Browse the Canola Meal Feeding Guide by chapter:
Canola meal is well accepted by swine, and with improvements in diet formulation, it can be included at increasingly high levels in the diet during all phases of growth and reproduction. The widespread adoption of more accurate feed evaluation systems for energy and amino acids, along with greater knowledge of the nutritional composition of canola meal insure accurate feeding results.
The effect of a feed ingredient on feed intake in pigs is difficult to objectively evaluate, given the many factors involved. Variables such as basic palatability of the ingredient, dietary inclusion level, other ingredients in the feed mix, feed energy, fibre content (bulk density), and feed mineral balance will influence feed intake.
For canola meal, several factors with the potential to reduce feed intake exist, such as glucosinolates, tannins, sinapine, fibre and mineral balance, which are explained in more detail in Chapter 2 of this guide. Certainly, glucosinolates represent a major negative influence on feed intake in pigs. Glucosinolates have a bitter taste that can result in the meal being objectionable to many animals. Canola meal produced in Canada, with its very low levels of glucosinolates (3.57μmol/g), has a very neutral taste. As mentioned in Chapter 2, traditional rapeseed meal can have glucosinolate levels of over 100μmol/g. Levels this high result in meal that can only be used in minimal amounts so as to avoid issues with feed intake.
Heyer et al.(2018) replaced 20% of the soybean meal in the control diet with solvent extracted canola meal, or canola meal that had been subjected to low, medium or high extruder intensity. Although the extrusion further reduced the glucosinolates content of the meal, there were no differences in feed intake by weaned pigs. Feed intake, weight gain and feed to gain ratio did not differ for any of the treatments, including the control. This study showed that further reduction of glucosinolates in canola meal would not benefit feed intake and that weaned pigs fed canola meal ate as much as pigs fed soybean meal.
Landero et al. (2018) conducted feed preference trials with weaned pigs given the choice of either soybean meal or canola meal. A strong preference was observed for soybean meal, which agrees with previous literature; however, when no choice was given, canola meal could be included at up to 20% in the diet without impacting feed intake or growth performance.
Restrictions for inclusion levels of canola meal may remain in practice, but are being continually challenged and disproven by researchers. Improper feed quality evaluation information for digestible nutrients in canola meal has resulted in some problems with poorer pig performance in the past. Current data clearly show that diets containing canola meal, when properly formulated, will support high levels of efficient growth performance. The nutritional value of canola meal for swine is being understood increasingly well, and the major limitation for value and inclusion is the available energy content, especially when measured as net energy. Ultimately, the relationship between ingredient cost and nutrient content will determine the appropriate level of inclusion of canola meal in well-formulated diets.
Canola meal is a coproduct that contains a relatively large amount of fibre and a complex carbohydrate matrix with limited digestibility. Diet formulation based on NE allows for the proper inclusion of canola meal in swine diets so as to not impact performance.
|wdt_ID||Reference||Digestible energy (DE)||Metabolizable energy (ME)||Net energy (NE)|
|1||Berrocoso et al., 2015¹||3,084||2,922||1,928|
|2||Heo et al., 2014||2,901||2,692||1,850|
|3||Kim et al., 2018||2,925||3,180||2,099|
|4||Le et al., 2017||2,605||2,409||1,765|
|5||Liu et al., 2014||2,883||2,681||1,769|
|6||Liu et al., 2016¹||2,630||2,303||1,520|
|7||Maison et al., 2015¹||2,972||2,724||1,798|
1Calculated as ME x 0.66 (Kil et al, 2013)
Energy values published by the National Research Council (NRC, 2012) are given in Table 1 and are based on historical information, and more currently determined values have been added. While there appears to be a range in determined values, Kim et al (2018) recently reviewed the methods available for calculating NE and found that the results ranged from 1,960 to 2,233 kcal/kg as fed for canola meal.
It is therefore likely that the various methods in use add to the variability of published values. The energy value of expeller and cold pressed canola meal vary with the amount of ether extract in the meal. Woyengo et al. (2016) provided the equation below to allow the adjustment of net energy values: NE,kcal/kg = 0.700 × DE + 1.61 × EE + 0.48 × starch − 0.91 × CP − 0.87 × ADF, where NE = net energy, DE = digestible energy, EE= ether extract, CP = crude protein and ADF= acid detergent fiber.
