U.S. patent application number 11/890032 was filed with the patent office on 2007-11-29 for food and feed compositions including resistant starch.
Invention is credited to Ian Lewis Brown, Wallace H. Kunerth, Bill L. Miller.
Application Number | 20070275038 11/890032 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 32711418 |
Filed Date | 2007-11-29 |
United States Patent
Application |
20070275038 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Brown; Ian Lewis ; et
al. |
November 29, 2007 |
Food and feed compositions including resistant starch
Abstract
The invention described in this application relates to a method
of increasing the amount of weight gained by the mammal during a
feeding period, to a method of increasing the amount of milk
replacer consumed by the mammal during a feeding period, to a
method of decreasing the amount of scour of the ruminant during a
feeding period, to a method of decreasing the amount of respiratory
distress of the mammal during a feeding period, to a method of
feeding the ruminant, to a mammal ration, to a daily mammal ration,
to a method of feeding mammals an animal feed that contains
resistant starch, and to a method of increasing the feed efficiency
of a mammal during a feeding period that entails feeding the mammal
an effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the feeding
period and feeding the mammal an effective amount of resistant
starch during the feeding period.
Inventors: |
Brown; Ian Lewis; (Gymea,
AU) ; Miller; Bill L.; (Fort Dodge, IA) ;
Kunerth; Wallace H.; (Parker, CO) |
Correspondence
Address: |
MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP
233 S. WACKER DRIVE, SUITE 6300
SEARS TOWER
CHICAGO
IL
60606
US
|
Family ID: |
32711418 |
Appl. No.: |
11/890032 |
Filed: |
August 3, 2007 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
10340935 |
Jan 13, 2003 |
7252836 |
|
|
11890032 |
Aug 3, 2007 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
424/442 ;
426/2 |
Current CPC
Class: |
A23L 33/21 20160801;
A23K 40/00 20160501; A23K 50/10 20160501; A21D 2/186 20130101; A23K
20/163 20160501; A23K 50/60 20160501; A23K 50/30 20160501; A23L
29/212 20160801 |
Class at
Publication: |
424/442 ;
426/002 |
International
Class: |
A23K 1/16 20060101
A23K001/16; A23K 1/18 20060101 A23K001/18 |
Claims
1. A method of increasing the feed efficiency of a mammal during a
feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal a fluid
animal feed comprising resistant starch in an amount effective to
increase feed efficiency during the feeding period wherein the
ratio of resistant starch to fluid non-resistant starch animal feed
is from 3:100 to 10:100 based on the dry weight of the resistant
starch and the dry weight of the non-resistant starch animal feed
components wherein the resistant starch is provided to the mammal
in combination with corn starch.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the fluid animal feed is a milk
replacer and the amount of milk replacer provided to the mammal is
greater than about one pound per day, based upon the dry weight of
the milk replacer.
3. The method of claim 1 wherein the fluid animal feed is a milk
replacer and the weight ratio of the resistant starch to the milk
replacer ranges from about 5:100 to about 7:100 based upon the dry
weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of the milk
replacer.
4. A method of increasing the amount of weight gained by a mammal
during a feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal
a fluid animal feed comprising resistant starch during the feeding
period wherein the ratio of resistant starch to fluid non-resistant
starch animal feed is from 3:100 to 10:100 based on the dry weight
of the resistant starch and the dry weight of the non-resistant
starch animal feel components wherein the resistant starch is
provided to the mammal in combination with corn starch.
5. The method of claim 4 wherein the fluid animal feed is a milk
replacer and the amount of milk replacer provided to the mammal is
greater than about one pound per day, based upon the dry weight of
the milk replacer.
6. The method of claim 4 wherein the fluid animal feed is a milk
replacer and the weight ratio of the resistant starch to the milk
replacer ranges from about 3:100 to about 7:100, based upon the dry
weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of the milk
replacer.
7. A method of feeding a mammal, the method comprising: providing
the mammal with a fluid animal feed during a feeding period, the
fluid animal feed comprising an animal feed component and the
mammal provided with more than about 1.25 pounds of the animal feed
component per day, based on the dry weight of the animal feed
component, during the feeding period; and providing resistant
starch to the mammal during the feeding period wherein the ratio of
resistant starch to animal feed is from 3:100 to 10:100 based on
the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of the
non-resistant starch animal feed components.
8. The method of claim 7 wherein the fluid animal feed is a fluid
milk replacer.
9. The method of claim 7 wherein the weight ratio of the resistant
starch to the non-resistant starch animal feed component ranges
from about 5:100 to about 7:100, based upon the dry weight of the
resistant starch and the dry weight of the animal feed
component.
10. The method of claim 9 wherein the animal feed component is dry
milk replacer.
11. The method of claim 9 wherein the animal feed component is a
powdered milk replacer, a pelleted milk replacer, a granular milk
replacer, or any of these in any combination.
12. The method of claim 7 wherein the ruminant is provided with at
least about 1.5 pounds of the animal feed component per day, based
on the dry weight of the animal feed component.
13. The method of claim 7 wherein the ruminant is provided with at
least about 2.0 pounds of the animal feed component per day, based
on the dry weight of the animal feed component.
14. A method of increasing the feed efficiency of a mammal during a
feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal a fluid
animal feed comprising resistant starch in an amount effective to
increase the feed efficiency of the mammal during a feeding period
during the feeding period wherein the ratio of resistant starch to
fluid non-resistant starch animal feed is from 3:100 to 10:100
based on the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight
of the non-resistant starch animal feed components the fluid animal
feed is a milk replacer and the amount of milk replacer provided to
the mammal is greater than about one pound per day, based upon the
dry weight of the milk replacer.
15. A method of increasing the amount of weight gained by a mammal
during a feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal
a fluid animal feed comprising resistant starch in an amount
effective to increase the amount of weight gained by the mammal
during the feeding period wherein the ratio of resistant starch to
fluid non-resistant starch animal feed is from 3:100 to 10:100
based on the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight
of the non-resistant starch animal-feel components wherein the
fluid animal feed is a milk replacer and the amount of milk
replacer provided to the ruminant is greater than about one pound
per day, based upon the dry weight of the milk replacer.
Description
RELATED APPLICATION DATA
[0001] This application is a continuation of U.S. patent
application Ser. No. 10/340,935, filed Jan. 13, 2003, now allowed,
the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0002] This invention generally relates to food compositions for
humans that include resistant starch as a source of dietary fiber,
to animal feed compositions that include resistant starch as a
source of dietary fiber, and to a method of feeding animals. More
particularly, this invention relates both to food compositions and
animal feed compositions that include plants, grains, or parts
thereof and resistant starch derived from the plant or grain. This
method also particularly relates to a method of feeding animals,
especially ruminants and monogastrics, prior to weaning, an animal
feed that contains resistant starch.
BACKGROUND
[0003] It has been recognized that a balanced diet should include
an adequate level of dietary fiber. There are many natural food
sources of dietary fiber such as cereals, particularly bran, that
are recognized as good dietary fiber sources.
[0004] However, it would seem that a high proportion of diets of
people of the developed countries contain an inadequate level of
dietary fiber. An inadequate level of dietary fiber has been linked
with a number of diseases that may be broadly classified as
metabolic and gastrointestinal. Some examples of these diseases are
diabetes mellitus, diverticular disease and colonic cancer. It has
also been found that some forms of dietary fiber are useful in
lowering blood cholesterol.
[0005] Additionally, some types of fiber have been prescribed for
reducing scours in calves, and a Plantago seed supplement has been
described to help reduce animal stress conditions, prevent or treat
scours, and promote the growth of ruminants. Also, some fiber
supplements have been described for increasing the rate of weight
gain per unit weight of protein consumed by ruminants and
monogastrics
[0006] One attempted approach to providing adequate levels of
dietary fiber has entailed manufacturing processed foods that have
a high dietary fiber content. Such foods include breakfast cereals,
snack bars, bread and the like. Typically bran, especially outer
tissues of the kernel, including pericarp from a variety of cereal
sources such as wheat, maize or corn, oats, rice, pea and other
pulses, barley, triticale, sorghum, milo, potato, tapioca, cassaya,
sago and other plant extracts have been used as fiber sources.
[0007] More recently, resistant starches have been recognized as a
potential source of dietary fiber. Resistant starches are starches
that are highly resistant to hydration and, when ingested, pass
through the upper regions of the gastrointestinal tract largely
unchanged.
[0008] To date the only natural sources that contain a significant
amount of resistant starch are green bananas and raw potatoes. Such
resistant starch sources do, however, present substantial problems
in formulating satisfactory food products, such as low
gelatinization temperatures that are typically on the order of
about 60.degree. C. to about 80.degree. C. It is also possible to
produce resistant starch by extensively processing, namely
repeatedly cooking and cooling, starch pastes.
[0009] Copending International Patent Application No.
PCT/AU93/00389 that was filed on Jul. 30, 1993 and is entitled
"High Amylose Starch and Resistant Starch Fractions" discloses a
hybrid maize seed that is capable of yielding a starch having an
amylose content of more than about 80%. Application No.
PCT/AU93/00389 further discloses a maize starch derived from such
seed having an amylose content of more than about 80%. This starch
was designated as "High Amylose Starch" in view of the surprising
high amylose content. A number of examples of compositions
including high amylose starch with a variety of different number of
food applications were given in Application No. PCT/AU93/00389 and
U.S. Pat. No. 6,303,174 B1.
[0010] Surprisingly, it was found that the aforementioned high
amylose starch is high in dietary fiber content and is a resistant
starch. Moreover, it was found that such starches may be
advantageously incorporated into food products to achieve enhanced
levels of dietary fiber content. Additionally, these starches have
relatively high gelatinization temperatures, typically on the order
of about 160.degree. C. to about 170.degree. C.
[0011] Also of interest to the present invention is information
relating to the occurrence and treatment of scours (i.e. diarrhea
and dysentery), especially in ruminants. Ruminants, such as cattle,
have a four compartment stomach, as opposed to the single stomach
that human beings have. Two of these stomach compartments are the
abomasum and the rumen. In a mature ruminant, fermentation of feed
in the rumen provides the majority of energy and protein to the
ruminant. On the other hand, in a newborn ruminant, the rumen is
substantially undeveloped and the abomasum is the primary stomach
compartment for digestion and nutrient assimilation. Consequently,
young ruminants are typically fed a liquid diet that is digestible
in the abomasum. This liquid diet initially only contains readily
digestible nutrients, since the abomasum is incapable of digesting
sufficient amounts of more complex nutrients that typically form
the majority of the nutrition found in solid feeds.
[0012] While still being fed the liquid diet that is digestible in
the abomasum, young ruminants are gradually introduced to a solid
feed that contains readily digestible carbohydrates to support
development of the rumen. Volatile fatty acids produced during
fermentation of readily digestible carbohydrates support rumen
tissue development and therefore control the rate of rumen
development. Also, volatile fatty acids that are produced in the
rumen help support development of microorganisms that break down
the solid feed and transform components of the solid feed into
microbial protein and volatile fatty acids. After the rumen has
developed sufficiently to support the nutritional requirements of
the young ruminant, the liquid diet is typically withdrawn and the
nutritional requirements of the young ruminant are thereafter
generally supplied by solid feed.
[0013] Weaning occurs when liquid feed is withdrawn from the diets
of young mammals, such as young ruminants. As used herein, the term
"mammal" refers to non-human animals. Thus, as used herein, the
term "pre-weaning period" refers to the period when nutrients are
predominantly or entirely supplied in liquid form to mammals, such
as ruminants (including calves) or monogastrics (including pigs),
as part of the liquid feed. Correspondingly, the term "post-weaning
period" refers to the period when nutrients are no longer
predominantly or entirely provided to mammals, such as ruminants
(including calves) or monogastrics (including pigs), in the form of
liquid feed. The post-weaning period for ruminants is sometimes
also referred to as the "ruminant period."
[0014] For ruminants, the pre-weaning period may also be broken
down into a pre-ruminant period and a transition period. The
"pre-ruminant period" is the time period when only nutrients in
liquid form (as the liquid feed) are provided to the young
ruminant. The "transition period" is the time period when the young
ruminant is continuing to receive liquid nutrients while also
receiving gradually increasing amounts of solid feed, such as dry
calf starter, to support development of the rumen in anticipation
of weaning. The transition period (and thus also the pre-weaning
period) ends, and the post-weaning period (also referred to as the
ruminant period for ruminants) begins when the liquid feed that
supplies liquid nutrients is predominantly or entirely withdrawn
from the young ruminant's diet and the young ruminant is
predominantly or entirely fed only solid feed, such as dry calf
starter.
[0015] Typical liquid feeds for young mammals, such as young
ruminants and monogastrics, include fluid milk or fluid milk
replacers. Fluid milk replacers are frequently substituted in place
of fluid milk because fluid milk that is produced by mature,
lactating mammals, especially milk produced by mature, lactating
ruminants, is generally more valuable when sold to consumers or
when used to manufacture food products that are sold to consumers.
Thus, fluid milk replacers that are produced to simulate fluid milk
are generally substituted in place of fluid milk for feeding young
mammals, especially when feeding young ruminants and monogastrics.
Fluid milk replacers may be based upon dairy components and
non-dairy components that are combined to provide nutrient and
palatability characteristics approximating the nutrient and
palatability characteristics of fluid milk. Milk replacers are
typically marketed in powdered form to avoid the higher
transportation and storage costs of distributing fluid milk
replacer. Powdered, pelleted, and granular milk replacers are mixed
with water prior to use to form fluid milk replacers that are
provided to the young mammals. The formulation and feeding of fluid
milk replacers is well-known in the art.
[0016] Young mammals, when provided only with nutrients in liquid
form (as the liquid feed), are quite susceptible to diarrhea and
dysentery especially during the pre-ruminant period for young
ruminants or during the pre-weaning period for ruminants and
non-ruminants alike. These instances of diarrhea and dysentery are
sometimes characterized as scours, especially in the field of
veterinary medicine. Scours may seriously compromise the health of
affected young mammals (such as young ruminants and young
monogastrics) by causing loss of water, bicarbonate, and
electrolytes, such as sodium ions and potassium ions, from the
blood and body fluids of the young mammals. A number of different
factors, such as mechanical (higher feeding rates--especially for
milk and fluid milk replacers), nutritional (feed quality), and/or
environmental (stress and/or disease) factors, may contribute to
scours development and progression in young mammals, such as young
ruminants and young monogastrics.
[0017] When any of these factors irritates the intestine of a young
mammal to a sufficient degree, the young mammal's body attempts to
neutralize, isolate, destroy, and/or flush out the irritant using
water. Indeed, the feces of a young mammal with scours may contain
as much as five to ten times more water than the feces of a young
mammal not suffering from scours. Loss of water that is employed in
this fight against scours causes the young mammal to quickly become
dehydrated and may cause the young mammal to die from dehydration,
electrolyte loss, and/or increased blood acidity within just a few
hours. At the very least, even if the young mammal recovers from
scours, the growth rate of young mammals affected by scours
typically decreases dramatically during, and for some time after, a
scours outbreak. Consequently, dairy farmers and livestock
producers alike are greatly interested in techniques for
economically reducing the incidence of scours in young mammals.
[0018] Besides reducing the incidence of scours, dairy farmers and
livestock producers are also greatly interested in techniques for
economically achieving enhanced milk replacer consumption rates and
enhanced rates of mammal weight gain, since such techniques
eventually will have the effect, upon maturation of the young
mammals, of beneficially reducing milk and meat (such as beef,
pork, and lamb) production costs. Also, dairy farmers and livestock
producers recognize that the care and feeding of livestock prior to
weaning play an important role in determining the amount and
quality of products produced by the mammals, upon maturation. As an
example, the age of dairy cows at freshening and the onset of
lactation may be reduced by modifying the nutrient mix and nutrient
composition in feed the dairy cows consume and by inducing the cows
to gain weight more quickly during the pre-weaning prior to
freshening. Also, in cattle ranching operations, increasing the
rate of weight gain by young ruminants beneficially reduces the
time required for producing cattle with a size that is suitable for
market.
[0019] Furthermore, in both dairy operations and
livestock_operations, it is generally desirable to increase the
feed efficiency of young mammals. As used herein, the term "feed
efficiency" refers to the ratio, over a select time period for one
or more particular mammal(s), of (1) the weight gained by the
mammal(s) versus (2) the weight of feed consumed by the mammals. As
the ruminants more efficiently transform ingested feed into weight
gain, the feed efficiency ratio, and consequently the feed
efficiency, of the mammals increases, since less feed by the
mammals is required to attain a unit amount of weight gain.
[0020] A major overall desire of dairy farmers and livestock
producers alike is to reduce the overall cost to produce a product,
such as milk or meat, with an acceptable level of quality.
Depending upon numerous cost variables, such as the cost of feed,
labor costs on the farm or ranch, and equipment and building costs
on the farm or ranch, this desired cost reduction may be achieved
by increasing the rate of weight gain by young mammals and/or
increasing the feed efficiency of young mammals, while also
reducing the incidence of health issues, such as scours and
respiratory distress. Thus, dairy farmers and livestock producers,
depending upon their particular cost variables, may employ improved
mammalian health along with either enhanced rates of weight gain or
increased feed efficiency or a combination of enhanced rates of
weight gain and increased feed efficiency to reduce the cost of
bringing milk and meat to the consumer market.
[0021] To complement liquid feeds fed to ruminants, such as cattle,
prior to weaning, a number of additives and supplements have been
developed for feeding calves along with the liquid feed during the
pre-weaning period. These additives and supplements have been
developed for a number of different purposes. For example, some
additives and supplements have been developed to generally enhance
the health of the young calves or help prevent or control
development of specific conditions or ailments, such as scours.
Additionally, some additives or supplements have been developed in
an attempt to enhance appetite, enhance maturation rate, and/or
enhance weight gain.
[0022] In this regard, various veterinary pharmaceutical
compositions have been developed to help prevent or inhibit
development of certain ailments in mammals, such as ruminants and
monogastrics. Also, numerous vitamin compositions have been
developed to help enhance the general health of mammals, such as
ruminants and monogastrics, and/or to help prevent or inhibit
development of ailments or conditions in mammals, such as ruminants
and monogastrics. Additionally, some types of fiber have been
prescribed for reducing scours in calves, and a Plantago seed
supplement has been described to help reduce animal stress
conditions, prevent or treat scours, and promote growth of some
mammals. Also, some fiber supplements have been described for
increasing the rate of weight gain per unit weight of protein
consumed by some mammals.
