Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-03T17:41:44.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sustainable pig nutrition in organic farming: By-products from food processing as a feed resource

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2007

Sonja Wlcek  and
Werner Zollitsch
Sonja Wlcek
Affiliation:
BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, Gregor Mendel-Str. 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.
Werner Zollitsch*
Affiliation:
BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, Gregor Mendel-Str. 33, A-1180, Vienna, Austria.
*
*Corresponding author: werner.zollitsch@boku.ac.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since keeping nutrient cycles intact is one of the most important goals in organic farming, the option of recycling by-products from organic food processing by feeding them to organically raised pigs was analyzed in this study. A more specific objective was to estimate the potential of this nutrient source for reducing the protein deficiency in organic pig nutrition. Sector-specific questionnaires were sent to 321 processors of organic foods in Austria. The information provided was used to estimate the total quantity of the respective by-products available. Proximate analysis, amino acid and mineral analysis were performed for different by-products. These data were combined with the available quantities of the respective by-products, resulting in the amounts of nutrients potentially recyclable for pig nutrition. Each year 2400 t of wheat bran, 990 t of rye bran and 1300 t of residues from the separation of seed grains are already fed to different kinds of livestock. Some 510 t of stale bread are currently disposed of, but could be used as a highly nutritive feedstuff for pigs, once the problem of collection is solved. Relevant amounts of other energy-rich by-products were found: currently, about 11,000 t (2000 t on a dry matter basis) of feed-grade potatoes are composted, resulting in a waste of 27,000 GJ of metabolizable energy (ME). These potatoes could be better utilized as a dietary energy source for approximately 12,300 pigs. Additionally, about 12,900 t of whey from organically produced milk are discarded, which could be used to feed roughly 14,000 pigs. High-protein by-products are scarce. Annually, 80 t and 63 t of expellers from pumpkin seed and sunflower seed, respectively, are produced from organically grown oilseeds. Only small quantities of okara (by-product of the production of tofu from soybeans) and buttermilk are available. Only 4% and 5% of the protein and lysine requirements, respectively, of the pigs currently kept on organic farms in Austria could be covered by by-products rich in protein. Excluding feed-grade potatoes means a loss of 18% crude protein (CP), 18% lysine and 26% ME of the entire nutrient supply available from organic by-products.

Keywords

by-productpigorganicnutritionfeedproteinpotatowhey
Type
Research Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , September 2004 , pp. 159 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Boucqué, C.V & Fiems, L.O. (1988) Vegetable by-products of agro-industrial origin. Livestock Production Science 19: 97–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Wecke, C. (2002) Eignung von Nebenprodukten für die Flüssigfütterung von Mastschweinen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Futterwertvariabilität und wirtschaftlicher Effizienz. in Wecke, C. (ed.) Nebenprodukte der Nahrungs- und Genussmittelherstellung als Futtermittel für Schweine. Leipziger Universitätsverlag Leipzig, Germany9–111.Google Scholar
3Köpke, U. (1994) Nährstoffkreislauf und Nährstoffmanagement unter dem Aspekt des Betriebsorganismus. in Mayer, J., Faul, O., Ries, M., Gerber, A. & Kärcher, A. (eds) Ökologischer Landbau__ Perspektive fur die Zukunft! SOL-Sonderausgabe, 58 Stiftung Ökologischer Landbau, Bad Dürkheim, Germany.Google Scholar
4Herrmann, H.J.Krutzinna, C.Lehmann, B. & Woelfert, J. (1995) Tierhaltung im Ökologischen Landbau—Ökologische Tierhaltung? In Dewes, T. & Schmitt, L. (eds). Beiträge zur 3. Wissenschaftstagung zum Ökologischen Landbau, February 21–23 Kiel. Wissenschaftl. Fachverl., Gießen, Germany p. 253–256.Google Scholar
5Lampkin, N. (1990) Organic Farming. Farming Press Ipswich, UK.Google Scholar
6Boehncke, E. (1993) Grundzüge einer artgemäßen Tierernährung. Ökologie und Landbau 87: 23–26.Google Scholar
