Skip to main content

Full text of "Sunflower seed oil meal studies"

See other formats


v.v MI:y 

. .f;9'.4v. 

■j ■ : • & / #|js£a 

'■■■? '■ ’' y /' , ■ v i 

' 

’-v 

V ;.E * I II * * V 
I ' > 

9f $SMM 

_ 




mmm& »# fill $y# 

4v>^A/-. ; ‘fd ■})(- . 

Ip 

$Mffl 


For Reference 


NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM THIS ROOM 


SUNFLOWER SEED OIL MEAL STUDIES 

I THE EFFECTS OF METHODS OF 
PROCESSING ON THE NUTRITIVE VALUE 
OF SUNFLOWER SEED OIL MEAL 

II THE SUPPLEMENTARY VALUE OF 
SUNFLOWER SEED OIL MEAL IN 

PRACTICAL CHICK STARTING RATIONS 


Alexander B. Morrison 


Department of Animal Science 
UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA 
September 19^2 












0JC MBBI* 

wmium 







THE UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA 


SUNFLOWER SEED OIL MEAL STUDIES 

I THE EFFECTS OF METHODS OF PROCESSING ON THE 
NUTRITIVE VALUE OF SUNFLOWER SEED OIL MEAL 

II THE SUPPLEMENTARY VALUE OF SUNFLOWER SEED 
OIL MEAL IN PRACTICAL CHICK STARTING RATIONS 


A DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES 
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE 

OF MASTER OF SCIENCE 


FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE 
DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL SCIENCE 


by 

ALEXANDER BAILLXE MORRISON 


EDMONTON, ALBERTA, 
SEPTEMBER, 1952. 


■ 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2017 with funding from 
University of Alberta Libraries 



https://archive.org/details/sunflowerseedoilOOalxa 


TWs\% 

4T 


UNIVERSITY OP ALBERTA 


FACULTY OP AGRICULTURE 


DEPARTMENT OP ANIMAL SCIENCE 


The undersigned hereby certify that they 


have read and recommend to the School of Graduate 
Studies for acceptance, a thesis entitled "Sunflower 
Seed Oil Meal Studies I The Effects of Methods of 
Processing on the Nutritive Value of Sunflower Seed 
Oil Meal II The Supplementary Value of Sunflower Seed 
Oil Meal in Practical Chick Starting Rations", 
submitted by Alexander Baillie Morrison, B. Sc., in 
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree 
of Master of Science. 


PROFESSOR 



PROFESSOR 




PROFESSOR 



Dat 

























■ 



■ 






■>c 


















ABSTRACT 


Eight experiments were conducted to study the 
effects of methods of processing on the nutritive value 
of sunflower seed oil meal. The results obtained 
indicate that processing conditions employed in the 
manufacture of sunflower seed oil meal markedly 
influenced the nutritive value and chemical composition 
of the meal. The nutritive value was lowered as 
processing conditions became more severe. Marked 
variability in the chemical composition of raw, 
laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower seed oil meals 
prepared from different raw materials was noted. Low- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal (processed at 200° - 
220°F.) and regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
(processed at 240° - 260°F.) are not complete single 
sources of amino acids for the chick, when fed at the 
twenty percent protein level. Rations containing low- 
temperature or regular-temperature sunflower seed oil 
meal as the only source of protein were improved for 
chick growth by the addition of vitamin-free casein and 
methionine. Regular processing temperatures of 240° - 
260°F. resulted in a decrease in the liberation of lysine 
by acid hydrolysis, as compared to the liberation of 
lysine from a low-temperature meal processed at 200° - 220°F. 
Extraction of regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
with ethanol or trichloroethylene increased its nutritive 



















































































. 





















. 





























value for chicks. Adding the trichloroethylene extract 
hack to the extracted meal at twice the level originally 
present depressed the growth of chicks. 

Five experiments were conducted to study the 
supplementary value of sunflower seed oil meal in 
practical chick starting rations. The results obtained 
indicate that low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
(processed at 200° - 220°F.) may satisfactorily replace 
one-third of the fish meal and meat meal, two-thirds of 
the soybean oil meal, or all of the meat meal in the 
practical chick starters used. Regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal (processed at 240° - 260°F.) 
satisfactorily replaced one-third of the fish meal and 
meat meal mixture or two-thirds of the soybean oil meal 
in the rations used. When two and one-half percent fish 
meal was included in the ration, regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal satisfactorily replaced one-third 
of the meat meal in the starter. When meat meal was the 
only source of supplementary protein in the ration, 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal replaced all 
of the meat meal present without detrimental effect. 




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 


The writer wishes to thank Professor L. W. 
McSlroy, Head of the Department of Animal Science, for 
placing the facilities of the Department at his disposal, 
and to gratefully acknowledge the helpful advice given by 
Drs. D. R. Clandinin and A. R. Robblee, Associate 
Professors of Poultry Husbandry, during the course of 
this study, and in the preparation of the manuscript. 

Thanks are extended to Co-op. Vegetable Oils 
Limited, Altona, Manitoba, for preparing sunflower seed 
oil meals. Acknowledgment is also made to Merck and Co. 
Limited, Montreal, Quebec; Lederle Laboratories Division, 
American Cyanamid Company, Pearl River, N.Y.,; and 
Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., Nutley 10, N.J., for supplying 
the vitamins used during the course of the study. 

The work was supported In part by a National 
Research Council Grant-in-Ald. 




TABLE OF CONTENTS 


Page 

Introduction. 1 

Review of Literature. 2 

Part I The Effects of Methods of Processing 
on the Nutritive Value of Sunflower 
Seed Oil Meal. 12 

Status of the Problem. 12 

Experiment 1. 12 

Experiment 2. 16 

Experiment 3. 22 

Experiment 4... 25 

Experiment 5..... 29 

Experiment 6. 35 

Experiment 7. 38 

Experiment 8... 41 

Part II The Supplementary Value of Sunflower 
Seed Oil Meal in Practical Chick 
Starting Rations.. 45 

Status of the Problem... 45 

Experimental (G-eneral) .. 46 

Experiment 1. 47 

Experiment 2. 51 

Experiment 3. 54 

Experiment 4. 56 

Experiment 5 • .. 59 

G-eneral Discussion.... 62 

G-eneral Summary. 66 

Bibliography. 69 










































INTRODUCTION 


Commercial production of sunflower seeds in Canada 
was undertaken as a wartime emergency measure, in order to 
obtain a domestic source of edible vegetable oils. Commercial 
quantities of sunflower seed were first produced in 1943• 
Initially, production was scattered throughout southern 
Manitoba and Saskatchewan, but by 1945 had become centered 
around Altona, Manitoba, where a co-operative processing 
plant was established. By 1949, production had increased 
to the extent that approximately sixty thousand acres were 
seeded, yielding in the neighborhood of one thousand pounds 
of sunflower seeds per acre. 

The most Important by-product of the sunflower 
oil industry is sunflower seed oil meal, the high-protein 
residue remaining after expression of the oil from the 
partially decorticated sunflower seeds. Recent shortages 
of animal protein supplements have resulted in the use of 
increasing amounts of vegetable protein supplements in 
livestock and poultry rations, and, as a result, the use 
of sunflower seed oil meal In Canadian poultry rations has 
reached significant proportions. Unfortunately, however, 
little Information is available concerning the nutritive 
value of sunflower seed oil meal for poultry. 




Since processing variables have been shown to 
markedly influence the nutritive value of soybean oil meal 
(see Review of Literature), experiments were initiated at 
the University of Alberta during 1951 to study the possible 
effects of methods of processing on the nutritive value of 
sunflower seed oil meal. Part I of this report is 
concerned with the results of these studies. Studies were 
also conducted to determine the supplementary value of 
sunflower seed oil meal in practical chick starting 
rations. These are discussed in Part II of this report. 

REVIEW OF LITERATURE 

Studies on the nutritive value of soybean protein 
have been the subject of numerous investigations. As early 
as 1917, Osborne and Mendel found that raw soybeans 
supported a slow rate of growth in rats when used as the 
only source of protein in the ration. When water was added 
to ground raw soybeans and the resulting mixture cooked, a 
meal supporting an adequate rate of growth was produced. 
Hayward, steenbock, and Bohstedt (1936-a) described 
experiments in which soybean oil meals prepared under 
varying conditions were fed to rats. They found that 
expeiler meals processed at 112° to 130°C. and 140° to 150°C. 
for two and one-half minutes, or hydraulic meals processed at 
105°C. and 121°G. for ninety minutes, possessed twice the 
nutritive value of ground raw soybeans, low temperature 















. 




expeller meals processed at 105°C. for two minutes, or 
hydraulic meals processed at 82°C. for ninety minutes. 

Hayward et al . (1936) reported that high temperature 
expeller soybean oil meal processed at 140° to 150°C. for 
two and one-half minutes, medium and high temperature 
hydraulic soybean oil meals processed at 105°C. and 121^0. 
for ninety minutes, and solvent extracted soybean oil meal 
processed at 9B°C. for fifteen minutes supported twice the 
growth rate in chicks of either ground raw soybeans or low 
temperature expeller soybean oil meal processed at 105°C. 
for two minutes* 

Previously, Mitchell and Smuts (1932) and 
Shrewsbury and Bratzler (1932) had reported that ground 
raw soybeans are deficient in cystine so far as their growth 
promoting value for the rat is concerned. Hayward, Steenbock, 
and Bohstedt (1936-b) found that the addition of 0.3 percent 
L-cystine to ground raw soybeans resulted in a similar 
increase in the nutritive value of the beans to that obtained 
by autoclaving the raw beans for one hour at fifteen pounds 
steam pressure. They suggested that heating the soybean 
protein causes the cystine fraction to become available to 
the rat. Johnson, Parsons, and Steenbock (1939) reported 
the apparent presence in raw soybeans of a sulfur-nitrogen 
complex which, although absorbable, is not utilized by the 
body. They concluded that autoclaving makes this portion 
available. About this time, Rose et al . (1936), Rose (1937), 










Womack, Kemmerer, and Rose (1937), and Womack and Rose 
(1941) demonstrated the dispersibility of cystine and the 
indispensibility of methionine in the diet of the rat* 

They found that on a cystine deficient diet, body cystine 
arises from dietary methionine, while on a methionine 
deficient diet, cystine exerts a methionine-sparing action* 
That such a relationship prevails in the case of the chick 
has been ably demonstrated by Klose and Almquist (1941), 
G-rau and Almquist (1943), and Almquist and G-rau (1944, 
1945). 

As a result of rat feeding trials, Hayward and 
Hafner (1941) concluded that when fed at a level of 
approximately twenty-five percent of the diet, ground raw 
soybeans failed to induce growth in rats over a period of 
eight weeks* Addition of 0*3 percent L~cystine caused a 
definite increase in the nutritive value of the ration, 
while 0*3 percent DL-methionine produced an even greater 
response. Inclusion of 0*3 percent L-cystine and 0.3 
percent DL-methionine stimulated no greater growth than 
did addition of methionine alone. Autoclaving the raw 
soybeans increased the nutritive value of the protein to 
about half-way between that of the cystine and methionine 
supplemented lots. Supplementation of cooked soybeans 
with either methionine or cystine markedly Increased their 
nutritive value* Although ground raw soybeans supported 
some growth in chicks, the effects of supplementation with 








methionine and cystine paralleled the results of the 
rat studies. The authors concluded that while the 
sulfur-amino acid fraction of the protein is unavailable 
in raw soybeans, autoclaving makes this portion available. 
This conclusion was supported by the findings of Mitchell, 
Hamilton, and Beadles (1945) who observed that the effects 
of heat treatment on soybeans were to render the protein 
more digestible and more completely utilizable In 
metabolism, the latter effect resulting from increased 
availability of cystine. Evans and McGinnis (1946) 
reported that autoclaving soybean oil meal affected the 
availability of methionine and cystine. Moderate 
autoclaving (100° to 12QOC. for thirty minutes) increased 
methionine and cystine retention, whereas drastic 
autoclaving (130°G. for thirty or sixty minutes) decreased 
it. In a later report, the same workers (194b) confirmed 
their earlier results, and also demonstrated that 
excessive autoclaving causes partial destruction of 
cystine. Bouthilet et al . (1950) reported the presence 
of an undigested methionine-rich complex in the feces of 
chickens fed ground raw soybeans, which was not present 
in the feces of chickens fed autoclaved soybeans* 

Another concept of the effects of methods of 
processing on the nutritive value of the soybean was 
suggested in 1944, when Bowman noted that aqueous 
extracts of soybeans contained a fraction which inhibited 






’ 


, ";; ' v 1 ■ 







■- 




- 














■ ■ • 















; 






■ 





1 








- • ■ 


\\ : . 


: 






■ 




. 











