DIRECTORY   

Directory  of Tables  III

Directory  of Figures  IV

Directory  of Abbreviations  V

1.  Introduction  1

2.  Pig feeding and the importance of protein for the result and.  

profit  in husbandry  2

3.  Soybeans - Main supplier of protein in feed rations  5

3.1  Characterisation  5

3.2  Development on the feeding stuff market  7

4.  Alternative protein plants  12

4.1  Coarse colza meal  12

4.1.1  Characterisation  12

4.1.2  Development on the feeding stuff market  13

4.2  Grain legumes: Field beans  15

4.2.1  Characterisation  15

4.2.2  Development on the feeding stuff market  16

4.3  Grain legumes: Lupines  18

4.3.1  Characterisation  18

4.3.2  Development on the feeding stuff market  20

5.  Analysis  22

5.1  Feed value  22

I

5.1.1  Coarse colza meal  23

5.1.2  Field beans  24

5.1.3  Lupines.  25

5.2  Application in feed mixes.  26

5.2.1  Coarse colza meal  27

5.2.2  Field beans  28

5.2.3  Lupines.  29

5.3  Comparison of costs  29

5.3.1  Coarse colza meal  31

5.3.2  Field beans  33

5.3.3  Lupines.  34

5.4  Conclusion  35

6.  Summary  37

References   39

Addition   47

Declaration   48

II

Directory  of Tables  

Table 1:  Feed mixes with soy grist for pig fattening  31

Table 2:  Feed mixes with coarse colza meal for pig fattening  32

Table 3:  Feed mixes with field beans for pig fattening  33

Table 4:  Feed mixes with lupines for pig fattening  34

III

Directory  of Figures  

Figure  1: Cost distribution in pig fattening  

Figure  2: Amount of essential amino acids in 1kilogramme of feeding stuff  

Figure  3: Worldwide soy cultivation area  

Figure  4: Development of soy grist prices at CBOT  

Figure  5: Development of the usage of coarse colza meal in Germany  

Figure  6: Development of the field bean production in Germany  

Figure  7: Lupine cultivation area in Germany  

Figure  8: Comparison of amino acids in 1kilogramme of feeding stuff  

Figure  9: Development of prices for soybeans at CBOT  

IV

Directory of Abbreviations

BSE Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy CBOT Chicago Board of Trade EWG European Economic Community FIBL Research Institute for Biological Cultivation GMO Genetically Modified Organism HP High Protein MATIF International future market of France MEs Metabolic energy content, relating to pig feeding MON 88017 ID-number of a famous genetically modified corn sort PLANAK Board of Agrarian Structure and Coast Protection UFOP Union to promote Oil- and Protein Plants USA United States of America VAT Value-added tax 00-Poor in glucosinolates and erucic acid

V

1. Introduction

The need for qualitative protein sources has steadily increased, beginning from the second half of the past century. Not only husbandry business and the food industry, but also biofuel-production depends more and more on certain protein plants, which are often very important suppliers of essential amino acids. In contrast to the increasing industrialisation and the development of the world population, protein plants turn out to be a vital base. Especially rising incomes in developing countries cause a higher demand for protein, as the economic growth will change eating habits. At this stage, worsened by the financial crisis, embargoes and a drop of protein plant production, there is a lack of high-quality protein. This affects highly the European region, which depends on imports from abroad. The current market situation, which is strained by high prices, as well as bans on soybean imports, puts pressure on oil mills and husbandry business. For that reason, alternative protein plants are claimed to substitute the most significant protein supplier: soy.

This term paper deals with the question New Developments in the Plant Protein Market for pig feeding and has the aim to clarify the situation on the protein market as soon as the development of protein crop cultivation. An important ingredient, beside the description of current trends in protein crop cultivation and developments on the market at the beginning of this work, is an analysis of usage of certain alternative protein crops in pig feeding, concerning quality of protein and costs for feeding. The results of this analysis, accompanied by the current development of alternative protein plants on the (inter-) national market, will be enhanced in an all embracing conclusion at the end, which allows precise and practical forecasts for the near future.

1

2. Pig feeding and the importance of protein for the result and

profit in husbandry

With a view to the rapidly rising world population, which has increased from six billion to over eight billion in just 30 years, it can be expected that the amount of pork will rise in a similar way to ensure the demand of edibles. The mass of pork has tripled in the last 30 years, so that the output of worldwide meat processing is now over 100 million tons. Especially China is going to be an important producer, while the accession rate in the expansion of pork production in Europe and the USA is not so heavy. Today, China produces almost 50% of the world’s pork. This shows that the centre of pig production has already switched to Asia. In considering of the development of feeding stuff, primarily protein will play an important role on the world market (RHED- ER 2010 PAGE 124).

Companion animals like pigs depend on essential amino acids from plants. On the one hand these amino acids are vitally important for enzyme-, antibody-, and hormone production, on the other hand they influence the growth of meat and consequently the live weight gain, the pork quality and the continuance of pig fattening. The meat growing mainly depends on the feed intake of proteins. As cereal crops like barley or wheat are not very good sources of proteins, concerning quality and amount of protein, pig keepers are forced to

use protein plants like soybeans to fulfill the biological valence 1 . For feed mixes in pig feeding it is important to maintain a certain sequence of lysine 2 , methionine/cysteine 3 , threonine 4 and tryptophan 5 to improve the abovementioned performance of the animals and to prevent fatty degeneration of future carcass. This can be seen as an ideal composition of protein.

¹ Criterion for the quality of protein in feeding

² Affects meat-growing

³ Affect milk-production

⁴ Affects mucus-production

⁵ Affects feed intake

2

many crops show different praecaecal ⁶ digestibility However, many crops show different praecaecal of the certain

amino acids. This is important to know, to adapt the amount of components amino acids. This is important to know, to adapt the amount of components amino acids. This is important to know, to adapt the amount of components in feed rations. An ideal composition of the above n ideal composition of the above-mentioned single amino mentioned single amino acids is aspired, which is acids is aspired, which is in general for fattening pigs at 1:0.6:0.6:0.2 and general for fattening pigs at 1:0.6:0.6:0.2 and should be adjusted to the energy content of the feed ( should be adjusted to the energy content of the feed (CLAUSEN LAUSEN 1959 ^{CITED IN} JAHN 2009). With regard to figure 1, which is With regard to figure 1, which is derived from the average costs in fattening he average costs in fattening from the business year 2008/2009 the business year 2008/2009 by ASSE AND ZACHARIAS 2009 2009, 37% of the

total direct costs in the fattening, beside costs for piglets, vet, water/energy, total direct costs in the fattening, beside costs for piglets, vet, water/energy, total direct costs in the fattening, beside costs for piglets, vet, water/energy, feeding (30-40kg) and other, are costs for feeding from a 40kg) and other, are costs for feeding from a live-weight weight of 40 to 115kg. Costs for feeding osts for feeding are on average at 46.50 Euro per fattening pig per fattening pig in this period, provided that costs for growth , provided that costs for growth contribute 0.62 Euro per kilogramme (KNEES AND M MUELLER 2009 PAGE 41 TO 42).

