the effect of feed composition and feeding …the effect of feed composition and feeding strategies...
TRANSCRIPT
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
327
The effect of feed composition and feeding strategies on excretion rates in German pig production
UlrichDämmgen*,1WilfriedBrade**,2JoachimSchulz***,3HeinrichKleineKlausing****,4NicholasJ.Hutchings*****,5
Hans-DieterHaenel*,andClausRösemann*
*1 JohannHeinrichvonThünenInstitute,InstituteofAgriculturalClimate Research,Bundesallee50,38116Braunschweig,Germany
**2 University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Institute for Animal BreedingandGenetics,Buenteweg17p,30559Hannover,Germany
***3 Landwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen, Außenstelle Lingen, Am Hundesand12,49809Lingen,Germany
****4 Deuka-DeutscheTiernahrungCremerGmbH&Co.KG,Weizenmüh- lenstraße20,40221Düsseldorf,Germany
*****5University of Aarhus, Dept. of Agroecology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences,POBox50,ResearchCentreFoulum,8830Tjele,Denmark
Abstract
Inorderto improvethemethodsandupdatethedatafor theGermanagricultural emission inventory, a surveywasmadeamongpignutritionexpertstoobtainrepresen-tativedietcompositionsandfeedingstrategies.Theanaly-sis shows that the introductionof phase feeding resultsin reduced excretion rates of volatile solids.Contrary toexpectations,thedirecteffectonallotherexcretionratesis comparatively small. However, phase feedingwith itstypicalall-in-all-outmanagementresultsinextendedpro-duction cycles as fattening of new animal groups com-mencesaftercleansinganddisinfection,andthesedonotcommencebeforethelastanimallefttherespectivecom-partment.Thisleadstoareductionofemissionsperplace.Theeffectofdietsadjustedtocrudeproteindemands isobvious.Improvementofstandarddietisaclearoptiontoreduceemissions.As the emissions of methane from manure manage-
ment,aswellasthoseofallnitrogenspecies,aredirectlyrelated to the respective amounts excreted, the calcula-tionsusingdetailedinformationonfeedcompositionwillresultinreducedemissionratesfrompigproduction.
Keywords: pigs, feed, phase feeding, production cycles, excretion, methane, volatile solids, nitrogen, TAN
Zusammenfassung
Der Einfluss von Futterzusammensetzung und Fütte-rungsstrategien auf die Ausscheidungsraten in der deutschen Schweineproduktion
Zur methodischen Verbesserung und Aktualisierungder deutschen landwirtschaftlichen Emissionsinventarefür Schweine wurden repräsentative Futterzusammen-setzungenundDaten zu Fütterungsstrategienbei Fütte-rungsexpertenerfragt.DieAuswertungzeigt,dassmitderEinführungderPhasenfütterungdieAusscheidungenvonumsetzbaremKohlenstoff (volatile solids) verringertwer-den.DerdirekteEinflussaufalleanderenAusscheidungenist wider Erwarten gering. Bedingt durch das Mastma-nagement der Rein-Raus-Methode verlängern sich dieProduktionszyklen.EineneueTiergruppekannersteinge-stalltwerden,wenndasletzteTierdasStallabteilgeräumthatunddieReinigungundDesinfektionerfolgt ist.Diesverringert die Emissionenpro Platz erheblich.Der EffektvonN-angepassterFütterungistklarzuerkennen,ebensodasPotential,dasbeiverbesserterStandardfütterungnochausgeschöpftwerdenkann.Da die Mengen der Ausscheidungen linear die Men-
ge der Emissionen von Methan aus dem Lager sowiesämtlicher Stickstoff-Spezies beeinflusst, werden die Be-rechnungen unter Verwendung detaillierter Futterzu-sammensetzungen zu niedrigeren Emissionen aus derSchweine-Produktionführen.
Schlüsselwörter: Schweine, Futter, Phasenfütterung, Pro-duktionszyklen, Ausscheidung, Methan, „volatile solids“, Stickstoff, TAN
328
1 Introduction
Pigproduction isan important sector inGermanagri-culture.Itisalsoakeysourceofgreenhousegasandam-moniaemissions.Duringthepastdecades,methodsinpigproductionhavechanged.Thishasbeenduetochangesingenetics,feeding,housing,andmanuremanagement.AccordingtoGoodPracticeRules,emissionreportinghastoreflectthesechangesasfaraspossible.Changesingeneticshavebeenreflectedintheperfor-
mancedatausedtodescribeenergyintake(Haeneletal.,2011).Housingandmanuremanagementaswellastheroleofairscrubbershavebeendealtwithinrecentpub-lications (Dämmgenetal.,2010;2011a,b).Changes infeedingpracticeshavenotbeentakenintoaccountyet.Thepurposeofthisworkisthecompilationofregional
dataonfeedcompositionandfeedingregimes inawaythatallowstheirincorporationintoemissioninventories.In order to illustrate the effects of changing feeding
practices,thefeedintakeratesandexcretionratesarecal-culatedforstandardanimals(seebelow).
2 Modelling procedures and data requirements
Thefirststepinthecalculationofemissionsfromanimalhusbandryistheassessmentofenergyrequirementsandfeedintakerates.Bothguidancedocuments(IPCC,1996;2006;EEA,2009)presupposethatanimalsarefedaccord-ingtoenergyrequirements.Thesecondstepisthecalcula-tionofrelevantexcretionrates.Methane(CH4)isdirectlyreleasedasaconsequenceofentericfermentationinthedigestivetract.Excretionsofvolatilesolids(VS)leadtotheemissionsofCH4fromthestorageofanimalfaeces.Excre-tionoftotalnitrogen(N)andtotalammoniacalnitrogen(TAN)govern the releaseofammonia (NH3),nitrousandnitricoxides(N2O,NO),anddi-nitrogen(N2)intheanimalhouse,duringmanurestorageandduringandafteritsap-plication.Here,theguidancedocumentsoutlinethepro-cedure;theyalsosupposetheuseofnationalapproachesanddataasfaraspossible.
2.1 Energy intake rates
Energyrequirementsaretheentitiesgoverningfeedin-takerates.TheGermansystemmakesuseofthemetabo-lizable energy (ME) requirements that are calculated ac-cordingtoFlachowskyetal.(2006)asdescribedinHaeneletal.(2011).Themethodologydistinguishesbetweenthe following
subcategoriesoflivestock:Sows and suckling pigsaretreatedtogether.Energy
requirementsarecalculatedfortwogravidityphases,forthelactatingperiodandtheperiodbetweenweaningand
mating. Thenumberofpiglets raised, their finalweightandthemeanweightofthesowaretakenintoaccount.Thestandard sowusedinthisworkhasameanweight
of200kganimal-1.Noweightgainisconsidered.23pig-letsareraisedandweanedataweightof8.5kganimal-1.
Weaners, fattening pigs and boars(maturemalesforreproduction)aretreatedinasimilarmanner.Theirweightandweightgainsareconsideredasdriversforenergyre-quirements.FordetailsseeHaeneletal.(2011).Thestandard weanershaveameanweightgainof410
ganimal-1d-1andafinalweightof28.5kganimal-1.Thenumberofproductioncyclesperyeartakesaserviceanddisinfectionperiodof8dround-1intoaccount.