[0023] Though the various mammalian feed supplements and additives
that have been proposed and/or practiced over the years have
enhanced the overall knowledge base with respect to mammalian
feeding, these feed supplements and additives, as well as feeding
techniques that employ these feed supplements and additives, have
not yet fully identified, addressed, or optimized options for
maintaining mammalian health; increasing weight gain rates by
mammals, such as ruminants and monogastrics; or increasing the feed
efficiency of mammals, such as ruminants and monogastrics. Thus,
dairy farmers and livestock producers alike are still in need of
new and better approaches to feeding mammals, such as ruminants and
monogastrics, that maintain the health of, increase weight gain
rates by, and/or increase the feed efficiency of mammals, such as
ruminants and monogastrics. The method of the present invention
achieves reduced scours incidence, reduced respiratory distress,
enhanced weight gain rates and increased feed efficiencies in young
mammals, such as young ruminants and monogastrics, and thereby
satisfies this need of dairy farmers and livestock producers.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0024] The present invention includes a food composition and an
animal feed composition that each have an enhanced dietary fiber
content, characterized in that the dietary fiber is derived from a
(1) resistant starch which contains resistant starch.
[0025] It has now been found that resistant starch helps reduce the
incidence of scours in young mammals, such as young ruminants and
monogastrics, and also helps enhance milk replacer consumption
rates and rates of weight gain by young mammals, such as young
ruminants and monogastrics. The method of the present invention
achieves reduced scours incidence, reduced respiratory distress,
enhanced weight gain rates, and increased feed efficiencies in
young mammals, such as young ruminants, and thereby satisfies a
previously unmet need of dairy farmers and livestock producers.
Such techniques eventually will have the effect, upon maturation of
young mammals, such as young ruminants and monogastrics, of
beneficially reducing milk and meat production costs.
[0026] Furthermore, the present invention relates to a method of
feeding mammals, such as ruminants and monogastrics, an animal feed
that contains resistant starch. For example, the present invention
includes a method of increasing the feed efficiency of a young
mammal, such as a young ruminant, during a feeding period that
entails feeding the young mammal an effective amount of a fluid
animal feed during the feeding period, and feeding the young mammal
an effective amount of resistant starch during the feeding period.
The present invention also includes a method of increasing the
amount of weight gained by a young mammal, such as a young ruminant
or monogastric, during a feeding period, a method of increasing the
amount of milk replacer consumed by the mammal during a feeding
period, a method of decreasing the amount of scours of the mammal
during a feeding period, a method of decreasing the amount of
respiratory distress of the mammal during a feeding period, and a
method of feeding the mammal. The present invention further
includes animal feed compositions, including but not limited to, a
mammal ration, such as a ruminant or monogastric ration, and a
daily mammal ration, such as a daily ruminant or monogastric
ration.
[0027] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of increasing the feed efficiency of a mammal during a
feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal an
effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the feeding period;
and feeding the mammal an effective amount of resistant starch
during the feeding period, where the mammal may be, for example, a
ruminant, such as a calf, or a monogastric, such as a pig.
[0028] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of increasing the amount of weight gained by a mammal during
a feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal an
effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the feeding period;
and feeding the mammal an effective amount of resistant starch
during the feeding period, where the mammal may be, for example, a
ruminant, such as a calf, or a monogastric, such as a pig.
[0029] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of increasing the amount of milk replacer consumed by a
mammal during a feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the
mammal an effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the
feeding period, the fluid animal feed comprising the milk replacer;
and feeding the mammal an effective amount of resistant starch
during the feeding period, where the mammal may be, for example, a
ruminant, such as a calf, or a monogastric, such as a pig.
[0030] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of decreasing the amount of scour of a mammal during a
feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal an
effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the feeding period;
and feeding the mammal ruminant an effective amount of resistant
starch during the feeding period, where the mammal may be, for
example, a ruminant, such as a calf, or a monogastric, such as a
pig.
[0031] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of decreasing the amount of respiratory distress of a mammal
during a feeding period, the method comprising: feeding the mammal
an effective amount of a fluid animal feed during the feeding
period; and feeding the mammal an effective amount of resistant
starch during the feeding period, where the mammal may be, for
example, a ruminant, such as a calf, or a monogastric, such as a
pig.
[0032] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of feeding a mammal the method comprising: providing the
mammal with a fluid animal feed during a feeding period, the fluid
animal feed comprising an animal feed component and the mammal
provided with more than about 1.25 pounds of the animal feed
component per day, based on the dry weight of the animal feed
component, during the feeding period; and providing resistant
starch to the mammal during the feeding period, where the first
mammal may be, for example, a ruminant, such as a calf.
[0033] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
mammal ration, a first diet comprising the mammal ration, where the
mammal ration comprises: an effective amount of a fluid animal
feed; and an effective amount of resistant starch, the mammal
ration effective to improve the health of the mammal as determined
by a member selected from the group consisting of: increasing the
feed efficiency of a first mammal on the first diet during a
feeding period, as compared to the feed efficiency of a second
mammal on a second diet during the feeding period; increasing the
amount of weight gained by a first mammal on the first diet during
a feeding period, as compared to the amount of weight gained by a
second mammal on the second diet during the feeding period;
increasing the amount of milk replacer consumed by a mammal on the
first diet during a feeding period, as compared to the amount of
milk replacer consumed by a second mammal on the second diet during
the feeding period; decreasing scour in a mammal on the first diet
during a feeding period, as compared to scour in a second mammal on
the second diet during the feeding period; decreasing respiratory
distress in a mammal on the first diet during a feeding period as
compared to the feed efficiency of a second mammal on the second
diet during the feeding period; and combinations thereof; where the
first diet and the second diet are identical except the second diet
is free of the resistant starch; the first mammal may be, for
example, a first ruminant, such as a first calf, or a first
monogastric, such as a first pig; the second mammal may be, for
example, a second ruminant, such as a second calf, or a second
monogastric, such as a second pig; and the mammal ration may be a
ruminant or monogastric ration.
[0034] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
daily mammal ration during a feeding period, the daily mammal
ration comprising: resistant starch; and an animal feed component,
the amount of the animal feed component present in the daily mammal
ration being preferably greater than about 1.25 pounds, on a dry
matter basis, during the feeding period, where the daily mammal
ration may be, for example, a daily ruminant ration.
[0035] Another embodiment of the present invention relates to a
method of feeding mammals comprising the step of feeding said
mammal a feed composition having an enhanced dietary fiber content
comprising a feed and a feed ingredient, said feed ingredient
comprising substantially chemically unmodified starch granules from
a plant, grain, or parts thereof. Preferably, said starch granules
comprise at least about 0.05% w/w of resistant starch, said starch
granules providing a sufficient resistant starch so as to yield an
enhanced dietary fiber content in the feed composition of about
0.05% w/w or more, where the mammal may be, for example, a ruminant
or a monogastric. More preferably, said starch granules comprise at
least about 15% or more, more preferably 20% or more, more
preferably 40% or more, more preferably 60% or more, and more
preferably 70% w/w or more of resistant starch.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING
[0036] The FIGURE is a graph of total dietary fiber versus amylose
content for various samples representing three maize
varieties-regular maize, waxy maize and high amylose maize.
DISCLOSURE OF INVENTION
[0037] As used herein, "high amylose" means an amylose content on a
dry solids basis (dsb) of 50% (w/w) or more, more preferably 60%
(w/w) or more, more preferably 70% (w/w) or more, and more
preferably 80% (w/w) or more. Particularly preferred amylose
contents on a dry solids basis are 85% (w/w) or more and 90% (w/w)
or more. For a rice starch, as used herein, an amylose content on a
dry solids basis of 27% (w/w) or more is considered to be a "high
amylose starch". Note that the method used to determine amylose
content is that described in International Patent Application No.
PCT/AU93/00389, that correspond to U.S. Pat. No. 5,714,600; the
entire contents of U.S. Pat. No. 5,714,600 are incorporated herein
by way of reference.
[0038] The resistant starch that is utilized in the present
invention is believed to function like dietary fiber. Resistant
starches are starches that are highly resistant to hydration and
the effects of digestive enzymes. Resistant starches, when ingested
by mammals, are not digested or absorbed by organs of the
gastrointestinal tract, to at least a predominant extent, as the
resistant starch(es) passes (pass) through the upper regions of the
gastrointestinal tract. In ruminants, the phrase "upper regions of
the gastrointestinal tract" refers to the rumen, reticulum, omasum,
and abomasum, which are briefly described later in this document.
As used herein, the term "resistant starch" is defined as "the sum
of starch and products of starch degradation not absorbed in the
small intestine of healthy individuals" (Euresta Newsletter 11.1
(1991). Besides resistant starch (also referred to as "RS" herein),
classifications for other types of starch include rapidly
digestible starch ("RDS") and slowly digestible starch ("SDS").
Unlike the resistant starch that is utilized in the present
invention, rapidly digestible starch and slowly digestible starch
are less resistant or even non-resistant to hydration and the
effects of digestive enzymes and, when ingested by mammals, are
significantly or even substantially digested and/or absorbed by
organs of the upper gastrointestinal tract, as the rapidly
digestible starch or slowly digestible starch passes through the
upper regions of the gastrointestinal tract.
[0039] Those of ordinary skill in the art generally classify
resistant starch into one of the following four different
classifications: RS1, RS2, RS3, or RS4 as defined in Brown,
McNaught and Moloney (1995) Food Australia 47: 272-275. All
resistant starch, such as the RS1, RS2, RS3, or RS4, resistant
starches may be employed as the resistant starch that is utilized
in the present invention.
[0040] RS1 refers to starch that is physically inaccessible that is
locked within cell walls of botanical substances and therefore
qualifies as resistant starch. The RS1 type of resistant starch is,
for example, found in partially milled grains, seeds, and legumes.
RS2 refers to native resistant starch which are a component of
starch granules such as those found in bananas (especially green
bananas) and raw potatoes. Bananas and raw potatoes have relatively
low gelatinization temperatures typically on the order of about
60.degree. C. to about 80.degree. C. that present substantial
problems to formulating satisfactory food products; therefore,
while acceptable sources of the resistant starch utilized in the
present invention, bananas and raw potatoes are not preferred
sources of the resistant starch utilized in the present invention.
Intragranular polymeric rearrangements that lead to an increased
granular resistance to amylase digestion are also included in this
category. This increased resistance could be the result of heat
and/or moisture treatments or annealing of the intact granule.
[0041] Next, RS3 refers to retrograded non-granular starch or
crystalline non-granular starch, such as starch found in cooked and
cooled potatoes, bread crusts, and cereals (cornflakes, for
example) and starch pastes that have been extensively processed (by
repeated cooking and cooling). Finally, RS4 refers to specific
starches that have been chemically modified and/or re-polymerized
(which may include molecular weight reduction), such as ethers,
esters, and crossbonded starches, as well as chain linkage altered
dextrins, pyrodextrins, and maltodextrins.
[0042] Again, the resistant starch that is utilized in the present
invention may be any resistant starch, such as any of the RS1, RS2,
RS3, or RS4 resistant starches or any combination of any different
resistant starches. Preferably, the resistant starch that is
utilized in the present invention is high amylose starch.
[0043] Any high amylose starch that is utilized in the present
invention is preferably a maize starch. The maize starch is
preferably derived from any single maize hybrid, any double maize
hybrid, or any multiple cross maize hybrid, with a maize single
cross F1 hybrid that is capable of producing maize having a high
amylose content being particularly preferred. Some suitable, though
non-exhaustive, examples of high amylose starch are the
HI-MAIZE.RTM. high amylose starches available from Penford
Australia Limited of Lane Cove, New South Wales, Australia.
HI-MAIZE.RTM. 1043 starch is one particularly preferred high
amylose starch for use in the present invention.
[0044] While maize starch is preferred as the resistant starch, any
other resistant starch may be utilized to achieve benefits of the
present invention. For example, resistant waxy maize (corn) starch;
resistant regular or normal maize (corn) starch; resistant wheat
starch; resistant rice starch; resistant legume, pea or pulse
starch; resistant barley starch; resistant triticale starch;
resistant sorghum starch; resistant milo starch; resistant cassaya
starch; resistant oat starch; resistant potato starch; resistant
tapioca starch; and resistant sago starch are some other
non-exhaustive examples of resistant starch that may be utilized in
the present invention.
[0045] The resistant nature of the starches of this invention are
not fully understood. Nonetheless, while not being bound by theory,
it is suspected that the conformation and architecture of the
starch granule and the molecular arrangement of the glucan
polymers, including crystalline structures, and the association of
these polymers with other substances, including free fatty acids,
may be responsible for imparting the resistant characteristic.
[0046] The resistant starch will typically be, and preferably is,
in the form of a powder that is preferably free flowing to help
maintain particles of the resistant starch in solution if combined
with water. The resistant starch is preferably ground to allow it
to pass through various Bureau of Standards Sieves from the U.S.
Standard Sieve Series. The sieving profile may easily be changed
depending on the grinding mill and screen size used to break up the
agglomerates formed during drying of the starch. The average
particle size of high amylose grain starch is generally less than
about 14 microns, as measured using the method detailed below. The
average particle size of waxy or regular maize starch granules is
generally greater than about 14 microns. For example, HI-MAIZE.RTM.
1043 starch has a powdery particle size distribution, with a
maximum of one weight percent of the particles being about 112
microns or larger.
[0047] Starch granules from any botanical source are a
heterogeneous mixture varying in physiological age. This variation
in physiological age affects the physical size, structure and
properties of different starch granules. A number of authors have
noted property variations between different starch size fractions
if the starch granules are physically separated according to their
granule size. For example, Cluskey et al. "Fractionation and
Characterization in Dent Corn and Amylomaize Starch Granules" in
Starke, 32 (4.S.) 105-109 (1980) reported on the fractionation of
dent corn and amylomaize starch granules. Cluskey et al. discovered
an inverse relationship between granule size and iodine binding
capacity (indicative of amylose content) in the amylomaizes starch
granules: the apparent amylose found in the fractions of amylose V
starch that Cluskey et al. studied amounted to 40 weight percent
amylose for the fraction with the largest particle sizes and 52
weight percent amylose for the fraction with the smallest particle
sizes.
[0048] Cluskey et al. first fractionated a high amylose maize
starch--High Amylose 80 (October 1991)--into seven subsamples based
on granule, size using the aqueous differential sedimentation
procedure described by Cluskey et al. (1980), supra. This method
was chosen to minimize the potential for damaging the starch
granules since the procedure indicates that exposure of starch
granules to distilled water for long periods of time does not
affect the integrity of the starch granules and does not introduce
any residues into the starch fraction samples. Each starch sample
(60 grams) was separated into the seven fractions. Each of the
seven fractions of each starch sample were then freeze-dried and
weighed on a Mettler PE 3600 top pan balance. A scanning electron
microscope was used to visually confirm that each starch sample
fraction had a uniform distribution of different size granules.
[0049] Each of the different starch sample fractions were analyzed
for granule size according to the particle size analysis method
described in the Property Determination & Characterization
Techniques section of this document. The apparent amylose
concentration of each of the different starch sample fractions was
also determined using the amylose content determination procedure
described in the Property Determination & Characterization
Techniques section of this document. The dietary fiber content of
the different starch sample fractions was determined using the
methods disclosed in co-pending Australian patent application
PL6537.
[0050] As seen in Table 1 below, the level of resistant starch for
the high amylose starches, particularly high amylose 80, is
substantially greater than regular maize starch. TABLE-US-00001
TABLE 1 Total Dietary Fiber and Resistant Starch Levels in
Different Maize Starches Total Insoluble Dietary Fiber Resistant
Starch Sample Description (% dsb) By Method # 1 (% dsb) By Method #
2 (% dsb) Waxy Maize Starch (8/91) <0.2 0.7 '' 0.5 5.8 Regular
Maize Starch (7/91) <0.2 1.3 '' 0.9 -0.4 High Amylose 50 Starch
(7/91) 8.0 8.2 '' 0.4 7.5 High Amylose 80 Starch (7/91) 21.2 Not
Determined 11.9 High Amylose 80 Starch (10/91) 31.8 20.0 '' 1.8
18.1 RS Determination Method # 1: Muir et al, Measurement of
Resistant Starch Factors Affecting Starch Escaping Digestion In
Vitro, @ Am. J. Clin. Nutr. vol 56, pp 123-127 (1992). RS
Determination Method # 2: McClearly et al, A Rapid Procedure for
Total Starch Measurement in Cereal Grains and Products, @ pp
304-312, Proc. 42.sup.nd RACI Cereal Chem. Conf., Christchurch, NZ,
Ed. VJ Humphrey-Taylor (1992).
[0051] From Table 1, it is evident the resistant starch content of
the three different high amylose starches is substantially greater
than the resistant starch content of both the waxy maize starch and
the regular maize starch. Indeed, the resistant starch content of
the High Amylose 80 starch is particularly high, compared to the
resistant starch contents of both the waxy maize starch and the
regular maize starch.
[0052] The FIGURE shows a graph of total dietary fiber versus
amylose content for a variety of samples representing three
different maize varieties: regular maize, waxy maize and high
amylose maize. From this FIGURE, it is evident that all of the
regular maize and waxy maize samples contained substantially no
dietary fiber, whereas all of the high amylose maize samples had a
measurable dietary fiber content. The regular maize samples
depicted in the FIGURE were found to have an amylose content of
about 28 weigh percent, while the amylose content of the waxy maize
depicted in the FIGURE was nil. The finding that amylose content
and fiber content are related to each other in a direct ratio is
surprising. Consequently, both the finding that an amylose content
greater than about 50 weight percent in starch is associated with
significant dietary fiber content is somewhat surprising and the
substantial dietary fiber content increases relative to increasing
amylose content increases are likewise surprising, both in the
context of the data presented in the FIGURE and in Table 1.
[0053] While maize starch is preferred as the resistant starch and
the dietary fiber and resistant starch results shown respectively
in the FIGURE and in Table 1 are directed to maize starch, it
should be appreciated that this invention is broad and resistant
starches besides resistant maize starch may serve as the resistant
starch of the present invention. For example, resistant wheat,
resistant rice, resistant pea and other resistant pulses, resistant
barley, resistant triticale, resistant sorghum, resistant milo,
resistant cassaya, resistant oats, resistant potato, resistant
tapioca, and resistant sago starch may also be utilized as
resistant starches in the compositions of the present invention.
Furthermore, any resistant starch that has been physically modified
or chemically modified to produce a derivative and any resistant
starch created by physical modification or chemical modification of
botanical material may be utilized in the present invention.
