Metabolizable Energy of Soybean Meal and Canola Meal as Influenced by the Reference Diet Used and Assay Method.

Abstract

Simple SummaryA standard nutritionally balanced diet is used as a reference diet into which test feedstuffs are added to determine metabolizable energy of the added test feedstuff either by difference or regression method. We hypothesized that if the composition of the reference diet changes, the metabolizable energy of the test feedstuff will also changes and that the difference and regression methods will not give similar metabolizable energy values for the test feedstuff under these circumstances. To test this hypothesis, we used two reference diets (corn-soybean meal and corn-canola meal), instead of using just one reference diet, to determine metabolizable energy of soybean meal and canola meal. The metabolizable energy of soybean meal and canola meal was greater when corn-canola meal was the reference diet compared with using corn-soybean meal reference diet. Compared with the difference method, the regression method gave greater metabolizable energy value for the test feedstuffs. Results from the current study show that the calculated metabolizable energy value of feedstuffs depends on the reference diet used and that the difference and regression methods did not give similar metabolizable energy value for the test feedstuffs.A 21-day experiment was conducted to study the effect of reference diet type and assay method on apparent metabolizable energy (AME) and nitrogen-corrected (AMEn) of soybean meal (SBM) and canola meal (CM). Broilers (n = 240) were allocated to 10 treatments with eight replicates/treatment and three birds/replicate. Treatments included corn-SBM or corn-CM reference diets (RD). To each RD, 300 or 450 g/kg of SBM or CM were added to make a total of eight test diets. For the difference method, AME of SBM and CM substituted at 300 g/kg in corn-CM RD gave greater AME values compared to inclusion in the corn-SBM RD. The AMEn of SBM increased with increase in inclusion level in the corn-CM RD but AMEn of CM decreased with increased inclusion level of CM in the corn-SBM RD. For the regression method, AME and AMEn of the test feedstuffs were greater with corn-CM RD compared with corn-SBM RD. The AME of SBM was not affected by assay method, whereas AME of CM was lower when determined using the regression method. In conclusion, both the reference diet type and assay method influenced assayed AME and AMEn value of test protein feedstuffs and should be considered in cross-studies comparisons.