Follow us on :



Take a look at the Recent articles

Dietary sesame seed hulls utilization on lamb performance, lipid oxidation and fatty acids composition of the meat

E. Bonos

Research Institute of Animal Science / ELGO-Dimitra, Paralimni Giannitsa, 58100, Pella, Greece

E-mail : bhuvaneswari.bibleraaj@uhsm.nhs.uk

A. Kargopoulos

School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, 53100, Florina, Greece

Z. Basdagianni

Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Environment, School of Agriculture, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124, Thessaloniki, Greece

D. Mpantis

School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, 53100, Florina, Greece

E. Taskopoulou

School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, 53100, Florina, Greece

B. Tsilofiti

School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, 53100, Florina, Greece

I. Nikolakakis

School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, 53100, Florina, Greece

DOI: 10.15761/AHDVS.1000101

Article
Article Info
Author Info
Figures & Data

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the dietary use of sesame seed hulls on lamb performance parameters and some meat quality characteristics. A total of 36 lambs of Pelagonia (Florina) breed 68 ± 5 days old and with average initial body weight 18.5 ± 2.6 kg, were randomly allocated to 3 groups. The lambs of the Control group were fed a normal diet based on alfalfa hay, wheat straw and concentrate feed (mainly maize, barley and soybean meal), whereas those from Groups S100 and S200 were fed alfalfa hay, wheat straw and concentrate feeds containing sesame seed hulls at 100 g/kg feed and 200 g/kg feed, respectively. After 9 weeks, experimental period, the animals of Group S200 had significantly (P<0.05) better final body weight, fasting live weight, weight with empty rumen, hot carcass weight, and cold carcass weight compared to the Control group. Moreover, the dressing percentage was significantly higher (P<0.05) for group S200, compared to group S100, but not compared to the controls. Meat lipid oxidation measured as thiobarbituric acid reactive substances content did not differ among all three groups (P>0.05) after 2 or 4 days of refrigeration. Moreover, the fatty acid profile of the meat did not differ (P>0.05) for saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids among all groups. In conclusion, sesame seed hulls can be used in lamb nutrition with some possible benefits regarding the performance parameters.

Key words

fatty acid composition, lambs, lipid peroxidation, meat quality, sesame seed hulls

Introduction

The feedstuffs market is suffering from price fluctuations and quite often availability problems [1-3]. These detrimental situations are usually observed for high protein feeds such soybean meal [4], but they can also be observed for cereals such as maize [5] and barley [6], and other feed ingredients. Consequently, farmers have problems with supplying their livestock with good quality feeds, while keeping the feed cost at manageable levels. Accordingly, nowadays there is an observed increased demand for novel feedstuffs characterized by low price and decent availability, which can be utilized in livestock feeds, without any adverse effects on animal health and productivity. Therefore, many by-products of the food and feed industries are now being examined as alternative feedstuffs.

Sesame (Sesamum indicum) can be considered as a significant oil producing plant, which is cultivated mainly for the production of sesame bread, tahini (or tehineh), halva and sesame oil [3,7,8]. According to FAO data for 2010 [9], sesame seed production occupied 78 million acres, with a production of 3.84 million tons. The sesame seeds contain on average 44 to 58% oil, 18 to 25% crude protein, 13.5% carbohydrates and 5% ash [10-13]. The sesame seeds oil fatty acid composition is on average 18.5% saturated fatty acids (SFA), 45.4% monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), and 36.1% polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), with oleic and linoleic acids being the main components [13]. Also, sesame seeds contain high amounts of the natural antioxidants sesamin, sesamolin, and sesaminol glucosides [3,13-15], which are considered beneficial for animal health. The sesame oil also contains high quantities of these antioxidant polyphenolic compounds, which makes it resistant to oxidation [12,13,15].

During the oil extraction of sesame seeds and the production of tahini, the seeds are dehulled and the kernels are further processed. The produced sesame seed hulls (SSH) on average represent the 12.0% to 13.6% of the initial seed weight, and they also contain a significant percentage of small unbroken seeds that escape the hulling process [13]. The chemical composition of the SSH varies between different extraction facilities [3,13], due to the different oil extraction processes The SSH are utilized in some countries in livestock nutrition, but published data examining the effect of dietary SSH on farm animals performance, and especially on animal product quality, for example meat lipid composition and resistance to oxidation, are very limited [3,16-18].

The aim of this study was to examine the possible effects of replacing parts of soybean meal and maize with SSH in the diet of Pelagonia (Florina) growing lambs, focusing on the performance parameters, carcass quality, meat oxidation during refrigerated storage, and meat fatty acid composition

Materials and methods

Sesame seed hulls procurement

The SSH examined in this experiment were provided by a white sesame seed processing factory in Greece, that produces halva and tehineh. The hulls were analysed according to the proximate analysis guidelines of AOAC [19] for dry matter, crude protein, crude fat, crude fiber, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), ash, and total carbohydrates. The metabolizable energy content of the SSH was estimated based on NRC [20] and Obeidat and Gharaybeh [16]. The chemical composition and metabolisable energy of the SSH is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Chemical composition of sesame seed hulls

 

g/ kg

of Feed

g / kg

of Dry matter

Dry matter

970.0

-

Crude protein

108.3

111.6

Crude fat

134.2

138.4

Crude fiber

171.0

176.3

Ash

165.0

170.1

Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF)

165.6

170.7

Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF)

123.2

127.0

Total carbohydrates

126.0

129.9

Ca

97.2

100.2

Metabolizable Energy (MJ/kg)

15.9

16.4

Animals and diets

The animal experiment was performed in the animal farm of the School of Agriculture Technology, Food Technology and Nutrition, of the Technological Educational Institution of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece. The animal handling and experimental procedures were performed to the principles of the Greek Directorate General of Veterinary Services for the care of animals in experimentation.

