Soybean Meal An Excellent Protein Source for Poultry Feeds docx

Soybean Meal
An Excellent Protein Source
for Poultry Feeds
Darwin G. Britzman, Ph.D.
1
I. Soybean Meal-An Ideal Protein Source for Poultry
Soybeans have been used as a protein/amino acid source in human diets for more than 5000 years. In the
early 1900’s soybeans were introduced into the United States primarily for their oil content. It was
eventually discovered that the meal by-product was a valuable ingredient for livestock and poultry when it
was properly processed. As early as 1917, it was demonstrated that raw soybeans fed to rats were
nutritionally inferior to properly heated soybeans.
Since that time, soybean meal has become the most important source of protein for poultry and other livestock
throughout the world. It is the standard against which other protein sources are compared. It has also become
the protein source that determines the price of proteins for livestock feeding throughout the world.
Soybean production increased globally by 4,017,141 metric tons per year from 1988 to 1998. In 1998 one
hundred fifty seven million metric tons of soybeans were produced in the world. Soybean meal production
in 1998 was 101 million metric tons.
In the United States soybean meal is the primary source of supplemental protein in poultry, swine and other
livestock diets. In 1998 13.28 million metric tons of soybean meal were used in poultry diets. In many of
the feed formulas for poultry and swine, soybean meal is the only source of supplemental protein. Poultry
consume 52.9% of the soybean meal utilized in the United States.
Soybean meal is an excellent choice as a supplemental protein source for poultry for a number of reasons
including the following:
1. Soybean meal contains a high level of protein in comparison to other plant protein sources.
44% with hulls
46.5% to 50% without hulls
2. Soybean meal has an excellent profile of essential amino acids as well as other nutrients including
potassium and the vitamins choline, folic acid, riboflavin, niacin, pantothenic acid and thiamine.
This is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Major Nutrients in Regular and Dehulled Soybean Meal*
Regular Meal Dehulled Meal

Dry Matter 88.2 88.4
Protein 44.0 47.5
Ether Extract 0.8 1.0
Crude Fiber 7.0 3.9
Methionine 0.62 0.67
Cystine 0.66 0.72
Lysine 2.69 2.90
Tryptophan 0.74 0.74
Threonine 1.72 1.87
Phenylalanine 2.16 2.34
Tyrosine 1.91 1.95
Valine 2.07 2.22
Arginine 3.14 3.48
Histidine 1.17 1.28
Leucine 3.39 3.74
Isoleucine 1.96 2.12
Metabolizable Energy, Kcal./Kg. 2230 2440
Choline, Mg./Kg. 2794 2731
Calcium, % 0.29 0.27
Non Phytate Phos., % 0.27 0.27
Potassium, % 2.00 1.98
*Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, Ninth Revised Edition, 1994
2
Table 2: The Digestibility for Limiting Amino Acids in Poultry Diets*
Lysine Methionine Cystine
%
Blood Meal 86 91 76
Canola Meal 80 90 75
Coconut Meal 58 83 48
Corn Gluten Meal 88 97 86

Cottonseed Meal 67 73 73
Feather Meal 66 76 59
Fish Meal 88 92 73
Meat Meal 79 85 58
Peanut Meal 83 88 78
Poultry by-product Meal 83 88 78
Soybean Meal Dehulled 91 92 82
Sesame Meal 88 94 82
Sunflower Meal Dehulled 84 93 78
* Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, Ninth Revised Edition, 1994
Table 3: A Comparison of Soybean Meal with Other Protein Sources as a Source of Lysine *
Protein Source Protein Lysine %
% %
Plant Proteins
Soybean meal 44 2.90 100
Soybean meal 46.5 3.01 104
Soy Protein Concentrate 66 4.20 145
Soy Protein Isolate 92 5.20 179
Alfalfa Meal 17 0.80 28
Canola Meal 38 2.27 27
Corn Gluten Meal 42.1 0.78 58
Sunflower Meal 45.5 1.68 58
Cottonseed Meal 41 1.51 52
Wheat Bran 15 0.56 19
Wheat Gluten, Spray Dried 74 1.30 44
Wheat Middlings 16 0.68 24
Yeast, Brewers Dried 45 3.23 111
Animal Proteins
Egg Protein, Spray Dried 48 3.30 114
Fish Meal 60 4.75 164