7Stocker, P. (2001) Principles of organic livestock production. In Younie, D. & Wilkinson, J.M. (eds). Organic Livestock Farming—Principles, Practicalities and Profits. Chalcombe Publications Lincoln, UK25–31.Google Scholar
8Thielen, C. 1993. Fütterungspraxis bei alternativ gehaltenen Mastschweinen. PhD dissertation, Department of Animal Nutrition, Veterinarian University, Hannover, Germany.Google Scholar
9Wurzinger, M. 1999. Erhebung der Fütterungspraxis bei Mastschweinen auf biologisch wirtschaftenden Betrieben in Niederösterreich. Diploma thesis, Department of Livestock Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
10Wagner, E.Iben, C.Gruber, T. & Baumgartner, J. (2000) Bioschweinehaltung in Österreich—Fütterung in der Schweinemast. Proceedings of the Society of Nutrition and Physiology 9 78.Google Scholar
11Zollitsch, W., Wlcek, S., Leeb, T., & Baumgartner, J. 2000. Aspekte der Schweine- und Geflügelfütterung im biologisch wirtschaftenden Betrieb. Proceedings, 27. Viehwirtschaftliche Fachtagung, 6–8 June 2000, BAL Gumpenstein, Irdning, Austria.Google Scholar
12Council of the European Union (1999) Council Regulation (EC) No. 1804/1999 of 19 July 1999 supplementing Regulation (EEC) No. 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs to include livestock production Official Journal L 222 24/08/1999.p. 0001–0028.Google Scholar
13Pfirter, H.P. (1994) Nebenprodukte als Teile von Futterrationen: Möglichkeiten—Grenzen. Proceedings Verwendung von Nebenprodukten aus der Lebensmittelherstellung in der Tierernährung 4 May 1994. Schriftenreihe aus dem Institut für Nutztierwissenschaften der ETH Zürich 12: 61–75.Google Scholar
14Kamphues, J. (1996) Principles and procedure of testing by-products in the case of intended utilization as feedstuffs. Proceedings, Workshop Unkonventionelle Futtermittel 10–11 April. Landbauforschung Völkenrode 169: 138–150.Google Scholar
15Chaubert, C. (1994) Les sous-produits de l'agro-alimentaire. Proceedings Verwendung von Nebenprodukten aus der Lebensmittelherstellung in der Tierernährung 4 May. Schriftenreihe aus dem Institut für Nutztierwissenschaften der ETH Zürich 12: 13–36.Google Scholar
16Hackl, W. (1996) Feeding value and feeding of bakery-recycling products to fattening pigs. Proceedings, Workshop Unkonventionelle Futtermittel 10–11 April Landbauforschung Völkenrode 169 119.Google Scholar
17Lindermayer, H. (1996) Snacks and bakery residues in pig feeding. Proceedings Workshop Unkonventionelle Futtermittel 10–11 April. Landbauforschung Völkenrode 169: 353–357.Google Scholar
18Schenkel, H.Baumeister, S. & Eckstein, B. (1999) Content of nutrients and minerals in bread and bakery products with respect to pig feeding. In Böhme, H. & Flachowsky, G. (eds) Aktuelle Aspekte bei der Erzeugung von Schweinefleisch. Landbauforschung Völkenrode 193 299–303.Google Scholar
19Chaubeauti, E.Noblet, J. & Carré, B(1991) Digestion of plant cell walls from four different sources in growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 32: 207–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Le Goff, G.Noblet, J. & Cherbut, C. (2003) Intrinsic ability of the faecal microbial flora to ferment dietary fibre at different growth stages of pigs. Livestock Production Science 81: 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21Nürnberg, K.Kracht, W. & Nürnberg, G. (1994) Zum Einfluß der Rapskuchenfütterung auf die Schlachtkörper- und Fettqualität beim Schwein. Züchtungskunde 66(3): 230–241.Google Scholar
22Schöne, F.Kirchheim, U. & Schumann, W. (1994) Glucosinolate degradation by rapeseed myrosinase and effect on rapeseed acceptability by growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48: 229–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Schöne, F.Kirchheim, U.Schumann, W. & Lüdke, H. (1996) Apparent digestibility of high-fat rapeseed press cake in growing pigs and effects on feed intake, growth and weight of thyroid and liver. Animal Feed Science and Technology 62: 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Schöne, F.Hartung, H.Jahreis, G.Graf, T. & Tischendorf, F. (1998) Prüfung fettreicher Rapsfuttermittel (Saat und Kuchen) an Zuchtsauen—Futteraufnahme, Aufzuchtergebnisse und Milch(fett)zusammensetzung. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 79: 184–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25Wetscherek-Seipelt, G.Wetscherek, W. & Zollitsch, W. (1991) Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Kürbiskernkuchen in der Schweinemast. Die Bodenkultur 42: 277–289.Google Scholar