Enzyme addition is an avenue to increase the available energy in diets that include canola meal. Multi-carbohydrase enzymes have been developed and used as a means to extract energy from the cell wall of non-starch polysaccharides. Sanjayan et al. (2014) included multi-carbohydrase enzymes in the diets of weaned pigs fed increasing inclusions of canola meal. Growth performance was not improved, but enzyme addition did increase apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of crude protein at 20% and 25% canola meal inclusion in the experimental diets. More recently, Velayudhan et al. (2018) noted numeric increases in ATTD for DM (3.6%) and gross energy (3.3%) when a multi-carbohydrase enzyme was included in canola meal diets for lactating sows. Sows lost less weight (5.3 vs. 3.3 kg) with no increase in intake with the enzyme supplemented diet.
The improvements in the above studies applied to the entire diet, and might be expected to vary depending upon how much canola meal was included in the diet. In vitro analyses are useful in that they permit the ingredient to be analyzed free of the remainder of the diet. In vitro dry matter digestion of both solvent extracted and expeller canola meal were improved by 8.7 and 9.2% respectively (Lee et al, 2018) with enzyme supplementation.
Swine diets are routinely formulated to levels of digestible amino acids rather than total amino acids. Recent feeding trials with canola meal in starter, grower and finisher pigs, in which the diets were balanced to the same levels of digestible lysine resulted in a growth rate equivalent to what is typically found with soybean meal as the primary protein source, even at very high inclusion levels of canola meal. This is reviewed further in the section below titled Canola Meal in Starter Diets.
Furthermore, experiments showed that amino acids in swine diets should be formulated on the basis of true, or standardized, amino acid digestibility (Nyachoti, et al., 1997). Standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids is now the preferred unit of measurement for swine (Stein et al., 2007). Using SID reliably corrects for basal endogenous losses related to the animal’s digestive process, as well as indigestibility related to the feed ingredient. Table 2a provides results from recent studies conducted to determine the standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids for solvent extracted canola meal and Table 2b shows results for expeller canola meal. While some of the references have imposed a variety of treatments, the values provided in Table 2a and 2b are for Brassica napus canola meal as would be available from Canadian processing plants.
|Amino Acid||Average, %||Standard Deviation|
|Aspartate + Asparagine||74.76||4.42|
|Glutamate + Glutamine||85.23||2.32|
1Adewole et al., 2017; Almeida et al, 2014; Berrocoso et al., 2015; Flavero et al., 2014; le et al., 2017; Maison and Stein, 2014; Mejicanos and Nyachoti, 2018; Sanjayan et al., 2014; Trindade Neto et al., 2012
2Average of 29 values
|Aspartate + Asparagine||73.50||5.82||Dispensable||2|
|Glutamate + Glutamine||81.73||5.99||Dispensable||2|
1Seneviratne et al., 2011; Grageola et al., 2013; Woyengo et al., 2016
2Average of 3 values
The amino acid profile of canola meal has been demonstrated to meet the amino acid needs of swine in a very efficient manner, with lysine being the first limiting amino acid. Because synthetic lysine is readily available, the addition of lysine to canola meal based diets results in a protein that will readily meet the needs of swine.
The convention used to evaluate amino acid profiles of ingredients is to determine the percentages of each essential amino acid relative to lysine. Interestingly, whether using the NRC (2012) or the European Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) model (van Milgen and Dourmad, 2015) to assess amino acid requirements, canola meal stacks up almost perfectly (Table 3), particularly if lysine, the first limiting amino acid, is augmented. This means that pigs can use canola amino acids efficiently to support tissue gain.
|wdt_ID||Amino Acid(s)||INRA Model||NRC NRC||Canola Meal||Canola + Lysine¹|
|8||Phenylalanine + Tyrosine||95||94||109||100|
1Lysine content of canola meal increased by 9% (lysine x 1.09)
The lipid portion of canola meal has been shown to be highly digestible by swine. Seneviratne et al. (2011) found that the lipid component of expeller canola meal was 93.6% digested. Because canola oil is largely composed of monounsaturated fatty acids and low in saturated fatty acids, the digestibility is high.
The mineral and vitamin profile of canola meal has been provided in detail in Chapter 2. In addition, there have been some revealing studies conducted specifically in swine with regards to calcium and phosphorus.
Canola meal is a rich source of phosphorus. Like many oilseed meals, a large portion of the phosphorus in canola meal is bound by phytic acid. It is common practice to add phytase enzyme to improve the digestibility of phosphorus and reduce the need for addition of this nutrient to the diet. Results from three studies (Akinmusire and Adeola, 2009; Flavelo et al., 2014; Adhekari et al., 2016) demonstrated that phosphorus digestibility can be increased in canola meal with the use of phytase from an average of 34 to 61%. Recently, Maison et al. (2015) analyzed five samples of canola meal and determined a greater digestibility value for phosphorus of 45%, a value that is higher than determined from older studies. Phytase supplementation still increased phosphorus digestibility to 64%, similar to the previous findings.
