds were packaged in plastic bags or covered tray packs before being put on refrigerated display.
T
Journal Paper No. 2468, Purdue Agricultural Experiment Station.
Purchases were made from each store once during each calendar season in 1963. One purchase lot consisted of two whole and two cut-up ready-to-cook fresh fryers for each of three seasons, and one of each type for the fourth. Information was obtained each time on the retailer's source of
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at UCSF Library on April 8, 2015
MARGY WOODBURN, RODNEY HARRINGTON AND WILLIAM J. STADELMAN Departments of Foods and Nutrition and Animal Sciences, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana 47907