Figure1: Cost distribution in pig fattening Figure1: Cost distribution in pig fattening

⁶ Forward the blind gut

3

A big share of these costs is caused by the dedication of soybeans in rations, which cover more than 80% of the protein demand. Compared with wheat or barley, the price of soy is tripled. Additional, alternative suppliers of protein are in demand all over the world to reduce the high share of soy in feed mixes (17-22%) and to adapt the feeding costs to the current revenues in pig fattening. This is very important to remain competitive on the international pork market (STALLJOHANN 2010).

This short introduction in pig feeding shows the importance of protein and makes clear, that it has a great effect in biological performance and also in success in pig fattening. The current situation on the protein market as well as the steadily rising soy prices of the last 30 years give a real impression about the importance of proteins in the agricultural sector.

4

3. Soybeans - Main supplier of protein in feed rations

3.1 Characterisation

The soybean originally comes from Asia, or more precisely from China, where it has been cultivated for over 5000 years. In botanical terms, the soy-

bean is an annual Legume (Fabaceae) 7 . With the help of plant breeding, it is now an important protein crop which is scientifically known as: Glycine Max. Based on the outer appearance, the soybean is a bushy plant with unbranched stalks, which usually has a size of one metre. It produces yellow or brown haired husks, which are two to five centimetres long and contain five round seeds. Another important feature is the fact, that the beans have fully trained taproots with a length of more than 1.50 metres. The secondary roots offer enough space for a symbiotic relationship with the bacterium Rhizobium 8 , enabling a fixation of a lot of atmospheric nitrogen for protein bonds. Because of that fact, Chinese farmers primarily used soybeans to add nitrogen into the soil and to improve the crop rotation. As soybeans depend on warm, mild climate with optimum growing conditions of 20°C to 30°C, they are predominantly cultivated on the American and Asian continent. According to the chemical composition of the seeds, which depends on sorts, the beans contain over 40% protein, 35% carbohydrates,

20% fat, mainly linolenic acid 9 , and 5% ash. Besides these main nutrients, the beans incorporate a high level of important essential amino acids like lysine, methionine/cysteine, threonine and trypthophan, as well as necessary vitamins and a lot of metabolic energy, which are useful and important in human and animal diet (INFORMATION BIOWISSENSCHAFTEN 2008A). Generally, the beans will be crushed for the extraction of the oil. On the one hand it boosts the character of a protein-supplier, on the other hand the soybean oil is an important additive in pig feeding, which supplies a lot of metabolic energy and which will also be used for biofuel-production. After crushing, the so called soy grist is usually heat-treated with hot steam (700-800°C) in certain toasting establishments.

⁷ Belongs to the pea family

⁸ Renowned for the fixation of atmospheric nitrogen

⁹ Has a dietetic effect

5

This method has been found successful to reduce herbal substances like

antinutritive ingredients 10 and to remove the extractor. Furthermore, it improves the biological valence, because the availability of several amino acids is higher by 30% after toasting.

The protein and energy content of soy grist range from 44-48% protein and 14-16 MJMEs on the current market. Important to know is the fact, that because of the high shares of lysine, methionine/cysteine, threonine and tryptophan, as they are presented in figure 2 in comparison to those of wheat, soy grist is helpful to appreciate the usual feed mixes with grain only, which show big deficits in the accommodation of essential amino acids (GRANZ ^{ET AL.} 2005 PAGE 250 TO 253).

Figure 2: Amount of essential amino acids in 1kilogramme of feeding stuff

¹⁰ Often influence the health as well as enzyme functions in a negative way

6

3.2 Development on the feeding stuff market

With the increasing intensity in agriculture, mainly in husbandry, refiners like pig keepers depend on cheap and high-quality animal feed, with constant nutritional value. While at the beginning of the 20 ^th century mainly the USA and China used soybeans as ingredient in feed rations for the expanding husbandry, the interest in this protein plant began enormously to grow from the second half of the 20 ^th century. So, China and the USA subsidised their farmers to cultivate soybeans for their own markets. But after establishing abroad, the necessity of adequate protein suppliers achieved the European husbandry, too. With the agreement on tariffs between the EWG and the USA as well as the introduction of an intervention price for cereals, Europe changed from importer of grain to importer of protein crops. At this time, soy displaced cereals from feed rations, because of their higher nutritional value as well as the lower prices for soybeans. Depending on different harvesting times for soybeans in the northern and southern hemisphere, the price for soy usually varies under seasonal fluctuations. This means, that the harvest of the southern hemisphere affects the protein market in April, because harvest time in Brazil or Argentina is in spring and normally a great amount of soy reaches the world market. The formation of prices is calculated at the commodity forward exchange in Chicago, CBOT. With a share of over 50% on the oil crop cultivation, the soybean is the most important product on the Exchange in Chicago. This makes clear that the real pricing is not based on supply and demand but rather on pure play (LYSSENKOV 2005 PAGE TWO AND THE FOLLOWING).

Great soybean importers like China or the EU-27 depend on exports from Brazil and Argentina. Nowadays the USA, Brazil and Argentina produce more than 80% of the whole soy amount, numerical 169 million tons (2008/2009). 90% of all soybean exports and 60% of the world soy grist exports are caused by the three American nations (AGRA EUROPE 2010A ^{EXCHANGE AND ARGUMENT PAGE TWO).} The EU-27 has to import 25 million tons of soy grist and 15 million tons of soybeans, which will be converted to soy oil and soy grist (INFORMATION LIFE SCIENCE 2008B). Provided that the share of soy in feed mixes in Europe range from 17-22%,

7

almost 25% of the world’s soybeans are converted in the EU-27 (AGRA-EUROPE 2010A EXCHANGE AND ARGUMENT PAGE TWO).

The following figure 3 clarifies this issue and gives an overview on the distribution of the world’s main soy producer. The whole production volume of soy amounted to 210 million tons in 2009. This means that the volume of soy has doubled in the last 20 years. More than 60% of these soybeans are used for feeding, while the rest is required for human diet and biofuel-production. So, it is obvious that the world’s demand for soy is far-ranging (TOEPFER INTERNA- ^TIONAL 2010 PAGEELEVEN).

Europe only produces almost 0.50% of the whole amount of soybeans, mainly in warm countries like Italy and France and just 35% of all necessary protein plants for feeding.

Figure 3: Worldwide soy cultivation area

8

Since the beginning of the 21 ^th century, the worldwide cultivation area has reached over 90 million hectares (LYSSENKOV 2005 PAGE TWO AND THE FOL-LOWING). Mainly the biggest producers like the USA, Brazil and Argentina have expanded their soy cultivation by over 20%. Crucial for that development was the BSE- disease in Europe in 2000. The consequence of this awesome disease in cattle farming was an act from the 1 ^st January 2001, which banned the application of carcass meal in husbandry. Until then, carcass meal was a cheap animal feed, which contains more than 50% protein and a lot of micronutrients (INFORMATION BIOWISSENSCHAFTEN 2000). Over the last years, the accommodation with soybeans and soy grist got worse. The high demand of China increased steadily and also the need in the USA for the expansion of the pork market went up. From 2003, accompanied by a below average harvest, the prices for soy grist rose by nearly 60%, as it is described in figure 4, which shows the evolution of wholesale prices at the CBOT in the last ten years. Clearly to distinguish are the peaks of prices in 2001 and 2003, which demonstrate the mentioned issues.