Standard fattenersareassumedtohaveameanweightgainof750ganimal-1d-1andafinalweightof110kganimal-1.Serviceanddisinfectionperiodsarevariable.
Standard boarshaveameanweightof180kganimal-1.Aweightgainisnottakenintoaccount.
2.2 Feed intake rates and feed properties
Inadditiontothedifferentiationofsubcategories,feed-ing-phases1,
1 A feeding-phase is defined as a period duringwhich the composition ofadietiskeptunchanged.Bothbeginningandendofafeeding-phasearedefinedbyanimalweights.
andadministrative region (e.g. federal stateor–withinNiedersachsen(LowerSaxony)–ruraldistricts)aretakenintoaccount.Unlessstatedotherwise,variablesshould be subscripted accordingly; a given variableXi,j,k would therefore relate to livestock subcategory i in thefeedingphasejandfortheregionk.Anyelementofanequationthatisconstantacrosslivestockcategory,feedingphaseandregionisindicatedasconstant.
Calculation of weighted means. The livestockdietscommonlyconsistofamixtureofconstituents.Thechar-acteristicsofthecompletediet(specificMEcontentetc.)are calculatedusingaweightedaverage, so for agivencharacteristic Z in a diet containingN constituents, thevalueforthecompletedietis:
∑
⋅N
n
XZZ1
nn (1)
whereZ weightedmeanofagivencharacteristicZZn valueofthecharacteristicforthenthconstituentXn proportion that thenth constituent contributes tothemassofthecompletediet(inkgkg-1)
and
1
1n ∑
N
n
X
11
a ∑
A
a
X (1a)
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
329
Feed intake rates(drymatter,DM)arededucedfromenergyintakeratesaccordingtoEquation(2):
k j, i, ME,
k j. i,k j, i, feed, DM, η
MEm (2)
wheremDM, feed, i, j. k feedintakerate(DM)forananimalsub- categoryiinafeedingphasejandare- gionk(inkganimal-1d-1DM)MEi, j, k ME requirements of an animal sub- categoryiinafeedingphasejandare- gionk(inMJanimal-1d-1)ηME, i, j, k specificMEcontentoffeedforanani- mal subcategory i in a feedingphase j andaregionk(inMJkg-1)
Nitrogen intake ratesareobtainedbycombiningfeedintakerateswithNcontentsofthefeedconstituents:
k j, i, feed, N,
k j, i, ME,
k j. i,k j, i, feed, N, η
η⋅
MEm (3)
wheremN, feed, i, j. k rateofNintake(drymatter)foranani- mal subcategory i in a feedingphase j andaregionk(inkganimal-1d-1DM)MEi, j, k metabolizable energy requirements for an animal subcategory i in a feeding phasejandaregionk(inMJanimal-1d-1)ηME, i, j, k specificMEcontentoffeedforanani- mal subcategory i in a feedingphase j andaregionk(inMJkg-1)ηN, feed, i, j, kmean N content of feed of an animal subcategoryiinafeedingphasejanda regionk(inkg-1kg-1)
ThemeanNcontentsareweightedmeansobtainedinanalogytoEquations(1)and(1a).
Mean feed properties(suchasmeangrossenergycon-tentsηGE, i, j, k,meanashcontentsXash, i, j, karealsoweightedmeans calculated from the respective feed constituents’propertiesasinEquation(1).Withfewexceptions,standardspecificME,GE,N,and
ashcontentsanddigestibilitiesareobtainedfromJentschet al. (2004), crude protein (XP) contents from the listsprovidedbyLfL(2009)andDLG(2011).Therelevantpropertiesofthedietconstituentsconsid-
eredarelistedinTable1.Regional feed compositions were supplied by experts
(seeChapter3).
2.3 Methane excretion from enteric fermentation
IPCC (1996) relates the amount ofCH4 released fromentericfermentationtothegrossenergy(GE)intake.Withdata available for German pig production this relationreads:
αη
ηη
⋅⋅⋅CH4
CH4GE
MEent CH4,
xMEE (4)
whereECH4, ent rateofCH4excretion(emission)fromentericfer- mentation(inkgplace-1a-1CH4)ME intakerateofmetabolizableenergy(inMJplace-1d-1)ηME MEcontentoffeed(inMJkg-1)ηGE GEcontentoffeed(inMJkg-1)xCH4 methaneconversionrate(xCH4=0.006MJMJ
-1)ηCH4 energycontentofmethane(ηCH4=55.65MJ(kgCH4)
-1)α timeunitsconversionfactor(α =365da-1)
2.4 Volatile solids excretion rates
VSexcretionratesarederivedfromtheintakeratesofmetabolizableenergy,theenergy,andtheashcontentsoffeedandthedigestibilityoforganicmatter,asexpressedinEquation(5)2.
2 ThisapproachdiffersfromthemethodologypreviouslyusedinGermanin-ThisapproachdiffersfromthemethodologypreviouslyusedinGermanin-ventories(Rösemannetal.,2011).FordetailsseeDämmgenetal.(2011a).
DOMfeed ash,ME
faeces 11 XXMEVS −⋅−⋅η
(5)
whereVSfaeces volatile solids excretion rate with faeces (in kg place-1a-1)ME intakerateofmetabolizableenergy(inMJplace-1a-1)ηME MEcontentoffeed(inMJkg-1)Xash, feed ashcontentoffeed(inkgkg-1)XDOM apparentdigestibilityoforganicmatter(inkgkg-1)
2.5 Nitrogen excretion rates
ThegeneralNbalanceisusedtoassesstheratesofover-allNexcreted:
pglN
MEexcr mmmMEm −−−⋅ η
η (6)
wheremexcr rateofNexcreted(kgplace-1a-1N)ME MEintakeratewithfeed(kgplace-1a-1N)η -1
ME MEcontentoffeed(inMJkg )ηN Ncontentoffeed(inkgkg-1),derivedfromXP content
330
m rateofNexcretedwithmilk(kgplace-1 -1l a N)
mg rateofNretainedintheanimal(kgplace-1a-1N)mp rateofNinoffspringproduced(kgplace-1a-1N)
and
N
XPN X
ηη (6a)
whereηN Ncontentoffeed(inkgkg-1)ηXP crudeproteincontentoffeed(inkgkg-1)XN Ncontentofcrudeproteininfeed(XN=1/6.25kgkg
-1)
Forsowswithsuckling-pigsml is ignoredintheinven-toryas theNbalancecovers theunitofasowwithherlitter. Also, for sows,meanweight gains are not takenintoaccount.Hence,mgiszeroforsows.TheNcontentofgrowingpigsis0.0256kgkg-1.
2.6 Total ammoniacal nitrogen excretion rates
It is assumed that TAN is excreted with urine only,whereasallorganicNiscontainedinfaeces3.
3 ThemethodusedinRösemannetal.(2011)wasslightlymodifiedbyreplac-ThemethodusedinRösemannetal.(2011)wasslightlymodifiedbyreplac-ingthedigestibilityofenergybythatofN.