■ 








the tryptic digestion of casein in vitro * Ham and 
Sandstedt (1944) described the nature and properties 
of a proteolytic inhibiting substance in a dilute acid 
extract of raw soybeans. The activity of the inhibitor 
was destroyed by autoclaving either the extract or the 
raw soybeans. Ham, Sandstedt, and Mussehl (1945) found 
that the proteolytic Inhibiting factor present in 
unheated soybean oil meal retarded the growth of chicks 
when administered in rations containing either autoclaved 
soybean oil meal or animal protein feedstuffs as the 
source of supplementary protein. They demonstrated a 
marked decrease in proteolytic activity of the 
intestinal contents of chicks receiving a diet of raw 
soybean oil meal, as compared to the activity of the 
intestinal contents of chicks receiving a diet of 
autoclaved soybean oil meal. Almquist and Merritt (1951) 
found the effect of the trypsin inhibitor to be a general 
one, that of decreasing the rate of digestion of the 
entire soybean protein. Kunitz (1945) succeeded in 
crystallizing the inhibitor. He showed that it was 
protein in nature, and concluded that it inhibits the 
action of trypsin, and to some extent that of chymotrypsln. 
McGinnis and Menzies (1946) reported that the fraction of 
raw soybean flakes responsible for the poor nutritive 
value of raw soybeans may be inactivated by in vitro 








'• j 






7 


papain digestion as well as oy Heating* Westfall and 
Hauge ^1948; described experiments in which soybean flours 
heated at various temperatures were fed to mice. They 
concluded that the trypsin inhibitor is the chief cause 
of the poor utilization of the protein of inadequately 
heated soybean flours and suggested that measurement of 
the trypsin inhibitor content gives a reliable index of the 
nutritive value of soybean oil meals, provided heating is 
not prolonged beyond the point of total inactivation of 
the inhibitor. This view is supported by the findings of 
Borchers, Ackerson, a.nd Mussehl (1948). Liener (1951) and 
Borchers and Ackerson (1951) presented data which indicate 
the presence in raw soybeans of a toxic principle not 
identical with the trypsin inhibitor. 

Results of experiments conducted by Glandinin 
et al . (1947) showed that prolonged heating of solvent 
extracted raw soybean flakes in an autoclave at fifteen 
pounds steam pressure resulted in the production of meals 
of inferior nutritive value for chicks. The data indicated 
that meals of high nutritive value for the chick may be 
prepared by heating solvent extracted raw soybean flakes 
in the autoclave for a period of from four to thirty 
minutes at fifteen pounds steam pressure, while meals of 
inferior nutritive value were obtained by heating for 







longer periods of time, Clandinin et al . (1948) 


observed that meals of equal nutritive value for 
chicks may be prepared by heating solvent extracted 
raw soybean flakes in the autoclave for four minutes 
at fifteen pounds steam pressure, or for forty-five 
minutes at four pounds steam presure. Fritz, Kramke, 
and Reed (194?), working with turkey poults, concluded 
that for maximum biological value, ground raw soybeans 
should be autoclaved at fifteen pounds steam pressure 
for twenty to thirty minutes. Evans and McG-innis (1948) 
found that autoclaving raw soybean flakes at 100°C., 

110°C., or 120°C. for thirty minutes Increased the 
nutritive value of the protein for chicks. Autoclaving 
at 130°C. for either thirty or sixty minutes lowered the 
nutritive value. 

Riesen et al . (194?) described experiments 
designed to study the liberation of amino acids from 
raw, properly heated, and overheated soybean oil meals. 
Subsequent to acid hydrolysis (alkaline hydrolysis in the 
case of tryptophan), less lysine, arginine, and tryptophan, 
as measured microbiologically, were liberated from over¬ 
heated soybean oil meal than from either raw or properly 
heated soybean oil meal. In addition, the liberation of 
each of the essential amino acids by pancreatic digestion 
was increased by proper heat treatment and decreased by 






. 






excessive heat treatment. These investigators were of 
the opinion that in order to obtain a meal of maximum 
nutritive value for chicks, sufficient heat must be 
applied to not only destroy the trypsin inhibitor but 
also to alter the protein in such a way as to make it 
more readily attacked by proteolytic enzymes. They 
concluded that the quantity of amino acids determined 
micr©biologically subsequent to acid hydrolysis does 
not necessarily provide a satisfactory measure of the 
growth promoting properties of a protein, but were of 
the opinion that enzymatic hydrolysis values may 
constitute a more reliable index of the relative 
nutritive value of different soybean oil meals. Ingram 
et al . (1949) reported that the quantity of amino acids 
determined microbiologically subsequent to in vitro 
enzymatic digestion constitutes a reliable Index of 
the nutritive value of soybean oil meal. On the other 
hand, Clandlnin and Robbie© (1952) presented data which 
do not support this contention, particularly when one is 
concerned with meals processed under different conditions, 
and where overheating Is a factor. Under any one set of 
conditions, however, they demonstrated that maximum 
in vitro enzymatic liberation would characterize a 
superior meal. 

Roxas (1916) theorized that in the presence of 
heat a reaction occurs between reducing sugars and the 



















amino groups of amino acids. In studies with chicks, 
Stevens and McGinnis (1947) supplemented overheated 
soybean oil meal diets with lysine, autoclaved either 
alone or with cerelose for four hours at 120°C. Lysine 
autoclaved with cerelose for four hours at 120°G. was 
either destroyed or rendered unavailable for chick 
growth, whereas lysine autoclaved alone for four hours 
at 120°C. supplemented overheated soybean oil meal for 
chick growth as effectively as did unheated lysine. 
Evans and Butts (1948) suggested that when soybean oil 
meal is overheated, lysine is made biologically 
unavailable in two different ways. They theorized that 
part of the lysine is converted to a substance inactive 
for Leuconostoc mesenteroides P-80 , while another 
portion is converted to a form resistant to in vitro 
enzymatic hydrolysis but available to this organism 
subsequent to acid hydrolysis of the soybean oil meal. 
Patton and Hill (1948) have shown that heating amino 
acids in the presence of reducing sugars renders the 
former nutritionally unavailable for micro-organisms. 
Patton, Hill and Foreman (1948) concluded that partial 
inactivation of free amino acids, amino vitamins and 
certain amino acids (basic and tryptophan especially) 
in intact proteins results from combination of the 
reactive amino groups with aldoses, their aldehyde 
degradation products, or polymers of the latter, under 















■ 

- 




v -. • . -5. ;•/" 






;• ' , 





L1 







the influence of heat. They concluded that this 
type of amino acid-carbohydrate reaction is responsible, 
at least in part, for the decrease in nutritive value 
brought about by overheating soybean oil meal. 

Clandinin et al . (1951) demonstrated that the 
liberation of lysine by acid and enzymatic hydrolysis 
from a heated lysine-glucose mixture autoclaved at 
fifteen pounds steam pressure for varying periods of 
time was greatly decreased by the heat treatment. 

The liberation of lysine by enzymatic hydrolysis 
from a heated lysine-glucose mixture was less than 
the liberation of lysine by acid hydrolysis, suggesting 
the formation on heating of an enzymatic resistant, 
acid non-resistant linkage between lysine and glucose. 

















. 



























PART I 


The Effects of Methods of Processing on the Nutritive 
Value of Sunflower Seed Oil Meal 

Status of the Problem 

As a background for this study, the effects 
of processing variables on the nutritive value of 
soybean oil meal have been indicated in the "Review 
of Literature". Results of preliminary experiments 
(Clandinin and Robblee, 1950) indicated that sunflower 
seed oil meals produced in Canada are of variable 
nutritive value for chicks. It therefore seemed 
advisable to study the effects of methods of processing 
on the nutritive value of sunflower seed oil meal. 

Experiment 1 


Ob.lect 

To study the effects of processing temperatures 
on the nutritive value of sunflower seed oil meal. 

Experimental 

Three sunflower seed oil meals, made from the 
same original raw material but processed at different 

temperatures, were obtained from a commercial processing 

& 

plant . The meals were designated SI, S2 and S3. The 
Co-op. Vegetable Oils Limited, Altona, Manitoba. 


































' 


















13 . 


conditions under which the meals were processed are 
shown in Table 1. Meal S4 was prepared by autoclaving 
meal SI for four hours at fifteen pounds steam pressure. 
The technique employed in autoclaving was the same as 
that used by Clandinin et al . (1947). 

One hundred day-old Single Comb White Leghorn 
cockerel chicks were divided into five comparable lots 
of twenty chicks each and fed the rations shown in 
Table 2. The chicks were brooded in electrically 
heated starting batteries with raised screen floors. 

Feed and water were supplied a d libitum . The experiment 
was terminated at the end of twenty-eight days* at which 
time the chicks were weighed individually. 


Table 1.- Processing conditions employed in the pro¬ 
duction of the sunflower seed oil meals 


Sunflower Seed 
Oil Meal 
Number 

Temperature 
in Cooker* 
Degrees F. 

Temperature 
in Conditioner* 
Degrees F. 

Autoclaved at 
15 Pounds 
Hours 

SI 

200 

220 

— 

S2 

220 

240 

— 

S3 

240** 

260** 

-- 

S4 

200 

220 

4 


The meals were processed for approximately thirty 
minutes in the cooker and three minutes in the conditioner. 

Usual conditions employed in commercial production of 
sunflower seed oil meal. 































Results and Discussion 


The results of the experiment are shown in 
Table 2. The growth of chicks fed the soybean oil meal 
control ration was greater than the growth of chicks fed 
any of the sunflower seed oil meal rations, indicating 
that solvent extracted soybean oil meal is a more complete 
supplementary source of amino acids for the chick than the 
sunflower seed oil meals used in this study. Sunflower 
seed oil meals processed at 200° - 220°F., (Lot 2), and 
at 220° - 240°F., (Lot 3), appeared to be of equivalent 
nutritive value for chicks. However, processing 
temperatures of 240° - 260°F. decreased the nutritive 
value of the meal (Lot 4). Autoclaving sunflower seed 
oil meal SI for four hours at fifteen pounds steam pressure 
resulted In the production of a meal supporting a slow rate 
of growth in chicks (Lot 5)* The slow rate of growth 
observed parallels the effects of overheating soybean oil 
meal reported by Clandinin et al . (1947)* 

Conclusions 

(l) Processing conditions employed in the production 
of sunflower seed oil meal were shown to affect 
the nutritive value of the meal. The nutritive 
value of the meal was low r ered as processing 
conditions became more severe. From the results 
obtained, it would appear advisable to utilize 






Table 2.- 


Sffect of processing conditions on the nutritive 
value of sunflower seed oil meal 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground yellow corn. 

59.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

Dehydrated alfalfa meal. 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Ground limestone. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal... 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Iodized salt. 

.5 

.5 

.5 

• 5 

.5 

Insoluble grit.. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Fish oil (2250A-300D). 

.5 

♦ 5 

• 5 

• 5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate 

+ 


+ 

+ 

+ 

(1/4 lb./ton)............. 






Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.). 

+ * 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Gholine chloride (0.15 $)*.•• 

+ 

+ 

+ 

4* 

+ 

Vitamin E (3 mg./kg.). 

+ 

4- 

+ 

4* 

4* 

Merck APF #8 (1 lb./ton).... 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

4- 

Soybean oil meal (solvent)... 

32 





Sunflower seed oil meal SI 


28 




Sunflower seed oil meal S2** 



28 



Sunflower seed oil meal S3** 




28 


Sunflower seed oil meal S4** 





28 

Total. ....... 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25) % . 

21.2 

20.A 

20.5 

20.3 

20.4 

Number of chicks.... . 

19 

20 

19 

19 

20 

Average weight at 28 days 






(sm.). 

281.9 

235.6 

237.1 

178.3 

80.6 

# 

Calculated to supply the 

following levels per : 

100 gms 

. of 

rations thiamine hydrochloride 0. 

3; riboflavin 

0.6; calcium 

pantothenate 2.0; pyridoxine hydrochloride 0.4 

; nicotinic 

acid 5.0; para-amino benzoic acid 10.0; 

biotin 

0.02; 

folic 

acid 0.05; vitamin K (Menadione) 

0.05 milligrams. 


** 






See Experimental for description 

of meals. 
































■ .-r - ■ " - 
















.-.v : : > 

. 









• 


• 

• 

... 


* 

- ’ ' ' ; 


. 

- • : . .. . 



















lower processing temperatures in the production of 
sunflower seed oil meal than those (240°- 260°F.) 
now used commercially. 

(2) Chicks fed rations containing sunflower seed oil 
meal as the source of supplementary protein grew 
at a slower rate than chicks receiving a ration 
containing soybean oil meal as the source of 
supplementary protein. 

Experiment 2 


Object 

To study the effects of several processing 
variables on the nutritive value of sunflower seed oil 
meal. 

E xperimental 

The processing variables studied in this 
experiment are shown in Table 3* Six sunflower seed oil 
meals processed under different conditions were obtained 
from a commercial processing plants In order to test 
the variability between expellers, sunflower seed oil 
meals Sll, S12 and S13 were taken from three different 
Anderson expellers operating at the regular processing 
temperatures of 240°F. in the cooker and 260°F. in the 
conditioner. 

Co-op. Vegetable Oils Limited, Altona, Manitoba. 






