An added benefit of phytase supplementation is the improvement in calcium digestibility. González-Vega, et al. (2013) demonstrated that the addition of phytase enzyme increased the availability of calcium in canola meal from 47 to 70%. Similarly Adhikari et al. (2016) saw an improvement in calcium digestibility from 58% to 75%.
Glucosinolates are a main anti-nutritional factor found in canola meal for swine. In the initial years of feeding canola meal, the maximum level of glucosinolates that pigs could tolerate in the diet was defined by several researchers. Bell (1993) proposed a maximum level in pig diets of 2.0 to 2.5μmol of glucosinolates/g of diet. Two subsequent studies supported this recommendation (Schöne et al., 1997a, 1997b). In the first of these two studies, growing pigs weighing approximately 20–50 kg were fed a variety of diets containing the same levels of canola meal, but varying in total glucosinolate content from 0–19 μmol/g (Schöne et al., 1997a).
A concentration greater than 2.4μmol/g of glucosinolates in the diet had negative effects on feed intake, growth rate and thyroid function. In the second study, the maximum safe glucosinolate level was determined at 2.0μmol/g of diet (Schöne et al., 1997b). Given that Canadian canola meal contains, on average, 3.6μmol/g of glucosinolates, this would correspond to a maximum canola meal inclusion level of 55 to 69% in growing pig diets, a value greater than necessary for commercial formulation to meet amino acid requirements for a cereal-based diet. Recent studies have demonstrated that grower-finisher pigs will perform well on diets containing up to 30% canola meal (Smit et al., 2014a), and starter pigs perform well with diets containing 40% canola meal (Parr et al., 2015). The maximum tolerable concentration of glucosinolates in swine diets remains of interest, but current levels of glucosinolates are demonstrating no limitations for canola meal inclusion in grower-finisher diets.
Historical feeding guidelines suggested that performance would suffer when young pigs were provided with diets in which canola meal comprised greater than 5% of the total (Bourdon and Aumaître, 1990; Lee and Hill, 1983). However, new research has brought to light a very different story on canola meal inclusion in starter pigs. Landero et al.(2011) fed canola meal to weaned pigs with an average initial weight of 8.1 kg at inclusion levels of up to 200 g/kg without negatively impacting performance. This was demonstrated again in 2014 by Sanjayan et al., in a study where canola meal was included at 25% of the diet for weaned pigs (initial body weight of 7.26 kg), with highly acceptable performance results after the first week of the trial. To determine if the grain source included in the canola meal diet might make a difference, Mejicanos et al. (2017) provided diets to piglets (starting weight 6.7 kg on average) with 20% soybean meal compared to 20% canola meal and either wheat or corn as the primary grain.
Performance of pigs with canola meal diets equaled that of soybean meal diets. The main difference in these three studies, compared to the earlier work, is that researchers formulated diets based on NE and SID amino acids. Wang et al. (2017) fed newly weaned pigs with diets containing 20% canola meal. The 4 sources of canola meal tested were selected to show differences in quality characteristics as might occur with differing extremes in growing season. There were differences in apparent total tract digestibility between the soybean meal and canola meal diets, but no differences in digestibility between the 4 canola meal diets.
In another study, Parr et al, (2015) provided piglets with diets containing 10, 20, 30 or 40% canola meal, replacing soybean meal in the diets. There was a linear increase in gain to feed ratio as the canola meal inclusion increased. This important study shows that, with correct diet formulation, up to 40% canola meal can be included in starter diets for piglets. Table 4 provides comparisons between canola meal and soybean meal as determined in recent studies for solvent extracted meal. In general, there were few statistically significant treatment effects on average daily gain (ADG) and gain per unit of feed.