[0054] Besides the resistant starch, any starch other than
resistant starch, such as any rapidly digestible starch ("RDS")
and/or any slowly digestible starch ("SDS"), may be employed in any
combination with the resistant starch in the present invention. As
used herein, "rapidly digestible starches" are defined as starches
that have been cooked to ensure full granule disruption (but not
allowed to form any resistant material). Most raw granular starches
are slowly but fully digested. Preferably, when a starch other than
resistant starch is employed in combination with the resistant
starch, only rapidly digestible starch is employed in combination
with the resistant starch. Exemplary rapidly digestible starches
include rapidly digestible waxy maize (corn) starch, rapidly
digestible regular or normal maize (corn) starch, rapidly
digestible wheat starch, rapidly digestible rice starch, rapidly
digestible pea and other pulse starch, rapidly digestible barley
starch, rapidly digestible triticale starch, rapidly digestible oat
starch, rapidly digestible potato starch, rapidly digestible
tapioca starch, rapidly digestible sago starch, and the like. When
a rapidly digestible starch is employed in combination with the
resistant starch, approximately the same weights of resistant
starch and rapidly digestible starch are preferably used.
[0055] Suitable rapidly digestible regular maize (corn) starch for
use in combination with the resistant starch may be obtained from
many sources, such as A.E. Staley Manufacturing Company of Decatur,
Ill. STADEX.RTM. starch that may be obtained from A.E. Staley
Manufacturing Company of Decatur, Ill. Suitable is an example of
rapidly digestible regular maize (corn) starch that may be suitably
used in combination with the resistant starch in accordance with
the present invention. The rapidly digestible regular maize (corn)
starch should be suitable for feeding to ruminants and may
generally have any particle size range and any average particle
size. The rapidly digestible regular maize (corn) starch, such as
the STADEX.RTM. starch, preferably has a particle size range of
about 5 microns to about 25 microns and preferably has an average
particle size of about 13.9 microns.
[0056] The resistant starch of the invention may be incorporated
into a wide range of food products that are intended solely for
human consumption. A non-exhaustive list of such products include:
pasta; noodles; instant noodles; breakfast cereals; baked goods
such as bread, biscuits, crackers and the like; snack foods; cheese
and other dairy based products, confectionery; beverages, including
but not limited to fruit juice such as orange juice; yoghurt,
including but not limited to drinking and spoonable yoghurts;
health supplements; pharmaceuticals; and the like.
[0057] Incorporation of the resistant starch of the invention into
food products will be at a level consistent with the required level
of dietary fiber in the finished food product. A broadly useful
level of incorporation generally lies in the range of from about
0.25-99.75% (w/w), based on the total weight of the finished food
product. It will be appreciated that in some food products,
resistant starch containing whole grain or flour, semolina,
polenta, or grits derived from the grain may be incorporated alone
or in combination with non-resistant starch. Furthermore, the
resistant starch of the invention may be used as a partial
replacement for the flour incorporated in food products, such as
bread.
[0058] Other starches, hydrocolloids, or dietary fibers may also be
utilized in the food compositions of this invention that are
intended for human consumption. Other starches and starch
containing materials, include but are not limited to, plant
components, such as, grain, tuber, seeds, and the like, which may
be physically, enzymatically or chemically modified, such as
through the processes of dextrinisation or dry roasting in the
presence or absence of a catalyst such as hydrochloric, nitric,
sulfuric acid, and the like. Other hydrocolloids, include but are
not limited to gums, such as guar, xanthan, locus bean, carageenan,
pectin, and gellan; cellulose and cellulose derivatives, such as
carboxy methylcellulose, microcrystalline cellulose; and the like.
Other dietary fibers, include but are not limited to, psyllium;
inulin; oligosaccharides, such as fructo-, galacto-, malto-,
isomalto-, gentio-, agaro, neoagaro-, .alpha.-gluco-,
.beta.-gluco-, cyclo-, inulo-, glycosylsucrose, latulose,
lactosucrose, or xylosucrose; bran, pericarp, endosperm, or cell
wall material from cereals such as wheat, triticale, sorghum, milo,
rice, sago, potato, tapioca, cassaya, oats, barley, and corn, or
pulses, such as peas and lupins, and the like, which may be further
processed or modified, such as by bleaching, and the like.
[0059] Any starch or material containing starch as a component,
such as flour, semolina, grits, polenta, and the like, employed in
combination with the resistant starch in food compositions intended
for human consumption is preferably in powdered form. All particle
size details and particle size distribution details provided herein
with regard to resistant starch are equally applicable to any
starch other than resistant starch that is employed in combination
with the resistant starch in food compositions intended for human
consumption. All details provided herein about how the resistant
starch is provided in food compositions intended for human
consumption are equally applicable to any starch beyond resistant
starch that is employed in combination with the resistant starch in
food compositions intended for human consumption.
[0060] In addition to food compositions intended for human
consumption, the present invention also encompasses animal feeds
and methods of feeding animals, such as ruminants and monogastrics.
For example, one method of the present invention relates to feeding
mammals, such as ruminants and monogastrics, especially prior to
weaning, an animal feed that contains resistant starch. This method
includes feeding young mammals, such as young ruminants and young
monogastrics, according to a feeding regimen prior to weaning
during a "pre-weaning period." During the pre-weaning period, the
mammals are fed a fluid animal feed along with resistant starch.
The resistant starch may be supplied separately from the fluid
animal feed, but is preferably supplied to the young mammals as
part of the fluid animal feed. In addition, during the pre-weaning
period, the young mammals have free access to water ad libitum.
[0061] Weaning occurs when the liquid feed is withdrawn from the
diet of the young mammals, such as young ruminants or young
monogastrics. Thus, as used herein, the term "pre-weaning period"
refers to the period when nutrients are predominantly or entirely
supplied to the young mammal, such as the young ruminant (for
example, a calf) or young monogastric (for example, a pig), in
liquid form, as part of a liquid feed, and the term "post-weaning
period" refers to the period when nutrients are no longer
predominantly or entirely provided to the mammal, such as the calf
or pig, in the form of liquid feed. In ruminants, the post-weaning
period is sometimes also referred to as the "ruminant period."
[0062] The fluid animal feed that is provided during the
pre-weaning period may generally include any fluid milk replacer
that provides a level of nutrition to mammals, such as ruminants or
monogastrics, sufficient to support the nutritional requirements of
the mammal during the pre-weaning period. The fluid milk replacer
may be liquid milk replacer, rehydrated milk replacer that is
formed by rehydrating dry, (such as powdered, pelleted, or
granular) milk replacer, or a combination of liquid milk replacer
and rehydrated milk replacer. As used herein, the term "liquid milk
replacer" refers to milk replacer that is in liquid form when
purchased. Often, if not predominantly, liquid milk replacer is
based upon dry, milk replacer that has been rehydrated. As used
herein, the term "rehydrated milk replacer" refers to milk replacer
that is prepared as a liquid, after purchase or preparation of the
dry, (such as powdered, pelleted, or granular) milk replacer, by
rehydrating the dry, milk replacer.
[0063] The resistant starch (and any material other than resistant
starch that is employed in combination with resistant starch, such
as other starches, hydrocolloids, gums, and/or fibers) is
preferably provided to the mammals, such as ruminants, as part of
the fluid animal feed, though the resistant starch (and any
material other than resistant starch that is employed in
combination with resistant starch) may optionally be provided
separately from the fluid animal feed. Surprisingly, it has been
discovered that ingestion of resistant starch (and any material
other than resistant starch that is employed in combination with
resistant starch) by young mammals, such as young ruminants or
young monogastrics, in accordance with the present invention helps
control scours and enhances the respiratory health of the young
mammals. Nonetheless, the fluid animal feed may, and preferably
does, include antibiotics to further help control scours and
further enhance the respiratory health of the young mammals. Some
non-exhaustive examples of desirable antibiotics include Neomycin
and Oxytetracycline, which are preferably provided in the fluid
animal feed in combination with each other. Beneficially, however,
the surprising ability of resistant starch (and any material other
than resistant starch that is employed in combination with
resistant starch) to help control scours and enhance the
respiratory health of young mammals, such as young ruminants or
young monogastrics, reduces the amount of relatively expensive
antibiotics needed to maintain scours incidence and respiratory
health at an acceptable level.
[0064] The fluid animal feed may optionally also include any other
nutritional component that is capable of remaining dissolved or in
suspension in the fluid animal feed. Some non-exhaustive examples
of other nutritional components that are typically capable of
remaining dissolved or in suspension in the fluid animal feed and
that may therefore typically be incorporated as part of the fluid
animal feed include vitamins, such as vitamin A, vitamin D, and/or
vitamin E; trace minerals, such as calcium, phosphorous, and or
magnesium; sugar(s); sugar solution(s); sugar alcohol(s); protein
material(s), such as vegetable protein material(s), animal protein
material(s), and marine protein material(s); bean-based or
grain-based oil(s); bean-based or grain-based meal(s); bean-based
or grain-based syrup(s); fatty acid(s); and any of these in any
combination. Preferably, however, the fluid animal feed primarily
consists of, and more preferably consists essentially of, the fluid
milk replacer, any optionally added antibiotics, and the resistant
starch (and any starch(es), hydrocolloid(s), or dietary fiber(s)
other than resistant starch that are employed in combination with
resistant starch).
[0065] The fluid milk replacer, when purchased as liquid milk
replacer, may generally be any commercially available liquid milk
replacer. The fluid milk replacer, when prepared from dry milk
replacer, may be formulated and prepared as the rehydrated milk
replacer by those responsible for feeding the mammals, such as the
ruminants or monogastrics. Some examples of suitable dry, (such as
powdered, pelleted, or granular) milk replacers for forming the
rehydrated milk replacer include AMPLIFIER.RTM. MAX NT powdered
milk replacer, AMPLIFIER.RTM. Select NT powdered milk replacer,
MAXI CARE.RTM. NT powdered milk replacer, and Nursing Formula NT
powdered milk replacer that are each available from Land O'Lakes,
Inc. of Arden Hills, Minn.
[0066] The fluid milk replacer may generally include any
concentration of crude protein. However, for young ruminants, the
fluid milk replacer preferably contains about 16 to about 35 weight
percent crude protein, based on the total dry weight of the fluid
milk replacer, to help optimize weight gain in the young ruminants.
More preferably, for young ruminants, the fluid milk replacer
contains about 20 to about 30 weight percent crude protein, based
on the total dry weight of the fluid milk replacer. Likewise, the
fluid milk replacer may contain any concentration of fat, but for
ruminants preferably contains about 5 to about 30 weight percent
fat, based on the total dry weight of the fluid milk replacer, to
increase the energy content of the fluid milk replacer, help reduce
the incidence of scours in the young ruminants, and inhibit
deleterious effects of any stress the young ruminants experience.
More preferably, for young ruminants, the fluid milk replacer
contains about 15 to about 20 weight percent fat, based on the
total dry weight of the fluid milk replacer.
[0067] Some examples of preferred fat sources for the fluid milk
replacer are edible lard and high quality vegetable fats that may
be used individually or in any combination. The fat in the fluid
milk replacer is preferably homogenized to reduce the particle size
of the fat and enhance the digestibility of the fat. One preferred
form of the fluid milk replacer for ruminants includes about 22
weight percent crude protein and about 20 weight percent fat, based
on the total dry weight of the fluid milk replacer.
[0068] If dry (such as powdered, pelleted, or granular) milk
replacer is used, the dry, milk replacer may be rehydrated with
water or any edible aqueous fluid, such as fluid milk, to form the
fluid milk replacer. The concentration of the dry, milk replacer in
the water or aqueous fluid may be varied in any ratio, depending on
the desired concentration of nutrients in the fluid milk replacer
and the desired consistency of the fluid milk replacer. Preferably,
however, the dry milk replacer is rehydrated in water to form fluid
milk replacer having a total solids concentration ranging from
about 10 weight percent to about 20 weight percent, based on the
total weight of the fluid milk replacer. Of course, rehydrated milk
replacer may also be combined with liquid milk replacer to form the
fluid milk replacer. Likewise, dry (such as powdered, pelleted, or
granular) milk replacer may be rehydrated by combining the dry,
milk replacer with liquid milk replacer and, optionally, additional
water and/or additional aqueous fluid.
[0069] The fluid animal feed may be prepared by combining the
animal feed component, such as powdered or dry milk replacer, and,
optionally any other nutritional component(s). Preferably, the
resistant starch (and any starch other than resistant starch that
is employed in combination with resistant starch) is also
incorporated in the fluid animal feed. As used herein, the term
"animal feed component" generally refers, collectively, to any and
all milk replacer(s), such as dry (such as powdered, pelleted, or
granular) milk replacer(s), fluid milk replacer(s), liquid milk
replacer(s), and/or rehydrated milk replacer(s) incorporated in the
fluid animal feed. The fluid animal feed should include an
effective amount of the animal feed component. The term "effective
amount of the animal feed component" is defined subsequently
herein.
[0070] The resistant starch (and any material other than resistant
starch that is employed in combination with resistant starch) that
is employed in the present invention provides optimum results when
preliminarily mixed with a dry form of the animal feed component,
such as powdered or dry milk replacer. Thus, the resistant starch
(and any material other than resistant starch that is employed in
combination with resistant starch) is preferably incorporated in
the fluid animal feed. Mixing the resistant starch (and any
material other than resistant starch that is employed in
combination with resistant starch) with a dry form of the animal
feed component prior to addition of water simplifies distribution
and use of the fluid animal feed. In particular, the mixture of the
resistant starch (and any material other than resistant starch that
is employed in combination with resistant starch) and the dry form
of the animal feed component may be transported as a pre-mixed
composition that is later combined with water (or an aqueous fluid)
so the person supplying the fluid animal feed to the mammals, such
as the ruminants or monogastrics, does not have to accurately mix
the animal feed component and the resistant starch (and any
material other than resistant starch that is employed in
combination with resistant starch) prior to feeding the fluid
animal feed to the mammals.
[0071] Shortly, before feeding the mammals (such as the ruminants
or monogastrics) the fluid animal feed, the mixture of the
resistant starch (and any material other than resistant starch that
is employed in combination with resistant starch) and the dry form
of the animal feed component may be mixed with any desired amount
of water, such as an effective amount of water, to form the fluid
animal feed. As used herein, the term "effective amount of water"
means an amount of water that is sufficient to provide the fluid
animal feed with a texture and consistency similar to the texture
and consistency of fluid milk. Of course, besides water, the
"effective amount of water" takes into account the water content of
any aqueous fluid other than, or in addition to, water that is
combined with the dry form of the animal feed component.
[0072] As used herein, the term "monogastrics" means an animal that
has a single chamber stomach. Some non-exhaustive examples of
monogastrics include, pigs, horses, cats and dogs.
[0073] As used herein, the term "ruminant" means an even-toed,
hoofed animal that has a complex 3- or 4-chamber stomach and that
typically re-chews what the ruminant has previously swallowed. Some
non-exhaustive examples of ruminants include cattle, sheep, goats,
oxen, musk, ox, llamas, alpacas, guanicos, deer, bison, antelopes,
camels, and giraffes.
[0074] The digestive tract of a cow, one example of the ruminant
that may be fed in accordance with the present invention, includes
a stomach that has four different components: a rumen, a reticulum,
an omasum, and an abomasum. The four sections of the stomach may
affect digestion of a component passing through the stomach because
each section of the stomach serves a different function in the
digestive process.
[0075] In the rumen of a mature ruminant with a fully functional
ruminant, food is mixed with the saliva and then churned in a
coordinated motion. The food mixture undergoes some fermentation
and bacterial digestion in the rumen. Also, portions of the food
mixture that enter the rumen with an excessively large particle
size are formed into a cud that the ruminant regurgitates and
rechews to reduce the particle size. Properly sized food that
leaves the rumen passes from the rumen through the reticulum and
into the omasum. While in the omasum, the food mixture is mixed to
maintain the food mixture in a homogenous state and to remove
excess fluid. Then, the homogenous mixture is passed from the
omasum to the abomasum where gastric digestion occurs.
[0076] During the pre-weaning period, under feeding regimens
currently employed in the dairy industry, young ruminants are
typically fed the animal feed component, such as the fluid milk
replacer, at rates that extend up to about 1.25 pounds of the
animal feed component, per day, based on the dry weight of the
animal feed component. Consequently, any feeding rate ranging up to
about 1.25 pounds of the animal feed component, such as the milk
replacer, per day, based on the dry weight of the animal feed
component, that occurs during at least part of the pre-weaning
period falls within the meaning of the term "conventional feeding
rate," as defined herein, for the animal feed component, such as
the milk replacer, unless otherwise specified. Correspondingly, any
feeding rate above about 1.25 pounds of the animal feed component,
such as the milk replacer, per day, based on the dry weight of the
animal feed component, during at least part of the pre-weaning
period falls within the meaning of the term "enhanced feeding
rate," as defined herein, for the animal feed component, such as
the milk replacer, unless otherwise specified.
[0077] Preferably, the enhanced feeding rate for the animal feed
component is at least about 1.5 pounds of the animal feed
component, such as the milk replacer, per day, based on the dry
weight of the animal feed component, during the pre-weaning period.
More preferably, the enhanced feeding rate for the animal feed
component is at least about 2.0 pounds of the animal feed
component, such as the milk replacer, per day, based on the dry
weight of the animal feed component, during the pre-weaning period.
When employing the conventional feeding rate anytime during the
pre-weaning period, the conventional feeding rate is preferably at
least about 1.0 pounds of the animal feeding component.
[0078] The resistant starch that is provided to the young mammals,
such as young ruminants, along with the animal feed component
during the pre-weaning period may generally be provided at any
effective amount of the resistant starch. As defined herein,
"effective amount" of the resistant starch means an amount of the
resistant starch that, when provided to, and consumed by, a young
mammal (such as a young ruminant) during the pre-weaning period, in
combination with the animal feed component, such as the milk
replacer, or in combination with both the animal feed component and
any starch other than resistant starch, is effective to increase
the feed efficiency of the young mammal, increase the amount of
weight gained by the mammal, increase the amount of milk replacer
consumed by the mammal, decrease the amount of scour of the mammal,
and/or decrease the amount of respiratory distress of the mammal
during all or part of a feeding period, such as the pre-weaning
period.