■ 





* 














17 . 


For those readers unfamiliar with oil seed 
technology, it would seem advisable to briefly outline 
the operations involved in the commercial production of 
sunflower seed oil meal. The sunflower seeds are first 
dried to approximately ten percent moisture. They are 
then partially dehulled. The sunflower '’meats 11 next pass 
to a steam-jacketed cooker, located directly above the 
expeller. A revolving worm gear slowly moves them 
through the cooker, and into a conditioner, where they are 
further heated. The meats remain in the cooker approximately 
thirty minutes, and in the conditioner approximately three 
minutes. This preliminary heating Increases the efficiency 
of expression of the oil. From the conditioner, the meats 
pass through the expeller. The pressure exerted by a 
revelring worm gear against a series of horizontal steel 
bars arranged in the form of a barrel mechanically removes 
most of the oil from the meats. Pressure in the expeller 
is maintained by a constriction at the end of the expeller 
barrel, known as the "choke". During expression of the oil, 
a considerable quantity of frictional heat is evolved. No 
provision is made for cooling the shaft of the expeller. 

The expeller barrel, however, is cooled by previously 
expressed sunflower oil, pumped over the barrel at the rate 
of fifty gallons per minute. The sunflower seed oil meal 
leaves the expeller in the form of “chips*' which are later 
ground and sacked. 








. 










18 


Meal Sl4 was processed in tne same manner as 
meal S13 except that the choke on the expeller was opened 
one and one-half turns from the regular operating position. 
Meals S15 and S16 were both processed at a temperature of 
200°F. in the cooker, and 220°F. in the conditioner. 
However, in the preparation of meal Sl6, the choke on the 
expeller was opened in a manner similar to that used in 
the preparation of meal 314. 

Samples of the meals were analyzed for percentage 
moisture, crude protein, oil, and crude fibre. The methods 
of analysis for percentage moisture, crude protein, and 
crude fibre were essentially those of the Association of 
Official Agricultural Chemists (1945), while the method 
used for the determination of percentage oil was that of 
the American Oil Chemists 8 Society (1946). 


Table 3.- Effect of processing conditions on the chemical 
composition of sunflower seed oil meals 


Meal 

No. 

Expel¬ 

ler 

No. 

Temperature 
Degrees F. 

Coo- Condi" 
ker tioner 

Choke 

Mois¬ 

ture 

% 

Protein 

(NX6.25) 

% 

Oil 

ft 

Crude 

Fibre 

ft 

Sll 

I 

240 

260 


3*4 

40.9 

4.2 

14.9 

S12 

2 

240 

2b 0 


3*6 

39.8 

5*9 

15.3 

S13 

3 

240 

260 


3.3 

42.7 

5.2 

12.0 

a 14 

3 

240 

260 

open 

4.1 

39.3 

7.6 

13.5 

S15 

3 

200 

220 


4.3 

38.3 

7.2 

14.2 

Sib 

3 

200 

220 

open 

5*0 

37.2 

8.3 

13.6 








- 








. 








.. ' 




























, 












■ ■ ■ J> 
















19. 

One hundred and forty day-old Single Comb White 
Leghorn cockerel chicks were divided into seven comparable 
lots of twenty chicks each, and fed the rations shown in 
Table 4. The experimental procedure followed was the 
same as that used in Experiment 1. The experiment was 
terminated after twenty-four days, when the chicks were 
weighed individually. 

Results and Discussion 

The results of chemical analysis of the six 
sunflower seed oil meals are shown in Table 3. A mutual 
interdependence in the percentage oil, crude fibre, crude 
protein, and moisture in the meals is evident. Opening 
the choke on the expeller increased the percentage oil 
in both the 240° - 260°F. meal (S14), and in the 200° - 220°F. 
meal (S16). In addition, lowering the processing temperatures 
from 240° - 260°F. to 200° - 220°F. increased the percentage 
oil in the meal, A combination of processing temperatures of 
200° - 220°F. and open choke resulted in the production of a 
meal (S16) having the highest percentage oil of the series 
of six meals. 

The average weights of the chicks fed the six 
meals are shown in Table 4, There appeared to be no 
difference in the nutritive value of sunflower seed oil 
meals produced by the three expellers, since chicks fed 
meals Sll, S12, and S13 (Lots 2, 3, and 4, respectively) 
grew at the same rate. However, chicks fed meals Sll, 

































. 
















. . - 

■ 






20 * 


Table 4.- Effect of processing variables on the nutritive value of 
sunflower seed oil meals 


nation and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

/o 

% 

% 

% 

% 

frT'minr! vrIIow onrn. 

39.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

34.5 

10 

Wheat bran. 

Wheat shorts. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Dehydrated alfalfa meal... 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

Ground limestone.. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal. 

1-5 

1.5 

1.3 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Iodized salt... 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Insoluble grit... 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Fish oil (2250A-300D)-- 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate 

(1/2 lb./ton).. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.)... 

4 * 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Choline chloride (0.15$).. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Vitamin E (3 mg./kg. ) ..... 

4 

4 

4 

+ 

4 

4 

4 

Merck APF #8 (1 lb./ton).. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Soybean oil meal (solvent) 

30 







Sunflower seed oil 

meal Sir** . 


35 






Sunflower seed oil 
meal S12***.. 


35 





Sunflower seed oil 

meal S13** . 

Sunflower seed oil 

meal Sl4^. 

Sunflower seed oil 

meal S15** . 

Sunflower seed oil 

meal S16^*. 



35 

35 

35 

35 

Total...... . 

100 

100 

ICO 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX 6 . 2 . 5 ) . 

Number of chicks..... . 

Average weight at 24 days 
(gm*). 

22.0 

20 

253.7 

22.1 

19 

172.6 

22.4 

20 

160.0 

22.3 

20 

167.9 

21.3 

20 

235.6 

21.1 

20 

240.7 

21.3 

20 

257.6 


* See Table 2 for description of vitamin mix 
** See Experimental for description of meals. 























































21 . 


S12, and S13 did not grow at as fast a rate as chicks fed the 
soybean oil meal control ration (Lot 1). Meal S14, which was 
processed in a manner similar to meal S13 except that the choke 
on the expeller was opened one and one-half turns, supported 
a faster rate of growth than meal S13. This might be 
accounted for on the basis of a decrease in the amount of 
frictional heat damage produced during expression of the oil. 
Sunflower seed oil meal S15 (processed at 200° - 220©F.) 
supported a faster rate of growth than meal S13» and a rate 
of growth equivalent to that obtained with meal S14. The 
latter finding indicates that meals of equal nutritive value 
for chicks may be produced by opening the choke during 
production of the 240° - 26Q°F. meal, or by utilizing lower 
processing temperatures prior to expression of the oil. Chicks 
fed meal S16 (Lot 7), prepared by utilizing processing 
temperatures of 200° - 22QOF. and opening the choke on the 
expeller, grew at a rate comparable to that of chicks fed the 
soybean oil meal control ration (Lot 1). 

The results obtained thus indicate that the chemical 
composition and nutritive value of sunflower seed oil meal is 
affected by the processing temperatures and choke setting. 

Meals of superior nutritive value for chicks may be prepared 
by lowering the processing temperatures and/or opening the 
choke on the expeller. 









... . 








?• ■ 


. 








■ ■ 











22 


Conclusions 

(1) The percentage residual oil in sunflower seed oil 
meals processed at 200° - 220°F* and 240° - 260°F. 
was increased by opening the choke on the expeller. 

(2) Sunflower seed oil meal processed at 200° - 22Q°F. 
contained more residual oil than did a meal processed 
at 240° - 260°F* 

(3) Opening the choke on the expeller resulted in the 
production of sunflower seed oil meals of superior 
nutritive value to that of meals processed under 
similar temperature conditions with the choke in 
the regular position* 

(4) Sunflower seed oil meal of equivalent nutritive 
value to solvent extracted soybean oil meal may be 
produced by lowering the processing temperatures 
and opening the choke on the expeller* 


Experiment 3 

Object 

To study the effects of moist heat on the nutritive 
value of raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower seed 
oil meals* 


Ex-perl mental 

Raw, partially decorticated sunflower '’meats*’ were 
coarsely ground in a plate mill, bagged, and extracted with 
trichloroethylene In an improvised extractor* After extraction 









- 






' 













































23 . 


of the oil, the raw sunflower seed oil meal was air-dried for 
three days, and stored at 37°C. until used, at which time 
organoleptic examination failed to detect the presence of 
trichloroethylene in the meal. Samples of the meal were heated 
in the autoclave at fifteen pounds steam pressure for the 
varying periods of time shown in Table 5* Eighty day-old 
Single Comb White Leghorn cockerel chicks were divided into 
four lots of twenty chicks each, and fed the rations shown in 
Table 6. The experimental procedure followed was the same as 
that used in Experiment 1* 


Table 5*” Description of sunflower seed oil meals 


Meal Number 

Description of Meals 


1 L 

Laboratory solvent extracted 


2L 

As 1L but heated at fifteen pounds 
pressure for thirty minutes 

steam 

3 L 

As 1L but heated at fifteen pounds 
pressure for four hours 

steam 


Results and Discussion 

The average weights of the chicks at twenty-eight 
days are shown in Table 6. Chicks fed solvent extracted 
soybean oil meal (Lot 1) grew at a faster rate than chicks 
fed raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower seed oil 
meal (Lot 2). This difference might be accounted for by the 
unexpected higher protein content of Ration 1 as compared 
to Ration 2. Generally speaking, however, protein levels 











. 







































, 

• ■ •• :•••» 






* £ 2 ■ / • ' 




- 




' 










Table 6.- 


Effect of moist heat on the nutritive value of 
raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower 
seed oil meals 


Eation and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

G-round yellow corn. 

39.5 

39.5 

39.5 

39.5 

Wheat bran. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

W r heat shorts.. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Dehydrated alfalfa meal. 

5 

5 

5 

5 

Ground limestone. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal... 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Iodized salt. 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Insoluble grit. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Fish oil (2250A-300D). 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate (l/2 lb./ton). 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.). 

+* 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Choline chloride (0.15$)........ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Vitamin E (3 mg./kg.)... 


+ 

+ 

+ 

Merck APJ#3 (1 lb./ton). 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Soybean oil meal (solvent). 

30 




Sunflower seed oil meal 1L^ # .... 


30 



Sunflower seed oil meal 2L**.... 



30 


Sunflower seed oil meal 3L* # .••• 




30 

Total... 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25)$.. 

22.1 

20.4 

20.4 

20.4 

Number of chicks..... 

20 

20 

20 

20 

Average weight at 28 days (gm. ). 

255.8 

232.5 

214.8 

110.6 


* See Table 2 for description of vitamin mix. 

** See Table 5 for description of meals. 










































25 . 

in chick starting rations in excess of twenty percent are 
not considered to be beneficial from the growth promoting 
point of view. 

The results obtained indicate that heating the 
raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower seed oil meal 
for thirty minutes at fifteen pounds steam pressure (Lot 3) 
appeared to decrease the nutritive value of the meal for 
chicks. Heating the raw meal for four hours at fifteen 
pounds steam pressure resulted in the production of a meal 
of decidedly inferior nutritive value for chicks (Lot 4). 

It is of interest to note that Mitchell, Hamilton, and 
Beadles (1949) found that autoclaving raw, solvent extracted, 
sunflower seed oil meals for thirty minutes at twenty pounds 
steam pressure significantly depressed both the digestibility 
of the protein and Its biological value. 


Conclusion 

(1) Heating raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower 
seed oil meal for thirty minutes at fifteen pounds 
steam pressure appeared to decrease Its nutritive 
value for chicks, while heating for four hours at 
this steam pressure resulted In the production of a 
meal of Inferior nutritive value for chicks. 


Experiment 4 


Object 

To study the variability in the composition of 
sunflower seed oil meals prepared from different raw materials. 




' 


























. 




. 
















■ . 





























26 . 


Experimental 

Four samples of sunflower '‘meats 11 were obtained 
from different sources. Sample 1 was Identical to that used 
in a preliminary study on variability in the nutritive value 
of sunflower seed oil meals (Crawford, 1950). Sample 2 
consisted of raw material brought in from Manitoba in the 
spring of 1950. Sample 3 was obtained from Chicago in 1950, 
while sample 4 consisted of raw material procured at the same 
time as the meals used in Experiment 2 (January, 1952). 

Samples 1, 2 and 3 were kept in cold storage from time of 
purchase until used in this study. 

Small amounts of each sample were coarsely ground 
in a plate mill and extracted with trichloroethylene. The 
method of extraction followed was the same as that used in 
Experiment 3. After extraction, the raw sunflower seed oil 
meals (designated as 1R, 2R, 3R, and 4R) were air-dried for 
three days, and stored at 37°0. until used, at which time no 
odor of trichloroethylene could be detected in any of the 
meals. Samples of the meals were analyzed for percentage 
crude protein, oil, moisture, and crude fibre, using the 
methods referred to in Experiment 2. 