|Type||Canola meal||Control||P Value||Group|
|Inclusion %||20.00||20.00||Landero et al., 2011|
|ADG, g||493.00||488.00||0.59||Landero et al., 2011|
|Gain/feed||0.70||0.73||0.09||Landero et al., 2011|
|Inclusion %||20.00||20.00||Mejicanos et al., 2017|
|ADG, g||408.00||408.00||0.46||Mejicanos et al., 2017|
|Gain/feed||0.61||0.59||0.02||Mejicanos et al., 2017|
|Inclusion %||40.00||28.00||0.95||Parr et al., 2015|
|ADG, g||0.57||0.56||0.00||Parr et al., 2015|
|Gain/feed||0.68||0.59||Parr et al., 2015|
|Inclusion %||15.00||20.00||Sanjayan et al, 2015|
|ADG, g||453.00||452.00||0.98||Sanjayan et al, 2015|
|Gain/feed||0.60||0.60||0.71||Sanjayan et al, 2015|
|Inclusion %||15.00||15.00||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
|ADG, g||445.00||469.00||0.87||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
|Gain/feed||0.71||0.71||0.32||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
|Inclusion %||20.00||20.00||Wang et al., 2017|
|ADG, g||664.00||660.00||0.46||Wang et al., 2017|
|Gain/feed||0.66||0.65||0.05||Wang et al., 2017|
Table 5 shows results from three recent growing-finishing studies. There were no differences in performance in the two studies in which canola meal was compared to solvent extracted soybean meal. Recently Smit et al. (2018) compared solvent extracted canola meal to expeller soybean meal and saw greater rates of gain and gain to feed ratio with the expeller soybean meal diet. The authors noted that the grower diet, containing 25% canola meal was abruptly introduced to the pigs, and they suffered reduced feed intakes for a short period afterwards. Feed intake did rebound, however gains and feed to gain ratio remained significantly different. If pigs are to be changed to very high levels of canola meal, it might be necessary to make the changes in stages.
|Type||Canola meal||Control||P Value||Reference|
|Inclusion %||11.3||27.3||Kim et al, 2015|
|ADG, g||700||725||0.102||Kim et al, 2015|
|Gain/feed||0.46||0.44||0.196||Kim et al, 2015|
|Inclusion %||27.3/23.2||21.0/18.0||Little et al., 2015|
|ADG, g||940||930||0.700||Little et al., 2015|
|Gain/feed||0.36||0.37||0.020||Little et al., 2015|
|Inclusion %||25/20||15/12.5||Smit et al., 2018¹|
|ADG, g||988||1025||0.001||Smit et al., 2018¹|
|Gain/feed||0.361||0.373||0.001||Smit et al., 2018¹|
1The control diet was based on expeller soybean meal
Three feeding trials were conducted in three Mexican states — Nuevo León, Sonora and Michoacán (Hickling, 1996). The objective was to replicate the performance found in previously conducted Canadian feeding trials (Table 6), but using Mexican ingredients (two of the feed trials used sorghum as the grain base in the diet and one trial used corn) and Mexican conditions (environment, pig genetics and management). Also, the canola meal used in the trials was produced from Canadian canola seed by Mexican oilseed processors. The design was very similar to the Canadian trials.
Three dietary treatments were used: a control, a low canola meal diet and a high canola meal diet. The diets were balanced for minimum digestible amino acids, ideal protein and equal energy levels. The diets and results are shown in Table 7. As with the temperate climate results, equivalent growth, feed efficiency and carcass quality performance were observed in all three dietary treatments. Performance between locations varied due mainly to pig genetics and seasonal effects.
|Item||Grower SBM||Grower Low CM||Grower High CM||Finisher SBM||Finisher Low CM||Finisher High CM||Group||Order|
|Soybean meal||20||16||13||16||10||4||Ingredients, %||1|
|Canola meal||0||6||10||0||8||15||Ingredients, %||1|
|Canola oil||1||1||1||1||1||1||Ingredients, %||1|
|Average daily feed, kg||1.91||1.93||1.89||3.06||3.11||3.08||Performance||2|
|Average Daily gain, kg||0.76||0.76||0.77||0.84||0.83||0.82||Performance||2|
|Average daily feed, kg||~||~||~||2.43||2.5||2.47||Overall Performance||3|
|Average Daily gain, kg||~||~||~||0.8||0.8||0.8||Overall Performance||3|
|Dressing, %||~||~||~||78||78||78||Overall Performance||3|
|Backfat index||~||~||~||107||107||107||Overall Performance||3|
|Item||Grower SBM||Grower Low CM||Grower High CM||Finisher SBM||Finisher Low CM||Finisher High CM||Group||Order|
|Sorghumn or corn||72||68||67||76||72||70||Ingredients, %||1|
|Soybean meal||24||19||16||20||13||10||Ingredients, %||1|
|Canola meal||0||8||12||0||10||15||Ingredients, %||1|
|Average daily feed, kg||2.17||2.23||2.18||3.22||3.21||3.12||Performance||2|
|Average Daily gain, kg||0.78||0.77||0.76||0.85||0.83||0.82||Performance||2|
|Average daily feed, kg||~||~||~||2.72||2.74||2.67||Overall Performance||3|
|Average Daily gain, kg||~||~||~||0.82||0.82||0.8||Overall Performance||3|
|Meat Yield||~||~||~||48.6||48.8||49.3||Overall Performance||3|
|Backfat, cm||~||~||~||2.38||2.33||2.15||Overall Performance||3|
Early studies showed that canola meal is readily accepted in diets for sows and gilts. Flipot and Dufour (1977) found no difference in reproductive performance between sows fed diets with or without 10% added canola meal. Lee et al. (1985) found no significant difference in reproductive performance of gilts through one litter. Studies at the University of Alberta (Lewis et al., 1978) have shown no difference in reproductive performance of gilts through two reproductive cycles when fed diets containing up to 12% canola meal. Other studies indicated that levels of 20% canola meal did not affect performance of lactating sows (King et al., 2001).These results suggest that canola meal may represent the main supplemental protein source in gilt and sow diets.
