2012 sociedade brasileira de zootecniawww sbz org br - PDF document

© 2012 Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecniawww.sbz.org.br materials, directly affecting the profitability in poultry.nutritional values of feeds, so that rations can adequatelycomposition, the values of apparent metabolizable energyde Viçosa, using the traditional method of total excretaR. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012 649 R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012The reference diet (Table 1) was formulated based on for a period of 10 days;calculated, by means of equations proposed by Matterson = GEcons. - GEexc. DM = DM = ME + ( ME - ME g/g substitution = ( GEcons. - GEexc.) - 8,22 x NB DM = DM = ME + (ME nTR - ME g/g substitutionwhere MEration; ME = corrected apparentmetabolizable energy of the test ration; AMEnmatter)Calculated Digestible methionine (g/kg)5.4Limestone9.1Digestible methionine + cystine (g/kg)8.2Salt5.1Digestible threonine (g/kg)6.7L-lysine HCl (98%)3.2Digestible thriptophan (g/kg)2.2DL-methionine (99%)2.6Calcium (g/kg)9.01.0Available phosphorus (g/kg)4.50.5Sodium (g/kg)2.2Choline chloride 60%1.0 6,000 mg; vit. B6 - 3,300 mg; pantothenicComposition per kg of product: manganese - 75,000 mg; iron - 20,000 mg; zinc - 50,000 mg; copper - 4,000 mg; cobalt - 200 mg; iodine - 1,500 mg; and vehicle q.s. - 1,000 g. Chemical composition and metabolizable energy values of feedstuffs for broiler chickens R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012energy of = gross energy consumed; = gross energy excreted; NB = nitrogen balance;= nitrogen = endogenous nitrogen excreted; DM = dryand observed values of crude protein varying from 349.9 Analyses conducted at the Laboratory of Animal Nutrition Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal de Viçosa.FeedstuffsDMCFNDFADFGE(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)862.796.9370.9150.9937.5475.2632.1369.3931.916.022.210.3n.e.n.e.n.e.893.8139.2353.877.0883.4290.9418.624.2884.717.48.26.6884.139.3267.238.1928.811.2352.1307.9Bread-making residue853.910.261.37.9 FeedstuffDMCPEEMMCaP(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)(g/kg)862.719.12.925.01.01.0937.5194.921.540.61.212.3931.973.543.46.00.31.7922.6509.5113.8246.584.7893.8263.85.940.81.56.7883.4316.55.453.53.413.4884.7126.60.96.50.82.7884.192.223.515.10.45.3928.8682.812.716.60.38.4853.9151.515.725.21.93.3 Analyses conducted at the Laboratory of Animal Nutrition of the Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal de Viçosa. 651 R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012to meat and bones on the Brazilian Charts (Rostagno et al.,is in the group of meat and bone meal of 510.0 g/kg. InAlbino obtained by Silva (2008), of 18.8 g/kg.presented value 18% higher than that mentioned byvalue described by Rodrigues et al. (2001), and that describedRostagno et al. (2005). These variations occurring in theproducts are more evident, since there is no standardizationin the process of production (Tucci et al., 2003).lower than the value obtained by Bastos et al. (2004): 0.5 g/kg,but was higher than the value described by Rostagno et al.Both values of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and ofvalues determined Vieira et al. (2007).ADF = 86.3 g/kg; by Brumano et al. (2006), NDF = 80.5 g/kgin this research, since many tests were conducted using theamylase acts on starch degradation in the feedstuff,the enzyme amylase does not act effectively in the Chemical composition and metabolizable energy values of feedstuffs for broiler chickens R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012will then occur, thus helping to overestimate the values ofMillet presented higher values of NDF and ADF thanPinheiro et al. (2003) found lower values of NDF: 207.5 g/kg;and higher values of ADF: 117.1 g/kg, with respect to thevalues found for millet in the present research.energy of feedstuff of animal origin are expected andemphasize the importance of updating these values forwas lower than the values found for the two varietiesthe estimated values of energy for nitrogen balance since,et al. (2000). According to Tavernari et al. (2010), highthe values reported by the NRC (1994) and the Janssen (1989).FeedstuffsDMAMEAMEnCAM(kcal/kg)(kcal/kg) (kcal/kg) (kcal/kg)862.71,7511,7310.470.47937.51,3371,1160.290.24931.93,3803,3510.820.81922.62,6862,5240.640.61893.87026930.180.17883.41,7811,6070.410.37884.73,5413,5430.900.90884.13,0653,0460.780.78928.83,9393,8260.720.70853.93,5493,4940.900.89 Table 4 -Apparent metabolizable energy (AME), corrected apparent metabolizable energy (AMEn) and coefficients of apparent 653 R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012et