In addition, using the microbiological technique, 
a study was made of the liberation of essential amino acids 
(glycine excluded) from the meals by acid hydrolysis (alkaline 
hydrolysis in the case of tryptophan). The hydrolysis 
procedures, test organisms, and basal media employed were 
the same as those used by Clandinin (1949). 





Results and Discussion 


The composition of the raw sunflower seed oil meals 
is shown in Table 7- Meals 1R, 2R, and 3 R contained 


Table 7*" Composition of raw sunflower 
seed oil meals 


Meal 

Number 

Crude 

Protein 

(NX6.25) 

% 

Moisture 

% 

Oil 

% 

Crude 

Fibre 

% 

1 R 

1+7.1 

7.2 

1.2 

13.9 

2 R 

1+7.3 

7.1 

1.5 

13.5 

3R 

1+7.7 

6.8 

2.0 

8.2 

1 +R 

38.0 

6.9 

1.3 

16.6 


approximately the same amount of protein. On the other 
hand, meal ipR contained nearly ten percent less protein 
than the other three meals. There were no marked differences 
in the moisture and oil content of the four meals. 

Considerable variation in the crude fibre content 
of the meals was observed. Meals 1R and 2R contained 
approximately the same amount of crude fibre. Meal 3 R 
contained much less crude fibre than the other three meals, 
while meal I 4 JR contained a very high level of crude fibre. 

The results of the amino acid assays are shown in 
Table 8 . The figures represent averages of two assays in 









duplicate, and are expressed as percentage amino acid of 
nitrogen X 6.25. Results of an analysis of variance 
indicated that significant differences exist in the 
methionine, lysine, and arginine content of the meals* 


Table 8*- Essential amino acid content-* of 
raw sunflower seed oil meals 


Meal Number-*-* 

1 R 

2 R 

3 R 

i+R 

Lysine 

2.57 

2.66 

2.89 

2.89 

Arginine 

8.81 

8.83 

8.1+5 

8.97 

Tryptophan 

8.30 

1.05 

1.19 

1.1I+ 

Methionine 

1.63 

1.61 

1.1+7 

1.39 

Histidine 

2.09 

2.09 

1.85 

1 . 81 + 

Threonine 

3.31 

3.55 

3.1+0 

3.61+ 

Leucine 

5 * 1(8 

5 - 5 U 

5-57 

5-35 

Isoleucine 

3*73 

3-8I4- 

3.69 

3.69 

Valine 

3-59 

3.63 

3 * 5 U 

3.36 

Phenylalanine 

4.13 

4.18 

1+.10 

3.96 

Total 

36 • 6i|. 

36.98 

36.15 

36.23 


-* Expressed as percentage amino acid of 
nitrogen X 6.25* 

-** See Experimental for description of meals. 


In this connection, it is of interest to note that Kuiken 
and Lyman (I9J4.9) found differences of up to nineteen 
percent in the methionine content of twenty different 
strains of soybeans, although, in general, the amino acid 



















































29 


distribution in the protein was quite uniform between 
strains. A more detailed study of the variation in the 
amino acid composition of different varieties and strains 
of sunflower seeds grown under the same and different 
conditions would seem advisable. 

Almquist (19lj-7) reported that the lysine and 
methionine requirements of the chick are 0.9 percent and 
O.R percent of the diet, respectively. On the basis of 
amino acid values obtained in this study, it would therefore 
appear that raw sunflower seed oil meal, when fed at the 
twenty percent protein level, does not contain sufficient 
lysine and methionine to meet the requirements of the 
chick. 


Conelusions 

(1) Considerable variation in the protein and crude 
fibre content of four sunflower seed oil meals 
prepared from different raw materials was observed 

(2) A significant difference in the methionine, lysine 
and arginine content of the meals was noted. 

( 3 ) Results of amino acid assays appeared to indicate 
that, when fed at the twenty percent protein 
level, raw sunflower seed oil meal would not 
supply sufficient lysine or methionine to meet 
the requirements of the chick. 

Experiment 5 


Object 

To determine the level of vitamin-free casein, 
in the presence of O.Ij. percent DL-methionine, required to 









- 








■ 




* 












. 




* 






- 


















' 






« 


■ 











































■ 


: 


30 . 


adequately supplement a low-temperature sunflower seed oil 
meal (SI), a regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal (S3), 
and a severely overheated sunflower seed oil meal (S4) . 

Experimental 

Three hundred and twenty day-old Single Comb White 
Leghorn chicks (one hundred and sixty of each sex) were 
divided into sixteen comparable lots of twenty chicks each 
and fed the semi-purified rations shown in Table 9* The 
dextrin used was prepared by autoclaving moistened corn 
starch for eighty minutes at fifteen pounds steam pressure. 
After drying, the material was ground to a granular 
consistency in a plate mill. Vitamin additions were the 
same as those used in Experiment 1 except that Merck APF 
#3 was used as a source of vitamin Bp2 instead of Merck APF #8® 

Sunflower seed oil meals SI, S3, and S4, used in 
Experiment 1, served as the only source of protein in the 
rations. Since casein has been shown to be slightly 
deficient in sulphur-containing amino acids (Mitchell, 1924), 
0.4 percent DL-methionine was included in rations where 
vitamin free casein was added. Additions of casein to the 
rations were made at the expense of dextrin. The experimental 
procedure followed was the same as that used in Experiment 1. 
The chicks were weighed in groups at weekly intervals. The 
experiment was terminated after twenty-one days, when the 
chicks were weighed individually. 
















































. 

. 












* 









51 . 

Table 9.- Effect of casein - methionine supplementation on the nutritive value of sunflower seed oil meals 

Ration and Lot Number 1 2 3 I). 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

Ingredients jg # # 


Dextrin. 

1+7.5 

1 + 7*5 

14+.1 

4 i.i 

38.1 

35.1 

1+9.25 

1+5.85 

I+2.85 39.85 

36.85 47.50 44..10 41.10 38.10 

35.10 

Corn (mazola)oll.. 

5 

5 

3 

3 

3 

3 

r 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Salts V*. 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

6 

Pish oil (225OA-3OOD). 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

•5 

Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.)... 

+ - 3 Hfr 


+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Choline chloride (0.15#).. 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Vitamin E (3 mg./kg. 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Merck APP #3 (1 lb./ton).. 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

DL - Methionine. 

0 

0 

.1+ 

4 

4 

•1+ 

0 

.1+ 

4 

.1+ 

.1+ 

0 

•1+ 

4 

.1+ 

.1+ 

Casein (vitamin-test). 

0 

0 

3 

6 

9 

12 

0 

3 

6 

9 

12 

0 

3 

6 

9 

12 

Sunflower seed oil 

















meal SI***. 

1+3 

1+3 

1+3 

k 3 

1+3 

1+3 











Sunflower seed oil 

















meal S3***. 







1+1.25 

1 + 1.25 

41.25 41.25 

I+1.25 






Sunflower seed oil 

















meal Sij***. 












1+3 

1+3 

1+3 

1+3 

1+3 

Total. 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 100 

100 

100 

L 00 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (calculated) %•••• 

20.7 






20.7 





20.7 





Number of chicks. 

20 

20 

18 

19 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

18 

20 

20 

17 

Average weight at 

















21 days (gm.). 

152.8 155.7 170.5 

187.8 190.8 

193*2 

93.0 142.1 : 

L77.8 I85.9 180.4 

1 + 8.9 

73*2 

125.0 

166.4 193.5 


* Briggs et al . (19(4.3) 


See Table 2 for description of vitamin mix. 
See Experiment 1 for description of meals. 























no rroJoos,;■■■■■ fc rnr to 'no 


mr 


no 





£ 5 




-r 


J J- " ; ' 

. 

:■ . .r ' 

' 

I 

# 




' ■ ' ’ - 


. • , " 

70 J ‘J H J '(.• 

£bc’:\. 

'■oV-msjZ 

BP-lit 

' ' 

■■ -!••' : 



GOI. CGI ■ 1 OCT 001 


LstfoT 


{ j r.; 1 ' ) n t. :0 0 4 7 c i’ 




8x 


i 



.1 


* 



,‘tev 


:■ 0 ■ * ! ' ; C/ : :o;~ r • 


to J • • C .0 J ' ■ 


■ • i 


,ro0 I ri-o e ' 



















32 . 


Results and Discussion 

The average weights of the chicks at twenty-one 
days are shown In Table 9. It is evident that rations 
containing low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal (Si) 
were improved for chick growth by the addition of casein 
and methionine. The optimum level of supplementation 
appeared to be reached when six percent vitamin-free 
casein and 0.4 percent DL-methionine were added to the 
ration (Lot 4). 

Chicks fed a ration containing regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal (S3) as the only source of protein 
in the ration (Lot 7) did not grow as fast as the chicks fed 
lev/-temperature meal (Lots 1 or 2). These results are in 
agreement with those obtained in Experiment 1, and indicate 
the inferior nutritive value or regular -temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal for chicks, as compared to low- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal. Rations containing 
regular-temperature sunriower seed oil meal were improved 
by supplementation with vitamin-free casein and methionine. 

The chicks in Lot 9 grew as fast as those in Lots 10 or 11, 
indicating that the optimum level of supplementation was 
reached when six percent vitamin-free casein and 0.4 percent 
DL-methionine were added to the ration. Thus, it would appear 
that neither low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal nor 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal constitutes a 
complete source of amino acids for the chick when fed at the 









' 












: 


■ 


■ 


. 




























33 . 


twenty percent protein level. These results are at variance 
with those reported by G-rau and Almquist (194-5). 

In agreement with the results obtained in 
Experiment 1, chicks receiving a ration which contained 
sunflower seed oil meal S4, (Lot 12) grew very slowly. 
Equivalent growth response to that obtained from rations 4 
or 9 occurred when sunflower seed oil meal S4 was supplemented 
with twelve percent vitamin-free casein and 0.4 percent 
DL-methionine. In this connection, it is of interest to 
recall that Clandinin et al . (1947) found that heating 
solvent extracted raw soybean flakes in the autoclave for 
four hours at fifteen pounds steam pressure resulted in 
the production of a meal of inferior nutritive value for 
chicks, and that it required the addition of seven and 
one-half percent casein to a ration containing four-hour 
overheated soybean oil meal to restore a normal growth 
rate. The difference between the amount of casein required 
tc restore normal growth in four-hour overheated soybean oil 
meal and that required to complete four-hour overheated 
sunflower seed oil meal is probably accounted for by the 
inherent deficiencies present in low-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal, which are not present in properly heated 
soybean oil meal. 

Determination of the amino acid deficiencies in 
low-temperature, regular-temperature, and severely overheated 
sunflower seed oil meal awaits the results of further studies. 
























































. 





























- 


' 














34 . 


Conclusions 

(1) Low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal and 
regular-temperature sum lower seed oil meal 
do not constitute a complete source of amino 
acids for the chick, when fed at the twenty- 
percent protein level. 

(2) The optimum level of supplementation of 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
appeared to be reached when at least six 
percent vitamin-free casein in conjunction 
with 0.4 percent DL-metnionine was added to 
the ration. In the presence or 0.4 percent 
DL-methionine, a level or vitamin-free casein 
approaching six percent of the ration was 
required to supplement low-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal. 

(3) Sunflower seed oil meal S4 (prepared by 
autoclaving sunflower seed oil meal SI for 
four hours at fifteen pounds steam pressure) 
was of inferior nutritive value for chicks. 
The optimum level of supplementation of this 
meal appeared to be reached when twelve 
percent vitamin-free casein in the presence 
of 0.4 percent DL-methionine was added to the 


ration 










■ 













35 . 


Experiment 6 


Object 

To determine the essential amino acid content 
(glycine excluded) of sunflower seed oil meals SI, S2, 
S3, and S4. 


Expertmental 

A study was made of the liberation of essential 
amino acids (glycine excluded) from the meals by acid 
(alkaline hydrolysis in the case of tryptophan) and 
enzyme tic hydrolysis. The hydrolysis procedures, test 
organisms, and basal media employed were the same as those 
used by Clandinin (1949). 

Results and Discussion 

The results of the amino acid determinations are 
summarized in Table 10. The results, expressed as percentage 
amino acid of nitrogen X 6.25, were calculated from the 
averages of two assays in duplicate. With the exception of 
lysine, the data show little difference in the liberation 
of essential amino acids subsequent to acid (alkaline 
hydrolysis for tryptophan) hydrolysis of meals SI, S2, and 
S3. Indirectly, the data suggest that rations containing 
meals SI or S2 as the only source of supplementary protein 
would be marginal in lysine content for the chick. Eence, 
the slower rate of growth of chicks fed meal S3 as compared 












. 










. 


- 














. 

































36 . 

to those fed meals SI and S2 (See Experiment 1) may be 
the result of the slight destruction of lysine during 
the processing of meal S3. 

While on the basis of growth results, (see 
Experiments 1 and 5), one might expect an appreciable 
decrease in the liberation of essential amino acids 
subsequent to acid hydrolysis of meal S4 (alkaline 
hydrolysis for tryptophan), such was not the case. Only 
depressed liberation of lysine, arginine, tryptophan, 
and possibly threonine was noted. 


