DDGS Feed Guide

Feed Guide
Edition 1.1, 2013
The Feed Opportunities from the Biofuels
Industries (FOBI)
The Feed Opportunities from BioFuels Industries (FOBI) Network, which operated from May 2009 to March 2011,
was a collaborative and multidisciplinary network composed of researchers from public and private research
institutes. The vision of FOBI was to stimulate the sustainable growth of the bio-ethanol and livestock sectors in
support of economic activities in rural Canada. FOBI focused on optimization of the feed value chain of wheat
dry distillers grains with solubles (wheat DDGS) as well as on value addition to bio-ethanol co-products. The
University of Saskatchewan served as the “network lead” with the Feeds Innovation Institute taking the lead
administrative role. A contribution of $5.58 million was provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)
through its Agriculture and Bioproducts Innovation Program, with the total value of the FOBI research program
being $6.18 million.
The FOBI Network had 63 researchers representing AAFC, Alberta Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
Feedlot Health Management Services Ltd., University of Alberta, University of Calgary, Saskatchewan Research
Council, Prairie Swine Centre, Western Beef Development Centre and University of Saskatchewan. The FOBI
research program provided training for more than 30 highly qualified personnel with the majority expected to
continue working within the Canadian bio-economy.
The network also partnered with five bio-ethanol producers in Alberta and Saskatchewan provinces: Terra Grain
Fuels Inc., Belle Plain SK; NorAmera BioEnergy Corp., Weyburn SK; Pound-Maker Agventures Ltd., Lanigan SK;
North West Bio-Energy Ltd., Unity SK; and Highland Feeders Ltd., Vegreville AB. Active collaboration with ethanol
manufacturers, related commercial entities and feedlots ensured that “market-pull” rather than “technology-push”
drove the FOBI Network.
The FOBI Network investigated feed constituents from wheat DDGS and their functionality in relation to multiple
livestock species. The wheat breeding group of FOBI focused on identifying opportunities to improve the input
side with new wheat varieties from existing germplasm specifically for bio-ethanol and co-product output.
The value added group focused on optimization of ethanol processes leading to improvements in the ethanol
production systems. FOBI also assessed the impact of the ethanol industry on economics of the livestock
industry and governance implications, leading to the development of new markets and the policies required to
support them.
This feed guide is based on the livestock nutrition work developed by the FOBI Network. For more information on
the FOBI Network or wheat DDGS visit www.ddgs.usask.ca.
2
Introduction
The Canadian biofuels industry continues to expand, fostered by demand supported by legislated
inclusion rates of ethanol in gasoline and biodiesel in diesel fuel. With the Prairies commonly referred
to as ‘Canada’s Bread Basket’ Canadian wheat is a natural fit for use in ethanol production. Valuable
byproducts such as wet distillers grains, thin stillage, dry distillers grains, and dry distillers grains with
solubles (DDGS) have become available for the Canadian livestock feed industry with wheat DDGS
providing a concentrated source of nutrients. This publication provides useful information on wheat DDGS
as a feeding option in Canadian livestock production. A copy of this publication can be found on the
Canadian International Grains Institute’s web site (www.cigi.ca).
Thank you to Janice Bruynooghe, Julie Mackenzie and Sandy Russell, Spring Creek Land and Cattle
Consulting; and Dr. Mary-Lou Swift, Pacific Agri Technologies Ltd.; for their significant contributions to this
guide, edited by Dr. Rex Newkirk, Canadian International Grains Institute (Cigi).
Table of Contents
WHEAT DDGS – BACKGROUND AND MARKET
4
WHEAT DDGS – PROCESSING
5
WHEAT DDGS – NUTRIENT COMPOSITION
9
WHEAT DDGS IN RUMINANT DIETS
12
WHEAT DDGS IN POULTRY DIETS
20
WHEAT DDGS IN SWINE DIETS
25
WHEAT DDGS IN AQUACULTURE DIETS
29
REFERENCES
30
WHEAT DDGS NUTRIENT COMPOSITION TABLES
34
3
BACKGROUND AND MARKET
Wheat Dry Distillers Grains With Solubles
(Wheat DDGS) - Background And Market
When one considers wheat production in Canada, thoughts of warm bread, freshly baked cookies and flakey
pie crusts may come to mind rather than ethanol production. However, in 2010, Canadian plants produced
approximately 1.36 billion litres of ethanol derived from 64% corn, 31% wheat, and 1% other feedstocks (USDA
Foreign Agricultural Service, 2010). As a byproduct of ethanol production, wheat DDGS is in essence a dried
combination of the condensed liquid fraction (solubles) remaining after ethanol is extracted and then added back
into the coarse ethanol-free solids (distillers grains). Wheat DDGS is used almost exclusively as an animal feedstuff
although other minor uses have been explored such as for experimental soil fertility trials (Schoenau, 2010).
If ethanol production did not occur, wheat DDGS as a byproduct would not exist. Also, if ethanol were not cost
effective to produce, mandated by governments, or in demand, wheat DDGS production would be insignificant. As
such, fuel markets and biofuel policy are important to understand.
In 2009/2010, Canadian ethanol plants produced approximately 0.26 million tonnes of wheat DDGS per year
(International Grains Council, 2010) valued at approximately $51 million annually.
There are many factors at play within the biofuels industry in Canada. Unlike the U.S.A., fuels security is not a driving
force behind ethanol production in Canada. Federal and provincial commitment to renewable fuels in Canada
provides an incentive to industry growth. The Renewable Fuels Regulations, as part of the Government of Canada’s
Renewable Fuels Strategy, came into effect in December 2010. By requiring 5% renewable fuel content (ethanol)
in fuels produced or imported, the Government of Canada estimates “a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of
one megatonne per year over and above the reductions attributable to existing provincial requirements. This is the
equivalent of taking a quarter of a million vehicles off the road.” (Environment Canada, 2010).
To meet these new regulations, ethanol production is set to increase across Canada (CRFA, 2010) and the
production of wheat DDGS is also likely to increase. Canadian farmers produce an average of 23.2 million tonnes
of wheat annually (Canadian Wheat Board, 2010), with the majority exported worldwide. Wheat is a readily available
and relatively low-cost grain and its production into ethanol results in wheat DDGS as a highly desirable livestock
feedstuff.
4
Wheat DDGS - Processing
Ethanol and DDGS Production Process
Ethanol plants utilizing grain feedstocks follow a process (Figure 1) that takes approximately 60 hours. On average,
for every kilogram of wheat processed, one third of that wheat will be converted to ethanol, one third to DDGS
and one third to carbon dioxide (http://www.ddgs.usask.ca/MarketingandTechInfo/EthanolIndustryStatusinWestern
Canada.aspx).
Grain Intake
High-starch, low-protein wheat such as winter wheat, soft white wheat and Canadian Prairie Red Spring wheat
are purchased with the quality approximately equivalent to a Canadian Grain Commission Grade No. 2 and free
of such impurities as ergot, fusarium and vomitoxin. These impurities do not break down in ethanol production,
so if infected grains were used they would be concentrated approximately threefold in the DDGS byproduct.
Cleaning
Wheat is cleaned to remove impurities such as pebbles and dirt.
5
PROCESSING
Producing high-volume, quality ethanol from grain is the end goal of the distillation process in which DDGS is a
byproduct. At the end of June 2010, 20 plants existed or were under construction in Canada to process feedstocks
such as wheat, corn, wood waste, wheat straw, and municipal landfill waste into ethanol (USDA Foreign Agricultural
Service, 2010).
GRAIN
SLURRY
Dry grinding
Cleaning
Water
Alpha-amylase
Other enzymes
Yeast
Antibiotic
Glucoamylase
H2SO4 / H3PO4
Liquefaction
Cooker
MASH
Heat exchanges
Saccharification
CO2
BEER
Beer well
Fermentation
Sieve
ETHANOL
WHOLE
STILLAGE
Centrifuge
Destillation
PROCESSING
THIN
STILLAGE
WET
DISTILLERS
GRAINS
MODIFIED WET
DISTILLERS
GRAINS WITH
SOLUBLES
Dryer
Evaporator
CONDENSED
DISTILLERS
SOLUBLES
Dry Grinding
WET
DISTILLERS
GRAINS WITH
SOLUBLES
DRIED
DISTILLERS
GRAINS
DRIED
DISTILLERS
GRAINS WITH
SOLUBLES
Wheat is ground to increase the surface area of the grain and expose the starch which accounts for
approximately 70% of its weight (Gibb et al., 2008). Individual ethanol plants have their own specifications as to
what particle size the wheat is ground or ‘milled.’
Liquefaction
Ground wheat is mixed with water and the enzyme alpha-amylase then cooked to create a mash. Starches are
gelatinized and liquefied.
6
saccharification and Fermentation
Today, simultaneous saccharification and fermentation occur in most new ethanol plants. The mash is cooled,
gluco-amylase emzymes are added to break down the liquefied starches into fermentable sugars, and yeast is
added to ferment the sugars. Urea, thin stillage, antibiotics, and a sulfur source may also be added.
“Beer”
The result of fermentation is a slurry “beer” of approximately 12.5% ethanol by volume.
Distillation
The fermented “beer” slurry is pumped continually into a multi-column distillation system where 95% pure ethanol
is removed off the top and whole stillage is removed from the bottom. Whole stillage contains water, fibre, oil,
protein, yeast cells, and unfermented grain particles. Ethanol is dehydrated further to remove all water and produce
anhydrous ethanol.
Centrifuge
The liquid component of whole stillage is removed from the solid components. Thin stillage and wet distillers grains
are produced.
PROCESSING
Thin Stillage Evaporation
Thin stillage can be condensed through evaporation, resulting in a syrup called condensed distillers solubles
(CDS) of approximately 30% dry matter (DM) (Gibb et al., 2008). Relatively large amounts of fat, minerals, water
soluble sugars, proteins and organic acids are contained within CDS.
Wet Distillers Grains
At this point in processing, ethanol plants may vary in end byproduct type produced: condensed distillers
solubles, wet distillers grains, wet distillers grains with solubles, modified wet distillers grains with solubles, dried
distillers grains, and dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS). Any byproducts that remain ‘wet’ are limited by
the need for close proximity of livestock to the bioethanol plant. For such a high-moisture feed, storage time is
short because of spoilage and transportation costs are high.
Dryer
Wet distillers grains, condensed distillers solubles, and freshly dried DDGS are combined in a ratio resulting in the
mix entering the dryer at 65% DM and 35-40% CDS (Ileleji and Rosentrater 2008). Rotary drum or ring dryers are
used at varying temperatures and air speeds to dry DDGS.
By the end of processing, one tonne of wheat has produced 375 litres of ethanol and 370 kilograms (37%) of
wheat DDGS (CRFA, 2010) which contains a threefold concentration of protein, fibre and minerals compared to
grain entering the ethanol plant.
7
Secondary Processing Opportunities
Currently, secondary processing of wheat DDGS is not carried out on a commercial scale. However, researchers have
indicated that processing opportunities exist to enhance nutrient digestibility for non-ruminants.
Twin-screw extrusion could be used as a process to enhance nutrient digestibility and decrease anti-nutritional effects
in monogastrics. Extrusion physically disrupts cells with the cleavage of non-starch polysaccharides into smaller
fragments (Oryschak et al., 2009).
Pilot-scale dry fractioning of wheat DDGS has been developed in Alberta (Hein, 2010) where particles are separated
by size and weight. Although the high-fibre content of DDGS limits nutrient utilization by monogastrics, a carefully dried
wheat DDGS can have a very high crude protein (CP) content. Eduardo Beltranena’s FOBI team found that pilotscale fractioning operations resulted in two categories of feedstuffs: a fraction with 29% protein (CP) and 36% fibre
suitable for ruminants, and a fraction with 49% CP and 18% fibre well-suited for monogastrics (All About Feeds, 2010).