More recently, Velayudhan and Nyachoti (2017) provided sows with diets containing 0, 15 or 30% canola meal from the time they were moved to the farrowing room until weaning at 21 days of lactation. The researchers determined that there were no effects of treatment on body weight change or change in backfat thickness, and that both piglet growth and milk composition were not influenced by the diets. There were likewise no differences in the weaning to estrus interval. The researchers concluded that up to 30% canola meal can be included in diets for sows with no loss in performance by sows or their litters. A follow up study (Velayudhan et al., 2018) confirmed that sow performance was optimal when up to 30% canola meal was included in the diet.
In another recent study (Liu et al., 2018) sows were allocated diets that replaced 0, 50 or 100% of soybean meal in the diet starting from day 7 of gestation through to weaning. The highest level of canola meal was 23.3% of the gestation diet, and 35.1% in the lactation diet. Piglet survival was significantly greater with thediets containing canola meal, but the weaning to estrus interval was slightly higher with the highest canola meal diet than with the control diet (Table 8).
|wdt_ID||Parameter||Soybean Meal||Soy/Canola||Canola Meal||P Value|
|1||Number of sows||40.00||37.00||37|
|3||Overall body weight loss||28.20||27.20||32.8||0.22|
|4||Pigs born alive/litter||12.50||11.90||12.2||0.76|
|5||Litter birth weight, kg||18.70||19.10||19.2||0.65|
|6||Piglet survival, %||80.20||87.00||87.0||<0.05|
|7||Weaning to estrus, days||5.42||5.22||5.80||<0.05|
1Liu et al., 2018
As would be expected, there is no loss in performance when pigs receive expeller canola meal. Seneviratne et al. (2011) provided weanling pigs with diets enriched with 15% canola meal in exchange for 15% soybean meal (Table 9). There were no differences in ADG or gain to feed ratio in that study. Landero et al., 2012 feed diets containing 5, 10, 15 and 20% canola meal, substituted for soybean meal to pigs, starting at 26 days of age and continuing until 54 days of age. There were no differences in performance for any of the treatments. Diets were formulated to the same NE and SID levels. Apparent total tract digestibility of protein and energy declined linearly as the inclusion level of the canola meal increased.
|Type||Canola meal||Control||P Value||Group|
|Inclusion %||20.00||20.00||Landero et al., 2012|
|ADG, g||455.00||454.00||0.933||Landero et al., 2012|
|Gain/feed||0.71||0.72||0.757||Landero et al., 2012|
|Inclusion %||15.00||15.00||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
|ADG, g||445.00||469.00||0.870||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
|Gain/feed||0.72||0.71||0.323||Seneviratne et al., 2011|
Canola oil is routinely fed to all types of pigs. Crude canola oil is often an economical energy source as well as a dust suppressant in the feed. Canola seed is also fed as a protein and energy source, although it is usually limited to 10% dietary inclusion, since higher levels will result in softer fat in the carcass (Kracht, et al., 1996). Canola seed should be ground before feeding. It can effectively be fed raw, although heat treatment may prove beneficial as long as excessive heat is not used during processing, which will reduce amino acid digestibility. A nutrient analysis should also be conducted on canola seed, as it may be seed that is not suitable for canola processors. Montoya and Leterme (2010) estimated an NE content of full-fat canola seeds of 3.56 Mcal/kg (DM basis), but noted a possible underestimation due to a demonstrated reduction in feed intake and performance at dietary inclusion levels above 10% for growing pigs.