4 RAM:Rohprotein-angepassteMischung:mixtureadjustedtocrudeproteindemands
pglDNNurine mmmXMEm −−−⋅⋅ η
ηME (7)
wheremurine rateofNexcretedwithurine(kgplace-1a-1N)ME MEintakeratewithfeed(kgplace-1a-1N)ηME MEcontentoffeed(inMJkg-1)ηN Ncontentoffeed(inkgkg-1)XDN apparentdigestibilityofN(inkgkg-1)ml rateofNexcretedwithmilk(kgplace-1a-1N)mg rateofNretainedintheanimal(kgplace-1a-1N)mp rateofNinoffspringproduced(kgplace-1a-1N)
3 Data base
Asurveywasmadein2010toprovideinformationonfeedsforsowswithpiglets,weaners,fatteners,andboars(forreproduction).Thissurveyprovidedinformationabouttypical animal feed compositions among regions aswellas on the frequency distribution of feeding phases, theshareofdietswithreducedNcontents(RAMfeed4),andthenumberofanimal roundsperyearforeachGermanfederalstateandeachyearfrom1990to2009.
3.1 Feed composition
3.1.1 Results of the survey
Asurveywasmadetoassesstypicalfeedcompositionsforallregionalfeedtypes.Asarule,thelocalagriculturaladvisorsprovidedvariousdietsforeachpigsubcategory.So,inall,288dietsweredescribed,ofwhich86werefedtosows,66toweanersand122tofatteningpigs.Boarswerenormallyfedonsowfeed.ThespatialresolutionwastoreflectthevariabilityinGermanpigproductionthatisobviouslygovernedbysoilpropertiesandmarketsaswellastradition.ForNiedersachsen,thefederalstatewiththehighestpigdensity,11regionswereidentifiedwherethefeedcompositionwaslikelytovary.Allotherfederalstateswereassumedtobehomogeneouswithrespecttotheirpigfeedcompositionandfeedingstrategy.Someadvisorsconsideredtheirinformationconfidential.
Hence,resultswillbeanonymized.
3.1.2 Gap filling
One federal state did not provide data. Here, thosedatafromtheneighbouringfederalstateswereusedthatwouldresultinthemostunfavourableexcretionrates.Thiswastoavoidunderestimationofemissions.For thecity statesofHamburg,Bremen (withBremer-
haven), and Berlin data for Schleswig-Holstein, Nieder-sachsen, and Brandenburgwere used, respectively. Saa-rlandwasdescribedinthesamewayasRheinland-Pfalz.
3.1.3 Temporal representativeness
Thecompositionoffeedsisassumedtohavechangedonlytoalesserextent.From1996onwards,theuseofgraininthefeedmanu-
facturingindustryhassteadilyincreasedfrom35percentinaverageoverallkindoffeedvarietiesto44percent(DVT,2011).Grainreplacedstarch-richby-productslikemanioc,importedfromthirdcountries,aswellasby-productsfromthe grain-milling industry likemaize gluten feed. InDe-cember2000 theuseofby-products fromanimaloriginwhichwasusedasproteinandenergysourceinsomefeedforpigsandpoultrywasbannedbecauseoftheBSEcrisis.Thesefeedstuffswerereplacedbyanincreaseduseof,forinstance,soyabeanmeal.Figure 1 illustrates that the main properties have
changedlittleoverthelasttwodecades.
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
331
10
11
12
13
14
15
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
ME
conte
nt [M
J k
g]
-1
mean min max
1990 1995 2000 20102005
Year
1990 1995 2000 20102005
Year
1990 1995 2000 20102005
Year
12
14
16
18
20
XP
conte
nt [g
kg
]-1
mean min max
mean min max mean min max
ME
conte
nt [M
J k
g]
-1
XP
conte
nt [g
kg
]-1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
12
14
16
18
Figure1
Temporal variationofMEandXP contentsof various feeds.Above: fatteningpig feeds;below: farrowing sow feeds.Data courtesyofK.-H.Grünewald,contentsbefore2000fromalimitednumberofsamples,dataafter2000fromabout300to250and140to200samplesperyearforfatteningpigsandsows,respectively.
3.2 Feed properties
3.2.1 Properties of feed constituents
BasedontheequationsprovidedinChapter2,thecal-culationofexcretionratesforCH4,VS,N,andTANpresup-posesknowledgeofthefollowingfeedproperties• metabolizableenergycontent, ηME,forallanimals(feedintakerates)
• gross energy content, ηGE (assessment of emissionsfromentericfermentation)
• digestibilityfororganicmatter, XDOM,(assessmentofVSexcretionrates)
• crudeproteincontent,ηXP(Nintakerate)• digestibility of N, XDN (assessment of TAN excretionrates)
InEurope,propertiesandcompositionofcommoditieshavetobedeclaredtosomeextent(EC,2002).Thiscov-ersthepercentagesofpigfeedconstituentsaswellasthemeanME,XP,andashcontentsofthemix.Propertiesoffeedconstituentscanbeobtainedfromvariousdatacol-lations:
• DLG(2005)isconsideredtobetheofficialexpertjud-gementforGermanyandnationalconsent (Spiekers,headofthegroupofauthors,pers.comm.).Table3ainDLG(2005)isconfinedtothemostimportantfeedandcontainsDM,ME,andcrudeprotein(XP)contents.
• LfL(2009)isanalmostcomprehensivedatabase.TheinformationusedforthisworkcomprisestheDM,ME,andXPcontents.
• KTBL(unpublished)usesacollationoffeedpropertiesthatcontainsthedigestibilitiesXDOMandXNinadditiontoDM,ME,andXPcontents.
• Jentschetal.(2004)isacomprehensiveandveryde-taileddatabase.ApartfromGE,DE,ME,andashcon-tentsitprovidesinformationonthedigestibilitiesXDE,XDOMandXDN.
3.2.2 Harmonization and data gap closing for feed con-stituents
Thebackboneof Table1 is thedataprovidedby Jen-tschetal.(2004).Inordertomeetthe“official”informa-tioninDLG(2005),weightedmeanshadtobeproducedfromJentschetal.(2004)data,suchasamixtureofvari-
332
ouswheatqualities(wheat,fullgrains,55%;wheat,fullgrains,proteinrich,25%;wheat,flatgrains,20%).Thisappliestogreenmeal,barley,wheatandoat,wheatandryebrans,rapeseedexpeller,andfishmeal.For some feed constituents (soya and rape seed oils)
somepropertiescouldbeextractedfromDLGFuttermit-telnet(DLG,2011).Propertiesofcornsteepcouldbededucedfrom infor-
mationprovidedbythemanufacturer(Beuker,undated).
Table1:
Nutritionalpropertiesoffeedconstituentsinpigproduction.
DLG/LfL Jentschetal.
