1 / 22

Livestock Perspectives on Bio-energy co-products

Livestock Perspectives on Bio-energy co-products. Feeding DDGS to IN Livestock. Specie Diet inclusion tons / year Swine 10% 274,950 Dairy 20% 263,000 Repl. Heifers 30% 70,000 Poultry 10% 177,390 Beef/cow-calf var. 47,477 TOTAL 832,817. 60%.

onaona
Download Presentation

Livestock Perspectives on Bio-energy co-products

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Livestock Perspectives on Bio-energy co-products

  2. Feeding DDGS to IN Livestock SpecieDiet inclusiontons / year Swine 10% 274,950 Dairy 20% 263,000 Repl. Heifers 30% 70,000 Poultry 10% 177,390 Beef/cow-calf var. 47,477 TOTAL 832,817 60% Est. production of DDGS = 1.4 M tons

  3. DDGS Nutritional Issues • Variability in available amino acids • Lys digestibility range = 60 to 84% • Novus Intl. in vitro assay (r2 = 0.88)

  4. Amino Acid Digestibility (%) Novus Intl., 2006

  5. Low Dig. Lys. High Dig. Lys.

  6. DDGS Nutritional Issues • Variability in available amino acids • Lys digestibility range = 60 to 84% • Variability in available energy • ME ranges between 2629 to 2981 kcal/kg • Variability in phosphorus Total P, % Available P, % total P Corn 0.3 20 to 30% DDGS 0.75 60 to 80%

  7. DDGS Nutritional Issues • Variability in sodium content (corn=0.02%) • 0.05 to 0.17% Typical diet = 0.18% • Pelleting – molasses “balls” from solubles cause “gumming” of dies reducing throughput and pellet durability • INCONSISTENCY (w/in & between plants) • Mycotoxins (concentrated 3X) • Sulfur content (0.4 to 0.8 vs corn = 0.12)

  8. SBM vs DDGS • DDGS contains 62% of the protein of SBMSBM = 44 or 48 DDGS = 27 • DDGS contains 30% of the total lysine of SBM SBM = 2.83 DDGS = 0.84 • DDGS contains 16% of the available lysineSBM = 2.41 DDGS = 0.39

  9. Feed Manufacturing Issues • Flow rates (handling / transportation) • Bridging- bad with high inclusion rates • Particle size? ( < 400 to > 600 um) • Separation/settling issues? • Pelletability? • Wet feeding - spoilage

  10. Other Issues / Unknowns with DDGS • Effect on Animal Performance (including reproductive performance) ? • Effect on Product Quality ?

  11. Other Issues / Unknowns with DDGS • Effect on Animal Performance (including reproductive performance) ? • Effect on Product Quality ? • Effect on Nutrient Management ? • Producer Education

  12. Processing Methods or Technologies 1. Conventional dry grind

  13. Ruminant Feed Nonruminant Food Co-products in Dry Grind Corn Process One bushel of Corn Corn Dry Grind Facility 2.5-2.7 gal of Ethanol 15-17 lbs of DDGS V. Singh, UIUC

  14. Processing Methods or Technologies 1. Conventional dry grind 2. Modified dry grind – recovers germ and pericarp fiber with a horizontal drum degerminator 3. Quick germ quick fiber – recovers germ and pericarp fiber by soaking corn in water for 6 to 12 hours with alpha-amylase

  15. Ruminant Food Nonruminant Food Coproducts from Modified Dry Grind and Quick Germ Quick Fiber Processes Corn Dry Grind Facility One bushel Corn 2.6 gal Ethanol Dry Degerm Defiber Process 4 lb Germ 7.0 lb Residual DDGS + 4 lb Pericarp Fiber V. Singh, UIUC

  16. Effect of Processing Technology on Nutrient Content of DDGS (%)1 Conventional Modified Quick germComponent dry grind dry grind quick fiber Protein 21 25 28 Fat 14 9 6 Fiber (TDF) 36 28 25 Lysine 0.73 0.63 0.91 Phosphorus, % 0.78 0.47 1.12 1 dry matter basis. Parsons et al., 2006

  17. Processing Methods or Technologies 1. Conventional dry grind 2. Modified dry grind – recovers germ and pericarp fiber with a horizontal drum degerminator 3. Quick germ quick fiber – recovers germ and pericarp fiber by soaking corn in water for 6 to 12 hours with alpha-amylase 4. Enzymatic Dry Grind (E-Mill) – uses enzymes to recover additional endosperm fiber

  18. Ruminant Food Nonruminant Food Coproducts from Enzymatic Dry Grind (E-Mill) Corn Dry Grind Facility One bushel Corn 2.6 gal Ethanol Quick Germ Quick Fiber E-Mill 3.3 lb Germ 3.7 lb Residual DDGS 4 lb Pericarp Fiber 4 lb Endosperm Fiber V. Singh, UIUC

  19. Overall Issues with DDGS • Product Variation • Handling, Storage, Transportation • Effect on Animal Performance • Effect on Product Quality • Effect on Nutrient Management • Producer Education

  20. Glycerol from Bio-diesel • ~ 10% of production • What to do with off-spec for human / industrial use? • Can use up to 10% in diets (CHO energy +) • Purity vs. cost? • Pellet binder? • Change in animal fat composition / amount • Handling issues?

  21. Helpful Resources • http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/ • http://ilift.traill.uiuc.edu/distillers/

More Related