Figure 4: Development of soy grist prices at CBOT

9

While the production volume of over 200 million tons of soybeans stayed the same, the biggest country and pork producer of the world China doubled its own demand of soy to over 19 million tons in 2003 and 2004. This caused a drastically worldwide lack of soy stocks (LINKER 2003). With the worldwide austerity of cereal crops in 2007 (the prices for wheat and barley had doubled) as well as Chinese soy imports of 34 million tons, prices for soy grist reached the level of 1973. Because of the strong European currency, prices in Europe did not pass the mark of 300 Euro (LINKER 2007). The unrestrained growth in biofuel-production on the American continent, accompanied by a high share of genetically modified sorts in soybean im-ports, aggravates the lack of soy not only worldwide but also in the European Union (AGRA EUROPE 2009A EUROPE-NEWS ^{PAGE FOUR TO FIVE).} The development of the last 15 years shows, that the worldwide share of GMO-soybeans has decupled and is now at 75%. Since 2008, the European Union controls more and more the imports concerning contaminations by ge-

netic modified organism and has introduced a so called zero-tolerance 11 . Through an act from the European parliament on 22 ^th September 2003, which demands a registration for all products in food or feeding stuff, which contain more than 0.90% GMO material, a lot of soy imports were not able to be marketed on the European market. With the ban on cultivation of GMO maize MON88017 in 2009, the ban on certain soybean imports were tightened, too (TOP AGRAR 2009). For a short time, the European Union kept an artificial austerity on the own market, which influenced the price situation in a negative way. It caused retail-prices of 35 Euro per quintal in the first half of the business year 2009/2010. Based on the fact that a lot of sorts from North America were allowed to market at the beginning of 2010, accompanied by the prospects of the Chicago board of trade of high crop outputs in soy cultivation on the southern American continent in spring, the price for soy stays at 257 US-Dollar per ton with tendency to 250 Dollar after the harvest in the following business year. This means 50 Euro per ton less than in July 2009. Mainly Brazil will show high outputs in soy production,

¹¹ Bans the usage of GMO-feeding stuff without a permission

10

above all it has expanded the cultivation area by 6% (AGRA-EUROPE 2009B, EXCHANGE AND ARGUMENT PAGE 3).

According to the US-Department of Agriculture, the offer of soybeans in this business year will increase to 250 million tons worldwide (AGRA-EUROPE 2010B EXCHANGE AND ARGUMENT PAGE ONE). The current market price for soy grist with 44% of crude protein ranges from 267 to 342 Euro per ton (OVID 2010). Nevertheless, the inventories of soy grist are lean. Indeed the expansion of the soy cultivation will be advanced to 300 million tons in 2020, especially in southern America like Brazil and Argentina, which have doubled their cultivation area in the last 20 years, while the share of USA soy has shrunken to under 40% since the middle of the 90s. More than 100 million hectares in Brazil will be available in the future. Of course, this means a great destruction of rainforest with ecological outcomes, but the soy exports will still earn foreign currency (DIEMER 2005 PAGE 13 TO 15; KEMMERLING 2010).

Due to the world’s increasing pork production, which will rise by 20% in the next ten years, mainly China will boost their demand for protein plants. From 1980 to 2005 the Asian nation has quadrupled its pork consumption to 60kg per consumer. For that reason, it can be expected that the biggest country in the world will produce more than 75% of the world’s pork in 2016, while the EU will boost their production by just 600.000 tons (WINDHORST 2008 PAGE 32 TO 33).

On this account it is necessary to do researches with alternative protein plants, which can be cultivated in our maritime climate to replace soy grist in feed rations, provided that the performance of the animals as well as the profit in pig fattening can be boosted.

11

4. Alternative protein plants

4.1 Coarse colza meal

4.1.1 Characterisation

Rapeseed, botanical name Brassica Napus, is a yellow flowering oleiferous fruit, which belongs to the family of the cruciferous plant (Brassicaceae) ¹² . It originally comes from Asia, where it was cultivated for over 4000 years be-fore Christ. The oil crop is characterised by a branched growth, with a height of 1.50 metres with black- brown coloured pods in harvesting times. Each pod, which has a length up to ten centimetres, contains 20 black, round seeds. Due to new developments in plant breeding, it is possible to harvest more than five tons of rapeseed per hectare.

Another important attribute is the heavy distinct taproot, which develops well on heavy, profound, and nutrient rich soils. The root causes an optimal soil condition with a lot of nitrogen, so that rapeseed is an attractive preceding crop in crop rotation (ALPMANN ET AL 2006 PAGE 94 TO 99). Besides the usage for food or feeding stuff, rapeseed is an important supplier for oil, which is mainly used for fuel and lubricant production. After crushing or extrusion of the seed in oil mills with an adjacent extraction of the important oil, the rest of the rapeseed is called coarse colza meal. Circa 0.6 tons from each ton of processed rapeseed is coarse colza meal, which can be used as protein feeding stuff to substitute soy grist in feed rations (ALPMANN ET AL 2006 PAGE 58). While rapeseed contains more than 40% fat, mainly polyene acid 13 , the coarse colza meal features just 3% fat, but a high protein content of 35%. Because of the oil extraction, the share of metabolic energy has mottled to 9.90 MJMEs. This is the reason why coarse colza meal gains a protein character. Furthermore, it contains more than 13% indigestible crude fibre, which is caused by a high share of peals at the processing.

¹² Plants which have crossed petals

¹³ Reduces the endurance of pork

12

By virtue of the success in plant breeding it is possible to reduce the share of

glucosinolates ¹⁴ , which usually reduces the hormone production and disorders the bone metabolism. Also the share of the unsaturated fatty acid erucic acid 15 could be reduced by the development of the 00-rapeseed (GRANZ ^{ET AL.} 2005 PAGE 250 TO 252).

In view of the next 15 years, it can be expected researchers will find a way to improve the content of essential amino acids, which would make the feeding stuff much more interesting in husbandry (HART AND KÜHL 2010 PAGE 171).

4.1.2 Development on the feeding stuff market

With little success in reducing the share of glucosinolates of rapeseed by 50 to 90% at the beginning of the 1970s, the cultivation area of the oil crop began to expand and also the application in feed rations grew. Feeding stuff producers usually adopted 6-8% of coarse colza meal in mash. In the space of 20 years, the consumption has decupled till 1985 (ANDREE ET AL 1997 ^PAGE 14).

