J APPL POULT RES 2007. 16:381-386
© 2007 Poultry Science Association
Use of Camelina sativa in the Diets of Young Turkeys1
D. D. Frame*,2,
M. Palmer
and
B. Peterson*
* Department of Animal, Dairy, and Veterinary Sciences, Utah State University, Logan 84322; and Utah State University Cooperative Extension, Ephraim 84627
Correspondence: 2 Corresponding author: davidf{at}ext.usu.edu
 |
SUMMARY
|
|---|
Camelina sativa is one of various oilseed crops being studied for its potential value in biofuel production. The resultant by-product of oil extraction, camelina meal (CM), could be marketable as a livestock feed. Our study evaluated the potential use of CM as a feed ingredient in turkey poult starter diets. This was a pilot study to determine whether further work investigating inclusion of CM as a potential feed ingredient in turkey diets might be of value if a least-cost formulation warranted its integration. Results indicate that CM may be a potentially useful minor ingredient in turkey diets if economically feasible, but caution should be exercised in using CM above 5% of finished feed in a poult starter diet. In an appended test, similar weight gain and feed conversion were attained with a diet containing camelina oil as a replacement for vegetable oil compared with the control diet.
Key Words: Camelina sativa • turkey poult • diet • growth
|
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
|
|---|
There has been increasing interest in converting waste cooking oil and oil produced from renewable products, such as oilseed crops, into biofuels to decrease dependence on petroleum products as fuel sources. Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz (Camelina) is an oilseed-producing plant in the family Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) originating from the Mediterranean and Central Asia [1]. Research has been conducted with camelina as a useful research and oilseed crop [2]. In 2005, the USDA awarded over $18 million in small business innovation research grants for the study of renewable biofuel energy sources, with one of those grants specifically addressing C. sativa [3]. If the oil from C. sativa becomes a viable substrate for biodiesel production, the marketing and beneficial use of the resultant meal would further increase the value of the crop.
Camelina meal (CM) is a by-product of camelina oil (CO) extraction and has a CP content similar to canola meal [4]. Studies have shown that the oil content of the seed ranges from 37 to 41% and is reported to be high in n-3 fatty acids (FA) [1].
Although scattered European reports and reviews of the potential of feeding CM to cattle are available, little information was found in US refereed scientific publications quantifying the value of feeding CM to livestock. Only one British study could be found that evaluated the nutritive value of C. sativa for poultry [5]. In that study, Acamovic et al. tube-fed CM to broiler chickens with the precision-feeding method. The nutritive value of CM was calculated after fecal collection and analysis. They found that the ME value of CM was similar to that of rapeseed, even though CM had a higher lipid content. The conclusion of the study was that, although promising as a protein supplement for poultry, it would be necessary to improve the nutritional value of CM and further investigate its palatability in poultry diets. We encountered no studies that specifically addressed the feeding of CM or CO to turkeys.
Two experiments were performed in which CM [6] was integrated into turkey starter diets to evaluate its performance as a potential feed-stuff by measuring poult growth and feed conversion through the early brooding period (first 4 wk of life). Appended to experiment 1 was a treatment evaluating the performance of CO as a direct replacement for vegetable oil.
Medical researchers have asserted that a diet abundant in n-3 FA is beneficial to human cardiac health [7]. Camelina oil is known to be high in n-3 FA [8]. Although this paper does not specifically address the effects of n-3 FA deposition in turkeys, our aim was to explore the possibility that a turkey diet rich in CO might feasibly be fed. In addition, we were interested in evaluating the performance of poult diets that integrated CO as a replacement for vegetable oil in the event the former became available at an appropriate purchase price. Therefore, treatment 4 in experiment 1 consisted of a diet formulated to the same specifications as the control diet but with CO replacing vegetable oil.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|---|
Housing
Commercial Large White tom turkey poults were used in this trial. Poults were allocated to 4 treatments, with 4 replicates of each treatment, and housed in upright condominium-style multitier battery brooders located at the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State University Turkey Research Facility (Ephraim, UT). Ten male poults were placed in each tier at 1 d of age. Poults were allocated to treatments in a complete randomized block design.