Researchers estimate that returns would be high on investment when fractioning equipment was added to the end of
the processing chain.
PROCESSING
Tumuluru et al. (2010) have tested many processes that could be used to pellet wheat DDGS to overcome challenges in
its transport, flowability and animal feed-sorting. Dense, dry, durable pellets were obtained through a 6.4 mm die with the
addition of steam at 50-80oC and 5.1% feed moisture content.
8
Wheat DDGS - Nutrient Composition
Ethanol plants are designed to process high-starch grain and convert it to ethanol (Katzen International Inc., 2011).
A pure wheat DDGS will have a different nutrient composition than a 70:30 corn blend or straight corn DDGS
(Tables 1-3). As well, soil nutrients and growing conditions will vary from one region to the next, impacting the
wheat nutrient composition. Starting with a feedstock of consistent type and origin improves the ability to produce
consistent DDGS.
The addition of enzymes, yeasts or sulfur, and the efficiency of fermentation (the ability to capture as much ethanol
as possible, leaving minimal starch in the whole stillage fraction) may vary between ethanol plants. The drying
process can add significant variability to the end product (Nuez and Yu, 2009). Overheating, variations in particle
size, and differing moisture contents are linked to drying. The quantity of solubles added back to distillers grains at
drying impacts nutritional values, the binding of feed particles and overall wheat DDGS particle size (Nuez, 2010).
In the past, corn DDGS was often used as a reference point for wheat DDGS. It has been well studied and
consistencies in the product have been achieved. However, through the work of the FOBI Network the nutrient
composition of wheat DDGS has been researched.
As discussed in the previous section, ethanol production processes and feedstock sources vary, with the process
causing fibre, protein and minerals to concentrate approximately three times within wheat DDGS. When wheat
is processed into wheat DDGS, dry matter crude protein levels increase from 8.5-14.0% to 20.0-38.0%, and fat
levels increase from 1.6-2.0% to 2.5-6.7% (Aldai et al., 2009). When corn is processed into DDGS, crude protein
increases from 7.4-10% to 23-32% and fat increases from 3.5-4.7% to 9.0-12.0% (Aldai et al., 2009). Wheat DDGS
9
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION
The average nutrient composition of wheat and corn DDGS are provided in the nutrient composition tables at the
end of this guide. Product inconsistency is one of the main issues challenging wheat DDGS acceptance as livestock
feed (Neuz, 2010). Because wheat DDGS is a byproduct rather than an end product, quality control in the past
has been overlooked on occasion. Variations in nutrient values and moisture content have not only been seen in
wheat DDGS from plant to plant, but from batch to batch (Nuez and Yu, 2009; Walter, 2010; Tumuluru et al., 2010).
Individualized, plant-specific processing techniques such as fermentation conditions, drying method, amount of
solubles added back, and grinding procedure or type of grain used can all contribute to product variability as does
the nutrient content of the starting grains.
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION
is typically higher in
protein (40 vs 30%)
and considerably lower
in oil (5 vs 10%) than
corn DDGS (Gibb et
al., 2008).
Protein molecular
structures are altered
during ethanol
production (Yu et al.,
2010; Yu et al., 2009)
and although it is too
early in the research to
know how this impacts
nutritive values, it is
known that the amide
I:II ratio is significantly
different between
wheat and wheat
DDGS (Yu et al., 2010;
Yu et al., 2009).
High-protein wheat
DDGS (38-40% of DM)
is a result of gentle
drying and care not to
scorch the product (All
About Feeds, 2010).
Walter (2010) and
Nuez (2010) noted that
lysine is susceptible
to heat damage and
variability between
wheat DDGS batches
exists.
Component
Wheat DDGS
Wheat/Corn DDGS (wt/wt)
70/30
50/50
30/70
Corn DDGS
Crude Protein
37.5
33.7
34.3
32.0
28.1
Ether Extract
4.1
5.9
9.6
8.8
9.9
Ash
4.6
5.7
5.4
4.9
3.8
Calcium
0.10
0.10
0.08
0.05
0.05
Phosphorus
0.96
0.83
0.92
0.90
0.77
Non-Phytate P
0.78
0.64
0.72
0.62
0.57
Simple Sugars
0.9
1.1
-
-
1.9
Starch
1.6
3.3
2.2
2.4
6.6
NSP
20.0
23.2
18.6
22.6
20.6
NDF
24.5
27.0
35.9
40.3
30.0
Total Fibre
30.9
35.5
38.1
45.2
32.7
Amino Acid
Wheat DDGS
Wheat/Corn DDGS (wt/wt)
Corn DDGS
70/30
50/50
30/70
Arginine
1.48
1.46
1.35
1.29
1.23
Histidine
0.73
0.75
0.80
0.79
0.75
Isoleucine
1.11
1.09
1.38
1.17
1.02
Leucine
2.45
2.59
3.42
2.97
3.24
The quantity of
Lysine
0.92
0.97
0.79
0.84
0.86
solubles added to
Methionine
0.73
0.67
0.68
0.64
0.57
wet distillers grains
Cystine
0.34
0.77
0.60
0.60
0.50
pre-drying is the
Phenylalanine
1.65
1.56
1.76
1.62
1.32
most easily controlled
process that can
Tyrosine
1.03
0.97
1.14
1.18
1.24
potentially create
Threonine
1.17
1.16
1.19
1.19
1.06
increased variability in
Tryptophan
0.40
0.23
wheat DDGS (Nuez
Valine
1.71
1.67
1.55
1.36
1.35
and Yu, 2009; Neuz,
2010). Solubles are
high in fat (up to 34%)
and low in neutral
detergent fibre (NDF), so the more solubles added to wheat DDGS the higher the fat and lower the NDF content.
Mineral content in wheat DDGS can vary as different lots of wheat are sourced (Nuez and Yu, 2010). Differences
between grain lots may be attributed to wheat class, soil parameters within each field (plants take up minerals from
parent soil) and/or year (moisture-stressed plants concentrate nutrients). A statistically insignificant mineral difference
between two lots of wheat that is amplified three times when manufactured into wheat DDGS may cause the
difference to become significant.
10
Ethanol plants in Canada commonly use a blend of grains to produce ethanol. The ratios of corn and wheat in the
feed stock are likely the greatest source of variation in wheat DDGS. Researchers at the University of Manitoba (B.A.
Slominski, A. Rogiewicz, M. Nyachoti, K. Wittenberg) have studied the impact of corn/wheat ratio on the nutritive
value of wheat DDGS for swine and poultry. Tables 1-4 show the impact of changing this ratio on the DDGS nutrient
composition based on their research. Table 4 contains equations that can be used to calculate the nutrient content
of DDGS based on the proportion of wheat and corn used to generate the DDGS product.
Amino Acid
Wheat
DDGS
Wheat/Corn DDGS
50/50
30/70
Corn DDGS
82.7
76.5
77.2
82.7
Histidine
76.1
68.9
71.9
76.0
Isoleucine
79.3
69.8
73.7
76.0
Leucine
83.3
81.3
83.4
85.7
Lysine
59.0
51.2
55.4
62.7
Methionine
81.2
71.0
74.7
81.3
Cystine
77.5
55.1
65.7
72.4
Phenylalanine
85.4
82.6
82.9
83.2
Tyrosine
93.9
86.9
88.0
89.0
Threonine
70.7
68.3
62.4
68.3
Valine
78.2
76.6
74.3
75.6
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION
Argine
Source: B.A. Slominski, A. Rogiewicz, M. Nyachoti, K. Wittenberg, 2010.
TABLE 4. Equations to calculate the approximate nutrient content of
corn/wheat DDGS based on the proportion of wheat in the product
(8% moisture basis).
Component
Equation
R2
Crude Protein (%)
% wheat grain x 0.0869 + 28.775
0.93
Non-Phytate P (%)
% wheat grain x 0.0021 + 0.6196
0.74
AMEn (kcal/kg)
% wheat grain x (-3.67) + 2902.8
0.95
% wheat grain x (-3.0506) + 3205.2
0.99
TMEn
Source: B.A. Slominski, A. Rogiewicz, M. Nyachoti, K. Wittenberg, 2010.
11
Wheat DDGS In Ruminant Diets
RUMINANT DIETS
Ethanol byproducts such as wheat DDGS, corn DDGS, and wet distillers grains are an excellent feedstuff for
inclusion in ruminant diets. Microbes within the rumen enable ruminants to utilize feeds that are high in fibre and
low in starch. Ruminants can also utilize poorer quality protein sources and non-protein nitrogen (Walter, 2010).
Overall, wheat DDGS research has shown that ruminant performance is favourable with dry matter intake (DMI),
average daily gain (ADG), gain:feed ratio, days on feed, milk production, milk quality and meat quality being
equivalent to, or slightly better than standard industry diets.
Wheat DDGS can act as an energy and/or protein source for ruminants at 15% inclusion (Walters, 2010;
Klopfenstein et al., 2008). Zhang et al. (2010b) carried out a separate parallel trial with a corn DDGS/wheat
DDGS mix (70:30) used to replace the forage component for one set of animals, and the concentrate component
for another. The animals responded well in both instances.
Wheat DDGS can provide an excellent source of rumen undegraded protein (RUP) (Nuez 2010; Walter 2010).
RUP of crude protein (CP) is 54.5% in wheat DDGS vs 26.2% in wheat grain. Nuez and Yu (2010) noted that
optimal heating/drying, starch removal, breakdown of readily available proteins during fermentation, and addition
of solubles all contribute to RUP.
Ruminants fed high levels of corn DDGS have a decreased DMI. This effect has been linked to the high oil
content (11.2% ether extract [Schingoethe et al. 2009] ) of corn DDGS which helps meet animal requirements
at a lower DMI (Anderson et al., 2006; Walter et al. 2010). Diets formulated with 20-40% wheat DDGS rather
than barley grain maintain fat levels equivalent to barley-based diets (Walter et al., 2010). Wheat DDGS has
consistently been reported to maintain or increase DMI (Beliveau and McKinnon 2009; McKinnon and Walker
2008; Walter et al. 2010; Gibb et al. 2009).
The concentration of nutrients from cereal grains in the resulting DDGS is an issue that requires careful
monitoring in the ration. For example, in wheat DDGS the sulfur content is typically 0.35-0.45% (see nutrient
composition tables at the end of this guide). However, depending on the plant of origin, DDGS sulfur content can
vary from 0.3-1.1% (DM basis) in both corn and wheat DDGS (Nunez, 2010). Sulfur levels in excess of 0.4% (DM
basis) in beef and dairy cattle can cause depression, behavioural changes, and neurological disorders (Nuez,
2010). In some instances, supplemental copper may need to be fed in order to guard against any sulfur-induced
copper deficiencies (Walter, 2010).
12
The calcium (Ca):phosphorus (P) ratio in wheat DDGS is approximately 0.18:1 (see nutrient composition tables
at the end of this guide). Wheat DDGS may contain more than 1% phosphorus compared to 0.3% in barley
grain, while calcium levels are typically 0.15% of DM (McKinnon and Walker, 2008). A 2:1 Ca:P ratio in ruminant
feeds has been the industry standard formulation to prevent metabolic and urinary problems associated with
an imbalance of these two minerals (NRC, 1996). Most ruminant diets, particularly finishing diets, will require
supplemental calcium when DDGS are fed. The implication of excess dietary phosphorous in DDGS-based diets
is further discussed in the ruminant manure management sub-section.