A total of 36 lambs (18 male and 18 female) of Pelagonia (Florina) breed (Ovis aries) were used in the experiment. These lambs were initially 68 ± 5 days old (Mean ± St.Dev.) with initial body weight of 18.5 ± 2.6 kg (Mean ± St.Dev.), which did not differ significantly (P>0.05) between males and females. All lambs were individually marked and then were randomly allocated to three treatment groups of 12 lambs each (6 male and 6 female). Each lamb was individually housed in a separate pen (2.7 m2) with hay litter, equipped with appropriate feeder and waterer.

During the 9 weeks of the trial the lambs from the Control group were given a normal rearing ration which was based on alfalfa hay, wheat straw and concentrate (mainly maize, barley and soybean meal). The lambs from Groups S100 and S200 were fed alfalfa hay, wheat straw and concentrate feeds containing SSH at 100 g/kg feed and 200 g/kg feed, respectively. The concentrate feeds of S100 and S200 groups were calculated to be isonitrogenous and isocaloric to the concentrate feed of the control group. The composition and chemical analysis [19,21] of the examined concentrate feeds is given in Table 2. For all groups, the alfalfa hay and the wheat straw were provided in raw form, whereas the concentrate feed was provided in powder form. Feed and drinking water were provided ad libitum.

Table 2. Ingredients and chemical composition of experimental diets

Ingredients, g/kg

Control

S100

S200

Maize

250

130

-

Barley

295

340

380

Wheat bran

70

70

70

Soybean meal

125

80

40

Wheat straw

-

20

50

Alfalfa hay

220

220

220

Sesame seed hulls

-

100

200

Monocalcium phosphate

10

10

10

Calcium carbonate

5

5

5

Salt

10

10

10

Vitamin and mineral premix1

15

15

15

Total

1000

1000

1000

Chemical composition, g/kg of feed

Dry matter

897

902

908

Crude protein

191

188

187

Crude fiber

110

136

165

Crude fat

30

44

58

ADF

144

169

199

NDF

261

295

336

Ash

58

86

117

Μetabolisable Energy (MJ/kg)

12.6

12.6

12.9

1 Premix supplying per kg of feed: 5.85 g Ca; 1.22 g P; 9000 I.U. vitamin A; 3.75 mg vitamin B1; 1300 I.U. vitamin D3; 24.5 mg vitamin E; 0.5 mg Co; 2 mg Cu; 0.7 mg I; 30 mg Fe; 52 mg Mn; 0.24 mg Se; 80 mg Zn.

Measurements

All lambs were individually weighed at the beginning and the end of the trial, and individual feed consumption was recorded daily. At the end of the experiment all lambs were slaughtered after 24hours of fasting. Fasted live weight was recorded immediately before slaughter and hot carcass weight after slaughter. Empty live weight was calculated by subtracting rumen content weight from the fasted live weight. Cold carcass weight was recorded after keeping the carcass at 4°C for 24h. Dressing percentage was calculated as hot carcass weight/empty live weight. Carcass yield was calculated as cold carcass weight/empty live weight. Samples were taken from the rib steaks (Longissimus dorsi muscle) and the thighs (Gluteii muscles), from all the animals of each group, which were immediately vacuum packed and frozen (-45°C) for further analysis.

Lipid oxidation of the rib steak and thigh samples was determined according to a modified Vyncke’s [22] method, as described by Kasapidou et al. [23]. The previously frozen samples were placed in refrigeration conditions (1°C) in a normal fridge, with each sample on a separate plate. One half of the total number of samples was kept refrigerated for 2 days and the other half for 4 days before performing the lipid oxidation analysis. Initially, the muscles of each sample were separated from the bones, and after external/adjacent fat and connective tissue was removed, they were ground in a food processor (Moulinex, France). Subsamples (5 g) were homogenized in 25 ml of 7.5% trichloroacetic acid (w/v) containing 0.1% (w/v) of both n-propyl gallate and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid disodium salt, using a Polytron (Kinematica AG, Littau, Switzerland model PT-MR 3000). The obtained samples were left for approximately 15 to 20 min to allow the extraction of the thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and the resulting slurry was filtered, and 5 ml of the filtrate was mixed with 5 ml of 0.02 M thiobarbituric acid. A sample containing 5 ml of the trichloroacetic acid solution and 5 ml of the thiobarbituric acid solution was prepared to be used as blank. All samples were left in the dark overnight, and the next day absorbance was read at 532 nm against the blank sample using an UV–VIS spectrophotometer (U-2800 Double Beam Spectrophotometer, Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan). TBARS content was calculated using 1,1,3,3 tetraethoxypropane (5–20 nM) as standard and expressed as mg of malondialdehyde per kg of muscle. Each sample was analyzed twice and the average value was calculated.