al. (2005) and Brumano et al. (2006), but lower than thealthough they presented values higher than those obtainedstudy was greater than the values found for two differentbeans used in this experiment did not suffer any kind ofThe values of apparent metabolizable energy correctedresidue - 3,494 kcal/kg.ALBINO, L.F.T. Zootecnia) - Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG.ALBINO, L.F.T.; SILVA, M.A. Valores nutritivos de alimentos paraaves e suínos determinados no Brasil. In: SIMPÓSIOAVES E SUÍNOS, 1996, Viçosa, MG. Viçosa, MG:Universidade Federal de Viçosa, 1996. p.303-318.BASTOS, A.O.; MOREIRA, I.; MURAKAMI, A.E.M. et al. (L.) Brown) grão, v.34, n.6, p.1915-1919,BONETT, L.P.; BAUMGARTHER, M.S.T.; KLEIN, A.C. et al.Phaseolus vulgares L.Arquivos de Ciência dav.11, n.3, p.235-246 2007.BRUMANO, G.; GOMES, P.C.; ALBINO, L.F.T. et al. Composição, v.35, n.6, p.2297-2302, 2006.BRUM, P.A.; AVILA, P.A.R.; MAIER, V.S. et al. Valores de energia Revista Brasileira de Agrociência, v.8, n.1, p.51-55,CAVALCANTE, R.R.; FIGUEREDO A.V.; CARVALHO, M.A.M. et al.alimentos alternativos para cutias (Revista Ciência Animal Brasileira, v.6,D’AGOSTINI, P.; GOMES, P.C.; ALBINO, L.F.T. Valores de, v.33, n.1, p.128-134, 2004.GOMES, P.C.; RODRIGUES, M.P.; ALBINO, L.F.T. et al., v.37, n.9, p.1617-1621,JANSSEN, W.M.M.A. European table of energy values forLIMA, R.B. Avaliação nutricional de derivados da moagemúmida do milho para frangos de corte industrial. MANTOVANI, C.; FURLAN, A.C.; MURAKAMI, A.E. et al., v.22,MATTERSON, L.D.; POTTER, L.M.; STUTZ, M.W. et al. 1965.The metabolizable energy of feed ingredients for chickens.Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report, v.11,MORATA, R.L.; TAVERNARI, F.C.; VIEIRA, R.A. et al. ValoresSuplemento Revista Brasileira de Ciência Avícola –, v.10, p.53, 2008. Chemical composition and metabolizable energy values of feedstuffs for broiler chickens R. Bras. Zootec., v.41, n.3, p.648-654, 2012NAGATA, A.K.; RODRIGUES, P.B.; FREITAS, R.T.F. et al. Energiametabolizável de alguns alimentos energéticos para frangos deCiência e Agrotecnologiav.28, n.3, p.668-677,NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL - NRC. Nutrient requirementsof poultry. 9.ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy ofSciences, 1994. 155p.NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL - NRC. Nutrient requeriments. 10.ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press,NERY, L.R. Valores de energia metabolizável e aminoácidosde Viçosa, Viçosa, MG.NUNES, R.V.; ROSTAGNO, H.S.; ALBINO, L.F.T. et al., v.30, n.3,NUNES, R.V. Digestibilidade de nutrientes e valoresTese (Doutorado em Zootecnia) – Universidade Federal deViçosa, Viçosa, MG.NUNES, R.V.; POZZA, P.C.; NUNES, C.G.V. et al. Valores, v.34, n.4, p.1217-224, 2005.NUNES, R.V.; ROSTAGNO, H.S.; GOMES, P.C. et al. Valores, v.35, n.4, p.1752-757,OSBORN, T.C. Genetic control of beans seed protein. , v.7, p.93-116, 1988.PINHEIRO, M.S.M.; FIALHO, E.T.; LIMA, J.A.F. et al. Milheto, v.2, n.2, p.99-109, 2003.PIRES, C.V.; OLIVEIRA, M.G.A.; CRUZ, G.A.D.R. et al. L.). , v.16, n.2,RODRIGUES, P.B.; ROSTAGNO, H.S.; ALBINO, L.F.T. et al.Valores energéticos do milheto, do milho e subprodutos do milho,, v.30, n.6, p.1767-1778, 2001.ROSTAGNO, H.S.; ALBINO, L.F.T; DONZELE, J.L. et al. Tabelasbrasileiras para aves e suínosexigências nutricionais. Viçosa, MG: Universidade Federal deViçosa, 2005. 186p.SANTOS, Z.A.S.; FREITAS, R.T.F.; FIALHO, E.T. et al. ValorAgrotecnologia, v.29, n.1, p.232-237, 2005.SATORELLI, S.A.A. 1998. Dissertação (Mestrado emSILVA, D.J.; QUEIROZ, A.C. químicos e biológicos). 3.ed. Viçosa, MG: UFV, 2002. 235p.SILVA, T.C.P. Substituição do farelo de trigo pela torta deSILVA, N.R. Desempenho produtivo de bovinos de corteem Zootecnia) – Universidade Federal do Tocantins, Tocantis.STRINGHINI, J.H.; CAFÉ, M.B.; FERNANDES, C.M. et al. AvaliaçãoCiência Animal Brasileira, v.1, n.2, p.123-126, 2000.TAVERNARI, F.C.; MORATA, R.L.; RIBEIRO JÚNIOR, V. et al.Avaliação nutricional e energética do farelo de girassol paraArquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecniav.62, n.1, p.172-177, 2010.TUCCI, F.M.; LAURENTIZ, A.C.; SANTOS, E.A. DeterminaçãoActa Scientarum Animal Sciencesv.25, n.1, p.85-89, 2003.VALADARES FILHO, S.C. Nutrição, avaliação de alimentos eANUAL DA SOCIEDADE BRASILEIRA DE ZOOTECNIA, 37.,2000, Viçosa, MG. Viçosa, MG: Sociedade Brasileira deVALADARES FILHO, S.C.; MAGALHÃES, K.A.; ROCHA JÚNIOR,V.R. et al. Tabelas brasileiras de composição de alimentos. 2.ed. Viçosa, MG: DZO-UFV, 2006. 329p.VIEITES, F.M. Valores energéticos e de aminoácidosFederal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG.VIEIRA, R.O.; RODRIGUES, P.B.; FREITAS, R.T.F. et al., v.36,