[0079] As one non-exhaustive example of the effective amount of the
resistant starch, the weight ratio of the resistant starch to the
animal feed component, such as the milk replacer, that is provided
to the young mammal(s), such as the young ruminant(s), may range
from about 0.1:100 to about 10:100, based upon the dry weight of
the resistant starch and the dry weight of the animal feed
component, during at least part, and preferably during all, of the
pre-weaning period. Preferably, the weight ratio of the resistant
starch to the animal feed component, such as the milk replacer,
that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the young
ruminant(s), ranges from about 1:100 to about 7.5:100, based upon
the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of the
animal feed component, during at least part, and preferably during
all, of the pre-weaning period.
[0080] More preferably, when providing resistant starch without
providing any other starch, such as corn starch, the weight ratio
of the resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as the
milk replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the
young ruminant(s), ranges from about 3:100 to about 10:100, based
upon the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of
the animal feed component, during at least part, and preferably
during all, of the pre-weaning period. Still more preferably, the
weight ratio of the resistant starch to the animal feed component,
such as the milk replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s),
such as the young ruminant(s), without providing any other starch,
is about 5:100 to about 7:100, based upon the dry weight of the
resistant starch and the dry weight of the animal feed component,
during at least part, and preferably during all, of the pre-weaning
period.
[0081] On the other hand, when starch, such as corn starch, other
than resistant starch is provided in combination with the resistant
starch, the weight ratio of the resistant starch to the animal feed
component, such as the milk replacer, that is provided to the young
mammal(s), such as the young ruminant(s), more preferably ranges
from about 1:100 to about 4:100, based upon the dry weight of the
resistant starch and the dry weight of the animal feed component,
and the weight ratio of the starch (such as corn starch) other than
resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as the milk
replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the
young ruminant(s), ranges from about 1:100 to about 4:100, based
upon the dry weight of the starch and the dry weight of the animal
feed component during at least part, and preferably during all, of
the pre-weaning period.
[0082] Still more preferably, when starch other than resistant is
provided in combination with the resistant starch, the weight ratio
of the resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as the
milk replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the
young ruminant(s), is about 2.5:100, based upon the dry weight of
the resistant starch and the dry weight of the animal feed
component, and the weight ratio of the starch (such as corn starch)
other than resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as
the milk replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as
the young ruminant(s), is about 2.5:100, based upon the dry weight
of the starch other than resistant starch and the dry weight of the
animal feed component during at least part, and preferably during
all, of the pre-weaning period.
[0083] For purposes of considering comparisons between different
young mammal(s), such as comparisons between different young
ruminant(s), that are fed in different ways, the "effective amount
of the resistant starch" may be characterized as a "first effective
amount of the resistant starch" or as a "second effective amount of
the resistant starch," depending upon the particular comparison
under consideration. Both the "first effective amount of the
resistant starch" and the "second effective amount of the resistant
starch" fall within the scope of the "effective amount of the
resistant starch."
[0084] The first effective amount of the resistant starch may be
considered in a comparison of a first mammal, such as a first
ruminant, with a second mammal, such as a second ruminant, where
the first mammal is fed the first effective amount of the resistant
starch in combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component," but where the first mammal is not fed any starch other
than resistant starch. When used in combination with the first
effective amount of the resistant starch, the "effective amount of
the animal feed component" is the amount of the animal feed
component that is fed to the first mammal during the time period
when the resistant starch is fed to the first mammal. When the
effective amount of the animal feed component is used in
combination with the first effective amount of the resistant
starch, the animal feed component and the resistant starch are
preferably fed to the first mammal together as part of the fluid
animal feed.
[0085] When used in combination with the first effective amount of
the resistant starch, the animal feed component is preferably fed
to the first ruminant at the enhanced feeding rate (above about
1.25 pounds of the animal feed component per day, based on the dry
weight of the animal feed component) for the animal feed component
for most, if not all, of the feeding period. Nevertheless, when
provided along with the first effective amount of the resistant
starch, it is believed the effective amount of the animal feed
component may permissibly be about 1.25 pounds, or less, of the
animal feed component per ruminant (per calf, for example) per day
for a substantial amount, most, or even all of the feeding period,
while still realizing benefits in accordance with the present
invention.
[0086] Taking these considerations into account, the "first
effective amount of the resistant starch," as used herein, means an
amount of the resistant starch that, when fed during the
pre-weaning period along with the effective amount of the animal
feed component to the first mammal, such as the first ruminant:
[0087] (1) that is provided an equal amount of the same, or
substantially the same, animal feed component as the second mammal
(such as the second ruminant), where the animal feed component is
provided at an equal rate to both the first mammal and the second
mammal, [0088] (2) while the first mammal is provided with the
first effective amount of the resistant starch and the second
mammal is provided with a starch, such as corn starch, other than
resistant starch, with the weight of the starch other than
resistant starch provided to the second mammal being equal to the
weight of the resistant starch provided to the first mammal, and
[0089] (3) while the first mammal and the second mammal also have
equal access to water ad libitum, is effective to cause at least
one, preferably at least two, more preferably at least three, still
more preferably at least four, even more preferably at least five,
and most preferably all six of the following improvements that are
listed in (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) below: [0090] (a) an
increase in the feed efficiency of the first mammal versus the feed
efficiency of the second mammal, as measured over a segment of the
pre-weaning period, preferably over a four week segment of the
pre-weaning period, and more preferably over the entire pre-weaning
period, [0091] (b) a larger amount of weight gain by the first
mammal versus the amount of weight gain by the second mammal as
measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over
a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over
a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0092] (c) a larger
amount of animal feed component consumption by the first mammal
versus the amount of animal feed component consumption by the
second mammal over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably
over a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably
over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0093] (d) a
decreased scour score by the first mammal versus the scour score of
the second mammal over a segment of the pre-weaning period,
preferably over a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more
preferably over a two week segment of the pre-weaning period, still
more preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period,
and even more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0094]
(e) a decrease in the number of days where the scour score of the
first mammal is greater than one versus the number of days where
the scour score of the second mammal is greater than one, as
measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over
a one and/or two week segment of the pre-weaning period, more
preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and
still more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, and/or
[0095] (f) a decrease in the number of days where the respiratory
score of the first mammal is one versus the number of days where
the respiratory score of the second mammal is one, as measured over
a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week
segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week
segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over
the entire pre-weaning period.
[0096] The first effective amount of the resistant starch, in
combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component," is preferably sufficient to cause the feed efficiency
of the first mammal, such as the first ruminant, to increase by at
least about ten percent, and more preferably by at least about
twenty percent, versus the feed efficiency of the second mammal,
such as the second ruminant, as measured over a segment of the
pre-weaning period, preferably over a four week segment of the
pre-weaning period, and more preferably over the entire pre-weaning
period.
[0097] Also, the first effective amount of the resistant starch, in
combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component," is preferably sufficient to cause the first mammal,
such as the first ruminant, to gain at least about ten percent more
weight, and more preferably at least about twenty percent more
weight, than the second mammal (such as the second ruminant) gains,
as measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably
over a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably
over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period.
[0098] Additionally, the first effective amount of the resistant
starch, in combination with the "effective amount of the animal
feed component," is preferably sufficient to cause the first
mammal, such as the first ruminant, to consume at least about five
percent more, and preferably at least about ten percent more of the
animal feed component (weight basis), as compared to the amount of
animal feed component (weight basis) consumed by the second mammal,
such as the second ruminant, over a segment of the pre-weaning
period, preferably over a one week segment of the pre-weaning
period, more preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning
period, and still more preferably over the entire pre-weaning
period.
[0099] Furthermore, the first effective amount of the resistant
starch, in combination with the "effective amount of the animal
feed component," is preferably sufficient to cause the first
mammal, such as the first ruminant, to exhibit a scour score that
is at least about five percent less, more preferably at least about
ten percent less, and still more preferably at least about fifteen
percent less, than the scour score of the second mammal, such as
the second ruminant, over a segment of the pre-weaning period,
preferably over a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more
preferably over a two week segment of the pre-weaning period, still
more preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period,
and even more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period.
[0100] Next, the first effective amount of the resistant starch, in
combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component," is preferably sufficient to cause the number of days
the first mammal, such as the first ruminant, exhibits a scour
score greater than one to decrease at least about ten percent, more
preferably at least about fifteen percent, still more preferably at
least about twenty percent, even more preferably at least about
thirty percent, and most preferably at least about forty percent,
versus the number of days the second mammal, such as the second
ruminant, exhibits a scour score greater than one, as measured over
a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week
segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week
segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over
the entire pre-weaning period.
[0101] Finally, the first effective amount of the resistant starch,
in combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component," is preferably sufficient to cause the number of days
the first mammal, such as the first ruminant, exhibits a
respiratory score of one to decrease at least about five percent,
more preferably at least about ten percent, and still more
preferably by one hundred percent, as compared to the number of
days the second mammal, such as the second ruminant, exhibits a
respiratory score of one, as measured over a segment of the
pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week segment of the
pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week segment of the
pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over the entire
pre-weaning period.
[0102] For these comparisons of the first mammal (such as the first
ruminant) and the second mammal (such as the second ruminant) that
are provided above in regard to the first effective amount of the
resistant starch and the effective amount of the animal feed
component, the first mammal and the second mammal may be provided
substantially the same animal feed component, but preferably are
provided the same animal feed component. Furthermore, in these
comparisons of the first mammal (such as the first ruminant) and
the second mammal (such as the second ruminant) that are provided
above in regard to the first effective amount of the resistant
starch and the effective amount of the animal feed component, the
first mammal and the second mammal are preferably provided with the
same amount of the animal feed component, based on the dry weight
of the animal feed component, while the first mammal and the second
mammal are given equal access to water ad libitum.
[0103] Furthermore, in these comparisons of the first mammal (such
as the first ruminant) and the second mammal (such as the second
ruminant) that are provided above in regard to the first effective
amount of the resistant starch and the effective amount of the
animal feed component during the pre-weaning period, the first
mammal preferably receives the fluid animal feed as a combination
of the animal feed component and the resistant starch. Also in
these comparisons of the first mammal (such as the first ruminant)
and the second mammal (such as the second ruminant) that are
provided above in regard to the first effective amount of the
resistant starch and the effective amount of the animal feed
component during the pre-weaning period, the second mammal
preferably receives the fluid animal feed as a combination of the
animal feed component and the starch, such as corn starch, other
than resistant starch, with the starch other than resistant starch
being provided to the second mammal at the same weight rate as the
resistant starch is provided to the first mammal.
[0104] Though these comparisons that are provided above in regard
to the first effective amount of the resistant starch and the
effective amount of the animal feed component are provided in terms
of a first mammal (such as a first ruminant) and a second mammal
(such as a second ruminant), these comparisons are equally
applicable to a first group of mammals (such as a first group of
ruminants) versus a second group of mammals (such as a second group
of ruminants), respectively. In this comparison of groups of
mammals (such as ruminants), the first group of mammals and the
second group of mammals preferably include about the same number of
mammals, preferably include the same or similar species (or the
same or about the same weighting of different species), and
preferably each include mammals with the same, or about the same,
median age.
[0105] As another approach, the second effective amount of the
resistant starch may be considered in a comparison of the first
mammal (such as the first ruminant) with a third mammal (such as a
third ruminant), where the first mammal is fed the second effective
amount of the resistant starch in combination with both (1) starch
other than the resistant starch and (2) the "effective amount of
the animal feed component." When used in combination with the
starch other than resistant starch and with the second effective
amount of the resistant starch, the "effective amount of the animal
feed component" is the amount of the animal feed component that is
fed to the first mammal (such as the first ruminant) during the
period when the resistant starch and the starch other than the
resistant starch are fed to the first mammal.
[0106] When used in combination with the second effective amount of
the resistant starch, the animal feed component is preferably fed
to the first ruminant (a first calf, for example) at the enhanced
feeding rate (above about 1.25 pounds of the animal feed component
per day, based on the dry weight of the animal feed component) for
the animal feed component for most, if not all, of the feeding
period. Nevertheless, when provided along with the second effective
amount of the resistant starch, it is believed the effective amount
of the animal feed component may permissibly be about 1.25 pounds,
or less, of the animal feed component per ruminant (per calf, for
example) per day for a substantial amount, most, or even all of the
feeding period, while still realizing benefits in accordance with
the present invention. When the effective amount of the animal feed
component is used in combination with the second effective amount
of the resistant starch, the animal feed component, the resistant
starch, and the starch other than the resistant starch are
preferably fed to the first mammal (such as the first ruminant)
together as part of the fluid animal feed.
[0107] Taking these considerations into account, the "second
effective amount of the resistant starch," as used herein, means an
amount of the resistant starch that, when fed during the
pre-weaning period along with the effective amount of the animal
feed component and with starch other than the resistant starch to
the first mammal (such as the first ruminant): [0108] (1) that is
provided an equal amount of the same, or substantially the same,
animal feed component as the third mammal (such as the third
ruminant), where the animal feed component is provided at an equal
rate to both the first mammal and the third mammal, [0109] (2)
while the first mammal is provided with the first effective amount
of the resistant starch and a quantity of the starch other than the
resistant starch, and the third mammal is provided with the starch
other than resistant starch, with the weight of the starch other
than resistant starch provided to the third mammal being equal to
the combined weight of (a) the resistant starch and (b) the starch
other than the resistant starch provided to the first mammal, and
[0110] (3) while the first mammal and the third mammal also have
equal access to water ad libitum, is effective to cause at least
one, preferably at least two, more preferably at least three, still
more preferably at least four, even more preferably at least five,
and most preferably all six of the following improvements that are
listed in (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) below: [0111] (a) an
increase in the feed efficiency of the first mammal versus the feed
efficiency of the third mammal, as measured over a segment of the
pre-weaning period, preferably over a four week segment of the
pre-weaning period, and more preferably over the entire pre-weaning
period, [0112] (b) a larger amount of weight gain by the first
mammal versus the amount of weight gain by the third mammal as
measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over
a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over
a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0113] (c) a larger
amount of animal feed component consumption by the first mammal
versus the amount of animal feed component consumption by the third
mammal over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a
one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a
four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0114] (d) a
decreased scour score by the first mammal versus the scour score of
the third mammal over a segment of the pre-weaning period,
preferably over a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more
preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and
still more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, [0115]
(e) a decrease in the number of days where the scour score of the
first mammal is greater than one versus the number of days where
the scour score of the third mammal is greater than one, as
measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over
a one and/or two week segment of the pre-weaning period, more
preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and
still more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period, and/or
[0116] (f) a decrease in the number of days where the respiratory
score of the first mammal is one versus the number of days where
the respiratory score of the third mammal is one, as measured over
a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week
segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week
segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over
the entire pre-weaning period.
[0117] The second effective amount of the resistant starch, in
combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the feed efficiency of the first
mammal, such as the first ruminant, to increase by at least about
ten percent, more preferably by at least about twenty percent, and
still more preferably by at least about twenty-five percent, versus
the feed efficiency of the third mammal, such as the third
ruminant, as measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period,
preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and
more preferably over the entire pre-weaning period.
[0118] Also, the second effective amount of the resistant starch,
in combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the first mammal, such as the first
ruminant, to gain at least about ten percent more weight, more
preferably at least about twenty percent more weight, and still
more preferably at least about thirty percent more weight than the
third mammal (such as the third ruminant) gains, as measured over a
segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week
segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week
segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over
the entire pre-weaning period.
[0119] Additionally, the second effective amount of the resistant
starch, in combination with the "effective amount of the animal
feed component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the first mammal to consume at least
about three and a half percent more, and preferably at least about
five percent more, of the animal feed component (weight basis), as
compared to the amount of animal feed component (weight basis)
consumed by the third mammal over a segment of the pre-weaning
period, preferably over a one week segment of the pre-weaning
period, more preferably over a four week segment of the pre-weaning
period, and still more preferably over the entire pre-weaning
period.
[0120] Furthermore, the second effective amount of the resistant
starch, in combination with the "effective amount of the animal
feed component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the first mammal, such as the first
ruminant, to exhibit a scour score that is at least about five
percent less, more preferably at least about ten percent less, and
still more preferably at least about fifteen percent less, than the
scour score of the third mammal, such as the third ruminant, over a
segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week
segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week
segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over
the entire pre-weaning period.
[0121] Next, the second effective amount of the resistant starch,
in combination with the "effective amount of the animal feed
component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the number of days the first mammal
(such as the first ruminant) exhibits a scour score greater than
one to decrease at least about ten percent, more preferably at
least about fifteen percent, still more preferably at least about
twenty percent, even more preferably at least about thirty percent,
and most preferably at least about forty percent, versus the number
of days the third mammal (such as the third ruminant) exhibits a
scour score greater than one, as measured over a segment of the
pre-weaning period, preferably over a one week segment of the
pre-weaning period, more preferably over a four week segment of the
pre-weaning period, and still more preferably over the entire
pre-weaning period.
[0122] Finally, the second effective amount of the resistant
starch, in combination with the "effective amount of the animal
feed component" and the starch other than resistant starch, is
preferably sufficient to cause the number of days the first mammal
(such as the first ruminant) exhibits a respiratory score of one to
decrease at least about five percent, more preferably at least
about ten percent, and still more preferably by one hundred
percent, as compared to the number of days the third mammal (such
as the third ruminant) exhibits a respiratory score of one, as
measured over a segment of the pre-weaning period, preferably over
a one week segment of the pre-weaning period, more preferably over
a four week segment of the pre-weaning period, and still more
preferably over the entire pre-weaning period.
[0123] For these comparisons of the first mammal (such as the first
ruminant) and the third mammal (such as the third ruminant) that
are provided above in regard to the second effective amount of the
resistant starch and the effective amount of the animal feed
component, the first mammal and the third mammal may be provided
substantially the same animal feed component, but preferably are
provided the same animal feed component. Furthermore, in these
comparisons of the first mammal (such as the first ruminant) and
the third mammal (such as the third ruminant) that are provided
above in regard to the second effective amount of the resistant
starch and the effective amount of the animal feed component, the
first mammal and the third mammal are preferably provided with the
same amount of the animal feed component, based on the dry weight
of the animal feed component, while the first mammal and the third
mammal are given equal access to water ad libitum.