Table 10.- Essential amino acid content*' of sunflower seed 
oil meals 


Hydrolysis 


Acid** *** 



Enzymatic 


Meal Number**'* 

SI 

S2 

S3 

34 

SI 

S2 

33 

S4 

Lysine 

2.81 

2.71 

2.26 

1.87 

0.68 

1.47 

1.33 

0.71 

Arginine 

8.26 

8.03 

8.02 

6.43 

6.22 

8.20 

8.64 

6.13 

Tryptophan 

0.86 

0.97 

0.89 

0.64 

0.44 

0.73 

0.85 

0.82 

Methionine 

1.33 

1.34 

1.32 

1.49 

0.91 

1.22 

1.42 

1.15 

Histidine 

2.14 

2.08 

2.00 

2.20 

1.24 

1.70 

2.15 

1.69 

Threonine 

3.30 

3*10 

3.11 

2.99 

2.02 

2.72 

2.70 

2.18 

Leucine 

5.37 

5*77 

5.82 

6.32 

2.43 

4.12 

4.85 

4.19 

Isoleucine 

3.31 

3*73 

3.69 

3.36 

1.78 

2.56 

3.00 

2.73 

Valine 

4.76 

4.61 

4.57 

4.37 

1.69 

2.89 

3.39 

3.07 

Phenylalanine 

3.94 

3.94 

3.97 

4.11 

1.67 

3.02 

3.47 

3.22 

Total 

U 3 

• 

O 

00 

V>i 

Ch 

. 

ro 

CD 

35.65 

34.73 

19.08 

28.63 

o 

CO 

• I 

rH 1 

25.89 


* Expressed as percentage amino acid of nitrogen X 6.25. 

** Alkaline hydrolysis for tryptophan. 

*** See Table 1 for description of meals. 




























37 . 


There appears to be no relationship between the 
liberation of essential amino acids subsequent to enzymatic 
hydrolysis of meals SI, S2, S3 and S4 and their nutritive 
value. The results show greater liberation of essential 
amino acids from meal S3 than from meal SI, although meal 
SI is unquestionably of superior nutritive value to meal S3. 

In addition, although sunflower seed oil meal S4 is of 
inferior nutritive value for chicks, the liberation of 
essential amino acids subsequent to enzymatic hydrolysis 
of meal S4 is as great as the liberation from meal SI. Thus, 
the data do not support the contention of Ingram et al . (1949) 
that enzymatic hydrolysis values constitute a reliable index 
of the nutritive value of a protein supplement. Although 
Clandinin and Robbie© (1952) found that under a given set 
of conditions, maximum enzymatic liberation values 
characterize a superior soybean oil meal, such is evidently 
not the case so far as sunflower seed oil meal Is concerned® 

Gonclusions 

(1) Processing temperatures of 240° - 260°F. (meal S3) 
resulted in a decrease in the liberation of lysine 
by acid hydrolysis as compared to the liberation of 
lysine from similar meals processed at 200° - 220°F. 
(meal SI) or 220° - 240°F. (meal S2). 

(2) Autoclaving meal SI for four hours at fifteen 
pounds steam pressure resulted in depressed 
liberation by acid hydrolysis of lysine, arginine, 
tryptophan, and possibly threonine. 







38 . 


(3) There was no relationship between the liberation 
of essential amino acids (glycine excluded) 
subsequent to enzymatic hydrolysis and the 
nutritive value of the sunflower seed oil meals 
used. 


Experiment 7 

Object 

To study the effects of water treatment on the 
nutritive value of low-temperature and regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal. 


Experiment 

Sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3, used in 
Experiment 1, were used in this experiment. Samples of the 
meals were treated with water, using a method similar to 
that shown to markedly improve the nutritive value of 
linseed oil meal for chicks (McGinnis and Polls, 1946; 
Kratzer, 194?)• Portions of the meals were mixed with two 
and one-half times their weight of water, soaked at room 
temperature for eighteen hours, dried at 60°0. for three 
days, and incorporated in the rations shown in Table 11. 
Twenty day-old Single Comb White Leghorn cockerel chicks 
were fed each ration. The experimental procedure followed 
was the same as that used in Experiment 1. The experiment 
was terminated at the end of twenty-two days, at which time 
the chicks were weighed Individually. 











39 . 

Table 11.- Effect of water treatment on the nutritive value 
of sunflower seed oil meals 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground yellow' corn. 

39.5 

39.5 

39.5 

39.5 

39.5 

Wheat bran. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Wheat middlings.. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Dehydrated alfalfa meal....... 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

Ground limestone. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal.. 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Iodized salt.... 

• 5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Insoluble grit... 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Fish oil (2250A-300D)... 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate (l/4 lb./ton) 

+ 

+ 

+ 


+ 

Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.). 

+* 


+ 

+ 

4* 

Merck APF #8 (l Ib./ton)...... 

+ 


+ 

+ 

4 

Choline chloride (0.15/0. 

+ 

+ 

+ 


+ 

Vitamin E (3 mg./kg.)..... 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

4 

Soybean oil meal (solvent).... 

30 





Sunflower seed oil meal SI**.. 


30 




Sunflower seed oil meal S3'*** • 



30 



Sunflower seed oil meal SI 
water treated***.. • 




30 


Sunflow T er seed oil meal S3 
water treated***.... 





30 

Total... 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25) % . 

Number of chicks....... 

Average weight at 22 days (gm.) 

22.1 

17 

221.8 

22.0 

19 

221.3 

22.0 

19 

187.2 

22.0 

20 

222.5 

22.0 

19 

172.7 


* See Table 2 for description of vitamin mix. 

** See Table 1 for description of meals. 

*** See Experimental. 



















































Results and Discussion 


The average weights of the chicks are shown in 
Table 11. Under the conditions of the experiment, chicks 
fed sunflower seed oil meal SI (Lot 2) grew as rapidly as 
chicks fed the soybean oil meal control ration (Lot 1). 

These results appear to be at variance with those obtained 
in Experiment 1. However, the percentage protein in the 
rations used in this experiment was higher than in the 
rations used in Experiment 1, and the rations used in the 
two experiments were not identical in composition. In 
agreement with the results obtained in Experiment 1, the 
growth of chicks fed sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lot 3) was 
less than that of chicks fed meal SI (Lot 2). 

Chicks fed water treated sunflower seed oil meals 
(Lots 4 and 5) grew at the same rate as chicks receiving the 
untreated meals (Lots 2 and 3). Hence, the water treatment 
used had no effect on the nutritive value of either 
low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal (SI) or regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal (S3). Thus, it would 
appear that unlike linseed oil meal, sunflower seed oil meal 
does not contain a growth inhibiting principle which may be 
inactivated by water treatment. 

Conclusion 

(1) Water treatment had no effect on the nutritive 

value of low-temperature and regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal. 


















. 


















. 








' 










' 

































Experiment 8 


Object 

To study the effects of extraction with 
trichloroethylene and ethanol on the nutritive value of 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal. 

Experimental 

Portions of regular-temperature sunflower seed 
oil meal (S3) were bagged and extracted in a soxhlet flask 
with trichloroethylene (meal El) or 95 percent ethanol 
(meal E3). The extraction time was twenty-four hours. 

After extraction, the meals were air-dried for three days, 
and stored at 37°G* until used, at which time no odor of 
trichloroethylene or ethanol could be detected In the meals. 

The extracts were stripped of trichloroethylene and ethanol 
and stored In the refrigerator until used. In the 
preparation of meal E2, the trichloroethylene extract was 
added back to a portion of meal El at twice the level 
originally present in the unextracted meal. Meal E4 was 
prepared in a similar manner by adding the ethanol extract 
back to a portion of meal E3 at twice the level originally 
present in the unextracted meal. 

One hundred and forty day-old Single Comb White 
Leghorn chicks (mixed sexes) were divided into seven comparable 
groups of twenty chicks each and fed the rations shown In Table 
12. The experiments. 1 procedure followed was the same as that 
used in Experiment 1. The experiment was terminated after 
twenty-four days, at which time the chicks were weighed 
individually. 















. 

. 

; ' ;0 '■ 1 . 






. ; : * .7 •; ;■ ' ; , \f 

; • • - 














c * 




. 








: 

■ 















42 . 


Table 12.- Effect of extraction with trichloroethylene and ethanol 
on the nutritive value of regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

i 

% 

Ground yellow corn. 

59.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

63.5 

Dehydrated alfalfa meal... 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Ground limestone. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal. 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Iodized salt. 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Insoluble grit. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Pish oil (2250A-300D). 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate 








(1/4 lb./ton). 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Vitamin mix (2 gm./kg.)... 


+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Merck APF #8 (l lb./ton).. 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Soybean oil meal (solvent) 

32 







Sunflower seed oil meal SI** 

28 






Sunflower seed oil meal S3 



28 





Sunflower seed oil meal El** 



28 




Sunflower seed oil meal E2** 




28 



Sunflower seed oil meal E3** 





28 


Sunflower seed oil meal E4** 






28 

Total. 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25) % . 

20.7 

20.7 

20.1 

20.8 

20.1 

21.1 

19.7 

Number of chicks.. 

20 

19 

20 

20 

20 

20 

19 

Average weight at 24 days 
(gm.).• * • •.* • 

190.7 

150.3 

107.3 

126.0 

83.5 

129.6 

115.2 


* See Table 2 for description of vitamin mix 

** See Experimental for description of meals. 





































■ 











' 

: ; 






. 

- 






. 


' 




. 


' 


. 
















43 . 


Results and Discussion 

The results of the experiment are shown in Table 12. 
In agreement with the results obtained in Experiment 1, chicks 
fed the soybean oil meal control ration (Lot 1) grew at a 
faster rate than those fed the sunflower seed oil meal 
rations (Lots 2-7). The chicks receiving sunflower seed 
oil meal S3 (Lot 3) grew at a slower rate than those 
receiving sunflower seed oil meal SI, (Lot 2) again 
demonstrating the inferior nutritive value of regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal. 

The increased rate of growth of the chicks in 
Lots 4 and 6, as compared to those in Lot 3, indicates 
that extraction of sunflower seed oil meal S3 with 
trichloroethylene or ninety-five percent ethanol resulted 
in an increase in the nutritive value of the meal for chicks. 

Adding the trichloroethylene extract back to the 
extracted meal at twice the level originally present 
resulted in a depressed rate of growth of the chicks in 
Lot 5, a,s compared to those in Lots 3 or 4. The chicks in 
Lot 7, however, appeared to grow as fast as those in Lot 6, 
indicating that the ethanol extract did not contain any 
growth inhibiting factor(s). 

The results suggest, though not conclusively, the 
presence of a growth-inhibiting principle in regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal which may be extracted 
















































• 


































. 



























4 














44 . 


by trichloroethylene. The possibility that residual 
trichloroethylene caused the depressed growth observed 
in Lot 5 seems slight, since the analytical method outlined 
by Bailee (1952) indicated a level of less than .01 percent 
trichloroethylene in the extract. 

Conclusions 

(1) Extraction of regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal with trichloroethylene or 
ninety-five percent ethanol increased the 
nutritive value of the meal for chicks. 

(2) Adding the trichloroethylene extract back 
to the extracted meal at twice the level 
originally present depressed the growth of 
chicks. 





PART II 


The Supplementary Value of Sunflower Seed Oil Meal in 
Practical Chick Starting Rations 

Status of the Problem 

Comparatively few references on the nutritive 
value of sunflower seed oil meal for chicks are to be 
found in the literature. Pettit et al . (1944) reported 
the results of experiments in which meat meal in chick 
starting rations was replaced by sunflower seed oil meal. 
Sunflower seed oil meal satisfactorily replaced its 
protein equivalent of meat meal in amounts up to fourteen 
percent of the ration, representing a total substitution 
of the meat meal. Grau and Almquist (1945) concluded 
that when fed at the twenty percent level, sunflower seed 
protein constitutes a complete single source of amino 
acids for the chick. Kondra and Hodgson (1948) observed 
that a chick starter containing two percent sunflower 
seed oil meal, seven and one-half percent meat meal, two 
percent fish meal, and two percent skimmilk powder 
supported a norma,1 rate of growth in chicks to seven w r eeks 
of age. Replacement of the skimmilk powder, fish meal, and 
half of the meat meal by ten percent sunflower seed oil 
meal, resulted in a slow rate of growth. McGinnis, Hsu, 
and Carver (1948) reported that the nutritive value of a 
chick starting ration containing thirty-one percent 
sunflower seed oil meal was improved by the addition of 




« 




























. 










■ 

















46 . 


0*6 percent DL-lysine monohydrochloride. Nikolaiczuk, 
Brisson, and Man! (1948) concluded that sunflower seed 
oil meal provides an incomplete protein for the growth 
of chicks, since its nutritive value was improved by the 
amino acid assortment of meat meal. O’Neil (1948) found 
sunflower seed oil meal satisfactorily replaced one-third 
of the total animal protein in a chick starting ration, 
hartley, Slinger, and Hill (1950) reported that growth 
and feed efficiency of turkey poults were not affected 
when soybean oil meal was progressively replaced by 
sunflower seed oil meal in levels up to twelve percent 
of the ration. 

