Feeding Standards

P.Sumathi
 Feeding standards
• Feeding standards are statements or quantitative
description of the amounts of one or more
nutrients required by animals.
• It is necessary to avoid underfeeding of high
requirement animals
• Feeding standards used to formulate the balanced
ration.
• 1.comparative type
• 2.digestible nutrient system
• 3.production value types
 Feeding standards
• B)Digestible- Nutrient
• A) Comparative type system
• 1.Hay standard • 1.Grouven’s feeding system
• 2.Scandinavian “ feed • 2.Wolff”s feeding std
• 3. Wolff”s Lehmann
unit” standard feeding std
• 4.Haeckers”s feeding std
• 5.Savage feeding std
• 6.Morrison std
• 7.National Research Council
Std
• 8.Japanese feeding std
• 9.Indian std
• C)Production- Value
type
• 1.Kellner- feeding std
• 2.Armsby feeding std
• 3.Agricultural
Research Council Std
 Comparative type

• 1.Hay standard
• Thaer -1810
• Feeds compared using meadow hay as unit
• 100 lbs on meadow hay = 91 lbs clover
hay or 200 lbs of potatoes.
• No-chemical value of feeds &
physiological requirements of animals.
• Based on practical feeding experiences
 2.Scandinavian feed unit

• Professor Fjord - 1884

• Only one factor feed unit was taken in to account.
• Value of one pound of common grains such as
corn, barely is given as one unit value and the
value of all other foods is based upon this.
• One feed unit required for each 150 lbs of body
wt.
• Additional one unit for every 3 lbs of milk
produced.
• Grains are of different types in different
countries, feed units should also be different.
 Digestible nutrient system
• Grouven’s feeding standard -1859
• Formulated first feeding standard with crude
protein, carbohydrate and fat content of feed.
• Cow weighing 1000 lbs - 28.7 lbs DM ,
containing 2.67 lbs CP , 0.6 lbs crude fat and
14.55 lbs crude carbohydrate .total nutrient
present in the feed is not accurate value.
• Henneberg and Stohann –digestible nutrients
present in the feed.-more valuable.
• wolff ,s feeding standrad
• Dr.Emil von wolff – 1864
• Based on digestible protein, digestible fat
and digestible carbohydrate
• Dairy cow – 1000 lbs - 24.5 lbs of DM
containing 2.5 lbs of digestible
carbohydrate ,0.4 lbs digestible fat
• Nutritive ratio–1:5.4.
• Quantity and quality of milk production not
considered
• Wolff Lehmann feeding standard
• Took into account the quantity of milk produced
but not the quality
• Haecker’s feeding standard
• Considered both quantity and quality of milk
produced
• First to separate requirement for maintenance from
requirement for production
• Standards included digestible crude protein,
carbohydrate and fats.
• Latter expressed in DCP, TDN.
• Savage feeding standard
• Haecker’s standard – too low especially in
protein
• Protein requirement increased by 20%
• Milking cows – at least 24 lbs of DM
• Nutritive ratio- not wider 1:6 or narrower
1:4.5.
• 2/3 of DM – roughage ; 1/3 – concentrate
• Morrison feeding standard
• DM,DCP,TDN
• TDN = dig CP + dig NFE + dig CF + dig
EE x 2.25
• Fat comparatively higher energy value
• Consider faecal loss.
• Combustible gas , heat and urine loss not
considered
• Low quality feed over estimated
• Can be used in pigs and horses
 NRC standard
• Similar to Morrison feeding standards but
based on size of the animal
• DP, TDN and also recommended
requirements for Ca, P,carotene,vit D
• Poultry:ME
• Swine and horses:DE
• Sheep:DE,ME,TDN
• Dairy, beef cattle: ME,TDN, NEm, NEg
• Growing animal:DE, ME,TDN,NEm ,NEg.
• Lactating cows:NEl
• Japanese feeding standards for dairy cattle
• Based on live wt raised to the 0.75 power .
maintenance=37.37g TDN/kg or 116.3 Kcal
ME/kg.
• Milk production
• 154 parts dig. Protein/100 parts milk protein,
1,444 kcal ME/ 1,000 kcal milk energy.
 Indian standards

• Nutrient needs of animals under tropical

environments differ from those developed
in temperate climate.
• Draw suitable feeding stds for the Indian
livestock and poultry.
C.Production-value type
 Kellner’s Starch Equivalent

 This system developed in Germany.

 The production value of feeds is measured by
their utilization for fat deposition in adult animal
relative to the fat producing power of 1Kg of
starch.
 It was based on determination of the carbon-
nitrogen balance by respiration experiments.
Gain of fat and protein were calculated by C-N
balance.
• 1Kg of starch fed in excess of maintenance
requirement produced 248g of body fat.
• 1g of fat is equivalent to 9.5kcal.
• The net energy value of 1kg starch for fattening is
2.36 Mcal.
• Kellner expressed fat producing power of feed
stuffs ie,their energy value in terms of the number
of kg starch that produce the same amount of fat
as 100kg of the respective feed.This value is called
as starch value or starch equivalent.
• Kellner determined the actual fat
producing power of nutrients typical of the
proximal constituents of feed stuffs.
 Energy efficiency and starch
equivalents of pure nutrients.
Digestible Fat MJ Starch
nutrient deposited in equivalent
gram factor

