Standardized amino acid digestibility in cecectomized roosters and lysine bioavailability in chicks fed distillers dried grains with solubles.

This study was conducted to compare the concentration of standardized digestible (SDD) Lys and relative bioavailable Lys in 7 sources of corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). A second objective was to evaluate 2 in vitro methods, reactive Lys and color score, to predict the concentration of SDD Lys and bioavailable Lys in DDGS. Seven sources of DDGS were fed to cecectomized roosters, and digestibility of amino acids was measured using the total excreta collection method. To measure the relative bioavailable Lys in DDGS, a standard curve (r(2) = 0.96, P < 0.01) was constructed from 9-d weight gain of young chicks fed a Lys-deficient basal diet or diets containing increasing concentrations of l-Lys-HCl. Seven additional diets were formulated by adding each of the 7 sources of DDGS to the basal diet, and total weight gain of chicks was measured. Weight gain of chicks fed each DDGS-containing diet was then compared with the standard curve to calculate the bioavailable Lys and bioavailability of Lys in each source of DDGS. All DDGS sources were analyzed for reactive Lys using the guanidination procedure, and a Hunterlab color score was used to measure the degree of lightness (L), redness (a), and yellowness (b). Results showed that the mean SDD Lys values and the mean relative bioavailability of Lys were 61.4 and 69.0%, respectively. Differences between the concentration of SDD Lys and the concentration of bio-available Lys were not observed in 5 of 7 sources of DDGS. The concentration of SDD Lys was correlated (r(2) = 0.84, P < 0.05) with the concentration of reactive Lys in DDGS. Greater Hunterlab L scores were associated with a greater (r(2) = 0.90, P < 0.05) concentration of bioavailable Lys in DDGS. In conclusion, the concentration of SDD Lys in DDGS does not overestimate the concentration of bioavailable Lys for poultry. Values for reactive Lys may be used to estimate the concentration of SDD Lys, whereas Hunterlab L may be used to estimate the concentration of bioavailable Lys in DDGS.

Factors affecting the variability in ileal amino acid digestibility in corn distillers dried grains with solubles fed to growing pigs.

Two experiments were conducted to compare the ileal digestibility of AA in distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) sourced from different regions (IL, MN, KY), to compare AA digestibility in DDGS and in distillers dried grains (DDG) and to compare AA digestibility in DDGS from ethanol production (DDGS(ethanol)) and DDGS from beverage production (DDGS(beverage)). In Exp. 1, five samples of DDGS(ethanol) were sourced from Minnesota (MN1, MN2), Illinois (IL1, IL2), and from Kentucky (KY). In Exp. 2, six samples of DDGS(ethanol), 1 sample of DDG, and 1 sample of DDGS(beverage) were used to compare values for apparent ileal digestibility and standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of AA between DDGS(ethanol) and DDGS(beverage) and between DDG and DDGS(ethanol). Results of Exp. 1 showed that the SID of Lys in DDGS from MN2 (72.8%) was greater (P < 0.01) than in DDGS from MN1 (66.8%), IL1 (66.8%), and KY (65.8%) but not different from IL2 (70.1%). Except for Leu and Glu, no differences in SID for any of the other AA were observed among the 5 sources of DDGS. In Exp. 2, the SID for Lys in DDGS(beverage) was greater (P < 0.01) than in DDGS(ethanol) (69.3 vs. 64.8%), but for CP and all other AA except His, no differences between the 2 types of DDGS were observed. The SID for most AA in DDG were greater (P < 0.05) than in DDGS(ethanol), which suggests that the AA in the solubles that are added to DDGS may be less digestible than the AA in DDG. In conclusion, results of these experiments confirm that the digestibility of Lys is more variable among sources of DDGS than the digestibility of other AA. However, the SID of AA among DDGS sources within a region can vary as much as among DDGS sources from different regions, and AA in DDGS(beverage) may be as digestible as AA in DDGS(ethanol). The digestibility of AA in DDG is greater than in DDGS, which indicates that AA in the solubles have a lower digestibility than AA in DDG.