1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences
  4. Volume 7, 2019
  5. Article

Annual Review of Animal Biosciences

Volume 7, 2019

Meeting Global Feed Protein Demand: Challenge, Opportunity, and Strategy

Abstract

Feed protein supplements are one of the most expensive and limiting feed ingredients. This review offers a comprehensive analysis of how the expected expansion of animal production, driven by the rising world population and living standards for more animal-sourced foods, is creating a global shortage of feed protein supply. Because ruminants, chickens, and pigs contribute to 96% of the global supply of animal protein and aquaculture is growing fast, means of meeting the feed protein requirements of these species are elaborated. Geographic variation and interdependence among China, Europe, and North America in the demand and supply of feed protein are compared. The potential and current state of exploration into alternative feed proteins, including microalgae, insects, single-cell proteins, and coproducts, are highlighted. Strategic innovations are proposed to upgrade feed protein processing and assessment, improve protein digestion by exogenous enzymes, and genetically select feed-efficient livestock breeds. An overall successful and sustainable solution in meeting global feed protein demands will lead to a substantial net gain of human-edible animal protein with a minimal environmental footprint.

Keyword(s): alternative protein, amino acid, feed, food animal, nutrition
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838
2019-02-15
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/animal/7/1/annurev-animal-030117-014838.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1. FAOSTAT. 2016. Food and Agriculture Data 2016 Rome: Food Agric. Organ http://www.fao.org/statistics/en/
  2. 2.  Murphy SP, Allen LH 2003. Nutritional importance of animal source foods. J. Nutr. 133:3932S–35S
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.  Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J 2012. World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision ESA Work. Pap. 12–03, Agric Dev. Econ. Div., Food Agric. Organ., Rome http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap106e/ap106e.pdf
  4. 4.  Mottet A, de Haan C, Falcucci A, Tempio G, Opio C, Gerber P 2017. Livestock: On our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate. Glob. Food Secur. 14:1–8
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 5. HighQuest/Soyatech. 2003. How the Global Oilseed and Grain Trade Works Chesterfield, MO: US Soybean Export Counc https://unitedsoybean.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/RevisedJan12_GlobalOilSeedGrainTrade_2011.pdf
  6. 6.  Hartmann C, Siegrist M 2017. Consumer perception and behavior regarding sustainable protein consumption: a systematic review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 61:11–25
     [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. Food Agric. Organ. 2017. The Future of Food and Agriculture: Trends and Challenges Rome: Food Agric. Organ http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6583e.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.  Robinson TP, Pozzi F 2011. Mapping supply and demand for animal-source foods to 2030 Work. Pap. No. 2, Anim. Prod Health, Food Agric. Organ., Rome http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2425e/i2425e00.pdf
  9. 9. Natl. Res. Counc. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press, 9th rev. ed..
  10. 10. Natl. Res. Counc. 2012. Nutrient Requirements of Swine Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  11. 11. Natl. Res. Counc. 2016. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  12. 12. Alltech. 2018. Global Feed Survey Data Nicholasville, KY: Alltech https://go.alltech.com/alltech-feed-survey
  13. 13. Am. Soybean Assoc. 2017. Soy Stats 2017: A Reference Guide to Important Soybean Facts and Figures St. Louis, MO: Am. Soybean Assoc 36 pp. https://soygrowers.com/news-media/soy-stats/
  14. 14. Natl. Agric. Stat. Surv. 2017. Grain Crushings and Co-Products Production 2016 Summary Washington, DC: US Dep. Agric http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1899
  15. 15.  Westcott P, Hansen J 2016. USDA Agricultural Projections to 2025 Washington, DC: US Dep. Agric https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=37818
  16. 16.  Rojas OJ, Stein HH 2017. Processing of ingredients and diets and effects on nutritional value for pigs. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 8:48
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.  Stein HH, Kim SW, Nielsen TT, Easter RA 2001. Comparative standardized ileal protein and amino acid digestibilities by growing pigs and sows. J. Anim. Sci. 79:2113–22
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.  McPherson RL, Ji F, Wu G, Kim SW 2004. Fetal growth and compositional changes of fetal tissues in the pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 82:2534–40
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.  Ji F, Wu G, Blanton JR Jr, Kim SW 2005. Changes in weight and composition in various tissues of pregnant gilts and their nutritional implications. J. Anim. Sci. 83:366–75
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.  Kim SW, Hurley WL, Wu G, Ji F 2009. Ideal amino acid balance for sows during gestation and lactation. J. Anim. Sci. 87:E123–32
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.  Kim SW, Hurley WL, Han IK, Easter RA 1999. Changes in tissue composition associated with mammary gland growth during lactation in the sow. J. Anim. Sci. 77:2510–16
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.  Kim SW, Hurley WL, Han IK, Stein HH, Easter RA 1999. Effect of nutrient intake on mammary gland growth in lactating sows. J. Anim. Sci. 77:3304–15
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.  Kim SW, Hurley WL, Han IK, Easter RA 2000. Growth of nursing pigs related to the characteristics of nursed mammary glands. J. Anim. Sci. 78:1313–18