Blood Meal, Spray Dried 86 8.02 277
Fish Solubles, Dried 54 1.73 60
Porcine Plasma, Spray Dried 70 6.10 210
Meat and Bone Meal 50 2.80 97
Skim Milk, Dried 33 2.54 87
Whey, Dried 12 0.97 33
* Kansas State University Animal Science Department
3
3. The amino acids in soybean meal are highly digestible. A comparison of the digestibility with other
protein sources is presented in Table 2. Soybean meal has the highest lysine digestibility (91%) of any
on the commonly available protein sources. It also ranks high in methionine, cystine and threonine
digestibility. Methionine is the first limiting amino acid in most poultry diets.
In addition, the variation in digestibility is less for soybean meal as compared to other oilseed meals.
Soybean meal’s relative value as a lysine source compared to other protein supplements is shown in
Table 3.
4. Soybean meal has an excellent lysine to protein ratio. This is shown in Table 4.
5. Soybean meal is a palatable source of supplemental protein. It does not adversely impact the
palatability of rations for poultry or any other type of livestock.
6. When properly processed, soybean meal contains no toxins or antinutritional factors which affect
poultry and other livestock performance.
7. Compared to other plant protein sources, soybean meal has a low content of fiber and a high level of
energy.
44% soybean meal contains approximately 7% fiber
Dehulled soybean meal contains from 3.3 to 3.5% fiber
8. Soybean meal can serve as the sole source of supplemental protein for all types of poultry at an any stage
of growth or production. In most poultry diets soybean meal provides 80% of the dietary amino acids.
9. There is an increasingly abundant supply of soybean meal available to most of the world.
10. Generally soybean meal is a competitively priced source of protein.
11. The quality of soybean meal is relatively consistent compared to other protein sources.
II. Soybean Meal Quality

Soybeans are relatively consistent in quality. Therefore, the quality of the soybean meal is affected mostly
by the processing, handling and storage procedures in producing and transporting the meal. Factors
affected include the following:
P r o t e i n-the protein content of regular (44%) soybean meal will be affected by the amount of foreign
material in the beans or the amount of soy hulls added back to the meal in the processing procedure.
Soybeans grown in the northern regions of the United States tend to be slightly lower in protein
content. There are also seasonal effects on the protein content of the soybeans. These factors will
affect the protein content of dehulled soybean meal and are the reasons for the variances in protein
guarantees for dehulled soybean meal. Those guarantees will vary from 46.5% to 50% protein.
Table 4: Lysine to Protein Ratios for Various Feed Ingredients
Ingredient Crude Protein Lysine Lysine/Protein
% %
Corn 8.3 0.26 3.13
Sorghum grain 9.2 0.22 2.39
Barley 10.5 0.36 3.42
Soybean meal 47.5 3.02 6.36
Fish meal 62.9 4.81 7.64
Sunflower meal 42.2 0.82 1.94
Cottonseed meal 41.4 1.72 4.15
Sesame meal 42.6 1.01 2.37
Canola meal 35.6 2.08 5.84
Meat meal 54.0 3.07 5.27
Requirement, 14 day old broiler 23.0 1.10 4.78
4
Fat-the oil content of soybean meal is affected by the solvent extraction process. If the extraction
process is incomplete, the residual oil will be high. The oil adds to the energy value of the soybean
meal, however, if the meal is to be stored for a period of time there is a risk of rancidity with higher
oil levels. For that reason, a maximum of 1% oil in the soybean meal is preferred. The minimum
guarantee is for 0.1%. Most meals will contain about 0.5%.
Fiber-the fiber content of the soybean meal comes primarily from the hulls that are added back to

the meal during processing. Foreign materials in the soybean can also add to the fiber content of the
meal. Fiber, of course, dilutes the metabolizable energy content of the soybean meal. Maximum
fiber guarantees for 44% and dehulled soybean meal are 7 and 3.3 to 3.5%, respectively.
Moisture-the maximum moisture in the meal should be 12%. Higher levels of moisture can result in
the development of molds within the meal when stored under warm temperature conditions. Higher
moisture content also dilutes the nutritional value of the soybean meal.
Anti-nutritional factors -raw soybeans contain natural toxins for poultry. Trypsin and chymotrypsin
inhibitors-the most problematic anti-nutritional factor is a trypsin inhibitor. The trypsin inhibitors
disrupt protein digestion. They affect poultry by increasing the size of the pancreas by 50 to 100%.
This has adverse effects on bird growth and egg production.
Other toxins include compounds such as phytohaemaglutinins (lectins). These toxins interfer with
the normal absorption of pancreatic amylase thereby allowing the enzyme to be quickly eliminated
in the feces. These compounds are of less importance than the trypsin inhibitors.
Urease is only important in monogastric nutrition as a guide for measuring the adequacy of
processing. It is, however, of concern in ruminant feeds that contain urea. The urease will begin to
break down the urea when it comes in contact with it.
Allergenic factors-Glycinin and Beta-conglycinin reduce nutrient absorption due to their effect on
the integrity of the micro-villi of the small intestine.
Lipase and lipoxygenase-result in peroxidation and the beany flavor of soybean meal.
Hexane-this is the solvent used to extract the oil from the soybeans. Inadequate removal of the
hexane after the extraction process will result in liver damage in poultry. Generally excessive
hexane is not a problem as processors make every effort to recover it from the meal because of cost
and safety considerations.
F o r t u n a t e l y, the anti-nutritional compounds in soybeans are heat sensitive and can be destroyed by proper
processing (toasting) of the soybeans during the production of the soybean meal. The factors involved in proper
processing and methods to evaluate the adequacy of processing will be discussed in section III of this report.
Particle size-the meal should be homogenous, free flowing, without coarse particles or excessive
fines. Coarse particles will result in poultry being able to select the soybean meal from non pelleted
(mash) feed. This will result in unbalanced diets and is not desirable. Extremely fine soybean meal
will result in excessive dust during the feed manufacturing process and when the soybean meal is

