EFFECTS OF COMMERCIAL ENZYMES IN DIETS CONTAINING DRIED DISTILLERS GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES FOR NURSERY PIGS

Two experiments utilizing a total of 530 pigs were conducted to evaluate the effects of commercial enzymes in diets containing dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) on nursery pig growth performance. In Exp. 1, 180 pigs (initially 19.9 lb) were used in a 27-d growth trial to compare the effects of Easyzyme, Hemicell-W, and Porzyme in diets containing 30% DDGS on weanling pig performance. The 5 dietary treatments fed were a positive control (corn-soybean meal-based diet), negative control (diet with 30% corn DDGS), and the negative control diet with either 0.05% Easyzyme, 0.05% Hemicell-W, or 0.05% Porzyme added. Overall (d 0 to 27), pigs fed the diet containing Easyzyme had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the positive control diet. Pigs fed diets containing Hemicell-W had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the control diet with or without 30% DDGS or the diet containing Porzyme. Pigs fed the diet containing Porzyme had ADG similar (P > 0.10) to that of pigs fed the control diets with or without 30% DDGS. There were no differences (P > 0.10) in ADFI or F/G. In Exp. 2, 350 pigs (initially 24.3 lb) were used to evaluate the effects of a commercial enzyme in diets containing a variety of levels and sources of DDGS on nursery pig performance. The 10 experimental treatments were (1) corn-soybean meal positive control, (2) 15% corn DDGS, (3) 30% corn DDGS, (4) 30% corn DDGS + 0.05% Easyzyme, (5) 15% milo DDGS from source 1, (6) 30% milo DDGS from source 1, (7) 30% milo DDGS from source 1 + 0.05% Easyzyme, (8) 15% milo DDGS from source 2, (9) 30% milo DDGS from source 2, and (10) 30% milo DDGS from source 2 + 0.05% Easyzyme. Overall (d 0 to 21), there was no (P > 0.10) enzyme × DDGS source interaction for any of the measured growth variables. Pigs fed diets with increasing corn DDGS had ADG, ADFI, and F/G similar (P > 0.10) to those of pigs fed the control diet. Pigs fed diets with increasing milo DDGS had poorer (linear, P = 0.002) F/G than pigs fed the control diet. Also, pigs fed diets containing milo DDGS had poorer (P = 0.04) F/G than pigs fed diets containing corn DDGS. However, pigs fed different sources of milo DDGS had similar (P > 0.10) ADG, ADFI, and F/G. Adding 0.05% Easyzyme to the diets containing 30% DDGS did not influence (P > 0.10) ADG, ADFI, or F/G.


Summary
Two experiments utilizing a total of 530 pigs were conducted to evaluate the effects of commercial enzymes in diets containing dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) on nursery pig growth performance.In Exp. 1, 180 pigs (initially 19.9 lb) were used in a 27-d growth trial to compare the effects of Easyzyme, Hemicell-W, and Porzyme in diets containing 30% DDGS on weanling pig performance.The 5 dietary treatments fed were a positive control (corn-soybean meal-based diet), negative control (diet with 30% corn DDGS), and the negative control diet with either 0.05% Easyzyme, 0.05% Hemicell-W, or 0.05% Porzyme added.Overall (d 0 to 27), pigs fed the diet containing Easyzyme had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the positive control diet.Pigs fed diets containing Hemicell-W had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the control diet with or without 30% DDGS or the diet containing Porzyme.Pigs fed the diet containing Porzyme had ADG similar (P > 0.10) to that of pigs fed the control diets with or without 30% DDGS.There were no differences (P > 0.10) in ADFI or F/G.In Exp. 2, 350 pigs (initially 24.3 lb) were used to evaluate the effects of a commercial enzyme in diets containing a variety of levels and sources of DDGS on nursery pig performance.The 10 experimental treatments were (1) corn-soybean meal positive control, (2) 15% corn DDGS, (3) 30% corn DDGS, (4) 30% corn DDGS + 0.05% Easyzyme, (5) 15% milo DDGS from source 1, (6) 30% milo DDGS from source 1, (7) 30% milo DDGS from source 1 + 0.05% Easyzyme, (8) 15% milo DDGS from source 2, (9) 30% milo DDGS from source 2, and (10) 30% milo DDGS from source 2 + 0.05% Easyzyme.Overall (d 0 to 21), there was no (P > 0.10) enzyme × DDGS source interaction for any of the measured growth variables.Pigs fed diets with increasing corn DDGS had ADG, ADFI, and F/G similar (P > 0.10) to those of pigs fed the control diet.Pigs fed diets with increasing milo DDGS had poorer (linear, P = 0.002) F/G than pigs fed the control diet.Also, pigs fed diets containing milo DDGS had poorer (P = 0.04) F/G than pigs fed diets containing corn DDGS.However, pigs fed different sources of milo DDGS had similar (P > 0.10) ADG, ADFI, and F/G.Adding 0.05% Easyzyme to the diets containing 30% DDGS did not influence (P > 0.10) ADG, ADFI, or F/G.

Introduction
Rising feed ingredient costs have prompted the swine industry to utilize products that improve feed efficiency.Enzymes have been used extensively in Europe, where feedstuffs with high fiber concentrations are the primary source of carbohydrates in swine diets.Enzymes are used to improve feed utilization and decrease the cost of gain.Because corn is highly digestible and has a low fiber content, enzymes have not consistently shown economic improvements in growth performance when used in corn-based diets.
Recently, high ingredient costs have led to increasing use of coproduct ingredients in swine diets.Dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) are one such coproduct that is widely used.Because the starch fraction is removed, DDGS have a greater fiber fraction than corn.Therefore, enzymes may be more beneficial in diets containing DDGS than in corn-soybean meal-based diets.The objective of these experiments was to evaluate the effects of different commercial enzymes in diets containing a variety of sources of DDGS on weanling pig growth performance.