26Kling, M. & Wöhlbier, W. 1983. Handelsfuttermittel. Vol. 2A+2B. Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
27Zollitsch, W. 1991. Einsatz inländischer Sojaprodukte in der Schweine- und Hühnermast. PhD thesis, Department of Livestock Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
28Salewski, A. (1994) Raps- und Leinkuchen im Schweinefutter. Deutsche Geflügelwirtschaft und Schweineproduktion 15: 19–21.Google Scholar
29Flachowsky, G.Langbein, T.Bohme, H.Schneider, A. & Aulrich, K. (1998) Effect of false flax expeller combined with short-term vitamin E supplementation in pigs feeding on the fatty acid pattern, vitamin E concentration and oxidative stability of various tissues. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 78: (4–5) 187–195Google Scholar
30Arosemena, A., DePeters, E.J. & Fadel, J.G. (1995) Extent of variability in nutrient composition within selected by-product feedstuffs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 54: 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Miller, E.R., Holden, P.J., and Leibbrandt, V.D. 1987. By-products in swine diets. http://www.genome.iastate.edu/edu/PIH/108.html (verified 25 October 2003).Google Scholar
32Vogel, G. & Fröhlich, H. (1984) Gemüseabfälle, eine nicht zu unterschätzende Futterreserve. Feldwirtschaft 25(11): 507–511.Google Scholar
33Nicholson, J.W.G.Snoddon, P.M. & Dean, P.R. (1988) Digestibility and acceptability of potato steam peel by pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68(1): 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34van Lunen, T.A.Anderson, D.M.Laurent, A.M.Nicholson, J.W.G. & Dean, P.R. (1989) The feeding value of potato steam peel for growing-finishing pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 69(1): 225–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35Shurtleff, W. & Aoyagi, A. (1990) The Book of Tofu. Tofu Soymilk Production. The Soyfoods Center Lafayette, USA.Google Scholar
36Naumann, C. & Bassler, R. 1976. Methodenbuch. Vol. III. (4th ed. 1997). Verband Deutscher Landwirtschaftlicher Untersuchungs- und Forschungsanstalten (VDLUFA), Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
37Commission of the European Union (1998) Commission Directive 98/64/EC of September 3, 1998 establishing Community methods of analysis for the determination of amino-acids, crude oils and fats, and olaquindox in feedingstuffs and amending Directive 71/393/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) Official Journal L 257 19/09/1998. 0014–0028.Google Scholar
38Kirchgessner, M. & Roth, F.X. (1983) Schät & zgleichungen zur Ermittlung des energetischen Futterwertes von Mischfuttermitteln für Schweine. Zeitschrift für Tierphysiologie. Tierernährung und Futtermittelkunde 50: 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39DLG, (Deutsche Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft) (1991) DLG-Futterwerttabellen— Schweine. 6th ed.DLG-Verlag, Frankfurt, a. M., Germany.Google Scholar
40Verband landwirtschaftlicher Veredelungsproduzenten 2000. Tätigkeitsbericht 1999—Ergebnisse aus dem Sauenplanereinsatz. Wels, Austria.Google Scholar
41Wecke, C. (2001) Development of a methodical algorithm for calculation of regional available by-products, exemplarily shown for the Federal State of Saxony. Proc. Tierernährung— Ressourcen und neue Aufgaben. Landbauforschung Völkenrode Braunschweig, Germany 223: 21–28.Google Scholar
42Jentsch, W.Schiemann, R.Hoffmann, L.Beyer, M. & Zwierz, P. (1989) Untersuchungen zur energetischen Verwertung von Kartoffelstärke und Kartoffeln unterschiedlicher Behandlung beim Schwein. Archive Animal Nutrition 39(11): 875–892.Google Scholar
43Kracht, W.Bolduan, G.Ender, K.Matzke, W.Ohle, H.O. & Redeker, J. (1988) Zum Futterwert von Kartoffeln in der Schweinemast. Tierzucht 42(6): 276–278.Google Scholar
44Kirchgessner, M. (1997) Tierernährung 10th ed.Verlags Union Agrar, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
45Sundrum, A.Bütfering, L.Henning, M. & Hoppenbrock, K.H. (2000) Effects of on-farm diets for organic pig production on performance and carcass quality. Journal of Animal Science 78: 1199–1205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46BLT, Bayeriche Landesanstalt für Tierzucht (1999) Futterberechnung für Schweine. 12th ed.Poing, Germany.Google Scholar
47Heiss, R. (ed.) (1996) Lebensmitteltechnologie: biochemische, chemische, mechanische und thermische Verfahren der Lebensmittelverarbeitung 5th ed.Springer Verlag Berlin, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar