动物营养学报 >

2022 , Vol. 34 >Issue 5: 3348 - 3357

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.05.060

研究论文 RESEARCH PAPER

基于套算法和消化率计算法估测肉鸭饲料原料代谢能的比较研究

  • 尹丽婷 ,
  • 赵峰 ,
  • 张虎 ,
  • 李珂 ,
  • 李黛淋 ,
  • 王钰明
展开
  • 1. 中国农业科学院北京畜牧兽医研究所, 动物营养学国家重点实验室, 北京 100193;
    2. 新希望六和股份有限公司, 北京 100102
尹丽婷(1989—),女,辽宁盘锦人,硕士研究生,从事饲料养分生物学效价评定研究。E-mail:tingting495@126.com

收稿日期: 2021-10-17

  网络出版日期: 2022-05-14

基金资助

中国农业科学院科技创新工程（ASTIP-IAS07）

收起

A Comparative Study on Metabolizable Energy Evaluation Based on Difference Method and Digestibility Calculation Method for Feed Ingredients in Ducks

  • YIN Liting ,
  • ZHAO Feng ,
  • ZHANG Hu ,
  • LI Ke ,
  • LI Dailin ,
  • WANG Yuming
Expand
  • 1. State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China;
    2. New Hope Liuhe Co., Ltd., Beijing 100102, China

Received date: 2021-10-17

  Online published: 2022-05-14

Fold

摘要

本试验旨在研究2种计算方式对肉鸭饲料原料代谢能（ME）的影响，为采用生物学法测定肉鸭饲料原料ME时选择合适的计算方式提供参考。本研究分为2个试验。试验一：采用绝食法分5个批次测定肉鸭内源能损失的变异，同时通过排空强饲法测定10个肉鸭饲料原料配制的试验饲粮的ME，并通过2种公式计算各待测饲料原料的ME，公式1（套算法）根据基础饲粮、试验饲粮的ME及试验饲粮中基础饲粮的比例计算待测饲料原料的ME；公式2（消化率计算法）通过待测饲料原料的能量消化率乘以待测饲料原料的总能得出ME。试验二：以试验一中的10个肉鸭饲料原料配制10种验证饲粮，采用排空强饲法测定其ME，同时根据饲粮中各原料的比例及试验一中2种计算方式得出的原料ME计算饲粮的ME，比较饲粮ME计算值与实测值的差异。结果显示：1）在内源粪排泄量及内源能损失的差异上，1~3批次显著地低于4~5批次（P<0.05），内源粪排泄量与内源能损失变异系数分别在8.21%~12.20%和9.37%~15.35%变化；2）在2种计算方式间，玉米及棉籽粕的表观代谢能（AME）和真代谢能（TME）均有显著差异（P<0.05）；3）根据公式1和公式2得出的饲料原料AME计算出的10个验证饲粮的AME中，计算值均显著高于实测值（P<0.05），但饲粮AME实测值对计算值的回归与Y=X均无显著差异（P>0.05）。根据公式1和公式2计算的饲料原料TME获得的10个饲粮的TME计算值中，分别有7和9个饲粮的实测值与计算值相差在400 kJ/kg以内；根据公式1和公式2计算的饲料原料TME获得的饲粮TME计算值与实测值均无显著差异（P>0.05），且饲粮TME实测值对计算值的回归与Y=X均无显著差异（P>0.05）。综上可知，TME比AME具有更好的可加性，且采用消化率计算法获得的肉鸭饲料原料的ME更为准确。

关键词： 樱桃谷鸭; 差量法; 消化率计算法; 代谢能

本文引用格式

尹丽婷 , 赵峰 , 张虎 , 李珂 , 李黛淋 , 王钰明 . 基于套算法和消化率计算法估测肉鸭饲料原料代谢能的比较研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022 , 34(5) : 3348 -3357 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2022.05.060

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to study the effect of 2 formulas for calculating metabolizable energy (ME) of feed ingredients for ducks, and to provide a reference for selecting an appropriate formula to determine the ME of feed ingredients in bioassay method for ducks. This study was divided into 2 parts. Experiment 1 was to determine the variation of endogenous energy loss (EEL) of fasting ducks in 5 batches. Then, the ME of 10 experimental diets prepared with 10 feed ingredients were determined with emptying and force-feeding method, and 2 formulas were used to calculate the ME of feed ingredients. The formula 1 (difference method) used to calculate the ME of feed ingredients was according to the ME of basal diet and experimental diet, and the proportion of basal diet in experimental diet. The formula 2 (digestibility calculation method) used to calculate the ME of feed ingredients was according to energy digestibility of feed ingredient multiplying its gross energy. Experiment 2 was to compare the differences of calculated and determined ME of 10 validation diets prepared with feed ingredients used in experiment 1. The determined ME of 10 validation diets were determined with emptying and force-feeding method, and the calculated ME of 10 validation diets were calculated from the proportion of feed ingredients in the validation diets and their ME calculated with 2 formulas in the experiment 1. The results showed as follows:1) in the variation of endogenous dry matter loss (ELDM) or EEL, the values in batches 1 to 3 were significantly lower than those in batches 4 to 5 (P<0.05). The variation coefficients of ELDM and EEL varied from 8.21% to 12.20% and from 9.37% to 15.35%, respectively. 2) Between the 2 calculation formulas, the apparent metabolizable energy (AME) and true metabolizable energy (TME) were significantly different in corn and cottonseed (P<0.05). 3) The AME of 10 validation diets calculated with formula 1 or 2 were both significantly higher than the determined values (P<0.05). However, the regression model of determined AME on calculated values of diets had no significant difference with the line of Y=X (P>0.05). The difference of less than 400 kJ/kg between determined and calculated TME from the TME of feed ingredients determined with formulas 1 and 2 was observed in 7 and 9 out of 10 diets, respectively. Additionally, there was no significant difference between determined and calculated TME from the TME of feed ingredients determined with formulas 1 or 2 (P>0.05), and between the regression model of determined TME on calculated values of diets and the line of Y=X (P>0.05). In conclusion, the additivity of TME is better than that of AME. It is more accurate to use the digestibility calculation method to calculate the TME of feed ingredients for ducks.