Moreover, the fatty acid composition of the rib steak muscle samples was determined by gas chromatography. Fatty acids methyl esters were obtained from the frozen samples using the protocol described by O’Fallon et al. [24]. Then, the separation and quantification of the fatty acid methyl esters was carried out with a gas chromatographic system (TraceGC model K07332, ThermoFinnigan, ThermoQuest, Milan, Italy) equipped with a flame ionization detector and a fused silica capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm i.d., coated with cyanopropyl polysiloxane (phase type SP-2380) with a film thickness of 0.20 μm. Supelco, Bellefonte, PA, USA) and a model CSW 1.7 chromatography station (CSW, DataApex Ltd, Prague, Czech Republic) and. The chromatographic conditions were: Carrier: N2, Flow: 1 ml/min; Oven: Temperature 70°C for 0.5 min, increase 30°C/min to 180°C for 10 min, increase 5°C/min to 225°C for 10 min; Inlet temperature: 250°C; Detector temperature: 250°C; Injection: 1 μl, with split 1/20. Fatty acid methylesters retention times and elusion order were identified using ‘Tridecanoic acid’ (T0502-5G, Sigma-Aldrich, USA) internal standard and reference standards: ‘F.A.M.E Mix C8-C24’ (C.N. 18918-1AMP, Supelco, USA), ‘37 Component FAME Mix’ (47885-U, Supelco, USA), ‘Linoleic acid methyl ester cis/trans isomers’ (4-7791, Supelco, USA), as well as accompanying Supelco reference material for the column.

Statistical analysis

In all measurements, the experimental unit was each individual animal. Experimental data were analyzed with the aid of IBM SPSS Statistics 20 software (IBM, USA), using the general linear model function. For the performance parameters, Group and Sex were used as fixed factors in a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and their possible interaction (Group x Sex) was also examined. For the lipid oxidation analysis Group and Tissue used were used as fixed factor in a two-way ANOVA, and their possible interaction (Group x Tissue) was examined. Moreover, for the fatty acid composition analysis the Group was used as a fixed factor in a one-way ANOVA. Values of P<0.05 were considered significant. The homogeneity of the variances was examined with Levene’s test and post-hoc analysis was undertaken with Tukey’s test to identify the differences between the means.

Results and discussion

The SSH used in this trial contained a moderate amount of crude fat and crude protein. SSH chemical composition can vary greatly, depending on the processing method and collection stage. For example, Elleuch et al. [13] examined two different SSH products with very different chemical compositions (dry matter: 83.79% vs. 97.02%; crude fat: 12.21% vs. 32.84%; crude protein 10.23% vs. 18.35%) which were collected before and after roasting the seeds. Also, Farran et al. [18], examined a SSH with moderate amount of crude protein (15.20%) and high amount of ether extract (25.81%). In addition, Obeidat and Gharaybeh [16], used a SSH with high amount of crude protein (25.8%) and moderate amount of ether extract (17.6%). Roasting of the seeds during processing removed moisture and increased the dry matter of SSH. Also, the relatively high crude fat content can be the result of a high number of small seeds that escaped the hulling process. This can be considered beneficial for the feed with such SSH addition, as it increases the energy and antioxidants content. Generally the oil content and protein of the oil seeds by-products is largely affected by the plant variety, as well as the extraction process, for example mechanical or solvent extraction, dehulling and roasting [13,25,26].

All lambs completed the study without any noticeable health problems. The effect of SSH dietary supplementation on the lamb performance parameters is reported in Table 3. The average daily weight gain was significantly (P=0.027) higher for group S200 compared to the controls. Also, the average daily feed consumption was significantly higher (P<0.001) for group S100 compared to the other two groups, as well as significantly higher for group S200 compared to the controls. The feed conversion ratio (kg of feed / kg of weight gain) did not differ (P=0.058) among the groups. Moreover, the male lambs consumed higher quantities of feed compared to the females (P<0.001), and had higher (P=0.001) average daily weight gain, with lower (P=0.021) feed conversion ratio. In an earlier experiment by Obeidat and Aloqaily [17] who examined the dietary use of SSH on Awassi lambs, it was reported that dry matter and organic matter intake was significantly greater for lambs feed diets with SSH compared to controls. Also, in another experiment [16] with black goat kids, it was found that dry matter, organic matter and crude protein intake diets with 10% SSH, was higher compared to controls or diets with 20% SSH. Differences in feed intake may be attributed to modified palatability, digestibility and/or lower dustiness, for example due to the increased crude fat in the diets supplemented with SSH [16,17].

Table 3. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb performance parameters (Mean ± St. Dev)

 

