1980
DOI: 10.1017/s0021859600027969
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of protein quality of poultry feedingstuffs. 3. Expeller-processed oilseed cakes

Abstract: A study was made to evaluate the protein quality of groundnut cake (GN), mustard cake (MS) and cottonseed cake (CS) and to find a suitable laboratory test for predicting the protein quality of these cakes for chicks. Different oilseed cakes varied considerably in their crude protein, true protein and crude fibre content. The nitrogen solubility was higher in GN (87-7%) followed by MS (78-7%) and CS (60-9%). A similar trend was evident with regard to in vitro protein digestibility. The GN protein was, however, … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1987
1987
1987
1987

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Feeding trials with chicks and rats showed that lysine with a free e-amino group was not necessarily absorbed or utilized (Amadi and Hewitt 1975 Booth (1911) (Zombade et al 1980a); however, halfofthe variation in GPV was not explained. For oilseed meals, the relationship between GPV and available lysine was not significant (Zombade et al 1980b Carpenter (1960) accurately predicted available lysine whereas the method of Roach et al (196'7) gave misleadingly high values (Walz and Ford 1972 Roach et al (1967) assay values or to either Roach et al (1961) or Carpenter (1960) For personal use only. (Batterham et al 1979(Batterham et al , 1984.…”
mentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Feeding trials with chicks and rats showed that lysine with a free e-amino group was not necessarily absorbed or utilized (Amadi and Hewitt 1975 Booth (1911) (Zombade et al 1980a); however, halfofthe variation in GPV was not explained. For oilseed meals, the relationship between GPV and available lysine was not significant (Zombade et al 1980b Carpenter (1960) accurately predicted available lysine whereas the method of Roach et al (196'7) gave misleadingly high values (Walz and Ford 1972 Roach et al (1967) assay values or to either Roach et al (1961) or Carpenter (1960) For personal use only. (Batterham et al 1979(Batterham et al , 1984.…”
mentioning
confidence: 91%