Impact of Dried Distillers Grains with Solubles (DDGS) on Ration and Fertilizer Costs of Swine Farmers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The feed ingredient price increases that have adversely affected livestock producers may be offset through the use of coproducts from one of the potential reasons for the price increase in ethanol production. Dried distillers grain with soluble (DDGS) was found to be a more cost‐effective source of energy, amino acids, and phosphorus than either corn, soybean meal, or canola meal, and consequently, its inclusion in the ration reduces feed costs by approximately 13% across the three growth phases for a representative Ontario pig farm. It would require a significant increase in the relative price of DDGS before it would not be part of the least‐cost feed formulation at the maximum rate allowed (25% of the ration). The inclusion of DDGS increases the protein and phosphorus content of the ration, and consequently, the manure content of nitrogen and phosphorus, respectively, if DDGS makes up more than 15% of the ration. The resulting savings to fertilizer costs associated with DDGS will depend on factors such as fertilizer prices, crop needs, and manure nutrient changes, but the benefits, regardless of the scenario, are significantly smaller than the savings to feed costs. Consequently, the use of DDGS in the swine ration is determined primarily through its ability as a cost‐effective source of energy and phosphorus, but the saving has been less than the overall feed ingredient price increase since 2006. Les augmentations de prix des ingrédients entrant dans la composition des aliments pour animaux qui ont touché défavorablement les éleveurs de bétail peuvent être contrebalancées par l’utilisation de coproduits issus de l’une des raisons possibles de ces augmentations de prix, à savoir la production d’éthanol. Les solubles de distillerie (DDGS) se sont révélées une source d’énergie, d’amino‐acides et de phosphore plus économique que le maïs, le tourteau de soya ou de canola, et leur utilisation dans les rations a permis de diminuer les coûts des aliments pour animaux d’environ 13 p. 100 au cours des trois phases de croissance sur une ferme porcine typique en Ontario. Il faudrait que le prix relatif des DDGS augmente considérablement pour que les DDGS n’entrent pas dans la formulation des aliments pour animaux à moindre coût au taux maximal permis (25 p. 100 de la ration). L’ajout de DDGS accroît la teneur de la ration en protéines et en phosphore et, par conséquent, la teneur du fumier en azote et en phosphore à condition que les DDGS constituent plus de 15 p. 100 de la ration. Les économies de coûts des engrais liées à l’utilisation des DDGS dépendent de certains facteurs tels que le prix des engrais, les besoins des cultures en éléments nutritifs et les changements dans les éléments nutritifs du fumier mais les avantages, peu importe le scénario, sont significativement moins élevés que les économies de coûts des aliments pour animaux. En conséquence, l’utilisation de DDGS dans la ration pour porcs est principalement déterminée par la capacitéà constituer une source d’énergie et de phosphore économique, mais les économies sont inférieures aux avantages alimentaires globaux.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".