Relative metabolizable energy values for fats and oils in young broilers and adult roosters

Our goal was to determine if relative bioavailability values (RBV) for fats and oils (lipids) determined in adult roosters are different than RBV determined with young broiler chickens. Lipids that were expected to have widely varying ME content were evaluated using a slope-ratio approach in adult r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Poultry science 2017-07, Vol.96 (7), p.2320-2329
Main Authors: Aardsma, M P, Mitchell, R D, Parsons, C M
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animal Feed - analysis
Animal Husbandry - methods
Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena
Animals
Biological Availability
Chickens - metabolism
Diet - veterinary
Energy Metabolism
Lipid Metabolism
Male
Random Allocation
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Our goal was to determine if relative bioavailability values (RBV) for fats and oils (lipids) determined in adult roosters are different than RBV determined with young broiler chickens. Lipids that were expected to have widely varying ME content were evaluated using a slope-ratio approach in adult roosters (Exp. 1) via the precision-fed rooster assay (PFRA) and broiler chicks via a growth assay (Exp. 2). The same lipids were tested in both experiments and were refined corn oil (RCO), a 2:1 blend of stearic acid (C18:0) with RCO (SAB1), a 1:1 blend of C18:0 with RCO (SAB2), tallow (TW), poultry fat (PF), and corn oil from a corn ethanol plant (DDGSCO). In Exp. 1, roosters were tube-fed diets containing 0, 5, and 10% of supplemental lipid in ground corn. In Exp. 2, diets consisted of 0, 5, and 10% supplemental lipid in an amino-acid fortified corn-soybean meal diet. Chicks were limit-fed test diets from 10 to 20 d posthatch to maintain energy as the growth-limiting factor. The TMEn of diets or BW gain of chicks were regressed on supplemental lipid level. The RBV were calculated as the regression coefficient of the test lipid divided by that of RCO. For Exp. 1 a non-linear response was observed for SAB2; however, the RBV for SAB1 (22%), TW (72%), PF (96%), and DDGSCO (90%) were as expected. The RBV of SAB1 and TW were lower (P
ISSN:0032-5791
1525-3171
DOI:10.3382/ps/pex028