Sub-Acute Rumen Acidosis (SARA) is a condition that can occur in ruminants when rumen pH drops below
5.8 for extended periods of time (Li et al., 2010). The cause is most likely due to diet fibre not being ‘physically
effective1’ coupled with a diet high in starch. SARA lowers feed intake, decreases gains and can result in liver
abscess problems (Walter, 2010; Beliveau and McKinnon, 2009).
Until recently, researchers hypothesized that wheat DDGS may decrease the occurrence of SARA due to its
relatively low-starch and high-fibre content. However, Beliveau and McKinnon (2009) have shown that even
though wheat DDGS is a low-starch, high-fibre product, the small particle size does not allow it to be physically
effective in reducing SARA. As a result wheat DDGS is not effective in stimulating sufficient chewing activity to
generate saliva production that would help buffer rumen pH when DDGS replaces a portion of the barley grain
in an 89% barley grain diet. Beliveau and McKinnon (2009) also suggest that the low pH (4.3) of wheat DDGS
may negatively impact rumen pH. Similar results were noted by Walter et al. (2010) who concluded that replacing
barley grain with up to 40% wheat DDGS did not mitigate rumen fermentation processes associated with
acidosis. Li et al. (2010) reported that feeding a concentrate-based diet, where wheat DDGS replaced mainly
barley silage at 30% (5% silage remaining) and 35% DM (silage excluded), lowered rumen pH below 5.8 for 14
hours. Feeding 25% DDGS (10% silage remaining) resulted in no change in the amount of time (10 hours) rumen
pH was lowered, as compared to the control.
The current trend within the cow/calf industry is towards low-cost extensive winter feeding with a focus on
environmental sustainability. Typically lower-quality forages high in fibre and low in protein are the basis for these
operations. Forage-based wintering beef cow diets normally require supplementation to meet late pregnancy
nutritional requirements (Van De Kerckhove and Lardner, 2008).
Van De Kerckhove and Lardner (2008) found that in an extensive chaff/hay grazing system2 supplemented with
rolled barley, wheat DDGS or 50:50 rolled barley:wheat DDGS fed at levels to meet the cows’ total digestible
nutrients (TDN) needs, that wheat DDGS was an acceptable alternative to barley grain as an energy and protein
supplement. In this work, all supplementation regimes resulted in similar weight increases (-2.27 to + 11.79
kilograms), and positive changes to body condition scores (0.1-0.2 change) and rump (1-3 millimeters) and rib fat
(0.6-1.1 millimeters) increase.
Backgrounding
Backgrounding is the process of growing cattle at moderate rates of gain. The goal is to develop frame
and muscle, yet minimize fat deposition. Typically target gains are 0.9-1.2 kg/day, depending on the type of
cattle being backgrounded. Such gains can be achieved in a feedlot or on-farm through a forage-based diet
supplemented with a protein and energy source (Clark and Lardner, 2009).
1
Physical effectiveness is calculated by multiplying total NDF by particles sized over 1.18 mm (Mertens, 1997).
2
With the addition of equipment and slight modifications to a combine, chaff can be collected during combining and left in the field or hauled
to a centralized location to be utilized as a feedstuff.
13
RUMINANT DIETS
Cow/Calf Production
Demand is high for research and information on lowering backgrounding costs and using alternative feedstuffs.
Clark and Lardner (2009) determined that bale grazing3 weaned calves and supplementing them with 0.8-1.0 %
body weight of wheat DDGS or 50:50 wheat DDGS:barley combination had no adverse impact and produced
3.5-4.0 % higher gains. Summer pasture-grazed stockers supplemented with 0.5% body weight wheat DDGS or
50:50 wheat DDGS:barley grain combination consistently gained equal to or slightly more than straight barleysupplemented animals (Clark and Lardner, 2009).
McKinnon and Walker (2008) determined that wheat DDGS could be included at levels of 25-50% of the ration
dry matter (replacing barley grain) without any adverse impact on cattle performance. A 50% wheat DDGS
diet, at approximately 21% CP, did not provide any additional growth response over a 25% wheat DDGS diet
(McKinnon and Walker, 2008).
In agreement are results from Gibb et al. (2008). Replacing half (20% DM) or all (40% DM) of the barley grain in a
backgrounding diet with wheat DDGS did not impact DMI, ADG, or gain:feed ratio. The rate at which to include
wheat DDGS as a replacement for barley grain is a matter of cost as there is no improvement in performance
when wheat DDGS is included at levels greater than 25% of the diet DM.
It is clear that backgrounded cattle fed in dry lots or on pasture have the potential to use wheat DDGS as a
supplemental source of protein and energy. Depending on the relative cost of wheat DDGS versus barley grain,
inclusion rates as high as 25% of diet DM can be fed without adverse effects on performance.
TABLE 5. Impact of DDGS on beef performance in feedlot rations.
Relative to Control Results
DDGS Replacement
DMI
ADG
Gain:
feed ratio
Days on
feed
Alberta - Gibb, Hao &
McAllister (2008)
20% of diet DM
replacing steam rolled barley
Equal
Equal
Equal
-
Alberta - Gibb, Hao &
McAllister (2008)
40% of diet DM
replacing steam rolled barley
Equal
Equal
Equal
-
Alberta - Gibb, Hao &
McAllister (2008)
60% of diet DM
replacing steam rolled barley
Equal
Equal
Equal
-
Alberta - Gibb, Hao &
McAllister (2008)
60% of diet DM + calcium
replacing steam rolled barley
Equal
Equal
Equal
-
Saskatchewan Walter, Aalhus,
Robertson, McAllister,
Gibb, Dugan, Aldai &
McKinnon (2010)
Replacement of 20% of rolled
barley grain
Equal
Equal
Equal
3 days
less
Saskatchewan Walter, Aalhus,
Robertson, McAllister,
Gibb, Dugan, Aldai &
McKinnon (2010)
Replacement of 40% of rolled
barley grain
Increase of
0.5 kg/day
Equal
Equal
15 days
less
RUMINANT DIETS
Study
3
Bale grazing is a feeding technique where bales are set out in an area and livestock are allowed to feed free choice on the bale without a
feeder around it or it being further processed.
14
Finishing
A beef finishing feedlot diet is unique. Animals are expected to gain at a rate to maximize growth, lay down
adequate marbling, deposit backfat, and maximize carcass yield all within a limited time frame. Usually, cattle are
gradually introduced to an 85% grain-based finishing diet (Gibb et al, 2008). Wheat DDGS can be substituted for
a portion of the concentrate (grain) in the ration depending on opportunity costs.
As seen in Table 5, wheat DDGS can be successfully incorporated to replace a portion of grain within finishing
diets with no identified adverse impact on animal productivity.
When evaluating a potential new feedstuff for feedlot cattle, productivity is typically the first thing that is looked
at. However, product quality and meeting consumer expectations is just as important. In many ways, corn
DDGS research has provided insight into the impact that feeding wheat DDGS will have on ruminants. The effect
that corn DDGS has on meat quality and carcass traits has been debated. In a review of the literature, Walter
(2010) noted that marbling scores steadily decreased with increases in corn DDGS at inclusion rates over 23%.
Concurrently, carcass hot weight and yield grade increased. Meat quality, including shelf life and colour and
stability, has been noted to decrease with higher levels (40-50 %) of corn DDGS feeding (Aldai et al., 2009). In
contrast, Swanson (2010) found that when corn DDGS was included in finishing diets at 0%, 17%, 33%, and
50% there were no significant differences between dressing percentage, marbling score, and yield grade.
Meat quality from animals fed wheat DDGS is comparable with that currently produced with more traditional diets
in Canadian beef production systems. Aldai et al. (2009) fed animals 20% and 40% wheat DDGS with no change
in meat quality (chemical composition, cooking time, cooking loss, tenderness, drip loss, colour) or differences
in sensory tests (taste, smell, sight). Stoll et al. (2010) found steaks from steers fed wheat DDGS were lighter,
but meat and cooking characteristics were not affected. Although steaks from barley-fed steers held their colour
better, steaks from animals fed wheat DDGS had better colour stability than steaks from animals fed corn DDGS
(Stoll et al., 2010).
When ethanol is produced, starch is removed from the grain and as a result the byproduct has minimal starch
content and other nutrients such as protein, fibre and oil are concentrated. The increased fat content, particularly
with corn DDGS, has the potential to alter fat composition of the beef carcass. The addition of wheat DDGS to
the diet (20-40% DMI) decreased the fatty acid isomers 10t-18:1 (unhealthy trans fat isomer) and increased the
fatty acid isomer 11t:18:1 (health promoting isomer) in studies conducted by Aldai et al. (2010) and Dugan et al.
(2010). These researchers concluded that the change was not great enough to warrant the addition of wheat
DDGS in diets simply to alter trans 18:1 (11t:10t ratio) for the benefit of consumers.
15
RUMINANT DIETS
With these contradictions and some obvious differences in wheat DDGS nutrient composition, FOBI researchers
led an in-depth study of meat quality and carcass traits to compare wheat DDGS to corn DDGS on performance,
carcass and meat quality characteristics of cattle (Aldai et al., 2009; Walter et al., 2010; Aldai et al., 2010). Walter
et al. (2010) included 40% wheat DDGS or corn DDGS in finishing diets with no identified negative impact on
carcass quality or sub-primal boneless boxed beef yields. Animals fed wheat DDGS included at 20% or 40%
produced backfat, yield, ribeye area and marbling scores consistent with barley-finished cattle (Aldai et al.,
2009). Within the same trial, animals fed corn DDGS had greater backfat, lower lean yield, and less ribeye area in
comparison to animals fed barley and wheat DDGS (Aldai et al., 2009). Aldai et al. (2009) noted that three other
Canadian studies agreed with their findings.
Dairy
Due to the small particle size of wheat DDGS resulting from the processes involved in ethanol production, dairy
producers and nutritionists formulate dairy rations to ensure cow chewing time is sufficient to maintain rumen
pH which is linked to maintaining milk fat concentrations (Nuez, 2010; Chibisa et al., 2012; Zhang et al., 2010a;
Zhang et al., 2010b).
Penner and Christensen (2009) found that wheat DDGS or corn DDGS could effectively replace 19% of the
concentrate (e.g. barley, canola meal) without negatively impacting milk yield, milk composition or chewing.
Zhang et al. (2010) replaced a portion of the barley silage with 20% DDGS or 20% DDGS + 10% alfalfa hay. DMI,
milk yield and milk protein yields were increased slightly with overall DDGS inclusion.
Somewhat contrary to Penner and Christensen’s findings (2009), eating, chewing time and ruminating time were
reduced for cows on DDGS-containing diets (Zhang et al., 2010b). No differences were seen by including 10%
alfalfa hay. Further studies on higher rates of alfalfa hay inclusion may clarify the effectiveness of including hay in
the diets with wheat DDGS to maintain milk fat.
TABLE 6. Effect of wheat DDGS on milk yield, milk fat yield, and dry matter intake in dairy
cattle rations.
Relative to Control Results
RUMINANT DIETS
Study
Wheat DDGS Replacement
Milk Yield
Milk Fat Yield
DMI
Germany - Franke et al.
(2009)
Replaced 16.5% rape seed
meal
No change
No change
No change
Saskatchewan - Chibisa et
al. (2012)
Replaced 10% canola meal
(protein)
2.0 kg/day
0.08 kg/day
1.0 kg/day
Saskatchewan - Chibisa et
al. (2012)
Replaced 15% canola meal
(protein)
1.2 kg/day
0.14 kg/day
0.3 kg/day
Saskatchewan - Chibisa,
et al. (2012)
Replaced 20% canola meal
(protein)
1.6 kg/day
0.07 kg/day
2 kg/day
Alberta - Zhang et al.