|wdt_ID||Animal Diet Type||Inclusion Level||Reason|
|1||Piglet Starter diets||40%||High performance reported up to 40%|
|2||Hog Grower Finisher diets||25%||No practical data available beyond 25%|
|3||Sow gestation||25%||No practical data available beyond 25%|
|4||Sow lactation||35%||High performance reported up to 35%|
Adewole, D.I., Rogiewicz, A., Dyck, B., Nyachoti, C.M. and Slominski, B.A., Standardized ileal digestible amino acid contents of canola meal from
Canadian crushing plants for growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 95(6), pp.2670-2679.
Adhikari, P.A., Heo, J.M. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2016. High dose of phytase on apparent and standardized total tract digestibility of phosphorus and apparent total tract digestibility of calcium in canola meals from Brassica napus black and Brassica juncea yellow fed to growing pigs. Canadian journal of animal science, 96(2), pp.121-127.
Akinmusire, A.S. and Adeola, O., 2009. True digestibility of phosphorus in canola and soybean meals for growing pigs: Influence of microbial phytase. Journal of animal science, 87(3), pp.977-983
Almeida, F.N., Htoo, J.K., Thomson, J. and Stein, H.H., 2014. Effects of heat treatment on the apparent and standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids in canola meal fed to growing pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 187, pp.44-52.
Bell, J.M., 1993. Factors affecting the nutritional value of canola meal: a review. Canadian journal of animal science, 73(4), pp.689-697
Berrocoso, J.D., Rojas, O.J., Liu, Y., Shoulders, J., González-Vega, J.C. and Stein, H.H., 2015. Energy concentration and amino acid digestibility in highprotein canola meal, conventional canola meal, and soybean meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 93(5), pp.2208-2217.
Bourdon, D. and Aumaitre, A., 1990. Low-glucosinolate rapeseeds and rapeseed meals: effect of technological treatments on chemical composition, digestible energy content and feeding value for growing pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 30(3-4), pp.175-191
Favero, A., Ragland, D., Vieira, S.L., Owusu-Asiedu, A. and Adeola, O., Digestibility marker and ileal amino acid digestibility in phytasesupplemented soybean or canola meals for growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 92(12), pp.5583-5592.
Flipot, P. and Dufour, J.J., 1977. Reproductive performance of gilts fed rapeseed meal cv. Tower during gestation and lactation. Canadian journal of animal science,57(3), pp.567-571
González-Vega, J.C., Walk, C.L., Liu, Y. and Stein, H.H., 2013. Determination of endogenous intestinal losses of calcium and true total tract digestibility of calcium in canola meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 91(10), pp.4807-4816
Grageola, F., Landero, J.L., Beltranena, E., Cervantes, M., Araiza, A. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2013. Energy and amino acid digestibility of expeller-pressed canola meal and cold-pressed canola cake in ileal-cannulated finishing pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 186(3-4), pp.169-176.
Heo, J.M., Adewole, D. and Nyachoti, M., 2014. Determination of the net energy content of canola meal from B rassica napus yellow and B rassica juncea yellow fed to growing pigs using indirect calorimetry. Animal science journal, 85(7), pp.751-756.
Heyer, C.M.E., Wang, L.F., Beltranena, E. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2018. Growth Performance of Weaned Pigs Fed Raw or Extruded Canola Meal with Low to High Extrusion Intensity. Journal of animal science, 96(suppl_2), pp.176-176.
Hickling, D. 1996. Canola meal hog-feeding trials in Mexico. Canola Council of Canada. Winnipeg, MB, Canada Hickling, D. 1994. Canola meal hog-feeding trials in Western Canada. Canola Council of Canada. Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Kil, D.Y., Kim, B.G. and Stein, H.H., 2013. Feed energy evaluation for growing pigs. Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences, 26(9), p.1205.
Kim, K., Goel, A., Lee, S., Choi, Y. and Chae, B.J., 2015. Comparative ileal amino acid digestibility and growth performance in growing pigs fed different level of canola meal. Journal of animal science and technology, 57(1), p.21.
Kim, J.W., Koo, B. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2018. Net energy content of canola meal fed to growing pigs and effect of experimental methodology on energy values. Journal of animal science, 96(4), pp.1441-1452.
King, R.H., Eason, P.E., Kerton, D.K. and Dunshea, F.R., 2001. Evaluation of solvent-extracted canola meal for growing pigs and lactating sows. Australian journal of agricultural research, 52(10), pp.1033-1041.
