What Is The Feeding Value Of Carinata Meal To Cattle? Derek Brake - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

What Is The Feeding Value Of Carinata Meal To Cattle? Derek Brake

Importance Of Discovering Value For Non-Fuel Products From B. Carinata 100 80 Meal Meal 60 40 Oil Oil 20 0 Solvent Extracted Mechanically Extracted

How To Make Meal From A Non-Food Oilseed Into A Food?

A Few Challenges To Feeding Carinata Meal

Glucosinolates Are Goitrogenic • Depressed thyroid function – T3 – T4 • Erucic acid – myocardial lipidosis – fatty heart

Intake Of Brassica-based Meals Are Regulated • AAFCO & FDA limits intake of brassica meals to ruminants – Previously marketed in US as ‘Mustard Meal’ ( IFN 5-12-149) • 10% DM in diets of nonlactating ruminants • 0% DM in nonruminant and lactating cattle diets – Brassica carinata meal has been recommended by FDA for definition in 2017 AAFCO by IDC • T71.35

Intake Of Brassica-based Meals Are Regulated • Proposed definition of Brassica carinata meal. • T71.35 Brassica carinata meal, solvent extracted is the meal obtained after the removal of most of the oil by solvent extraction of Brassica carinata seeds. The meal shall contain less than 2% erucic acid and less than 30 micromoles of total glucosinolates per gram. It is a source of protein for beef cattle in an amount not to exceed 10% of the total diet. The maximum sulfur content must be guaranteed. • Predominate concern related to erucic acid intake in humans – Myocardial lipidosis

Beef Feeding Trials At SDSU • Why are cattle fed protein meals? – After puberty performance in cattle is limited by energy – Ruminal fermentation can be limited by N to support optimal microbial growth • Protein meals are often fed to optimize ruminal fermentation – to yield more energy from fermentation

Beef Feeding Trials At SDSU • In Vitro – estimate nutrients that are ruminally available • Cow performance and digestion – determine value to cow-calf producers as a protein supplement • Feeding behavior in finishing cattle – evaluate value of carinata meal to finishing cattle

In Vitro Experiments • Modified Tilley and Terry procedure to estimate potential nutrient digestion from several oilseed meals produced from different manufacturing methods – Incubation of feed in ruminal fluid & then acid-pepsin solution – Method is correlated to amount of nutrient disappearance from forage

Effect Of Oilseed On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Nutrient 1 Camelina Carinata Flaxseed 65.9 b 78.7 a 67.6 b OM 80.8 b 88.1 a 82.5 b CP 19.4 a 3.2 a -93.9 b EE 1 Means in rows with different superscripts differ; P < 0.01

Effect Of Processing Among Solvent-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Temp, °C 80 100 100 120 120 120 Time, min 90 65 90 40 65 90 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 65.7 ab 65.8 ab 65.8 ab 65.5 ab 64.0 b 67.5 a OM 1.19 82.4 a 79.6 b 78.8 b 79.7 b 76.4 c 79.0 b CP 0.78 EE 44.3 39.3 29.9 43.0 36.9 31.9 14.4 Carinata 78.4 d 78.6 d 86.8 a 84.0 bc 85.5 ab 82.5 c OM 1.19 87.5 c 87.9 bc 91.5 a 88.6 bc 89.7 ab 86.7 c CP 0.78 -45.8 b -33.7 b 66.9 a -33.2 b -1.7 b 72.9 a EE 14.4

Effect Of Processing Among Solvent-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Temp, °C 80 100 100 120 120 120 Time, min 90 65 90 40 65 90 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 65.7 ab 65.8 ab 65.8 ab 65.5 ab 64.0 b 67.5 a OM 1.19 82.4 a 79.6 b 78.8 b 79.7 b 76.4 c 79.0 b CP 0.78 EE 44.3 39.3 29.9 43.0 36.9 31.9 14.4 Carinata 78.4 d 78.6 d 86.8 a 84.0 bc 85.5 ab 82.5 c OM 1.19 87.5 c 87.9 bc 91.5 a 88.6 bc 89.7 ab 86.7 c CP 0.78 -45.8 b -33.7 b 66.9 a -33.2 b -1.7 b 72.9 a EE 14.4

Effect Of Processing Among Mechanically-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Diameter, cm 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.64 0.64 0.64 Hertz 15 20 25 15 20 25 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 66.1 ab 67.5 a 66.0 ab 65.9 ab 65.1 b 63.2 c OM 0.97 81.6 b 82.5 b 79.0 b CP 81.2 82.7 81.2 0.75 EE -11.2 11.0 2.0 7.7 3.7 31.9 11.2 Carinata 79.1 a 72.4 c 75.3 b 75.7 b 72.2 c 82.5 c OM 0.97 89.9 a 85.2 c 87.8 ab 88.1 ab 87.7 b 86.7 c CP 0.75 72.9 a EE 7.0 25.6 -13.1 -6.2 9.6 11.2

Effect Of Processing Among Mechanically-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Diameter, cm 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.64 0.64 0.64 Hertz 15 20 25 15 20 25 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 66.1 ab 67.5 a 66.0 ab 65.9 ab 65.1 b 63.2 c OM 0.97 81.6 b 82.5 b 79.0 b CP 81.2 82.7 81.2 0.75 EE -11.2 11.0 2.0 7.7 3.7 31.9 11.2 Carinata 79.1 a 72.4 c 75.3 b 75.7 b 72.2 c 82.5 c OM 0.97 89.9 a 85.2 c 87.8 ab 88.1 ab 87.7 b 86.7 c CP 0.75 72.9 a EE 7.0 25.6 -13.1 -6.2 9.6 11.2