Since 1990, rapeseed is one of the most important oil-seed, which has the secondary greatest share on the world market. Especially the cultivation in Europe has increased considerably in the last 25 years. While in the middle of the 80s the production volume was at 5.50 million tons, the current volume amounts to 21 million tons. Through the introduction of the land set-aside reform 16 at the beginning of the 90s, the cultivation area in the EU-27 is now at 6.40 million hectares. The biggest producer in the Union is Germany, which produces on an area of almost 1.50 million hectares over six million tons of rapeseed (AGRA-EUROPE 2009C, EXCHANGE AND ARGUMENT PAGE FOUR).

¹⁴ Influence the feed intake in a negative way and cause a deficit of iodine in the thyroid

gland

¹⁵ Causes fatty disease of the heart

¹⁶ Should cease the overproduction of food

13

Accompanied by the rising production volume of rapeseed, the volume of the product coarse colza meal from the processing increases, too. Seeing figure 5, the application in husbandry in Germany has almost tripled in the last 25 years. Besides the usual application in mash, the direct usage in feed mixes goes up. The BSE-crisis and the ban on carcass meal in 2001, have boosted the demand of alternative protein components (HART AND KÜHL 2010 PAGE 165). In 2007, 9.80 million tons of coarse colza meal were consumed for husbandry in the EU-27. This is already one quarter of the current European soy consumption (FISCHER 2008).

Figure 5: Development of the usage of coarse colza meal in Germany

With a prognosticated expansion of the cultivation area of rapeseed in Germany by 15% plus usual yields in experience of four tons per hectare in 2013, the volume of coarse colza meal will increase, too (UFOP 2010 PAGE ONE TO TWO).

14

Currently, the wholesale-price per ton for coarse colza meal ranges from 130 to 167 Euro (OVID 2010). However, if the stocks of soy will be backfilled by the new harvest, experts await a cutback of coarse colza meal on wholesale to 130 Euro in autumn (FUNK 2010 PAGE 142 TO 143). Because of the fact, that rapeseed is the second important oil plant behind soy with a worldwide share of 14% on the oil crop-production, it will be in demand in the future, especially for biofuel-production. Today, the EU-27 has to import two million tons of rapeseed to cover the demand of over 23 million tons. Due to the high mobility and demand of oil plants for vegetable oil in diet and biofuelproduction, prices will be stable on a high level. So, just like the prices for rapeseed, which have reached the level of 300 Euro at the MATIF at the end of February, because of to the introduction of punitive tariff for bioethanol from the USA, prices for coarse colza meal will long-dated go up, too (HARES 2010 PAGE 121 TO 123).

4.2 Grain legumes: Field beans

4.2.1 Characterisation

Just like the soybean, field beans (Vicia Faba) are annual legumes. Wild varieties of this crop were already cultivated in the Middle East in the Mesolithic 17 . From the outer appearance the field bean can be compared with the soybean, too. It is also a bushy plant with unbranched stalks, which has a size of up to two metres. In bloom, it provides up to six blossoms in the axils, which turn to hairless husks with a length of eight to twelve centimetres. When the crop matures, it loses its leaves and the black brown coloured husks contain six seeds. Field beans are usually cultivated as summer crop, which are less sensitive to climate and which can be harvested after 200 days. Because of a higher protein content and digestibility as well as less antinutritive ingredients, white sorts are preferred for the cultivation. The current crop yields are on average at four tons per hectare.

¹⁷ 9600 before Christ

15

Another feature of this crop is the fixation of lot atmospheric nitrogen. This fact makes field beans very attractive as element in a crop rotation with cereals. The sensitivity against mildew demands an adequate stocking to prevent disease and a cutback of the performance in the fattening (BÖHLER ^AND DIERAUER 2009 PAGE ONE AND THE FOLLOWING).

Field beans deliver a lot of protein and starch for animal feeding. The amount of these valuable substances depends on the different sorts, locations and atmospheric conditions. In general field beans have a crude protein content of 26%, while the starch content is at 37%. The share of fat is lower than that of coarse colza meal and is just around 2%. Also the percentage of crude fibre is marginally lower and averages 7.80%. As well as any other local legumes, the beans contain secondary ingredients (tannins, inhibitors of trypsin, glucosides) ¹⁸ . In order to prevent the negative effects in pig feeding, there are special limits (ABEL ET AL 2004 PAGE THREE).

4.2.2 Development on the feeding stuff market

The amount of antinutritive ingredients and the low digestibility of certain amino acids, accompanied by little success in breeding processes always confine the application of field beans in pig rations and make them bland. Nevertheless, beside the protein character, field beans are an interesting crop to improve the crop rotation, which is advanced by special programmes of the European Union (MAIER-LOEPER AND SOMMER 2004). Low yields in cultivation of a maximum of four tons per hectare as well as small success in plant breeding made the cultivation of field beans in the EU uninteresting for many years, although they are protein plants, which grow well in the European climates. To cover a great share of the protein demand by their own, a law from 1978, which assured minimum rates and allowances for field beans, should boost the grain legumes cultivation in the EU.

¹⁸ Influence the digestibility of protein and reduce the feed intake

16

With the agricultural reform in 1992, at that time the minimum rates averaged 235 Euro per ton, the former pricing policy was replaced by the Agricultural Transfer Payments 19 . From that point, a so called compensation for field crops was introduced, assumed that a certain share of cultivation area of a farm was cultivated with protein plants. This should support the diversification of farmland.

The former price support in the 1980s boosted the production output for grain legumes from 2 to 5.50 million tons in the EU. Important producers were the UK and France, were the climate is more moderate.

The following figure 6 illustrates the progress of the field bean production in Germany from 1985 to 1994.

Figure 6: Development of the field bean production in Germany

¹⁹ Should compensate competitive disadvantages of the world market

17

It can be seen clearly that the price cutting at the beginning of the 1990s caused a decline of the whole grain legume production in the EU. In the middle of the 90s, the production volumes of field beans in Germany were mottled from over 200.000 tons in the 80s. Main reason for that development was the lower competitiveness of grain legumes concerning crop yields and market prices, in comparison with cereal cultivation (ABEL ^{ET AL} 1996 PAGE ONE TO TEN).

Despite reducing additional premiums from the EU-budget for local protein plants in the near future (56 Euro/ha since 2005), the market for grain legumes is declining. The self sufficiency of protein is just at 25% in the EU-27 and is partially covered by a cultivation of around 1.40 million ha in 2005 (V. RICHTHOFEN 2006 PAGE 35).

The cultivation area of field beans in Germany was on average at 16.000 hectares from 2002-2007. Since 2008, unreadiness economy, worse distribution of small production volumes as well as the absence of standard qualities have caused a decline of the cultivation area by over 30% (SPECHT 2009). By reason of the decline in cultivation area, as well as the high substitution rate for soy grist in the last two years, producer prices for field beans are currently at 16.00 Euro per quintal, inclusive of Vat (LANDWIRT- SCHAFTSKAMMER SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN 2010). The currently expected pricedecrease of soy grist as well as the probable omission of the protein plant premium in 2012 allow to assume, that the field bean cultivation could be cut back in the following years (SPECHT 2009).