Kracht, W., Jeroch, H., Matzke, W., Nürnberg, K., Ender, K. and Schumann, W., The influence of feeding rapeseed on growth and carcass fat quality of pigs. Lipid/Fett, 98(10), pp.343-351.
Landero, J.L., Beltranena, E., Cervantes, M., Morales, A. and Zijlstra, R.T., The effect of feeding solvent-extracted canola meal on growth performance and diet nutrient digestibility in weaned pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 170(1-2), pp.136-140.
Landero, J.L., Beltranena, E., Cervantes, M., Araiza, A.B. and Zijlstra, R.T., The effect of feeding expeller-pressed canola meal on growth performance and diet nutrient digestibility in weaned pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 171(2-4), pp.240-245.
Landero, J.L., Wang, L.F., Beltranena, E., Bench, C.J. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2018. Feed preference of weaned pigs fed diets containing soybean meal, Brassica napus canola meal, or Brassica juncea canola meal. Journal of animal science, 96(2), pp.600-611.
Le, M.H.A., Buchet, A.D.G., Beltranena, E., Gerrits, W.J.J. and Zijlstra, R.T., Digestibility and intestinal fermentability of canola meal from Brassica juncea and Brassica napus fed to ileal-cannulated grower pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 234, pp.43-53.
Lee, J.W., Patterson, R. and Woyengo, T.A., 2018. Porcine in vitro degradation and fermentation characteristics of canola co-products without or with fiber-degrading enzymes. Animal feed science and technology, 241, pp.133-140.
Lewis, A.J., Aherne, F.X. and Hardin, R.T., 1978. Reproductive performance of sows fed low glucosinolate (Tower) rapeseed meal. Canadian journal of animal science, 58(2), pp.203-208.
Little, K.L., Bohrer, B.M., Maison, T., Liu, Y., Stein, H.H. and Boler, D.D., 2015. Effects of feeding canola meal from high-protein or conventional varieties of canola seeds on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and cutability of pigs. Journal of animal science, 93(3), pp.1284-1297.
Liu, Y., Jaworski, N.W., Rojas, O.J. and Stein, H.H., 2016. Energy concentration and amino acid digestibility in high protein canola meal, conventional canola meal, and in soybean meal fed to growing pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 212, pp.52-62.
Liu, Y., Oliveira, M.S. and Stein, H.H., 2018. Canola meal produced from high-protein or conventional varieties of canola seeds may substitute soybean meal in diets for gestating and lactating sows without compromising sow or litter productivity. Urbana, 51, p.61801.
Liu, Y., Song, M., Maison, T. and Stein, H.H., 2014. Effects of protein concentration and heat treatment on concentration of digestible and metabolizable energy and on amino acid digestibility in four sources of canola meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 92(10), pp.4466-4477.
Maison, T., Liu, Y. and Stein, H.H., 2015. Apparent and standardized total tract digestibility by growing pigs of phosphorus in canola meal from North America and 00-rapeseed meal and 00-rapeseed expellers from Europe without and with microbial phytase. Journal of animal science, 93(7), pp.3494-3502.
Maison, T. and Stein, H.H., 2014. Digestibility by growing pigs of amino acids in canola meal from North America and 00-rapeseed meal and 00-rapeseed expellers from Europe. Journal of animal science, 92(8), pp.3502-3514.
Mejicanos, G.A. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2018. Effect of tail-end dehulling of canola meal on apparent and standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids when fed to growing pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 243, pp.102- 111.
Mejicanos, G.A., Regassa, A. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2017. Effect of high canola meal content on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and fecal bacteria in nursery pigs fed either corn or wheat based diets. Animal feed science and technology, 231, pp.59-66.
Mejicanos, G., Sanjayan, N., Kim, I.H. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2016. Recent advances in canola meal utilization in swine nutrition. Journal of animal science and technology, 58(1), pp.7-20.
Montoya, C.A. and Leterme, P., 2010. Validation of the net energy content of canola meal and full-fat canola seeds in growing pigs. Canadian journal of animal science, 90(2), pp.213-219.
NRC. 2012. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. 11th ed. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. Nyachoti, C.M., De Lange, C.F. and Schulze, H., 1997. Estimating
endogenous amino acid flows at the terminal ileum and true ileal amino acid digestibilities in feedstuffs for growing pigs using the homoarginine method. Journal of animal science, 75(12), pp.3206-3213.