In view of the scarcity of information concerning 
the nutritional value of sunflower seed oil meal in 
practical chick starting rations, experiments were 
initiated to study the supplementary value of sunflower 
seed oil meal in practical chick starters. 

Experimental (General) 

Two sunflower seed oil meals (meals SI and S3) 
that differed in their processing history (see Bart I, 
Experiment 1) were used in the experiments reported herein. 
Meal S3 was produced in a commercial processing plant, using 
regular processing temperatures of 240° - 260°F. and was 
shown to be of inferior nutritive value to meal SI, which 
was produced in the same plant using considerably lower 
processing temperatures (200° - 220°F.). 







' 

’ 

. 








Two hundred and thirty-eight day-old New 
Hampshire chicks (mixed sexes), divided into seven 
comparable lots of thirty-four chicks were used in each 
experiment. The chicks were brooded in electrically 
heated starting batteries with raised screen floors. 

Feed and water were supplied ad libitum . The experiments 
were terminated after twenty-eight days, at which time 
the chicks were weighed individually. 

The rations used in each experiment were 
formulated so as to contain the same levels of protein, 
calcium, and phosphorus. Percentage adjustments were 
made at the expense of wheat. 

The experiments were repeated using Single 
Comb White Leghorn chicks, but since the results obtained 
were essentially the same as those found with the New 
Hampshire chicks, the data are not presented in this 
report. 


Experiment 1 


Object 

To determine the effect on chick growth of 
replacing the meat meal and fish meal in a practical 
chick starter with low-temperature or regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal (meal SI or S3 respectively). 







48 . 


Experimental 

The rations used In the experiment are shown In 
Table 13. Fish meal and meat meal, In the proportion of 
one part of fish meal to two parts of meat meal supplied 
the supplementary protein in the basal ration (Lot 1). In 
the various treatments, successive two percent portions 
of fish meal and four percent portions of meat meal were 
replaced by either sunflower seed oil meal SI (Lots 2-4) 
or sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 5-7). 

Results and Discussion 

The average weights of the chicks at twenty-eight 
days are shown in Table 13. Ghicks fed rations in which 
one-third of the fish meal and meat meal (two percent fish 
meal and four percent meat meal) was replaced by either 
sunflower seed oil meal SI (Lot 2) or sunflower seed oil 
meal S3 (Lot 5) grew at a faster rate than chicks fed the 
basal ration (Lot 1). This finding might be explained on 
the basis of the supplementary action of different proteins. 

Replacement of two-thirds of the fish meal and 
meat meal by low-temperature (200° - 220°F.) sunflower 
seed oil meal (Lot 3) did not appear to adversely affect 
chick growth. However, replacement of two-thirds of the 
fish meal and meat meal by regular temperature (240° - 260°F.) 
sunflower seed oil meal (Lot 6) resulted in the production 
of a ration which supported a slower rate of growth. 


















































. 



































49 - 


Replacement of all of the fish meal and meat meal by 
sunflower seed oil meal SI resulted in a decrease in the 
nutritive value of the ration for chicks (Lot 4). Similarly, 
chicks fed a ration in which all of the fish meal and meat 
meal was replaced by sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lot 7) did 
not grow as fast as chicks fed the basal ration. 

Chicks fed ration 4 grew at a faster rate than 
chicks fed ration 7, indicating the inferior nutritive value 
of regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal, as compared 
to low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal. 

On the basis of the results obtained, it would not 
appear advisable to replace with regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal more than one-third of the fish meal and meat 
meal in a chick starter of the type used in this study. 

Conclusions 

(1) Chicks fed a practical chick starter in which one- 
third of the fish meal and meat meal was replaced by 
low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal or regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal grew at a 
faster rate than chicks fed the unaltered ration. 

(2) Low -temperature sunflower seed oil meal satisfactorily 
replaced up to two-thirds of the fish meal and meat 
meal in the practical chick starter used. Replace¬ 
ment of two-thirds of the fish meal and meat meal by 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal resulted 
in a decrease in the nutritive value of the ration. 































, 


























V- 












50 . 


Table 13.- Replacement of fish meal and meat meal in a practical 
chick starter by sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground wheat.. 

30.25 

27.25 

23-75 

20.25 

27-25 

23.75 

20.25 

Ground oats. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground barley.. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground corn. 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

Fish meal 

(7 6 % protein)..... 

6 

4 

2 

0 

4 

2 

0 

Meat meal 

( 55 % protein). 

12 

8 

4 

0 

8 

4 

0 

Sunflower seed oil 
meal SI*.......... 


8 

16 

24 




Sunflower seed oil 
meal S3*. 





8 

16 

24 

Alfalfa meal.. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Bonemeal.... 

0 

1 

2-5 

3-5 

1 

2.5 

3.5 

Ground limestone.... 

1.5 

1.5 

1-5 

2 

1.5 

1.5 

2 

Iodized salt........ 

• 5 

.5 

-5 

-5 

-5 

.5 

.5 

Fish oil (2250A-300D) 

.25 

.25 

-25 

-25 

-25 

.25 

.25 

Manganese sulfate 
(1/4 lb./ton). 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Riboflavin premix**. 

.5 

.5 

-5 

-5 

-5 

.5 

.5 

Merck APF #8 (1 lb./ 
ton).. 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 



Total*... 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 


Protein (NX6.25)$f... 20.0 19*7 19.8 20.1 20.0 20.3 20.5 

Number of chicks.... 33 34 33 31 34 32 33 

Average weight at 

28 days (gm.) 298.5 324.3 291.0 255.8 320.3 240.7 188.9 


* See Experimental (General) for description of meals. 


** Contained one gram riboflavin per ten pounds wheat middlings. 



















































51 . 

(3) Low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal was of 
superior supplementary and nutritive value to 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal. 


Experiment 2 


Object 

To determine the effect on chick growth of 
replacing the meat meal in a practical chick starter 
containing two and one-half percent fish meal with low- 
temperature or regular-temperature sunflower seed oil 
meal (meal SI or S3, respectively). 


Experimental 

The rations used in this experiment (Table 14) were 
designed to show the effect on chick growth of replacement of 
successive six percent portions of meat meal by low-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal (Lots 2-4) or by regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal (Lots 5 - 7)• Two and one-half 
percent fish meal was included in each ration. 


Results and Discussion 

The average weights of the chicks at twenty-eight 
days are shown in Table 14. Chicks fed a ration in which one- 
third of the meat meal was replaced by sunflower seed oil meal 
SI (Lot 2), appeared to grow at a faster rate than chicks fed 
the basal ration (Lot 1). Replacement of two-thirds or all of 
the meat meal in the basal ration with sunflower seed oil meal 
SI did not decrease the nutritive value of the ration (Lots 3 and 
4, respectively). Chicks fed a ration in which one-third of the 






























































* 
































. 


















52 . 


Table 14.- Replacement of meat meal In a practical chick starter 
by sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 


Ration and Lot Number 1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground wheat. 

28.25 

25.25 

22.25 

19.25 

25.25 

22.25 

19.25 

Ground oats. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

1 n 


t r\ 


JLU 

.LU 

1U 

Ground barley. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground corn. 

25 

25 

25 

pc 

pc 

25 

25 



0 

Fish mea1........... 

2.6 

2.6 

2 .6 

p 6 

p c 


0 c 

(76$ protein) 




<-0 




Meat meal. 

(55$ protein) 

18 

12 

6 

0 

12 

6 

0 

Sunflower seed oil 
meal SI*. ... 


7 

±4 

21 




Sunflower seed oil 
meal S3*.......... 





7 

14 

21 

Alfalfa meal.. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Iodized salt........ 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

• 5 

Fish oil (2250A-30GD) 

.25 

.25 

.25 

• 25 

.25 

• 25 

♦ 25 

Ground limestone.... 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Bonemeal............ 


2 

4 

6 

2 

4 

6 

Manganese sulfate 
(1/4 Ib./ton)..... 

+ 

+ 

+ 


+ 


+ 

Riboflavin premix**. 

.5 

♦5 

.5 

.5 

• 5 

.5 

.5 

Merck APF #8 

(1 lb./ton)....... 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 


Total.. 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25)$... 
Number of chicks.... 
Average weight at 

28 days (gm.)..... 

21.6 

31 

306.6 

20.8 

31 

323.7 

20.3 

33 

316.6 

20.4 

32 

300.6 

20.7 

32 

306.1 

20.4 

31 

279.8 

20.6 

31 

278.0 


* See Experimental (General) for description of meals. 

** Contained one gram riboflavin per ten pounds wheat middlings. 































J 



















meat meal was replaced with sunflower seed oil meal 3s> 

(Lot 5) grew at as fast a rate as chicks receiving the 
basal ration. However, replacement of two-thirds or all 
of the meat meal by sunflower seed oil meal decreased 
the nutritive value of the ration for chicks (Lots 6 and 
7, respectively). 

The results of this experiment would appear to 
indicate that in the presence of two and one-half percent 
fish meal, regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal may 
satisfactorily replace up to one-third of the meat meal in 
a practical chick starter of the type used in this study. 

Conclusions 

(1) Low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
satisfactorily replaced all of the meat meal 
in a practical chick starter containing two 
and one-half percent fish meal. 

(2) Regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
replaced up to one-third of the meat meal in 
a practical chick starter containing two and 
one-half percent fish meal. Replacement of 
two-thirds or all of the meat meal by regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal, however, 
resulted in a decrease in the nutritive value 
of the ration for chicks. 





. 








' 


: 












‘ 





















Experiment 3 


54 


Object 

To determine the effect on chick growth of 
replacing the soybean oil meal in a practical chick starter 
containing two and one-half percent fish meal with low- 
temperature or regular-temperature sunflower seed oil 
meal (meal SI or S3, respectively). 

Experimental 

The rations fed are shown in Table 15 and were 
formulated in such a way as to show the effect on chick 
growth of replacement of successive seven percent portions 
of soybean oil meal by either sunflower seed oil meal 31 
(Lots 2-4) or sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 5-7). 

Two and one-half percent fish meal was included in each 
ration. 

Results and Discussion 

The results of the experiment are shown in Table 15 
Chicks fed rations in which up to two-thirds of the soybean 
oil meal was replaced by either sunflower seed oil meal SI 
or sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 2 and 3, and 5 and 6, 
respectively), grew as fast as chicks fed the basal ration 
(Lot 1). Replacement of all of the soybean oil meal by 
sunflower seed oil meal SI or S3 (Lots 4 and 7) decreased 
the nutritive value of the ration for chicks. These results 
are at variance with those reported by Nikolaiczuk, Brisson, 
and Mani (1948) who found that sunflower seed oil meal is 

















» 











































' 





























































. 


’ 


. 


















55 . 


Table 15*- Replacement of soybean oil meal in a practical chick 
starter by sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

of 

7 ° 

% 

% 

Ground wheat.. 

27.75 

27.75 

27.75 

27.75 

27.75 

27.75 

27.75 

Ground oats. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground barley. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground corn. 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

Fish meal 

(7 6 % protein). 

2.5 

2.5 

2.5 

2.5 

2.5 

2.5 

2.5 

Soybean oil meal 
(solvent). 

21 

14 

7 


14 

7 


Sunflower seed oil 
meal SI* ** .......... 


7 

14 

21 




Sunflower seed oil 
meal S3*.. 





7 

14 

21 

Alfalfa meal........ 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Iodized salt........ 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Fish oil (2250A-300D) 

*25 

.23 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

Ground limestone.... 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal.. ... 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Riboflavin premix*:*. 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

• 5 

.5 

• 5 

Manganese sulfate 
(1/4 lb./ton)..... 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Merck APF #8 

(1 lb./ton)....... 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 


Total.... 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Protein IHX6.25)#... 20.2 19.7 20.0 20.0 20.4 19.9 19.9 

Number of chicks.... 32 33 29 31 31 31 31 

Average weight at 

28 days (gm.). 325.0 320.0 332.0 305.9 339.8 316.9 276.0 

* See Experimental general) for description of meals. 

** Contained one gram riboflavin per ten pounds wheat middlings. 






































V-. U'.:.X-j 

: : 

















56 . 


superior to soybean oil meal as a source of protein for the chick. 
On the other hand, G-artley, Slinger, and Hill (1950) reported that 
the growth of turkey poults was adversely affected when twenty- 
eight percent sunflower seed oil meal completely replaced soybean 
oil meal in a turkey starting ration. 


Conclusion 

(1) Low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal or regular- 
temperature sunflower seed oil meal satisfactorily 
replaced up to two-thirds or the soybean oil meal in 
a practical chick starter ration containing two and 
one-half percent fish meal. 

