Oilseed Meal Processing and Feeding Trials

William Gibbons

Michael Brown, Jill Anderson

South Dakota State University

Projects

• Oilseed meal processing

• Aquaculture trials

• Dairy cattle trials

Oilseed Meal Processing

• Reduce glucosinolates

• Reduce oligosaccharides, fiber, pectin

• Increase protein and limiting amino acids

• Allow for increased feeding rates and animal performance

• Hypothesis: A fungal consortium

will metabolize undesirable

components into protein rich

cell mass

50% (dm) Hexane Extracted Canola Meal

FungalCulture ProteinMaximum(%dw)

ProteinIncrease(%dw)

HEControl 36.1±0.8 A.pullulans(NRRL-58522) 41.0±1.8 13.6±4.8A.pullulans(NRRL-42023) 39.7±0.5 10.1±1.5A.pullulans(NRRL-Y-2311-1) 41.3±0.2 14.5±0.6P.kudriavzevii 39.7±0.1 10.0±0.2T.reesei(NRRL-3653) 44.4±1.7 23.1±4.7F.venenatum(NRRL-26139) 40.2±2.1 11.3±5.8M.circinelloides 40.7±0.8 12.9±2.1

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Fungal Cultures

Protein (% dw) Residual Sugars (% w/w)

50% (dm) Cold Pressed Canola Meal

FungalCulture ProteinMaximum(%dw)

ProteinIncrease(%dw)

CPControl 38.6±0.7 A.pullulans(NRRL-58522) 45.2±0.7 16.9±1.9A.pullulans(NRRL-42023) 43.7±1.6 13.2±4.1A.pullulans(NRRL-Y-2311-1) 44.6±0.2 15.4±0.6P.kudriavzevii 42.2±0.1 9.2±0.3T.reesei(NRRL-3653) 47.5±1.5 22.9±3.9F.venenatum(NRRL-26139) 44.4±1.9 14.8±4.9M.circinelloides 43.0±1.4 11.4±3.6

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Fungal Cultures

Protein (% dw) Residual Sugars (% w/w)

Total Glucosinolate Reduction in Canola Meal

Glucosinolates HexaneExtracted ColdPressed

FungalCulture TotalGLS(mg/g) Reduction(%)

TotalGLS(mg/g) Reduction(%)

RawMeal 17.4±0.6 24.7±1.0

ProcessControl 6.0±0.5 65.5±2.7 12.2±0.3 50.7±1.3A.pullulans(NRRL-58522) 1.7±0.4 90.3±2.2 1.2±0.9 95.2±3.7

A.pullulans(NRRL-42023) 1.0±0.5 94.5±3.1 6.1±5.9 75.5±23.9

A.pullulans(NRRL-Y-2311-1) 1.6±0.4 90.9±2.2 4.3±1.1 82.4±4.4P.kudriavzevii 5.4±0.4 69.0±2.5 11.7±0.3 52.7±1.3

T.reesei(NRRL-3653) 0.4±0.0 97.9±0.2 1.0±0.2 95.9±0.7

F.venenatum(NRRL-26139) 2.3±0.7 86.8±3.7 4.4±1.7 82.1±6.7M.circinelloides 4.2±0.4 75.9±2.2 10.4±1.1 58.1±4.4

Autoclaving reduced GLS by 50-66%Microbial conversion reduced GLS by 53-98%

Conclusions

• Greatest improvement in canola meal quality• T. reesei• A. pullulans (NRRL-58522)• A. pullulans (Y-2311-1)

• Submerged incubation has shown similar results• Future work

• Pretreatment and enzyme hydrolysis• Nitrogen supplementation• Expanding to carinata and camelina meals

Preliminary Carinata and CamelinaConversion Trials

Treatment Carinata Camelina

Protein (%) GSL (mg/g) Protein (%) GSL (mg/g)

Cold Pressed 45.35 10.1 42.44 13.0

Cold Pressed & MicrobiallyConverted

49.11 3.0 40.86 0.0

Cold Pressed & Extruded 45.14 9.5 43.07 13.3

Cold Pressed, Extruded, & Microbially Converted

49.69 2.3 49.15 1.0

Microbial conversion via A. pullulans

Preliminary Carinata and CamelinaConversion Trials

Treatment Carinata Camelina

Protein (%) GSL (mg/g) Protein (%) GSL (mg/g)

Solvent Extracted 48.25 9.4 47.08 13.5

Solvent Extracted& Microbially Converted

56.92 1.4 53.08 0.4

Solvent Extracted& Extruded

48.96 8.4 46.58 11.7

Solvent Extracted, Extruded, & Microbially Converted

55.73 2.3 53.63 0.2

Microbial conversion via A. pullulans

Aquafeed Development & Fish Performance Trials

Aquaculture Trials

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

19501952195419561958196019621964196619681970197219741976197819801982198419861988199019921994199619982000200220042006200820102012

Pro

du

ctio

n (

mill

ion

to

n)

Year

Wild Catch Farmed Fish

FAO (Fisheries and Aquaculture Department). 2012. State of world fisheries and aquaculture 2012. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.