Procedures
All experimental procedures were approved by the Kansas State University (KSU) Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.Experiment 1.A total of 180 pigs (initially 19.9 lb) were used in a 27-d growth trial to evaluate the effects of 3 different commercial enzymes in diets containing corn DDGS on weanling pig performance.Pigs were blocked by weight and allotted to 1 of 5 dietary treatments.There were 6 pigs per pen and 6 pens per treatment.Each pen contained 1 self-feeder and 1 nipple waterer to provide ad libitum access to feed and water.Pigs were housed in the KSU Swine Teaching and Research Center.
A common pelleted starter diet was fed from weaning until the start of the experiment.The 5 dietary treatments fed were (1) positive control (corn-soybean meal diet), (2) negative control (corn-soybean meal diet with 30% corn DDGS; Chief Ethanol Fuels, Hastings, NE), and the negative control diet with either (3) 0.05% Easyzyme (Archer Daniels Midland Company, Decatur, IL), (4) 0.05% Hemicell-W (Form-A-Feed, Inc., Stewart, MN), or (5) 0.05% Porzyme (Danisco, New Century, MO) added (Table 1).Inclusion levels were based on manufacturers' recommendations and guaranteed analysis (Table 2).Treatment diets were fed for 27 d and were in meal form.Average daily gain, ADFI, and F/G were determined by weighing pigs and measuring feed disappearance on d 7, 14, and 27 of the trial.
Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design with pen as the experimental unit.Pigs were blocked on the basis of weight at the beginning of the trial, and analysis of variance was performed by using the MIXED procedure of SAS.Contrasts were used to determine the effects of enzyme source compared with the control.Experiment 2. A total of 350 pigs (initially 24.3 lb) were used in a 21-d growth trial to evaluate the effects of a commercial enzyme in diets containing corn or milo DDGS on nursery pig performance.Pigs were blocked by weight and allotted to 1 of 10 dietary treatments.There were 5 pigs per pen and 7 pens per treatment.Each pen (5 ft × 5 ft) contained a 4-hole dry self-feeder and 1 cup waterer to provide ad libitum access to feed and water.The study was conducted at the KSU Segregated Early Weaning Facility.
Data were analyzed as a completely randomized design with pen as the experimental unit.Data were analyzed with an analysis of variance by using the MIXED procedure of SAS with treatment as a fixed effect.Contrasts were used to determine the effects of DDGS source and enzyme inclusion compared with the control.

Results and Discussion
Experiment 1. Diet analysis was similar to expected levels (Table 5).Overall (d 0 to 27), there were no differences (P > 0.10) between pigs fed the corn-soybean meal diet or the corn-soybean meal diet with 30% DDGS (Table 6).Furthermore, pigs fed diets containing Porzyme had ADG, ADFI, and F/G simi-lar (P > 0.10) to those of pigs fed the cornsoybean meal diet with or without 30% DDGS.However, pigs fed diets containing Hemicell-W and Easyzyme had poorer (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the positive control diet, and pigs fed the diet containing Hemicell-W also had lower (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed the negative control diet or diet containing Porzyme.There were no differences (P > 0.10) in ADFI or F/G.Experiment 2. Diet analysis was similar to expected levels (Table 7).Corn DDGS had lower CP and fiber contents but higher crude fat content than milo DDGS.Milo DDGS from source 1 had higher CP, fat, fiber, and ash contents than milo DDGS from source 2. Overall (d 0 to 21), there were no (P > 0.10) enzyme × DDGS source interactions for any of the measured growth variables (Tables 8 and 9).Pigs fed diets with increasing corn DDGS had ADG, ADFI, and F/G similar (P > 0.10) to those of pigs fed the control diet.Pigs fed diets with increasing milo DDGS had poorer (linear, P = 0.002) F/G than pigs fed the control diet but similar ADG.Also, pigs fed diets containing milo DDGS diets had poorer (P = 0.04) F/G than pigs fed diets containing corn DDGS.Pigs fed different sources of milo DDGS had similar (P > 0.10) ADG, ADFI, and F/G.However, pigs fed diets containing 30% DDGS had ADG, ADFI, and F/G similar (P > 0.10) to those of pigs fed diets including 30% DDGS with 0.05% enzyme.
In summary, adding different enzymes to diets containing 30% DDGS did not improve performance compared with either a cornsoybean meal-based diet or a corn-soybean meal-based diet with 30% added DDGS.Feeding diets including milo DDGS resulted in poorer feed efficiency because of the lower energy content of milo DDGS.Dried distillers grains withsolubles. 3Diets were formulated from the same lot of corn DDGS from Chief Ethanol Fuels, Hastings, NE. 4 Easzyme, Hemicell-W, and Porzyme were added in place of corn.  2 Results of analyzed values on which the diets were formulated. 3Chief Ethanol Fuels (Hastings, NE). 4 Kansas Ethanol (Lyons, KS). 5 U.S. Energy Partners (Russell, KS).

Table 8 . Effects of dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) with enzymes on nursery pig performance (Exp. 2) 1
Pigs were fed experimental diets for 21 d.

Table 9 . Probability effects of dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) enzymes on nursery pig performance (Exp. 2) 1
2asyzyme (Archer Daniels Midland Company, Decatur, IL).Pigs were fed experimental diets for 21 d.2Diets were formulated from the same lot of corn DDGS from Chief Ethanol Fuels, Hastings, NE. 1