Feedconstituent ηME ηXP ηN ηME ηN ηGE ηash XDE XDOM XDN
English German MJkg-1 % kgkg-1 MJkg-1 kgkg-1 MJkg-1 kgkg-1 MJMJ-1 kgkg-1 kgkg-1
greenmeal Grünmehl 7.72 18.71 0.026 7.76 18.24 0.097 0.54 0.57 0.48
wheat Weizen 15.45 13.75 0.022 15.45 18.51 0.027 0.85 0.88 0.83
triticale Triticale 12.73 12.05 0.019 15.59 18.26 0.021 0.87 0.90 0.82
rye Roggen 15.34 10.23 0.016 15.19 18.29 0.021 0.85 0.88 0.76
barley Gerste 14.43 12.39 0.020 14.57 18.46 0.025 0.81 0.84 0.83
oat Hafer 12.73 12.05 0.019 12.72 19.09 0.037 0.68 0.70 0.79
CCM CCM 14.89 10.00 0.016 14.61 18.91 0.020 0.80 0.82 0.76
maize Mais 16.02 10.57 0.017 16.00 18.88 0.017 0.86 0.89 0.79
maizeflakes Maisflocken 16.02 10.57 0.017 16.00 18.88 0.017 0.86 0.89 0.79
millet Hirse 14.67 12.95 0.021 15.80 18.68 0.019 0.86 0.90 0.75
linseed Leinsamen 18.33 24.84 0.040 20.00 26.75 0.050 0.81 0.79 0.86
potatopeel Kartoffelschalen 13.97 15.45 0.025 11.16 17.06 0.075 0.71 0.76 0.20
potatochips Kartoffelchips 15.50 0.014 15.61 0.045 0.90 0.94 0.65
sugarbeetpulp Trockenschnitzel 9.04 10.04 0.016 8.98 18.02 0.055 0.74 0.79 0.38
sugarbeetpulpwithmolasses Melasseschnitzel 9.77 0.017 17.49 0.050 0.77 0.82 0.42
bakerywaste Backabfälle 16.65 12.09 0.019 14.38 19.26 0.030 0.80 0.83 0.80
wheatbran Weizenkleie 9.43 16.02 0.026 9.46 18.91 0.064 0.59 0.60 0.70
ryebran Roggenkleie 10.09 16.36 0.026 10.06 13.13 0.068 0.63 0.66 0.72
oatflakes Haferflocken 16.56 12.86 0.021 16.32 19.04 0.025 0.89 0.91 0.90
oatbran Haferschälkleie 6.20 7.49 0.012 6.76 18.76 0.055 0.39 0.40 0.55
wheatglutenfeed Weizenkleber 10.87 0.023 20.26 0.030 0.66 0.68 0.70
maizeglutenfeed Maiskleberfutter 12.15 26.16 0.042 11.72 19.11 0.045 0.68 0.70 0.65
distillersdriedgrainswithsolubles Weizenschlempe 11.33 36.93 0.059 11.06 20.05 0.065 0.70 0.71 0.76
maizestarch Maisstärke 16.81 0.001 17.30 0.010 0.95 0.98 0.00
maizegerms Malzkeime 8.68 29.57 0.047 11.08 18.65 0.066 0.69 0.71 0.72
applepomace Apfeltrester 6.06 0.009 19.23 0.030 0.43 0.43 0.00
molasses Melasse 13.28 12.84 0.021 12.79 15.23 0.110 0.90 0.93 0.30
peanutoil Erdnussöl 36.65 0.006 39.80 0.000 0.97 0.98 0.00
soyaoil Sojaöl 37.36 0.00 0.000
rapeseedoil Rapsöl 36.62 0.00 0.000
sunfloweroil Sonnenblumenöl 36.62 0.00 0.000
sugar Zucker 15.16 1.45 0.002 14.75 16.00 0.000 0.95 0.96 0.00
peas Erbsen 15.68 25.11 0.040 15.63 18.75 0.038 0.85 0.89 0.88
Some less frequently used feed constituentswere leftwithout any or an inconsistent data set. They were re-placedbysimilarconstituents:• maizeflakesbymaize(allproperties)• rapeseedandsunfloweroilsbysoyaoil(digestibilitiesonly)
• soyaproteinbysoyabeans(allproperties)• soyapulpbylegumeseedhulls(allproperties)• fishoilbyfishjuice(allproperties)• lignocellulosebygrainstraw(allproperties)• riceglutenfeedbywheatglutenfeed(allproperties)• palmbutterbypeanutoil(allproperties)
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
333
DLG/LfL Jentschetal.
Feedconstituent ηME ηXP ηN ηME ηN ηGE ηash ηDE ηDOM ηDN
English German MJkg-1 % kgkg-1 MJkg-1 kgkg-1 MJkg-1 kgkg-1 MJkg-1 kgkg-1 kgkg-1
fababean Ackerbohne 14.77 29.77 0.048 14.84 18.95 0.040 0.83 0.85 0.85
soyabean Sojabohne 17.57 40.43 0.065 18.45 23.96 0.050 0.83 0.86 0.89
soyaprotein Sojaeiweißkon-zentrat
17.57 40.43 0.065 18.45 23.96 0.050 0.83 0.86 0.89
linseedexpeller Leinexpeller 12.08 37.49 0.060 13.51 20.69 0.065 0.75 0.76 0.82
rapeseedexpeller Rapsexpeller 14.13 36.37 0.058 13.19 20.28 0.080 0.75 0.75 0.81
soypulp Sojaschalen 7.52 12.78 0.020
rapeseedextractionmeal Rapsextraktions-schrot
11.24 39.89 0.064 12.08 19.24 0.085 0.73 0.73 0.81
sunflowerextractionmeal Sonnenblumen-extraktionsschrot
11.99 45.49 0.073 10.79 19.55 0.070 0.63 0.63 0.79
soyabeanextractionmeal48%XP
Sojaextraktions-schrot48%,getoastet
16.18 54.83 0.088 15.77 20.05 0.065 0.90 0.91 0.92
soyabeanextractionmeal44%XP
Sojaextraktions-schrot44%,getoastet
14.66 50.23 0.080 14.82 19.96 0.065 0.88 0.89 0.89
potatoprotein Kartoffeleiweiß 18.45 83.50 0.134 18.63 22.46 0.024 0.91 0.90 0.92
sweetwhey Molke,Süß-,frisch
14.06 13.64 0.022 14.72 16.07 0.088 0.93 0.96 0.90
acidwhey Molke,Sauer-,frisch
13.33 15.00 0.024 14.31 15.91 0.115 0.90 0.95 0.90
wheyprotein Molkeneiweiß,frisch
16.00 0.114 19.56 0.160 0.92 0.91 0.91
skimmedmilkpowder Milchprodukte(Magermilch-pulver)
15.47 0.060 17.72 0.081 0.93 0.94 0.91
wheyconcentrate Molke,Süß-,getrocknet
13.92 0.021 15.71 0.095 0.92 0.94 0.87
fishmeal64%XP Fischmehl64%RP
15.00 67.78 0.108 11.98 18.84 0.205 0.72 0.71 0.72
yeast Bierhefe,Wein-hefe(Vinasse)
13.86 52.11 0.083 14.23 20.05 0.085 0.69 0.68 0.75
cornsteep Maisquellwasser Beu-ker
13.40 43.00 0.069 0.019
fishoil Fischöl 0.000 0.000
lignocellulose Lignocellulose 0.001 0.030
riceglutenfeed Reiskleber
palmbutter Pflanzenfett
formicacid Ameisensäure 5.54 0.000 5.54 0.000 1.00 1.00 0.00
propionicacid Propionsäure 21.81 0.000 21.81 0.000 1.00 1.00 0.00
calciumphosphate Calciumphosphat 0.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 0.00 0.00 0.00
lime(calciumcarbonate) KohlensaurerKalk 0.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 0.00 0.00 0.00
sodiumbicarbonate Natriumhydro-gencarbonat
0.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 0.00 0.00 0.00
salt Viehsalz 0.00 0.000 0.00 1.000 0.00 0.00 0.00
Darkgraycellsindicatedatagaps.