Process effects on carinata composition

CP = cold pressed, EX= extruded, SE = solvent extraction, FE = microbial conversion

Process DM

(%)

Crude

Protein

(%)

Crude

Lipid (%)

Crude

Fiber

(%)

Crude

Ash (%)

NFE

(%)

Total

Glucosinolate

(µMoles/g)

CP 93.6 45.4 7.83 6.5 7.3 26.6 23.7

CP, EX 93.8 45.1 7.7 6.8 7.3 26.9 22.3

CP, SE 93.5 48.2 0.5 6.4 7.8 30.6 22.2

CP, EX, SE 87.5 49.0 0.6 7.1 7.9 22.9 19.7

CP, FE 92.7 49.1 6.9 13.3 4.4 19.0 7.1

CP, EX, FE 94.8 49.7 12.1 13.2 4.3 15.5 5.5

CP, SE, FE 93.6 56.9 0.6 14.0 5.1 12.6 3.4

CP, EX, SE, FE 95.1 55.7 0.5 12.7 4.9 21.3 5.5

Process effects on camelina composition

CP = cold pressed, EX= extruded, SE = solvent extraction, FE = microbial conversion

Process DM

(%)

Crude

Protein

(%)

Crude

Lipid (%)

Crude

Fiber

(%)

Crude

Ash (%)

NFE

(%)

Total

Glucosinolate

(µMoles/g)

CP 93.6 42.4 7.52 12.0 5.9 25.7 24.9

CP, EX 93.6 43.1 7.33 13.9 5.9 23.4 25.5

CP, SE 93.7 47.1 0.11 12.6 6.5 27.5 25.9

CP, EX, SE 95.1 46.6 0.28 12.8 6.5 28.9 22.5

CP, FE 93.0 40.9 8.16 22.3 3.2 18.5 0.0

CP, EX, FE 92.0 49.2 5.76 18.9 4.0 14.2 0.7

CP, SE, FE 93.2 53.1 0.66 18.5 4.6 16.5 0.4

CP, EX, SE, FE 94.2 53.6 1.48 22.2 5.9 11.1 0.3

Digestibility & palatability of processed carinataand camelina in rainbow trout

CP = coldpress, EX= extruded, SE = solvent extraction, FE = microbial conversion

Carinata Camelina

Diet Treatment

Energy

Digestibility

(%)

Protein

Digestibility

(%)

Palatability

(%)

Energy

Digestibility

(%)

Protein

Digestibility

(%)

Palatability

(%)

CP 52.9 83.0 1.40 38.7 66.4 1.49

CP, EX 65.9 89.7 1.33 52.4 76.2 1.75

CP, SE 65.9 92.5 1.82 21.3 60.6 1.72

CP, EX, SE 50.2 86.3 1.87 52.8 86.7 1.67

CP, FE 66.6 82.7 1.47 75.4 86.6 1.39

CP, EX, FE 58.8 74.8 1.61 52.5 69.1 1.50

CP, SE, FE 54.4 79.6 1.60 57.7 76.6 1.67

CP, EX, SE, FE 60.7 87.7 1.65 63.7 78.4 1.83

Culture Investigations

Completed Palatability & digestibility of processed meals in rainbow trout

Improved with extraction and conversion

Digestibility of processed meals in hybrid striped bass (completing trace marker analysis)

Current studies• Determining the glucosinolate tolerance limit in hybrid striped bass

– Thyroxine and deiodinase responses, organosomatic indices, and nonspecific immune responses

Upcoming studies• Initiate long-term performance trials

– Growth, feed conversion, histology, and organosomatic responses

• Rainbow trout – April 2016

• Hybrid striped bass – August 2016

• Complete palatability trials for hybrid striped bass

– Summer 2016

• Physiological responses of fish to various fish-meal replacement inclusion levels of processed meals

– Summer 2016

Carinata meal: Potential for Dairy Cattle

• Three research projects:

