Characterization and anaerobic digestion of manure from pigs submitted to feed restriction or supplemented with ractopamine or chromium
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-6891v25e-77719EAbstract
The aim of this study was to characterize the production and anaerobic digestion of manure
from finishing pigs subjected to feed restriction or supplemented with ractopamine or chromium (Cr).
The waste came from 50 barrows in the finishing phase, aged ± 154 days, with a starting weight of
99.0 ± 4.4 kg and a final weight of 117.2 ± 5.8 kg. The experimental diets were as follows: control
(conventional diet), qualitative restriction (7.5% reduction in net energy compared to the control diet),
quantitative restriction (15% reduction in feed supply), Cr (0.8 mg), and ractopamine (10 ppm). The
data were subjected to an analysis of variance using a randomized block design, in which the weeks of
analysis were considered blocks (cofactors). There were no differences in manure production between
the diets regarding natural matter (NM), dry matter (DM), mineral matter (MM), or organic matter (OM).
Animals fed the control diet had the highest residue coefficient, and there was no difference among
the other diets. No differences were observed among the diets regarding total solids, pH, or total
nitrogen in the tributaries or effluents. The highest biogas yield (574 mL g-1) of added volatile solids (VS)
was obtained in the digesters supplied with manure from animals fed a qualitatively restricted diet.
It can be concluded that a qualitatively restricted diet results in higher manure production but with
lower nitrogen and phosphorus excretion and higher biogas yields.
Downloads
References
Silva ADL, Moreira JÁ, Oliveira RLR, Mota LC, Teixeira ENM, Souza JG, Oliveira RGP. Qualitative feed restriction for late finishing pigs on meat quality and fatty acid profile. Semina: Ciências Agrárias. 2016; 37(4): 2343-2353. https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2016v37n4Supl1p2343
Njoku C, Adeyemi O, Sanwo K, Sanya B, Popoola A, Aina A. Effects of qualitative and quantitative feed restriction on carcass yield and pork quality. Polish Journal of Natural Sciences. 2018; 33(1): 29-48. http://www.uwm.edu.pl/polish-journal/sites/default/files/issues/articles/njoku_et_al_2018_0.pdf
Vasconcelos TS, Thomaz MC, Castelini FR, Alvarenga PVA, Oliveira JÁ, Ramos GF, Santos Ruiz U. Evaluation of pineapple byproduct at increasing levels in heavy finishing pigs feeding. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2020; 269(1): 114664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2020.114664
Santos APD, Kiefer C, Martins LP, Fantini CC. Restrição alimentar para suínos machos castrados e imunocastrados em terminação. Ciência Rural. 2012; 42(1): 147-153. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782012000100024
Evans GW, Bowman TD. Chromium picolinate increases membrane fluidity and rate of insulin internalization. Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry. 1992; 46(4): 243-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-0134(92)80034-S
Vincent JB. Effects of chromium supplementation on body composition, human and animal health, and insulin and glucose metabolism. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care. 2019; 22(6): 483-489. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCO.0000000000000604
Farias TVA, Kiefer C, Nascimento KMRDS, Corassa A, Alencar SADS, Rodrigues GP, Santos APD. Chromium and energy restriction as substitutes for ractopamine in finishing gilts diet. Ciência Rural. 2022; 52(1): e20200736. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20200736
Ele T, Wei C, Lin X, Wang B, Yin G. Meta-analysis of the effects of organic chromium supplementation on the growth performance and carcass quality of weaned and growing-finishing pigs. Animais. 2023; 13(12): 2014. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13122014
Leal RS, Mattos BOD, Cantarelli VDS, Carvalho GCD, Pimenta MEDSG, Pimenta CJ. Performance and carcass yield of pig fed diets containing different levels of ractopamine. Revista Brasileira de Saúde e Produção Animal. 2015; 16(1): 582-590. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-99402015000300010
Pompeu MA, Rodrigues LA, Cavalcanti LFL, Fontes DO, Toral FLB. A multivariate approach to determine the factors affecting response level of growth, carcass, and meat quality traits in finishing pigs fed ractopamine. Journal of Animal Science. 2017; 95(4): 1644-1659. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016.118
Rickard JW, Allee GL, Rincker PJ, Gooding JP, Acheson RJ, McKenna DR, Carr SN. Effects of ractopamine hydrochloride on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of heavy-weight finishing pigs sent for slaughter using a 3-phase marketing strategy. Translational Animal Science. 2017; 1(1): 406–411. https://doi.org/10.2527/tas2017.0053)
Andretta I, Kipper M, Lehnen CR, Demori AB, Remus A, Lovatto PA. Meta-analysis of the relationship between ractopamine and dietary lysine levels on carcass characteristics in pigs. Livestock Science. 2012; 143(1):91-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2011.09.004
Almeida VVD, Nuñez AJC, Miyada VS. Ractopamine as a metabolic modifier feed additive for finishing pigs: a review. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology. 2012; 55: 445-456. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132012000300016
Rostagno HS, Albino LFT, Donzele JL, Gomes PC, Oliveira RD, Lopes DC, Euclides RF. Tabelas brasileiras para aves e suínos: composição de alimentos e exigências nutricionais. 3ª Ed. Viçosa: UFV, 2011. 252p.