334
3.2.3 Gap closure for a missing diet digestibility of organic matter
Onefederalstatedidnotreportfeedcompositiondatabutoverallfeedproperties.Thesedidnotcoverdigestibil-ityofOM.ThedietdigestibilityofOMcannotbederivedfrom the digestibility for energy by a simple regressionanalysis (seeFigure2).Hence,thereporteddigestibilitiesforenergywereusedasasubstitute.
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95
Digestibility [MJ MJ ]X-1
Dig
estibili
ty[k
g k
g]
XD
om
-1
Figure2:DE
ComparisonbetweenthedietdigestibilitiesforenergyXDEandorga-nicmatterXDOM.DatapairscalculatedforthevariousexemplarGer-mandistricts.
3.2.4 Exemplary feed composition and properties
Theexpertscommunicatedfeedcompositionsandprop-ertiesaslistedwiththeadvicenotes.Theweightedmeanwasformedifmorethanonefeedcompositionwasavail-able.Table2showsanexample.
Table2:
Compositionoffatteningpigfeedsinadistrict.FeedsforfatteningpigsinSchleswig-Holstein,weights45to85kganimal-1.Feedpropertiesrelatedtofreshmatter(FM)(DMcontentofFM0.88kgkg-1).
feedconstituent feed1 feed2 feed3 feed4 feed5 mean unit
barley 25 25.2 26.4 20 28 24.9 %
triticale 0 0 0 5 5 2.0 %
wheat 40 54.2 43.8 49 42 45.8 %
wheatbran 2.4 0 4.3 1 0 1.5 %
maize 3.5 0 0 0 0 0.7 %
millet 5.1 0 0 0 0 1.0 %
rapeseedextractionmeal 2 2 4.3 0 0 1.7 %
rapeseedexpeller 6 6 2.5 8 8 6.1 %
soyabeanextractionmeal48%XP 11 10 14 13.4 13.1 12.3 %
molasses 0.5 0.4 1.7 0 0 0.5 %
palmbutter 1.4 0.5 2.1 0.5 0.9 1.1 %
lime(calciumcarbonate) 1.17 1.1 1.1 1.13 1.12 1.1 %
calciumphosphate 0.12 0.3 0.1 0.13 0.16 0.2 %
salt 0.39 0.4 0.4 0.41 0.45 0.4 %
weightingfactor 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
MEcontent 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 MJkg-1
XPcontent 0.170 0.175 0.17 0.17 0.171 kgkg-1
ashcontent 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 kgkg-1
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
335
3.3 Feeding strategies
Forsowsandweaners,singleandtwo-phasefeedingsareconsidered. Fatteningpigsareassumed tobe fed inone, twoor threephases; bigmodernenterprises feed-ingcontinuouslyvaryingfeedsareincludedinthree-phasefeeding. InNiedersachsen, special diets are fedwith re-duced N contents. An example result of the inquiry isshowninTable3.
Table3:
Fatteningpigs–feedingstrategies(%ofanimalplaces).ExampleresultsobtainedforEmslandruraldistrict.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
1phase 30 25 20 15 10 5 5 5 5 5
2phases 65 66 67 68 69 70 70 70 70 70
ofwhichNreduced 0 0 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 20 25 25
3phases 5 9 13 17 21 25 25 25 25 25
ofwhichNreduced 0 0 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 20 25 25
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
1phase 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2phases 70 65 60 55 50 45 45 45 45 45
ofwhichNreduced 30 40 50 60 70 70 75 80 85 85
3phases 27 32 37 42 47 52 52 52 52 52
ofwhichNreduced 30 40 50 60 70 70 75 80 85 85
3.4 Animal rounds
Adistinctionismadebetweentheassessmentsofani-mal rounds for single and multi-phase feeding. Expertsagreeonthefactthat,insinglephasefeeding,ithadbeenGermanpracticetoreplaceanimalswithoutthethoroughcleansingprocedurethathasbecomestandardfor“all-in-all-out”productionintwo-andthree-phasefeeding.Theyalsoagreethatinsinglephasefeedingthemeandurationoftheperiodduringwhichtheplaceisempty,isabout5dround-1(seealsoKTBL,2006,pg,503).Thisisassumedtobeconstantoverthewholeperiodconsidered.Incontrastmulti-phase feeding is typically related to“all-in-all-out”production.Here,service,cleansing,anddisinfectionvarywithtime.
3.4.1 Expert judgement
Germanexpertswereaskedtocontributethetimeseriesofanimalroundsfortheirrespectiveregion.ResultsfromalmostallGermanfederalstatescouldbeobtained.Somedatawasextractedfromreportsofbreeders’institutions,
otherwasderivedfromweightandweightgaindataandlocaltimesforservice,cleansing,anddisinfection.Assomeofthedatawerecommunicatedconfidentially,theresultsshowninTable4havetobepresentedanonymously.
3.4.2 Data gap closure
Numbersofanimalroundsarerequiredforeachsinglefederal stateascomplete timeseries.However, someofthetimeserieswereincomplete.Theanalysisofthedata
providedbytheexpertsrevealedthattheassumptionofalinearreductionofthetimespanduringwhichplaceswereemptyforanyreasonfrom22dround-1in1990and15dround-1resultedinthesmallestscatter.Hence,thesetimespans incombinationwith reportedweightsandweightgainswereusedtoassessthenumberofanimalrounds.Onefederalstatedidnotsupplydata.Thelowestnum-
ber of animal rounds obtained for its direct neighbourswasusedinstead.Informationaboutanimalperformance isnonexistent
or rare for the smaller states. Again, it is assumed thatHamburgcanbe treated in thesamewayasSchleswig-Holstein, Bremen as Niedersachsen, Berlin as Branden-burg,andSaarlandasRheinland-Pfalz.Theresultsforthevariousfederalstatesarecollatedin
Table4.
