(Key Words: Swine, Protein Source, Amino Acids.)
Research conducted at Kansas State University with early weaned pigs determined average daily gain and feed efficiency improved when the dietary lysine level was increased to 1.70% using crystalline amino acids (Owen et al, 1995). However, other studies exposed problems associated with feeding high levels of crystalline amino acids to nursery pigs. Kerr and Easter (1995), in a nitrogen balance study, observed reduced growth rate and feed efficiency in growing pigs fed a 12% crude protein diet supplemented with a mixture of crystalline amino acids compared to those fed a 16% crude protein diet.
Average daily gain and gain:feed increased linearly as dietary lysine level increased from 1.15% to 1.60% using whey protein concentrate as the amino acid source in a previous experiment (Davis et al., 1996). This study was conducted to determine whether similar performance could be obtained when all or a portion of the whey protein concentrate was replaced by a crystalline amino acid mixture. Therefore, the specific objectives of this experiment were to 1) confirm the response of nursery pigs fed elevated dietary lysine levels using whey protein concentrate as the amino acid source, and 2) to determine if similar growth and efficiency can be obtained when crystalline amino acids were substituted for a portion of the amino acids in whey protein concentrate.
The trial was conducted in an environmentally controlled nursery with room temperature maintained initially at 86° F, and decreased by 2° F weekly until room temperature reached 78° F. Pigs were housed in elevated pens (4’11" x 5’) with woven wire flooring and had ad libitum access to water and feed. Pig weight and feed intake were recorded weekly and average daily gain, average daily feed intake, and gain:feed were calculated. A blood sample from each pig was taken on d 14 of the trial and analyzed for blood urea nitrogen.
Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design with pen as the experimental unit. Blocks were based on initial body weight. Analysis of variance was performed using the General Linear Models procedures of SAS (1988). A comparison of the negative control vs. the average of the diets containing whey protein concentrate and the negative control vs. the average of the diets containing crystalline amino acids were made. Additionally, the effects of lysine source, lysine level and lysine source x lysine level interaction were evaluated.
Blood urea nitrogen concentrations of pigs fed the negative control diet were lower (P<.05) than the average of pigs fed diets containing whey protein concentrate and higher (P<.01) than the average of pigs fed diets containing crystalline lysine. Blood urea nitrogen increased as dietary nitrogen increased in pigs fed whey protein concentrate as the amino acid source and decreased with increasing lysine in pigs fed crystalline amino acids (interaction, P < .05).
Similar results in a previous study (Davis et al., 1996) where performance improved when whey protein concentrate was used as the protein source in weanling pig diets, suggests whey protein concentrate is an excellent protein source for young pigs. Several reports suggest that pigs have a minimum crude protein requirement and will not respond to amino acid additions if nitrogen is limiting (Kerr and Easter, 1995; Roth et al., 1993). This could be an explanation for the poor response observed in pigs fed diets supplemented with crystalline amino acids since no attempt was made to keep the dietary treatments fed during Phase 1 isonitrogenous. However, the lack of response to crystalline amino acid supplementation is not consistent with the excellent performance observed by Owen et al. (1995) who reported increasing performance and efficiency with increasing amino acid supplementation. In conclusion, crystalline amino acid substitution for whey protein concentrate in the diets of nursery pigs with formulation procedures used in this study did not produce acceptable pig performance.
Kerr, B. J. and R. A. Easter. 1995. J. Anim. Sci. 73:3000.
Davis, M. E. et al. 1996. Okla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Rep. P-951-265.
Roth, F. X. et al. 1993. J Anim. Physiol. a. Anim. Nutr. 70:196.
Owen, K. Q. et al. 1995. J. Anim. Sci. 73:68(Suppl. 1).
SAS. 1985. SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.