Apha - American Public Health Association. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 24th ed. Washington DC: APHA, AWWA, WEF, 2023, 1624p.
Ripley LE, Boyle WC, Converse JC. Improved alkalimetric monitoring for anaerobic digestion of high-strength wastes. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation. 1986; 58(1): 406-411. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25042933
Jenkins SR, Morgan JM, Zhang X. Measuring the usable carbonate alkalinity of operating anaerobic digesters. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation. 1991; 63(1): 28-34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25043948
Silva DJ, Queiroz AC. Análise de Alimentos (métodos químicos e biológicos), 3ª Ed. Viçosa: UFV, 2006. 235p.
Perkin-Elmer Corporation. Analytical methods for anatomic absorption spectrophotometry. Morwalk, 1996. 300p.
Malavolta E, Vitti GC, Oliveira SA. Micronutrientes, uma visão geral. In: Ferreira ME, Cruz MC. Micronutrientes na agricultura. Piracicaba: POTAFOS/CNPq, 1991. p.1-33.
González-Fernández C, García-Encina. Impact of substrate to inoculum ratio in anaerobic digestion of swine slurry. Biomass and Bioenerg. 2009; 33(8): 1065-1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.03.008
Astals S, Ariso M, Galí A, Mata-Alvarez J. Co-digestion of pig manure and glycerine: Experimental and modelling study. Journal of Environmental Management. 2011; 92(4): https://doi.org/1091-1096, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.014
Coca FOCG, Xavier CAN, Andrade WR, Arruda LDO, Gonçalves LMP, Kiefer C, Santos TMB. Produção de biogás com dejetos de suínos – efeito de energia líquida e ractopamina da dieta. Archivos de Zootecnia. 2016; 65(252): 507-512. https://doi.org/10.21071/az.v65i252.1918
Morozova I, Nikulina N, Oechsner H, Krümpel J, Lemmer A. Effects of Increasing Nitrogen Content on Process Stability and Reactor Performance in Anaerobic Digestion. Energies. 2020; 13(5): 1139. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13051139
Agyeman FO, Han Y, Tao W. Elucidating the kinetics of ammonia inhibition to anaerobic digestion through extended batch experiments and stimulation-inhibition modeling. Bioresource technology. 2021; 340(1): 125744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125744
Nguyen VK, Chaudhary DK, Dahal RH, Trinh NH, Kim J, Chang SW, Nguyen DD. Review on pretreatment techniques to improve anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge. Fuel, 2021. 285(1): 119105p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119105
Zamri MFMA, Hasmady S, Akhiar A, Ideris F, Shamsuddin AH, Mofijur M, Mahlia TMI. A comprehensive review on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021; 137 (1):110637. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032120309217
Zhang W, Li L, Xing W, Chen B, Zhang L, Li A, Yang T. Dynamic behaviors of batch anaerobic systems of food waste for methane production under different organic loads, substrate to inoculum ratios and initial pH. Journal of bioscience and bioengineering. 2019; 128(6): 733-743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2019.05.013
Kothari R, Pandey AK, Kumar S, Tyagi VV, Tyagi SK. Different aspects of dry anaerobic digestion for bio-energy: an overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014; 39(1): 174-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.011
Xu F, Li Y, Ge X, Yang L, Li Y. Anaerobic digestion of food waste - challenges and opportunities. Bioresource Technology. 2018; 247(1): 1047-1058. https://10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.020
Li Y, Chen Y, Wu J. Enhancement of methane production in anaerobic digestion process: a review. Applied Energy. 2019; 240(1): 120-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.243
Atelge MR, Atabani AE, Banu JR, Krisa D, Kaya M, Eskicioglu C, Duman, FATİH. A critical review of pretreatment technologies to enhance anaerobic digestion and energy recovery. Fuel. 2020; 270(1): 117494. https://doi.org/117494,10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117494
Santos T, Trevizan PS, Xavier CA, Kiefer C, Ferraz AL. Biodigestão anaeróbia de dejetos de suínos em terminação suplementados com ractopamina por diferentes períodos. Engenharia Agrícola. 2016; 36(1): 399-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-4430-Eng.Agric.v36n3p399-407/2016
Mao C, Feng Y, Wang X, Ren G. Review on research achievements of biogas from anaerobic digestion. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015; 45(1): 540-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.032
Hakawati R, Smyth BM, McCullough G, Rosa F, Rooney D. What is the most energy efficient route for biogas utilization: heat, electricity or transport? Applied Energy. 2017; 206(1): 1076-1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.068
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Brazilian Animal Science/ Ciência Animal Brasileira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