Feed Treatments
Experiment 1.
Treatment 1 (control) was fed the standard starter diet used by the Utah turkey industry. Treatment 2 (CM5%) was fed a starter diet containing CM at 50 g/kg of complete feed. Treatment 3 (CM15%) was fed a starter diet integrating CM at 150 g/kg of complete feed. Treatment 4 was identical in formulation to the control, except that a direct substitution of CO for vegetable oil was made. All CM treatment diets were formulated to approximate the same calculated levels of CP, ME, Met, total sulfur amino acids, and Lys as the control diet (see Table 1
for diet composition).
Experiment 2.
This was a repeat of experiment 1 except that rather than using CO, treatment 4 consisted of a diet containing CM at a level of 20% (200 g/kg) of complete feed (CM20%). A 20% level of CM was chosen because in experiment 1, the statistical difference between CM levels was marginal.
Live Performance
Individual poult weights were taken at placement, 3 d, 3 wk, and 4 wk of age in experiment 1; only placement and final 4-wk weights were taken in experiment 2.
Feed Analysis
The CM was sent to the University of Arkansas Poultry Science Central Analytical Laboratory for analysis of the amino acid profile and CP, caloric, crude fat, and selected mineral contents (Table 2). Once formulated and mixed, finished starter feed samples were sent to the University of Arkansas Poultry Science Central Analytical Laboratory for analysis of the amino acid profile and CP, caloric, and selected mineral contents.
Statistical Analysis
Mean replicate weights and feed conversion were used to compare growth performance. A complete random block design ANOVA [9] was used to evaluate the data.
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
|
|---|
Live Performance
Experiment 1.
There was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.05) in final BW and feed conversion among treatments in experiment 1 (Table 3). Although not significantly different, there was a numerical trend for BW to decrease with increasing dietary content of CM. The diet in which CO replaced vegetable oil was rendered comparable in growth and feed conversion to the control diet.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Experiment 1: mean BW (g) at placement, 3 d, 3 wk, and 4 wk of age, and total feed consumption (g/poult) and feed conversion at 4 wk of age1
|
|
Experiment 2.
The CM15% and CM20% diets (treatments 3 and 4) showed a significant (P < 0.01) decrease in BW at 4 wk of age (Table 4). Feed conversion in poults fed CM15% was equal (P > 0.05) to that of birds fed the control or CM5% diets.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4. Experiment 2: mean BW (g) at placement and 4 wk of age, and total feed consumption (g/poult) and feed conversion at 4 wk of age1
|
|
Feed Analysis and Consumption
Table 5 compares the calculated nutrient content of the finished feeds with actual values reported by laboratory analysis. Analytical results were similar to expected values; however, CM15% had a greater total percentage of fat, which was greater than that of the CM5% diet, and was consequently greater than that of the control diet. This occurred because in formulating the diets, more vegetable oil was needed to balance the ME content of the diet with increasing levels of CM inclusion.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 5. Comparison of calculated (CAL) and analytic (ANA) values for nutrients, and selected limiting amino acid composition of the complete feeds1
|
|
There was no significant difference (P < 0.05) in amount of feed consumed per poult between treatments by 28 d of age in experiment 1; however, there was a significant difference (P < 0.01) in experiment 2 (see Tables 3
and 4). Treatment groups in experiment 2 with CM15% and CM20% consumed less feed than the control and CM5% groups. The decreased feed consumption, coupled with the decreased weight gain, was also accompanied by a significantly (P < 0.01) poorer feed conversion in the CM20% treatment.
