HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dilger, R. N. Articles by Baker, D. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dilger, R. N. Articles by Baker, D. H.

DL-Methionine Is as Efficacious as L-Methionine, but Modest L-Cystine Excesses Are Anorexigenic in Sulfur Amino Acid-Deficient Purified and Practical-Type Diets Fed to Chicks

Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801

¹ Corresponding author: dhbaker{at}uiuc.edu

Three bioassays were conducted to elucidate the effects of dietary cystine on the efficacy of L-Met and DL-Met fed to chicks. In assay 1, a purified diet markedly deficient in Met (0.12%) and cyst(e)ine (0.05%) was used to compare the relative effectiveness of L-Met and DL-Met in the presence of graded levels of dietary cystine. Addition of 0.05% Met improved (P < 0.01) weight gain when added to diets with 0 or 0.07% added L-cystine, but weight gain decreased linearly (P < 0.01) with greater cystine supplementation up to 0.35%, regardless of Met supplementation. There were no differences in growth performance due to supplementation of L-Met vs. DL-Met. In assay 2, a corn-soybean meal-peanut meal diet (0.25% Met and 0.25% cyst(e)ine) was supplemented with 0, 0.025, 0.05, or 0.075% L-Met plus 0 or 0.2% added L-cystine. Supplemental Met improved (P < 0.01) growth performance, but weight gain and feed intake were depressed (P < 0.01) by cystine supplementation. Whereas 0.2% added L-cystine depressed feed intake 6.9%, weight gain was reduced only 3.6%. Thus, cystine supplementation actually improved (P < 0.01) gain:feed. In assay 3, the corn-soybean meal-peanut meal diet was supplemented with 0 or 0.03% L-Met or DL-Met in the absence or presence of 0.2% added L-cystine. Again, Met supplementation improved (P < 0.01) growth performance, whereas supplemental cystine reduced (P < 0.05) weight gain and feed intake, but increased (P < 0.01) gain:feed. From these bioassays, it may be concluded that there is no evidence to suggest differences in effectiveness between L-Met and DL-Met in purified or practical-type low-protein diets of varying sulfur amino acid (SAA) content fed to chicks from 8 to 20 d of age. However, supplemental cystine has a negative impact on voluntary feed intake when supplemented in diets markedly deficient in SAA. This effect is evident with minimal SAA intake and when greater than 50% of SAA intake is provided by cyst(e)ine, rather than Met.

Key Words: chick • cysteine • cystine • efficacy • methionine

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. N. Dilger and D. H. Baker Cyst(e)ine imbalance and its effect on methionine precursor utilization in chicks J Anim Sci, August 1, 2008; 86(8): 1832 - 1840. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]