used in meal (mash) feeds.
The American Feed Industry Association recommends the following particle sizes:
95-100% through U.S. Standard Sieve No. 10
40-60% through U.S. Standard Sieve No. 20
Maximum of 6.0% through U.S. Sieve No. 80
Flowability-soybean meal is an ingredient that does not flow well in feed mill bins and also tends to
cake or bridge. Therefore, anticaking and flow enhancers are often added to the meal. Limestone
(calcium carbonate) is frequently used. A maximum of 0.5% is recommended.
Other Physical Properties -The American Feed Industry Association has also recommended the
following physical properties:
The color to be light tan to a light brown
The odor to be fresh, not sour, musty or burned
The taste to be bland, free of any beany or burned taste
The bulk density from 16.4 to 18.2 kg. per cubic foot
5
III. Evaluating Soybean Meal Quality
There are a number of methods for evaluating soybean meal quality. These include the following:
Visual Observation-representative samples of soybean meal shipments should be examined to
determine if there are any obvious contaminates. The meal may have become contaminated with
other grains such as corn during shipment and storage. This would, of course, be obvious to the
naked eye. If such contamination were great enough it would dilute the nutrient content of the
meal.
Analyses for Protein, Fiber and Moisture -Since soybean meal is used as a feed ingredient primarily
to provide protein and amino acids, it is important to determine that it contains the minimum level
of protein that has been guaranteed.
Soybean meal is included in feed formulas to provide protein However, soybean meal also provides
some energy. A laboratory assay for fiber would determine if the crude fiber levels are below the
maximum guarantees. If above guarantee, the energy values for the soybean meal would probably
be less than table values. This is also true for moisture. There is also the risk of molding and caking
if moisture contents are above 12% and temperature conditions are right.

These procedures deal primarily with the quality of the soybeans from which the soybean meal has been
produced or the handling of the meal during shipment. The following procedures deal with the processing
of the soybeans to produce soybean meal.
Heat Processing-it has been well documented that soybean must be heat processed to destroy the
antinutritional factors which were discussed in Section II of this report. The degree to which the
soybeans are heated is extremely sensitive. If the soybeans are not adequately heated, the
antinutritional factors will not be destroyed and the amino acid digestibility is negatively affected.
If the soybeans are excessively heated, the antinutritional factors are destroyed and amino acid
digestibility is again negatively affected.
The effect of inadequate heat processing on the amino acid digestibility of soybean meal is shown in
Table 5. The heat processing was accomplished by autoclaving raw soybeans at 121 degrees Centigrade
and 15 psi. These data show that the digestibility of lysine, methionine, cystine and threonine was
increased as the length of autoclaving increased. This was also true for the other essential amino acids.
Table 5: Effect of Under Processing on Amino Acid Digestibility of Raw Soybeans
% Digestibility
Autoclave Time Minutes Lysine Methionine Cystine Threonine
0 73 65 67 64
9 78 70 70 68
18 87 86 83 82
Table 6: Effect of Over Processing Soybean Meal on Amino Acid
Analytical Values and Digestibility
% Digestibility
Autoclave Time Minutes Lysine Methionine Cystine Threonine
0 91 82 86 84
20 78 69 86 86
40 69 62 83 80
Analytical Values
0 3.27 0.70 0.71 1.89
20 2.95 0.66 0.71 1.92
40 2.76 0.63 0.71 1.87