Starch 250 9.95 1.0

Crude fibre 250 9.95 1.0
EE from oil 600 23.89 2.4
seeds

EE from 525 20.92 2.1

cereals
Digestible Fat MJ Starch
nutrient deposited equivalent
EE from 474 18.87 1.9
roughage
Protein 235 9.31 0.94

sugar 188 7.49 0.8

• The FAT producing power of protein and sugars
is lower since break down of protein to nitrogen
free substances and formation and excretion of
urea need energy,and loss of energy is involved
in the fermentation of sugars.
• Fat producing power of the ether extract from oil
seeds is higher than from cereals and roughage
because the latter fractions contain a greater %
of non glyceride compounds(waxes and
pigments)
 Production value and starch
value
• The % of the digestible nutrients are multiplied
by the respective starch equivalent factors. The
arithmetic sum of these products is called the
production value.
• Oil cakes-the calculated production value is
identical with starch value , but starch value of
oats is lower than the calculated production value
 Value number
• The actual starch value is obtained from the
production value by multiplying by the value
number.
• The value number expresses the ratio between the
starch value of a feed stuff and that of the
calculated production value.
• The value number for oil cakes is 100%, for oat
grain 95% and for roughage less(wheat straw
30%)
Alternative way of calculating starch
value
• Value factors were determined by balance
experiments for a limited number of feed
stuff only.
• Kellner recommended an alternative way
for calculating starch value from the
predicted production values by correction
based on the crude fibre content of feed
stuff.
• Correction based on the basis of the crude fibre
content of the feed stuffs.
• The production value of a roughage would be
reduced by 0.58 units for every 1% CF present in
the roughage.
• For eg, PV of a hay containing 28.4% CF is 59;
for 28.4% CF present in this hay (28.4x0.58)
16.5 units are deducted,
thus the corrected starch value is 42.5(59-16.5).
• Kellner related the difference between
calculated production value and starch
value to the energy cost of digesting
CF.Fibre content of the ration rises , the
ratio of acetic to propionic acid in the
rumen content increases and the energy of
such acid mixture is utilized less efficiently
for body fat system.
 Demerits
• Starch value of a ration is not constant at
different levels of feeding , but decreases
with increasing levels.
• SV differs considerably for different
productive purposes even at the same level
of feeding.
 Armsby’s NE value
• Kellner and armsby carried out experiment
in which the NE value of the food was
determined as the increase in energy
retention resulting from an increase in food
intake.
• Kellner compared 2 levels above
maintenance and measured energy values
of food for fattening.
• Armsby compared 2 levels below
maintenance, the higher level was close to
maintenance and calculated the NE of the
food by relating the addition of more food
to the resultant saving in body tissues.
• NE value of food measured by using
animal calorimeter
 Hay ME Heat Energy
intake (MJ/day) production balance
(kg/day) (MJ/Day) (MJ/day)

Trial 1 4.633 39.93 41.06 -1.12

Trial 2 2.801 24.19 33.74 -9.62

Difference 1.832 15.74 7.22 8.48

(1-2)

Values 1 8.64 4.00 4.64

/kg hay
• An increase of 1.83kg of hay decreased the
steer’s loss of body substances by 8.49 MJ.
1kg of hay thus contain 4.64 MJ of NE.
• Armsby express the NE content of feeds in
therms.
• 1therms =1Mcal=1000kcal
 Demerits
• 1.Expense of requirements, NE in the
various feeds is excessively high.
• 2.NE value for only a few feeds had
actually been determined
• 3.Most of the value from the Table of
Morrison’s dig. Nutrients.
East German system of Nehring
• Modification of kellner
• Use value factor –not needed.
• Nehring determined the gain of fat in adult animal
obtained by addition of various feed stuff to their
maintenance ration by respiration experiments.
• On the basis of these results multiple regression
equation were computed resulting the content of
digestible nutrients in feeds to their energy
potential.
• Cattle: y=1.78x1
+7.04x2+2.37x3+2.13x4
• Pigs:
y=2.14x1+7.71x2+0.01x3+3.27x4
• Y-net energy (k cal) ,NEF equals the energy value of
1kcal of net energy produced in adult animals
• X1-DCP;X2-DEE;X3-DCF;X4-DNFE in 1kg of food.
 Feed mixtures

• To determine the fat producing power of

feed mixtures containing concentrates and
roughages, the following regression
equation were computed:
• Cattle : Y=1.71x1+7.52x2+2.01(x3+x4)
• Pigs : Y=2.56x1+8.54x2+2.96(x3+x4)
• Chickens: Y=2.58x1+7.99x2+3.19(x3+x4)
 California NE system
• NRC (1976)bases the energy requirement
for growth on beef cattle on a system
developed by Lofgreen &Garret in
California.
• NEm-BMR predicted as 0.332MJ W0.75
• NEg for steers=(0.2205G+0.0286G2)W0.75
• NEg for heifers
=(0.2344G+0.0529G2)W0.75
 Agricultural research council
standard(ARC)
• Unit of energy has been expressed in terms
of starch equivalent instead of TDN, ME
or NE.