Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 50, Issue 1, pp 155–160 | Cite as

Feedlot of lambs fed biodiesel co-products: performance, commercial cuts and economic evaluation

  • Eliéder Prates RomanziniEmail author
  • Américo Garcia da Silva Sobrinho
  • Roberta de Lima Valença
  • Thiago Henrique Borghi
  • Nomaiací de Andrade
  • Priscila Arrigucci Bernardes
Regular Articles


The aim of this study was to evaluate the animal performance, commercial cuts, and their yields within the production system, and economics of sheep production, of lambs finished in feedlots and fed with or without biodiesel co-products. A total of 40 lambs were divided into four biodiesel co-product treatment groups: a no-treatment control; peanut meal; crude glycerin; and peanut meal + crude glycerin. Animal performance did not differ (P > 0.05) among the treatment groups, where the average daily gain was close to 0.26 kg/day. Likewise, the quantitative carcass characteristics did not differ (P > 0.05) and the biological mean yield was 54.92%. Similarly, the commercial cuts and their yields did not differ (P ≥ 0.09) among the treatments. These results took into consideration the standard, age, and slaughter body weight of the animals. The economic evaluation determined that peanut meal was the best co-product for use in finishing lambs in a feedlot. Hence, all the biodiesel co-products evaluated can be used at feedlots to finish lambs without changing the variables measured.


Crude glycerin Partial budgets Peanut meal 


Funding information

The authors thank São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP; grant #2013/23495-5) for providing financial support. E.P. Romanzini received a scholarship from the National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq; grant #131978/2014-4). R.L. Valença received a scholarship from the Brazilian Federal Coordination of Higher Education (CAPES). T.H. Borghi and P.A. Bernardes received a scholarship from FAPESP (grants #2012/25250-7 and #2013/09364-5, respectively). N. Andrade received a scholarship from CNPq (grant #142283/2014-2).

Compliance with ethical standards

Statement of animal rights

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. The protocol used in this experiment was in accordance with the National Council for Animal Experiments Control (CONCEA) guidelines and was approved by the Ethics Committee on Animal Use (CEUA) of FCAV-Unesp/Jaboticabal Campus (Protocol #022014/13).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.


  1. Abughazaleh, A.A., Abo El-Nor, S. and Ibrahim, S.A., 2011. The effect of replacing corn with glycerol on ruminal bacteria in continuous culture fermenters. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 95, 313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, M.S., 2000. Effects of diet on short-term regulation of feed intake by lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 83, 1598–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. AOAC, 1995. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 16th edition, (Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, TX).Google Scholar
  4. Barros, M.C.C., Marques, J.A., Silva, F.F., Silva, R. R., Guimarães, G.S., Silva, L.L. and Araújo, F.L., 2015. Glicerina bruta na dieta de ovinos confinados: consumo, digestibilidade, desempenho, medidas morfométricas da carcaça e características da carne. Semina Ciências Agrárias, 36, 453–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castro, D.P.V., Yamamoto, S.M., Araújo, G.G.L., Pinheiro, R.S.B., Queiroz, M.A.A., Albuquerque, I.R.R. and Moura, J.H.A., 2017. Influence of drinking water salinity on carcass characteristics and meat quality of Santa Inês lambs. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 49, 1095–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ezequiel, J.M.B., Sancanari, J.B.D., Machado Neto, O.R., da Silva, Z.F., Almeida, M.T.C., Silva, D.A.V., van Cleef, F.O.S. and van Cleef, E.H.C.B. 2015. Effects of high concentrations of dietary crude glycerin on dairy cow productivity and milk quality. Journal of Dairy Science, 98, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goering, H.K. and Van Soest, P.J., 1970. Forage Fiber Analyses, (USDA, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  8. Hoffmann, R., Engler, J.J.C., Serrano, O., Thame, A.C.M. and Neves, E.M., 1992. Administração da Empresa Agrícola, (Pioneira, São Paulo).Google Scholar
  9. Instituto FNP, 2014. Anualpec 2014: Anuário da Pecuária Brasileira, (Instituto FNP, São Paulo).Google Scholar
  10. Merlim, F.A., Silva Sobrinho, A.G., Borghi, T.H., Zeola, N.M.B.L., Cirne, L.G.A., Romanzini, E.P., Andrade, N. and Almeida, F.A., 2015. Ile de France lambs fed diets containing glycerin: characteristics of carcass and commercial cuts. Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Biotechnology, 3, 79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Myers, S.S., Smith, M.R., Guth, S., Golden, C.D., Vaitla, B., Mueller, N.D., Dangour, A.D. and Huybers, P., 2017. Climate change and global food systems: potential impacts on food security and undernutrition. Annual Reviews Public Health, 38, 259–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. NRC (National Research Council) 2006. Nutrients Requirements of Sheep, (National Academy Press, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  13. Oliveira, J.S., Antoniassi, R., Freitas, S.C. and Muller, M.D., 2013. Composição química da glicerina produzida por usinas de biodiesel no Brasil e potencial de uso na alimentação animal. Ciência Rural, 43, 509–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ružić-Muslić, D., Petrović, M.P., Petrović, M.M., Bijelić, Z., Caro-Petrović, V., Maksimović, N. and Mandić, V., 2014. Protein source in diets for ruminant nutrition. Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry, 30, 175–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Silva Sobrinho, A.G., Kadim, I.T. and Purchas, R.W., 2003. Effect of genotypes and age on carcass and meat quality characteristics of ram lambs. Agriculture Marine Science, 8, 73–78.Google Scholar
  16. Sniffen, C.J., O’Connor, J.D., Van Soest, P.J., Fox, D.G. and Russell, J.B., 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. II. Carbohydrate and protein availability. Journal of Animal Science, 70, 3562–3577.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. UNICETEX. Informativo semanal do indicador de preço do cordeiro paulista–Setembro/2015. Centro de Inovação, Empreendedorismo e Extensão Universitária, 2015. Accessed 4 Oct 2015
  18. Van Soest, P.J., 1994. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eliéder Prates Romanzini
    • 1
    Email author
  • Américo Garcia da Silva Sobrinho
    • 1
  • Roberta de Lima Valença
    • 1
  • Thiago Henrique Borghi
    • 1
  • Nomaiací de Andrade
    • 1
  • Priscila Arrigucci Bernardes
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Animal Science, School of Agricultural and Veterinarian SciencesSão Paulo State University (Unesp)JaboticabalBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Exact Science, School of Agricultural and Veterinarian SciencesSão Paulo State University (Unesp)JaboticabalBrazil

Personalised recommendations