6
The effect of over processing on soybean meal is shown in Table 6. These data demonstrate that both the
analytical values and digestibility of lysine and cystine were reduced by prolonged heating. However,
methionine and threonine were not similarly affected. It is known that lysine is affected by the Maillard
reaction which binds the free amino groups of the lysine with the carbonyl groups in carbohydrates and
reducing sugars and renders the lysine unavailable. The process by which cystine is inactivated by
overprocessing is not known.
The fact that soybean meal quality is very sensitive to processing procedure makes it very important to have
quality evaluation procedures. No doubt the most reliable method of quality evaluation would be to conduct
in vivo digestibility feeding trials. However, such trials are time consuming, costly and subject to biological
variation. Fortunately, there are laboratory procedures that are more rapid and are useful in evaluating
processing adequacy. A brief description of four methods is presented in Table 7.
The Urease Assay-this has been the most commonly used laboratory procedure by the commercial feed
industry in the United States to determine if the soybean meal has been adequately heated to destroy
the antinutritional factors. The enzyme urease is used as a determinate because it is destroyed by heat
at a rate similar to the trypsin inhibitors. The urease assay is a simpler and less costly laboratory
procedure than is the trypsin inhibitor assay. The urease procedure measures the pH rise in an
ammonia solution. For raw soybeans the rise is about 2.0 pH units. The desired pH rise for properly
processed soybean meal is between 0.05 to 0.2 units. Some research has shown that a rise of 0.5 pH
units is acceptable for broilers, turkeys and swine. Satisfactory results have also been obtained with
soybean meal that had a 0 rise in pH units. The urease assay is an effective measure to determine that
soybean meal has been adequately heated to destroy the antinutritional factors. However, it does not
determine if the soybean meal has been overheated and lysine has been rendered undigestible.
KOH Procedure-this procedure was proposed by Araba and Dale at the University of Georgia in 1990.
This procedure is used to determine if soybean meal has been overheated.
Protein Dispersibility Index (PDI) -this procedure has recently received considerable interest and is
being researched by Dr. Carl Parsons at the University of Illinois.
Nitrogen Water Solubility Index -this procedure has received very little attention in poultry and animal
nutrition.
Table 7: Methods for Determining Processing Adequacy of Soybean Meal

Urease Assay
1. Mix 0.2 g of SBM with 10 ml. of urea solution
2. Put in 30° C water bath for 30 minutes
3. Determine pH
4. Calculate pH increase (final pH - initial pH)
KOH Procedure
1. Mix 1.5 g of SBM with 75 ml of 0.2% KOH for 20 minutes
2. Centrifuge or filter
3. Measure soluble Nitrogen
Protein Dispersibility Index (PDI)
1. Mix 8 g of SBM with 150 ml of water
2. Blend at 8500 rpm for 10 minutes
3. Centrifuge or filter and measure soluble Nitrogen
Nitrogen Water Solubility Index
1. Mix 5 g of SBM with 20 ml of water
2. Stir at 120 rpm for 120 minutes at 30° C
3. Centrifuge or filter and measure soluble Nitrogen
7
The application of the urease and KOH protein solubility tests is shown in Table 8. As the processing time of
raw soybeans was increased from 0 to 18 minutes, the weight gain of chicks increased and the pH change
demonstrated that the urease had been destroyed and protein solubility decreased. However, the latter two
were very erratic and inconsistent in changing. This experiment demonstrated that the KOH protein solubility
assay is not effective in determining that soybean meal has been inadequately heated.
Another experiment is shown in Table 9. demonstrating the effect of overprocessing of soybean meal. As
processing time increased from 0 to 80 minutes at 120 degrees and 15 psi, chick growth decreased, feed
efficiency decreased, pH decreased and protein solubility decreased. The solubility of the protein decreased
from 86% at 0 time of autoclaving to 40.8% at 80 minutes of autoclaving. This experiment demonstrated that
the urease test is not effective in determining whether or not the soybean meal has been overprocessed. A
protein solubility of 70 to 85% is considered acceptable.
In an unpublished research trial by Engram and co-workers, three of the methods of processing evaluation were

utilized. These results are presented in Table 10. These data show that 18 minutes of autoclaving raw soybeans
were required to maximize the growth of chicks. During this time the KOH protein solubility did not change,
nor did the urease index. However, the Protein Dispersibility Index (PDI) decreased as autoclaving time
increased indicating that this method may be more sensitive to underprocessing than the other two procedures.
Table 8: Effect of Autoclaving Raw Soybeans on Chick Growth, Urease Index
and KOH Protein Solubility
Autoclave Time Chick Growth Urease Index KOH Protein
Minutes grams/chick pH Change Solubility %
EXPERIMENT # 1
0 98 2.2 87
3 113 2.2 89
6 120 2.1 91
9 124 1.9 91
12 143 0.2 87
15 150 0.0 85
18 151 0.1 76
SBM 158 0.2 77
EXPERIMENT # 2
0 122 2.5 93
6 124 2.4 86
12 152 1.4 90
15 153 0.1 90
18 155 0.0 90
21 156 0.0 74
SBM 156 0.1 74
Table 9: Effect of Autoclaving Soybean Meal on Chick Growth, Urease Index
and KOH Protein Solubility
Autoclave Time Chick Growth* Feed KOH Protein Urease pH
Minutes grams/chick Efficiency Solubility % Change
0 450