336
Table4:
Fatteningpigs,numberofanimalroundsintwo-andthree-phasefeeding.Reporteddataupright,dataachievedfromgapfillinginitalics.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
1 2.49 2.55 2.45 2.40 2.49 2.42 2.53 2.54 2.44 2.49
2 2.18 2.55 2.45 2.40 2.49 2.44 2.52 2.51 2.53 2.50
3 2.47 2.49 2.45 2.40 2.49 2.42 2.47 2.44 2.44 2.49
4 2.33 2.34 2.25 2.27 2.37 2.39 2.46 2.49 2.52 2.56
5 2.33 2.34 2.25 2.27 2.37 2.39 2.46 2.49 2.52 2.56
6 2.47 2.49 2.48 2.46 2.55 2.46 2.47 2.44 2.44 2.52
7 2.60 2.70 2.70 2.60 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.60 2.70 2.50
8 2.47 2.49 2.48 2.46 2.55 2.46 2.47 2.44 2.44 2.52
9 2.18 2.55 2.45 2.40 2.49 2.42 2.52 2.47 2.57 2.56
10 2.33 2.34 2.25 2.27 2.37 2.39 2.46 2.49 2.63 2.56
11 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67
12 2.40 2.40 2.41 2.41 2.35 2.31 2.35 2.36 2.38 2.44
13 2.35 2.31 2.33 2.34 2.37 2.35 2.35 2.41 2.46 2.53
mean 2.39 2.44 2.42 2.41 2.43 2.40 2.43 2.44 2.48 2.50
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
1 2.60 2.82 2.56 2.55 2.80 2.57 2.49 2.57 2.65
2 2.55 2.42 2.77 2.43 2.48 2.55 2.76 2.76 2.94
3 2.60 2.66 2.50 2.55 2.56 2.57 2.49 2.57 2.65
4 2.56 2.58 2.60 2.56 2.50 2.46 2.41 2.55 2.58
5 2.56 2.58 2.60 2.56 2.50 2.46 2.41 2.55 2.58
6 2.63 2.66 2.50 2.58 2.56 2.63 2.54 2.62 2.66
7 2.60 2.70 2.70 2.60 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70
8 2.63 2.66 2.50 2.58 2.56 2.63 2.54 2.62 2.66
9 2.59 2.56 2.56 2.58 2.61 2.65 2.68 2.73 2.78
10 2.59 2.61 2.60 2.69 2.35 2.34 2.41 2.55 2.71
11 2.67 2.69 2.69 2.69 2.69 2.69 2.69 2.68 2.68
12 2.56 2.48 2.49 2.50 2.54 2.57 2.61 2.61 2.62
13 2.51 2.54 2.50 2.46 2.51 2.53 2.57 2.57 2.55
mean 2.56 2.57 2.55 2.52 2.55 2.56 2.58 2.61 2.62
4 Results
Examples of excretion rates for standard animals arecalculatedfortheyears1994,2001,and2007.Theyarecomparedwith the results obtainedwith the previouslyused feeding strategies anddiet compositions.Hitherto,noregionaldifferentiationwasmade.Allsows,weaners,andfatteningpigshadbeentreatedasbeingfedwithtwophases.Reduced-NfeedhadbeentakenintoaccountforsomedistrictsinNiedersachsen.FordetailsseeRösemannetal.(2011).SimilarcalculationshadbeenperformedforNiedersach-
senandfatteningpigs(Dämmgenetal.,2011c)partlyus-ingthesamedatasourceasthiswork.Aftercompletionofthesecalculations,thecalculationproceduresforVSandN
excretionratesusedhithertowerecheckedandmodified(Dämmgenetal.,2011a).Hence,theresultsobtainedintheworkathandmaydifferfromthosepublishedearlier.
4.1 Methane excretion rates (enteric fermentation)
EmissionsfromentericfermentationdependontheGEintakeandonthemethaneconversionfactor.Thelatterisassumedtobeconstantforallpigs(IPCC,1996,TableA-4providesamethaneconversionfactorof0.006MJMJ-1fordevelopedcountries,which isused intheGermanemis-sion inventory).As theGE contents of feeds are almostconstantforthemajorfeedconstituents(Table5),hardlyanychangesareexpectedasaresultofchangedfeedingpractices(Table6).
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
337
Table5:
GEcontentsoffeed,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 18.32 18.28 18.31 18.45 MJkg-1GE
weaners 18.76 18.77 18.78 18.45 MJkg-1GE
fatteningpigs 18.71 18.67 18.65 18.45 MJkg-1GE
boars 18.32 18.33 18.34 18.45 MJkg-1GE
1)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
Table6:
Methaneexcretionrates(entericfermentation),annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 2.07 2.07 2.08 2.13 kgplace-1a-1CH4
weaners 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.43 kgplace-1a-1CH4
fatteningpigs 1.21 1.18 1.17 1.32 kgplace-1a-1CH4
boars 1.75 1.74 1.75 1.73 kgplace-1a-1CH41)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
Table7:
Digestibilitiesoforganicmatter,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.81 kgkg-1
weaners 0.86 0.85 0.87 0.85 kgkg-1
fatteningpigs 0,86 0.86 0.86 0.82 kgkg-1
boars 0.83 0.84 0.83 0.83 kgkg-1
1)digestibilitiesofenergyinMJMJ-1,usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
Table8:
Ashcontentsoffeed,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 0.062 0.059 0.059 0.02 kgkg-1
weaners 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.02 kgkg-1
fatteningpigs 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.02 kgkg-1
boars 0.057 0.056 0.057 0.02 kgkg-1
1)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
Table9:
Volatilesolidsexcretionrates,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 155 161 163 205 kgplace-1a-1VS
weaners 26.0 26.2 26.5 31.6 kgplace-1a-1VS
fatteningpigs 80.5 79.3 79.4 117 kgplace-1a-1VS
boars 128 129 128 145 kgplace-1a-1VS
1)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
338
Table10:
Nitrogenexcretionrates,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 25.7 25.3 25.2 26.3 kgplace-1a-1N
weaners 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.0 kgplace-1a-1N
fatteningpigs 11.9 11.5 11.3 13.9 kgplace-1a-1N
boars 27.0 27.1 27.0 27.5 kgplace-1a-1N
1)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
Table11:
Totalammoniacalnitrogenexcretionrates,annualnationalmeans
1994 2001 2007 previouscalculations1) unit
sows(includingsucklingpiglets) 19.4 19.1 19.0 20.1 kgplace-1a-1TAN
weaners 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 kgplace-1a-1TAN
fatteningpigs 8.6 8.2 8.0 10.2 kgplace-1a-1TAN
boars 21.4 21.4 21.3 22.2 kgplace-1a-1TAN
1)usingthemethodologydescribedinRösemannetal.(2011)
4.2 Volatile solids excretion rates
Major changes can be observed for VS (Table 9). Thesmalldifferencesindigestibilities(Table7)havealargeef-fect onVS excretion rates,which is farmore importantthanthetreblingoftheashcontents(Table8).
4.3 Nitrogen and TAN excretion rates
TheeffectofreducedNinputandthereductionofpro-ductioncyclesleadtoasignificantreductioninNexcretionratesforfatteningpigs,comparedtothepreviousmeth-od.ThechangesinNexcretionratesfortheothersubcat-egoriesaresmaller.Asignificant increase isobservedforweaners(Table10).ThisappliesalsotoTANexcretionrates(Table11).Theuseofthedigestibilityofcrudeprotein(XP)NinsteadofthedigestibilityofenergyreducesTANexcre-tionrates.
5 Discussion
For sows,nutrition requirements (energy,protein) varysignificantlyamongthedifferentstagesofthepigletpro-duction cycle. For growing pigs (weaners and fatteners)theratioofcrudeproteintoenergydecreasescontinuallywithage.Hence,ithasbecomegeneralpracticetoreflectthisinthedietsbyphasefeedingasthisisalsoeconomi-callybeneficial.