Experiment 4 


Object 

To study the replacement value of low-temperature and 
regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meals imeals SI and S3) in 
a practical chick starting ration containing meat meal as the only 
protein supplement. 

Experimental 

The rations fed in the experiment are shown in Table 16 . 
They were similar to those used in Experiment 2 , except that no 
fish meal was included in the rations and successive seven percent 
increments of meat meal were replaced with sunflower seed oil meal 
SI (Lots 2-4) or sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 5 - ?)• 






57 


Table 16.- Replacement, of meat meal in a practical chick starter 
by sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground wheat. 

27.75 

23.92 

20.09 

15.25 

23.92 

20.09 

16.25 

Ground oats. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

lo 

Ground barley. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground corn. 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

Meat meat 

(55% protein)..... 

21 

14 

7 


14 

7 


Sunflower seed oil 
meal SI*. 

t 

6.5 

17 

25.5 




Sunflower seed oil 
meal S3*... 





6.5 

17 

25.5 

Alfalfa meal.. 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Iodized salt... 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Fish oil ^2£3 oa-3oOD) 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

Ground iimesrone. . .. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Bonemeal... 


2.33 

4.66 

7 

2.33 

4.66 

7 

Riboflavin premix**. 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Manganese sulfate 
(1/2 lb./ton)..... 


+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Merck APF if 8 

(1 lb./ton). 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Total... 

ICO 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25)%... 
Number of chicks.... 
Average weight at 

28 days (gm.).,... 

19.2 

33 

169.4 

19.2 

32 

203.6 

19.3 

31 

226.5 

19.9 

34 

228.0 

19.3 

33 

198.9 

19.8 

31 

195.6 

19.8 

34 

171.1 


* See Experimental (General) for description of meals. 

** Contained one gram riboflavin per ten pounds wheat middlings. 
































- 


























' { 



- 










■■ 



















58 . 


Results and Discussion 

The average weights of the chicks at twenty-eight 
days are shown in Table 16. The plane of nutrition in this 
experiment was lower than in Experiment 2, possibly because 
of omission of the two and one-half percent fish meal from 
the rations. Chicks fed rations in which successive seven 
percent increments of meat meal were replaced with sunflower 
seed oil meal £1 (Lots 2, 3 and 4, respectively) grew at a 
faster rate than chicks fed the basal ration (Lot 1). Since 
meat meal has been shown to be deficient in methionine for 
the chick (March, Biely, and Young, 1950) the supplementary 
value of sunflower seed oil meal SI might be related to its 
higher methionine content. 

Replacement of up to two-thirds of the meat meal 
by sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 5 and 6) Increased the 
nutritive value of the ration. The chicks in Lot 7, 
receiving a ration in which all of the meat meal was replaced 
by sunflower seed oil meal S3, grew as fast as the chicks in 
Lot 1. 

Conclusions 

(1) Low-tempera,ture and regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal satisfactorily replaced all of the 
meat meal in a practical chick starter in which 
meat meal constituted the only protein supplement. 

(2) L 0 w-temperature and regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal exerted a supplementary effect in 
chick starter rations containing meat meal as the 
only other protein supplement. 









' 

. : 































'•. .. - ■ - 














Experiment 5 


Object 

To study the replacement value of low-temperature 
and regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meals (meals SI 
and S3) in a practical chick starter containing soybean oil 
meal as the only protein supplement* 

Experimental 

The rations fed are shown in Table 17* They were 
similar to those used in Experiment 3, except that the two 
and one-half percent fish meal in each ration of that 
experiment was omitted and nine percent portions of soybean 
oil meal were replaced by either sunflower seed oil meal SI 
(Lots 2-4) or sunflower seed oil meal S3 (Lots 3 - 7). 

Results and Discussion 

The results of the experiment are shown in Table 17. 
Sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 satisfactorily replaced 
two-thirds of the soybean oil meal (Lots 3 and 6, respectively) 
in the basal ration (Lot 1). Replacement of all of the 
soybean oil meal by sunflower seed oil meal SI (Lot 4) 
decreased the nutritive value of the ration, while replace¬ 
ment of all of the soybean oil meal by sunflower seed oil 
meal S3 (Lot 7) resulted in the production of a ration of 
decidedly inferior nutritive value for chicks. In agreement 
with the results obtained in the four preceding experiments, 
sunflower seed oil meal SI was of superior nutritive value 
to sunflower seed oil meal S3. 


















































' 








' 





60 . 


Table 17*- Replacement of soybean oil meal in a practical chick 
starter by sunflower seed oil meals SI and S3 


Ration and Lot Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Ingredients 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Ground wheat. 

24.25 

24.25 

24.25 

24.25 

24.25 

24.25 

24.25 

Ground oats. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

Ground barley. 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

10 

frTfynnci nnrn. „ . „ .. 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

20 

Soybean oil meal 

(solvent).. 

2? 

18 

9 

18 

9 

Sunflower seed oil 
meal SI*... 


9 

18 

27 




Sunflower seed oil 
meal S3*. 





9 

18 

27 

Alfalfa meal......... 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

TnrH 7.«d salt* ........ 

.3 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

.5 

Fish oil (2250A-300D) 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.25 

Ground limestone..... 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Bonemeal..... 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

1.5 

Riboflavin premix**.. 

• 5 

*5 

• 5 

.5 

.5 


.5 

Manganese sulfate 
(1/4 lb./ton)...... 

+ 

+ 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Merck APF ff8 

(1 lb./ton). 

4 

4- 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Total................ 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

Protein (NX6.25)#.... 
Number of chicks..... 
Average weight at 

28 days (gm.). 

20.6 

33 

301.2 

19*6 

33 

302.5 

20.7 

34 

297.9 

21.0 

33 

269.9 

20.4 

34 

290.X 

20.2 

33 

296.0 

21.4 

34 

165.6 


* See Experimental (general) for description of meals. 

»* Contained one gram riboflavin per ten pounds wheat middlings. 




































■ - : 





0 





















61 . 


Conclusion 

(1) Low-temperature and regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal satisfactorily replaced up to two- 
thirds of the soybean oil meal in a practical 
chick starter containing soybean oil meal as the 
only protein supplement. 











































GENERAL DISCUSSION 


Part I 

The results obtained indicate that processing 
variables markedly influence the nutritive value of sunflower 
seed oil meal. It would appear that, while efficient 
expression of the oil is obtained, processing conditions 
now in use commercially do not result in the production of 
meals of maximum nutritive value for the chick. Lower 
processing temperatures result In an increase in the 
nutritive value of the meal, but also increase the percentage 
residual oil. Opening the choke on the expeller also 
increases both the nutritive value of the meal and the 
percentage residual oil. Since most of the heat-damage 
appears to occur in the expeller, the feasibility of 
utilizing a water-cooled shaft In the expeller would seem 
worthy of Investigation. While still allowing for maximum 
efficiency of expression of the oil, this might decrease 
the amount of frictional heat-damage produced next to the 
expeller shaft. In this connection, it is of interest to 
note that sunflower seed oil meal “chips” leaving an 
expeller which is operating at the regular temperatures 
and choke setting, appear scorched on the side next to the 
expeller shaft. Since sunflower seed oil meal represents 
an important by-product of the sunflower oil Industry, the 
economic feasability of utilizing proper processing 
conditions should be considered by the industry. 





























. 








• ' 




■ 















Although excessive processing temperatures result 


in the production of sunflower seed oil meals of inferior 
nutritive value, the mode of action is, as yet, not 
understood. It is possible that the effects of heat-damage 
parallel those observed in overheated soybean oil meal by 
Clandinin et al . (1947). Since the analytical data 
(Experiments4 and 6) indicate that sunflower seed oil meal 
is marginal in lysine and methionine content for the chick, 
slight destruction or inactivation of lysine and/or 
methionine during processing might account for the slower 
rate of growth of chicks fed regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal as compared to those fed low-temperature 
sunflow r er seed oil meal. The results of Experiment 5 would 
seem to indicate that the problem is essentially amino acid 
in nature, since the addition of vitamin-free casein and 
methionine appeared to completely overcome the effects of 
excessive heat treatment. 

The results of Experiment 8 suggest the presence 
of a “toxic" factor in the trichloroethylene extractable 
portion of regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal. The 
effects of processing temperatures on the trichloroethylene- 
soluble portion of the meal need further investigation. 

The results of Experiment 6 show that the liberation 
of essential amino acids by enzymatic hydrolysis was greater 
from regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal than from 





' 




. 

. 

. 

• i • . Lil 

' ' 

■ 










- 














. 
































54. 

low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal. It would seem, 
therefore, that one effect of heat on sunflower seed oil 
meal is to denature the protein and thus render it more 
readily attacked by proteolytic enzymes in vitro . 

Part II 

The results of the five experiments reported in 
Part II further emphasize the desirability of utilizing 
lower processing temperatures in the production of sunflower 
seed oil meal. A meal processed at 200° - 220°F. was 
consistently of higher nutritive value for chicks than a 
similar meal processed at the regular temperatures of 
2400 - 260°F. 

Regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal was 
a reasonably satisfactory protein supplement for use in 
chick starting rations, although not found to be of as high 
nutritive value as reported by Nikolaiczuk, Brisson, and 
Mani (1948). The results indicate that regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal may satisfactorily replace one-third 
of a fish meal and meat meal mixture (composed of one part 
of fish meal to two parts of meat meal); or two-thirds of 
the soybean oil meal in the chick starters used. In general 
agreement with this finding O’Neil (1948) reported that 
sunflower seed oil meal replaced up to one-third of the 
animal protein in chick starting rations without detrimental 
effect. When two and one-half percent fish meal was included 
in the ration, regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 






65 . 


satisfactorily replaced one-third of the meat meal in the 
ration. However, when meat meal was the only protein 
supplement in the ration, regular-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal replaced all of the meat meal in the chick 
starter. The lower plane of nutrition that had to be 
achieved by the sunflower seed oil meal supplemented groups 
in the latter experiment probably accounts for this finding. 

On the other hand, low-temperature sunflower seed 
oil meal replaced two-thirds of the fish meal and meat meal 
mixture, all of the meat meal, and two-thirds of the soybean 
oil meal in the chick starters used, without having any 
adverse effects on chick growth. 






* 

• ' ' j . 

. 

' 

- 


66 


GENERAL SUMMARY 


Part I 

Eight experiments were conducted to study the 
effects of methods of processing on the nutritive value 
of sunflower seed oil meal. The results of the experiments 
are summarized below. 

Processing conditions employed in the manufacture 
of sunflower seed oil meal markedly influenced the nutritive 
value of the meal. The nutritive value was lowered as 
processing conditions became more severe. 

Processing variables were also shown to influence 
the chemical composition of sunflower seed oil meal. 

Lowering the processing temperatures from 2i|0°P. - 260°P. to 
200°P. - 220°P., or opening the choke on the expeller increased 
the percentage residual oil in the meal. 

Excess heat was shown to affect the nutritive 
value of raw, laboratory solvent extracted, sunflower seed 
oil meal. Heating the raw, extracted meal for thirty minutes 
at fifteen pounds steam pressure appeared to decrease its 
nutritive value for chicks, while heating for four hours 
at fifteen pounds steam pressure resulted in the production 
of a meal of inferior nutritive value. 

Marked variability was observed in the protein and 
crude fibre content of raw, laboratory solvent extracted, 
sunflower seed oil meals prepared from four different raw 
materials. Significant differences were also noted in the 
methionine, lysine, and arginine content of the meals. 



« 




























, 





















* 















* 





. 

■ 

. 


67 


Low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal (processed 
at 200° - 220°F.), and regular-temperature sunflower seed 
oil meal (processed at 240° - 260°F.), are not complete 
sources of amino acids for the chick when fed at the twenty 
percent protein level. The optimum level of supplementation 
of the above meals appeared to be reached when six percent 
vitamin-free casein in conjunction with 0.4 percent DL- 
methionine was added to rations containing low-temperature 
or regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal as the only 
source of protein in the ration. A sunflower seed oil meal 
prepared by autoclaving low-temperature sunflower seed oil 
meal for four hours at fifteen pounds steam pressure was of 
inferior nutritive value for chicks. The optimum level of 
supplementation of this meal appeared to be reached when 
twelve percent vitamin-free casein and 0.4 percent DL- 
metnionine were added to the ration. 

Regular processing temperatures of 240° - 260°F. 
resulted in a decrease in the liberation of lysine by acid 
hydrolysis as compared to the liberation of lysine from 
low-temperature meal processed at 200° - 220°F. Autoclaving 
low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal for four hours at 
fifteen pounds steam pressure resulted in depressed 
liberation of lysine, arginine, tryptophan, and possibly 
threonine subsequent to acid hydrolysis (alkaline hydrolysis 
for tryptophan). No relationship between the liberation of 
essential amino acids by enzymatic hydrolysis and the 
nutritive value of the sunflower seed oil meals was observed. 


- 

, . - 








.... . 




















. 












. 

■ 


. 
















68 . 

Water treatment had no effect on the nutritive 
value of regular-temperature or low-temperature sunflower 
seed oil meal. 