4.3 Grain legumes: Lupines

4.3.1 Characterisation

As well as the field- and soybeans, the lupines (Lupinus albus) also belong to the family of the Legumes (Fabaceae). The lupine is actual an invasive perennial plant, which original comes from North America and wherefrom it was brought to Europe in the 19th century. As typical kind of legumes,

18

it is now used for improving crop rotation, because of the skill to fix atmospheric nitrogen as well as a protein supplier in human and animal diet. Beside the yellow lupine, the blue blooming (Lupinus Angustifolius) is much more significant in agriculture. Relating to the outer appearance, the lupine is characterised by a bushy form with a maxium of 1.50 metres. This legume has a long florescence with up to 80 blossoms and blue coloured dipetalous. The bloom ranges from May to August. After bloom, the lupine provides the typical husks, which contain four to twelve seeds (BÖHLER AND DIERAUER 2002 PAGE ONE AND THE FOLLOWING).

Of all local grain legumes, the blue coloured lupines are the protein plants with the highest share of crude protein, which averages 29% and whose protein has a higher quality. Beside the big share of crude fibre, almost 14% plus undigestible polysaccharides, the content of energy for monogasts is at 12.50 MJMEs.

While the content of starch is lower, blue lupines have a higher fat concentration of 5.50-8.80%, which is composed of linolenic acid. Inevitable is the fact, that the lupines also contain certain secondary ingredients, like tannins, inhi-bitors of trypsin and alkaloids 20 . However, experiments with thermic care of the seeds improve the digestibility of this grain legume and reduce the share of secondary ingredients, so that the amount of alkaloids is under 0.05%. The enormous plant breeding progress concerning Lupinus angustifolius, which contains more digestible protein and less antinutritive ingredients, clears the way for the application in pig feeding. Accompanied by new techniques to reduce the danger of the effect of secondary ingredients, the application of lupines in pig rations has established. Above all the digestibility of protein is higher than that of soy grist (GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FÖRDERUNG DER LUPINE 2007 ^{PAGE TEN TO} 15).

²⁰ Influence the performance of the fattening pig as soon as the success in fattening in a

negative way

19

4.3.2 Development on the feeding stuff market

As a local grain legume, the financial supporting of protein crop cultivation at the beginning of the 1980s also referred to the cultivation of lupines. After the initiation of a new agricultural reform in 1992, the interest in legume cultivation decreased, because of high production costs and high producer prices for cereals. In contrast to field beans, lupines have developed to a real substitute for expensive soy grist in some regions, because of the enormous processes in breeding in the 1990s.

High prices for soybeans in Chicago disposed several European farmers to cultivate lupines in 1997 and 1998. For that reason, the cultivation area for lupines began to increase. This is demonstrated in figure 7, where the development of the cultivation area of Germany in the period from 1997 to 2006 is shown.

Figure 7: Lupine cultivation area in Germany

20

It is clear to see, that in the middle of the 90s, Germany had a cultivation area of 40.000 ha. The later increased sale of soybeans reduced the amount of lupine cultivation area to 24.000 ha in 1999. Initial the ban on application of animal meal advanced the expansion of acreages for lupines. Followed by a premium for local protein plants in 2005, the cultivation rose to 33.000 hectares, but it is ambiguous how long the premium can be payed. Besides, the preservation of protein-premiums is coupled to a certain cultivation area and crop rotation. Till now, Germany is the biggest producer of Lupines in the EU-27 (GESELL- SCHAFTZUR FÖRDERUNG DER LUPINE 2007 PAGE FIVE TO TEN). The current cultivation area is under 20.000 ha. Seeing these facts, PLANAK has developed an offer to maintain the premiums after 2012, while the regulations will be loosened. Farms could receive up to 75 Euro per hectare, when they cultivate just 10% of their farm area with protein crops, instead of the existing 30% regulation and include a minimum of five crops in their crop rotations (AGRARZEITUNG 2010 PAGE NINE).

Due to the small size of cultivation area and no real market for lupines, the prices depend heavily on the prices for soy and cereals. On the basis of costs for soy grist and wheat, only the cheapness of lupines in feed rations can be calculated. Concerning market prices for soy grist at 36 Euro and for wheat at almost 11.35 Euro per quintal in March, the derived price for 100kg of lupines is on average at 22.10 Euro, inclusive of VAT (HOLLMICHEL 2010).

21

5. Analysis

The current situation on the oil- and protein plant market, especially the consideration of the development of soy on the world market makes clear, that the husbandry business in the EU, which has boosted the usage of grist from oil plants by almost 30% from 2000 to 2007, has to find alternative protein plants to be independent from the speculations on the world market (HART AND KÜHL 2010 PAGE 164 TO 165). These alternatives should cause adequate feeding costs, while the qualities of the feed will be improved. The following section refers to the above-quoted alternative protein plants like coarse colza meal, field beans and blue lupines, which seem to be a competitive substitute for soybeans in animal feeding.

Crucial point of this section is an arrangement between the single protein plants with regard to the most important protein supplier: soy grist. On the basis of the features: Feed value, application in feed mixes as well as a comparison of costs, the advantages and disadvantages of the three mentioned protein alternatives will be listed.

5.1 Feed value

To bear in mind, compressive and hotness treated soy grist is characterised by a protein content of up to 50%, which has a digestibility of 85%. With regard to the biological valence, which should have a relation of 1:0.6:0.6:0.2 in ideal circumstances, the digestible amino acids like lysine, methionine/cysteine, threonine and tryptophan have in each case a share of 23.00, 10.40, 13.70 and 4.80 grammes relating to 1000g of feeding stuff with a dry substance of 88% (SCHÖNE AND WEIß 2008 PAGE FIVE). Only the deficit of me-thionine/cysteine, which under-runs the limit by 15%, has to be balanced by the application of cereals like wheat. The big share of protein is accompanied by an enormous content of metabolic energy, which ranges from 13 to almost 16 MJMEs because of a low content of crude fibre through pealing. That quarantee, combined with wheat,

22

an adequate supply with energy and a substantial meat growing, which influence the quality of the future carcass. Due to the toasting after harvesting, operators do not expect any cutbacks in performance, caused by secondary ingredients (GRANZ ET AL. 2005 PAGE 250 TO 253).

All in all, because of these facts, soy grist has a great significance for pig keepers, to revalue own feed mixes from cereals.

