Nutritional evaluation of Zambia indigenous soy bean (Glycine max) and sunflower (Helianthus annus) as protein sources in poultry and pigs diets.

E M Aregheore
{"title":"Nutritional evaluation of Zambia indigenous soy bean (Glycine max) and sunflower (Helianthus annus) as protein sources in poultry and pigs diets.","authors":"E M Aregheore","doi":"10.1002/(sici)1521-3803(199810)42:05<298::aid-food298>3.3.co;2-u","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two trials were carried out to compare the nutritional values of two Zambian indigenous plant protein sources--soy bean cake (SBC) and sunflower meal (SFM) in the diets of broilers and growing pigs. In trial 1, 120 one week old chickens (Abbor acre strain) were used. There were no differences (P > 0.05) between chickens on SBC and SFM in voluntary feed intake. Average daily gain of SBC chickens differed (P < 0.05) from those of SFM. The protein source had an effect (P < 0.05) on N retained [g/day]. Carcasses dry matter and crude protein were higher (P < 0.05) in SBC chickens, but ash, ether extract, Ca and P were the same as SFM. In trial 2, 12 Large white x Landrace growing barrows 1-2 months old were used. In this trial, SBC diet was consumed more than SFM. Pigs on SBC and SFM gained 0.526 and 0.284 g/head/day, respectively (P < 0.05). Nutrient digestibility was higher (P < 0.05) in SBC diet. Trial 1, demonstrated that SBC and SFM could be used for broilers without adverse effect on growth rate and body conformation. However, for growing pigs SBC is a better protein source than SFM in the tropical environment of Zambia. Finally, results obtained seem to suggest that SBC and SFM can be used as plant protein sources, but SFM is not an ideal plant protein source for growing pigs.</p>","PeriodicalId":11281,"journal":{"name":"Die Nahrung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Die Nahrung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1521-3803(199810)42:05<298::aid-food298>3.3.co;2-u","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Two trials were carried out to compare the nutritional values of two Zambian indigenous plant protein sources--soy bean cake (SBC) and sunflower meal (SFM) in the diets of broilers and growing pigs. In trial 1, 120 one week old chickens (Abbor acre strain) were used. There were no differences (P > 0.05) between chickens on SBC and SFM in voluntary feed intake. Average daily gain of SBC chickens differed (P < 0.05) from those of SFM. The protein source had an effect (P < 0.05) on N retained [g/day]. Carcasses dry matter and crude protein were higher (P < 0.05) in SBC chickens, but ash, ether extract, Ca and P were the same as SFM. In trial 2, 12 Large white x Landrace growing barrows 1-2 months old were used. In this trial, SBC diet was consumed more than SFM. Pigs on SBC and SFM gained 0.526 and 0.284 g/head/day, respectively (P < 0.05). Nutrient digestibility was higher (P < 0.05) in SBC diet. Trial 1, demonstrated that SBC and SFM could be used for broilers without adverse effect on growth rate and body conformation. However, for growing pigs SBC is a better protein source than SFM in the tropical environment of Zambia. Finally, results obtained seem to suggest that SBC and SFM can be used as plant protein sources, but SFM is not an ideal plant protein source for growing pigs.

赞比亚本土大豆(Glycine max)和向日葵(Helianthus annus)作为家禽和猪日粮蛋白质来源的营养评估。
我们进行了两项试验,以比较两种赞比亚本地植物蛋白来源--大豆饼(SBC)和葵花籽粕(SFM)在肉鸡和生长猪日粮中的营养价值。在试验 1 中,使用了 120 只一周龄的鸡(Abor acre 品系)。摄入 SBC 和 SFM 的鸡在自愿采食量上没有差异(P > 0.05)。SBC 鸡的平均日增重与 SFM 鸡的平均日增重存在差异(P < 0.05)。蛋白质来源对氮保留量[克/天]有影响(P < 0.05)。SBC 鸡的胴体干物质和粗蛋白较高(P < 0.05),但灰分、醚提取物、钙和磷与 SFM 鸡相同。在试验 2 中,使用了 12 只 1-2 月龄的大白×兰德良种生长母鸡。在该试验中,SBC 日粮的消耗量高于 SFM 日粮。食用 SBC 日粮和 SFM 日粮的猪头日增重分别为 0.526 克和 0.284 克(P < 0.05)。SBC 日粮的营养消化率更高(P < 0.05)。试验 1 表明,SBC 和 SFM 可用于肉鸡而不会对生长速度和体型产生不利影响。然而,对于生长猪来说,在赞比亚的热带环境中,SBC 比 SFM 是更好的蛋白质来源。最后,试验结果似乎表明,SBC 和 SFM 可用作植物蛋白质来源,但 SFM 并不是生长猪理想的植物蛋白质来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信