Key words： cherry valley ducks; difference method; digestibility calculation method; metabolizable energy

参考文献

[1] MELOCHE K J, KERR B J, SHURSON G C, et al.Apparent metabolizable energy and prediction equations for reduced-oil corn distillers dried grains with solubles in broiler chicks from 10 to 18 days of age[J].Poultry Science, 2013, 92(12):3176-3183.  
[2] 张晋源, 王钰明, 杜中原, 等.不同实验室间测定单胃动物饲料样品总能的一致性及可加性研究[J].动物营养学报, 2021, 33(6):3581-3591. ZHANG J Y, WANG Y M, DU Z Y, et al.Consistency and additivity in gross energy of monogastric animal feed samples between different laboratories[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(6):3581-3591.(in Chinese)
[3] 杜中原, 苏艳芳, 陈凯旋, 等.2种氧弹热量计测定样品总能的差异及其对能量消化率的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2021, 33(2):1128-1136. DU Z Y, SU Y F, CHEN K X, et al.Difference in two types of oxygen bomb calorimeter to determine gross energy and its effects on energy digestibility of samples[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(2):1128-1136.(in Chinese)
[4] ADEOLA O.Digestion and balance techniques in pigs[M]//LEWIS A J, LEE SOUTHERN L.Swine nutrition.Boca Raton:CRC Press, 2000:881-894.
[5] WOYENGO T A, KIARIE E, NYACHOTI C M.Metabolizable energy and standardized ileal digestible amino acid contents of expeller-extracted canola meal fed to broiler chicks[J].Poultry Science, 2010, 89(6):1182-1189.  
[6] KONG C, ADEOLA O.Evaluation of amino acid and energy utilization in feedstuff for swine and poultry diets[J].Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2014, 27(7):917-925.  
[7] 尹玉港, 赵峰, 李辉, 等.套算法与消化率计算法测定鸭饲粮脂肪代谢能值的比较研究[J].动物营养学报, 2011, 23(7):1176-1184. YIN Y G, ZHAO F, LI H, et al.A comparative study on the metabolizable energy of dietary fats determined by the difference method and digestibility calculation method in ducks[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2011, 23(7):1176-1184.(in Chinese)
[8] SIBBALD I R.A bioassay for true metabolizable energy in feedingstuffs[J].Poultry Science, 1976, 55(1):303-308.  
[9] ADEOLA O, RAGLAND D, KING D.Feeding and excreta collection techniques in metabolizable energy assays for ducks[J].Poultry Science, 1997, 76(5):728-732.  
[10] WANG Y M, YIN L T, ZHANG H, et al.Accuracy of predicting metabolizable energy from in vitro digestible energy determined with a computer-controlled simulated digestion system in feed ingredients for ducks[J].Animal Nutrition, 2022, 8(1):52-60.
[11] WU S B, CHOCT M, PESTI G.Historical flaws in bioassays used to generate metabolizable energy values for poultry feed formulation:a critical review[J].Poultry Science, 2020, 99(1):385-406.  
[12] DALE N M, FULLER H L.Endogenous energy losses of fed versus fasted roosters[J].Poultry Science, 1982, 61(5):898-901.  
[13] REN L Q, TAN H Z, ZHAO F, et al.Using corn starch as basal diet to determine the true metabolizable energy of protein feedstuffs in Chinese yellow chickens[J].Poultry Science, 2012, 91(6):1394-1399.  
[14] 杨霞, 党方昆, 赵峰, 等.鸡内源总能的变异及其对饲料原料真代谢能值的影响[J].动物营养学报, 2016, 28(7):2005-2012. YANG X, DANG F K, ZHAO F, et al.Variation of gross endogenous energy and its effect on value of true metabolizable energy of feedstuffs in roosters[J].Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(7):2005-2012.(in Chinese)
[15] TOMONAGA S, OKUYAMA H, TACHIBANA T, et al.Effects of high ambient temperature on plasma metabolomic profiles in chicks[J].Animal Science Journal, 2018, 89(2):448-455.  
[16] YANG Z, PIRGOZLIEV V R, ROSE S P, et al.Effect of age on the relationship between metabolizable energy and digestible energy for broiler chickens[J].Poultry Science, 2020, 99(1):320-330.  
[17] KING D, RAGLAND D, ADEOLA O.Apparent and true metabolizable energy values of feedstuffs for ducks[J].Poultry Science, 1997, 76(10):1418-1423.  
[18] HONG D, RAGLAND D, ADEOLA O.Additivity and associative effects of metabolizable energy and amino acid digestibility in barley and canola meal for white pekin ducks[J].Poultry Science, 2001, 80(11):1600-1606.  
[19] HONG D, RAGLAND D, ADEOLA O.Additivity and associative effects of metabolizable energy and amino acid digestibility of corn, soybean meal, and wheat red dog for white Pekin ducks[J].Journal of Animal Science, 2002, 80(12):3222-3229.  
[20] ADEOLA O.Energy values of feed ingredients for white Pekin ducks[J].International Journal of Poultry Science, 2003, 2(5):318-323.  
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

    联系我们

  • 地址：北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号
    　　　中国农业大学动科动医大楼153室
  • 邮编：100193
  • 电话：010－62817823
  • 网址：http://www.chinajan.com
  • E-mail：cjan@chinajan.com
京公网安备 11010802041926号    京ICP备17050989号-2