(2010b)
Replaced part of barley silage
at 20% of diet DM
2.8 kg/day
higher
No change
2 kg/day
higher
Alberta - Zhang et al.
(2010b)
Replaced part of barley silage
at 20% of diet DM + add 10%
alfalfa hay
3.6 kg/day
higher
No change
2.6 kg/day
higher
Alberta - Zhang et al.
(2010a)
70/30 corn/wheat DDGS fed
to replace 20% barley silage
(forage portion),
3.4kg/day
higher
No change
3.6 kg/day
higher
Alberta - Zhang et al.
(2010a)
70/30 corn/wheat DDGS fed
to replace 20% barley grain
(protein portion)
No change
No change
No change
Saskatchewan - Penner et
al. (2009)
Replaced 19% of concentrate
fed
No change
No change
No change
Significantly more research has been carried out on feeding corn DDGS to dairy cattle than on wheat DDGS
(Schingoethe, 2009). Today in Canada and the U.S., corn DDGS is frequently included in dairy herd rations. In a
lactation performance study Anderson et al. (2006) concluded that corn wet or dry corn-based DDGS improved
feed efficiency by increasing milk yields, protein yields, and milk fat yields while tending to decrease DMI when
included at up to 20% of dietary DM.
16
As discussed previously, the oil content of corn DDGS has been shown to meet animal requirements while
decreasing DMI (Anderson et al., 2006), whereas wheat DDGS is lower in oil content. Studies consistently show
the inclusion of wheat DDGS in diets results in no DMI reduction.
As seen in Table 6, feeding wheat DDGS to dairy cattle has been evaluated under many different parameters to
determine suitability for use in dairy rations. Feeding wheat DDGS compared to control diets did not negatively
affect animal performance, and often increased milk yield, milk fat yield, and dry matter intake.
Considerations for Other Ruminants
Limited research has been conducted globally on feeding
wheat DDGS to other ruminants including bison, sheep and
goats. The basic nutritional qualities, chemical properties, and
feeding principles of wheat DDGS for the bovine industries
should be taken into consideration when applying wheat
DDGS to the rearing of other ruminants.
The exact nutritional requirements of bison have not yet been
researched, calculated, or tested on-farm (Hauer, 2005). The
species differences between bison and cattle in respect to
seasonality, rate of gain, and ability to digest forages may alter
how bison react to different feedstuffs (Feist, 2005), including
wheat DDGS.
Indications from research in Bulgaria show that wheat DDGS
can be successfully fed to dairy ewes during lactation. No
significant differences in milk yield or composition, wool
yield, fertility of lambed ewes, overall flock fertility, or weaned
lamb weights were seen between 101 ewes fed a standard
roughage/sunflower meal compound feed diet and 101 ewes fed roughage/wheat DDGS/grain diet of equal CP
and energy (Dimova et al., 2009). This is in agreement with bovine wheat DDGS research within Canada.
Although goats are ranked tenth behind other livestock in production numbers in Canada (Statistics Canada,
2006), ongoing opportunities exist in the marketplace. Wheat DDGS and corn DDGS feed intake data has not
been compiled for goats. Initial indications from a small-scale corn DDGS feeding trial in Alabama (Gurung et al.,
2009) point toward success in feeding male goats for slaughter up to 31% corn DDGS (DM) in the ration. No
differences in feed intake, growth performance (ADG, gain:feed) and carcass quality (dressing percentage, ribeye,
body wall fat, longissisimus muscle) were seen between control diets and corn DDGS inclusion diets (Gurung et
al., 2009). Inclusion of corn DDGS above 31% DM was not explored.
Distillers grains, solubles, and DDGS are discussed as a viable feeding option for sheep and goats within the
Sheep & Goat Management in Alberta - Nutrition Manual produced by the Lamb Producers and Alberta Goat
Breeders Association (2009). If wheat DDGS is chosen as a feedstuff for sheep and goats, species-specific
feeding principles should be taken into account:
- Nutritional requirements of a 150-pound (68 kilogram) sheep range from 9% crude protein (CP), 55% total digestible nutrients (TDN) with intake of 1.58 kg/day during gestation to 15% CP and 69% TDN with intake of 3.18 kg/day in heavy lactation (North Dakota State University Extension, 1996).
17
RUMINANT DIETS
The Canadian sheep industry is poised for expansion.
Currently, lamb has the highest red meat growth potential in
Canada while the overall national herd and individual herd
size is low (Canadian Sheep Federation, September 2010).
Research on feeding wheat DDGS to sheep has been limited
worldwide.
- Sheep and goats have the ability and tendency to sort feeds – pelleted complete feeds are ultimately best (Alberta Lamb Producers & Alberta Goat Breeders Association, 2009)
- Lamb creep rations should contain 18-20 % CP. The protein in creep feed should be urea free (Schoenian, 2009). Wheat DDGS high-protein levels may have an opportunity to fill this role.
- Goats are very sensitive to phosphorous levels. Recommendations are to include no more than 0.40% in the feed (Alberta Lamb Producers & Alberta Goat Breeders Association, 2009). Care should be taken as wheat DDGS is a high-phosphorus feed stuff.
RUMINANT DIETS
Male sheep and goats are susceptible to urinary calculi (stone-like mineral crystals) that can block the urethral tract and normal urination (Canadian Sheep Federation, 2011). Urinary calculi form when calcium (Ca) to phosphorous (P) ratios are not balanced at 2:1. Wheat DDGS is a high P, low Ca feedstuff. The addition of limestone (Ca) can be used to meet Ca:P ratio requirements within the diet.
Manure Management Considerations from Ruminants Fed
Wheat DDGS
As provinces move away from nitrogen-based to phosphorus-based manure management legislation, the
concerns focused on preventing excess phosphorus run-off have become more clear and stewardship within the
livestock feeding industry even more critical.
The threefold concentration of nutrients in wheat DDGS from processing, as compared to the grain from which it
was derived, has the potential to alter the standard calculated manure composition (phosphorus (P), nitrogen (N)
and its form, pH, C:N ratio) used to set current allowable manure application rates (Hao et al., 2010, Hao et al.,
2009, Benke et al., 2010). Windrowed, composted manure from cattle fed 60% wheat DDGS has been found
to have higher available N and total N than manure derived from barley grain-based diets according to FOBI
funded researcher, Hao et al., (2010). Hao et al. (2010) and Hao et al. (2009) determined that elevated electrical
conductivity and water soluble ammonium (NH4+), potassium (K), and sulfate (SO42+) within wheat DDGS feeds
would result in a greater N and salt excretion into the manure. Both can be difficult to mitigate against repeated
land application without irrigation as salinity problems may develop (Hao et al., 2009).
18
The impact that ruminant production has on greenhouse gas emissions [nitrous oxide (N2O)] and the ability for
feeding to reduce greenhouse gas emissions continues to be an important issue for producers and industry
stakeholders. Hao et al. (2010) caution that although an increase in N nutrients passed into manure may be
beneficial for crop or forage production, N2O was produced and emitted at significantly higher levels in 60% of
cattle fed wheat DDGS, with a potential 37% increase in global warming.
Hao et al. (2009) found that when feeding 40% or 60% wheat DDGS, fecal total P and manure total P were
positively correlated to feed total P indicating that increased feed P intake also increased P excretion. Benke et
al. (2009) have shown that repeated applications of DDGS manure to soils continue to raise available P levels to
nearly two times that of conventional manure. The generally high water solubility of P negatively impacts water
quality and aquatic life. Hao et al. (2009) did determine that water-soluble P levels from 60% DDGS manure
can be maintained at control levels. The addition of Ca (limestone) to the diet fostered the formation of calcium
phosphate with low water-solubility.
Although this publication’s main focus is on feed characteristics and quality, animal care and manure
management implications must also be considered prior to implementing any feeding strategy. Therefore, it is
important to test manure to ensure spreading is in compliance with provincial manure regulations or agricultural
operations acts. Up to 75% more land may be required to apply 35% DDGS feedlot manure at proper nutrient
rates for crop uptake (Benson et al., 2005). Feeding above 20% wheat DDGS (at 40% and 60% wheat DDGS)
has shown significant negative differences in odour-causing volatile fatty acids, water-soluble P, and greenhouse
gas emissions versus controls (Hao et al., 2009, Hao et al., 2010). Mitigation may include moderation of wheat
DDGS levels (20% wheat DDGS inclusion is no different than manure produced from the current barley ration),
maintaining 2:1 Ca:P levels in the ration or spreading manure at lower rates over a larger land base.
RUMINANT DIETS
19
Wheat DDGS In Poultry Diets
POULTRY DIETS
Introduction
Ethanol byproducts such as wheat DDGS can be an effective ingredient for inclusion in poultry diets. Wheat
DDGS can effectively comprise 10% of practical broiler diets if xylanase enzyme is not used and 15% if it is. Due
to the more mature digestive tract of the laying hen and its specific nutrient requirements, a practical inclusion
level of wheat DDGS would be 20%. However, as stated earlier, the nutrient content and feeding value of wheat
DDGS for poultry can be inconsistent due to variation within the feedstock itself and the processing conditions
which, in some cases, may limit inclusion levels in poultry diets. For example, Vilariño et al. (2007) showed that
leaving the bran layer on the kernel during the fermentation process resulted in wheat DDGS having greater
protein, ash, lipid and fibre content and decreased starch and sugar content as compared to wheat DDGS
manufactured by removing the bran pre-fermentation and adding it back to the dried fraction post-fermentation.
A comparison of the nutrient content of wheat DDGS reported in the studies reviewed and soybean and canola
meal is presented in Table 7. Overall, wheat DDGS contains similar amounts of protein and branched chain
amino acids (isoleucine, leucine and valine) as canola meal, and is comparable to soybean meal in crude fibre
and total sulphur amino acids. Wheat DDGS contains more lipid but significantly less arginine, histidine, lysine
and threonine than canola or soybean meal.
20
TABLE 7. Composition of wheat DDGS in scientific studies (first author listed) to determine energy, protein
and amino acid content and digestibility and growth (values in brackets represent range of samples used in
the study). Soybean meal and canola meal are included for comparison.
