• Dr. Roger Campbell, United Feeds/Ausgene, Gridley, IL, “The Biological Principles;”
• Dr. John Patience, Prairie Swine Center, Saskatoon, Canada, “An Overview of Energy Systems;”
• Dr. Jean Noblet, National Institute for Animal Research, St. Gilles, France, “Comparing Energy Systems;”
• Dr. Mike Tokach, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, “Energy for Finishing Pigs;”
• Dr. Floyd McKeith, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, “Dietary Fat Effects on Pork Quality;”
• Dr. John Pluske, Murdock University, Murdock, Australia, “Practical Application of Fat and Fiber on Disease Resistance.”
Dr. Jim Pettigrew, University of Illinois, chaired the meeting. The presentations were quite complimentary of animal fat and their contributions to swine diets. All presentations were recorded and will soon be available on compact disc along with the visuals.
Swine nutritionists have been in recent discussion and often contro-versy as to the most acceptable energy system to measure such in feed ingredients used for swine rations. The most commonly used system in the United States is metabolizable energy (ME) whereas Europe and Australia have generally adopted the net energy system. The current National Research Council values are based on ME, which has a tendency to overvalue ingredients such as soybean meal and undervalue animal fats when compared to net energy.
A summary of research trials conducted nearly a decade ago by Pettigrew and Dr. Ron Moser while both were at the University of Minnesota, was reviewed. At that time an average of five percent increase in daily gain and a 10 percent decrease in feed required per unit of gain was demonstrated across all trials. This resulted in a 4.76-kilogram (kg) advantage in market weight and 11.9 kg of feed saved. Tokach reported the summary of some 25 research studies conducted during the past 10 years in which either 2.5 percent or five percent fat was added to basic corn-soybean meal diets. The responses were reported to be nearly identical to the past summary. A “rule of thumb” response for each one percent increase in daily gain and two percent reduction in feed required for unit of gain can be expected from fat additions to swine grow-finish diets.
The presentations offered several other casual benefits to fat additions such as the decrease in number of feed deliveries required and the number of pigs that can be fed from a single feed mill production when using higher energy diets. The reduction in feed production costs, the increased longevity of mill equipment, and the control of dust were all referenced as unknown or casual benefits of fats.
FPRF has a project in progress to evaluate the energy value of various meat and bone meal samples via various energy determined systems. A project was recently completed as a similar project using broilers and turkeys for both meat and bone meal and poultry meal.
Though an accompanying article in this issue of Render (see “The Future is Catching Up,” page 10) discusses the energy opportunities as biofuel sources, animal fats and proteins are major contributors to the nutrients required for meat, milk, eggs, and fiber production.
August 2003 Render