a
1.79 86.0 0.03
5 445
a
1.87 76.3 0.02
10 424
a
1.83 74.0 0.00
20 393
b
1.89 65.4 0.00
40 316
c
2.04 48.1 0.00
80 219
d
2.55 40.8 0.00
* To 18 days of age
a, b, c, d
Are not significantly different
8
The particle size of the soybean meal samples affects protein solubility. This is shown in Table 11. Solubility
decreases markedly as particle size of the sample being tested increases. Therefore, it is important that
laboratories grind the soybean meal to consistent particle size to obtain repeatable results when utilizing this
assay procedure.
These experiments demonstrate that there
is no one perfect system of evaluating
soybean processing adequacy. The
protein solubility in KOH test is a method
to determine if soybean meal has been

overprocessed. It is not useful to
determine if the meal in underprocessed.
The urease assay is useful to determine if
the soybean meal is underprocessed but it
is not useful in determining if the meal
has been overprocessed. The more
recently used protein dispersibility index
may be the most sensitive assay. The
nitrogen water solubility index has not
been frequently used.
Perhaps the best approach would be to
combine a couple of the procedures.
The urease test could be used to determine that the soybean meal had been heated enough to destroy the
antinutritional factors. The value should be below 0.5 (below 0.3 preferred). The PDI system would then be
used to determine that the soybean meal had not been overprocessed. A PDI value between 35 to 45% would
be preferred.
As previously mentioned, the primary effect of overheating soybean meal is to render to lysine and cystine
unavailable. The negative effect on chick growth can be overcome by the addition of lysine to the damaged
soybean meal. The results of experiments demonstrating this are presented in Tables 12 and 13. Based on the
data presented in Table 12, the addition of 0.0033% L-lysine for every 10 point decrease in protein solubility
will negate the effect of the overprocessing.
Fortunately, United States’ commercial soybean processing plants have excellent controls in place for
processing soybean meal. Therefore, soybean meal coming from these plants is rarely if ever over or under
processed.
Table 10: Effect of Autoclaving Raw Soybean Flakes on Chick Growth and Assay Values
Autoclave Time Chick Growth KOH Protein Urease pH Protein Dispersibility
Minutes grams/chick Solubility % Change Index
0 178
c
97 2.4 76

6 180
c
93 2.2 63
12 189
b
93 2.1 63
18 204
a
94 1.8 47
24 207
a
81 0.2 30
30 205
a
81 0.3 32
36 207
a
78 0.1 24
80 205
a
0.1
SBM 78 0.1
a, b, c,
Are not significantly different
Table 11: Effect of Particle Size on Protein Solubility of
Dehulled Soybean Meal *
Mean Particle Size Protein Solubility
Micro Meters %
184 90
251 83

299 82
556 79
599 77
707 76
831 74
939 70
* In 0.2% Potassium Hydroxide Solution
9
IV. Utilizing Soybean Meal in Poultry Feeds
A comparison of soybean meals from different countries was reported by Dr. Robert Swick in 1995. The results
of this comparison are shown in Table 14. Dr. Swick demonstrated that differences do exist between soybean
sources in their ability to support broiler growth and feed efficiency.
Table 12: Amino Acid Additions on the Performance of Broilers Fed Overheated Soybean Meal
Treatment Body Weight grams Feed Efficiency
Control (PS 82%) 382
b
1.45
b
Overheated (PS 28%) 246
a
1.97
a
OH + Lysine 358
b
1.55
b
OH + Methionine 253
a
1.98
a

OH + Threonine 237
a
1.94
a
OH + Lys + Met 355
b
1.66
b
OH + Lys + Thr 348
b
1.60
b
OH + Lys + Met + Thr 347
b
1.66
b
OH + Met + Thr 227
a
1.84
a
a, b Means with different superscripts are significantly different at (P<.05)
PS = Protein Solubility
Table 13. L-Lysine Addition on the Performance of Broilers Fed Over-heated SBM
Treatment Body Weight grams Feed Efficiency
Control (PS 80.6%) 391
ab
1.41
Control + 0.2% L-Lys 411
ab
1.38

67% PS 54% PS 67% PS 54% PS
Overheated 383
b
361
b
1.52 1.55
OH + 0.05% L-Lys 394
ab
381
b
1.44 1.42
OH + 0.10% L-Lys 405
ab
393
ab
1.43 1.50
OH + 0.15% L-Lys 412
a
417
a
1.36 1.40
a, b
Means with different superscripts are significantly different at (P<.05)
PS = Protein Solubility
Table 14. U.S. vs Competitive Soybean Meals (Broiler Trial 0-21 days)
Soybean Meal Country of Origin
US-1 US-2 China Korea India 1 India 2 Brazil
Soybean Meals
Crude Protein, % 48.2 44.6 44.0 44.4 45.7 46.4 43.3
Fat % 1.18 1.16 1.05 1.25 1.33 1.15 0.68