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.  Kim SW, Baker DH, Easter RA 2001. Dynamic ideal protein and limiting amino acids for lactating sows: impact of amino acid mobilization. J. Anim. Sci. 79:2356–66
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.  Bosi P, Casini L, Finamore A, Cremokolini C, Merialdi G et al. 2004. Spray-dried plasma improves growth performance and reduces inflammatory status of weaned pigs challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88. J. Anim. Sci. 82:1764–72
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.  Weaver AC, Campbell JM, Crenshaw JD, Polo J, Kim SW 2014. Efficacy of dietary spray dried plasma protein to mitigate the negative effects on performance of pigs fed diets with corn naturally contaminated with multiple mycotoxins. J. Anim. Sci. 92:3878–86
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.  Cromwell GL, Azain MJ, Adeola O, Baidoo SK, Carter SD et al. 2011. Corn distillers dried grains with solubles in diets for growing-finishing pigs: a cooperative study. J. Anim. Sci. 89:2801–11
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.  Yaakugh IDI, Tegbe TSB, Olorunju SAS, Aduku AO 1994. Replacement value of brewers’ dried grain for maize on performance of pigs. J. Sci. Food Agric. 66:465–71
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.  Tusnio A, Pastuszewska B, Swiech B, Taciak M 2011. Response of young pigs to feeding potato protein and potato fibre—nutritional, physiological and biochemical parameters. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 20:361–78
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.  Schedle K, Simmongiovanni A, Corrent E, Bartelt J 2016. Effect of a protein reduced diet with and without high contents of industrial by-products, on zootechnical performance and slaughter parameters of fattening pigs. Vet. Med. Zootech. 73:113–17
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.  Taliercio E, Kim SW 2014. Identification of a second major allergenic epitope in the α-subunit of soy β-conglycinin. Food Agric. Immunol. 25:311–21
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.  Taliercio E, Loveless T, Turano M, Kim SW 2014. Identification of epitopes of the β-subunit of soybean β-conglycinin that are antigenic in four animal species. J. Sci. Food Agric. 94:2289–94
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.  Hong KJ, Lee CH, Kim SW 2004. Aspargillus oryzae GB-107 fermentation improves nutritional quality of food soybeans and feed soybean meals. J. Med. Food 7:430–36
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.  Kim SW 2010. Bio-fermentation technology to improve efficiency of swine nutrition. Asian-Austral. J. Anim. Sci. 23:825–32
     [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.  Kim SW, van Heugten E, Ji F, Mateo RD 2010. Fermented soybean meal as a vegetable protein source: I. Effects on growth performance of nursery pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 88:214–24
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.  Kim SW, Knabe DL, Hong KJ, Easter RA 2003. Use of carbohydrases in corn-soybean meal-based nursery diets. J. Anim. Sci. 81:2496–504
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.  Wang D, Zeng Z, Piao XS, Li DF, Xue LF et al. 2011. Effects of keratinase supplementation of corn-soybean meal based diets on apparent ileal amino acid digestibility in growing pigs and serum amino acids, cytokines, immunoglobulin levels and loin muscle area in nursery pigs. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 65:290–302
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.  Wang D, Piao XS, Zeng ZK, Lu T, Zhang Q et al. 2011. Effects of keratinase on growth performance, nutrient utilization, intestinal morphology, intestinal ecology and inflammatory response of weaned piglets fed diets with different levels of crude protein. Asian-Austral. J. Anim. Sci. 24:1718–28
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.  Heo JM, Kim JC, Hansen CF, Mullan BP, Hampson DJ, Pluske JR 2008. Effects of feeding low protein diets to piglets on plasma urea nitrogen, faecal ammonia nitrogen, the incidence of diarrhoea and performance after weaning. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 62:343–58
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.  Heo JM, Kim JC, Hansen CF, Mullan BP, Hampson DJ, Pluske JR 2009. Feeding a diet with decreased protein content reduces indices of protein fermentation and the incidence of postweaning diarrhea in weaned pigs challenged with an enterotoxigenic strain of Escherichia coli. J. Anim. Sci 87:2833–43
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.  Kerr BJ, Easter RA 1995. Effect of feeding reduced protein, amino acid-supplemented diets on nitrogen and energy balance in grower pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 73:3000–8
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.  Canh TT, Aarnink AJA, Schutte JB, Sutton JD, Langhout DJ, Verstegen MWA 1998. Dietary protein affects nitrogen excretion and ammonia emission from slurry of growing-finishing pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 56:181–91
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.  Jones CK, Tokach MD, Usry JL, Neill CR, Patience JF 2014. Evaluating lysine requirements of nursery pigs fed low protein diets with different sources of nonessential amino acids. J. Anim. Sci. 92:3460–70
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.  Tuitoek K, Young LG, Lange CFM, Kerr BJ 1997. The effect of reducing excess dietary amino acids on growing-finishing pig performance: evaluation of the ideal protein concept. J. Anim. Sci. 75:1575–83
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.  Lee JH, Kim JH, Kim JD, Kim SW, Han IK 2001. Effects of low crude protein diets supplemented with synthetic amino acids on performance, nutrient utilization and carcass characteristics in finishing pigs reared using a phase feeding regimen. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 14:655–67
