DIMEVET, Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche Veterinarie, Università di Bologna, 40064 Ozzano Emilia, Italy.
DIMEVET, Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche Veterinarie, Università di Bologna, 40064 Ozzano Emilia, Italy.
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Jul;103(7):6244-6249. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-17644. Epub 2020 Apr 22.
Beet and cane molasses are produced worldwide as a by-product of sugar extraction and are widely used in animal nutrition. Due to their composition, they are fed to ruminants as an energy source. However, molasses has not been properly characterized in the literature; its description has been limited to the type (sugarcane or beet) or to the amount of dry matter (DM), total or water-soluble sugars, crude protein, and ash. Our objective was to better characterize the composition of cane and beet molasses, examine possible differences, and obtain a proper definition of such feeds. For this purpose, 16 cane and 16 beet molasses samples were sourced worldwide and analyzed for chemical composition. The chemical analysis used in this trial characterized 97.4 and 98.3% of the compounds in the DM of cane and beet molasses, respectively. Cane molasses contained less DM compared with beet molasses (76.8 ± 1.02 vs. 78.3 ± 1.61%) as well as crude protein content (6.7 ± 1.8 vs. 13.5 ± 1.4% of DM), with a minimum value of 2.2% of DM in cane molasses and a maximum of 15.6% of DM in beet molasses. The amount of sucrose differed between beet and cane molasses (60.9 ± 4.4 vs. 48.8 ± 6.4% of DM), but variability was high even within cane molasses (39.2-67.3% of DM) and beet molasses. Glucose and fructose were detected in cane molasses (5.3 ± 2.7 and 8.1 ± 2.8% of DM, respectively), showing high variability. Organic acid composition differed as well. Lactic acid was more concentrated in cane molasses than in beet molasses (6.1 ± 2.8 vs. 4.5 ± 1.8% of DM), varying from 1.6 to 12.8% of DM in cane molasses. Dietary cation-anion difference showed numerical differences among cane and beet molasses (7 ± 53 vs. 66 ± 45 mEq/100 g of DM, on average). It varied from -76 to +155 mEq/100 g of DM in the cane group and from +0 to +162 mEq/100 g of DM in the beet group. Data obtained in this study detailed differences in composition between sources of molasses and suggested that a more complete characterization could improve the use of molasses in ration formulation.
甜菜和甘蔗糖蜜作为糖提取的副产品在全球范围内生产，并广泛用于动物营养。由于其组成，它们被作为能量来源喂给反刍动物。然而，糖蜜在文献中没有得到适当的描述；其描述仅限于类型（甘蔗或甜菜）或干物质（DM）、总或水溶性糖、粗蛋白和灰分的含量。我们的目标是更好地描述甘蔗糖蜜和甜菜糖蜜的组成，检查可能的差异，并对这些饲料进行适当的定义。为此，我们从全球范围内采集了 16 个甘蔗糖蜜和 16 个甜菜糖蜜样本，并对其化学成分进行了分析。本试验中使用的化学分析方法分别对甘蔗糖蜜和甜菜糖蜜 DM 中的 97.4%和 98.3%的化合物进行了特征描述。与甜菜糖蜜相比，甘蔗糖蜜的 DM 含量较低（76.8±1.02%比 78.3±1.61%），粗蛋白含量也较低（DM 的 6.7±1.8%比 13.5±1.4%），甘蔗糖蜜的最低 DM 含量为 2.2%，甜菜糖蜜的最高 DM 含量为 15.6%。甘蔗糖蜜和甜菜糖蜜中的蔗糖含量不同（DM 的 60.9±4.4%比 48.8±6.4%），但即使在甘蔗糖蜜中（DM 的 39.2-67.3%）和甜菜糖蜜中，其变异也很高。在甘蔗糖蜜中检测到葡萄糖和果糖（DM 的 5.3±2.7%和 8.1±2.8%），其变异也很高。有机酸组成也不同。甘蔗糖蜜中的乳酸浓度高于甜菜糖蜜（DM 的 6.1±2.8%比 4.5±1.8%），甘蔗糖蜜中 DM 的含量从 1.6%到 12.8%不等。饲粮阳离子-阴离子差值（DCAD）在甘蔗糖蜜和甜菜糖蜜之间存在数值差异（平均每 100 克 DM 为 7±53 与 66±45 毫当量）。甘蔗糖蜜组的 DCAD 值从-76 到+155 毫当量/100 克 DM，而甜菜糖蜜组的 DCAD 值从+0 到+162 毫当量/100 克 DM。本研究获得的数据详细描述了糖蜜来源之间的组成差异，并表明更全面的特征描述可以提高糖蜜在配方中的应用。
