Perspective Phillip Smith Ph.D. Tyson Foods, Inc. June 14-16, 2016 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Valuing DDGS – A Nutritionist Perspective

Phillip Smith Ph.D. Tyson Foods, Inc. June 14-16, 2016 Peru Lima and Trujillo

“The greatest dilemma that the (animal) agriculture industry has faced in the last 50 years is ethanol and corn prices”

Rod Smith, Feedstuffs, December 2006

The outline of my presentation today:

• Basics of ethanol production and co-products
• Production and Usage estimates of DDGS
• List the locations currently using DDGS
• Typical analysis: DDGS
• Effects of reduced oil DDGS – reduced calorie
• Corn oil from DDGS
• Practical concerns and DDGS spec. sheet
• Future opportunities

Mid-Missouri Energy Ethanol Plant Malta Bend, MO

Potential domestic use of DDGS

Potential DDGS Demand

5 10 15 20 25 30 Catfish Layers Broilers Swine Ruminant Total Million Tons

Tyson Mills Currently Using Distillers

• South Fulton, TN

April 2004

• Robards, KY

April 2004

• Ramsey, IN

February 2005

• Pine Bluff, AR (Blending)

February 2005

• Cullman, AL (Blending) February 2005
• Sedalia, MO

March 2005

• Bergman, AR

March 2005

• Gonzales, TX

April 2005

• Estill Springs, TN

July 2005

• Fairmount, GA

July 2005

• Aurora, MO

July 2005

• Clarksville, AR

August 2005

• Pottsville, AR August 2005
• Nacogdoches, TX July 2005
• Springdale, AR April 2006
• Westville, OK June 2006
• New Market, VA July 2006
• Neshoba County, MS July 2006
• Hope, AR November 2006
• Nashville, AR November 2006
• Grannis, AR November 2006
• Currently in all 30Tyson Mills June 2016

43 464749 53 58 6462 6262 68 64 71 74 7877 80 8584848382848685858585 888688909089899090 8484 80 78767472716969696867 7072 68 62 62 79

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

J

• 8

O

• 8

J

• 9

A

• 9

J

• 9

O

• 9

J

• 1

A

• 1

J

• 1

O

• 1

J

• 1

1 A

• 1

1 J

• 1

1 O

• 1

1 J

• 1

2 A

• 1

2 J

• 1

2 O

• 1

2 J

• 1

3

% Broiler Complexes Using DDGS

4.2 4.44.5 4.24.2 4.7 4.3 4.64.64.6 5.15.25.2 5.0 5.4 4.9 5.55.55.4 5.75.85.96.16.15.96.06.16.2 6.5 6.9 7.5 8.18.28.0 7.87.87.77.87.77.6 7.3 6.9 6.66.5 6.26.1 5.95.9 6.16.16.26.2 5.96.1 6.1

3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

J-08 O-08 J-09 A-09 J-09 O-09 J-10 A-10 J-10 O-10 J-11 A-11 J-11 O-11 J-12 A-12 J-12 O-12 J-13

Broiler Average Inclusion of DDGS

For Only those using: Range 1% – 18%

Average Nutrient Spec for DDGS

Calories lb/kg 1224/2693 Protein 29.69 Lysine 0.87 TSAA 1.05 Trp 0.23 Arg 1.34 Thr 1.06 A.Phos 0.44 Calcium 0.08 Sodium 0.17

Nutritional composition of DDGS and Soybean Meal

Component Percentage DDGS SBM M.E. Kcals/Kg 2620 2453 Moisture 12.50 12.00 Crude protein 26.50 47.80 Crude fat 7.50 1.00 Crude fiber 7.00 3.00 Phosphorus 0.80 0.64 Potassium 0.90 0.72 Sodium 0.20 0.04 Total lysine 0.80 3.02

Predict Prediction ion equations for TMEn equations for TMEn DD DDGS GS (86

(86% % DM DM b basis asis pe per r Kg) Kg) TMEn = 2732.7 + 36.4 (fat) – 73.6 (fiber) + 14.5 (protein) – 26.2 (ash) Batal and Dale 2006 J. Appl. Poultry Res 15:89-93

Corn oil from DDGS C

Corn Corn Oil Assay Oil Assay Results Results

• Linoleic acid

53.30%

• Monounsaturated fat

27.76%

• Polyunsaturated fat

56.13%

• Saturated Fat

15.24%

• Free Fatty Acids

4.69%

• Insolubles

<0.01%

• Moisture 0.72%
• OSI 8.20 hr
• AME calculated

3900 - 4000 Kcals/lb

Practical issues with Distillers

• Logistics
• Reliance on one plant
• Bin allocation at mills
• Consistency
• Moisture levels
• Mycotoxins
• Pellet quality

Potential uses of DDGS in broiler diets continued:

• The usage of distillers will depend on

whether it will cost into the ration when the formulas are optimized

– Competition from other ingredients – Consistency – Nutrient value

DDGS Specification Sheet

• Consistent high quality

– Free flowing – Absence of syrup balls – Golden color

• Minolta Color Lightness L>50
• Minolta Color Yellowness b>40.0
• Novus IDEA value for Lysine dig. >65%

