4.3 Article

Influence of partial replacement of soya bean meal by faba beans or peas in heavy pigs diet on meat quality, residual anti-nutritional factors and phytoestrogen content

期刊

ARCHIVES OF ANIMAL NUTRITION
卷 67, 期 3, 页码 235-247

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1745039X.2013.801137

关键词

anti-nutritional factors; faba beans; peas; performance; phytoestrogens; pigs; soybean meal

资金

  1. grant Finanziamento Interateneo, Universita di Pisa

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the partial substitution of soybean meal by faba beans (18%) or peas (20%) as additional protein sources in diets destined for typical Italian heavy pig production. It compared animal performances, meat quality, the presence of residual anti-nutritional factors (ANF) and phytoestrogens in plasma and meat and the possible effects on pig health, by evaluating oxidative, inflammatory and pro-atherogenic markers. The results showed that the productive performances, expressed as body weight and feed conversion ratio, of pigs fed with faba bean and pea diets were similar to those of pigs fed only the soybean meal. Meat quality of pigs fed with the three diets was similar in colour, water-holding capacity, tenderness and chemical composition. Despite the higher levels of phytoestrogen in the plasma of pigs fed only the soybean meal, phytoestrogen concentration in the muscle was equivalent to that of animals fed diets with faba beans, whereas pigs fed a diet with peas showed a lower concentration. Inflammation and pro-atherogenic parameters did not show significant differences among the three diets. Overall, the partial substitution of soybean meal by faba beans appears more interesting than with peas, particularly in relation to the higher amount of polyphenols in the diet and the highest concentration of phytoestrogens found in the plasma and muscle of animals, while the pyrimidine anti-nutritional compounds present in the diet did not appear to accumulate and had no effect on the growth performance of animals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据