Non-Ruminant Animal Feed Management Issues and Practices CNMP Core Curriculum Feed Management – Section 6.3

CNMP Development Core Training Curriculum These course materials have been developed as a cooperative effort between five land-grant universities and The Natural Resources Conservation Service. Ames, Iowa 50011, (515) Copyright © , Iowa State University of Science and Technology. All rights reserved. Copyright Information

Objectives Review the digestion process and excretion of N and P Become familiar with how the nutrient requirements of swine and poultry vary Understand the issues related to feed management with swine and poultry Provide you with strategies to encourage producers on reducing nutrient excretion

Supplemental Materials NRC Nutrient Requirements of Swine NRCS Nutrient Management Technical Note 3 LPES Lesson No. 10 Reducing the Nutrient Excretion and Odor of Pigs Through Nutritional Means NRC Nutrient Requirements of Poultry NRCS Nutrient Management Technical Note 4 LPES Lesson No. 11 Using Dietary and Management Strategies to Reduce the Nutrient Excretion of Poultry

Feed Enzymes & Gastric juices Absorption Lean tissue development feces urine Saliva Water

Stage of growth Lower protein contents in diets as pigs and poultry mature Lower P content for animals later in growth More P in diets for replacement animals More fiber (soy hulls; wheat mid; sugar beet pulp) in gestation diets Increased energy (corn) in lactation diets Increased Ca content for layer diets Milk and by-products in weaning pig diets

Feed AA+peptides AA, peptides, NH 3 Lean muscle (protein) feces urine CP+AA NH 3, MCP (urea)

Overfeeding Nitrogen Difficult to balance amino acids in diets with typical feed ingredients Variation in available amino acid content of feeds Genetic potential of pigs vary Environmental stress (heat or cold temperatures) can affect nitrogen utilization Sufficient available energy is needed for efficient N utilization

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation using synthetic amino acids in their current pig rations? Are the rations reformulated when there are different ingredient changes especially with by-products? What is the laboratory analysis schedule for the feed management plan?

Strategies for Swine  Improving N management Synthetic amino acids Phase feeding Split-sex feeding  Improving P management Phytase; available P Phase feeding Split-sex feeding

Contributions of amino acids from corn and SBM, relative to the requirement of a 88 lb pig Corn (74.1% of diet) + Soybean meal (24.3% of diet)

Contributions of amino acids from corn and SBM, relative to the requirement of a 88 lb pig Corn (84.1% of diet) + Soybean meal (12.9% of diet) + Synthetic Lys, Met, Thr, Trp.

Dietary Effects on N Excretion* Diet conc.14% CP12% CP +lys10% CP + lys, thr, meth, tryp N intake, g/d N dig & abs, g/d N in feces, g/d777 N retained, g/d26 N in urine, g/d N excreted, g/d Reduction N, % Diet cost, $/lb Change in cost, $//b -----$0.001+$0.005 * Based upon 200 lb pig

Nitrogen Inputs From Feed N from Feed Diets (lb/year) Ratio Corn-Soy162, Corn-Soy + Lysine140, Corn-Soy + 4 amino acids120, ,000 Spaces; Feeder-Finish

Nitrogen Manipulation For 1% reduction in CP and AA addition, reduce total N and ammonia excretion by 8% - 10% Practical experience has shown must adjust AA levels for sexes and different genetic lines

Fiber Effects on Nitrogen Fiber addition -- shift in N excretion pattern from urinary N to fecal N Fiber and low CP/syn. AA diet reduced slurry pH, N excretion and NH 3 emissions Examples: Dietary soybean hull; sugar beet pulp; wheat midds

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation currently grouping pigs into separate sexes and feeding different rations? Are rations changed at different stages of growth (phase feeding) in the production cycle?

Phase Feeding Impacts Reduce excessive nutrient excretion Reduce feed costs Reduce land application area and odor potential Increase nutrient efficiencies for production

Diet cost obtained using least-cost feed formulation for a varying number of phases in the feeding program. Phase-feeding diets are also cheaper, but the extra hassle may outweigh the benefits

Feed PP+nPPLean muscle (protein) feces urine PP+nPP PP+nPP+MP (urea) PP+nPP

Corn 0.32% P  samples 68% phytate (61 to 85) Phytate

The dietary P issue Because pigs and poultry can not digest a major portion of the P (phytic P) in typical feed grains, supplemental P is added to the ration. As a result, total P is fed in excess of animal need and excess P is excreted in manure.

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation currently using the enzyme, phytase, in the ration and reducing the level of P in the ration? Are by-product feeds being used in the ration?

Nutrition Approach Feed pigs only the P that they need. –Reduce over feeding of P –Formulate the diet on an “available P” basis vs. “total P” basis –Phase feeding for P as well as N Manipulate dietary P concentrations to reduce total P excretion while maintaining productivity. –Supplement pig diets with phytase to help animals break down phytic P –If available, feed high available P (HAP) corn or soybean to replace conventional corn.