Rate Of Nutrient Disappearance From Brassicas • Ruminal fermentation is dynamic – Ruminally available N = a + b × (1- e -kd × t ) – Ruminal release and degradation of Gls could be related to amount of time feed remains in rumen for fermentation Bach et al., 1998

Effect Of Processing Among Solvent-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Temp, °C 80 100 100 120 120 120 Time, min 90 65 90 40 65 90 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 65.7 ab 65.8 ab 65.8 ab 65.5 ab 64.0 b 67.5 a OM 1.19 82.4 a 79.6 b 78.8 b 79.7 b 76.4 c 79.0 b CP 0.78 EE 44.3 39.3 29.9 43.0 36.9 31.9 14.4 Carinata 78.4 d 78.6 d 86.8 a 84.0 bc 85.5 ab 82.5 c OM 1.19 87.5 c 87.9 bc 91.5 a 88.6 bc 89.7 ab 86.7 c CP 0.78 -45.8 b -33.7 b 66.9 a -33.2 b -1.7 b 72.9 a EE 14.4

Effect Of Processing Among Mechanically-Extracted Brassicas On In Vitro Nutrient Disappearance Processing conditions Diameter, cm 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.64 0.64 0.64 Hertz 15 20 25 15 20 25 Camelina ------- Apparent Nutrient Disappearance, % ------- SEM 66.1 ab 67.5 a 66.0 ab 65.9 ab 65.1 b 63.2 c OM 0.97 81.6 b 82.5 b 79.0 b CP 81.2 82.7 81.2 0.75 EE -11.2 11.0 2.0 7.7 3.7 31.9 11.2 Carinata 79.1 a 72.4 c 75.3 b 75.7 b 72.2 c 82.5 c OM 0.97 89.9 a 85.2 c 87.8 ab 88.1 ab 87.7 b 86.7 c CP 0.75 72.9 a EE 7.0 25.6 -13.1 -6.2 9.6 11.2

Rate Ruminal CP Disappearance Mechanically-extracted Solvent-extracted CP fraction 1 , % Camelina Carinata Flaxseed Camelina Carinata Flaxseed SEM 21.5 d 84.5 a 50.5 c 19.0 de 69.5 b 17.0 e Soluble 1.2 74.0 b 14.0 e 44.5 c 79.5 a 27.0 d 76.0 ab Slowly degradable 2.0 10.5 b 9.5 bc 11.5 b 6.0 c 18.5 a 8.5 bc Degradation rate 1.5 1 Means in rows with different superscripts differ; P ≤ 0.05

Glucosinolate Content Of Brassica Meal Mechanically-extracted Solvent-extracted Gls, m mol/g Camelina Carinata Flaxseed Camelina Carinata Flaxseed Progoitrin 0.0 1.4 0.0 7.6 1.1 0.0 Sinigrin 0.0 132.7 0.0 20.8 106.8 0.0 GS9 10.7 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 GS10 27.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GS11 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 Means in rows with different superscripts differ; P ≤ 0.05

Glucosinolate Content Of Brassica Meal Mechanically-extracted Solvent-extracted Gls, m mol/g Camelina Carinata Flaxseed Camelina Carinata Flaxseed Progoitrin 0.0 1.4 0.0 7.6 1.1 0.0 Sinigrin 0.0 132.7 0.0 20.8 106.8 0.0 GS9 10.7 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 GS10 27.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GS11 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 Means in rows with different superscripts differ; P ≤ 0.05

Sinigrin Release To Incubation Fluid From Solvent-Extracted Carinata Meal 1600 1400 1200 Sinigrin, m M 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 hour

Sinigrin Release To Incubation Fluid From Mechanically-Extracted Carinata Meal 1600 1400 1200 Sinigrin, m M 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 hour

What Did We Learn? • Estimates of total-tract digestion indicate that Carinata meal may be extensively digested • Carinata meal appears to be a good source of ruminally available nitrogen • Carinata meal in our study contained detectable amounts of goitrogenic glucosinolates but amounts decreased with increased amounts of time

Effect Of Solvent- Or Mechanically-extracted Brassica Carinata Meal On Performance Of Cows • What are effects of extraction method on value of carinata meal to cows? • Does value of carinata meal differ when cattle are fed forage- based diets with different particle size?

Methods • 56 non-pregnant cows were blocked by BW • Fed either long-stem or chopped corn-stalk residues • 2 cows within each pen randomly assigned to receive: – Cold-pressed carinata meal – Solvent-extracted carinata meal – Canola meal (positive control) • 1 cow within each pen was randomly assigned to receive no supplemental protein (negative control)

Observations • Differences in response to supplemental protein and particle size • No protein source × particle size of corn stalk residues – Apparently, greater forage length does not provide added benefit to supplementing cattle with carinata meal

Effects Supplemental Protein On Body Weight * Body wt, kg Control ME-Carinata SE-Carinata Canola SEM P Beginning 490 480 483 489 38.6 0.67 d 14 484 481 487 497 35.6 0.53 d 28 478 489 488 502 40.0 0.68 460 a 464 ab 482 ab 498 b d 42 35.7 <0.01 479 a 472 a 489 ab 507 b d 56 33.7 0.01 * Means with different superscripts within a row differ