2006 Toronto Feeding DDGS to Livestock and Poultry final€¦ · Feeding DDGS to Livestock and...

Feeding DDGS to Livestock and PoultryDr. Jerry ShursonDepartment of Animal ScienceUniversity of Minnesota

320,000900,000 1,800,000

3,000,000 3,500,0007,800,000

30,000,000

0

5000000

10000000

15000000

20000000

25000000

30000000

35000000

Met

ric T

ons

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Est 2010

North American DDGS Production

Source: Sean Broderick, Commodity Specialists Company

U.S. DDGS Consumption

CSC 2006

Estimate 2002

44%

37%

3%16%

D airyB eefP o ultrySwine

Estimate 2004

Estimate 2003

Estimate 2005

45%

37%

5%13%

D airyB eefP o ultrySwine

45%

35%

5%15%

D airyB eefP o ultrySwine

46%

39%

4% 11%

D airyB eefP o ultrySwine

Wet distiller’s grainsPrimarily beef, some dairy

Dry distiller’s grainsBeef and dairy

Wet distiller’s grains with solublesBeef and dairy

Dried distiller’s grains with solublesDairy, swine, poultry, some beef

Modified wet cake (blend of wet and dry distiller’s grains)Primarily beef, some dairy

Condensed distiller’s solublesBeef and dairyOntario, Canada - swine liquid feeding systems

Types of Distiller’s By-Products from Dry-Grind Ethanol Plants

DDGS Varies in Nutrient Content, Digestibility, Color, and Particle Size Among U.S. Sources

High Quality,Highly DigestibleDDGS

Lower Quality,Less DigestibleDDGS

Color Extremes of DDGS

Fig. 1. Regression of digestible lys (%) and color (L*, b*)

R2 = 0.71

R2 = 0.74

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80

Lys (%)

L*, b

* sc

ore L*

b*Linear (L*)Linear (b*)

Source: Dr. Sally Noll (2003)

Prediction of Digestible Lysine from Optical Density (400 to 700 nm)

R2 = 0.86, RMSE = 0.05, PC = 14

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.60

0.65

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80In vitro digestible lysine, % .

In v

ivo

dig

estib

le ly

sine

, % .

Urriola et al. (2006)

0.42 – 0.990.75 (19.4)Phosphorus, %0.61 – 1.060.90 (11.4)Lysine, %3504 – 40483810 (3.5)Swine ME, kcal/kg

3.0 – 9.86.0 (26.6)Ash, %5.4 – 10.47.2 (18.0)Crude fiber, %8.8 – 12.410.7 (16.4)Crude fat, %28.7 – 32.930.9 (4.7)Crude protein, %87.3 – 92.489.3Dry matter, %

RangeAverageNutrient

Averages, Coefficients of Variation, and Ranges of Selected Nutrients Among 32 U.S. DDGS Sources (100% Dry Matter Basis)

27.6 Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles is the product obtained after the removal of ethyl alcohol by distillation from the yeast fermentation of a grain or a grain mixture by condensing and drying at least ¾ of the solids of the resultant whole stillageand drying it by methods employed in the grain distilling industry. The predominating grain shall be declared as the first word in the name.

AAFCO DDGS Definition

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Grains Solubles

DM, %CP, %Fat, %CF, %Ash, %Ca, %P, %

Comparison of the Nutrient Content of Corn Distiller’s Grains and Corn Condensed Distiller’s Solubles

0.620.570.680.890.780.77P, %

0.170.040.510.060.120.07Ca, %

No data0.270.250.230.180.25Trp, %

No data1.101.131.041.011.17Thr, %

No data0.610.660.540.540.62Met, %

No data0.990.830.900.610.92Lys, %

No data37893560No data35773781ME, kcal/kg*

No dataNo data3796No data38084053DE, kcal/kg*

4.283.77.34.65.36.9Ash, %

No data20.221.017.911.812.4ADF, %

15.1010.67.8No data7.96.3Crude fiber, %

9.008.88.915.33.511.3Fat, %

27.029.930.131.629.331.8Protein, %

PelletedDDGS

Whiskey DDGS

Partial De-germed

DDGS

High Fat DDGS“DDGS”

Golden Corn

DDGS

*Calculated energy values for swine

Comparison of Nutrient Composition of Golden DDGS to Other “DDGS Sources” (100% Dry Matter Basis)

Use of DDGS in Dairy Rations

Benefits and Limitations for Lactating Dairy Cows

More protein and energy than cornFeed at up to 20% of ration dry matterHighly digestible fiber source

Fewer digestive upsetsCan be a partial forage replacement

“Golden” DDGS gives best performanceHighly palatable

Low protein (lysine) quality

add other supplements high in lysine

Manure P excretion increases at high feeding levelsNo effect on milk fat if adequate forage in the ration

Benefits Limitations

Use of DDGS in Beef Rations

Benefits and Limitations for Finishing Feedlot Cattle

More protein and energy than cornFeed up to 40% of ration dry matter to replace corn