[0124] Furthermore, in these comparisons of the first mammal (such
as the first ruminant) and the third mammal (such as the third
ruminant) that are provided above in regard to the second effective
amount of the resistant starch and the effective amount of the
animal feed component during the pre-weaning period, the first
mammal preferably receives the fluid animal feed as a combination
of the animal feed component, the resistant starch, and the starch
other than the resistant starch. Also in these comparisons of the
first mammal (such as the first ruminant) and the third mammal
(such as the third ruminant) that are provided above in regard to
the second effective amount of the resistant starch and the
effective amount of the animal feed component during the
pre-weaning period, the third mammal preferably receives the fluid
animal feed as a combination of the animal feed component and the
starch, such as corn starch, other than resistant starch, with the
starch other than resistant starch being provided to the third
mammal at the same weigh rate as the combination of (a) the
resistant starch and (b) the starch other than the resistant starch
are provided to the first mammal.
[0125] Though these comparisons that are provided above in regard
to the second effective amount of the resistant starch are provided
in terms of a first mammal (such as a first ruminant) and a third
mammal (such as a third ruminant), these comparisons are equally
applicable to a first group of mammals (such as a first group of
ruminants) versus a third group of mammals (such as a third group
of ruminants), respectively. In this comparison of groups of
mammals, the first group of mammals and the third group of mammals
preferably include about the same number of mammals, preferably
include the same or similar species (or the same or about the same
weighting of different species), and preferably each include
mammals with the same, or about the same, median age.
[0126] One product of the present invention may be characterized as
a mammal ration, such as a ruminant ration. The mammal ration
includes at least the animal feed component and the resistant
starch, where the resistant starch and the animal feed component
are preferably combined with each other, as previously discussed.
Consistent with the discussions above, the weight ratio of the
resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as the milk
replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the
young ruminant(s), may range from about 0.1:100 to about 10:100,
based upon the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry
weight of the animal feed component. Preferably, the weight ratio
of the resistant starch to the animal feed component, such as the
milk replacer, that is provided to the young mammal(s), such as the
young ruminant(s), ranges from about 1:100 to about 7.5:100, based
upon the dry weight of the resistant starch and the dry weight of
the animal feed component. Another product of the present invention
may be characterized as a daily ration that may be fed to a mammal,
such as a ruminant, during the pre-weaning period. The daily ration
includes at least the animal feed component and the resistant
starch, where the resistant starch and the animal feed component
are preferably combined with each other, as previously discussed.
The amount of the animal feed component present in the daily ration
is preferably greater than about 1.25 pounds, on a dry matter
basis, during the pre-weaning period, especially when the daily
ration is fed to young ruminants, such as calves.
[0127] In one embodiment, the mammal ration (such as the ruminant
ration), comprises an effective amount of a fluid animal feed; and
an effective amount of resistant starch, the mammal ration
effective to improve the health of the mammal (such as the
ruminant) as determined by a member selected from the group
consisting of: increasing the feed efficiency of a first mammal on
the first diet during a feeding period, as compared to the feed
efficiency of a second mammal on a second diet during the feeding
period; increasing the amount of weight gained by a first mammal on
the first diet during a feeding period, as compared to the amount
of weight gained by a second mammal on a second diet during the
feeding period; increasing the amount of milk replacer consumed by
a first mammal on the first diet during a feeding period, as
compared to the amount of milk replacer consumed by a second mammal
on a second diet during the feeding period; decreasing scour in a
first mammal on the first diet during a feeding period, as compared
to scour in a second mammal on a second diet during the feeding
period, decreasing respiratory distress in a first mammal on the
first diet during a feeding period as compared to the respiratory
distress of a second mammal on a second diet during the feeding
period; and combinations thereof; where the first diet and the
second diet are identical except the second diet is free of the
resistant starch; the first mammal may be, for example, a first
ruminant, such as a first calf; the second mammal may be, for
example, a second ruminant, such as a second calf, and the mammal
ration may be a ruminant ration.
[0128] As another option, the resistant starch described herein may
be incorporated in otherwise conventional weaning formulations that
are known in the art for feeding newborn mammals, such as newborn
monogastrics (including pigs), other than ruminants. In these
conventional weaning formulations for mammals other than ruminants
(subsequently referred to as "non-ruminant mammals"), some portion
of non-resistant starch (such as rapidly digestible starch or
slowly digestible starch) employed in the conventional weaning
formulations is replaced with the resistant starch of the present
invention. Some suitable, though non-exhaustive, examples of the
resistant starch that may be incorporated in conventional weaning
formulations for non-ruminant mammals in place of some
non-resistant starch are the HI-MAIZE.RTM. high amylose resistant
starches available from Penford Australia Limited. HI-MAIZE.RTM.
958 starch and HI-MAIZE.RTM. 1043 starch are two particularly
preferred high amylose resistant starches that may be incorporated
in conventional weaning formulations for non-ruminant mammals in
place of some non-resistant starch. In a particular conventional
weaning formulation for non-ruminant mammals, any amount, such as
about 0.05 weight percent up to about ten weight percent, or even
more, of the non-resistant starch of the conventional weaning
formulation, based on the total weight of the non-resistant starch
in the conventional weaning formulation, may be replaced by
resistant starch, in accordance with the present invention, without
necessarily otherwise modifying the conventional weaning
formulation.
[0129] Ultimately, when feeding young non-ruminant mammals, such as
young monogastrics (including pigs), a weaning formulation in which
about 0.1 weight percent to about 10 weight percent (or even more,
such as up to about 15 weight percent or up to about 20 weight
percent) of the non-resistant starch of the weaning formulation,
based on the total weight of the non-resistant starch in the
weaning formulation, has been replaced with resistant starch, and
during a weaning period feeding trial ranging from about three days
to about twenty days (and optionally ranging from about seven to
about fourteen days or from about ten days to twelve days), (1) the
average weight gain of the monogastrics, such as pigs, fed the
resistant-starch-containing weaning formulation is greater than,
and preferably ranges from about three percent greater to about
fifteen percent greater (or even more) than, the average weight
gain of monogastrics, such as pigs, fed the weaning formulation in
which no resistant starch is substituted in place of non-resistant
starch; (2) the average daily feed intake (weight basis) of the
monogastrics, such as pigs, fed the resistant-starch-containing
weaning formulation is greater than, and preferably ranges from
about three percent greater to about fifteen percent greater (or
even more) than, the average daily feed intake (weight basis) of
monogastrics, such as pigs, fed the weaning formulation in which no
resistant starch is substituted in place of non-resistant starch;
and (3) the feed efficiency of the monogastrics, such as pigs, fed
the resistant-starch-containing weaning formulation is greater
than, and preferably ranges from about two percent greater to about
five percent greater, or even more, than, the feed efficiency of
monogastrics, such as pigs, fed the weaning formulation in which no
resistant starch is substituted in place of non-resistant
starch.
[0130] Various analytical techniques are employed herein. An
explanation of these techniques follows. All values presented in
this document for a particular parameter, such as weight percent
total protein, weight percent fat, and weight percent total solids,
are based on the "as is" sample and are therefore on a "wet basis",
unless otherwise specified herein.
Property Determination & Characterization Techniques
Particle Size Analysis
[0131] Granule size determinations for a starch sample may be
determined using a MasterSizer particle size analyzer that utilizes
a HE-Ne laser (632.8 nm) with a maximum output of 5 mW CW. Such a
MasterSizer particle size analyzer is available from Malvern
Instruments Inc., of Southborough, Mass. In the method that employs
this particle size analyzer, a starch slurry is made using
approximately 15 mL of distilled water in a 50 mL beaker. The
resulting slurry is sonicated for about four minutes. The slurry is
then introduced into the stirred cell of the MasterSizer particle
size analyzer and the obscuration value is adjusted using distilled
water to 0.20. The slurry is then stirred for about two more
minutes before particle size readings are taken. Four particle size
readings should preferably be taken for each sample to assure the
readings are stable and repeatable.
Procedure for Separating Starch from Maize Grain
[0132] The method by which starch was separated from the maize
grain was as follows: [0133] 1. Prepare 200 g meal by grinding the
maize grain through the 2 mm then the 1 mm screen of one Retsch
Mill. [0134] 2. Wet the milled grain from step 1 thoroughly,
stirring by hand, with 600 ml 0.1 N NaOH. [0135] 3. Add 2,200 ml
0.1 N NaOH to the contents obtained in step 2 and blend 5 minutes
at 2/3 speed with the Ultra Turrax. [0136] 4. Sieve the contents of
step 3 over 44.mu. screen. [0137] 5. Return sieve overs from step 4
with 1 L water and blend for another 3 minutes, if necessary.
[0138] 6. Sieve the contents of step 5 over 44.mu. screen. [0139]
7. Centrifuge the combined filtrate from steps 4 and 6 at 3000 rpm
for 15 minutes. Decant. Wipe out the neck of the bottle with a
tissue to remove fat. [0140] 8. Reslurry starch (centrifugate from
step 7) with 200 ml water, i.e. 50 ml in each of 4 tubes.
Centrifuge. [0141] 9. Remove starch from centrifuge tubes with
about 250 ml water to form a starch slurry. [0142] 10. Adjust pH of
starch slurry to 6.0-6.5 with 0.5 N HCl. Filter again over 44.mu.
screen, if necessary. [0143] 11. Buchner filter and air dry starch
obtained in step 10. This starch may then be used in the Amylose
Content Determination and in the Resistant Starch Content
Determination referenced herein and described below. Amylose
Content Determination
[0144] The amylose concentration of a particular starch sample may
be determined using the amylose content determination procedure
that is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,714,600. The entire content of
U.S. Pat. No. 5,714,600 is hereby incorporated by reference herein
in its entirety. For the purposes of the description of the
invention, the method by which amylose was determined is set out
below.
METHOD: Apparent Amylose (Blue Value)
SCOPE: High Amylose Maize Starch
APPARATUS:
Defatting:
[0145] Soxhlet extraction apparatus [0146] Steam bath [0147]
Whatman thimbles, 25.times.80 mm [0148] Drying Oven 105.degree. C.
[0149] Dessicator Amylose Determination: [0150] Stoppered 50 ml
test tubes [0151] Vortex mixer [0152] Boiling Water bath [0153]
Spectrophotometer (650 mm, slit width 0.2 mm) REAGENTS: Defatting:
[0154] Methanol (AR Grade) Amylose Determination: [0155]
Dimethylsulfoxide (HPLC Grade) [0156] Iodine/Potassium iodide
solution [0157] 3.0 g iodine and 30 g potassium iodide made up to
1000 mls with 0.1 N sodium hydroxide [0158] Methanol (AR Grade)
[0159] Amylose (Sigma Cat. No. A0512): [0160] Dried for 2 hours at
105.degree. C. prior to use. PROCEDURE: Defatting: [0161] (1) Weigh
5 grams of starch into the thimble. [0162] (2) Place the thimble in
the Soxhlet apparatus. [0163] (3) Extract the sample with methanol
(200 mls) for 20 hours. [0164] (4) Recover the thimble & dry in
oven at 105.degree. C. for 12 hours. Amylose Determination: [0165]
(1) Accurately weigh starch (100.0 to 105.0 mg) into the text tube.
[0166] (2) Add methanol (1 ml) and vortex mix. [0167] (3) Add DMSO
(15 mls), invert the test tube, and vortex mix. [0168] (4) Place
the test tubes in a vigorously boiling water bath for 60 minutes.
[0169] (5) Invert and vortex mix each test tube at 15 minute
intervals during this period. [0170] (6) Add distilled water (15
mls), invert and vortex mix. Place the test tube in the boiling
water bath for a further 30 minutes. [0171] (7) Quantitatively
transfer the contents of the test tube to a 100 ml volumetric flask
(use a funnel in the flask). Make the solution to volume with
distilled water. [0172] (8) Transfer an aliquot (3 mls) of this
solution to a 100 ml volumetric flask and add 90 mls of distilled
water. [0173] (9) Add Iodine/Potassium Iodide solution (1 ml) to
the diluted solution and immediately shake and mix thoroughly. Make
to volume with distilled water. [0174] (10) Measure the absorbance
of this solution at 605 nm compared to a blank consisting of
Iodine/Potassium Iodide solution (1 ml) diluted to 100 mls with
distilled water in a volumetric flask. CALCULATIONS: For native
starches: % Amylose dsb=Absorbance.times.13 wt. sample dsb.
[0175] Resistant Starch Content Determination
[0176] The resistant starch determination of a particular starch
sample may be determined using the resistant starch determination
procedure that is disclosed in McClearly et al, "A Rapid Procedure
for Total Starch Measurement in Cereal Grains and Products," pp
304-312, Proc. 42nd RACI Cereal Chem. Conf., Christchurch, N Z, Ed.
V J Humphrey-Taylor (1992). The entire content of McClearly et al.,
"A Rapid Procedure for Total Starch Measurement in Cereal Grains
and Products," pp 304-312, Proc. 42nd RACI Cereal Chem. Conf,
Christchurch, N Z, Ed. V J Humphrey-Taylor (1992) is hereby
incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. For the purposes
of the description of the invention, the method by which resistant
starch was determined is set out below.
Resistant Starch Determination
[0177] The amount of resistant starch is determined by subtracting
the amount of susceptible starch from the amount of total starch.
The procedure for total starch determination and the procedure for
susceptible starch determination are provided below: The procedure
for susceptible starch determination immediately follows the
procedure for total starch determination.
Total Starch Determination
[0178] Starch or flour sample (100.+-.10 mg, accurately weighed) is
weighed into a glass test-tube (14.times.120 nm) and the tube is
tapped so that all sample falls to the bottom of the tube. The
sample is wet with aqueous ethanol (0.2 mL, 50% v/v) and stirred on
a vortex mixer. DMSO (1 ml) is added using a positive displacement
dispenser, while the tube is being stirred. The tube is immediately
placed in a vigorously boiling water bath and cooled for 2 min.
After 2 min, an aliquot (2 mL) of thermostable .alpha.-amylase (80
units) in 50 mM MOPS buffer (pH 7.0) is added to the tube (while
still in the boiling water bath) and the mixture is incubated for 1
min, removed from the bath and vigorously mixed on a vortex stirrer
for 10 sec. The tube is returned to the boiling water bath for a
further 1 min. After exactly 2 min (from time of addition of the
.alpha.-amylase, remove the tube from the bath and add an aliquot
(4.0 mL) of 100 mM sodium acetate buffer (pH 4.5) containing
pullulanase (10 units) and 13-amylase (100 units). Mix the tube
contents vigorously for 10-20 sec and incubate the tubes at
50.degree. C. for 1 hour. Stir the tube contents 2-3 times during
this incubation period
[0179] Quantitatively transfer the tube contents to a 100 mL
volumetric flask (washing the tube with water from a wash bottle)
and adjust the volume to the mark. Aliquots (0.1 mL) in triplicate
are transferred to the bottom of glass test tubes. To two of these
(reaction tubes) is added amyloglucosidase (0.1 mL, 2 Units) in
sodium acetate buffer (100 mM, pH 4.5) and to the third (the
"blank" is added sodium acetate buffer (0.1 mL, 100 mM, pH 4.5).
The tubes are incubated at 50.degree. C. for 29 min. The absorbance
of the reaction solution and reaction blank is measured (510 nm)
against a reagent blank. The reagent blank is prepared by
incubating GOPOD reagent (3.0 mL) with acetate buffer (0.2 mL, 100
mM, pH 4.5) at 50.degree. C. concurrent with the reaction
solutions. Glucose standards (50 and 100 ig in 0.2 mL) are
incubated concurrently with GOPOD reagent (3.0 mL).
Susceptible Starch Determination
[0180] In this procedure, the sample is weighed and wet with
aqueous ethanol, as in the total starch determination. The sample
is then treated with an aliquot (1.0 mL) of thermostable a-amylase
(80 units), stirred vigorously and placed in a vigorously boiling
water bath. After 1 min, the tube is removed from the bath, stirred
vigorously and returned to the boiling water bath for a further 10
min. The tubes are then treated with cold, dilute sulphuric acid (2
mL, 0.2%) and placed in a rack in water at room temperature
(approx. 22.degree. C.). The volume is adjusted to 100 mL and
aliquots (0.1 mL) in triplicate are removed for glucose
determination after amyloglucosidase treatment (as in total starch
determination).
[0181] Dry Sample Weight Determination
[0182] To determine the dry weight of a particular sample, the
sample is first weighed. The weighed sample is then dried in an
oven at a temperature that is adequate to drive moisture from the
sample without degrading the sample components, such as at a
temperature ranging from about 100.degree. C. to about 110.degree.
C. The oven drying is continued until the weight of the dried
sample remains constant, despite additional oven drying.
[0183] Total Solids Determination
[0184] To determine the weight percent total solids, wet basis, in
a sample, the actual weight of total solids is determined by
analyzing the sample in accordance with Method #925.23 (33.2.09) of
Official Methods of Analysis, Association of Official Analytical
Chemists (AOAC) (168 Ed., 1995). The weight percent total solids,
wet basis, is then calculated by dividing the actual weight of
total solids by the actual weight of the sample.
[0185] Total Protein Determination
[0186] To determine the percent of total protein, wet basis, in a
sample, the actual weight of total protein is determined in
accordance with Method #991.20 (33.2.11) of Official Methods of
Analysis, Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC)
(16.sup.th Ed., 1995). The value determined by the above method
yields "total Kjeldahl nitrogen", which is ordinarily equivalent to
"total protein" since the above method incorporates a factor that
accounts for the average amount of nitrogen in protein. Since any
and all total Kjeldahl Nitrogen determinations presented herein are
based on the above method, and since the term "total protein" is
sometimes also referred to as "crude protein", the terms "total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen," "total protein," and "crude protein" are used
interchangeably herein. The weight percent total protein, wet
basis, is calculated by dividing the actual weight of total protein
that is determined in accordance with this method by the total
weight of the sample.
[0187] Scour Documentation
[0188] The scour level of a mammal (such as a ruminant) or a group
of mammals (such as a group of ruminants) may be quantified in
accordance with this procedure. First, Scour Scores are rated on a
scale of 1 to 4, for each individual mammal, based upon the
appearance of the mammal's feces using the following score
definitions: [0189] Scour Score=1 for a normal feces [0190] Scour
Score=2 for loose feces [0191] Scour Score=3 for feces exhibiting
separated water [0192] Scour Score=4 for diarrhea indicative of
severe dehydration
[0193] A scour score is assigned daily to each mammal, according to
this scale. For an individual mammal, the scour scores over a
period of days may be averaged to determine an average scour score
for that mammal over the period. For a group of mammals, the scour
scores assigned to the different mammals on each day of the period
may be averaged to determine an average scour score for that group
of mammals over the period.