Thacker
Cozannet
Bandega
Kluth
Oryschak
Vilariño
Vilariño
Soybean
Meal (44)*
Canola
Meal*
Protein (% DM)
35.7
36.1
(32.6-38.9)
39.9
(38.2 – 41.3)
36.1
39.2
32.1
35.1
44
38.0
Ash (% DM)
4.6
5.2 (4.3 – 6.7)
5.5
4.7
5.8
Lipid (% DM)
5.4
4.6 (3.6 – 5.6)
5.8
7.0
5.7
6.4
0.80
3.8
8.6
7.8
6.1
8.5
7.0
12.0
29.2
(25.1 – 33.8)
46.8
21.8
24.8
ADF** (% DM)
12.0
(7.7 – 17.9)
10.5
7.4
9.8
Starch (% DM)
4.1 (2.5 – 9.5)
11.7
3.0
Sugar (% DM)
Calcium (% DM)
Phosphorus
(% DM)
5.1 (3.6 – 8.7)
3.9
0.15
0.29
0.68
Crude Fiber (% DM)
NDF** (% DM)
33.2
0.18
0.24
6.5
0.13
0.91
0.99
0.81
0.90
0.27
1.17
1.67
1.40
1.52
3.14
2.08
0.77
0.66
0.72
1.17
0.93
4974
(4883 – 5064)
4724
Arginine (% DM)
1.59
1.61
(1.53 -1.67)
Histidine (% DM)
0.77
0.82
(0.78-0.85)
Isoleucine (% DM)
1.42
1.37
(1.3 -1.41)
1.26
1.43
1.09
1.20
1.96
1.37
Leucine (% DM)
2.45
2.46
2.65
2.09
2.33
3.39
2.47
Lysine (% DM)
0.92
2.63
(2.51 -2.77)
0.74
(0.69 -0.79)
0.69
1.01
0.70
0.64
2.69
1.94
0.61
(0.59 -0.62)
0.52
0.59
0.46
0.51
0.62
0.71
1.50
1.36
(1.30–1.39)
1.27
1.08
1.17
1.28
1.58
1.03
1.81
(1.72 – 1.9)
1.73
1.71
1.38
1.54
2.16
1.44
Threonine (% DM)
1.13
1.13
1.24
0.99
1.06
1.72
1.53
Valine (% DM)
1.64
1.18
(1.13-1.19)
1.70
(1.63-1.74)
1.49
1.75
1.37
1.52
2.07
1.76
Methionine (% DM)
Total Sulphur AA
(% DM)
Phenylalanine
(% DM)
5160
1.52
*Values taken from Nutrient Requirement of Poultry, Ninth Revised Edition, 1994.
**NDF, neutral detergent fibre; ADF, acid detergent fibre
Energy Content
Energy digestibility, apparent metabolizable energy (AME) and AME corrected for endogenous nitrogen excretion
(AMEn) of wheat DDGS has been determined in roosters, broilers, layers, and turkeys (Table 8). The estimations of
Vilariño et al. (2007) appear high in relation to the other published values. These values were determined using pelleted
diets which may have improved the energy digestibility in relation to the other studies in which mash diets were used.
The diets used in the determination of energy digestibility in Oryschak et al. (2010) and Thacker and Widyaratne (2007)
included an exogenous commercial enzyme designed for wheat-based diets. Cozannet et al. (2010) showed that
AMEn was highly correlated to ADF content (r = 0.80 to 0.93) regardless of poultry type.
21
POULTRY DIETS
Gross Energy (kcal/kg)
Energy
Digestibility
(%)
AME (kcal/
kg)
AMEn (kcal/
kg)
Roosters
2345
Metayer et al. (2009)
Cozzanet et al. (2010)
Vilariño et al. (2007)
2464
2469
2701/2562*
2672/2524*
2421
2371
Broiler
Cozzanet et al. (2010)
Metayer et al. (2009)
Oryschak et al. (2010)
Thacker and Widyaratne
(2007)
Layers
Cozzanet et al. (2010)
2047
54 (48)**
68.6***
2412
2300
2314
2164
Turkeys
POULTRY DIETS
Cozzanet et al. (2010)
Protein and Amino Acid Content and Digestibility
Unlike energy, there are widely divergent estimates of amino acid content and digestibility (Table 9) within the literature.
Lysine content of wheat DDGS ranged from 0.69% DM (Kluth and Rodehutscord, 2010) to 1.01% DM (Oryschak et al.
2010) (Table 1). Expressed as a percentage of protein, lysine content ranged from 1.82% (Vilariño et al. 2007) to 2.58%
(Thacker and Widyaratne, 2007; Oryschak et al. 2010). This may be due, in part, to the variation in lysine content of the
feedstock used to manufacture wheat DDGS. Wheat protein content, and therefore lysine and other amino acid content,
varies significantly between and within classes of wheat. Soft white wheat, the primary class of wheat used for ethanol
production in Canada, contains approximately 2-3% less protein than Canadian hard red spring wheat, the primary
wheat produced in western Canada for milling. Changing the ratio of soft to hard wheat used to produce ethanol would
be expected to have significant affects on protein and amino acid content of the DDGS produced.
Estimates of protein and amino acid digestibility are shown in Table 9. Cady et al. (2009) reported that lysine digestibility
ranged from 26-54% in eight samples of wheat DDGS collected from six countries. The report of Bandegan et al. (2009)
is of interest in that the data was generated from batches of wheat DDGS manufactured from five different feedstocks
within the same plant under the same manufacturing procedures. The lysine content in the five batches of wheat DDGS
ranged from 0.69-0.74% DM but the digestibility of lysine within those same batches ranged from 24.4-45.7%.
22
Bandegan
Kluth
Mean (Range)
Mean
15%
Inclusion
30%
Inclusion
67.0 (64.1 - 71.0)
65.0
72.8
69.4
Arginine
68.2 (63.3 -73.3)
74.0
82.2
80.5
Histidine
63.7 (57.4 – 69.1)
--
76.1
74.4
Isoleucine
68.8 (67.3 -72.4)
63.0
78.3
76.0
Leucine
73.4 (68.8 - 77.0)
65.0
82.8
81.1
Lysine
35.6 (24.4 - 45.7)
73.0
68.2
63.6
Methionine
73.7 (69.3 - 76.4)
70.0
86.5
84.3
Total Sulphur Amino Acids
67.3 (76.0 - 81.6)
Phenylalanine
79.2 (76.0 – 81.6)
71.0
81.8
80.6
Threonine
54.8 (48.2 – 60.9)
61.0
71.9
68.3
Valine
64.7 (58.6 – 69.7)
67.0
79.6
76.3
Protein
Oryschak et al. (2010)
The manufacturing process for wheat DDGS may involve high temperatures which can affect the digestibility
of lysine and other nutrients through the Maillard reaction. Cozannet et al. (2010) showed that energy content,
protein and amino acid digestibility is related to colour as measured by a colour meter and luminance
measurements. A summary of their findings comparing dark versus light is presented in Table 10.
FEEDING STUDIES
POULTRY DIETS
Several studies have investigated the growth of broiler chickens fed diets incorporating wheat DDGS. Thacker
and Widyaratne (2007) substituted equal parts of wheat and soybean meal with wheat DDGS at 0%, 5%,
10%, 15%, and 20% inclusion levels. An exogenous enzyme, commonly used in wheat-based diets, was
included in all diets. Although no statistical difference in broiler weight gain, feed intake or feed conversion
(feed:gain) was noted between treatments, these authors recommended a maximum inclusion of 15% wheat
DDGS in broiler diets. However, in this study the researchers did not base the formulation on digestible amino
acid content and the numerical trend to reduced performance at the 20% inclusion level is likely a result
of insufficient digestible essential amino acids. In contrast, Métayer et al. (2009) measured the AME and
digestibility of amino acids prior to formulating the diets and reported that growth was not different between
broiler birds fed starter diets containing 0% or 3% wheat DDGS, and grower-finisher diets containing 0%,
10% and 15% wheat DDGS. However, feed intake increased which reduced feed efficiency (gain:feed) by
4% and 5%, respectively, for birds consuming diets containing 10% and 15% wheat DDGS. The authors also
investigated the effect of an exogenous enzyme addition and found that performance was equalized between
birds consuming 15% wheat DDGS and enzyme, and birds consuming the diet containing 10% wheat DDGS.
Oryschak et al. (2010) reported that inclusion of wheat DDGS at 5% or 10% in broiler diets (0-42 days) had no
effect on body weight, feed intake, feed efficiency (gain:feed), breast weight or yield.
In a study designed to determine the AMEn of DDGS samples, average daily gain decreased when wheat DDGS was
incorporated into broiler and turkey diets at 25%, but feed intake was not affected in either poultry type (Cozannet
et al. 2010). The diets were not formulated to meet digestible amino acid requirements and this may account for the
reduction in average daily gain. Vilariño (2007) reported a slight reduction in feed intake (1.9%) in broilers consuming
diets containing 10% wheat DDGS. The reduction in feed intake was significant (5.4%) in birds consuming diets
containing 20% wheat DDGS, which resulted in a significant decrease in final body weight. The authors (Vilariño et
al. 2007) noted a difference in feed conversion in the first 10 days of the experiment and attributed this effect to an
overestimation of the digestible lysine content during the formulation of the diets. The feed conversion ratio of broilers
consuming control, 10% and 20% wheat DDGS treatments were 1.43, 1.56 and 1.61, respectively.
23
Summary and Recommendations
In summary, the energy content and digestibility of energy, protein and amino acids are related to the processing
conditions used in manufacturing. Indicators such as acid detergent fibre content and the amount of protein
(nitrogen) in the acid detergent fibre fraction can provide some information regarding energy content and protein
digestibility, respectively. Colour (dark vs light) is another indicator of product quality with dark-coloured wheat
DDGS, indicating overheating and loss in nutrient content and quality. From the data presented in the literature,
it would appear that the AME content of good quality wheat DDGS is in the range of 2400-2500 kcal/kg for
roosters, broilers and layers, and 2300-2400 kcal/kg for turkeys. Standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids
in wheat DDGS is lower than for soybean and canola meals. For example, the true ileal digestibility of threonine
in soybean meal, canola meal and wheat DDGS (NRC, 1994; Brandegan et al. 2010) is 88%, 78% and 62%,
respectively.
TABLE 10. Digestive utilization of nutrients in wheat DDGS and
the impact of colour (from Cozannet et al. (2009 and 2010).
Wheat DDGS
Dark
Light
Luminance (L)*
46.2
57.4
NDF (% DM)
33.6
30.1
ADF (% DM)
18.4
10.7
ADCIP (% DM)**
41.2
11.6
Lysine (% CP)
1.01
2.29
Protein
59.8
81.8
Non-Essential Amino Acids
64.1
83.9
Essential Amino Acids
51.0
78.0
Lysine
11.8
60.7
Rooster
2235
2564
Layer
2257
2519
Broiler
2164
2531
Turkey
2058
2424
POULTRY DIETS
Digestibility
AME kcal/kg
24
Wheat DDGS In Swine Diets
Ethanol co-products such as wheat DDGS can be included in swine diets. Under current pricing scenarios,
wheat DDGS is cost effective and can be included in mash diets. Wheat DDGS of good quality can be included
up to 10% in a weaner/nursery diet and up to 20% in a grower or finisher diet.
Wheat DDGS contains more non-starch polysaccharide (NSP) than wheat grain. The NSP content of wheat
DDGS is also slightly higher than in corn DDGS. Within the NSP, the content of xylose and arabinose sugar is
increased, indicating that the content of arabinoxylans is substantially higher in wheat DDGS than in the parent
wheat. Wheat DDGS contains more xylose than corn DDGS (Table 11) but has similar arabinose content. These
data indicate that the ratio of arabinose to xylose in the arabinoxylans in wheat DDGS is different than in corn
DDGS.
SWINE DIETS
Energy Digestibility and Content
Increased wheat NSP is related to reduced energy digestibility for swine (Zijlstra et al. 1999). Estimations of
energy digestibility and energy content differ substantially among studies, depending on study design, wheat
DDGS inclusion level, feedstock quality and fermentation, and drying technologies used in the manufacturing
process. Widyaratne and Zijlstra (2008) reported apparent total tract energy digestibility of 68.3% and 67.1%
for wheat DDGS and a 4:1 mixture of wheat:corn DDGS when each replaced 40% wheat in the diet. Nyachoti
et al. (2005) also replaced 40% of the wheat in the basal diet with wheat DDGS from two different lots and
reported total digestibility of energy as 65% and 68% as compared to wheat at 86%. The diets in the studies of
Widyaratne and Zijlstra (2007) and Nyachoti et al. (2005) were not balanced for energy or amino acid content.