Extraction of regular-temperature sunflower seed 
oil meal with trichloroethylene or ethanol increased its 
nutritive value. Adding the trichloroethylene extract 
back to the extracted meal at twice the level originally 
present depressed the growth of chicks. 

Part II 

The results of the experiments reported in Part II 
indicate that low-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
satisfactorily replaced two-thirds of the fish meal and 
meat meal mixture, all of the meat meal, or two-thirds of 
the soybean oil meal in the practical chick starters used. 

Regular-temperature sunflower seed oil meal 
satisfactorily replaced one-third of the fish meal and meat 
meal mixture, or two-thirds of the soybean oil meal in the 
starters used. When two and one-half percent fish meal was 
included in the starter, regular-temperature sunflower seed 
oil meal replaced one-third of the meat meal in the ration. 

When fish meal was omitted from the starter, regular-temperature 
sunflower seed oil meal replaced all of the meat meal in the 


ration used. 








X 














BIBLIOGRAPHY 


69 


Almquist, H.J., and C.R. Grau, 19l}i+. Interrelationship 
of methionine, choline, betaine and arsenocholine 
in the chick. J. Nutrition, 2 ^: 265 - 269 . 

Almquist, H.J., and C.R. Grau, 191+5* Further studies in 
cystine, methionine and choline in chick diets. 

J. Nutrition, 22.:219»222. 

Almquist, H.J., 191+7* Evaluation of amino acid requirements 
by observations on the chick. J. Nutrition, 5I4.: 514 . 5-565 . 

Almquist, H.J., and J.B. Merritt, 1951* Effect of soybean 
antitrypsin on experimental amino acid deficiency in 
the chick. Archives Biochem. and Biophysics, 51 : 14 . 50 - 1 + 55 . 

American Oil Chemists 1 Society, 191+6• Official and tentative 
methods of the American Oil Chemists' Society, 2nd ed. 
Chicago, Ill. 

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, 191+5* Official 
and tentative methods of analysis, 6 th ed. Washington, D.C 

Borchers, Raymond, C.W. Ackerson, and F.E. Mussehl, I 9 I+ 8 . 
Trypsin inhibitor. VI. Effect of various heating 
periods on the growth promoting value of soybean oil 
meal for chicks. Poultry Sci., 27:601-60l+. 

Borchers, Raymond, and C.W. Ackerson, 1951* Nutritive value 

of legume seeds. XI. Counteracting the growth inhibitor 
of raw soybeans. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol, and Med., 

28:81-85. 

Bouthilet, R.J., W.L. Hunter, C.A. Luhman, D. Ambrose, and 

S. Lepkovsky, I 95 O. The metabolism of raw versus heated 
soybeans in birds with colostomies. Poultry Sci., 

22.: 837-814.0. 

Bowman, Donald E., I 9 UI 4 -- Fractions derived from soy beans 

and navy beans which retard tryptic digestion of casein. 
Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol, and Med., 57? l59~ll+0 * 

Briggs, G.M. Jr., T.D. Luckey, C.A. Elvehjem, and E.B. Hart, 
I 9 I+ 5 . Studies on two chemically unidentified water- 
soluble vitamins necessary for the chick. J. Biol. 

Chem., 11+8:165-172. 

Clandinin, D.R., W.W. Cravens, C.A. Elvehjem, and J.G. Halpin, 
191+7. Deficiencies in over-heated soybean oil meal. 
Poultry Sci., 26:150-15^* 

Clandinin, D.R., W.W. Cravens, C.A. Elvehjem, and J.G. Halpin, 
191+8. The relationship between time and temperature to 
the nutritive value of soybean oil meal. Poultry Sci., 

SL: 570-571* 




* 










. 









70. 


Clandinin, D.R., 1949. The efiecfs of methods of 

processing on the nutriLive value of herring meals. 
Poultry Sci., ^o:i28-153. 

Clandinin, D.R., and A.k. nouDiee, 1950. The effects of 
methods oi processing on the nutritive value or 
sunflower meals. Poultry Sci., (Abstract). 

Clandinin, D.R., J.M. Stevens, A.B. Morrison, and A.R. 
Kooblee, 1951. Liberation or lysine oy acid and 
enzymes from heated lysine-giucose mixture. J. Biol. 
Chem., 190:219-222. 

Clandinin, D.R., and A.R. Robblee, 1952. The effect of 
processing on the enzymatic 11 Deration of lysine 
and arginine from soybean oil meal. J. Nutrition, 
^ 2525 - 530 . 


Crawford, G.R., 1950. Variability in quality of sunflower 
meals. Animal Science 72, University of Alberta. 

Evans, Robert John, and J. McGinnis, 1946. The influence 
of autoclaving soybean oil meal on the availability 
of cystine and methionine for the chick. J. Nutrition, 
21:449-461. 

Evans, Robert John, and J. McGinnis, 1948. Cystine and 
methionine metabolism by chicks receiving raw or 
autoclaved soybean oil meal. J. Nutrition, 35:477-488. 

Evans, Robert John, and H.A. Butts, 1948. Studies on the 
heat inactivation of lysine in soybean oil meal. J. 

Biol. Chem., 175:15-20. 

Fritz, J.C., E.H. Kramke, and C.A. Reed, 1947. Effect of 
heat treatment on biological value of soybeans. 

Poultry Sci., 26:657-661. 

Gartley, X.M., S.J. Slinger, and D.C. Hill, 1950. Further 
observations on the use of sunflower seed oil meal in 
turkey starter rations. Poultry Sci., 29:512-313. 

Grau, C.R., and H.J. Almquist, 1943* The utilization of 
the sulphur amino acids by the chick. J. Nutrition, 
26:631-640. 

Grau, C.R., and H.J. Almquist, 1945. Value of sunflower 

seed protein. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol, and Med.. 60:373-374. 


























71. 


Ham, Wendell E., and R.M. Sandstedt, 1944. A proteolytic 
inhibiting substance in the extract from unheated 
soy bean meal. J. Biol. Chem., 154:505-506. 

Ham, Wendell E., R.M. Sandstedt, and F.E. Mussehl, 1945. 

The proteolytic inhibiting substance in the extract 
from unheated soy bean meal and its effect upon growth 
in chicks. J. Biol. Chem., 161 :635-642. 

Hayward, J.W., H. Steenbock, and G-. Bohstedt, 1936-a. The 
effect of heat as used in the extraction of soy bean 
oil upon the nutritive value of the protein of soy bean 
oil meal. J. Nutrition, 11:219-234. 

Hayward, J.W., K. Steenbock, and G. Bohstedt, 1936-b. The 
effect of cystine and casein supplements upon the 
nutritive value of the protein of raw and heated soy 
beans. J. Nutrition, 12:275-283. 

Hayward, J.W., J.G. Halpin, C.E. Holmes, G. Bohstedt, and 
E.B. Hart, 1936. Soybean oil meal prepared at 
different temperatures as a feed for poultry. Poultry 
Sci., 16:3-14. 

Hayward, J.W., and F.H. Hafner, 1941. The supplementary 
effect of cystine and methionine upon the protein of 
raw and cooked soybeans as determined with chicks and 
rats. Poultry Sci., 20:139-149. 

Ingram, G.R., W.W. Riesen, W.W. Cravens, and C.A. Elvehjem, 
1949. Evaluating soybean oil meal protein for chick 
growth by enzymatic release of amino acids. Poultry 
Sci., 28:898-902. 

Johnson, L. Margaret, H.T. Parsons, and H. Steenbock, 1939* 
The effect of heat and solvents on the nutritive value 
of soybean protein. J. Nutrition, 18:423-434. 

Klcse, A.A., and H.J. Almquist, 1941. Methionine in the 
diet of the chick. J. Biol. Chem., 138 :467-469. 

Kondra, P.A., and G.C. Hodgson, 1948. Sunflower seed and 
rape-se'ed oil meals in chick starter rations. Sci. 
Agr., 28:264-267. 

Kratzer, F.H., 1947. Effect of duration of water treatment 
on the nutritive value of linseed meal. Poultry Sci., 
26:90-91. 

Kuiken, K.A., and Carl M. Lyman, 1949. Essential amino 

acid composition of soy bean meals prepared from twenty 
strains of soy beans. J. Biol. Chem., 177 * 29-36. 











. 






72 


Kunitz, M., 1945. Crystallization of a trypsin Inhibitor 
from soybean. Science, 101 :668-669. 

Liener, Irvin E., 1951* The intraperitoneal toxicity of 
concentrates of the soy bean trypsin inhibitor. J. 
Biol. Chem., 193:183-191. 

March, B., J. Biely, and R.J. Young, 1950. Supplementation 
of meat scrap with amino acids. Poultry Sci., 29 : 

444-449. — 

McGinnis, James, and H.L. Polls, 1946. Factors affecting 

the nutritive value of linseed meal for growing chicks. 
Poultry Sci., 25_:408 (Abstract). 

McGinnis, James, and V.K. Menzies, 1946. Effect of in vitro 
enzymatic digestion of raw soybean flakes on chick 
growth. Poultry Sci., 25:538-539. 

McGinnis, James, Peng Tung Hsu, and J.S. Carver, 1948. 

Nutritional deficiencies of sunflower seed oil meal 
for chicks. Poultry Sci., 27:389-393. 

Mitchell, H.H., and D.B. Smuts, 1932. The amino acid 

deficiencies of beef, wheat, corn, oats, and soybeans 
for growth in the white rat. J. Biol. Chem., 95 : 
263-281. 

Mitchell, H.H., T.S. Hamilton, and J.R. Beadles, 1945. 

The importance of commercial processing for the 
protein value of food products. I. Soybean, coconut 
and sunflower seed. J. Nutrition, 29:13-25. 

Mitchell, H.H., T.S. Hamilton, and J.R. Beadles, 1949. 

The nutritional effects of heat on food proteins, 
with particular reference to commercial processing 
and home cooking. J. Nutrition, 29:413-425. 

Nikolaiczuk, N., G.J. Brisson, and K.V. Mani, 1948. 

Investigations upon vegetable protein sources for 
poultry rations. Proc. 8th World's Poultry Congress, 
Copenhagen: 181-187. 

O'Neil, J.B., 1948. Mustard seed oil meal and sunflower 
seed oil meal in chick starter rations. Sci. Agr., 
28:127-130. 

Osborne, Thomas B., and L.B. Mendel, 1917. The use of 
soy bean as food. J. Biol. Chem., 32:369-387. 


















































73. 


Patton, A.R., and E.G. Hill, 1948. Inactivation of 

nutrients by heating with glucose. Science, 107:68-69. 

Patton, A.R., E.G. Hill, and E.M. Foreman, 1948. The role 

of carbohydrates in the heat damage of soybean protein. 
Poultry Sci., 22:680 (Abstract). 

Pettit, J.H., S.J. Slinger, E.V. Evans, and F.N. Marcellus, 
1944. The utilization of sunflower seed oil meal, 
wheat distillers' dried grains and rapeseed oil meal 
in poultry rations* Sci. Agr., 24:201-213. 

Riesen, W.H., D.R. Clandinin, C.A. Elvehjem, and ¥.¥. 

Cravens, 1947* Liberation of essential amino acids 
from raw, properly heated, and overheated soybean 
oil meal. J. Eiol. Chem., 167:143-150. 

Rose, ¥.C., K.S. Kemmerer, M. ¥omack, E.T. Mertz, J.K. 

Gunther, R.H. McCoy, and C.E. Meyer, 1936. The 
present status of the amino acids in nutrition. 

J. Biol. Chem., 114:IXXXV. 

Rose, ¥.C., 1937. The nutritional significance of the 

amino acids and certain related compounds. Science, 

86 : 298 - 300 . 

Roxas, M.L., 1916. The reaction between amino-acids and 

carbohydrates as a probable cause of humin formation. 

J. Biol. Chem., 27:71-93. 

Sallee, E.M. , 1952. Rapid test for trichloroethylene in 

vegetable oils. Modified Beilstein test. J. Am. Oil 
Chem. Soq., 29:197. 

Shrewsbury, G.L., and J.W. Bratzler, 1933. Cystine 

deficiency of soybean protein at" various levels, in 
a purified ration and as a supplement to corn. J. 

Agri. Res., 42:889-895. 

Stevens, Joan M., and J. McGinnis, 1947. The effect of 

autoclaving lysine in the presence of carbohydrate on 
its utilization by the chick. J. Biol. Chem., 171 : 
431-435. 

Westfall, R.J., and S.M. Hauge, 1948. The nutritive quality 

and the trypsin inhibitor content of soybean flour heated 
at various temperatures. J. Nutrition, 35:379-389. 

¥omack, M. , K.S. Kemmerer, and ¥.C. Rose, 1937* The relation 
of cystine and methionine to growth. J. Biol. Chem*, 
121:403-410. 

¥omack, Madelyn, and W.C. Rose, 1941. The partial replacement 
of dietary methionine by cystine for purposes of growth. 
J. Biol. Chem., 141:375-379. 









.