J.V. Caldas*, K. Hilton*, G. Mullenix*, D. Xuemei*, J.A. England*, F. Mussini†, and C.N. Coon*1

*Center of Excellence for Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA †Evonik Industries, 1701 Barrett Lakes Blvd., Suite 340, Kennesaw, GA 30144

Tyson, November 25th, 2015

1

Alexandria, IN

2

Atchison, KS

3

Camila, GA

4

Carrollton, MO

5

Cloverdale , IN

6

Malta Bend, MO

7

Menlo, IA

8

St. Joseph, MO

A Minolta Chroma Meter CR-300 - used to evaluate the color

L (li L (ligh ghtn tness) ess) a (r a (red edne ness) ss) b (y b (yello ellowness) wness)

Cor Corn DD n DDGS GS Supp Supplier lier L (Lightness L (Lightness) Mean Std Dev CV, % #1 Alexandria, IN 55.5 0.62 1.12 #2 Atchison, KS 48.6 1.58 3.26 #3 Camilla, GA 60.6 0.73 1.20 #4 Carrollton, MO 60.2 0.32 0.53 #5 Cloverdale, IN 47.9 0.22 0.46 #6 Malta Bend, MO 58.9 1.54 2.62 #7 Menlo, IA 57.8 0.13 0.22 #8

• St. Joseph, MO

55.8 1.19 2.13

DDGs DDGs su supp ppli lier ers s - U.S. .S.

# Su Supp ppli lier er 1 Alexandria, IN 2 Atchison, KS 3 Camilla, GA 4 Carrollton, MO 5 Cloverdale, IN 6 Malta Bend, MO 7 Menlo, IA 8

• St. Joseph, MO

DDGS samples - sent to 4 labs for analysis: Tyson University of Arkansas Missouri Evonik

# Supplier AME, kcal/lb SD CV, % Min. Max. Range 1 Alexandria, IN 1067 ab 90 8.8 933 1234

301

2 Atchison, KS 1101 a 105 10.4 976 1293

317

3 Camilla, GA 1121 a 75 7.1 1028 1260

232

4 Carrollton, MO 1051 ab 63 6.3 931 1129

198

5 Cloverdale, IN 1013 ab 108 11.1 813 1151

338

6 Malta Bend, MO 1077 ab 60 5.9 973 1162

189

7 Menlo, IA 995 b 65 6.6 886 1080

194

8

• St. Joseph, MO

1103 a 88 7.9 949 1219

270

No N Correction!!!!

• Av. AMEn

kcal/lb SD CV, % SEM P-value 1070 46 4.5 29.5 0.041

27

AS IS # Supplier AMEn, kcal/lb TMEn, kcal/lb Dif. 1 Alexandria, IN 1002 1100 98 2 Atchison, KS 1018 1312 294 4 Carrollton, MO 974 1076 102 Av. 1073 1163 165

28

Lysine

Supplier

Total, (86%DM) AID, % SID, % A.Dig AA,

(86%DM)

S.Dig AA,

(86%DM)

Alexandria, IN 0.78 65.5 69.8 0.51 0.54 Atchison, KS 0.92 69.7 73.0 0.65 0.68 Camilla, GA 0.74 66.6 71.0 0.49 0.53 Carrollton, MO 0.90 71.0 74.4 0.64 0.67 Cloverdale, IN 0.69 70.5 75.0 0.49 0.52 Malta Bend, MO 0.87 68.8 72.2 0.60 0.63 Menlo, IA 0.77 69.6 73.6 0.54 0.57

• St. Joseph, MO

0.75 69.1 73.5 0.52 0.55 Mean 0.80 68.9 72.8 0.56 0.59

SE 2.3 2.21 P-value 0.690 0.726 (AID) Apparent Ileal Digestibility (SID) Standardized ileal Digestibility

.

15.0 17.0 19.0 21.0 23.0 25.0 27.0 29.0

2/29 3/7 3/14 3/21 3/28 4/4

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

% Protein # Analyses 48 Minimum 25.3 Maximum 28.3 AVERAGE 26.4 %CV 3 LCL 25.0 UCL 27.9 % Fat # Analyses 48 Minimum 7.3 Maximum 10.1 AVERAGE 8.4 %CV 6 LCL 7.3 UCL 9.4

Acceptable Mycotoxin Levels in DDGS

• Fumonisin - Max. 30 ppm
• Vomitoxin - Max. 10 ppm
• Aflatoxin - Max. 60 ppb
• Only utilize corn with a maximum of 20 ppb
• f aflatoxin in the ethanol processing plant.
• Zearalenone - no standard set

DDGS Specification Sheet

• Moisture max.

15%

• Crude protein min. 24%
• Crude fat 5-8%
• Crude fiber max.

8.50%

• Sodium

0.15-.30%

• Phosphorus (total)

0.70-0.80%

Summary

• DDGS with low, medium, and high oil

effecting calorie value and subsequent usage

• Consistency between suppliers/plants is

affecting product image

• Corn oil from DDGS process is a valuable

energy source

• Economics will determine the future usage of

DDGS in poultry feeds

Thank You for Your Attention

• Phillip Smith

Tyson Foods, Inc (479)290-4795 phillip.smith@tyson.com