The impact of fibre-degrading enzymes on digestibility of wheat DDGS is not clear. The addition of a commercial
xylanase to a diet containing 40% wheat DDGS did not improve total tract energy digestibility (Widyaratne et al.,
2009). Thacker (2009) incorporated 20% of wheat DDGS into diets for growing pigs and reported the total tract
digestibility of dietary energy was 76.5% with no improvement with the addition of a xylanase and ß-glucanase
cocktail (76.7%). Some ethanol plants add fibre-degrading enzymes during the production process, making a
positive enzyme effect on DDGS less likely.
25
TABLE 11. Non-starch polysaccharide (NSP) including part of the
constituent sugar profile of wheat, and corn, wheat/corn, and wheat
DDGS (% DM)1.
Wheat
DDGS
Corn
Wheat/corn2
Wheat
2.15
7.57
9.72
1.39
17.85
19.24
5.35
16.56
21.91
7.76
15.13
22.89
Xylose
Soluble
Insoluble
Total
1.03
2.39
3.42
0.29
5.86
6.15
2.53
5.58
8.11
3.08
5.00
8.08
Arabinose
Soluble
Insoluble
Total
0.68
1.64
2.32
0.21
4.06
4.27
1.22
3.51
4.73
1.58
3.29
4.87
Variable
Total NSP
Soluble
Insoluble
Total
SWINE DIETS
Emiola et al. (2009) reported total tract and ileal dietary energy digestibility estimates of 68% and 65.6% when
wheat DDGS was added at 30% to pig diets balanced for energy and amino acid content. In this study, diets
were formulated to meet nutrient requirements (positive control, NRC, 1998) or formulated to be 4% and 5%
below requirements for digestibility energy and lysine (negative control), respectively. Two enzyme mixtures
containing glucanase, xylanase, and cellulase (low vs high) were each added to individual negative control dietary
treatments. The diet high in enzymes was equal in growth, efficiency and energy digestibility to that of the positive
control diet.
Recently, Yáñez et al. (2011) reported results of a study that incorporated 43.7% of a co-fermented wheat:corn
(1:1) DDGS in ground or unground form, with or without xylanase and/or phytase. Grinding wheat DDGS before
inclusion in the diet increased apparent total tract digestibility (70.9% vs 69.6%) and DE content (3.34 vs 3.28
Mcal/kg).
Phosphorus Digestibility
Digestibility of phosphorous (P) in wheat DDGS differed among studies. P digestibility in wheat DDGS was
substantially higher (62%) than in wheat (15%) (Widyaratne and Zijlstra 2008). In contrast, P digestibility did not
differ between two batches of wheat DDGS (50% and 55%) and wheat (44%) in another study (Nyachoti et al.,
2005). The difference might be due to difference in phytate and intrinsic phytase content among wheat samples.
Widyaratne and Zijlstra (2007) reported a phytate content of 1.39% DM in wheat versus 0.30% (air-dry basis)
for the wheat used in the study of Nyachoti et al. (2005). The remaining phytate in wheat DDGS still reduces P
digestibility, because the addition of phytase improved P digestibility of diets containing wheat DDGS (Yáñez et
al., 2011). The phytate content of the wheat:corn DDGS in this study was 1.05% DM.
26
Amino Acid Digestibility
The standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids was higher in wheat than in wheat DDGS (Widyaratne
and Zijlstra 2008), especially for lysine (71.4% vs 46.4%), indicating that heat damage of lysine during the
manufacturing process likely occurred. Nonetheless, the SID content of amino acids was higher in wheat DDGS
due to the higher content of total amino acids. The reduced (apparent) digestibility of amino acids for wheat
DDGS compared to wheat was also observed by Nyachoti et al. (2005). Yan et al. (2008) reported SID values for
lysine, threonine, and methionine of 49%, 72.3% and 78%, respectively. Cozannet et al. (2010) reported a mean
SID of lysine in wheat DDGS to be 55.6%. However, these authors also showed that lysine SID was dependent
on processing conditions, as shown by colour of the final wheat DDGS product. Samples with dark colouration,
indicating the browning (Maillard) reaction occurred during processing, had a mean SID of lysine of 55% while
lighter-coloured samples had a mean SID of lysine of 79%. The mean SID values for threonine and methionine
were 75% and 72%, respectively. These authors also showed that the SID of lysine was highly correlated (-0.84)
to the protein content of the acid detergent fibre (ADF) in wheat DDGS.
The addition of xylanase did not improve the apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of lysine in wheat DDGS (Emiola et
al. 2009) regardless of inclusion level (15% or 30%). However, the AID of lysine in this study was approximately
74%, indicating that less damage had occurred during the drying process. Similarly, Yáñez et al. (2011) reported
that the addition of phytase, with or without xylanase, did not improve the SID of amino acids in wheat:corn (1:1)
DDGS. Grinding the wheat:corn DDGS did improve SID for lysine (70.5% versus 64.3%) but not for threonine or
methionine.
Dietary Inclusion and Growth
Thacker et al. (2006) replaced wheat and soybean meal with up to 25% (5% increments) wheat DDGS in grower
diets, and up to 15% (3% increments) in finishing pig diets. Weight gain of grower hogs decreased with increased
wheat DDGS inclusion due to decreased feed intake. However, no effect of wheat DDGS inclusion was noted
in finishing hogs. The DDGS came from an old-style ethanol plant so the nutrient availability (e.g. lysine) of the
wheat DDGS in this study may have been limiting due to high drying temperatures used in the manufacturing
process.
Wheat DDGS has been studied in nursery pig diets. Increasing wheat DDGS inclusion from 0-20% at the
expense of soybean meal and wheat was studied in diets balanced for net energy and SID content (Avelar et al.,
2010). Increasing wheat DDGS in the nursery diet reduced feed intake, weight gain and feed efficiency. Up to
10% inclusion growth performance was maintained, whereas inclusion of 15% and 20% wheat DDGS in the diet
decreased body weight of weaned pigs by 0.4 and 5.4 kg, respectively. Therefore wheat DDGS should be limited
to 10% inclusion in nursery diets.
In a commercial-size study by FOBI researchers, wheat DDGS was included in the diets for growing pigs at 0%,
7%, 15%, 22.5% and 30% (Beltranena and Zijlstra, 2010). For every 7.5% increase in wheat DDGS inclusion,
feed efficiency decreased because pigs consumed 42 g/day more feed per kg of body weight gain. As a result,
the monetary return decreased linearly with increasing wheat DDGS inclusion. These authors recommended a
maximum of 20% inclusion of wheat DDGS in diets for growing hogs.
27
SWINE DIETS
In a follow-up study, Thacker (2009) reported that dietary inclusion of 20% and 12% wheat DDGS in grower
(19.7-43.6 kg) and finisher (43.6-114.3 kg) diets, respectively, did not affect on weight gain, feed intake, or feed
conversion.
Carcass Quality
Feeding high levels of corn DDGS in finishing pig diets has been shown to reduce backfat hardness so as a result
some have suggested limiting amounts in the finishing diet (Beltranena and Zijlstra, 2010). However, feeding
wheat DDGS has not been shown to have the same impact on carcass quality and therefore it can be used at
higher levels in finishing pig diets (Beltranena and Zijlstra, 2010). The reduction in backfat hardness when feeding
corn DDGS is attributed to the high levels of polyunsaturated fat in the oil. Both corn and wheat germ oil contain
large quantities of polyunsaturated fatty acids, but the total fat content of wheat DDGS is markedly less than corn
DDGS (5.4 vs 13.6%) so the impact of wheat DDGS on carcass quality is relatively minor.
Summary
Wheat DDGS is a co-product that can potentially be used as a feed ingredient in swine diets. To properly
characterize wheat DDGS, samples should be evaluated for digestible or available energy and amino acid
content. Energy and amino acid values can be predicted using protein, lipid and fibre content (detergent
fractions). In addition, a measure of protein content of the acid detergent fibre fraction might provide valuable
information regarding amino acid availability. Growth performance can be maintained if wheat DDGS is of good
and known quality and diets are formulated to an equal energy and amino acid profile. Published studies to date
indicate that the inclusion of wheat DDGS in nursery and grower/finisher formulations should be limited to 10%
and 20%, respectively. Fibre content of wheat DDGS will increase the size of viscera, thereby reducing dressing
percentage. Feeding corn DDGS reduces backfat hardness but wheat DDGS has a relatively small impact on
carcass quality due to the lower fat content of the product and can therefore be used in higher quantities than
corn DDGS in the finishing diet.
SWINE DIETS
The energy value of wheat DDGS is less than wheat. Formulation values for digestible energy content vary
but range between 13.4 (Nyachoti et al. 2005) and 14.6 MJ/kg (Cozannet et al. 2010) for growing pigs. The
availability of amino acids, particularly lysine, is dependent on processing conditions, especially during drying. A
weak link exists with colour, with darker wheat DDGS having decreased lysine availability.
28
Wheat DDGS In Aquaculture Diets
Further improvements in the nutritive value of wheat DDGS were obtained through aqueous extraction of protein
from wet wheat distillers grains (WWDG). This method has the advantage of performing all fractionation steps
on WWDG before the drying process. Therefore, no additional drying costs are incurred in the production of
this product. This process increased the protein content of WWDG from 43.2-68.5% and decreased nonstarch polysaccharides from 27.2-8.1%. The product also had significantly increased the apparent digestibility
coefficients for dry matter, gross energy and acid ether extract (P < 0.05) when fed to rainbow trout. The addition
of this product at up to 30% of the diet did not decrease the growth performance of rainbow trout. Wheat
DDGS may be added to salmonid diets at low levels but fractionation prior to feeding offers significant benefits
nutritionally and makes it more practical as an aquaculture feed.
29
AQUACULTURE DIETS
Limited information is available on feeding wheat DDGS to aquaculture species. Hilton and Slinger (1986)
demonstrated that it is feasible to use 10% corn DDGS in rainbow trout diets. However, as a salmonid species
which, like other carnivorous fish, require high levels of protein and fat and have little to no capacity to digest
fibre, corn DDGS is only marginally feasible as it contains high levels of fibre and only modest levels of protein
and fat. Wheat DDGS contains significantly higher levels of protein but less fat and more fibre than corn DDGS,
limiting its use in salmonid diets. Randall and Drew (2010) fractionated wheat DDGS, based on particle size,
and found that the fine components of the product are elevated in protein (43.2% vs 37.2% as fed basis) and
contained less neutral detergent fibre (21.6% vs 27.12% as fed basis), rendering the product more suitable
for salmonid diets. The digestibility of the energy and dry matter of the fine fractions of wheat DDGS (83% and
79%, respectively) were higher than in the starting material (75% and 66%, respectively) and were similar in
composition and digestibility to that of soybean meal.
References
Bandegan, A., W. Guenter, D. Hoehler, G.H. Crow
and C. M. Nyachoti. 2009. Standardized ileal amino
acid digestibility in wheat distillers dried grains with
solubles for broilers. Poultry Sci. 88:2692-2599.
Aldai, N., J.L. Aalhus, M.E.R. Dugan, T.A.
McAllister, L.J. Walter and J.J. McKinnon. 2009.
Retail and sensory quality of Longissimus thoracis
from steers fed corn- or wheat-based dry distillers’
grains plus solubles (DDGS). J. Anim. Sci. 87:
E-Suppl. Abstract Joint Annual Meeting.
Boila, R.J. and J.R. Ingalls. 1994. The post ruminal
digestion of dry matter nitrogen and amino acids in
wheat-based distillers’ dried grains and canola meal.
Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 49: 173-188.
Aldai, N., J.L. Aalhus, M.E.R. Dugan, W.M.