| Table 1. Composition of experimental dietsa. | |||||||
|
|
Phase 2 | Phase 3 | |||||
|
|
|
||||||
| Ingredient, % | 1.01 | 1.22 | 1.43 | 1.22 | 1.43 | 1.35 | 1.15 |
| Corn, ground | 35.52 | 35.52 | 35.52 | 35.52 | 35.52 | 55.075 | 68.975 |
| Lactose | 4.65 | 3.97 | 3.29 | 4.65 | 4.65 | 10.00 | - |
| Whey, dehyd. | 20.00 | 20.00 | 20.00 | 20.00 | 20.00 | - | - |
| SBM, 48% CP | - | - | - | - | - | 22.25 | 27.50 |
| Soy oil | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 2.50 | - |
| St-rolled oats | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | - | - |
| AP-301b | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 2.00 | - |
| Fish meal | 6.57 | 6.57 | 6.57 | 6.57 | 6.57 | 5.00 | - |
| Soy prot. conc. | 2.67 | 2.67 | 2.67 | 2.67 | 2.67 | - | - |
| AP-920c | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | - | - |
| Micro curb | - | - | - | - | - | .10 | - |
| Lysine, HCl | - | - | - | .27 | .54 | .15 | .15 |
| WPCd 77% CP | - | 4.80 | 9.60 | - | - | - | - |
| Ethoxiquin | .03 | .03 | .03 | .03 | .03 | .03 | - |
| Isoleucine | .03 | - | - | .16 | .30 | - | - |
| Threonine | .01 | - | - | .15 | .29 | .05 | - |
| Valine | - | - | - | - | .12 | - | - |
| Tryptophan | .02 | - | - | .06 | .10 | - | - |
| Methionine | .08 | .09 | .08 | .22 | .34 | .12 | - |
| Neoterramycin | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | - |
| CuSO4 | .07 | .07 | .07 | .07 | .07 | .05 | .08 |
| Ca carbonate | - | - | - | - | - | .27 | .60 |
| Vit. min. mixe | .38 | .38 | .38 | .38 | .38 | .25 | .25 |
| Dicalcium phos. | 1.39 | 1.30 | 1.19 | 1.40 | 1.39 | 1.43 | 1.90 |
| Cornstarch | 3.99 | 2.00 | - | 3.62 | 3.21 | - | - |
| Sucrose | 3.99 | 2.00 | - | 3.63 | 3.22 | - | - |
| Salt | .20 | .20 | .20 | .20 | .20 | .30 | .42 |
| Flavor | .10 | .10 | .10 | .10 | .10 | - | - |
| Zinc oxide | .30 | .30 | .30 | .30 | .30 | .30 | - |
| Tylan40-Sulfa | - | - | - | - | - | .125 | .125 |
b Blood meal source, American Protein Corp., Ames, IA.
c Plasma protein source, American Protein Corp., Ames, IA.
d Whey protein concentrate, Land O’Lakes, Fort Dodge, IA.
eVitamins and minerals meet or exceed the NRC (1988) requirements.
| Table 2. Performance of pigs fed whey protein concentrate vs. crystalline amino acids during Phase 1 of the nursery period.a | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Control |
|
WPC | CRYST | CRYST | ||
|
|
||||||
| Item | 1.01 |
|
1.43 | 1.22 | 1.43 |
|
| d 0 to 7 | ||||||
|
|
.42 | .51 | .55 | .45 | .37 | .03 |
|
|
.55 | .59 | .57 | .54 | .54 | .04 |
|
|
.77 | .87 | .98 | .84 | .70 | .05 |
| d 0 to 14 | ||||||
|
|
.60 | .66 | .69 | .62 | .50 | .03 |
|
|
.81 | .82 | .78 | .78 | .74 | .06 |
|
|
.76 | .84 | .90 | .81 | .68 | .04 |
| d 14 to 28 | ||||||
|
|
1.02 | 1.06 | .96 | 1.05 | .96 | .05 |
|
|
1.60 | 1.73 | 1.64 | 1.57 | 1.56 | .08 |
|
|
.64 | .63 | .59 | .67 | .62 | .04 |
| d 28 to 42 | ||||||
|
|
1.20 | 1.29 | 1.25 | 1.25 | 1.36 | .06 |
|
|
2.21 | 2.40 | 2.50 | 2.34 | 2.40 | .16 |
|
|
.54 | .56 | .51 | .53 | .57 | .03 |
| d 0 to 42 | ||||||
|
|
.94 | 1.00 | .96 | .97 | .94 | .03 |
|
|
1.54 | 1.65 | 1.64 | 1.57 | 1.57 | .09 |
|
|
.65 | .68 | .67 | .67 | .62 | .03 |
|
|
4.95 | 4.80 | 6.99 | 2.62 | 2.46 | .34 |
b WPC, whey protein concentrate (77% CP); CRYST, crystalline lysine.
c Blood urea nitrogen.
d Lysine source x lysine level interaction (P<.09).
e Lysine source x lysine level interaction (P<.05).
f Control vs. WPC (P< .05).
g Control vs. WPC (P<.1).
h Lysine level effect (P<.07).
i Control vs. CRYST (P<.01).