Average daily weight gain

Average daily feed consumption

Feed conversion ratio

Final body weight

Fasting live weight

Empty live weight 1

Hot carcass weight

Cold carcass weight

Dressing percentage 2

Carcass
yield3

Groups

kg/day

kg

kg feed /
 kg gain

kg

kg

kg

kg

kg

%

Kg / 100 kg of Body weight

Control

0.19 b ± 0.06

0.99 c ± 0.02

5.81 ± 1.63

30.8 b ± 3.4

28.6 b ± 3.2

27.0 b ± 2.9

14.8 b ± 1.7

14.0 b ± 1.6

54.9 ab ± 0.6

49.0 b ± 0.4

S100

0.22 ab ± 0.06

1.03 a ± 0.02

4.93 ± 1.28

32.4 ab ± 3.2

30.6 ab ± 3.0

29.0 ab ± 2.8

15.6 ab ± 1.6

15.1 ab ± 1.5

54.4 b ± 1.3

49.3 a ± 0.4

S200

0.25 a ± 0.05

1.02 b ± 0.02

4.20 ± 0.70

34.2 a ± 2.5

32.0 a ± 3.2

29.8 a ± 2.3

16.6 a ± 1.3

15.7 a ± 1.3

55.6 a ± 0.7

49.2 ab ± 0.3

P

0.027

<0.001

0.058

0.005

0.006

0.011

0.004

0.004

0.011

0.048

Sex

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Male

0.25 a ± 0.06

1.03 a ± 0.02

4.34 a ± 1.19

34.4 a ± 2.7

32.2 a ± 2.7

30.2 a ± 2.5

16.7 a ± 1.4

15.9 a ± 1.4

55.3 a ± 1.0

49.4 a ± 0.3

Female

0.19 b ± 0.05

0.99 b ± 0.02

5.62 b ± 2.02

30.4 b ± 2.6

28.6 b ± 2.6

27.0 b ± 2.3

14.8 b ± 1.3

14.0 b ± 1.3

54.6 b ± 0.9

48.9 b ± 0.2

P

0.001

<0.001

0.021

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

0.026

<0.001

Interaction P:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Group x Sex

0.711

0.099

0.586

0.732

0.755

0.567

0.708

0.735

0.755

0.669

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg.

1 Empty live weight was calculated by subtracting rumen content weight from the fasted live weight

2 Dressing percentage was calculated as hot carcass weight / empty live weight.

3 Carcass yield was calculated as cold carcass weight / empty live weight

a,b,c Values in the same column with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)

Regarding the carcass parameters, it was noticed that the final body weight at the end of the trial was significantly (P=0.005) higher for the S200 group, compared to the controls. Moreover, significant improvements were found for the S200 group fasting live weight (P=0.006), empty live weight (P=0.011), hot carcass weight (P=0.004) and cold carcass weight (P=0.004) compared to the control group. The dressing percentage was significantly higher (P=0.011) for the S200 group, compared to the S100 group, but not compared to the control group. Also, the S100 group had a significantly (P=0.048) higher carcass yield compared to the control group, whereas the S200 group was not different. Additionally, the male lambs had significantly better final body weight (P<0.001), fasting live weight (P<0.001), empty live weight (P<0.001), hot carcass weight (P<0.001), cold carcass weight (P<0.001), dressing percentage (P=0.026) and carcass yield (P<0.001), compared to the females. No significant interaction was found between dietary groups and lamb sex. The lamb performance parameters and the differences between males and females are comparable to those previously reported for the Florina (Pelagonia) breed [27]. In a previous study of Obeidat and Aloqaily, [17] who examined the dietary use of 10% or 20% SSH on Awassi lambs ration, it was reported that final fasting live weight, hot and cold carcass weight and dressing percentage did not differ between these SSH groups and controls. Also, in a trial with black goat kids [16] fasting live weight, empty live weight, hot and cold carcass weight and dressing percentage did not differ between groups that consumed 10% or 20% SSH and controls. The improvement of the performance parameters in this trial can probably be attributed to the increased feed intake and/or improved utilization of the feeds.

A relationship between lipid peroxidation, meat acceptability and rancidity has been reported in beef [28]. Large increase of TBARS content can be tasted as an “oxidized” flavor in the meat, making it unacceptable for the consumers. Additionally, the consumption of oxidized fats can be considered as a risk factor for the consumer health, because some of the compounds formed during lipid peroxidation are related to mutagenic and carcinogenic effects, possibly having cytotoxic and genotoxic properties [29-32]. In this experiment, the effect of dietary SSH on thigh and rib steak meat lipid oxidation (TBARS content) after 2 and 4 days of refrigeration is presented in Table 4. No significant differences (P>0.050) were found between the three experimental groups for these measurements. Moreover, thigh and rib steak meat had similar TBARS content (P>0.050) after 2 days of refrigeration, but after 4 days the rib steak meat had significantly (P=0.003) higher quantities compared to the thigh meat. The lack of differences between the different consumed feeds can possibly be attributed to the sufficient levels of endogenous antioxidants in the feed ingredients, as well as the supplemented vitamin and mineral premix. The differences between thigh and rib steak on day 4 of refrigeration, but not on day 2 could be an index of different levels of antioxidant accumulation on the respective muscle tissue. Possible explanations for this effect could be the different levels of lipid deposition, as well as the percentage of unsaturated fatty acid content of the examined parts, which make the stored meat more prone to lipid peroxidation [3,33]. Another possible explanation is the difference of muscle types, i.e. the number of white vs red muscle fibers in the examined muscles, which affect the myoglobin content of the meat [33].

Table 4. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb thigh and rib steak meat lipid oxidation (TBARS*, mg malonaldehyde /kg muscle) after 2 and 4 days of refrigeration (Mean ± St. Dev)

Group

After 2 days of refrigeration

After 4 days of refrigeration

Control

0.494 ± 0.156

0.762 ± 0.304

S100

0.522 ± 0.101

0.729 ± 0.213

S200

0.544 ± 0.140

0.895 ± 0.358

P

0.724

0.313

Tissue

 

 

Thigh meat

0.482 ± 0.734

0.629 a ± 0.164

Rib steak meat

0.559 ± 0.165

0.967 b ± 0.298

P

0.171

0.003

Interaction P:

 

 

Group x Tissue

0.700

0.955

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg

a,b Values in the same column with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)

