Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-k7rjm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-29T12:27:10.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of enzyme addition on the availability for poultry of amino acids in rapeseed meal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

C. Rymer  and
D. I. Givens
C. Rymer*
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Unit, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, PO Box 237, Reading, RG6 6AR, U.K.
D. I. Givens
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Unit, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, PO Box 237, Reading, RG6 6AR, U.K.
*
Email: c.rymer@reading.ac.uk
Get access

Extract

Rapeseed meal (RSM) is the richest source of commercially available home grown protein in the UK, but its inclusion in livestock diets is approximately half that of soyabean meal (SBM, DEFRA, 2004). RSM has a lower protein and available lysine content than SBM but increased nutrient digestibility was observed when pigs were fed RSM supplemented with non-starch polysaccharide degrading enzymes (Hoare et al., 2003). The objective of this experiment was to determine the effect of adding different amounts of a cell wall degrading enzyme on the available amino acid content of RSM as estimated in poultry.

Information

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2005 , 2005 , pp. 76
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

DEFRA (2004). GB Animal Feed Statistical Notice, Sept 2004. http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/statnot/mcompspn.pdf Google Scholar
Hoare, B., Cowan, D., McGrane, M. and O’Doherty., J.V., (2003). Irish J. Agr. Fd Res., 42: 255–263.Google Scholar