– Ensiling with forage to decrease glucosinolates

– In-situ rumen degradation and in-vitro intestinal digestibility

– Effects of carinata meal on growth and reproductive development of peripuberal dairy heifers

Ensiling Carinata Meal with Forage to Decrease Glucosinolates

• Two trials: Alfalfa Haylage and Corn Silage

• Three treatments (DM basis)

– 0:100 , 25:75, and 50:50 Carinata meal : Forage

• Ensiled for 0, 7, 21, or 60 days (4 reps/trt)

• Ensiling carinata meal with forage decreased glucosinolate levels

• Silage fermentation (data not shown) was decreased at higher carinata meal inclusion, but still within normal range

Carinata : Alflalfa Haylage

Carinata : Corn Silage

Ruminal degradability and intestinal digestibility of carinata and camelina meals compare to other

protein sources

Rumen in situ (with 3 cannulated dairy cows) and intestinal in vitro on:

Camelina meal (Cam), Carinata meal (Car), Canola meal (Can), Linseed meal (LN), DDGS (DG), and Soybean meal (SBM)

Nutrient Composition

Item1 Cam Car Can DG LN SBM

DM, % 92.3 92.9 96.4 96.1 89.0 97.8

Cr. Prot 37.7 44.3 44.0 32.8 39.0 51.1

Fat 14.32 2.1 2.8 8.7 4.0 1.8

NDF 25.7 23.7 28.1 24.4 27.1 9.0

Ash 5.0 7.6 7.8 4.8 6.5 6.8

1 DM basis2 Cam (camelina meal) was cold-pressed; Car (carinata), Can (canola), LN (linseed), SBM (soybean meal) were solvent extracted

Crude Protein Degradation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48

% C

PD

Rumen Incubation (h)

Camelina Meal

Canola Meal

Carinata Meal

DDGS

Linseed Meal

Soybean Meal

Crude protein degradability and digestibility

1Soluble CP; 2Potentially degradable CP; 3Undegradable CP; 4Rate of CP degradation; 5Ruminally degradable protein (RDP); 6Ruminally undegradable protein (RUP); 7Estimated intestinal digestible protein (IDP) after 12 h rumen incubation and pepsin-pancreatindigestion; 8Intestinally absorbable digestible protein (IADP) = Rumen undegradableprotein (RUP, % of CP) × intestinal CP digestion (% of RUP); 9 Total Digestible Protein (TDP) = RDP + IADP. abcd Values with unlike subscripts differ by P < 0.05 using Tukey’s Test.

• 24 heifers in RCBD experiment• Two treatment diets:• Carinata meal (Car) • Distillers dried grains (DDGS)

• Fed 16 weeks (6 to 11 months of age)• Used Calan gates to feed heifers

individually• Groups of six started on the

experiment by age and availability, • ¾ of heifers completed

Effects of carinata meal on growth, metabolic profile, and reproductive development of dairy heifers

(K

Ingredients, % DM1 Car DDGS

Hay 63.5 63.5

Ground corn 14.5 13.0

DDGS - 10.0

Carinata Meal 10.0 -

Soybean Meal 10.5 12.0

Vitamins and

Minerals

1.5 1.5

1Based on Dairy NRC software (2001)

Diet formulation – fed at 2.65% of Body Wt

Nutrient, % DM1 CRM DDG

DM, % Diet 85.5 86.0

Crude Protein 16.3 16.3

NDF (fiber) 47.7 49.3

Ether Extract 4.0 3.2

Non-fibrous Carbohydrates

29.3 28.9

ME, Mcal/kg DM 2.43 2.38

1Based on Dairy NRC software (2001)

Diet formulation – fed at 2.65% of Body Wt

Preliminary results

Item Car DDGS SEM P values

# of heifers 9 8 - -

Body weight, kg 267.2 265.4 1.61 0.22

ADG, kg/d 0.814 0.818 0.038 0.95

DM Intake , kg/d 6.50 6.54 0.174 0.86

Gain: feedkg of gain/ kg DMI

0.132 0.128 0.004 0.56

Conclusions (to date)

• Ensiling carinata with forages – Ensiling Car with forages decreased the sinigrin concentrations

– No major detriment to silage fermentation

• Camelina and carinata are highly degradable in the rumen – Comparable protein sources to SBM and linseed

meal (LN) for total digestibility

• Dairy heifers fed carinata meal– Preliminary results indicate that heifers fed

carinata meal have similar growth and feed efficiency as heifers fed DDGS

– ¾ of heifers completed

– Blood metabolites and laboratory work in-progress