The fatty acid profile of the meat is important for the physicochemical and the sensorial parameters of the meat. Moreover, in recent years there is increased research interest in the possible modification of this profile, aiming to increase the content of fatty acids considered beneficial for the consumer health. Research has shown that ruminant meat fatty acid profile can be influenced by different rations [34], such as the inclusion of rich PUFA sources in cattle diets [35]. Dietary lipids are subjected to lipolysis by rumen bacteria, which then hydrogenate and isomerize the PUFA included in the feed to more saturated end products [36,37]. At the same time metabolites such as rumenic acid (9 cis, 11 trans-18:2) or vaccenic acid (11 trans-18:1) are produced, which are consider to be beneficial for the consumer [38]. Moreover, it is possible that rumen bacterial populations can be modified by dietary ingredients [36]. Therefore, since SSH contain a significant amount of sesame oil rich in PUFA, it was hypothesized that SSH inclusion in the sheep diets could modify the rumen function and sheep meat composition. Also, SSH have increased crude fiber content compared to soybean meal and maize, which may elevate rumen pH and further modify fatty acid production [38,39]. As it can be seen in Table 5, in this trial only limited differences were found for individual fatty acids, i.e. eicosenoic (20:1n-9) was higher (P=0.002) for S100 and S200 groups, compared to the controls. Accordingly, the most common fatty acids, as well as SFA, MUFA, and PUFA did not differ significantly (P>0.050) between the three experiments groups, in contrast with the original hypothesis of the experiment. It is possible that since SSH unsaturated fatty acids are not protected, they are quickly saturated in the rumen, before being absorbed along the small intestine of the animal [36,37,40].

Table 5. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb on the fatty acid composition (% of total fatty acids) of the rib muscle tissue (Mean ± St. Dev.)

 

 

Control Group

S100 Group

S200 Group

 

Fatty Acid

Common name

%

±

%

±

%

±

P

12:0

Lauric

0.210

0.056

0.248

0.019

0.203

0.073

0.480

14:0

Myristic

2.695

0.797

3.301

0.137

2.646

0.737

0.311

14:1

Myristoleic

0.148

0.048

0.210

0.084

0.098

0.043

0.083

16:0

Palmitic

21.429

2.358

21.505

0.758

20.323

0.947

0.501

16:1

Palmitoleic

1.622

0.373

1.825

0.434

1.386

0.570

0.444

17:0

Heptadecanoic

0.908

0.113

0.978

0.174

0.742

0.095

0.080

17:1

Heptadecenoic

0.657

0.116

0.806

0.233

0.536

0.125

0.126

18:0

Stearic

14.162

1.930

14.073

2.304

13.099

1.854

0.724

9 cis-18:1

cis-Oleic

35.429

5.843

38.171

1.685

33.852

4.607

0.410

6 trans-18:2

trans-Linoleic

0.236

0.089

0.358

0.175

0.350

0.121

0.391

6 cis-18:2

cis-Linoleic

7.771

3.321

6.643

1.618

11.190

3.365

0.121

18:3n-6

γ-Linolenic

0.073

0.033

0.080

0.030

0.099

0.024

0.455

20:0

Arachidic

0.081

0.019

0.132

0.048

0.101

0.019

0.128

18:3n-3

α-Linolenic

1.155

0.214

1.025

0.041

0.935

0.190

0.228

20:1n-9

Eicosenoic

0.280 b

0.111

0.564 a

0.079

0.656 a

0.116

0.002

20:2

Eicosadienoic

0.062

0.030

0.053

0.006

0.079

0.029

0.344

20:3n-3

Eicosatrienoic

0.240

0.137

0.163

0.057

0.259

0.088

0.387

20:4n-6

Arachidonic

3.142

1.748

2.067

0.755

3.442

1.230

0.340

20:5n-3 EPA

Eicosapentenoic

0.463

0.283

0.268

0.098

0.354

0.087

0.351

24:0

Lignoceric

0.237

0.115

0.152

0.037

0.237

0.100

0.351

22:5n-3 DPA

Docosapentaenoic

1.112

0.580

0.682

0.168

0.856

0.166

0.288

22:6n-3 DHA

Docosahexaenoic

0.326

0.181

0.194

0.058

0.330

0.032

0.202

SFA

Total Saturated FA

40.502

3.608

41.166

1.805

38.151

1.708

0.260

MUFA

Total Monounsaturated FA

38.197

6.109

41.600

1.807

36.573

5.188

0.353

PUFA

Total Polyunsaturated FA

14.580

6.436

11.531

2.583

17.894

4.610

0.228

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg

a,b Values in the same row with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)

Conclusion

The dietary incorporation of SSH in the diets of Pelagonia (Florina) growing lambs, improved the final body weight, fasting live weight, weight with empty rumen, hot carcass weight, and cold carcass weight, and feed intake, compared to controls. Meat oxidation did not differ during refrigerated storage conditions. Also, rib meat fatty acid composition did not differ for SFA, MUFA and PUFA, among the dietary treatments. Therefore, SSH could be used in lamb diets with possible beneficial effects on the performance. Additional research should be performed with different diet formulations to enable determination of the optimum supplementation levels in ruminant diets for increased performance and meat quality.

