不溶性纖維和日糧配置方法對生長豬能量和養(yǎng)分消化率的影響

發(fā)布單位:天津瑞孚農(nóng)牧科技集團有限公司

查看次數(shù)：7543

時間：2020-06-16
      本試驗的主要目的在于研究不同DDGS水平和日糧配置方法（穩(wěn)定法和浮動法）的差異。試驗選用21頭生長母豬（初始體重33.1±0.4kg），安裝回腸瘺管，隨機分至7個日糧處理，試驗為3×7拉丁方設計。

      試驗處理包括基礎日糧，不同DDGS水平（15%、30%、45%）×不同配制方法：1）穩(wěn)定法，恒定的營養(yǎng)：和基礎日糧營養(yǎng)水平一致；2）浮動法，恒定的原料：DDGS等比例替代玉米，但其他飼料原料保持不變，營養(yǎng)水平是浮動的。日糧中添加0.5%三氧化二鉻作為指示劑。

      數(shù)據(jù)顯示，DDGS水平的增加降低了干物質(zhì)、總能、淀粉、必需氨基酸、淀粉的回腸表觀消化率（P＜0.05）。在穩(wěn)定法下，賴氨酸、蛋氨酸、蘇氨酸和色氨酸消化率的降低量更大（P＜0.05）。在穩(wěn)定法下，半纖維素消化率的降低量低于在浮動法情況下（P=0.045）。DDGS水平和配制方法對酸解粗脂肪的回腸表觀消化率有互作（P=0.015）；在穩(wěn)定法下，DDGS水平從0%提高到30%降低了酸解粗脂肪的表觀消化率，而30%和45%之間沒有明顯差異，在浮動法下，DDGS添加量對粗脂肪消化率沒有影響。DDGS添加量的增加降低了干物質(zhì)、總能、日糧纖維的全腸道表觀消化率（P＜0.05），而酸性洗滌纖維不受影響。在穩(wěn)定法下，不溶性纖維和總日糧纖維消化率的降低量低于浮動法（P＜0.05）。與浮動法相比，穩(wěn)定法測得的酸解粗蛋白全腸道表觀消化率降低（P＜0.01）。

      總之，以DDGS的形式增加不可溶纖維水平，降低了大部分日糧養(yǎng)分的消化率，包括干物質(zhì)、總能、淀粉、不溶性纖維和氨基酸。穩(wěn)定法和浮動法在評估干物質(zhì)、總能、淀粉、粗蛋白和氨基酸的消化率時是一致的（以蛋白形式存在的氨基酸）。這兩種方法的差異主要在不溶性纖維、脂肪和必需氨基酸（以合成氨基酸的形式）。


Impact of increasing the levels of insoluble fiber and on the method of diet formulation measures of energy and nutrient digestibility in growing pigs

The objective of this study was to determine the differences in response to distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) level under constant nutrient or floating nutrient concentrations. A total of 21 ileal-cannulated gilts (33.1 ± 0.4 kg body weight) were randomly allotted to one of seven dietary treatments in a 3-period incomplete Latin square design (n = 9). Treatments consisted of a 0% DDGS basal diet, plus diets containing 15%, 30%, or 45% DDGS. Diets were formulated using one of two different formulation methods: 1) constant nutrient (CNU) where nutrients were held equal to the basal diet or 2) constant ingredients (CIN) where DDGS were added at the expense of corn and all other ingredients remained constant, so nutrient levels were allowed to “float.” Chromic oxide was added to the diets at 0.5% as an indigestible marker. Increasing the level of DDGS decreased the apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of dry matter (DM), gross energy (GE), starch, dispensable amino acids (AA), and fiber components (P < 0.050). The decrease in the AID of Lys, Met, Thr, and Trp was more pronounced under CNU compared with the CIN formulation method (P < 0.050). The decrease in the AID of hemicellulose was less pronounced under CNU compared with the CIN formulation method (P = 0.045). There was a DDGS level × formulation method interaction for the AID of acid hydrolyzed ether extract (AEE; P = 0.015); for the CNU formulation method, increasing level of DDGS decreased the AID of AEE from 0% to 30% and remained similar from 30% to 45% DDGS, whereas the CIN had no effect on the AID of AEE. Increasing the level of DDGS decreased the apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of DM, GE, and fiber components (P < 0.050), except for acid detergent fiber, which was not affected. The decrease in the ATTD of insoluble dietary fiber and total dietary fiber was less pronounced under CNU compared with CIN (P < 0.050). The ATTD of AEE decreased for CNU compared with CIN (P < 0.010). In conclusion, increasing the insoluble fiber level in the form of DDGS decreased the digestibility of most dietary components, including DM, GE, starch, insoluble fiber, and AA. The CNU and CIN formulation methods are equivalent when evaluating the digestibilities of DM, GE, starch, crude protein, and AA (when they were not added in purified synthetic forms). Differences between CNU and CIN formulation methods were detected for the digestibility of insoluble fiber, fat, and essential AA (when added as crystalline AA).

文章來源：豬營養(yǎng)國際論壇
【免責聲明】：文章來源于網(wǎng)絡，我們對文中陳述觀點判斷保持中立，并不對文章觀點負責。僅供讀者參考。版權屬于原作者。