Robertson, T.A. McAllister, L.J. Walter and J.J.
McKinnon. 2010. Comparison of wheat- versus
corn-based dried distilllers’ grains with solubles on
meat quality of feedlot cattle. Meat Sci. 84:569-577.
Aldai, N., M.E.R. Dugan, J.L. Aalhus, T.A.
McAllister, L.J. Walter, and J.J. McKinnon. 2010.
Differences in the trans-18:1 profile of the backfat
of feedlot steers fed wheat or corn based dried
distillers’ grains. Anim. Sci. Tech. 157:168-172.
Alotaibi, K. and J.J. Schoenau. 2010. Crop growth
as affected by bioenergy by-products application.
Proceedings of Soils and Crops Workshop 2010,
University of Saskatchewan.
Anderson, J.L., D.J. Schingoethe, K.F. Kalscheur
and A.R. Hippen. 2006. Evaluation of dried and
wet distillers grains included at two concentrations in
the diets of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 89(8):
3133-3142.
REFERENCES
Avelar, E., R. Jha, E. Beltranena, M. Cervantes,
A. Morales and R.T. Zijlstra. 2010. The effect of
feeding wheat distillers dried grain with solubles
on growth performance and nutrient digestibility in
weaned pigs. Anim. Feed Sc. Tech. 160:73-77.
Beliveau, R.M. and J.J. McKinnon. 2009. Effect of
graded levels of wheat-based dried distillers’ grains
with solubles on rumen fermentation. Can. J. Anim.
Sci. 89:513-520.
Beltranena, E. and R. T. Zijlstra. 2010. Research
Update: Alternative feedstuffs for swine. Adv. Pork
Prod. 21:167-175.
Benke, M.B, X. Hao, Caffyn, P. J. Schoenau.
McAllister, T.A. 2010. Using manure from cattle
fed dried distillers’ grains with solubles (DDGS) as
fertilizer: Effects on nutrient accumulation in soil and
uptake by barley. Ag. Eco. Environ. 139:720-727.
30
Canadian Sheep Federation. Accessed 2011.
Virtual Tool Box: Flock Health & Nutrition sections.
Available: www.cansheep.ca.
Chibisa, G.E., D.A. Christensen and
T. Mutsvangwa. 2012. Effect of replacing canola
meal as the major protein source with wheat dried
distillers grains with solubles on ruminal function,
microbial protein synthesis, omasal flow, and milk
production in cows. J. Dairy Sci. 95: 824-841.
Clark, L. and H.A. Lardner. 2009. Wheat-based dried
distillers grains supplementation in backgrounding and
stocker programs. WBDC Fact Sheet #2009-01, PAMI.
Humboldt SK.
Cozannet, P., M. Lessire, J.P. Métayer, C.
Gady, Y. Primot, F. Skiba and J. Noblet. 2009.
Nutritional value of distillers grains in poultry (invited
paper). 17th European Symposium on Poultry
Nutrition, World Poultry Science Association.
23-27 August, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Cozannet, P., M. Lessire, C. Gady, J.P. Métayer,
Y. Primot, F. Skiba and J. Noblet. 2010. Energy
value of wheat dried distillers grains with solubles
in roosters, broilers, layers, and turkey. Poultry Sci.
89:2230-2241.
Cozannet, P., Y. Primot, C. Gady, J.P. Métayer
and P. Callu. 2010. Ileal digestibility of amino acids
in wheat distillers dried grains with solubles for pigs.
Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 158:177-186.
Cozannet, P., Y. Primot, C. Gady, J.P. Métayer,
M. Lessire, F. Skiba and J. Noblet. 2010. Energy
value of wheat distillers grains with solubles for
growing pigs and adult sows. J. Anim. Sci. 88:23822392.
Domova, N., I. Ivanova, M. Mihailova and N.
Todorov. 2009. Wheat distiller’s grains as a source
of protein in dairy sheep. Bulgarian J. Agric. Sci.
15(6):574-582.
Dugan, M.E.R., N. Aldai, J.K.G. Kramer, D.J.
Gibb, M. Juarez and T.A. McAllister. 2010.
Feeding wheat dried distillers’ grains with solubles
improves beef trans and conjugated linoleic acid
profiles. J. Anim. Sci. 88:1842-1847.
Emiola, I.A., F.O. Opapeju, B.A. Slominski and
C.M. Nyachoti. 2009. Growth performance and
nutrient digestibility in pigs fed wheat distillers dried
grains with solubles-based diets supplemented with
a multicarbohydrase enzyme. J. Anim. Sci. 87:23152322.
Ileleji, K. E. and K.A. Rosentrater. 2008. On the
physical properties of distillers dried grains with
solubles (DDGS). Proceedings ASABE. Rhode Island,
NY, USA.
Katzen International. Accessed 2011. Advances in
Ethanol. Available: www.katzen.com/daccomp.html.
Kluth, H. and M. Rodehutscord. 2010. Effect of
the duration of pre-feeding on amino acid digestibility
of wheat distillers dried grains with solubles in broiler
chicken. Poultry Sci. 89:681-687.
Franke, K., U. Meyer and G. Flachowsky. 2009.
Distillers dried grains with solubles compared with
rapeseed meal in rations of dairy cows. J. Anim.
Feed Sci. 18:601-612.
Lan, Y., F.O. Opapeju and C.M. Nyachoti. 2008.
True ileal protein and amino acid digestibilities in
wheat dried distillers’ grains with solubles fed to
finishing pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 140:155-163.
Gady, C., P. Dalibard and P.A. Geraert. 2008.
Nutritional variability of major co-products of the bioethanol industry. Poster presentation proceedings.
Poultry Sci. 87 (Suppl 1):111.
Li, Y.L., W.Z. Yang, T.A. McAllister and K.A.
Beauchemin. 2010. Effect of wheat distillers dried
grains with solubles (DDGS) as a replacement for
barley grain and barley silage on ruminal pH and
fermentation in finishing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 88:
E-Suppl. 2 Joint Annual Meeting.
Gibb, D.J., X. Hao and T.A. McAllister. 2008.
Effect of dried distillers’ grains from wheat on diet
digestibility and performance in feedlot cattle. Can. J.
Anim. Sci. 88:659-665.
Gurung, N.K., S.G. Solaiman, D.L. Rankins
and W.H. McElhenney. 2009. Effects of distillers
dried grains with solubles on feed intake, growth
performance, gain efficiency and carcass quality of
growing Kiko X Spanish male goats. J. Anim. Vet.
Advances. 8 (10):2087-2093.
Hao, X., M.B. Benke, D.J. Gibb, A. Stronks, G.R.
Travis and T.A. McAllister. 2009. Effect of dried
distillers grains with solubles (wheat-based) in feedlot
cattle diets on feces and manure composition.
J. Environ. Qual. 38:1709-1718.
Hein, T. 2010. Novel fractionation for DDGS.
Canadian Poultry Magazine, July 2010.
Available: www.canadianpoultrymag.com.
Hilton, J.W. and S.J. Slinger. 1986. Digestibility
and utilization of canola meal in practical-type
diets for rainbow trout. Can. J. Fish Aquacult. Sci.
43:149-155.
Métayer, J. P., J.M. Gaüzere, C. Gady, F. Skiba and
M. Vilariño. 2009. Valeur nutritionnelle d’une drêche
de ble chez le coq et le poulet et effet du niveau
d’incorporation et del’ajout d’un complex multienzymatique sur les performances de croissance
des poulets standards. Huitièmes Journées de la
Recherche Avicole, St. Malo, 25 et 26 March 2009.
National Research Council, 1994. Nutrient
Requirements of Poultry, 9th Revised Edition.
Oryschak, M., D. Korver, M. Zuidhof, X. Meng
and E. Beltranena. 2010. Comparative feeding
value of extruded and non-extruded wheat and corn
distillers grains with solubles for broilers. Poultry Sci.
89:2183-2196.
North Dakota State University. 1996. North
Dakota sheep pocket guide. AS-989. Available:
www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/ansci/sheep/as989-3.htm.
Nyachoti, C.M., J.D. House, B.A. Slominski and
I.R. Seddon. 2005. Energy and nutrient digestibilities
in wheat dried distillers grains with solubles fed to
growing pigs. J. Sci. Food Agric. 85:2581-2586.
31
REFERENCES
Hao, X., M. Benke, F.J. Larney and T.A. McAllister.
2011. Greenhouse gas emissions when composting
manure from cattle fed dried distillers’ grains with
solubles. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 89:105-114.
McKinnon, J. J. and A.M. Walker. 2008. Comparison
of wheat-based dried distillers’ grains with solubles
to barley as an energy source for backgrounding
cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 88:721-724.
Nuez Ortín, W.G. and P. Yu. 2009. Nutrient Variation
and Availability of Wheat DDGS, Corn DDGS and
Blend DDGS from BioEthanol Plants. J. Sci. Food
Agric. 89:1754–1761.
Stoll, L.C., J.J. McKinnon and P.J. Shand. 2010.
A comparison of wheat and corn DDGS on quality
of beef longissimus. Abstract: Conf. Am. Meat Sci.
Assoc. Lubbock, Texas, June 20-23.
Nuez Ortin, W.G. and P. Yu. 2010. Estimation
of ruminal and intestinal digestion profiles, hourly
effective degradation ratio and potential N to energy
synchronization of co-products from bioethanol
processing. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90:2058-2067.
Swanson, K. 2010. Effects of feeding corn
distillers’ grains on animal health, performance
and carcass value. Beef Cattle Research Council
Research Review. Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.
Available: www.cattle.ca/research.
Nuez Ortin, W.G. 2010. Variation and availability of
nutrients in co-products from bio-ethanol production
fed to ruminants. MSc Thesis. University of
Saskatchewan.
Terra Grain Fuels. Accessed 2011. Ethanol Facts.
Available: www.terragrainfuels.com/ethanol_facts.php.
Oryschak, M., D. Korver, M. Zuidhof, X. Meng
and E. Beltranena. 2010. Comparative feeding
value of extruded and non-extruded wheat and corn
DDGS for broilers. Poultry Sci. 89:2183-2196.
Pedersen, C. and J.E. Lindberg. 2010. Ileal and
total tract nutrient digestibility in wheat wet distillers
solubles and wheat dried distillers grains with
solubles when fed to growing pigs. Livestock Sci.
132:145-151.
Penner, G. and D.A. Christensen. 2009. Effect
of replacing forage or concentrate with wet or dry
distillers’ grains on the productivity and chewing
activity of dairy cattle. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 153:
1-10.
REFERENCES
Randall, K.M. and M.D. Drew. 2010. Fractionation
of wheat distiller’s dried grains and solubles using
sieving increases digestible nutrient content in
rainbow trout. Anim. Feed. Sci. and Technol.
159:138-142.
Rausch and Belyea. 2006. The future of coproducts from corn processing. Appl. Biochem.
Biotech. 128:47-86.
Schingoethe, D.J., K.F. Kalscheur, A.R. Hippen
and A.D. Garcia. 2009. Invited review: The use of
distillers products in dairy cattle diets. J. Dairy Sci.
92:5802-5813.
Schoenian, S. 2009. Sheep 201: A Beginner’s Guide
to Raising Sheep. Available:
http://www.sheep101.info/201/index.html
Slominski, B.A, A. Rogiewicz, M. Nyachoti and
K. Wittenberg. Husky Wheat and Wheat/Corn
DDGS for Poultry Nutrition. University of Manitoba.
Available: http://umanitoba.ca/afs/animal_science.