5.1.1 Coarse colza meal

In comparison with the most considerable protein feed soy grist, coarse colza meal shows a lower protein content, which averages of almost 35%. Figure 8 on page 26, which is derived from the UFOP WRITINGS 2004-2008 and compares the amount of essential amino acids in different protein crops, clarify the big difference to soy grist, relating to the supply with lysine and threonine. This is based mainly upon the lower praecaecal digestibility, which averages just 75%. However, the big share of sulphur containing amino acids like methionine/cysteine makes the stuff interesting for pig feeding. Like the lower protein content, the lower metabolic energy content of 10MJMEs is a result by the big share of crude fibre, which is caused by lignin 21 containing peals. Of course, this could be seen positive as the low energy content prevents fatty degeneration and supports the meat growing in the end of the fattening. So, one reason why coarse colza meal is attractive for pigs with a weight from 60-70kg. Aggravating is the danger of glucosinolates (8mmol per kilogramme) and erucic acid, which arrest the feed intake and stress the heart as well as the thyroid gland. As the reduced feed intake cuts the absorption of iodine, it is sometimes necessary to add feed mixes with iodine, in order to ensure that the thyroid gland produces enough essential hormones for the metabolism.

Nevertheless, cutbacks in performance and meat growth cannot be excluded when applying grist of rapeseed (SCHÖNE AND WEIß 2008 PAGE FOUR TO EIGHt).

²¹ Structural substance in plants

23

According to JOST 1996 from the Research Institute of Farm Animal in Swit-zerland, the digestibility of protein as well as the problem with glucosinolates can be improved by heating treatments as well as the usage of 00-seed. Experiments with piglets show a success rate of up to 15% more feed intake (JOST 1996 PAGE 219 TO 222).

5.1.2 Field beans

As with coarse colza meal, field beans show considerable deficits regarding protein content, in comparison to soy grist. They usually contain 26% crude protein, 37% starch, 7-11% crude fibre and have a metabolic energy content of a maximum of 13MJMEs. Initiating with the protein content, it is safe to say that levels of the four most limited essential amino acids are lower than those of coarse colza meal, see figure 8. The relation of the amino acids shows, besides the low protein content, that there is a worse digestibility, which is for methionine and tryptophan under 65% and which demands an addition via other protein suppliers for maintaining an adequate live weight gain and meat growing. This is very typical for local grain legumes. With regard to lysine, it seems better. Although the amount of lysine is just the half of that of soy grist, the digestibility is almost the same. According to the great starch content, which achieves the level of cereals, field beans could be seen as energy suppliers, too. Unfortunately, the ingredients diversify from sort to sort and demand specific analysis. However, field beans grapple with a high share of secondary ingredients like tannins, glucosides and protein inhibitors, which influence especially the praecaecal availability of protein (ABEL ET AL 2004 PAGE THREE TO SIX).

Just like coarse colza meal, thermic treatments reduce secondary ingredients like inhibitors of trypsin by almost 80% so that the digestibility of protein increases (WETSCHEREK 1994 PAGE 331 TO 335).

Another criterion and reason for usage at the end of the fattening is the fact, that grain legumes are sensitive to humidity.

24

So, moisture contents over 12% cause enormous infestations of mildew and arouse corporal pain, which often shows cutbacks in performance (ABEL ^{ET AL} 2004 PAGE THREE).

5.1.3 Lupines

Commonly, there are the same conditions, concerning antinutritive ingredients of grain legumes, like for field beans. The danger of alkaloids, which influence the feed intake as well as tannins and inhibitors of trypsin, are a big problem for the success in fattening. Admittedly, success in plant breeding and new methods in protein digestions, like thermic treatments, allow the usage in pig feeding. Of course, the ingredients of different sorts do not stay the same, but the blue lupines are renowned for their high protein content of 33%, in contrast to field beans. While the share of crude fibre and starch is low (16 and 10%), blue lupines show a higher share of fat (6%), which mainly consists of linolenic acid and has consequently a dietary effect on the organism. The content of metabolic energy is at 12.6MJMEs and corresponds to that of cereals like barley. Regarding to the quality of protein, lupines show also deficits in the accommodation of methionine, but concerning the content and digestibility of threonine, lupines are superior. The digestibilty of lysine, threonine and tryptophan is equal to that of soy. Although the amount of the four most important digestible amino acids underruns that of soy by the half, see figure 8. Nevertheless, the quality of protein is higher than that of field beans. With new developed sorts and the above named treatments, secondary ingredients could be reduced to such levels (alkaloid-level: 0,05%), that the application in animal feeding could be ex-panded (PAULICKS ET AL. 2004 PAGE THREE TO SIX).

25

Figure 8: Comparison of amino acids in 1kilogramme of feeding stuff

5.2 Application in feed mixes

Till now, soy grist was mainly used to boost the protein quality of feed mixes in Europe, which usually have a high share of cereals like wheat and barley. These crops are high in metabolic energy, particulate over 13 MJMEs, but cannot fulfill the demand of necessary amino acids like lysine, methionine/cysteine, threonine and tryptophan. Since the 1960s, great amounts of soybeans were brought to Europe to improve the biological valance, so that the application, which depends on breed and age of the pigs,

26

ranges from 17 to 22% in usual two-phase 22 feeding systems. Important to know is the pattern of amino acids, which is influenced by the used components of crops for feeding. Typical cereal mixes with wheat, barley and corn show deficits in the accommodation of lysine, threonine and tryptophan. For the composition of feed mixes, lysine is the most important criterion. The demand depends on the anabolism, which increases up to a live weight of 70kg. For that reason it is not amazing that the demand of lysine is at the beginning of the fattening at 15.10g and at the end at 14.60g per day. Just as important is the share of metabolic energy, which depends in certain kind of way on the share of lysine. The relation lysine/energy should be at 0.74 g/MJ at the beginning and 0.62 g/MJ at the end of the fattening. So, regarding to the demand of a day, the metabolic energy content should be at 28MJ at the beginning, and because of the higher conservation needs at 35MJ at the end of the fattening (BREITKREUZ 2008 PAGE 38).

5.2.1 Coarse colza meal

According to QUANZ ET AL. 2004, the Union to promote oil- and protein plants (UFOP) has done several experiments with coarse colza meal in animal feeding in the last years. It has been found at, that the amount at the beginning of the fattening can be expanded to 10%, while the older pigs can be feed with 15% of coarse colza meal. With regard to table 2 on page 32, which describes the amount and costs of certain feed rations with coarse colza meal, the usage of soy grist could reduce to 14.50% at the beginning and to 5.40% at the end of the fattening.

The reason for the differentiated usage is the fact, that coarse colza meal contains 25% less crude protein than soy grist and the digestibility is subordinate by 10%. Cause of a lysine content of 14.50g, accompanied by a low metabolic energy content and especially the existence of glucosinolates and erucic acid, the elevation of usage by 5% is just at the end of the fattening possible, where less protein for the growth is needed.

²² Two different feed mixes will be used during the pig fattening

27

So, the addition of extra lysine to the weight of 70kg is necessary as well as a high application of wheat and soy grist to fulfill the lysine/energy relation of 0.74. Furthermore, possible to evaluate is the low energy content of almost 10MJMEs, which prevents the fatty degeneration of the future meat carcass. With the help of these alternative crops, there could be saved almost 35% of soy grist at the first and almost 70% of soy grist at the second stage (QUANZ ET AL. 2004).