References

  1. Stillman R, Haley M, Mathew K (2009) Grain prices impact entire livestock production cycle. Amber Waves, USDA Economic Research Service March, 24-27.
  2.  Lawrence JD, Mintert J, Anderson JD, Anderson DP (2010) Feed grains and livestock: impacts on meat supplies and prices. Choices.
  3.  Nikolakakis I, Bonos E, Kasapidou E, Kargopoulos A, Mitlianga P (2014) Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on broiler performance, carcass traits and lipid oxidation of the meat. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde 78.
  4. Indexmundi (2016) March Soybean meal monthly price.
  5. Indexmundi (2016) March. Maize (corn) monthly price.
  6. Indexmundi (2016) March. Barley Monthly Price.
  7.  Abou-Gharbia HA, Shehata AAY, Shahidi FM (2000) Effect of processing on oxidative stability and lipid classes of sesame oil. Food Research International 33: 331-340.
  8. Abu-Jdayil B, Al-Malah K, Asoud H (2002) Rheological characterization of milled sesame (tehineh). Food Hydrocolloids 16: 55-61.
  9. FAO (2014) January. Food and Agricultural commodities production: Countries by commodity.
  10. Kahyaoglu T, Kaya S (2006) Modelling of moisture, color and texture changes in sesame seeds during the conventional roasting. Journal of Food Engineering 75: 167-177.
  11. Mohammed HMA, Awatif II (1998) The use of sesame oil unsaponifiable matter as a natural antioxidant. Food Chemistry and Toxicology 62: 269-276.
  12.  Yoshida H, Shigezaki J, Takagi S, Kajimoto C (1995) Variations in the composition of various acyl lipids, tocopherols and lignans in sesame seed oils roasted in a microwave oven. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 68: 407-415.
  13. Elleuch M, Besbes S, Roiseux O, Blecker C, Attia H (2007) Quality characteristics of sesame seeds and by-products. Food Chemistry 103: 641-650.
  14. Kamal-Eldin A, Moazzami A, Washi S (2011) Sesame seed lignans: potent physiological modulators and possible ingredients in functional foods & nutraceuticals. Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric 3: 17-29. [Crossref]
  15. Shahidi F, Liyana-Pathirana CM, Wall DS (2006) Antioxidant activity of white and black sesame seed and their hull fractions. Food Chemistry 99: 478-483.
  16. Obeidat BS, Gharaybeh FF (2011) Effect of feeding sesame hull on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and carcass characteristics of black goat kids. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 24: 206-213.
  17. Obeidat BS, Aloqaily BH (2010) Using sesame hull in Awassi lambs diets: Its effect on growth performance and carcass characteristics and meat quality. Small Ruminant Research 91: 225-230.
  18. Farran MT, Uwayjan MG, Miski AMA, Akhdar NM, Ashkarian VM (2000) Performance of broilers and layers fed graded levels of sesame hull. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 9: 453-459.
  19. Hungerford JM (2005) Committee on Natural Toxins and Food Allergens. Marine and freshwater toxins. J AOAC Int 88: 299-313. [Crossref]
  20. NRC (1994) Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press.
  21. NRC (2007) Nutrient Requirements of Small Ruminants: Sheep, Goats, Cervids, and New World Camelids. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press.
  22. Vyncke W (1975) Evaluation of the direct thiobarbituric acid extraction method for determining oxidative rancidity in mackerel (Scomber scombrus L.). Fette, Seifen, Anstrichmittel 77: 239-240.
  23. Kasapidou E, Wood JD, Richardson RI, Sinclair LA, Wilkinson RG, et al. (2012) Effect of vitamin E supplementation and diet on fatty acid composition and on meat colour and lipid oxidation of lamb leg steaks displayed in modified atmosphere packs. Meat Sci 90: 908-916. [Crossref]
  24. O'Fallon JV, Busboom JR, Nelson ML, Gaskins CT (2007). A direct method for fatty acid methyl ester synthesis: Application to wet meat tissues, oils and feedstuffs. J Anim Sci 85: 1511-1521. [Crossref]
  25. Bonos E, Christaki E, Florou-Paneri P (2011) The sunflower oil and the sunflower meal in animals nutrition. Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society 62: 58-70.
  26. Jakob JP, Mitaru BN, Mbugua PN, Blair R (1996) The feeding value of Kenyan sorghum, sunflower seed cake, and sesame seed cake for broilers and layers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61: 51-56.
  27. Christodoulou V, Bampidis VA, Sossidou E, Ambrosiadis J (2007) Evaluation of Florina (Pelagonia) sheep breed for growth and carcass traits. Small Ruminant Research 70: 239-247.
  28. Campo MM, Nute GR, Hughes SI, Enser M, Wood JD, et al. (2006) Flavour perception of oxidation in beef. Meat Sci 72: 303-311. [Crossref]
  29. Ichinose T, Nobuyuki S, Takano H, Abe M, Sadakane K, et al. (2004) Liver carcinogenesis and formation of 8-hydroxy-deoxyguanosine in C3H/HeN mice by oxidized dietary oils containing carcinogenic dicarbonyl compounds. Food Chemistry and Toxicology 42: 1795-1803. [Crossref]
  30. Jiménez-Colmenero F, Carballo J, Cofrades S (2001) Healthier meat and meat products: their role as functional foods. Meat Sci 59: 5-13. [Crossref]
  31. Liu Q, Lanari MC, Schaefer DM (1995) A review of dietary vitamin E supplementation for improvement of beef quality. J Anim Sci 73: 3131-3140. [Crossref]
  32. Łuczaj W, Skrzydlewska E (2003) DNA damage caused by lipid peroxidation products. Cell Mol Biol Lett 8: 391-413. [Crossref]
  33. Joo ST, Kim GD, Hwang YH, Ryu YC (2013) Control of fresh meat quality through manipulation of muscle fiber characteristics. Meat Sci 95: 828-836. [Crossref]
  34. Aldai N, Dugan MER, Kramer JKG, Mir PS, McAllister TA (2008) Non-ionophore antibiotics do not affect the trans-18:1 and CLA composition in beef adipose tissue. J Anim Sci 86: 3522-3532. [Crossref]
  35. Hristov AN, Kennington LR, McGuire MA, Hunt CW (2005) Effect of diets containing linoleic acid- or oleic acid-rich oils on ruminal fermentation and nutrient digestibility, and performance and fatty acid composition of adipose tissue and muscle tissues of finishing cattle. J Anim Sci 83: 1312-1321. [Crossref]
  36. Aldai N, Klieve AV, Dugan MER, Kramer JKG, Ouwerkerk D, et al. (2012) Evaluation of rumen fatty acid hydrogenation intermediates and differences in bacterial communities after feeding wheat- or corn-based dried distillers grains to feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 90: 2699-2709. [Crossref]
  37. Cozma A, Miere D, Filip L, Andrei S, Banc R, et al. (2013) A review of the metabolic origins of milk fatty acids. Notulae Scientia Biologicae 5: 270-274.
  38. Dugan ME, Aldai N, Kramer JK, Gibb DJ, Juarez M, et al. (2010) Feeding wheat dried distillers grains with solubles improves beef trans and conjugated linoleic acid profiles. J Anim Sci 88: 1842-1847. [Crossref]
  39. Bauman DE, Griinari JM (2003) Nutritional regulation of milk fat synthesis. Annu Rev Nutr 23: 203-227. [Crossref]
  40. POLAN CE, MCNEILL JJ, TOVE SB (1964) BIOHYDROGENATION OF UNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS BY RUMEN BACTERIA. J Bacteriol 88: 1056-1064. [Crossref]