TME, kcal/kg 3579
a
3294
ab
3065
b
3496
a
2874
c
3217
ab
3528
a
Urease activity 0.03
a
0.08
b
0.12
c
0.04
a
0.15
d
0.08
b
0.05
a
Performance
N 100 100 100 100 100 100

BW, g 713
a
698
ab
690
b
702
ab
675
b
672
b
FI, g 1037
ab
1039
ab
1009
b
1023
ab
1024
ab
1064
a
F/G 1.45
a
1.49
ab
1.46
a

1.46
a
1.52
b
1.59
c
a, b, c, d
: Means in a row that do not have a common superscript are significantly different (P<.05)
All rations contained 30% SBM and were isocaloric (3124 kcal/kg), isolysinic and isototal sulfur amino acids.
Dudley-Cash (1997); Kang & Swick (1995)
10
Dr. Swick has also shown that fish meal in broiler diets can be replaced by full fat soybean meal in broiler
diets. The results of this research are shown in Table 15. Dr. Swick stated that fish meal can be replaced
without affecting broiler performance if it is replaced on an equal nutrient basis.
Tables 16, 17, and 18 contain the
nutritional suggestions of the U.S. Research
Council for immature leghorn type
chickens, broilers and leghorn type laying
hens. These were taken from the Nutrient
Requirements of Poultry, Ninth Revised
Edition, 1994.
As previously mentioned in this report,
soybean meal is the primary source of
supplemental protein in poultry diets in the
United States. In broiler feeds, dehulled soybean meal is used. In egg production feeds either regular (44%)
soybean or dehulled soybean meal is used.
Example formulas for broiler starter, broiler grower, broiler withdrawal and an egg production layer feeds are
presented in the following pages. Formulas are presented with 44% and dehulled soybean meal. Also
presented are vitamin and trace mineral recommended additions to these feeds.
Table 15: Replacement of Fish Meal in Broiler Diets

with Fullfat Soybean Meal *
5% Fish Meal Fullfat Soybean Meal
Gain – KG 1.684 1.740
FCR 1.960 1950
* Reported at Poultry Science Meeting by Dr. Robert Swick and Saksit
Srinongkute
Table 16: Nutrient Requirements of Immature Leghorn-Type Chickens as Percentages
or Units per Kilogram of Diet
\Vhite.Egg - Laying Strains Brown Egg - Laying Strains
0 to 6 6 to 12 12 to 15 15 Weeks 0 to 6 6 to 12 12 to 18 18 Weeks
Weeks Weeks Weeks To First Egg Weeks Weeks Veeks to First Egg
450g
a
980g
a
1,375g
a
1,475
a
500g
a
1,100g
a
1,500g
a
1,600g
a
Nutrient Unit 2,850
b
2,850

b
2,900
b
2,900
b
2,800
b
2,800
b
2,850
b
2,850
b
Protein and amino acids
Crude protein
c
% 18.00 16.00 15.00 17.00 17.00 15.00 14.00 16.00
Arginine % 1.00 0.83 0.67 0.75 0.94 0.78 0.62 0.72
Glycine + serine % 0.70 0.58 0;47 0.53 0.66 0.54 0.44 0.50
Histidine % 0.26 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.21 0.16 0.18
Isoleucine % 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.45 0.57 0.47 0.37 0.42
Leucine % 1.10 0.55 0.70 0.80 1.00 0.80 0.65 0.75
Lysine % 0.85 0.60 0.45 0.52 0.80 0.56 0.42 0.49
Methionine % 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.22 0.28 0.23 0.19 0.21
Methionine +
Cystine % 0.62 0.52 0.42 0.47 0.59 0.49 0.39 0.44
Phenylalanine % 0.54 4.50 0.36 0.40 0.51 0.42 0.34 0.38
Phenylalanine +
tyrosine % 1.00 0.83 0.67 0.75 0.94 0.78 0.63 0.70
Threonine % 0.68 0.57 0.37 0.47 0.64 0.53 0.35 0.44