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.  Toledo JB, Furlan AC, Pozza PC, Carraro J, Moresco G et al. 2014. Reduction of the crude protein content of diets supplemented with essential amino acids for piglets weighing 15 to 30 kilograms. R. Bras. Zootech. 43:301–9
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.  Wu G, Liu Z, Bryant MM, Roland DA 2005. Performance comparison and nutritional requirements of five commercial layer strains in phase IV. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 4:182–86
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.  Nahashon SN, Adefope N, Amenyenu A, Wright D 2007. Effect of varying metabolizable energy and crude protein concentrations in diets of pearl gray guinea fowl pullets. 2. Egg production performance. Poult. Sci. 86:973–82
     [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.  Nahashon SN, Adefope N, Amenyenu A, Wright D 2007. Effect of varying concentrations of dietary crude protein and metabolizable energy on laying performance of pearl grey guinea fowl hens. Poult. Sci. 86:1793–99
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.  Xia W, Zhang H, Lin Y, Zheng C, Wang L et al. 2014. Effects of dietary metabolizable energy and crude protein levels on laying performance of laying ducks. Chin. J. Anim. Nutr. 26:3599–607
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.  Wang S, Ma W, Chen W, Ruan D, Zheng C et al. 2016. Effects of dietary metabolizable energy and crude protein levels on laying performance, egg quality and plasma biochemical indexes of Shaoxing ducks. Chin. J. Anim. Nutr. 28:3803–10
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.  Baker DH, Batal AB, Parr TM, Augspurger NR, Parsons CM 2002. Ideal ratio (relative to lysine) of tryptophan, threonine, isoleucine, and valine for chicks during the second and third weeks posthatch. Poult. Sci. 81:485–94
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.  D'Mello JPF 2003. Responses of growing poultry to amino acids. Amino Acids in Animal Nutrition JPF D'Mello 237–63 Oxon, UK: CABI
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.  Deepak N, Preetam VC, Rajkumar U, Prakash MG, Alexander G 2017. Evaluation of dietary energy and protein requirements of an improved backyard chicken variety (Rajasri) in its juvenile phase. Ind. J. Anim. Nutr. 34:208–13
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.  Perween S, Kumar K, Kumar S, Chandramoni, Gattani A 2017. Effect of feeding different dietary level of energy and protein on nutrient utilization and production economy in Vanaraja chicken under hot humid environment. Environ. Ecol. 35:544–48
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.  Jankowski J, Juskiewicz J, Gulewicz K, Lecewicz A, Slominski BA, Zdunczyk Z 2009. The effect of diets containing soybean meal, soybean protein concentrate, and soybean protein isolate of different oligosaccharide content on growth performance and gut function of young turkeys. Poult. Sci. 88:2132–40
     [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.  Vieira SL, Stefanello C, Sorbara JOB 2014. Formulating poultry diets based on their indigestible components. Poult. Sci. 93:2411–16
     [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.  Zheng L, Li D, Li ZL, Kang LN, Jiang YY et al. 2017. Effects of Bacillus fermentation on the protein microstructure and anti-nutritional factors of soybean meal. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 65:520–26
     [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.  Zuidhof MJ, Schneider BL, Carney VL, Korver DR, Robinson FE 2014. Growth, efficiency, and yield of commercial broilers from 1957, 1978, and 2005. Poult. Sci. 93:1–13
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.  Dorigam JC, Sakomura NK, de Lima MB, Sarcinelli MF, Suzuki RM 2016. Establishing an essential amino acid profile for maintenance in poultry using deletion method. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 100:884–92
     [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.  Bregendahl K, Roberts SA, Kerr B, Hoehler D 2008. Ideal ratios of isoleucine, methionine, methionine plus cystine, threonine, tryptophan, and valine relative to lysine for White Leghorn-type laying hens of twenty-eight to thirty-four weeks of age. Poult. Sci. 87:744–58
     [Google Scholar]
  62. 62. Natl. Bur. Stat. People's Repub. China. 2001–2016. China Statistical Yearbook Beijing: Natl. Bur. Stat. People's Repub. China http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/statisticaldata/annualdata/
  63. 63.  Bentley J 2017. U.S. per capita availability of red meat, poultry, and fish lowest since 1983. Amber Waves Feb. 6. https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2017/januaryfebruary/us-per-capita-availability-of-red-meat-poultry-and-fish-lowest-since-1983/
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.  Makkar HPS 2017. Review: feed demand landscape and implications of food-not-feed strategy for food security and climate change. Animal 12:81744–54
     [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.  Andrade E, Gonçalves A, Mendes-Ferreira A, Silva V, Pinheiro V et al. 2017. A novel feedstuff: ensiling of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) stover and apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) mixtures. Evaluation of the nutritive value, fermentation quality and aerobic stability. J. Sci. Food Agric. 97:4306–13
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.  Vishwanathan KH, Govindaraju K, Singh V, Subramanian R 2011. Production of okara and soy protein concentrates using membrane technology. J. Food Sci. 76:E158–64
     [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.  Verstraete W, De Vrieze J 2017. Microbial technology with major potentials for the urgent environmental needs of the next decades. Microb. Biotechnol. 10:988–94
     [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. Natl. Res. Counc. 2001. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press, 7th rev. ed..