[0194] As another alternative, changes in the scour status for a
particular mammal (such as a particular ruminant) may be tracked by
noting, for example, the number of days during the period when the
scour score was greater than 1 versus the number of days during the
period when the scour score was equal to 1. Likewise, differences
in scour status between different mammals (such as between
different ruminants) over a particular period may be tracked and
characterized by comparing the number of days during the period
when the scour score was equal to 1 for the different mammals of
the group
[0195] Respiratory Distress Documentation
[0196] The respiratory distress level of a mammal (such as a
ruminant or a monogastric) or a group of mammals (such as a group
of ruminants or a group of monogastrics) may be quantified in
accordance with this procedure. First, respiratory scores are rated
on a scale of 0 to 1, for each individual mammal based upon the
following definitions: [0197] A Respiratory Score of 0 is assigned
on a particular day if the mammal is not given antibiotics for
treatment of a respiratory infection. [0198] Alternatively, a
Respiratory Score of 1 is assigned on a particular day if the
mammal is given antibiotics for treatment of a respiratory
infection.
[0199] A respiratory score is assigned daily to each mammal,
according to this scale. For an individual mammal, the respiratory
scores over a period of days may be averaged to determine an
average respiratory score for that mammal over the period. For a
group of mammals, the respiratory scores assigned to the different
mammals on each day of the period may be averaged to determine an
average respiratory score for that group of mammals over the
period.
[0200] As another alternative, changes in respiratory health for a
particular mammal (such as a particular ruminant or monogastric)
may be tracked by noting, for example, the number of days during
the period when the respiratory score was 1 versus the number of
days during the period when the respiratory score was 0. Likewise,
differences in respiratory health between different mammals (such
as between different ruminants or different monogastrics) over a
particular period may be tracked and characterized by comparing the
number of days during the period when the respiratory score was
equal to 1 versus the number of days during the period when the
respiratory score was 0 for the different mammal of the group.
[0201] The present invention is more particularly described in the
following examples that are intended as illustrations only since
numerous modifications and variations within the scope of the
present invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art.
EXAMPLE
[0202] This Example that is provided below demonstrates the effect
of providing young ruminants, in particular young calves, during
the pre-weaning period, with resistant starch and calf milk
replacer, as compared to the effect of providing young calves,
during the pre-weaning period, with calf milk replacer, but without
any resistant starch. This Example further demonstrates the effect
of providing young calves, during the pre-weaning period, with
resistant starch, corn starch, and calf milk replacer, as compared
to the effect of providing young calves, during the pre-weaning
period, with calf milk replacer and corn starch, but without any
resistant starch.
[0203] In this Example, test cattle were first weighed upon arrival
at the test facility and were also weighed at the beginning of the
first week of the pre-weaning period and at the end of the first,
second, third, and fourth weeks of the pre-weaning period. Besides
weight, other performance parameters, scouring observations, and
antibiotic administrations were documented on a daily basis and
summarized for each of the four individual weeks during the four
week pre-weaning period feeding trial.
[0204] All data that is provided in Tables 2-11 below is based upon
individual data for each calf, then-present, as least square means
of the particular data over all calves present in the test at the
time the particular data was recorded. Data for parameters
presented in Tables 2-11 was analyzed using the general linear
model (GLM) statistical procedure of SAS.TM. statistical analysis
software for a randomized complete block design that included both
the particular feed regimen and the week of the test period in the
model statement. The SAS.TM. statistical analysis software is
available from SAS Institute, Inc. of Cary, N.C. Additionally, all
data was analyzed to determine the mean of the data for each
variable under consideration during the collection period for the
particular data.
[0205] Additionally, the PDiff function of the GLM statistical
procedure was used to characterize the mean values of the data by
providing for comparisons between mean data values for the calves
of different treatments for particular test parameters or
variables. The probability value P is a measure of the statistical
probability that the differing parameter values between (1) the
test animals provided with resistant starch and calf milk replacer,
(2) the test animals provided with both resistant starch and corn
starch along with calf milk replacer, and (3) the control animals
provided with the calf milk replacer and corn starch, but not
provided any resistant starch, may be explained by the difference
between receiving the resistant starch, receiving the resistant
starch in combination with corn starch, and/or receiving corn
starch, but no resistant starch.
[0206] A P value of 0.05 means that five times out of 100 the
results may be explained by factors other than differences between
the different treatments. Likewise, a P value of 0.77 means that 77
times out of 100, the difference in results between the control
group and a group provided with the resistant starch or a
combination of the resistant starch and corn starch may be
explained by factors other than differences between the different
treatments. For purposes of comparing data in this document, P
values of 0.20, or lower, are considered to be statistically
significant. Thus, where a P value of 0.20 or less is returned for
a particular variable, it is assumed that the differing results are
fully explained by the test regimen, i.e.: the presence or lack of
the resistant starch or providing resistant starch in combination
with corn starch.
[0207] Also, many of Tables 2-11 include a coefficient of variation
for data in a particular row. A coefficient of variation is simply
the standard deviation of a particular variable that is divided by
the mean of the variable and then multiplied by 100. Because
variances and standard deviations are used to measure error, and
because these values for variances and standard deviations are
sensitive to the absolute scale of the variable, coefficients of
variations are provided, since coefficients of variation remove the
influence of the overall magnitude of the data.
[0208] This Example demonstrates the effect of providing young
calves, during the pre-weaning period, with resistant starch and
calf milk replacer, as compared to the effect of providing young
calves, during the pre-weaning period, with calf milk replacer, but
without any resistant starch. This Example further demonstrates the
effect of providing young calves, during the pre-weaning period,
with resistant starch and corn starch along with calf milk
replacer, as compared to the effect of providing young calves,
during the pre-weaning period, with calf milk replacer and corn
starch, but without any resistant starch.
[0209] In this Example, fifty-four (54) Holstein bull calves from
Wisconsin ranging in age from 3 days old to 10 days old and
averaging about 100 pounds each, with a range of about 95 pounds to
about 105 pounds each, were assigned to one of three different
treatments. A first treatment is referred to herein as "Control", a
second treatment is referred to herein as "RS Test One", and a
third treatment is referred to herein as "RS Test Two".
[0210] Gamma globulin, as measured by the Zinc Sulfate Turbidity
test and expressed in weight percent gamma globulin, was initially
determined for each calf. Thereafter, each calf was assigned, in
terms of the gamma globulin concentration for the calf, to either
level (1), level (2), level (3), level (4), or level (5), where
level (1) included calves with gamma globulin concentrations
ranging from 0.00 to 0.49 weight percent; level (2) included calves
with gamma globulin concentrations ranging from 0.50 to 0.99 weight
percent; level (3) included calves with gamma globulin
concentrations ranging from 1.00 to 1.49 weight percent; level (4)
included calves with gamma globulin concentrations ranging from
1.50 to 2.49 weight percent; and level (5) included calves with
gamma globulin concentrations of 2.5 weight percent or higher.
Equal numbers of calves from the level (1) gamma globulin
concentration range were placed in the three different treatments
(Control, RS Test One, and RS Test Two); equal numbers of calves
from the level (2) gamma globulin concentration range were placed
in the three different treatments; equal numbers of calves from the
level (3) gamma globulin concentration range were placed in the
three different treatments; equal numbers of calves from the level
(4) gamma globulin concentration range were placed in the three
different treatments; and equal numbers of calves from the level
(5) gamma globulin concentration range were placed in the three
different treatments.
[0211] The calves from the three different treatments were each fed
and monitored during the four week feeding trial of the pre-weaning
period. Details about the handling, feed consumption, scour status,
and medication provision for the calves of these three different
treatments during the four week feeding trial are provided in
Tables 2-11 below. The feeding trial for the handling, feed
consumption, and medical condition and treatment details of this
example spanned a total of four weeks of the pre-weaning period for
the calves of the Control, RS Test One, and RS Test Two
treatments.
[0212] During the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning
period, none of the calves of the three different treatments had
any access to dry calf ration, such as dry calf starter. However,
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period, each
calf of each treatment had continuing and equal access to fresh
water, ad libitum.
[0213] The calves of the three different treatments each received
calf milk replacer during the four-week feeding trial of the
pre-weaning period. The calf milk replacer that was provided to the
calves of the Control, RS Test One, and RS Test Two treatments had
a crude protein concentration of about 22 weight percent, based on
the dry weight of the calf milk replacer, and a fat concentration
of about 20 weight percent, based on the dry weight of the calf
milk replacer. The calf milk replacer was provided to the calves of
the three different treatments at an equal rate, though the rate at
which the calf milk replacer was provided increased in Period 2
versus Period 1, increased in Period 3 versus Period 2, and
increased in Period 4 versus Period 3, as depicted in Table 2.
[0214] During Period 1, the calf milk replacer was provided to the
calves of the three different treatments in two equal feedings at
an overall rate of about 1.2 pounds of calf milk replacer per calf
per day (about 0.6 pounds of calf milk replacer per calf per
feeding of calf milk replacer), based on the dry weight of the calf
milk replacer. During Period 2, the calf milk replacer was provided
to the calves of the three different treatments in two equal
feedings at an overall rate of about 1.6 pounds of calf milk
replacer per calf per day (about 0.8 pounds of calf milk replacer
per calf per feeding of calf milk replacer), based on the dry
weight of the calf milk replacer. During Period 3, the calf milk
replacer was provided to the calves of the three different
treatments in two equal feedings at an overall rate of about 2.0
pounds of calf milk replacer per calf per day (about 1.0 pounds of
calf milk replacer per calf per feeding of calf milk replacer),
based on the dry weight of the calf milk replacer. During Period 4,
the calf milk replacer was provided to the calves of the three
different treatments in two equal feedings at an overall rate of
about 2.4 pounds of calf milk replacer per calf per day (about 1.2
pounds of calf milk replacer per calf per feeding of calf milk
replacer), based on the dry weight of the calf milk replacer.
[0215] Thus, during Period 1, the calf milk replacer was provided
to the calves of the three different treatments at the "standard
feeding rate" for the calf milk replacer. On the other hand, during
Periods 2, 3, and 4, the calf milk replacer was provided to the
calves of the three different treatments at the "enhanced feeding
rate" for the calf milk replacer.
[0216] In this Example, the calves of the Control treatment did not
receive any of the resistant starch during the four-week feeding
trial of the pre-weaning period. However, in this Example, the
calves of the Control treatment did receive corn starch during the
four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period. On the other
hand, in this Example, the calves of the RS Test Two treatment
received resistant starch during the four-week feeding trial of the
pre-weaning period, but did not receive any of the corn starch
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period.
Finally, in this Example, the calves of the RS Test One treatment
received equal amounts of both the resistant starch and the corn
starch during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning
period.
[0217] The calf milk replacer that was provided to the calves of
the three different treatments during the four-week feeding trial
of the pre-weaning period originated as powdered milk replacer that
was rehydrated prior to being provided to the calves. The calf milk
replacer was rehydrated with water to form rehydrated milk replacer
having a total solids concentration ranging from about 10 weight
percent to about 20 weight percent, based on the total weight of
the rehydrated milk replacer. For the calves of the Control
treatment, the resistant starch was added by hand to the powdered
milk replacer before the powdered milk replacer was rehydrated. For
the calves of the RS Test One treatment, the resistant starch and
corn starch were added by hand to the powdered milk replacer before
the powdered milk replacer was rehydrated. Likewise, for the calves
of the RS Test Two treatment, the resistant starch was added by
hand to the powdered milk replacer before the powdered milk
replacer was rehydrated.
[0218] The resistant starch that was employed in both RS Test One
and RS Test Two of this Example were HI-MAIZE.RTM. 1043 high
amylose resistant starch that was obtained from Penford Australia
Limited of Lane Cove, New South Wales, Australia. The corn starch
that was employed in both the Control and in RS Test One of this
example was obtained from A. E. Staley Manufacturing Company of
Decatur, Ill. The resistant starch that was employed in both RS
Test One and RS Test Two of this Example were HI-MAIZE.RTM. 1043
high amylose resistant starch that was obtained from Penford
Australia Limited of Lane Cove, New South Wales, Australia. The
corn starch that was employed in both the Control and in RS Test
One of this example was STADEX.RTM. starch obtained from A. E.
Staley Manufacturing Company of Decatur, Ill., which is a business
of Tate & Lyle North America, a division of Tate & Lyle
PLC. The STADEX.RTM. starch that was employed in both the Control
and in RS Test One of this example had a particle size range of
about 5 microns to about 25 microns and an average particle size of
about 13.9 microns.
[0219] The fluid animal feed that was provided to the calves of the
Control treatment included the rehydrated milk replacer (also
referred to herein as the fluid milk replacer) and corn starch,
along with a small amount of antibiotics, and did not contain any
of the resistant starch. The fluid animal feed that was provided to
the calves of the RS Test One treatment included the rehydrated
milk replacer (also referred to herein as the fluid milk replacer),
corn starch and resistant starch, along with a small amount of
antibiotics. The fluid animal feed that was provided to the calves
of the RS Test Two treatment included the rehydrated milk replacer
(also referred to herein as the fluid milk replacer) and resistant
starch, along with a small amount of antibiotics.
[0220] The antibiotics used for the calves of the Control, RS Test
One, and RS Test Two treatments consisted of a blend of Neomycin
and Oxytetracycline. The antibiotic blend was included in the fluid
animal feed that was provided to the calves at the same
concentration in the Control, RS Test One, and RS Test Two
treatments to cause each calf in each of the three different
treatments to receive the same daily dosage of each of the
antibiotics of the antibiotic blend. Of course, the daily
antibiotic dosage the calves of each of the three treatments
received increased when going from Period 1 to Period 4 as the
weight percent of milk replacer powder in the fluid milk replacer
increased when going from Period 1 to Period 4 (see Table 4). For
the calves of each of the three different treatments, the Neomycin
was included in the fluid animal feed at the rate of 250 grams of
Neomycin per ton of powdered milk replacer, based on the dry weight
of the powdered milk replacer, and the Oxytetracycline was included
in the fluid animal feed at the rate of 125 grams of
Oxytetracycline per ton of powdered milk replacer, based on the dry
weight of the powdered milk replacer.
[0221] The fluid animal feed was individually provided to each of
the calves in each of the three different treatments twice per day
at about 7:30 a.m. and again at about 4:00 p.m. Generally, the
calves of each of the treatments quickly consumed a majority of
their particular allotment of the fluid animal feed within a few
minutes of being provided with the fluid animal feed, though the
amount of the consumed fluid animal feed varied from calf to calf,
as reflected in Table 6 below. Also, the calves of each of the
three different treatments were, as previously indicated, given
continuous and equal access to fresh water, but were not provided
with any dry animal feed (such as calf starter or total calf
ration) during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning
period. Furthermore, each test calf in the three different
treatments received veterinary care and management consistent with
appropriate recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of
Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching.
(1.sup.st Edition, March 1988).
[0222] Details about the diet of the calves during the four-week
feeding trial of the pre-weaning period and details about the calf
milk replacer component of the fluid animal feed for the three
different treatments are provided in Tables 2, 3, and 4 below:
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Diet During 4-Week Feeding Trial Treatment
Milk Replacer (MR) Cornstarch.sup.C Resistant Starch.sup.C Total
Calf Number of Name Description (weight %).sup.D (weight %).sup.D
Ration (TCR) Calves Control 22:20.sup.A MR.sup.B 5.0 0.0 No 18 RS
Test One 22:20.sup.A MR.sup.B 2.5 2.5 No 18 RS Test Two 22:20.sup.A
MR.sup.B 0.0 5.0 No 18 .sup.AThe milk replacer had a crude protein
concentration of about 22 weight percent, based on the dry weight
of the milk replacer, and a fat concentration of about 20 weight
percent, based on the dry weight of the milk replacer.
.sup.BAntibiotics included in milk replacer: NT 250:125
(Neomycin/Oxytetracycline @ 250/125 grams/ton of dry milk
replacer). .sup.CCombined with the milk replacer prior to adding
water to form the fluid animal feed. .sup.DWeight percentage is
based on the dry weight of the milk replacer.