Dietary Effects on P Excretion* Dietary P, % P intake, g/d Retained P, g/d Excreted P, g/d Change, % (NRC) Phytase * Based upon 200 lb pig

Phosphorus Strategies Phytase studies showed reduction of P from 25 to 54% Phytase increased the availability of N, Zn, Cu, Mn, Ca HAP corn has been shown to reduce P excretion by 25 to 37%

Phosphorus Input From Feed P from Feed Diets (lb/year) Ratio Corn-Soy31, a. reduced safety margin29,16492 b. plus phytase25,40280 c. a+b22, ,000 Spaces; Feeder-Finish

Combination of Technologies Comparing a control diet to a reduced crude protein diet with 5% soy hulls (fiber), HAP corn, phytase and low sulfur minerals resulted in: –Growth and carcass qualities were the same –Reduced ammonium and total N in manure by 28-31% –Reduced P in the manure by 54% –Reduced ammonia emissions by 50% –Reduced hydrogen sulfide emission by 48%

Strategies for Poultry  Nitrogen management Amino acids Phase feeding  Phosphorus management Available P Phytase and Vitamin D Phase feeding

Tracking N in Broilers 51.1% 18.3%30.6%

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation using synthetic amino acids in their current poultry rations? Are the rations reformulated when there are different ingredient changes? What is the laboratory analysis schedule for the feed management plan?

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation currently grouping birds into separate sexes and feeding different rations? Are rations changed at different stages of growth (phase feeding) in the production cycle?

Nitrogen Strategies (poultry) Reduce CP and add synthetic AA –Reducing CP (15% to 10%) reduced N excretion 24% w/o affecting performance –N excretion reduction 10 to 27% broilers; 30 to 35% in layers Must be careful that there is sufficient nonessential AA and no AA imbalances Phase feeding reduces N excretion about 10%

Tracking P in Broilers 55.2% 44.8%

TSP Questions for Producer Is the operation currently using the enzyme, phytase, in the ration and reducing the level of P in the ration? Is the operation currently using vitamin D3 in the ration? Are by-product feeds being used in the ration?

Phase Feeding Impacts in Poultry Feeding Phase feeding can reduce dietary non- phytate P levels by 5% (grower), 15% (finisher) and 40% (withdrawal) Estimate a reduction of at least 10% litter P with 4 phase program

Meet bird P requirements Select feed ingredients with a high available P Use vitamin D Use phytase to reduce P excretion (20 -25%) Phosphorus Strategies

Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion in Broilers (g/bird) Industry Average (AgriStats 1999) Average weight = 5.0 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio (50 d of age)

Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion in Broilers (g/bird) Based on broiler nPP requirements, Angel et al, % decrease Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)

Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion in Broilers (g/bird) Based on broiler nPP requirements and use of phytase, Angel et al, unpublished % decrease Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)

Phosphorus Intake, Retention and Excretion in Broilers (g/bird) Based on broiler nPP requirements, phytase and 25OHD3 Angel et al, % decrease Average weight = 5 lb, 2:1 feed to gain ratio Industry Average (AgriStats 1999)

Feed Waste: An Expensive Loss of Nutrients Presuming 5% feed waste on average: –Responsible for 7.5% of N in manure. –Similar contribution for copper, zinc, and P –35% of carbohydrates Major source of odor

Feed Management to Improve Efficiency Diet formulation and management –Evaluate diet content and reduce unnecessary feed ingredients –Implement a routine chemical feed analysis program –Apply stringent quality control feed preparation and delivery to animals –Minimize feed wastage and check water –Implement phase feeding program –Implement split-sex feeding program

Feed Management to Improve Efficiency Improve nutrient utilization –Formulate feed based upon digestible amino acids and available phosphorus Increasing digestibility (availability) of nutrients –choice of feed ingredients –enzymes; synthetic feed ingredients –feed processing technologies –genetically modified feed ingredients (if available)

Class Exercise (Monogastrics) 4,000 head pig grow-finisher operation What amount of phosphorus is generated by the operation? Is it in excess of crop P removal? The P level in the grower diet is 0.50% and the P in the finisher diet is 0.40%. However, if the phytase enzyme is used, the P level in each diet can be reduced by 0.10%. What amounts of P excretion can be reduced by adding phytase to the pig’s diet?

Class Exercise (Monogastrics) Formula to calculate the amount of P in the diet Tons of feed X 2000 lbs./T = lbs of feed X %P in the diet = lbs. of P fed Formula to calculate the amount of P excreted Lbs. of P fed X 80% excreted by pig = lbs. of P excreted

Class Exercise (Monogastrics) Grower diet: 1,200 T X 2000 lbs./T = 2,400,000 lbs. X.005 P = 12,000 lbs. P fed Finisher diet: 2,270 T X 2000 lbs./T = 4,540,000 lbs. X.004 P = 18,160 lbs. P fed Total: 12,000 lbs. P + 18,160 lbs. P = 30,160 lbs. P fed. Excreted P: 30,160 lbs. P fed X.80 = 24,128 lbs. P excreted. Conversion of P to P equivalent: 24,128 lbs. P excreted X 2.29 = 55,253 lbs. P excreted Since crop removal is estimated at 52,230 lbs. per year, then there are 3,023 lbs. too much P excreted.

Class Exercise (Monogastrics) Grower diet: 1,200 T feed X 2000 lbs./T = 2,400,000 lbs. X.004 P = 9,600 lbs. P fed Finisher diet: 2,270 T feed X 2000 lbs./T = 4,540,000 lbs. X.003 P = 13,620 lbs. P fed Total: 9,600 lbs. P fed grower diet + 13,620 lbs. P fed finisher diet = 23,220 lbs. P fed. Excreted P: 23,220 lbs. P fed X.80 = 18,576 lbs. P excreted. Conversion of P to P equivalent: 18,576 lbs. P excreted X 2.29 = 42,539 lbs. P excreted

Class Exercise (Monogastrics) Difference in P excretion 55,253 lbs. P 2 O 5 excreted before phytase – 42,539 lbs. P 2 O 5 excreted with phytase = 12,714 lbs. P 2 O 5 less excreted Reduction on acres needed 12,714 lbs. P 2 O 5 / 65 lbs. P 2 O 5 per acre = acres less land needed for manure production on a P basis.