InNiedersachsen,specialmeasureshavebeentakentoreducetheNandphosphorus loadsontheenvironmentby introducing special dietswith reduced XP and phos-phoruscontents.Anexampledetailedanalysisoftheinfluenceofthevari-
ousinputparametersismadeforNiedersachsen,asherefeeding practices are more differentiated than in otherfederalstates.Fivefeedingtypesweredistinguished:• 1 singlephasefeeding• 2S two-phasefeeding,standardXPcontents• 2Rtwo-phasefeeding,reducedXPcontents• 3S three-phasefeeding,standardXPcontents• 3Rthree-phasefeeding,reducedXPcontents
The comparison is performed for sowswith litter andfattening pigs, as the contribution to emissions fromweanersandboarsisofminorimportance.The2007datasetisused.Changesarenegativeforreductionsandpositiveforin-
creases.
5.1 Sows with litter
Duetothefactthatthefeedintakeisgovernedbyen-ergy requirements, the energy intake is not affected byphase feeding.AsCH4emissions fromenteric fermenta-tionarederivedfromenergyintake,theyarealsonotaf-fectedbyphasefeeding(Table12).
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
339
Table12:
Sowspluslitter.CH4excretionrates(emissions)peranimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy.
Feedtype 1 2S 2R unit
CH4excretionrate 2.1 2.1 2.1 kgplace-1a-1CH4
changescomparedto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
+0.0 kgplace-1a-1CH4
introductionofphasefeeding +0.0 +0.0 kgplace-1a-1CH4
Theenergycontentoffeedsisadjustedtotherequire-mentsoflactatingandnon-lactatingsows.Thisresultsinaconsiderable reduction inVSexcretions.The reductionoftheXPcontenthasasmallnegativeeffect(Table13).
Table13:
Sowspluslitter.VSexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy.
Feedtype 1 2S 2R unit
VSexcretionrate 165 142 147 kgplace-1a-1VS
changescomparedto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
0 +5 kgplace-1a-1VS
introductionofphasefeeding -23 -23 kgplace-1a-1VS
AminoreffectonNexcretionratescanbeobservedasaresultofphasefeeding.However,thereductionoffeedXPcontentsisclearlyvisible(Table14).
Table14:
Sowspluslitter.Nexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy.
Feedtype 1 2S 2R unit
Nexcretionrate 26.5 26.2 24.3 kgplace-1a-1N
changescomparedto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
-1.9 kgplace-1a-1N
introductionofphasefeeding -0.3 -0.3 kgplace-1a-1N
IncontrasttoNexcretionrates,TANexcretionratesarere-ducedbyphasefeeding.Forthedietscompared,theeffectofthereducedXPcontentsisadverse,albeitsmall(Table15).
Table15:
Sowspluslitter.TANexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy.
Feedtype 1 2S 2R unit
TANexcretionrate 19.1 17.3 18.5 kgplace-1a-1N
changescomparedto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
+1.2 kgplace-1a-1N
introductionofphasefeeding -1.8 -1.8 kgplace-1a-1N
5.2 Fattening pigs
Phase feeding results in a reduced number of animalrounds.Thiscausesalinearreductioninallemissions.ForCH4emissionrates,theeffectsofbothadjusteden-
ergyandXPcontentsofthefeedareofminorimportance(Table16).
Table16:
Fatteningpigs.Methaneexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunc-tionoffeedingstrategy.
Feedtype 1 2S 2R 3S 3R unit
CH4excretionrate 1.31 1.20 1.18 1.16 1.17 kgplace-1a-1CH4
changescompa-redto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
-0.01 +0.01 kgplace-1a-1CH4
introductionofphasefeeding
+0.04 +0.04 -0.00 -0.00 kgplace-1a-1CH4
reducednumberofrounds
-0.15 -0.15 -0.15 -0.15 kgplace-1a-1CH4
With VS excretion rates, changes in both energy andXPcontentshaveanadverseeffect.Thismayevenover-compensate the gains due to reduced animal rounds inthecaseof3Rfeeding(Table17).
Table17:
Fatteningpigs.VSexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy(2007dataset).
Feedtype 1 2S 2R 3S 3R unit
VSexcretionrate 84.8 79.2 80.7 84.0 86.7 kgplace-1a-1VS
reductionscom-paredto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
+1.5 +2.8 kgplace-1a-1VS
introductionofphasefeeding
+4.3 +4.3 +9.1 +9.1 kgplace-1a-1VS
reducednumberofrounds
-9.9 -9.9 -9.9 -9.9 kgplace-1a-1VS
N excretion rates benefit from all aspects of feedingchanges.TheintroductionofphasefeedingalonereducesNexcretionratesofabout7%,whichisinlinewithex-perimentalfindings(e.g.Lindermeyeretal.,2010;Anony-mus,2010).HerethereducedN inputs intotheanimalsaffect the excretions significantly. Adjusted feeding as awholehaspositiveeffects.Thereishardlyanydifferencebetween2Sand3Sfeedings.Thecombinedeffectsadduptomorethan5kgplace-1a-1N(Table18).
340
Table18:
Fatteningpigs.Nexcretion ratesperanimalplaceasa functionoffeedingstrategy
Feedtype 1 2S 2R 3S 3R unit
Nexcretionrate 13.2 10.8 9.9 11.1 7.7 kgplace-1a-1N
reductionscom-paredto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
-0.9 -3.5 kgplace-1a-1N
introductionofphasefeeding
-0.9 -0.9 -0.5 -0.5kgplace-1a-1N
reducednumberofrounds
-1.5 -1.5 -1.5 -1.5kgplace-1a-1N
Theintroductionofphasefeedingasameasuretoad-justfeedpropertiestoenergyrequirementshasonlyami-noreffectonTANexcretionsrates.However,XPreductionaddsaconsiderableamountofsavings(Table19).
Table19:
Fatteningpigs.TANexcretionratesperanimalplaceasafunctionoffeedingstrategy(2007dataset).
Feedtype 1 2S 2R 3S 3R unit
TANexcretionrate 9.1 7.8 6.6 7.8 5.4 kgplace-1a-1N
reductionscom-paredto“1”duetoadjustedXPcontent
-1.2 -2.4 kgplace-1a-1N
introductionofphasefeeding
-0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 kgplace-1a-1N
reducednumberofrounds
-1.1 -1.1 -1.1 -1.1 kgplace-1a-1N
BothNandTANexcretionratesvaryregionally.Figure3illustratestheresultsobtainedforthe22Germanregionsinvestigated.
0
3
6
9
12
15
Region
N e
xcre
tion r
ate
[kg p
lace
a]
-1-1
0
3
6
9
12
15
Region
TA
N e
xcre
tion r
ate
[kg p
lace
a]
-1-1
Figure3.