  69. 69. Agric. Food Res. Counc. 1993. Energy and Protein Requirements of Ruminants Wallingford, UK: CABI
  70. 70.  Sok M, Ouellet DR, Firkins JL, Pellerin D, Lapierre H 2017. Amino acid composition of rumen bacteria and protozoa in cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 100:5241–49
     [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.  Thomas C 2004. Feed into Milk: A New Applied Feeding System for Dairy Cows Nottingham, UK: Nottingham Univ. Press
  72. 72.  Schwab CG, Broderick GA 2017. A 100-year review: protein and amino acid nutrition in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10094–112
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.  Calsamiglia S, Ferret A, Reynolds CK, Kristensen NB, van Vuuren AM 2010. Strategies for optimizing nitrogen use by ruminants. Animal 4:1184–96
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.  Schwab CG, Huhtanen P, Hunt C, Hvelplund T 2005. Nitrogen requirements of cattle. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Nutrition of Cattle E Pfeffer, A Hristov 13–70 Wallingford, UK: CABI
     [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. Agric. Res. Counc., Work. Party Nutr. Requir. Rumin. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock: Technical Review by an Agricultural Research Council Working Party Slough, UK: Commonw. Agric. Bur
  76. 76.  Van Amburgh ME, Collao-Saenz EA, Higgs RJ, Ross DA, Recktenwald EB et al. 2015. The Cornell net carbohydrate and protein system: updates to the model and evaluation of Version 6.5. J. Dairy Sci. 98:6361–80
     [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.  Yan T, Frost JP, Agnew RE, Binnie RC, Mayne CS 2006. Relationships among manure nitrogen output and dietary and animal factors in lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 89:3981–91
     [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.  Yan T, Frost JP, Keady TWJ, Agnew RE, Mayne CS 2007. Prediction of nitrogen excretion in feces and urine of beef cattle offered grass silage-based diets. J. Anim. Sci. 85:1982–89
     [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.  Zhao YG, Gordon AW, O'Connell NE, Yan T 2016. Nitrogen utilization efficiency and prediction of nitrogen excretion in sheep fed fresh perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne). J. Anim. Sci. 94:5321–31
     [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.  Abbasi IHR, Abbasi F, El-Hack MEA, Abdel-Latif MA, Soomro RN et al. 2018. Critical analysis of excessive utilization of crude protein in ruminants ration: impact on environmental ecosystem and opportunities of supplementation of limiting amino acids—a review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25:181–90
     [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.  Hynes DN, Stergiadis S, Gordon A, Yan T 2016. Effects of nitrogen levels in concentrate supplements on animal performance and nitrogen utilization of lactating dairy cows fed fresh-cut perennial grass. J. Dairy Sci. 99:8111–20
     [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.  Haque MN, Rulquin H, Andrade A, Faverdin P, Peyraud JL, Lemosquet S 2012. Milk protein synthesis in response to the provision of an “ideal” amino acid profile at 2 levels of metabolizable protein supply in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 95:5876–87
     [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.  Lean IJ, de Ondarza MB, Sniffen CJ, Santos JEP, Griswold KE 2018. Meta-analysis to predict the effects of metabolizable amino acids on dairy cattle performance. J. Dairy Sci. 101:340–64
     [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.  Calsamiglia S, Ferret A, Reynolds CK, Kristensen NB, van Vuuren AM 2010. Strategies for optimizing nitrogen use by ruminants. Animal 4:1184–96
     [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.  Cantalapiedra-Hijar G, Peyraud JL, Lemosquet S, Molina-Alcaide E, Boudra H et al. 2014. Dietary carbohydrate composition modifies the milk N efficiency in late lactation cows fed low crude protein diets. Animal 8:275–85
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. Food Agric. Organ. 2016. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Contributing to Food Security and Nutrition for All Rome: Food Agric. Organ 204 http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5555e.pdf
  87. 87. Organ. Econ. Coop. Dev./Food Agric. Organ. 2017. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2017–2026 Paris: Organ. Econ. Coop. Dev http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7465e.pdf
  88. 88.  Tacon AGJ, Metian M 2015. Feed matters: satisfying the feed demand of aquaculture. Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquacult. 23:1–10
     [Google Scholar]
  89. 89. Natl. Res. Counc. 2011. Nutrient Requirements of Fish and Shrimp Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  90. 90. Mar. Harvest. 2017. Salmon Farming Industry Handbook 2017 Bergen, Nor: Mar. Harvest http://hugin.info/209/R/2103281/797821.pdf
  91. 91.  Ytrestøyl T, Aas TS, Åsgård T 2015. Utilisation of feed resources in production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway. Aquaculture 448:365–74
     [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.  Viola S, Mokady S, Rappaport U, Arieli Y 1982. Partial and complete replacement of fishmeal by soybean meal in feeds for intensive culture of carp. Aquaculture 26:223–36
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.  El-Sayed A-FM 1998. Total replacement of fish meal with animal protein sources in Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (L.). Aquacult. Res. 29:275–80
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.  Ogello E, Munguti J, Sakakura Y, Hagiwara A 2014. Complete replacement of fish meal in the diet of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.) grow-out with alternative protein sources. A review. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2:962–78
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 95.  McLean E, Reid B, Fegan D, Kuhn D, Craig S 2006. Total replacement of fishmeal with an organically certified yeast-based protein in Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) diets: laboratory and field trials. Ribarstvo 64:47–58
     [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.  Francis G, Makkar HPS, Becker K 2001. Antinutritional factors present in plant-derived alternate fish feed ingredients and their effects in fish. Aquaculture 199:197–227
     [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.  Krogdahl Å, Penn M, Thorsen J, Refstie S, Bakke AM 2010. Important antinutrients in plant feedstuffs for aquaculture: an update on recent findings regarding responses in salmonids. Aquacult. Res. 41:333–44
     [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.  de Carvalho RAPLF, Ota RH, Kadry VO, Tacon AGJ, Lemos D 2016. Apparent digestibility of protein, energy and amino acids of six protein sources included at three levels in diets for juvenile white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei reared in high performance conditions. Aquaculture 465:223–34
     [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.  Hasan MR, Hecht T, De Silva SS, Tacon AGJ, eds. 2007. Study and analysis of feeds and fertilizers for sustainable aquaculture development Tech. Pap. 497, Food Agric. Organ. Fish Rome: https://articles.extension.org/sites/default/files/w/5/54/Studyandanalysis.pdf
  100. 100. Food Agric. Organ. 2017. Average apparent digestibility coefficients and digestible energy of various feeds and feed ingredients of common carp Aquacult. Feed Fertil. Resour. Inf. Syst., Food Agric. Organ Rome: http://www.fao.org/fishery/affris/feed-resources-database/en/
  101. 101.  Lall SP 2013. Apparent digestibility coefficients (ADC) of selected protein sources for Atlantic salmon reared in seawater Species profile, Table 8, Aquac. Feed Fertil. Resour. Inf. Syst., Food Agric. Organ Rome: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/affris/docs/Atlantic_Salmon/table_8.htm
  102. 102.  Nieto-López M, Tapia-Salazar M, Ricque-Marie D, Villarreal-Cavazos D, Lemme A, Cruz-Suárez LE 2011. Digestibility of different wheat products in white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei juveniles. Aquaculture 319:369–76
     [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.  Oujifard A, Seyfabadi J, Abedian Kenari A, Rezaei M 2012. Growth and apparent digestibility of nutrients, fatty acids and amino acids in Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei, fed diets with rice protein concentrate as total and partial replacement of fish meal. Aquaculture 342:56–61
     [Google Scholar]
  104. 104.  Yang Q, Zhou Z, Zhou Q, Tan B, Chi S, Dong X 2009. Apparent digestibility of selected feed ingredients for white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei, Boone. Aquacult. Res. 41:78–86
     [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.  Oliva-Teles A, Enes P, Peres H 2015. Replacing fishmeal and fish oil in industrial aquafeeds for carnivorous fish. Feed and Feeding Practices in Aquaculture DA Davis 203–33 Oxford, UK: Woodhead
     [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.  Tlusty M, Rhyne A, Szczebak JT, Bourque B, Bowen JL et al. 2017. A transdisciplinary approach to the initial validation of a single cell protein as an alternative protein source for use in aquafeeds. PeerJ 5:e3170
     [Google Scholar]
  107. 107.  van Raamsdonk LWD, van der Fels-Klerx HJ, de Jong J 2017. New feed ingredients: the insect opportunity. Food Addit. Contam. A 34:1384–97
     [Google Scholar]
  108. 108. Fed. Eur. Aquacult. Prod. 2015. Annual Report 2015 Liege, Belg: Fed. Eur. Aquacult. Prod 40 http://www.aquamedia.org/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=617
  109. 109.  Kiron V, Sørensen M, Huntley M, Vasanth GK, Gong Y et al. 2016. Defatted biomass of the microalga, Desmodesmus sp., can replace fishmeal in the feeds for Atlantic salmon. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:67
     [Google Scholar]
  110. 110.  Sørensen M, Gong Y, Bjarnason F, Vasanth GK, Dahle D et al. 2017. Nannochloropsis oceania–derived defatted meal as an alternative to fishmeal in Atlantic salmon feeds. PLOS ONE 12:e0179907
     [Google Scholar]
  111. 111. Minist. Agric. China. 2016. The Plan of National Agricultural Modernization 2016–2020 Beijing: Minist. Agric., People's Repub. China
  112. 112. Minist. Agric. China. 2016. The Plan of National Planting Structural Adjustment 2016–2020 Beijing: Minist. Agric., People's Repub. China
  113. 113.  Harris EK, Mellencamp MA, Johnston LJ, Cox RB, Shurson GC 2018. Effectiveness of different corn dried distiller grains with solubles feeding strategies and increasing the time intervals between the second Improvest dose and slaughter of immunologically castrated pigs on belly and pork fat quality. Meat Sci 135:62–73
     [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.  Awad EA, Zulkifli I, Soleimani AF, Loh TC 2015. Individual non-essential amino acids fortification of a low-protein diet for broilers under the hot and humid tropical climate. Poult. Sci. 94:2772–77
     [Google Scholar]
  115. 115.  Law FL, Zulkifli I, Soleimani AF, Liang JB, Awad EA 2017. The effects of low-protein diets and protease supplementation on broiler chickens in a hot and humid tropical environment. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 31:1291–300
     [Google Scholar]
  116. 116. EIP-AGRI Focus Group. 2014. EIP-AGRI Focus Group on Protein Crops: Final Report https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/publications/eip-agri-focus-group-protein-crops-final-report
  117. 117.  Martin N 2014. What is the way forward for protein supply? The European perspective. OCL 21:D403
     [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.  Carbon Trust 2013. Carbon Footprinting Software: Footprint Expert London: Carbon Trust http://www.carbontrust.com/software
  119. 119.  Kohn RA, Dinneen MM, Russek-Cohen E 2005. Using blood urea nitrogen to predict nitrogen excretion and efficiency of nitrogen utilization in cattle, sheep, goats, horses, pigs and rat. J. Anim. Sci. 83:879–89
     [Google Scholar]
  120. 120.  Negussie E, de Haas Y, Dehareng F, Dewhurst R, Dijkstra J et al. 2017. Invited review: large-scale indirect measurements for enteric methane emissions in dairy cattle: a review of proxies and their potential for use in management and breeding decisions. J. Dairy Sci. 100:2433–53
     [Google Scholar]
  121. 121. Eur. Feed Manuf. Fed. 2018. FEFAC position on the development of a European protein plan Rep. (18) PR 8, Eur. Feed Manuf. Fed Brussels: https://www.fefac.eu/file.pdf?FileID=81060&CacheMode=Fresh
  122. 122. Comm. Common Organ. Agric. Mark. 2017. Oilseeds and Protein Crops Market Situation Brussels: Eur. Comm https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/cereals/presentations/cereals-oilseeds/market-situation-oilseeds_en.pdf
  123. 123.  van Krimpen M, Veldkamp T, van Der Poel T 2015. Meeting the feed protein demand – possible solutions Slideshow. http://www.fefac.eu/file.pdf?FileID=64009&CacheMode=Fresh
  124. 124.  Johnston DJ, Theodoridou K, Ferris CP 2017. The effects of field bean (Vicia faba) inclusion level in the diet of freshly calved dairy cows. Proceedings of the 2017 Annual Meeting of the British Society of Animal Science, Chester, UK 34 Midlothian, UK: Br. Soc. Anim. Sci
     [Google Scholar]
  125. 125.  Johnston DJ, Dale AJ, Ferris CP 2016. Performance of dairy cows offered silages produced from grass swards or red clover/grass swards. Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting of European Association of Animal Production, Belfast, UK 404 Wageningen, Neth: Wageningen Acad
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 126. US Dep. Agric. Off. Chief Econ. 2018. World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates Washington, DC: US Dep. Agric https://www.usda.gov/oce/commodity/wasde/latest.pdf
  127. 127. US Dep. Agric. Off. Chief Econ. 2018. Oilseeds: world markets and trade World Prod., Mark. Trade Rep., US Dep. Agric., Washington, DC. https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/oilseeds-world-markets-and-trade
  128. 128.  Meeker DL, Meisinger JL 2015. Rendered ingredients significantly influence sustainability, quality, and safety of pet food. J. Anim. Sci. 93:835–47
     [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.  IFFO Yearbook 2017. IFFO Statistical Yearbook Presented at IFFO Annual Conference Washington, DC: Oct 23–25
  130. 130.  Clements JC, Chopin T 2017. Ocean acidification and marine aquaculture in North America: potential impacts and mitigation strategies. Rev. Aquacult. 9:326–41
     [Google Scholar]
  131. 131.  Smith J 2018. ADM selling high-protein ingredient as partial fishmeal replacement. Undercurrent News April 16. https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2018/04/16/agribusiness-giant-adm-selling-high-protein-ingredient-as-fishmeal-replacement/
  132. 132. US Grains Counc. 2018. Feed Grains in All Forms Equivalents, September–August Marketing Year Washington, DC: US Grains Counc https://grains.org/markets-tools-data/tools/feed-grains-in-all-forms-portal/
  133. 133. Coll. Food Agric. Nat. Resour. 2017. Biofuels Co-Products in Animal Feeds St. Paul: Univ. Minn https://www.biofuelscoproducts.umn.edu/general-information/ddgs-feeding-recommendations
  134. 134.  Guyader J, Janzen HH, Kroebel R, Beauchemin KA 2016. Production, management, and environment symposium: forage use to improve environmental sustainability of ruminant production. J. Anim. Sci. 94:3147–58
     [Google Scholar]
  135. 135.  Flachowsky G, Meyer U, Südekum K-H 2017. Land use for edible protein of animal origin—a review. Animals 7:25
     [Google Scholar]
  136. 136.  Sapkota AR, Lefferts LY, McKenzie S, Walker P 2007. What do we feed to food-production animals? A review of animal feed ingredients and their potential impacts on human health. Environ. Health Perspect. 115:663–70
     [Google Scholar]
  137. 137.  Givens DI 2005. The role of animal nutrition in improving the nutritive value. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 64:395–402
     [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.  Pinotti L, Krogdahl A, Givens I, Knight C, Baldi A et al. 2014. The role of animal nutrition in designing optimal foods of animal origin as reviewed by the COST Action Feed for Health (FA0802). Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 18:471–79
     [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.  Kim SW 2010. Bio-fermentation technology to improve efficiency of swine nutrition. Asian-Austral. J. Anim. Sci. 23:825–32
     [Google Scholar]
  140. 140. FAO. 2013. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition: report of an FAO Expert Consultation, 31 March–2 April, 2011, Auckland, New Zealand Food Nutr. Pap. 92, Food Agric. Organ., United Nations Rome: http://www.fao.org/ag/humannutrition/35978-02317b979a686a57aa4593304ffc17f06.pdf
  141. 141.  Tedeschi LO, Fonseca MA, Muir JP, Poppi DP, Carstens GE et al. 2017. A glimpse of the future in animal nutrition science. 2. Current and future solutions. R. Bras. Zootech. 46:452–69
     [Google Scholar]
  142. 142.  Kotrbáček V, Doubek I, Doucha J 2015. The chlorococcalean alga Chlorella in animal nutrition: a review. J. Appl. Phycol. 27:2173–80
     [Google Scholar]
  143. 143.  Lum KK, Kim JG, Lei XG 2013. Dual potential of microalgae as a sustainable biofuel feedstock and animal feed. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 4:53
     [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.  Gatrell SK, Lum KK, Kim JG, Lei XG 2014. Potential of defatted microalgae from the biofuel industry as an ingredient to replace corn and soybean meal in swine and poultry diets. J. Anim. Sci. 92:1306–14
     [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.  Popp J, Harangi-Rákos M, Gabnai Z, Balogh P, Antal G, Bai A 2016. Biofuels and their co-products as livestock feed: global economic and environmental implications. Molecules 21:285
     [Google Scholar]
  146. 146.  Ekmay R, Gatrell SK, Lum KK, Kim JG, Lei XG 2014. Nutritional and metabolic impacts of a defatted green marine microalgal (Desmodesmus sp.) biomass in diets for weanling pigs and broiler chickens. J. Agric. Food Chem. 62:9783–91
     [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.  Gatrell SK, Derksen T, O'Neil E, Lei XG 2017. A new type of defatted green microalgae exerts dose-dependent nutritional, metabolic, and environmental impacts in broiler chicks. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 26:358–66
     [Google Scholar]
  148. 148.  Austic RE, Mustafa A, Jung BY, Gatrell S, Lei XG 2013. Potential and limitation of a new defatted diatom microalgal biomass in replacing soybean meal and corn in diets for broiler chickens. J. Agric. Food Chem. 61:7341–48
     [Google Scholar]
  149. 149.  Manor ML, Kim J, Derksen TJ, Schwartz RL, Roneker CA et al. 2017. Defatted microalgae serve as a dual dietary source of highly bioavailable iron and protein in an anemic pig model. Algal Res 26:409–14
     [Google Scholar]
  150. 150.  Leng X, Hsu K, Austic RE, Lei XG 2014. Effect of dietary defatted diatom biomass on egg production and quality of laying hens. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 5:3
     [Google Scholar]
  151. 151.  Ekmay R, Chou K, Magnuson A, Lei XG 2015. Continual feeding of two types of microalgal biomass affected protein metabolism in laying hens. J. Anim. Sci. 93:287–97
     [Google Scholar]
  152. 152.  da Silva GG, Ferreira de JE, Takiya CS, Del Valle TA, da Silva TH et al. 2016. Short communication: partial replacement of ground corn with algae meal in a dairy cow diet: milk yield and composition, nutrient digestibility, and metabolic profile. J. Dairy Sci. 99:8880–84
     [Google Scholar]
  153. 153.  Stokes RS, Loy DD, Hansen SL 2016. Effects of increased inclusion of algae meal on finishing steer performance and carcass characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 94:687–96
     [Google Scholar]
  154. 154.  Gatrell SK, Kim JG, Derksen TJ, O'Neil EV, Lei XG 2015. Creating ω-3 fatty acid-enriched chicken using defatted green microalgal biomass. J. Agric. Food Chem. 63:9315–22
     [Google Scholar]
  155. 155.  Kim JG, Barcus M, Magnuson A, Tao L, Lei XG 2016. Supplemental defatted microalgae affects egg and tissue fatty acid composition differently in laying hens fed diets containing corn and flaxseed oil. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 25:528–38
     [Google Scholar]
  156. 156.  Phelps KJ, Drouillard JS, O'Quinn TG, Burnett DD, Blackmon TL et al. 2016. Feeding microalgae meal (All-G Rich; Schizochytrium limacinum CCAP 4087/2) to beef heifers. I: effects on longissimus lumborum steak color and palatability. J. Anim. Sci. 94:4016–29
     [Google Scholar]
  157. 157.  Green CH, Huntley ME, Archibald I, Gerber LN, Sills DL et al. 2016. Marine microalgae: climate, energy, and food security from the sea. Oceanography 29:10–15
     [Google Scholar]
  158. 158.  Walsh MJ, Van Doren LG, Sills DL, Archibald I, Beal CM et al. 2016. Algal food and fuel coproduction can mitigate greenhouse gas emissions while improving land and water-use efficiency. Environ. Res. Lett. 11:114006
     [Google Scholar]
  159. 159.  Leiber F, Gelencsér T, Stamer A, Amsler Z 2017. Insect and legume-based protein sources to replace soybean cake in an organic broiler diet: effects on growth performance and physical meat quality. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 32:21–27
     [Google Scholar]
  160. 160.  Makkar HPS, Tran G, Heuze V, Ankers P 2014. State-of-the-art on use of insects as animal feed. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 197:1–33
     [Google Scholar]
  161. 161.  Allegretti C, Talamini E, Schmidt V, Bogomi PC, Ortega E 2018. Insect as feed: an energy assessment of insect meal as a sustainable protein source for the Brazilian poultry industry. J. Clean. Prod. 171:403–12
     [Google Scholar]
  162. 162.  Matisse S, Boon N, Piekara I, Verstraete W 2016. Microbial protein: future sustainable food supply route with low environmental footprint. Microb. Biotechnol. 9:568–75
     [Google Scholar]
  163. 163.  Taylor IJ, Senior PJ 1978. Single cell proteins: a new source of animal feeds. Endeavour 2:31–34
     [Google Scholar]
  164. 164.  Overland M, Tauson AH, Shearer K, Skrede A 2010. Evaluation of methane-utilising bacteria products as feed ingredients for monogastric animals. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 64:171–89
     [Google Scholar]
  165. 165.  Oshoma CE, Eguakun-Owie SO 2018. Conversion of food waste to single cell protein using Aspergillus niger. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. . Manag 22:3350–55
     [Google Scholar]
  166. 166.  Bajpai P 2017. Singe Cell Protein Production from Lignocellulosic Biomass Singapore: Springer
  167. 167.  Patelski P, Berlowska J, Dziugan P, Pielech-Przybylska K, Balcerek M et al. 2015. Utilization of sugar beet bagasse for the biosynthesis of yeast SCP. J. Food Eng. 167:32–37
     [Google Scholar]
  168. 168.  Meng X, Slominski BA, Campbell LD, Guenter W, Jones O 2006. The use of enzyme technology for improved energy utilization from full-fat oilseeds. Part I: canola seed. Poult. Sci. 85:1025–30
     [Google Scholar]
  169. 169.  Campbell LD, Schoene F 1998. Effects of antinutritional factors in rapeseed: a review. EAAP Publ 93:185–98
     [Google Scholar]
  170. 170.  Ao T 2011. Using exogenous enzymes to increase the nutritional value of soybean meal in poultry diet. Soybean and Nutrition H El-Shemy 201–14 Rijeka, Croatia: Intech
     [Google Scholar]
  171. 171.  Glencross BD, Booth M, Allan GL 2007. A feed is only as good as its ingredients—a review of ingredient evaluation. Aquacult. Nutr. 13:17–34
     [Google Scholar]
  172. 172.  Zhao F, Ren LQ, Mi BM, Tan HZ, Zhao JT et al. 2014. Developing a computer-controlled simulated digestion system to predict the concentration of metabolizable energy of feedstuffs for rooster. J. Anim. Sci. 92:1537–47
     [Google Scholar]
  173. 173.  Yadav JL, Sah RA 2005. Supplementation of corn-soybean based broiler's diets with different levels of acid protease. J. Int. Agric. Anim. Sci. 26:65–70
     [Google Scholar]
  174. 174.  Pettersson D, Pontoppidan K 2013. Soybean meal and the potential for upgrading its feeding value by enzyme supplementation. Soybean—Bio-Active Compounds H El-Shemy 287–307 London: IntechOpen Ltd
     [Google Scholar]
  175. 175.  Chen H, Zhang S, Park I, Kim SW 2017. Impacts of energy feeds and supplemental protease on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and gut health of pigs from 18 to 45 kg body weight. Anim. Nutr. 3:359–65
     [Google Scholar]
  176. 176.  Rezaei M, Borbor S, Zaghari M, Teimouri A 2007. Effect of phytase supplementation on nutrients availability and performance of broiler chicks. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 6:55–58
     [Google Scholar]
  177. 177.  Santos FR, Hruby M, Pierson EEM, Remus JC, Sakomura NK 2008. Effect of phytase supplementation in diets on nutrient digestibility and performance in broiler chicks. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 17:191–201
     [Google Scholar]
  178. 178.  Matassa S, Boon N, Pikaar I, Verstraete W 2016. Microbial protein: future sustainable food supply route with low environmental footprint. Microb. Biotechnol. 9:568–75
     [Google Scholar]
  179. 179.  Ouweltjesa W, Verschurenb LMG, Pijlmand J, Bergsmac IR, Schokker D et al. 2018. The repeatability of individual nutrient digestibility in pigs. Livest. Sci. 207:63–67
     [Google Scholar]
  180. 180.  de Verdal H, Komen H, Quillet E, Chatain B, Allal F et al. 2018. Improving feed efficiency in fish using selective breeding: a review. Rev. Aquacult. 10:833–51
     [Google Scholar]
  181. 181.  Golovan SP, Meidinger RG, Ajakaiye A, Cottrill M, Wiederkehr MZ et al. 2001. Pigs expressing salivary phytase produce low-phosphorus manure. Nat. Biotechnol 19:741–45 Erratum 2001. Nat. Biotechnol 19:979
     [Google Scholar]
  182. 182.  Zheng QT, Lin J, Huang JJ, Zhang HY, Zhang R et al. 2017. Reconstitution of UCP1 using CRISPR/Cas9 in the white adipose tissue of pigs decreases fat deposition and improves thermogenic capacity. PNAS 114:E9474–82
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838
Loading
Meeting Global Feed Protein Demand: Challenge, Opportunity, and Strategy
Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 7, 221 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-animal-030117-014838
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error