2 results
Effects of available surface on gaseous emissions from group-housed gestating sows kept on deep litter
- F. X. Philippe, B. Canart, M. Laitat, J. Wavreille, N. Bartiaux-Thill, B. Nicks, J. F. Cabaraux
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
In the European Union, the group-housed pregnant sows have to have a minimal legal available area of 2.25 m2/sow. However, it has been observed that an increased space allowance reduces agonistic behaviour and consecutive wounds and thus induces better welfare conditions. But, what about the environmental impacts of this greater available area? Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify pollutant gases emissions (nitrous oxide, N2O, methane, CH4, carbon dioxide, CO2 and ammonia, NH3), according to the space allowance in the raising of gestating sows group-housed on a straw-based deep litter. Four successive batches of 10 gestating sows were each divided into two homogeneous groups and randomly allocated to a treatment: 2.5 v. 3.0 m2/sow. The groups were separately kept in two identical rooms. A restricted conventional cereals based diet was provided once a day in individual feeding stalls available only during the feeding time. Rooms were automatically ventilated. The gas emissions were measured by infra red photoacoustic detection during six consecutive days at the 6th, 9th and 12th weeks of gestation. Sows performance (body weight gain, backfat thickness, number and weight of piglets) was not significantly different according to the space allowance. In the room with 3.0 m2/sow and compared with the room with 2.5 m2/sow, gaseous emissions were significantly greater for NH3 (6.29 v. 5.37 g NH3-N/day per sow; P < 0.01) and significantly lower for N2O (1.78 v. 2.48 g N2O-N/day per sow; P < 0.01), CH4 (10.15 v. 15.21 g/day per sow; P < 0.001), CO2 equivalents (1.11 v. 1.55 kg/day per sow; P < 0.001), CO2 (2.12 v. 2.41 kg/day per sow; P < 0.001) and H2O (3.10 v. 3.68 kg/day per sow; P < 0.001). In conclusion, an increase of the available area for group-housed gestating sow kept on straw-based deep litter seems to be ambiguous on an environmental impacts point of view. Compared with a conventional and legal available area, it favoured NH3 emissions, probably due to an increased emitting surface. However, about greenhouse gases, it decreased N2O, CH4 and CO2 emissions, probably due to reduced anaerobic conditions required for their synthesis, and led to a reduction of CO2 equivalents emissions.
Nutritional properties of potato protein concentrate compared with soybean meal as the main protein source in feed for the double-muscled Belgian Blue bull
- E. Froidmont, B. Wathelet, R. Oger, J. M. Romnée, A. Colinet, D. Cloet, M. Didelez, J. C. Pichon, C. Boudry, G. Jean, N. Bartiaux-Thill
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The objective of this experiment was to compare the nutritional properties of potato protein concentrate, a by-product of the starch industry produced entirely in Europe, with that of soybean meal (SBM), for growing cattle. The experiment was conducted on double-muscled Belgian Blue bulls, fitted with rumen, duodenal and ileal cannulas, according to a 4 × 4 Latin square design. They were fed three different iso-N and iso-net energy diets formulated according to the Dutch feed evaluation system, differing in the nature of the main protein source, which was either SBM (‘SBM’ treatment), potato protein concentrate (PPC, ‘PPC’ treatment) or an iso-N mixture of these two protein sources (‘mixed’ treatment). A fourth treatment consisted of ‘PPC’ supplemented by 9.5% digestible proteins supplied by duodenal perfusion of sodium caseinate (CAS, ‘PPC + CAS’ treatment). No significant difference was observed in the ruminal fluid pH, whereas both ‘PPC’ and ‘PPC + CAS’ had the effect of reducing the ruminal ammonia nitrogen (N-NH3) concentration. No significant difference was observed in the apparent intestinal digestibility of the dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM) or N. Outflows of non-NH3-N, microbial proteins and dietary proteins from the rumen were similar for ‘PPC’, ‘SBM’ and ‘mixed’, and increased with CAS infusion by 20%, 17% and 27%, respectively. On the basis of in vivo observations, the degradability of SBM and PPC proteins was estimated at 0.60 and 0.43, respectively, corresponding to the values quoted in the literature. The supply of digestible essential amino acids (EAA) was significantly greater with ‘PPC + CAS’ and did not differ among ‘SBM’, ‘mixed’ and ‘PPC’. This illustrates the difficulty of altering the amino acid (AA) pattern of digestible protein by the nature of the protein of dietary origin when an animal is fed a high nutritional value diet. N retention was not affected by replacing SBM with PPC, but increased by 10% with CAS infusion. On the basis of the plasma AA pattern, the supply of digestible Met was probably limiting with ‘SBM’, ‘mixed’ and ‘PPC’. The CAS perfusion supplemented all AA, including Met, leading to increased N retention. This improvement was limited, however, and N utilisation remained unchanged between treatments. In conclusion, despite a more favourable EAA pattern, PPC offered no advantage compared with SBM for growing bulls when diets were formulated according to the Dutch feed evaluation system.