[0223] TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Weekly Milk Replacer & Starch
Provision Details During 4-Week Feeding Trial Period (Days)
Description Control RS Test One RS Test Two 1.sup.B (1-7) Weight
Percent Milk Replacer Powder In Fluid Milk Replacer.sup.C 10.00
10.00 10.00 Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.A 0.6 0.6 0.6 Pounds of Water Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.A 5.4 5.4 5.4 Pounds of Fluid Milk Replacer Per Milk
Replacer Feeding.sup.A 6.0 6.0 6.0 Total Pounds of Milk Replacer
Powder Fed During Period 8.4 8.4 8.4 Weight Percent Corn Starch Per
Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D 5.0 2.5 0.0 Grams of Corn Starch Per
Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 13.62 6.81 0.0 Total Grams of Corn
Starch Fed During Period 190.68 95.34 0.0 Weight Percent Resistant
Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D 0.0 2.5 5.0 Grams of
Resistant Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.0 6.81 13.62
Total Grams of Resistant Starch Fed During Period 0.0 95.34 190.68
2.sup.B (8-14) Weight Percent Milk Replacer Powder In Fluid Milk
Replacer.sup.C 12.12 12.12 12.12 Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Per
Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.8 0.8 0.8 Pounds of Water Per Milk
Replacer Feeding.sup.A 5.8 5.8 5.8 Pounds of Fluid Milk Replacer
Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 6.6 6.6 6.6 Total Pounds of Milk
Replacer Powder Fed During Period 11.2 11.2 11.2 Weight Percent
Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D 5.0 2.5 0.0 Grams of
Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 18.16 9.08 0.0 Total
Grams of Corn Starch Fed During Period 254.24 127.12 0.0 Weight
Percent Resistant Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D 0.0 2.5
5.0 Grams of Resistant Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.0
9.08 18.16 Total Grams of Resistant Starch Fed During Period 0.0
127.12 254.24 3.sup.B (15-21) Weight Percent Milk Replacer Powder
In Fluid Milk Replacer.sup.C 14.08 14.08 14.08 Pounds of Milk
Replacer Powder Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 1.0 1.0 1.0 Pounds
of Water Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 6.1 6.1 6.1 Pounds of
Fluid Milk Replacer Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 7.1 7.1 7.1
Total Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Fed During Period 14.0 14.0
14.0 Weight Percent Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D 5.0
2.5 0.0 Grams of Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 22.7
11.35 0.0 Total Grams of Corn Starch Fed During Period 317.8 158.9
0.0 Weight Percent Resistant Starch Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.D
0.0 2.5 5.0 Grams of Resistant Starch Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.A 0.0 11.35 22.7 Total Grams of Resistant Starch Fed
During Period 0.0 158.9 317.8 4.sup.B (22-28) Weight Percent Milk
Replacer Powder In Fluid Milk Replacer.sup.C 16.00 16.00 16.00
Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 1.2
1.2 1.2 Pounds of Water Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 6.3 6.3 6.3
Pounds of Fluid Milk Replacer Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 7.5
7.5 7.5 Total Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Fed During Period 16.8
16.8 16.8 Weight Percent Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.D 5.0 2.5 0.0 Grams of Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.A 27.24 13.62 0.0 Total Grams of Corn Starch Fed During
Period 381.36 190.68 0.0 Weight Percent Resistant Starch Per Milk
Replacer Feeding.sup.D 0.0 2.5 5.0 Grams of Resistant Starch Per
Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.0 13.62 27.24 Total Grams of
Resistant Starch Fed During Period 0.0 190.68 381.36 .sup.ATwo
Feedings of Milk Replacer per day for the Control, RS Test One, and
RS Test Two treatments during Period 1 thru Period 4. .sup.BEach
period had a seven day duration. .sup.CBased on the total weight of
the Fluid Milk Replacer .sup.DBased on the total weight of the Milk
Replacer Powder included in the Fluid Milk Replacer
[0224] TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Cumulative Milk Replacer & Starch
Provision Details During 4-Week Feeding Trial Periods (Days)
Description Control RS Test One RS Test Two 1-4.sup.B (1-28)
Average Weight Percent Milk Replacer Powder In Fluid Milk
Replacer.sup.C 13.235 13.235 13.235 Average Pounds of Milk Replacer
Powder Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.9 0.9 0.9 Average Pounds
of Water Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 5.9 5.9 5.9 Average Pounds
of Fluid Milk Replacer Per Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 6.8 6.8 6.8
Total Pounds of Milk Replacer Powder Fed During Periods 1-4 50.4
50.4 50.4 Weight Percent Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.D 5.0 2.5 0.0 Grams of Corn Starch Per Milk Replacer
Feeding.sup.A 20.43 10.21 0.0 Total Grams of Corn Starch Fed During
Period 1144.08 572.04 0.0 Weight Percent Resistant Starch Per Milk
Replacer Feeding.sup.D 0.0 2.5 5.0 Grams of Resistant Starch Per
Milk Replacer Feeding.sup.A 0.0 10.21 20.43 Total Grams of
Resistant Starch Fed During Period 0.0 572.04 1144.08 .sup.ATwo
Feedings of Milk Replacer per day for the Control, RS Test One, and
RS Test Two treatments during Period 1 thru Period 4. .sup.BEach
period had a seven day duration. .sup.CBased on the total weight of
the Fluid Milk Replacer .sup.DBased on the total weight of the Milk
Replacer Powder included in the Fluid Milk Replacer
[0225] Next, details about the average weight gain per calf during
the four individual periods of the four-week feeding trial of the
pre-weaning period along with an average total weight gain per calf
over the entire four-week feeding trial for the three different
treatments are provided in Table 5 below: TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5
Weight Gain During 4-Week Feeding Trial Average Gain RS Coefficient
of Per Calf Control Test One RS Test Two Variation (C.V.) Period
1.sup.A (lbs) -0.42 0.07 0.62 5474.16 Period 2.sup.A (lbs)
1.14.sup.e 3.71.sup.f 13.29.sup.f 175.75 Period 3.sup.A (lbs) 10.22
10.21 10.02 23.40 Period 4.sup.A (lbs) 9.52.sup.x 10.57.sup.xy
10.92.sup.y 24.09 Period 1 Through 20.46.sup.b 24.55.sup.a
24.86.sup.a 24.28 Period 4 (lbs) .sup.AEach period had a seven day
duration. .sup.a,bNumbers within the same row with different single
letter superscripts differ at a probability value of P < 0.05
.sup.x,yNumbers within the same row with different single letter
superscripts differ at a probability value of P < 0.10
.sup.e,fNumbers within the same row with different single letter
superscripts differ at a probability value of P < 0.20
[0226] The data presented in Table 5 shows that differences between
the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments
versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment, namely
inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, generally increased the average gain per calf during
the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for the
calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus the
calves of the Control treatment. Indeed, these results of Table 5
show a dramatic increase in average weight gain per calf during
Period 2 of the four-week feeding trial. The RS Test One treatment
during Period 2 caused the average weight gain per calf to increase
by more than 225% (P<0.20) versus the average weight gain per
calf of the Control treatment. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment
during Period 2 caused the average weight gain per calf to increase
by more than 200% (P<0.20) versus the average weight gain per
calf of the Control treatment. Also, the RS Test Two treatment
during Period 4 caused the average weight gain per calf to increase
by nearly 15% (P<0.10) versus the average weight gain per calf
of the Control treatment during Period 4
[0227] Furthermore, these results of Table 5 show a dramatic
increase in average weight gain per calf over the entire four-week
feeding trial. The RS Test One treatment caused the average weight
gain per calf over the four weeks of Period 1 through Period 4 to
increase by nearly 20% (P<0.05) versus the average weight gain
per calf of the Control treatment over this four week period.
Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment caused the average weight gain
per calf over the four weeks of Period 1 through Period 4 to
increase by nearly 21.5% (P<0.05) versus the average weight gain
per calf of the Control treatment over this four week period
[0228] Next, details about the average milk replacer consumption
per calf during the four individual periods of the four-week
feeding trial of the pre-weaning period along with an average total
milk replacer consumption per calf over the entire four-week
feeding trial are provided for the three different treatments in
Table 6 below: TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Milk Replacer Consumption
During 4-Week Feeding Trial Average Milk Replacer Consumption.sup.A
Per Coefficient of Variation Calf Control RS Test One RS Test Two
(C.V.) Period 1.sup.B (lbs) 6.97.sup.b 7.54.sup.ab 7.74.sup.a 15.02
Period 2.sup.B (lbs) 10.36.sup.a 11.01.sup.a 11.01.sup.a 739 Period
3.sup.B (lbs) 13.70 13.83 13.98 4.13 Period 4.sup.B (lbs) 16.20
16.57 16.74 6.36 Period 1 Through Period 4 (lbs) 47.22.sup.b
48.95.sup.a 49.48.sup.a 5.07 .sup.AMilk Replacer Consumption Weight
is provided on a dry matter (dm) basis .sup.BEach period had a
seven day duration. .sup.a,bNumbers within the same row with
different single letter superscripts differ at a probability value
of P < 0.05
[0229] The data presented in Table 6 shows that differences between
the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments
versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment, namely
inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, generally increased the average milk replacer
consumption per calf during the four-week feeding trial of the
pre-weaning period for the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test
Two treatments, versus the calves of the Control treatment. Indeed,
these results of Table 6 show a substantial increase in average
milk replacer consumption per calf during Period 1 of the four-week
feeding trial. For example, the RS Test Two treatment during Period
1 caused the average milk replacer consumption per calf to increase
by more than 11% (P<0.05) versus the average milk replacer
consumption per calf of the Control treatment.
[0230] Furthermore, these results of Table 6 show a significant
increase in average milk replacer consumption per calf during
Period 2 of the four-week feeding trial. For example, the RS Test
One treatment during Period 2 caused the average milk replacer
consumption per calf to increase by nearly 6.3% (P<0.05) versus
the average milk replacer consumption per calf of the Control
treatment. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment during Period 2
caused the average milk replacer consumption per calf to increase
by nearly 6.3% (P<0.05) versus the average milk replacer
consumption per calf of the Control treatment.
[0231] Finally, these results of Table 6 show a significant
increase in average total milk replacer consumption per calf over
the entire four-week feeding trial. First, the RS Test One
treatment caused the average milk replacer consumption per calf
over the four weeks of Period 1 through Period 4 to increase by
more than 3.5% (P<0.05) versus the average milk replacer
consumption per calf of the Control treatment over this four week
period. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment caused the average milk
replacer consumption per calf over the four weeks of Period 1
through Period 4 to increase by nearly 4.8% (P<0.05) versus the
average milk replacer consumption per calf of the Control treatment
over this four week period.
[0232] Next, weight, weight gain, and feed efficiency details over
the entire four-week feeding trial are provided for the three
different treatments in Table 7 below: TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Feed
Efficiency During 4-Week Feeding Trial Coefficient RS Test RS Test
of variation Description Control One Two (C.V.) Average Initial
Ig.sup.A For 1.48 1.58 1.48 48.30 All Calves Average.sup.B Initial
Weight Per 97.43 97.76 97.43 4.22 Calf, lbs. (at start of period 1)
Average.sup.C Ending Weight Per 117.89 122.31 122.29 24.28 Calf,
lbs. (at end of period 4) Average.sup.D Total Gain Per Calf
20.46.sup.b 24.55.sup.a 24.86.sup.a 24.28 During Period 1 Through
Period 4 (lbs) Feed Efficiency Average.sup.E 0.39.sup.b 0.49.sup.a
0.47.sup.a 27.91 During Periods 1-4 .sup.AExpressed in weight
percent, as measured by Zinc Sulfate Turbidity test, then assigned
to level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4, or level 5 as follows: (1)
Ig = 0.00-0.49, (2) Ig = 0.50-0.99, (3) Ig = 1.00-1.49, (4) Ig =
1.50-2.49, (5) Ig = 2.5 and higher. .sup.BThe initial weight(s) of
calves that were present in period 1 but did not complete period 4
are not included in this average. .sup.CThis average excludes
calves that were present in period 1 but did not complete period 4.
.sup.DThis average will not necessarily equal the value obtained by
subtracting the average initial weight per calf (at the start of
period 1) from the average ending weight per calf (at the end of
period 4), since this average is the sum of the weekly average
gains per calf for periods 1-4 which may include one or more calves
that did not finish period 4. .sup.EThe Feed Efficiency Average is
a ratio of the weight gained versus the weight of feed consumed.
The Feed Efficiency Average During Periods 1-4 is the mean of each
Feed Efficiency Average of each of the individual periods (1-4) for
each individual calf. .sup.a,bNumbers within the same row with
different single letter superscripts differ at a probability value
of P < 0.05
[0233] The data presented in Table 7 demonstrates that differences
between the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment,
namely inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test
Two treatments, generally increased the average gain per calf
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for
the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus
the calves of the Control treatment. Indeed, these results of Table
7 show a dramatic increase in average weight gain per calf over the
entire four-week feeding trial. First, the RS Test One treatment
caused the average weight gain per calf over the four weeks of
Period 1 through Period 4 to increase by nearly 20% (P<0.05)
versus the average weight gain per calf of the Control treatment
over this four week period. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment
caused the average weight gain per calf over the four weeks of
Period 1 through Period 4 to increase by nearly 21.5% (P<0.05)
versus the average weight gain per calf of the Control treatment
over this four week period.
[0234] These details of Table 7 also demonstrate that differences
between the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment,
namely inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test
Two treatments, generally increased the feed efficiency average for
the calves during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning
period for the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, versus the feed efficiency average for the calves of
the Control treatment. For example, the RS Test One treatment
caused the feed efficiency average for the calves during the
four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for the calves to
increase by more than 25% (P<0.05) versus the feed efficiency
average for the calves of the Control treatment during the
four-week feeding trial. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment caused
the feed efficiency average for the calves during the four-week
feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for the calves to increase
by more than 20% (P<0.05) versus the feed efficiency average for
the calves of the Control treatment during the four-week feeding
trial.
[0235] With regard to the superscript letters C and D in Table 7
above, the average weights of calves are presented for different
points in time during the test regimen and exclude any calf or
calves not present at the end of a period over which a particular
measurement was made or averaged, even though that calf was present
or those calves were present at the start of the period over which
the particular measurement was made or averaged. This phenomena
merely recognizes that there is virtually always some degree of
mortality in young calves, whether those calves are involved in
testing different feeding regimens or are merely being fed outside
of an experimental test regimen. Typically, in the experience of
the inventors, mortality rates for calves generally range up to
about ten percent, during shorter-length testing programs, such as
the four-week feeding trial of this Example.
[0236] Next, details about average calf scour scores over the
four-week feeding trial are provided for the three different
treatments in Table 8 below: TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Average Calf
Scour Scores Per Calf During 4-Week Feeding Trial Average
Calf.sup.B RS Test RS Test Coefficient of Scour Score.sup.A Control
One Two Variation (C.V.) Period 1.sup.C 1.95 1.86 1.79 27.18 Period
2.sup.C 1.43.sup.e 1.40.sup.ef 1.22.sup.f 29.13 Period 3.sup.C 1.08
1.04 1.02 13.64 Period 4.sup.C 1.00 1.03 1.00 4.33 Average.sup.D
Calf Scour 1.69.sup.e 1.63.sup.ef 1.51.sup.f 24.89 Score.sup.A for
Periods 1-2 Average.sup.D Calf Scour 1.36 1.33 1.26 16.30
Score.sup.A for Periods 1-4 .sup.AScour Scores are rated on a scale
of 1 to 4, for each individual calf, based upon the appearance of
the calve = s feces: Scour Score = 1 for a normal feces Scour Score
= 2 for loose feces Scour Score = 3 for feces exhibiting separated
water Scour Score = 4 for diarrhea indicative of sever calf
dehydration .sup.BThe Average Scour Score per calf for an
individual period was determined by first assigning a scour score
to each calf on each day of the period and then collectively
averaging all daily scour scores assigned for each of the calf.
.sup.CEach period had a seven day duration. .sup.DThe Average Scour
Score per calf over a range of two or more periods was determined
by averaging the Average Scour Scores per calf that were previously
determined for each of the individual periods included in the
range. .sup.e,fNumbers within the same row with different single
letter superscripts differ at a probability value of P <
0.20
[0237] The data presented in Table 8 demonstrates that differences
between the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment,
namely inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test
Two treatments, generally decreased the average calf scour score
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for
the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus
the calves of the Control treatment. Indeed, these results of Table
8 show a significant decrease in average calf scour score during
the four-week feeding trial.
[0238] For example, the RS Test Two treatment caused the average
calf scour score during Period 2 to decrease by nearly 14.7%
(P<0.20) versus the average calf scour score of the Control
treatment during Period 2. Likewise, the RS Test Two treatment
caused the average calf scour score over the two weeks of Period 1
through Period 2 to decrease by more than 10.6% (P<0.20) versus
the average calf scour score of the Control treatment during Period
1 through Period 2.
[0239] Next, details about the average calf scour days over the
four-week feeding trial are provided for the three different
treatments in Table 9 below: TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Average Calf
Scour Days During 4-Week Feeding Trial Average Calf RS RS Test
Coefficient of Scour.sup.A Days.sup.B During: Control Test One Two
Variation (C.V.) Period 1.sup.C 4.94 4.00 4.11 44.38 Period 2.sup.C
2.33.sup.x 2.13.sup.xy 1.22.sup.y 98.45 Period 3.sup.C 0.39 0.20
0.11 303.36 Period 4.sup.C 0.00 0.13 0.00 484.37 Total.sup.D
Average Scour 7.28.sup.x 6.13.sup.xy 5.33.sup.y 50.31 Days For
Periods 1-2 Total.sup.D Average Scour 7.67.sup.x 6.47.sup.xy
5.44.sup.y 53.25 Days For Periods 1-4 .sup.AScour Scores are rated
on a scale of 1 to 4, for each individual calf, based upon the
appearance of the calve = s feces: Scour Score = 1 for a normal
feces Scour Score = 2 for loose feces Scour Score = 3 for feces
exhibiting separated water Scour Score = 4 for diarrhea indicative
of sever calf dehydration .sup.BThe Average Calf Scour Days for an
individual period was determined by (a) first recording, by calf,
how many days during the period the calf had a Scour Score of 2 or
more to arrive at each calve's individual Scour Day measure for the
period and then (b) collectively averaging all individual Scour Day
measures of each calf determined in (a) during the period.
.sup.CEach period had a seven day duration. .sup.DThe Total Average
Scour Days over a range of two or more periods was determined by
totaling each of the Average Calf Scour Days for each of the
individual periods included in the range. .sup.x,yNumbers within
the same row with different single letter superscripts differ at a
probability value of P < 0.10
[0240] The data of Table 9 demonstrates that differences between
the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments
versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment, namely
inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, generally decreased the average calf scour days during
the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for the
calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus the
average calf scour days of the Control treatment. Indeed, these
results of Table 9 show a substantial decrease in average calf
scour days during Period 2 of the four-week feeding trial. For
example, the RS Test Two treatment during Period 2 caused the
average calf scour days to decrease by nearly 48% (P<0.10)
versus the average calf scour days of the Control treatment during
Period 2.
[0241] Furthermore, these results of Table 9 show a substantial
decrease in average calf scour days over the two week segment
extending from Period 1 through Period 2 of the four-week feeding
trial. For example, the RS Test Two treatment during this two week
period caused the average calf scour days to decrease by nearly
26.8% (P<0.10) versus the average calf scour days of the Control
treatment during this two week period.
[0242] Finally, these results of Table 9 show a substantial
decrease in average calf scour days over the four week segment
extending from Period 1 through Period 4 of the four-week feeding
trial. For example, the RS Test Two treatment during this four week
period caused the average calf scour days to decrease by more than
29% (P<0.10) versus the average calf scour days of the Control
treatment during this four week period.
[0243] Next, details about the average calf respiratory score over
the four-week feeding trial are provided for the three different
treatments in Table 10 below: TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Average Calf
Respiratory Score During 4-Week Feeding Trial Average.sup.B Calf
Respiratory RS Test RS Test Coefficient of Score.sup.A During:
Control One Two Variation (C.V.) Period 1.sup.C 0.00.sup.f
0.07.sup.ef 0.22.sup.e 466.60 Period 2.sup.C 0.72 0.67 0.28 281.38
Period 3.sup.C 0.94.sup.f 0.20.sup.e 0.89.sup.f 205.62 Period
4.sup.C 0.67.sup.f 0.00.sup.e 0.50.sup.ef 281.52 Total.sup.D
Average 2.33 0.93 1.89 182.66 Calf Respiratory Score for Periods
1-4 .sup.AA Respiratory Score of either 0 or 1 is assigned to each
calf each day. A Respiratory Score of 1 is assigned on a particular
day if the calf is given antibiotics for treatment of a respiratory
infection, and a Respiratory Score of 0 is assigned on a particular
day if the calf is not given antibiotics for treatment of a
respiratory infection. .sup.BThe Average Calf Respiratory Score for
an individual period was determined by (a) first recording each
calves Respiratory Score for each day of the period; (b) then, for
each calf individually averaging the total of all Respiratory
Scores for all days in the period; and then (c) collectively
averaging the individual Respiratory Score Averages determined in
(b) of all of the calves. .sup.CEach period had a seven day
duration. .sup.DThe Total Average Calf Respiratory Score over a
range of two or more periods was determined by totaling each of the
Average Calf Respiratory Scores for each of the individual periods
included in the range. .sup.e,fNumbers within the same row with
different single letter superscripts differ at a probability value
of P < 0.20
[0244] The data of Table 10 demonstrates that differences between
the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments
versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment, namely
inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, generally decreased the average calf respiratory score
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for
the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus
the average calf respiratory score for the calves subjected to the
Control treatment. Indeed, these results of Table 10 illustrate a
significant decrease in average calf respiratory scores during
Period 3 of the four-week feeding trial. For example, the RS Test
Two treatment during Period 3 caused the average calf respiratory
to decrease by more than 5% (P<0.20) versus the average calf
respiratory score attributable to the Control treatment during
Period 3.