Tryptophan % 0.17 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.16 0.13 0.10 0.11
Valine % 0.62 0.52 0.41 0.46 0.59 0.49 0.38 0.43
Fat
Linoleic acid % 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Macrominerals
Calcium
d
% 0.90 0.50 0.50 2.00 0.90 0.80 0.80 1.80
Nonphytate
phosphorus % 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.32 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.35
Potassium % 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Sodium % 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Chlorine % 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11
Magnesium MG 600.00 500.00 400.00 400.00 570.00 470.00 370.00 370.00
11
Trace minerals
Manganese mg 60.00 30.00 30.0 30.0 56.0 28.0 28.0 28.0
Zinc mg 40.00 35.00 35.0 35.0 38.0 33.0 33.0 33.0
Iron mg 80.00 60.00 60.0 60.0 75.0 56.0 56.0 56.0
Copper mg 5.00 4.00 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Iodine mg 0.35 25.00 0.35 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Selenium mg 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.10
Fat soluble vitamins
A IU 1500.00 1500.00 1500.0 1500.0 1,420.0 1,420.0 1,420.0 1,420.0
D3 ICU 200.00 200.00 200.0 300.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 280.0
E IU 10.00 5.00 5.0 5.0 9.5 4.7 4.7 4.7
K mg 0.50 0.50 0.5 0.5 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47
Water soluble vitamins
Riboflavin mg 3.60 1.80 1.8 2.2 3.4 1.7 1.7 1.7
Pantothenic acid mg 10.00 10.00 10.0 10.0 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4

Niacin mg 27.00 11.00 11.0 11.0 26.0 10.3 10.3 10.3
B12 mg 0.009 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.009 0.003 0.003 0.003
Choline mg 1300.0 900.00 500.0 500.0 1225.0 850.0 470.0 470.0
Biotin mg 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.09
FoIic acid mg 0.55 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.52 0.23 0.23 0.23
Thiamin mg 1.0 1.00 0.80 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8
Pyridoxine mg 3.0 3.00 3.00 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8
Note: Where experimental data are lacking, values typeset in bold italics represent an estimate based on values obtained for
other ages or related species
a
Final body weight.
b
These are typical dietary energy concentrations for diets based mainly on corn and soybean meal, expressed in kcal ME
n
/kg diet.
c
Chickens do not have a requirement for crude protein per se. There, however, should he sufficient crude protein to ensure an
adequate nitrogen supply for synthesis of non essential amino acids. Suggested requirements for crude protein are typical of
those derived with corn-soybean meal diets, and levels can be reduced somewhat when svnthetic amino acids are used.
d
The calcium requirement may be increased when diets contain high levels of phytate phosphorus (Nelson. 1984).
Table 17: Nutrient Requirements of Broilers as Percentages or Units per Kilogram of Diet
(90 Percent Dry Matter)
0 to 3 Weeks
a
3 to 6 Weeks
a
6 to 9 Weeks
a
Nutrient Unit 3,200

b
3,200
b
3,200
b
Protein and amino acids
Crude protein
c
% 23.00 20.00 18.00
Arginine % 1.25 1.10 1.00
Glycine + serine % 1.25 1.14 0.97
Histidine % 0.35 0.32 0.27
Isoleucine % 0.80 0.73 0.62
Leucine % 1.20 1.09 0.93
Lysine % 1.10 1.00 0.85
Methionine % 0.50 0.38 0.32
Methionine + cystine % 0.90 0.72 0.60
Phenylananine % 0.72 0.65 0.56
Phenylalanine + tyrosine % 1.34 1.22 1.04
Proline % 0.60 0.55 0.46
Threonine % 0.80 0.74 0.68
Tryptophan % 0.20 0.18 0.16
Valine % 0.90 0.82 0.70
12
Note: Where experiemental data are lacking, values typeset in bold italics represent an estimate based on values obtained for
other ages or related species
a
The 0-to 3-, 3- to 6-, and 6- to 8-week intervals for nutrient requirements are based on chronology for which research data were
available; however, these nutrient requirements are often implemented at younger age intervals or on a weight-of-feed basis.
b

These are typical dietary energy concentrations, expressed in kcal ME
n
/kg diet. Different energy values may be appropriate
depending on local ingredient prices and availability.
c
Broilers chickens do not have a requirement for crude protein per se. There, however, should be sufficient crude protein to ensure
an adequate nitrogen supply for synthesis of non essential amino acids. Suggested requirements for crude protein are typical of
those derived with corn-soybean meal diets, and levels can be reduced somewhat when synthetic amino acids are used.
d
The calcium requirement may be increased when diets contain high levels of phytate phosphorus (Nelson. 1984).
Fat
Linoleic acid % 1.00 1.00 1.00
Macrominerals
Calcium
d
% 1.00 0.90 0.80
Chlorine % 0.20 0.15 0.12
Magnesium mg 600 600 600
Nonphytate phosphorus % 0.45 0.35 0.30
Potassium % 0.30 0.30 0.80
Sodium % 0.20 0.15 0.12
Traceminerals
Copper mg 8 8 8
Iodine mg 0.35 0.35 0.35
Iron mg 80 80 80
Manganese mg 60 60 60
Selenium mg 0.15 0.15 0.15
Zinc mg 40 40 40
Fat soluble vitamins
A IU 1500 1500 1500