Variabilityoftotalnitrogen(N)andurinarynitrogen(TAN)excretionratescalculatedfor22Germanregions
6 Conclusions
TheGermandatasetscollatedforthisworkshowthatphasefeedingaloneresultsinreducedVSexcretionrates.Thereductionisachievedinthestepfromsingletotwo-phasefeeding.Theintroductionofathirdphaseisfarlesseffective.Changed feed compositions do not affect CH4 excre-
tionsfromentericfermentation,nordotheyshowagreateffect on N excretions. This contradicts the statementsfoundintheliteraturewithrespecttoNexcretionrates.In two- and three-phase feeding, the reductions in N
andTANexcretionsareasideeffectofthereducednum-berofanimal rounds thatgoeswith the introductionofphasefeeding.However,Nexcretionratesfortwo-phasefeedingoffat-
teningpigsrangefrom10.1to13.1kgplace-1a-1Nandfrom6.4to9.8kgplace-1a-1TAN,indicatingthatthereisconsiderableroomforreductions.AremarkablereductionintheexcretionratesofNand
TANcanbeachievedbyadjustingtheproteincontentsofthefeedtotherequirements.
Acknowledgements
Thedatausedinthisworkisbasedoncontributionsbyexpertsinpigproductionandpigfeedinginparticular:Dr.Hans-JoachimAlert,Köllitsch;Dr.UweBergfeld,Köllitsch;Hanke Bokelmann, Bremervörde; Johannes Bruns, Os-nabrück;Dr. UweClar, Uelzen;Hartwig Fehrendt,Olden-burg;BerndGrünhaupt,Fritzlar;LuiseHagemann,Teltow;Dr.ArndHeinze,Jena;GerdHermeling,Bersenbrück;KajoHollmichel, Kassel; Petra Klaus, Großenkneten; KlemensKuhlmann, Coesfeld; Dr. Jörg Küster, Northeim; Dr. Her-mannLindermayer,Poing;Dr.WernerLüpping,Blekendorf;DirkLüvolding,Vechta;Prof.Dr.WinfriedMatthes,Dummer-storf;AndreaMeyer,Hannover;HenningPieper,Hameln;Dr.ThomasPriesmann,Bitburg;Dr.ManfredWeber,Iden.
U. Dämmgen, W. Brade, J. Schulz, H. Kleine Klausing, N. J. Hutchings, H.-D. Haenel, C. Rösemann / Landbauforschung - vTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 4 2011 (61)327-342
341
Dr.Karl-HermannGrünewald,VFT-Geschäftsstelle,Bonn,suppliedthetimeseriesofdietproperties.Dr.Walter Staudacher, DLG, Frankfurt, supported the
inquirycritically.The authors express their gratitude, as the process of
datacompilationdemandedtimeandpatience.This work was supported by Landwirtschaftskammer
Niedersachsen,Oldenburg.
References
Anonymus(2010)MitPhasenfütterungFutterkostensenken.ÖsterrBauernzeit10.12.2010
Beuker (2010) Cornsteep [online]. To be found at <http://www.beuker.net/nl/rundveehouderij/producten/eiwitrijk/vloeibaar/cornsteep> [quoted14.10.2011]
DämmgenU,AmonB,GyldenkærneS,HutchingsNJ,KleineKlausingH,Ha-enelH-D,RösemannC(2011a)Reassessmentofthecalculationprocedureforthevolatilesolidsexcretionratesofcattle,pigsandpoultryintheAus-trian,DanishandGermanagriculturalemissioninventories.Landbauforsch61(2):115-126
DämmgenU,AmonB,HaenelH-D,HutchingsNJ,RösemannC(2011b)DatasetstoassessmethaneemissionsfromuntreatedcattleandpigslurryandsolidmanurestoragesystemsintheGermanandAustrianemissioninven-tories.Landbauforsch(62)1(submitted)
DämmgenU,BradeW,SchulzJ,HaenelH-D,RösemannC(2011c)EinflussvonFütterungsverfahrenaufdie EmissionenausderMastschweinehaltung inNiedersachsen.Züchtungskunde83(3):191-202
DämmgenU,HahneJ,HaenelH-D,RösemannC(2010)DieModellierungderEmissionenvonStickstoffspezies,NMVOCundStaubausAbluftreinigungs-anlageninderSchweinehaltungimdeutschenlandwirtschaftlichenEmissi-onsinventar.GefahrstoffeReinhaltungLuft70(10):437-443
DLG - Deutsche Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft (2005) Bilanzierung der Nähr-stoffausscheidungen landwirtschaftlicherNutztiere. Frankfurt aM :DLG-Verl,69p,ArbeitenDLG199
DLG - Deutsche Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft (2011) Futtermittelnet [on-line].Tobe foundat<http://www.dlg.org/futtermittel_net.html> [quoted14.10.2011]
DTV -DeutscherVerbandTiernahrung (2010)Mischfutter Tabellarium2010.Bonn:DVT
EC-EuropeanCommunity(2002)Directive2002/32/ECoftheEuropeanPar-liamentandof theCouncilof7May2002onundesirablesubstances inanimal feed[online].Tobefoundat<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:2002L0032:20060224:EN:PDF>[quoted14.10.2011]
EEA-EuropeanEnvironmentAgency(2009)EMEP/EEAairpollutantemissioninventoryguidebook.TechnicalreportNo6/2009.EuropeanEnvironmentAgency (EEA),Copenhagen.Tobe foundat<http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-emission-inventory-guidebook-2009>[quoted14.10.2011
FlachowskyG,PallaufJ,PfefferE,RodehutscordM,SchenkelH,StaudacherW,SusenbethA(2006)EmpfehlungenzurEnergie-undNährstoffversorgungvonSchweinen2006.FrankfurtaM:DLG-Verl,247p,Energie-undNähr-stoffbedarflandwirtschaftlicherNutztiere10
Lindermeyer H, Preißinger W, Propstmeier G (2010) „Einfache“ Multipha-senfütterung in der Ferkelaufzucht: „Verschneiden“ : VersuchsberichtS 17 (S13/2) [online]. To be found at <http://www.lfl.bayern.de/ite/sch-To be found at <http://www.lfl.bayern.de/ite/sch-wein/40343/linkurl_0_9.pdf>[quoted14.10.2011]
LfL-BayerischeLandesanstaltfürLandwirtschaft(2009)FutterberechnungfürSchweine.Freising-Weihenstephan:LfL,88p
HaenelH-D,DämmgenU,LaubachP,RösemannC(2011)Updateofthecalcu-lationofmetabolizableenergyrequirementsforpigsintheGermanagricu-lturalemissioninventory.Landbauforsch61(3):217-228
IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996) Revised 1996IPCCguidelinesfornationalgreenhousegasinventories:vol3:Referencemanual [online].Tobe foundat<http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gl/invs6.html>[quoted14.10.2011]
IPCC–IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(2006)2006IPCCguide-linesfornationalgreenhousegas inventories:vol4:Agriculture,forestryandother landuse[online].Tobefoundat<http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol4.html>[quoted14.10.2011]
JentschW,ChudyA,BeyerM(eds)(2004)RostockerFutterbewertungssystem:KennzahlendesFutterwertesundFutterbedarfsaufderBasisvonNettoe-nergie.Dummerstorf:FBN,392p
RösemannC,HaenelH-D,PoddeyE,DämmgenU,DöhlerH,Eurich-MendenB,LaubachP,DieterleM,OsterburgB(2011)CalculationsofgaseousandparticulateemissionsfromGermanagriculture1990-2009.Braunschweig:vTI,402p,LandbauforschSH342
342