Nyachoti, C.M., Zijlstra, R.T., De Lange, C.F.M. and Patience, J.F., 2004. Voluntary feed intake in growing-finishing pigs: A review of the main determining factors and potential approaches for accurate predictions. Canadian journal of animal science, 84(4), pp.549-566.
Parr, C.K., Liu, Y., Parsons, C.M. and Stein, H.H., 2015. Effects of high-protein or conventional canola meal on growth performance, organ weights, bone ash, and blood characteristics of weanling pigs. Journal of animal science, 93(5), pp.2165-2173.
Sanjayan, N., Heo, J.M. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2014. Nutrient digestibility and growth performance of pigs fed diets with different levels of canola meal from Brassica napus black and Brassica juncea yellow. Journal of animal science, 92(9), pp.3895-3905.
Schöne, F., Groppel, B., Hennig, A., Jahreis, G. and Lange, R., 1997a. Rapeseed meals, methimazole, thiocyanate and iodine affect growth and thyroid. Investigations into glucosinolate tolerance in the pig. Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 74(1), pp.69-80.
Schöne, F., Rudolph, B., Kirchheim, U. and Knapp, G., 1997. Counteracting the negative effects of rapeseed and rapeseed press cake in pig diets. British journal of nutrition, 78(6), pp.947-962.
Seneviratne, R.W., Beltranena, E., Newkirk, R.W., Goonewardene, L.A. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2011. Processing conditions affect nutrient digestibility of cold-pressed canola cake for grower pigs. Journal of animal science, 89(8), pp.2452-2461.
Smit, M.N., Landero, J.L., Young, M.G. and Beltranena, E., 2018. Effects of feeding canola meal or soy expeller at two dietary net energy levels on growth performance, dressing and carcass characteristics of barrows and gilts. Animal feed science and technology, 235, pp.166-176.
Smit, M.N., Seneviratne, R.W., Young, M.G., Lanz, G., Zijlstra, R.T. and Beltranena, E., 2014a. Feeding Brassica juncea or Brassica napus canola meal at increasing dietary inclusions to growing-finishing gilts and barrows. Animal feed science and technology, 198, pp.176-185.
Smit, M.N., Seneviratne, R.W., Young, M.G., Lanz, G., Zijlstra, R.T. and Beltranena, E., 2014b. Feeding increasing inclusions of canola meal with distillers dried grains and solubles to growing-finishing barrows and gilts. Animal feed science and technology, 189, pp.107-116.
Stein, H.H., Seve, B., Fuller, M.F., Moughan, P.J. and De Lange, C.F.M., 2007. Invited review: Amino acid bioavailability and digestibility in pig feed ingredients: Terminology and application. Journal of animal science, 85(1), pp.172-180.
Trindade Neto, M.A.D., Opepaju, F.O., Slominski, B.A. and Nyachoti, C.M., Ileal amino acid digestibility in canola meals from yellow-and blackseeded Brassica napus and Brassica juncea fed to growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 90(10), pp.3477-3484.
Van Milgen, J. and Dourmad, J.Y., 2015. Concept and application of ideal protein for pigs. Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 6(1), p.1. Velayudhan, D.E. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2017. Effect of increasing dietary canola meal inclusion on lactation performance, milk composition, and nutrient digestibility of lactating sows . Journal of animal science, 95(7), pp.3129-3135.
Velayudhan, D.E. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2016. Effect of high dietary canola meal inclusion in lactating sows on nutrient digestibility and sow and piglet performance. Journal of animal science, 94(Suppl. 5), pp.228-229.
Velayudhan, D.E., Hossain, M.M., Regassa, A. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2018. Effect of canola meal inclusion as a major protein source in gestation and lactation sow diets with or without enzymes on reproductive performance, milk composition, fecal bacterial profile and nutrient digestibility Animal feed science and technology 241, pp.141-150.
Wang, L.F., Beltranena, E. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2017. Diet nutrient digestibility and growth performance of weaned pigs fed Brassica napus canola meal
varying in nutritive quality. Animal feed science and technology, 223, pp.90- 98.
Woyengo, T.A., Kiarie, E. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2010. Energy and amino acid utilization in expeller-extracted canola meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of animal science, 88(4), pp.1433-1441.
Woyengo, T.A., Sánchez, J.E., Yáñez, J., Beltranena, E., Cervantes, M., Morales, A. and Zijlstra, R.T., 2016. Nutrient digestibility of canola coproducts for grower pigs. Animal feed science and technology, 222, pp.7-16.