D ICU 200 200 200
E IU 10 10 10
K mg 0.50 0.50 0.50
Water soluble vitamins
B12 mg 0.01 0.01 0.007
Biotin mg 0.15 0.15 0.12
Choline mg 1300 1000 750
Folacin mg 0.55 0.55 0.50
Niacin mg 35 30 25
Pantothenic acid mg 10 10 10
Pyridoxine mg 3.5 3.5 3.0
Riboflavin mg 3.6 3.6 3
Thiamin mg 1.80 1.80 1.80
13
Table18: Nutrient Requirements of Leghorn-Type Laying Hens as Percentages or Units per
Kilogram of Diet (90 percent Dry Matter)
Dietary Concentrations Required Amounts Required per Hen Daily
by White-Egg Layers at Different (mg or IU)
Feed Intakes
White-egg breeders White-egg layers Brown-egg layers
at 100 g of feed at 100 g of feed at 110 g of feed
Nutrient Unit 80
a, b
100
a, b
120
a, b
per hen daily
b
per hen daily per hen daily

c
Protein and amino acids
Crude protein
d
% 18.8 15.0 12.5 15000 15000 16500
Arginine
e
% 0.88 0.70 0.58 700 700 770
Histidine % 0.21 0.17 0.14 170 170 190
Isoleucine % 0.81 0.65 0.54 650 650 715
Leucine % 1.03 0.82 0.68 820 820 900
Lvsine % 0.86 0.69 0.58 690 690 760
Methionine % 0.38 0.30 0.25 300 300 330
Methionine +
Cystine % 0.73 0.58 0.48 580 580 645
Phenylalanine % 0,59 0.47 0.39 470 470 520
Phenylalanine - tyrosine % 1.04 0.83 0.69 830 830 910
Threonine % 0.59 0.47 0.39 470 470 520
Tryptophan % 0,20 0.16 0.13 160 160 175
Valine % 0.88 0.70 0.58 700 700 770
Fat
Linoleic acid % 1.25 1.0 0.83 1000 1000 1100
Macrominerals
Calcium
f
% 4.06 3.25 2.71 3250 3250 3600
Chloride % 0.16 0.13 0.11 130 130 145
Magnesium mg 625 500 420 50 50 55
Nonphytate phosphorus
g

% 0.31 0.25 0.21 250 250 275
Potassium % 0.19 0.15 0.13 150 150 165
Sodium % 0.19 0.15 0.13 150 150 165
Trace minerals
Copper mg ? ? ? ? ? ?
Iodine mg 0.044 0.035 0.029 0.010 0.004 0.004
Iron mg 56 45 38 6.0 4.5 5.0
Manganese mg 25 20 17 2.0 2.0 2.2
Selenium mg 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.006 0.006 0.006
Zinc mg 44 35 29 4.5 3.5 3.9
Fat soluble vitamins
A IU 3750 3000 2500 300 300 330
D
3
IU 375 300 250 30 30 33
E IU 6 5 4 1.0 0.5 0.55
K mg 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.05 0.055
Water soluble vitamins
B12
mg 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.008 0.0004 0.0004
Biotin mg 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.011
Choline mg 1310 1050 875 105 105 115
Folacin mg 0.31 0.25 0.21 0.035 0.025 0.028
Niacin mg 12.5 10.0 8.3 1.0 1.0 1.1
Pantothenic acid mg 2.5 2.0 1.7 0.7 0.20 0.22
Pyridoxine mg 3.1 2.5 2.1 0.45 0.25 0.28
Riboflavin mg 3.1 2.5 2.1 0.36 0.25 0.28
Thiamin mg 0.88 0.70 0.60 0.07 0.07 0.08
14
Note: Where experimental data are lacking, values typeset in bold italics represent an estimate based on values obtained for other

ages or related species
a
Grams feed intake per hen daily.
b
Based on dietary ME
n
concentrations of approximately 2900 kcal/kg and assumed rate of egg production of 90 percent (90
eggs per 100 hens daily).
c
Italicized values are based on those from white-egg layers but were increased 10 percent because of large body weight and
possibly more egg mass per day.
d
Laying hens do not have a requirement for crude protein per se. However, there should be sufficient crude protein to ensure
an adequate supply of nonessential amino acids. Suggested requirements for crude protein are typical of those derived with
corn-soybean meal diets, and levels can be reduced somewhat when synthetic amino acids are used.
e
Italicized amino acids values for white-egg-laying chickens were estimated by using Model B (Hurwitz and Bornstein, 1973),
assuming a body weight of 1800 g and 47 g of egg mass per day.
f
The requirement may be higher for maximum eggshell thickness.
g
The requirement may be higher in very hot temperatures.
American Soybean Association
www.asa-europe.org
Rue du Luxembourg 16b, 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique
Tel.: +32 2 548 93 80 • Fax: +32 2 502 68 66 • e-mail: