Digestibility marker and ileal amino acid digestibility in phytase-supplemented soybean or canola meals for growing pigs.

Two experiments using soybean meal (SBM) or canola meal (CM) were conducted to investigate whether the choice of digestibility marker influenced the apparent ileal digestibility (AID) or standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of N and AA in diets supplemented with phytase. In each experiment, 18 barrows fitted with T-cannulas at the ileocecal junction were assigned to 3 diets consisting of a N-free diet to determine endogenous losses of N and AA, a semipurified diet (SBM in Exp. 1 or CM in Exp. 2), and the semipurified diet supplemented with phytase at 1,000 phytase units/kg. Three digestibility markers including acid-insoluble ash (AIA), chromic oxide (Cr2O3), and titanium dioxide (TiO2) were added to each diet at 3 g/kg. Each diet was fed for 7 d, consisting of a 5-d adjustment and a 2-d collection of ileal digesta. In both studies, basal ileal endogenous losses determined with Cr2O3 as a digestibility marker were lower (P<0.01) than with those determined with AIA or TiO2 digestibility markers. Using SBM as the protein source in Exp. 1, there was no interaction between phytase and digestibility marker on AID or SID of AA. The AID of N and AA in SBM using AIA as a digestibility marker tended to be lower (P<0.1) compared with Cr2O3 or TiO2 digestibility markers. Phytase supplementation increased (P<0.001) the AID of Ca and P. The use of AIA or Cr2O3 digestibility marker tended to be associated with lower (P<0.1) SID values compared with TiO2. Phytase did not affect the SID of N or any AA in SBM except for Met, for which there was an increase (P<0.05) with phytase supplementation. Using CM as the protein source in Exp. 2, there were significant interactions between digestibility marker and phytase. Phytase supplementation had effects (P<0.01) on AID or SID when Cr2O3 or TiO2 was used as the digestibility marker. With Cr2O3 or TiO2 as the digestibility marker in the CM diets, phytase supplementation increased (P<0.05) the SID of N and all AA (except Trp). There was no SID of N or AA response to phytase supplementation of CM when AIA was used as a digestibility marker. In contrast, there were no clear improvements in AA digestibility from phytase supplementation for SBM. Phytase effects on AID or SID of AA were dependent on the digestibility marker used in diets when CM was used as the protein source but not when SBM was used as the protein source. Therefore, AA digestibility response to phytase supplementation may depend on the protein being evaluated as well as the choice of digestibility marker.