Article Type

Research Article

Publication history

Received date: December 20, 2016
Accepted date: January 09, 2017
Published date: January 13, 2017

Copyright

© 2017 Bonos E. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Citation

Bonos E,Kargopoulos A,Basdagianni Z,Mpantis D,Taskopoulou E, et al. (2017) Dietary sesame seed hulls utilization on lamb performance, lipid oxidation and fatty acids composition of the meat. Anim Husb Dairy Vet Sci 1: DOI: 10.15761/AHDVS.1000101

Corresponding author

Dr. Eleftherios Bonos

Research Institute of Animal Science ELGO-Dimitra, Paralimni Giannitsa, 58100, Pella, Greece.

Table 1. Chemical composition of sesame seed hulls

 

g/ kg

of Feed

g / kg

of Dry matter

Dry matter

970.0

-

Crude protein

108.3

111.6

Crude fat

134.2

138.4

Crude fiber

171.0

176.3

Ash

165.0

170.1

Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF)

165.6

170.7

Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF)

123.2

127.0

Total carbohydrates

126.0

129.9

Ca

97.2

100.2

Metabolizable Energy (MJ/kg)

15.9

16.4

Table 2. Ingredients and chemical composition of experimental diets

Ingredients, g/kg

Control

S100

S200

Maize

250

130

-

Barley

295

340

380

Wheat bran

70

70

70

Soybean meal

125

80

40

Wheat straw

-

20

50

Alfalfa hay

220

220

220

Sesame seed hulls

-

100

200

Monocalcium phosphate

10

10

10

Calcium carbonate

5

5

5

Salt

10

10

10

Vitamin and mineral premix1

15

15

15

Total

1000

1000

1000

Chemical composition, g/kg of feed

Dry matter

897

902

908

Crude protein

191

188

187

Crude fiber

110

136

165

Crude fat

30

44

58

ADF

144

169

199

NDF

261

295

336

Ash

58

86

117

Μetabolisable Energy (MJ/kg)

12.6

12.6

12.9

1 Premix supplying per kg of feed: 5.85 g Ca; 1.22 g P; 9000 I.U. vitamin A; 3.75 mg vitamin B1; 1300 I.U. vitamin D3; 24.5 mg vitamin E; 0.5 mg Co; 2 mg Cu; 0.7 mg I; 30 mg Fe; 52 mg Mn; 0.24 mg Se; 80 mg Zn.

Table 3. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb performance parameters (Mean ± St. Dev)

 