32
Thacker, P.A. 2006. Nutrient digestibility, performance
and carcass traits of growing-finishing pigs fed diets
containing dried wheat distillers grains with solubles.
Can. J. Anim. Sci. 86:527-529.
Thacker, P.A. 2009. Effects of supplementary
threonine, canola oil or enzyme on nutrient
digestibility, performance and carcass traits of
growing-finishing pigs fed diets containing wheat
distillers grains with solubles. Asian-Austral. J Anim.
Sci. 22:1676-1685.
Thacker, P.A. and G.P. Widyaratne. 2007.
Nutritional value of diets containing graded levels
of wheat distillers grains with solubles fed to broiler
chicks. J. Sci. Food Agric 87:1386-1390.
Tumuluru, J. S., L. Tabil, A. Opoku, M.R.
Mosqueda and O. Fadeyi. 2010. Effect of
process variables on the quality characteristics of
pelleted wheat distiller’s dried grains with solubles.
Biosystems Engineering 105:466-475.
University of Manitoba. 2009. Feed Research:
Nutritive values of pig feed ingredients.
Available: http://umanitoba.ca/afs/animal_science.
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service Global
Agricultural Information Network. 2010. Canada
Biofuels Annual. Gain report number: CA0023.
Available: http://gain.fas.usda.gov.
Van De Kerckhove, A. and H. Lardner. 2008.
Effects of supplementing beef cows grazing crop
residue with dried distillers’ grain. WBDC Fact Sheet
# 2008-05. PAMI. Humboldt SK.
Vilariño, M., J.M. Gaüzere, J.P. Métayer and
F. Skiba. 2007. Energy value of wheat DDGS in
adult cockerels and growth performances of broiler
chickens. 16th European Symposium on Poultry
Nutrition. Strasbourg, France. August 26-30, 2007.
Walter, L.J., T.A. McAllister, W.Z. Yang, K.A.
Beauchemin and J.J. McKinnon. 2010.
Comparison of wheat or corn dried distillers grains
with solubles on rumen fermentation and nutrient
digestibility in feedlot heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 88:
E-Suppl. 2 ABS#199.
Walter, L.J., J.L. Aalhus, W.M. Robertson, T.A.
McAllister, D.J. Gibb, M.E.R. Dugan and J.J.
McKinnon. 2010. Evaluation of wheat or corn dried
distillers’ grains with solubles on performance and
carcass characteristics of feedlot steers. Can. J.
Anim. Sci. 90: 259-269.
Yu, P., D. Damiran and W. Nuez Ortin. 2009.
Characterization of protein structure of the new
co-products from bioethanol production in western
Canada using DRIFT Spectroscopy: comparison
among blend DDGS, wheat DDGS and corn DDGS,
between wheat and wheat DDGS, and corn and corn
DDGS. Abstract for the 2009 Joint ADSA-CSASASAS Annual Meeting. July 12-16, 2009.
Yu, P., Z. Niu and D. Damiran. 2010. Protein
molecular structures and protein fraction profiles of
new co-products of bioethanol production: A novel
approach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58: 3460–3464.
Walter, L.J. 2010. Comparison of wheat or corn
dried distillers grains with solubles on performance,
carcass characteristics, rumen fermentation
parameters and diet digestibility of feedlot cattle.
MSc Thesis, University of Saskatchewan.
Zhang, S.Z., G.B. Penner, M. Abdelqader and M.
Oba. 2010. Effects of feeding alfalfa hay on chewing,
rumen pH, and milk fat concentration of dairy cows
fed wheat DDGS as a partial substitute for barley
silage. J. Dairy Sci. 93: 3243-3252.
Widyaratne, G.P. and R.T. Zijlstra. 2007.
Nutritional value of wheat and corn distillers dried
grain with solubles: digestibility and digestible
contents of energy, amino acids and phosphorus,
nutrient excretion and growth performance of
grower-finisher pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 87:103-114.
Zhang, S.Z., G.B. Penner, W.Z. Yang and
M. Oba. 2010. Effects of partially replacing
barley silage or barley grain with DDGS on rumen
fermentation and milk production of lactating dairy
cows. J. Dairy Sci.93: 3231-3242.
Widyaratne, G.P. and R.T. Zijlstra. 2008. Erratum.
Nutritional value of wheat and corn distillers dried
grain with solubles: digestibility and digestible
contents of energy, amino acids and phosphorus,
nutrient excretion and growth performance of
grower-finisher pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 88:515-516.
Zijlstra, R.T., C.F.M. de Lange, and J.F. Patience.
1999. Nutritional value of wheat for growing pigs:
chemical composition and digestible energy content.
Can. J. Anim. Sci. 79:187-194.
Widyaratne, G.P., J.F. Patience and R.T. Zijlstra.
2009. Effect of xylanase supplementation of diets
containing wheat distillers grains with solubles on
energy, amino acids and phosphorus digestibility and
growth performance of grower-finisher pigs. Can. J.
Anim. Sci. 89:91-95.
REFERENCES
Yáñez, J.L., E. Beltranena, M. Cervantes and
R.T. Zijlstra. 2011. Effect of phytase and xylanase
supplementation or particle size on nutrient digestibility
of diets containing distillers dried grains with solubles
co-fermented from wheat and corn in ileal-cannulated
grower pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 89:113-123.
Yang, Y., E. Kiarie, B.A. Slominski, A. BruleBabel and C.M. Nyachoti. 2010. Amino acid and
fiber digestibility, intestinal bacterial profile, and
enzyme activity in growing pigs fed dried distillers
grains with solubles-based diets. J. Anim. Sci. 88:
3304-3312.
33
Wheat DDGS Nutrient Composition Tables
(Range Of Values Shown Below Average Value In Brackets)
50% Wheat DDGS/
50% Corn DDGS
100% Corn
DDGS
8.5
(6.5-11.5)
35.9
(33.8-36.8)
12.8
SV
11.1
(7.4-14.9)
2
(1.2-2.9)
57
(54.4-59.5)
63.8
SV
13.8
(10.8-18.1)
42.3
(29.3-55.4)
34.9
SV
7.6
(6.3-8.6)
33.9
(30.6-37.3)
51.7
SV
19.6
SV
6.1
SV
47.3
SV
NA
NA
11.2
(10.2-12.1)
42.1
(39.0-43.9)
29.4
SV
8.7
(8.0-9.4)
30.5
(28.4-32.0)
NA
32
32.6
NA
NA
SV
5.4
(3.9-7.0)
3.2
(0.0-6.2)
5178
(5160-5197)
5.3
(4.6-6.3)
0.17
0.95
0.39
1.22
0.62
0.22
275
115
95
12
4.8
(4.3-5.3)
SV
7.6
(6.4-8.5)
3.8
SV
5273
SV
5.5
(5.2-6.2)
0.15
0.91
0.37
1.17
0.65
0.20
215
85
84
10
4.7
(3.66-5.8)
NA
8.2
(5.3-10.4)
3.4
(2.2-5.5)
5126
(5099-5153)
4.9
(3.3-5.4)
0.11
0.88
0.36
1.13
0.67
0.19
175
65
77
9
4.3
SV
13.6
(10.8-16.8)
4.9
(4.0-7.2)
5221
SV
4.6
(4.1-5.7)
0.05
0.81
0.32
1.04
0.71
0.17
74
14
58
5
2.8
SV
Wheat Grain
Moisture (%)
11.7
(10.5-12.6)
15.3
(13.3-17.2)
25.4
SV
24.7
(24.6-24.9)
0.1
(0.0-0.9)
12.3
(11.0-13.5)
26.3
SV
3.6
(2.97-3.9)
16.1
(15.02-17.22)
14.6
SV
7.6
(3.7-9.7)
39.3
(32.1-45.8)
19.2
SV
16.8
(15.7-17.7)
13.3
(4.85-23.98)
55.6
(47.7-60.7)
54.4
SV
15.1
(7.4-22.9)
38.8
(21.8-54.1)
29.7
SV
14.4
SV
1.9
(1.6-1.9)
61.7
(60.35-63.0)
4814
(4543-5086)
2.0
(2.0-2.12)
0.09
0.43
0.15
0.5
0.15
0.01
72
42
40
5
0.8
(0.6-0.99)
CP (%DM)
NPN (%CP)
SCP (%CP)
ADICP (%CP)
NDICP (%CP)
RUP(%CP)
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION TABLES
100% Wheat 70% Wheat DDGS/
DDGS
30% Corn DDGS
COMPONENT
ADF (%DM)
NDF (%DM)
NDFn (%DM)
NDF with Na2SO3
(%DM)
Crude Fat (%DM)
Starch (%DM)
GE (cal/g)
Ash (%DM)
Ca (%DM)
P (%DM)
Mg (%)
K (%DM)
S (%DM)
Na (%DM)
Fe (PPM)
Mn (PPM)
Zn (PPM)
Cu (PPM)
ADL (%DM)
*values in brackets represent the range reported in literature
SV – value based on single value found in literature
34
10.7
(9.9-11.4)
6.4
SV
34.4
SV
60.5
(55.0-66.1)
15
(9.5-23.2)
38.1
(31.6-49.5)
NA
DM basis
100% Wheat
DDGS
70% Wheat
DDGS/ 30%
Corn DDGS*
50% Wheat
DDGS/ 50%
Corn DDGS*
100% Corn
DDGS
Poultry
AMEn (kcal/kg)
2782
2901
2981
3180
Pigs
DE (Kcal/kg)
3924
3991
4036
4147
Cattle
TDN (%)
76
76
77
77
NEM (kcal/kg)
2080
2077
2075
2070
NEG kcal/kg)
1410
1410
1410
1410
NEL (kcal/kg)
1940
2036
2100
2260
100% Wheat
DDGS
70% Wheat
DDGS/ 30%
Corn DDGS
50% Wheat
DDGS/ 50%
Corn DDGS
100% Corn
DDGS
Arginine (% DM)
0.76
1.62
1.59
1.57
1.4
Histidine (% DM)
0.38
0.79
0.82
0.87
0.81
Isoleucine (% DM)
0.6
1.32
1.19
1.47
1.15
Leucine (% DM)
1.14
2.56
2.82
3.37
3.54
Lysine (% DM)
0.46
0.89
1.05
1.00 (0.86-1.14)
0.99
Methionine (% DM)
0.27
0.64
0.73
0.67
0.61
Total Sulphur AA (% DM)
NA
1.16
NA
NA
NA
Phenylalanine (% DM)
0.8
1.67
1.7
1.97
1.47
Threonine (% DM)
0.48
1.18
1.26
1.27
1.17
Tryptophan
0.21
0.41
0.3
0.24
Valine (% DM)
0.74
1.7
1.82
1.66
1.6
Phytate (% DM)
NA
NA
1.63
11.49 mg/g DM
NA
Alanine (% DM)
0.59
1.55
2.05
1.67
2.16
Aspartic acid (% DM)
0.82
2.04
0.85
1.97
2.11
Cystine (% DM)
0.37
0.62
10.41
0.68
0.57
Glutamic acid (% DM)
5.24
10.36
1.55
7.23
5.02
Glycine (% DM)
0.69
1.66
3.3
1.47
1.23
Proline (% DM)
1.66
3.59
1.83
2.8
2.26
Serine (% DM)
0.69
1.71
1.06
1.5
1.42
Tyrosine (% DM)
0.46
1.17
NA
1.38
1.22
NA
0.89
NA
1.07
0.97
Available Lysine (% DM)
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION TABLES
Wheat Grain
Component
All values are on a 100% dry matter basis
35
Publication design, layout and coordination provided by:
Canadian International Grains Institute (Cigi)