Explore

Communities in English

Advertise on Engormix

The Importance of the Fibre Fraction of the Feed in Non-Ruminant Diets

Published: May 12, 2020
By: G. G. Mateos, G. Fondevila and L. Cámara / Animal Science, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Summary

Abstract

Dietary fibre (DF) is an accurate term to define in practice the fibre fraction of ingredients and diets and includes cell walls, stored non-starch polysaccharides and lignin. Fibre has been associated traditionally with reduced palatability and impaired nutrient utilisation in non-ruminant diets. However, DF has also an important role in animal feeding, and a minimum amount of fibre is required to maintain the physiological functions of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). The impact of DF on GIT physiology and animal behaviour depends on the species, age, management and health status of the animal. In addition, the response differs considerably with the physico-chemical characteristics of the fibre source used. Solubility, degree of lignification, size, density and water holding capacity, are key factors affecting the benefits (or negative effects) of DF on performance of non-ruminant animals. In general, insoluble fibre sources such as oat hulls and other cereal co-products, are better adapted than soluble fibre sources such as sugar beet pulp to the physiology and function of the GIT of poultry. Soluble fibres increase the viscosity of the digesta which reduces feed intake and limit the contact between nutrients and endogenous enzymes in the lumen of the GIT. As a consequence, soluble fibres should be avoided in poultry feeding. In pigs, however, both types of fibre might be of benefit depending on age and health status of the animal (i.e., inclusion of sugar beet pulp in diets for gestating sows and oat hulls in diets for young weaned pigs). Currently, most nutritionists formulate diets for pigs and poultry based on crude fibre values, accepting that all fibre sources are “equivalent” in nutritional value and physiological effects on the GIT of the animals, which in most cases is not correct. Because of the complexity of the response, it is difficult to predict and give an accurate recommendation on the type and level of fibre to use in commercial diets for pigs and poultry.

 

Presented at the International Fibre Summit 2019 (https://internationalfibre.com/). Reproduced with permission from the organizers.

Related topics:
Authors:
Gonzalo Gonzalez Mateos
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
Lourdes Cámara Garcia
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
Influencers who recommended :
Victor Naranjo Haro, Ali Afsar and 1 more
Recommend
Comment
Share
Martin Smith
Evonik Animal Nutrition
Evonik Animal Nutrition
13 de enero de 2021
Dr. Mateos; I could not agree more!! We have already moved far beyond CRUDE fibre, with reliable analytical methods to measure soluble and insoluble fractions, levels of discrete NSPs etc. As various companies develop NIR techniques for these analytes, diet design should reflect these capabilities. The two areas requiring attention now, to my mind, is education of some farmers and almost all legislators, to bring these communities into the 21st century.
Recommend
Reply
Gonzalo Gonzalez Mateos
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - UPM
9 de enero de 2021

Not good enough. To formulate on CF based rather than on type of fiber is like formulating with CP rather than with AA. To formulate using CF is better than nothing but not good enough

Recommend
Reply
Juarez Donzele
Universidade Federal de Viçosa - UFV
Universidade Federal de Viçosa - UFV
17 de septiembre de 2020

Gonzalo Gonzalez Mateos, this is an interesting and timely article. I fully agree that classifying the fibrous material of a food, based on crude fiber (FB), which is routinely used, is not the most correct. In the case of ruminants, there would be no major complications, because all dry matter ingested initially passes through the rumen fermentation chamber. In the monogastric, the fibrous material enters the stomach, passing to the small intestine, which is characterized by being the main digestive and absorptive region of the gastrointestinal tract, constituting the place where the different sources of fiber most interfere in the digestibility of the energy of nutrients If the ration is correct, which would be more efficient to mitigate the negative effects of the fibrous source, the use of specific enzymes, prebiotic or probiotic. I want to take advantage of your understanding of the subject, which I think is of scientific and practical merit.

Recommend
Reply
Adeniyi Patrick Fatoye
9 de enero de 2021
The topic is quite logical.The materials that are used as sources of fibre in non ruminant animals have different cf values most animal nutritionists based feed formulation on the CF values,does it mean that the CF values of feed materials are not necessarily important?
Recommend
Reply
Profile picture
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Featured users in Pig Industry
Sriraj Kantamneni
Sriraj Kantamneni
Cargill
Global Business Technology Director
United States
Francis Simard
Francis Simard
Trouw Nutrition
Agr., M. Sc. / Nutrition and Development Director at Trouw Nutrition Canada
United States
Tom Frost
Tom Frost
DSM-Firmenich
Director of Innovation & Application
United States
Join Engormix and be part of the largest agribusiness social network in the world.