Feed excess protein and PHighly digestible fiber source

Fewer digestive upsets“Golden” DDGS gives best performanceNo effect on carcass yield, quality, or eating characteristics of beef

Need to supplement calcium to achieve proper Ca:P ratio

Avoid urinary calculiManure N and P excretion increases at high feeding levelsMonitor sulfur level of water and diet (< 0.4% ration DM)

Avoid polioencephalmalacia

Benefits Limitations

Use of DDGS in Swine Diets

Benefits and Limitations for Swine

Energy value = cornHigh available P

Reduce diet P supplementationReduce manure P excretion

Commonly fed at 10% of dietHigher levels can be used if amino acids are supplemented

Only “golden” DDGS should be usedHigh amino acid digestibility

Appears to reduce gut health problems due to ileitisMay increase litter size weaned and pig weaning weights when fed at high levels to sows

Low protein (lysine) qualityadd other supplements high in lysand trp

Manure N excretion increases Belly firmness and pork fat quality may be reduced when > 20% in the dietMycotoxin free grain should be used to produce ethanol and DDGSShort-term feed intake may be reduced when transitioning from a corn-SBM diet to high DDGS diets for sows

Benefits Limitations

Use of Corn DDGS for Poultry

Benefits and Limitations for Poultry

Good energy and amino acid source when limited to < 15% of the dietSource of highly available P

Reduce manure PMay improve egg yolk and skin color (xanthophyll)Source of “unidentified growth factors”?“Golden” DDGS gives best performanceHighly palatable

Energy value ~ 84% of cornLow protein quality

add other supplements high in lys, arg, trp

Sources high in sodium may increase litter moisture if adjustments to dietary salt levels are not made

Benefits Limitations

Relative Value of DDGS Differs Depending on Species

$108.00Beef Feedlot

$96.34Swine G-F Diet

$104.66Layer Diet

$100.09Poultry Finisher

$114.24Dairy Lactation Assumptions:

•Corn $2.00 / bu

•SBM $175.00 / ton

•Urea $360.00 / ton

•Non-ruminant diets corn/SBM

•Ruminant diets typical diets with competing by-products.

Feed Dollars/ ton

Source: Tilstra, Land O’ Lakes

Variation in Particle Size Among DDGS Samples Representing 25 U.S. Ethanol Plants

2005

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Variation in Bulk Density (Lbs/Cubic Ft.) Among DDGS Samples Representing 25 U.S. Ethanol Plants

1/05

-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 5 10 15 20 25

Examples of modified processesUse of new enzyme technology to increase DDGS proteinRemoval of bran and/or germ prior to fermentationRemoval of phosphorus

New Distiller’s Grains By-Products

Comparison of Nutrient Content of Dakota Gold DDGS with High Protein Dakota Gold (100% DM Basis)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Protein, % Fat, % NDF, % Ash, %

DDGSHP DDGS

Comparison of Amino Acid Content of Dakota Gold DDGS with High Protein Dakota Gold (100% DM Basis)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Lys, % Met, % Cys, % Thr, % Trp, %

DDGSHP DDGS

Comparison of Mineral Content of Dakota Gold DDGS with High Protein Dakota Gold (100% DM Basis)

00.1

0.20.30.40.5

0.60.70.80.9

Ca, % P, % Na, % S, %

DDGSHP DDGS

Comparison of Nutrient Content of DDGS with Glutenol and CPC (100% DM Basis)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Protein, % Fat, % NDF, % Ash, %

DDGSGlutenolCPC

Comparison of Amino Acid Content of DDGS with Glutenol and CPC (100% DM Basis)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Lys, % Met, % Cys, % Thr, % Trp, %

DDGSGlutenolCPC

Comparison of Calcium and Phosphorus Content of DDGS with Glutenol and CPC (100% DM Basis)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Ca, % P, %

DDGSGlutenolCPC

Opportunity Costs of Corn By-Products in Swine and Poultry Diets

$43.00$75.20$53.00$75.20$80.00Poultry

$61.60$63.40$51.00$78.00$80.00Swine

CPCGlutenolHP DDGS

DDGS Spec. 2

DDGS Spec. 1

Key Points for Evaluating and Using DDGS and New Distiller’s By-Products

Remember the primary components that affect nutritional and economic value

Metabolizable energyLevel and digestibility of amino acidsLevel and availability of P

Minimize variability in nutrient content by limiting the number of sources used

Question generic nutrient specification values provided by the supplier when formulating diets

Key Points for Evaluating and Using DDGS and New Distiller’s By-Products

Request current, complete nutrient profiles from source(s) being considered

www.ddgs.umn.edu

Request evidence of consistent quality and nutrient content from each source

Although higher protein distiller’s by-products may initially appear to have higher value, they are:

generally lower in fat and P contentstill have inferior protein quality

We have developed a DDGS web site featuring:* nutrient profiles and photos of DDGS samples* research summaries

- swine, poultry, dairy, & beef- DDGS quality

* presentations given* links to other DDGS related web sites* international audiences

U of M DDGS Web Sitewww.ddgs.umn.edu