5.2.2 Field beans

Special public aid programmes for cultivation of local grain legumes have made sure that the application of field beans in feed rations increase. Referring to this, the Chamber of Agriculture of North Rhine-Westphalia has also experimented with the usage of field beans in pig fattening in 2008. With a view to figure 8, field beans contain less lysine as soon as methionine and threonine. The digestibility of these amino acids range from 60 to 80 %, so that soy grist can only be partly displaced by field beans. To secure a relation of 1:0.6, regarding to lysine and methionine, the application of additional feeding stuff, like mineral food is necessary, to balance this relation, see the example of a feed ration in table 3 on page 33. In contrast to the mineral food of usual feed mixes, the content of lysine is higher. Furthermore, it contains methionine and tryptophan. The share of antinutritive ingredients defines the application. For maintaining a great live weight gain for young pigs, the application of field beans should not exceed 10%. At the end of the fattening, where the accommodation of protein gives way to energy, the usage can be extended to 15 to 20%. Because of the decreasing anabolism, the demand of lysine is lower than at the beginning. The feeding experiments show, that a complete abdication of soy grist is not possible. It has also been found out, that the relation between lysine and metabolic energy of the feed mixes are equal to those with coarse colza meal and consequently corresponds to the current requirements (MAIER-LOEPER AND SOMMER 2004).

28

5.2.3 Lupines

Like the other protein crops, the contents and the digestibility of the certain amino acids regulate the application in pig feeding. With the success in plant breeding and the reduction of secondary ingredients, the application can be extended to 15-20% over the whole fattening. However, sulphur containing amino acids like methionine as well as HP- soy grist ²³ must be appended to fulfill the biological valence. For reaching optimal lysine/energy levels, feed mixes with lupines have to be added by high shares of wheat and vegetable oil as well as additional lysine in mineral food, see table 4 on page 34, which demonstrate an usual feed mix with lupines. Experiments in feeding have shown that the amount of soy grist, while the application of lupines ranges from 15-20%, can be reduced to 11% at the beginning and to 4% at the end of the fattening. The change in demand of protein and energy at the end of the fattening effects, that the application of lysine by soy grist and mineral feeding can be reduced. However, the share of wheat should be over 50%, which helps to compensate the deficits of methionine, see figure 8, and concerning to vegetable oil over 2%, to fulfill the adequate energy content. Ac-cording to HOLLMICHEL 2008 the lysine/energy relation contributes 0.77 at the beginning and 0.61 at the end of the fattening. So, it consequently fulfills the current requirements. This example shows, that the amount of soy grist can be reduced by over 60%, but because of the lower protein content of this crop, a complete abdication of soy and minerals is not possible (PAULICKS ET AL. 2004 PAGE SEVEN TO EIGHT).

5.3 Comparison of costs

Besides the feed value, the costs for feeding has a great significance in pig fattening and decides about loss or profit.

As already mentioned in episode 2. Pig feeding and the importance of Protein for the result and profit in husbandry,

²³ Contains 48% protein

29

almost 40% of the total costs in fattening, are costs for feeding from 40 to 115kg live weight, which average 46.50 Euro per fattening pig. So, for deciding of the usage of alternative protein plants, a comparison of costs is inevitable. As reference base therefore are the costs of conventional feed rations, with shares of soy grist of 17-22% for pigs with more than 40kg live weight. This means specifically, that under the current price terms of 36.10 Euro for one ton of soy grist on the market, the application of this protein supplier in one ton of feed mix causes costs of 78.30 Euro for pigs at the beginning of the fattening, based on table 1 on page 31. With the reach of 70kg live weight, the application can be reduced to 17%, which causes less expenses of 59.60 Euro per ton. Relating to a feed intake of 75kg (feed conversion 2.5:1) at the initial feeding and 148kg (feed conversion 3.3:1) at the finishing (derived from GRANZ ET AL 2005 PAGE 499), this means that 14.70 Euro (over 30%) of the feeding costs per pig are spend for the application of soy grist.

In the following, based on the fact of certain feeding recommendations as well as current producer’s prices (inclusive of VAT) for agricultural products, several feed mixes with the mentioned protein plants for the beginning and for the finishing of the fattening, will be compared. The mentionable prices for cereals, protein-feeding stuff, vegetable oil and mineral food refer to the weekly prices of feeding stuff from LANDWIRTSCHAFTSKAMMER SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN 2010 and LANDWIRTSCHAFTLICHES WOCHENBLATT 2010. However, also the derived price for synthetic lysine, which is used in table 1 and 2, bases upon the current price situation for soy grist and barley from HOLLMI- CHEL 2010.The price for HP-soy grist refers to the current protein price per kilogramme, which is derived from conventional soy grist with 44% of protein. Relating to the conventional feeding with high shares of soy grist in pig feeding, see the following table 1 on page 31, the price for one ton of feeding stuff for pigs of the weight of 40 to 70kg is at 218.80 Euro, while the stuff costs 190.20 Euro for pigs at the end of the fattening, including the experiential costs for grinding and blending (1.00 Euro per quintal) when the blending is done on the farms. The lower demand of protein and energy, which is demonstrated in the low shares of wheat, soy,

30

mineral food and vegetable oil, reduces the cost by almost 28.60 Euro per ton of feed mix for the older pigs. Relating to the feeding costs, this means 44.60 Euro per pig during the whole fattening.

Table 1: Feed mixes with soy grist for pig fattening

5.3.1 Coarse colza meal

As a consequence of the usage of 10% at the initial feeding and 15% of coarse colza meal at the finishing in pig rations, the amount of soy grist could be reduced to 14% or rather to 5.40%. Because of the high share of wheat, which supports an adequate energy content of 13.5MJMEs, the price for one ton of feeding stuff at the beginning of the fattening overruns the level of 231.40 Euro, as it can be seen in table 2 on page 32. The little energy and protein demand at the end of the anabolism, allows to reduce the amounts of oil and soy grist to such an extent, that a feed mixture of one ton for pigs with a live weight over 70kg, has a cost benefit of 31.30 Euro,

31

in comparison to the feeding at the beginning. Collectively, in the face of a total feed intake of 223kg, feeding costs in the whole fattening amount 47.00 Euro.

Table 2: Feed mixes with coarse colza meal for pig fattening

5.3.2 Field beans

Prices for grain legumes often depend on the situation of the soy market and are now at circa 160 Euro per ton, inclusive of VAT. The example of application in pig mixes shows, that at first the amount should not over-run 10%, while later the application can be boosted up to 15%. With a view to table 3, which describes the composition of a typical field bean mixture, the amount of soy grist decreases from 14.50% at the beginning to 5.40% at the end of the fattening. Nevertheless, deficits in lysine, methionine and tryptophan have to be compensated by special mineral food. Because of high contents of metabolic energy, also the amount of wheat could be reduced by 14.50% in the end of the fattening. For that reason, there is a difference of 27.30 Euro between the feed mixes of the beginning and the finishing. All in all, the application of field beans reduces the feeding costs to 38.10 Euro.