It is interesting to note that although a higher gross energy caloric diet was consumed by the groups receiving CM, there was not a correspondingly greater weight gain compared with the control group. A possible explanation is that the ME value of CM was less than anticipated. Acamovic et al. [5] reported a true ME value for CM of 9.93 ± 1.13 MJ/kg of DM (2,373 ± 270 kcal/kg of DM). Because we did not know the actual ME value of our CM source, we formulated our diets with CM estimated at an ME of 2,258 kcal/kg on an as-fed basis (estimated DM at 88%).
Increasing amounts of CM in the diet were accompanied by a corresponding decrease in weight gain and poorer feed conversion. Many Cruciferae are known to contain variable quantities of glucosinolates [10, 11]. Although we did not explore the specific glucosinolate content of our source of camelina, perhaps these or other unrecognized components within the CM mildly depressed growth and feed conversion in the young poults. Another possibility is that one or more limiting amino acids were not as highly available biologically in CM as the analytical profile may suggest. Further tests are needed to determine the limitation, if any, of using CM in diets of older turkeys.
|
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
|
|---|
- Camelina meal may be used as a feed ingredient for turkey poults if a least-cost formulation warrants its inclusion; however, caution should be exercised in integrating levels of CM above 5% in turkey starter diets.
- Camelina oil may be integrated into turkey diets if cost and availability are reasonable. Weight gain and feed conversion were not significantly different from a similar diet containing vegetable oil.
- Subsequent studies are suggested in which turkey growth performance is evaluated when CM is integrated into grower and finisher diets.
- Amino acid digestibility and ME predictor studies of CM need to be conducted to fully assess the true nutritional usefulness of CM in turkey diets.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|---|
Grateful appreciation is expressed to the University of Arkansas Poultry Science Central Analytical Laboratory for analysis of the CM and finished feed.
|
FOOTNOTES
|
|---|
1 This research was supported by the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322. Approved as journal paper number 7820. 
|
REFERENCES AND NOTES
|
|---|
- Putnam, D. H., J. T. Budin, L. A. Field, and W. M. Breene. 1993. Camelina: A promising low-input oilseed. Pages 314–322 in New Crops. J. Janick and J. E. Simon, ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
- Robinson, R. G. 1987. Camelina: A useful research crop and a potential oilseed crop. Univ. Minn. Stn. Bull. 579-1987 (Item No. AD-SB-3275). Minn. Agric. Exp. Stn., Rosemont.
- USDA. 2005. News Release No. 0539.05. USDA Awards More Than $18 Million in Small Research Business Grants. http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usdahome?contentidonly=true&contentid=2005/12/0539.xml Accessed Apr. 18, 2006.
- NRC. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th rev. ed. Nat. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.
- Acamovic, T., C. Gilbert, K. Lamb, and K. C. Walker. 1999. Nutritive value of Camelina sativa meal for poultry. Br. Poult. Sci. 40:S27–S41.[Medline]
- Camelina meal and camelina oil, Great Northern Growers, Montana Producer Cooperative, Sunburst, MT.
- Ismail, H. M., 2005. The role of omega-3 fatty acids in cardiac protection: An overview. Front. Biosci. 10:1079–1088.[ISI][Medline]
- Crowley, J. G., and A. Fröhlich. 1998. Factors affecting the composition and use of camelina. Teagasc, Dublin, Ireland.
- Analytical Software. 2003. Statistix version 8. Analytical Software, Tallahassee, FL.
- Kjaer, A. 1960. Naturally derived isothiocyanates (mustard oils) and their parent glucosides. Pages 122–176 in Progress in the Chemistry of Organic Natural Products. L. Zechmeister, ed. Springer-Verlag, Vienna, Austria.
- Kjaer, A. 1976. Glucosinolates in the Cruciferae. Pages 207–219 in The Biology and Chemistry of the Cruciferae. J. G. Vaughan, A. J. Macleod, and B. M. G. Jones, ed. Acad. Press, London, UK.
TOP
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