Average daily weight gain

Average daily feed consumption

Feed conversion ratio

Final body weight

Fasting live weight

Empty live weight 1

Hot carcass weight

Cold carcass weight

Dressing percentage 2

Carcass
yield3

Groups

kg/day

kg

kg feed /
 kg gain

kg

kg

kg

kg

kg

%

Kg / 100 kg of Body weight

Control

0.19 b ± 0.06

0.99 c ± 0.02

5.81 ± 1.63

30.8 b ± 3.4

28.6 b ± 3.2

27.0 b ± 2.9

14.8 b ± 1.7

14.0 b ± 1.6

54.9 ab ± 0.6

49.0 b ± 0.4

S100

0.22 ab ± 0.06

1.03 a ± 0.02

4.93 ± 1.28

32.4 ab ± 3.2

30.6 ab ± 3.0

29.0 ab ± 2.8

15.6 ab ± 1.6

15.1 ab ± 1.5

54.4 b ± 1.3

49.3 a ± 0.4

S200

0.25 a ± 0.05

1.02 b ± 0.02

4.20 ± 0.70

34.2 a ± 2.5

32.0 a ± 3.2

29.8 a ± 2.3

16.6 a ± 1.3

15.7 a ± 1.3

55.6 a ± 0.7

49.2 ab ± 0.3

P

0.027

<0.001

0.058

0.005

0.006

0.011

0.004

0.004

0.011

0.048

Sex

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Male

0.25 a ± 0.06

1.03 a ± 0.02

4.34 a ± 1.19

34.4 a ± 2.7

32.2 a ± 2.7

30.2 a ± 2.5

16.7 a ± 1.4

15.9 a ± 1.4

55.3 a ± 1.0

49.4 a ± 0.3

Female

0.19 b ± 0.05

0.99 b ± 0.02

5.62 b ± 2.02

30.4 b ± 2.6

28.6 b ± 2.6

27.0 b ± 2.3

14.8 b ± 1.3

14.0 b ± 1.3

54.6 b ± 0.9

48.9 b ± 0.2

P

0.001

<0.001

0.021

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

0.026

<0.001

Interaction P:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Group x Sex

0.711

0.099

0.586

0.732

0.755

0.567

0.708

0.735

0.755

0.669

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg.

1 Empty live weight was calculated by subtracting rumen content weight from the fasted live weight

2 Dressing percentage was calculated as hot carcass weight / empty live weight.

3 Carcass yield was calculated as cold carcass weight / empty live weight

a,b,c Values in the same column with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)

Table 4. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb thigh and rib steak meat lipid oxidation (TBARS*, mg malonaldehyde /kg muscle) after 2 and 4 days of refrigeration (Mean ± St. Dev)

Group

After 2 days of refrigeration

After 4 days of refrigeration

Control

0.494 ± 0.156

0.762 ± 0.304

S100

0.522 ± 0.101

0.729 ± 0.213

S200

0.544 ± 0.140

0.895 ± 0.358

P

0.724

0.313

Tissue

 

 

Thigh meat

0.482 ± 0.734

0.629 a ± 0.164

Rib steak meat

0.559 ± 0.165

0.967 b ± 0.298

P

0.171

0.003

Interaction P:

 

 

Group x Tissue

0.700

0.955

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg

a,b Values in the same column with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)

Table 5. Effect of dietary sesame seed hulls on lamb on the fatty acid composition (% of total fatty acids) of the rib muscle tissue (Mean ± St. Dev.)

 

 

Control Group

S100 Group

S200 Group

 

Fatty Acid

Common name

%

±

%

±

%

±

P

12:0

Lauric

0.210

0.056

0.248

0.019

0.203

0.073

0.480

14:0

Myristic

2.695

0.797

3.301

0.137

2.646

0.737

0.311

14:1

Myristoleic

0.148

0.048

0.210

0.084

0.098

0.043

0.083

16:0

Palmitic

21.429

2.358

21.505

0.758

20.323

0.947

0.501

16:1

Palmitoleic

1.622

0.373

1.825

0.434

1.386

0.570

0.444

17:0

Heptadecanoic

0.908

0.113

0.978

0.174

0.742

0.095

0.080

17:1

Heptadecenoic

0.657

0.116

0.806

0.233

0.536

0.125

0.126

18:0

Stearic

14.162

1.930

14.073

2.304

13.099

1.854

0.724

9 cis-18:1

cis-Oleic

35.429

5.843

38.171

1.685

33.852

4.607

0.410

6 trans-18:2

trans-Linoleic

0.236

0.089

0.358

0.175

0.350

0.121

0.391

6 cis-18:2

cis-Linoleic

7.771

3.321

6.643

1.618

11.190

3.365

0.121

18:3n-6

γ-Linolenic

0.073

0.033

0.080

0.030

0.099

0.024

0.455

20:0

Arachidic

0.081

0.019

0.132

0.048

0.101

0.019

0.128

18:3n-3

α-Linolenic

1.155

0.214

1.025

0.041

0.935

0.190

0.228

20:1n-9

Eicosenoic

0.280 b

0.111

0.564 a

0.079

0.656 a

0.116

0.002

20:2

Eicosadienoic

0.062

0.030

0.053

0.006

0.079

0.029

0.344

20:3n-3

Eicosatrienoic

0.240

0.137

0.163

0.057

0.259

0.088

0.387

20:4n-6

Arachidonic

3.142

1.748

2.067

0.755

3.442

1.230

0.340

20:5n-3 EPA

Eicosapentenoic

0.463

0.283

0.268

0.098

0.354

0.087

0.351

24:0

Lignoceric

0.237

0.115

0.152

0.037

0.237

0.100

0.351

22:5n-3 DPA

Docosapentaenoic

1.112

0.580

0.682

0.168

0.856

0.166

0.288

22:6n-3 DHA

Docosahexaenoic

0.326

0.181

0.194

0.058

0.330

0.032

0.202

SFA

Total Saturated FA

40.502

3.608

41.166

1.805

38.151

1.708

0.260

MUFA

Total Monounsaturated FA

38.197

6.109

41.600

1.807

36.573

5.188

0.353

PUFA

Total Polyunsaturated FA

14.580

6.436

11.531

2.583

17.894

4.610

0.228

Groups: Control = 0 g SSH / kg; S100 = 100 g SSH / kg; S200 = 200 g SSH / kg

a,b Values in the same row with no common superscript differ significantly (P<0.05)