[0245] Furthermore, these results of Table 10 illustrate a
substantial decrease in average calf respiratory scores during the
final week (Period 4) of the four-week feeding trial. For example,
the RS Test One treatment during Period 4 caused the average calf
respiratory score to decrease by 100% (P<0.20) to an average
calf respiratory score of zero versus the average calf respiratory
score of the Control treatment during Period 4.
[0246] Next, details about the average electrolyte and antibiotic
costs for treatment of scours and respiratory ailments occurring
over the four-week feeding trial are provided in Table 11 below for
calves subjected to the three different treatments: TABLE-US-00011
TABLE 11 Average Electrolyte and Antibiotic Costs During 4-Week
Feeding Trial RS Test RS Test Coefficient of Period.sup.B
Variable.sup.A Control One Two Variation (C.V.) 1 Average
Electrolyte Cost for Period $5.83 $6.00 $4.59 70.68 Average
Antibiotic Cost for Period $0.12 $0.18 $0.17 365.25 Average
Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost for Period $5.95 $6.18 $4.76
72.58 2 Average Electrolyte Cost for Period $3.42.sup.e
$3.14.sup.ef $1.78.sup.f 113.82 Average Antibiotic Cost for Period
$0.55 $0.58 $0.32 269.78 Average Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost
for Period $3.98.sup.e $3.73.sup.ef $2.10.sup.f 113.57 3 Average
Electrolyte Cost for Period $0.64 $0.33 $0.07 341.90 Average
Antibiotic Cost for Period $0.80 $0.57 $0.81 194.86 Average
Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost for Period $1.44 $0.90 $0.88
193.59 4 Average Electrolyte Cost for Period $0.00 $0.45 $0.00
711.16 Average Antibiotic Cost for Period $0.46 $0.00 $0.39 301.94
Average Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost for Period $0.46 $0.45
$0.39 302.19 Total of Average Electrolyte Costs for Periods 1-4
$9.89.sup.e $9.92.sup.e $6.44.sup.f 79.67 Total of Average
Antibiotic Cost for Periods 1-4 $1.93 $1.33 $1.70 166.45 Total of
Average Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost for Periods $11.82.sup.e
$11.25.sup.ef $8.13.sup.f 80.81 1-4 .sup.AAll Variables (Average
Electrolyte Cost for Period, Average Antibiotic Cost for Period,
Average Electrolyte & Antibiotic Cost for Period, Total of
Average Electrolyte Costs for Periods 1-4, Total of Average
Antibiotic Cost for Periods 1-4, and Total of Average Electrolyte
& Antibiotic Cost for Periods 1-4) are on a per calf basis..
.sup.BEach period had a seven day duration. .sup.e,fNumbers within
the same row with different single letter superscripts differ at a
probability value of P < 0.20
[0247] The details of Table 11 demonstrate that differences between
the feeding regimens of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments
versus the feeding regimen of the Control treatment, namely
inclusion of resistant starch in the RS Test One and RS Test Two
treatments, generally decreased the average treatment cost per calf
during the four-week feeding trial of the pre-weaning period for
the calves of the RS Test One and RS Test Two treatments, versus
the average treatment cost per calf subjected to the Control
treatment.
[0248] For example, the RS Test Two treatment during Period 2
caused the average electrolyte cost per calf during Period 2 to
decrease by nearly 48% (P<0.20) versus the average electrolyte
costs per calf attributable to the Control treatment during Period
2. Furthermore, the RS Test Two treatment during the four weeks of
Period 1 through Period 4 caused the average electrolyte cost per
calf during this four week period to decrease by nearly 35%
(P<0.20) versus the average electrolyte costs per calf
attributable to the Control treatment during this four week
period.
[0249] As yet another example, the RS Test Two treatment during
Period 2 caused the average electrolyte and antibiotic cost per
calf during Period 2 to decrease by more than 47% (P<0.20)
versus the average electrolyte and antibiotic cost per calf
attributable to the Control treatment during Period 2. Furthermore,
the RS Test Two treatment during the four weeks of Period 1 through
Period 4 caused the average electrolyte and antibiotic cost per
calf during this four week period to decrease by more than 31%
(P<0.20) versus the average electrolyte and antibiotic cost per
calf attributable to the Control treatment during this four week
period.
[0250] Monogastric Weaning Formulation
[0251] In a comparison of feeding young pigs three different
weaning formulations, various benefits were observed. One of the
three different weaning formulations was simply a conventional,
commercially-available pig weaning formulation, served as the
control or baseline, and is referred to as the "first pig weaning
formulation" herein. Another (referred to herein as the "second pig
weaning formulation") of the three different weaning formulations
was the conventional, commercially-available pig weaning
formulation in which about 2.5 weight percent of the non-resistant
starch (typically readily digestible corn starch (CS)) of the
conventional, commercially-available pig weaning formulation, based
on the total weight of the non-resistant starch in the
conventional, commercially-available pig weaning formulation, was
replaced with a high amylose resistant starch. HI-MAIZE.RTM. 1043
starch was used in this example as the resistant starch. However,
HI-MAIZE.RTM. 958 starch, high amylose maize flour, or any other
source of resistant starch could be used. Finally, the third
(referred to herein as the "third pig weaning formulation") of the
three different weaning formulations was the conventional,
commercially-available pig weaning formulation in which about 5.0
weight percent of the non-resistant starch of the conventional,
commercially-available pig weaning formulation, based on the total
weight of the non-resistant starch in the conventional,
commercially-available pig weaning formulation, was replaced with
resistant starch. Other than for substituting resistant starch for
some of the non-resistant starch in the conventional
commercially-available pig weaning formulation, the second pig
weaning and the third pig weaning formulation were the same as the
first pig weaning formulation.
[0252] While the resistant starch compositions were incorporated
into the pig weaning formulation at 2.5% and 5% w/w levels of the
total composition for this example, incorporation at other levels
is anticipated. For example, in a particular conventional weaning
formulation for non-ruminant mammals, any amount, such as about
0.05 weight percent up to about ten weight percent, or even more,
of the non-resistant starch of the conventional weaning
formulation, based on the total weight of the non-resistant starch
in the conventional weaning formulation, may be replaced by
resistant starch, in accordance with the present invention, without
necessarily otherwise modifying the conventional weaning
formulation.
[0253] During an eleven day feeding trial that started about twenty
days after the pigs were born, where a first group of pigs was fed
the first pig weaning formulation, a second group of pigs was fed
the second pig weaning formulation, and a third group of pigs was
fed the third pig weaning formulation, the average weight gain of
the second group was about 5.6 percent greater than the average
weight gain of the first group, and the average weight gain of the
third group was about 13.6 percent greater than the average weight
gain of the first group. During the eleven day feeding trial, the
first, second, and third groups of pigs had equal access to the
first, second, and third pig weaning formulations, respectively.
Additionally, during the eleven day feeding trial, the first,
second, and third groups of pigs all had equal and continuing
access to drinking water.
[0254] During the eleven day feeding trial, the average daily
weight of feed intake of the second group was about 3.6 percent
greater than the average daily weight of feed intake of the first
group, and the average daily weight of feed intake of the third
group was about 10.2 percent greater than the average daily weight
of feed intake of the first group. Furthermore, during the eleven
day feeding trial, the feed efficiency of the second group was
about 3.7 percent greater than the feed efficiency of the first
group, and the feed efficiency of the third group was about 3.4
percent greater than the feed efficiency of the first group.
Feeding the pigs the second pig weaning formulation and the third
pig weaning formulation earlier in the life of the pigs, rather
than later, is believed important, since similar gains of the
second and third groups of pigs over the first group of pigs were
not consistently realized in a subsequent seven day feeding trial
that started immediately after the eleven day feeding trial
ended.
ADDITIONAL MODES FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
[0255] In order to better understand the scope of this invention, a
number of additional examples relating to food compositions
intended for human consumption will now be described.
[0256] Breakfast Cereals
[0257] The resistant starch of the invention may be used to
advantage in a variety of ready-to-eat breakfast cereals. These
include flaked cereals, extruded flake cereals, extruded gun-puffed
cereals, extruded and other shredded cereals, oven-puffed cereals,
granola cereals and extruded expanded cereals.
(1) Flaked Cereals
[0258] While still in grit form A-958 (HI-MAIZE.RTM. high amylose
starch 80%, available from Starch Australasia Limited) may be
processed to make a cornflake by using higher than conventional
levels of water addition and longer cooking times. The final
toasted product (formulation 2571/1) has a light color and is
significantly higher in dietary fiber content as is shown in Table
12.
(2) Extruded Flake
[0259] An extruded flake product was made by rotary cooking, cold
form pelleting, flaking and toasting according to formulation
2562/1. It will be seen from Table 12 that 2562/1 had a
significantly higher dietary fiber content as compared with the
control. TABLE-US-00012 FORMULATION: EXTRUDED FLAKE 2562/1
INGREDIENTS (%) Control (%) Maize Polenta 45.0 45.0 Starch A958
42.0 -- Regular Maize Starch -- 42.0 Sugar 8.7 8.7 Salt 1.9 1.9
Malt 2.5 2.5 100.0 100.0
[0260] Formulations 2459/2(b) and 2459/2(c) were prepared as
2562/1. However, 2459/2(b) were tempered overnight while for
2459/2(c), the flakes were dried out at 70.degree. C. for 30
minutes prior to flaking. TABLE-US-00013 FORMULATION: EXTRUDED
FLAKE (MULTIGRAIN) 2459/2(b) 2459/2(c) INGREDIENTS (%) (%) Starch
A958 43.1 43.1 Rice 11.5 11.5 Oats 11.5 11.5 Wheat 20.7 20.7 Sugar
8.6 8.6 Malt 2.6 2.6 Salt 2.0 2.0 100.0 100.0
[0261] The textural properties of the resultant flakes were
significantly different for each formulation with the 2459/2
forming hollow or pillow-like flakes, whereas 2459/2(c) had a
wrinkled, blistered appearance.
[0262] The dietary fiber content of the two flake formulations
2459/2(b) and 2459/2(c) are set out in Table 12, from which it will
be seen that overnight tempering of the moist pellet containing
starch A958 increases the total dietary fiber content of the
resultant flake significantly. A further extruded flake product was
made according to formulation 2556/1. TABLE-US-00014 FORMULATION:
EXTRUDED FLAKE 2556/1 INGREDIENTS (%) Wholegrain Calrose 56.0 Rice
7.0 Wheatgerm 6.9 Sugar 1.5 Salt 1.3 Malt 6.3 Icing Sugar Mixture
12.6 Gluten 8.4 Starch A958 100.0
[0263] The dietary fiber content for 2556/1 is set out in Table 12.
TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 12 DIETARY FIBER CONTENT OF BREAKFAST CEREALS
Total Soluble Insoluble Moisture Dietary Fiber Dietary Fiber
Dietary Fiber Formulation Content % (% dsb) (% dsb) (% dsb)
Cornflake 4.6 4.0 1.0 2.9 Control: 2571/1 6.2 20.7 1.2 19.5 2562/1
4.7 12.4 0.4 12.0 Control 6.5 3.9 0.3 3.5 2459/2(b) 4.3 17.1 -- --
2459/2(c) 5.0 15.3 -- -- 2556/1 5.4 4.5 1.1 3.5
(3) Wheat Bites
[0264] This product is a crunchy "pillow" which may be consumed as
a ready-to-eat cereal with milk or eaten piece-wise as a snack. The
formulation of the product is as follows: TABLE-US-00016 Ingredient
%(wet mix) Fine wholemeal flour 36.67 Castor sugar 15.35 Oat Flour
12.80 Starch A958 11.94 Fine Bran #3 8.53 Vitamin B1 0.0051 Vitamin
B2 0.0043 Niacin 0.0316 Iron 0.0145 Honey 1.19 Water 13.47
100.00
[0265] Preparation of the product is as follows:
(a) premix dry ingredients;
(b) process cereal mix with honey and water in a twin screw
extruder;
(c) crimp and cut ropes from extruder to form individual
pillows;
(d) toast pillows to reduce moisture and develop color and
flavor.
[0266] The product was found to have excellent crunch after contact
with milk for five minutes. It has a distinctive appearance being a
pillow with "strand" markings. Total dietary fiber content was
found to be 10%, at a moisture content of 2-4%. The product is
unusual in that it has a light airy texture with a relatively high
level of total dietary fiber.
[0267] The cereal products described above were characterized by
several physical properties which were quite unexpected. For
example, some of the flakes were blistered whilst others were
bubbled and appeared as if "popped". These characteristics are
highly desirable and would not have been considered achievable
using formulations of this type.
[0268] In addition, these cereal products extrude well, display
moderate to high expansion, yielding a final product with a medium
to coarse cell structure. The products are unusual in that they
have a light airy texture whilst containing a relatively high level
of total dietary fiber.
[0269] The breakfast cereal products have also been found to have
an excellent "bowl life" in that the flakes retained their crunch
after contact with milk for five minutes. Furthermore, during
processing and prior to toasting, it was observed that the flakes
had a tendency to stick less to each other as compared with the
control.
[0270] Bread
[0271] A number of bread samples were prepared using a high amylose
starch and for comparison a waxy maize starch "MAZACA" trade mark
of Starch Australasia Limited. The starches were incorporated into
the bread at a 5% and a 10% level of flour replacement.
[0272] In Table 13, set out below, are the results obtained for
each of the bread samples. These results clearly show that at both
the 5% and 10% levels of high amylose starch, the dietary fiber
content was substantially more than both the control product and
the mazaca based product.
[0273] Furthermore, it should be noted that the actual level of
dietary fiber found was significantly more than would be expected.
This suggests that a synergistic effect occurred during baking.
Indeed, it would have been expected that the dietary fiber content
would decrease as resistant starch is destroyed during such heating
processes. TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 13 Wheat Starch High Amylose
Analysis Control Starch Mazaca Total dietary fiber* -- 27 0 % (DB)
Test Baking Rate of flour 0 5 10 5 10 5 10 replacement (%) Water
absorption (%) -- -- -- 58 58 58 58 Total loaf score (%) 76 80 76
75 73 79 71 Fiber in Bread TDF % (DB) 4.2 4.0 -- 6.9 8.7 4.0
(approx. expected** -- -- -- 5.2 6.4 4.0 TDF %) *Total Dietary
Fiber (TDF) means (Resistant starch) **"expected" bread TDF is
based on control loaf fiber plus raw starch fiber.
[0274] A further series of test bakings was done according to the
formulations set out below: TABLE-US-00018 Batch Nos. Ingredients 1
2 3 4 5 6 Flour (g) 1000 950 900 850 800 750 Starch A.958 (g) 0 50
100 150 200 250 Gluten (g) 0 10 20 30 40 50 Salt (g) 18 18 18 18 18
18 Improver (g) 15 15 15 15 15 15 Fat (g) 20 20 20 20 20 20 Yeast
(g) 12 12 12 12 12 12 Water (ml) 600 610 630 650 670 700
[0275] Each batch was processed in a conventional manner. The total
dietary fiber for each batch was found to be: TABLE-US-00019 Total
Dietary Batch Fiber No. (% dsb) 1 5.4 2 7.1 3 9.1 4 10.8 5 12.8 6
14.5
[0276] In addition, it was noted that inclusion of the high amylose
starch did not have an adverse effect on crumb color, whilst
increasing levels of high amylose starch led to increasing dough
water absorption levels. Generally it was concluded that the high
amylose starch was an excellent source of dietary fiber for
inclusion in bread since any detrimental effect on load volume and
crumb firmness could be readily overcome by appropriate formulation
changes known to those skilled in the art.
[0277] It has also been found that gluten free bread which is high
in dietary fiber may be produced using the high amylose starch of
the invention. This is important as conventional gluten free bread,
which is consumed by sufferers of celiac disease, is generally low
in dietary fiber. For guidance, up to about 15% may be incorporated
into a gluten free bread to yield a dietary fiber content of about
10%.
[0278] As well as being able to provide enhanced dietary fiber
content in bread, the high amylose starch acts to reduce stalling
on storage of the bread, by it is thought, reducing the level of
amylopectin and helping to maintain the moisture content of the
bread.
[0279] Noodles
[0280] Typically, up to about 24% of high amylose starch may be
used as a flour replacement in spaghetti. This yields a dietary
fiber content of up to about 8.7%.
[0281] In use, it has been found that spaghetti made from high
amylose starch has less of the "speckiness" which is usually
associated with the addition of more conventional fiber additives
such as bran to achieve higher dietary fiber content. Furthermore,
during cooking, the spaghetti is less sticky and remains al denote
for longer.
[0282] Other Food Products
[0283] It has been found that, in addition to providing a dietary
fiber benefit in instant noodles, these products have a greater
crispiness as compared with conventional formulated products.
[0284] In the formulation of biscuits and crackers, it is possible
to overcome the use of a laminator by using the high amylose starch
of the invention. This is due to the expansion, popping effect
which serves to impart a lighter texture to such products.
INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY
[0285] From the foregoing description it will be evident that the
present invention, insofar as it relates to food compositions that
are intended for human consumption, provides a means for enhancing
the dietary fiber content of a variety of food compositions. Not
only does this have obvious nutritional benefits, but it allows for
the production of food compositions having physical characteristics
not previously known with conventional formulations.
[0286] It will be appreciated by persons skilled in the art that
numerous variations and/or modifications may be made to the
invention as shown in the specific embodiments without departing
from the spirit or scope of the invention as broadly described. The
present embodiments are, therefore, to be considered in all
respects as illustrative and not restrictive.
* * * * *