Table 3: Feed mixes with field beans for pig fattening

5.3.3  Lupines  

The  good digestibility of protein of the lupines reduces the share of soy grist  

to  11 at the beginning and to only 3.60 at the end of the fattening. Table  

4  shows that the low content of metabolic energy has to be balanced by high  

shares  of wheat and vegetable oil. To fulfill the biological valence, the appli-  

cation  of high lysine mineral food is necessary, which can also be reduced by  

0.70%  at the end, while the amount of lupines will be extended by 5 Con-  

sequently  , it becomes a price difference of 24.31 Euro between the first and  

second  feed mixture, which causes all in all feeding costs of 41.65 Euro per  

fattening  pigs.  

Table 4:  Feed mixes with lupines for pig fattening  

Crop  Live weight 40kg Live weight 70kg Price per quintal  

Wheat  50.00 50.00  11.35

Barley  18.80 22.40  10.25

HP  -soy grist 11.00 3.60  39.38

  (48 )  

Mineral  food (6 3.00 2.50  65.00

lysine  )  

Vegetable  oil 2.20 1.50  95.20

Lupines  15.00 20.00  22.10

Costs  for grin-  1.00

ding   

Costs  per ton 202.93  178.62

Source  : HOLLMICHEL  2008

34

5.4 Conclusion

With the help of the three most important features: feed value, application in feed mixes and the comparison of costs, differences between soy grist and local protein plants like coarse colza meal, field beans and lupines could be exposed.

This analysis shows that a complete substitution of soy grist from feed rations is not possible, due to the high share of essential amino acids like lysine, methionine/cysteine, threonine and tryptophan as well as the high digestibility of the soy protein. The comparison of feed value and especial the possibility of application in pig feeding, analysed by QUANZ ET AL (2004), MAIER-LOEPER AND SOMMER (2004) as soon as HOLLMICHEL (2008) show, that all of the mentioned local protein plants have deficits in the amount or the digestibility of certain amino acids. While the coarse colza meal under-runs the quality of soy protein concerning lysine, threonine and tryptophan, the grain legumes grapple mainly with a low availability of methionine/cysteine and threonine. The above mentioned possibilities of application with both types of crops de-mand the additional usage of special mineral food with an adequate share of the four essential amino acids. Furthermore, the danger of cutbacks in per-formance through secondary ingredients like erucic acid and glucosinolates from coarse colza meal, and antinutritive ingredients from grain legumes, defines the application of these alternative protein plants, especial at the beginning of the fattening. Relating to JOST (1996), ABEL AND SOMMER (2004) and PAULICKS (2004), cutbacks in performance will not be expected. Nevertheless, today where one ton of soy grist costs more than 360 Euro (WO- CHENBLATT 2010 PAGE 57),the changing of pig feed mixes for reducing the share of soy grist can heavily drop the costs for feeding. Seeing the example of field beans, which shows an application of 10% at the beginning and 15% at the end of the fattening, the feeding costs per fattening pig can be lowered by 6.50 Euro to overall 38.10 Euro, in contrast to conventional soy feed mixes (see 5.3). This means a reduction by 14%. Similar to field beans, the application of lupines causes economical advantages in pig feeding, too.

35

Indeed, higher costs for lupines as well as the necessity of special mineral food raise the costs, but nevertheless it causes a cost benefit of over 6% concerning feeding costs, which will be clear in 5.3.3. On the contrary, the usage of coarse colza meal, which is described by SCHÖNE AND WEIß (2008), is not significantly cheaper than a conventional feed mix. The escalation of feeding costs by 2.40 Euro, which is mainly caused by high prices of the oilseed grist as well as the usage of synthetic lysine, does not seem competitive to the application of grain legumes. The comparison shows, that feed rations per fattening pig with coarse colza meal and lupines only need almost 18.90kg respectively 13.50kg of soy grist in the whole fattening, while the application of field beans depend on the presence of 27.60kg of soy grist. However, current market prices for field beans create an enormous price advantage in feeding, which outweigh that of coarse colza meal and lupines. It can be expected that the application of coarse colza meal would cause more significant differences concerning feeding costs, when the prices would be reduced by 25%, while prices for soy grist stay the same. The fact that field beans and lupines can displace certain amounts of soy from rations without any cutbacks in performance, as soon as the possibility of retention of the protein crop bonus, the cultivation and the demand of these grain legumes will find their way in our crop rotations back in the near future, in contrast to SPECHT (2009). As processes like thermic treatments are rare inevitable for the application, these protein crops could really establish in our cultivation systems to supply low price protein, whose biological valence can easily be enhanced by the combination with cereals and little amounts of soy or synthetic amino acids.

36

6. Summary

By now, the substitution of soy grist or more precisely the autonomy from the great soy imports, which average over 30 million tons in the EU-27, is an im-portant step for Europe. Based on the fact that the pork production as well as the biofuel-production will increase by 20% respectively 85% in the next six years, the lack on the oil- and protein markets will cause high prices for soy. After 40 years of intensive importing of protein crops from abroad, which only cover 56% of the Europe protein demand, mainly farms of the EU-27 but also pork producers in Asia or America will be forced to change to alternative protein crops. As rapeseed is seen as the second most important oil crop behind soy and coarse colza meal is accepted as a significant supplier of protein, prices depend mainly on the worldwide supply of soy, whose demand will definitely long-dated outweigh the offer. But also the demand of vegetable oil in human diet, as well as the processing to biofuel has increased the prices for rapeseed products to such an extent, that the current application in feed mixes does not seem really competitive to soy grist. By now, the fact that outputs of local grain legumes vary enormously, accompanied by insecurity of saving protein bonus, has lower the cultivation area of field beans in Germany. The previous, small demand of field beans and lupines, partly caused by secondary ingredients, has brought reduced prices, which currently make the application in pig rations very attractive and show considerable economics obverse the coveted rapeseed- and soy products, especially for farms with own feeding stuff production. Based on that fact, it can be expected that the cultivation of grain legumes in the EU-27 will get such an important role in our cultivation systems as in the 1980s. Above all, legumes are also in demand as preceding crops and improve the efficiency of conventional crop rotations. For that reason, it would be interesting to do researches on the development of the grain legume cultivation area in this business year.

37

The above-listed analysis makes clear, that it is not really possible to dispense with the application of protein-alternatives on the imports of soy grist from overseas. Indeed, protein crops like grain legumes or coarse colza meal are helpful to reduce the amount of soy grist, but the fact of the lower content of protein and energy as well as cutbacks in performance through secondary ingredients and low production systems do not currently admit the total abdication of soy grist from feed mixes in pig fattening. Nevertheless, special plant breeding programmes, further experiments in pig feeding and new methods in processing will advance the position of European protein plants on the (inter-) national markets in the near future.

38

References

ABEL, HJ., BRINKMANN, J., MARGGRAF, R., PAHL, H., STELLING, D., WILHELM, J. (1996): Potentiale und Perspektiven des Körnerleguminosenanbaus in Deutschland. UFOP, Book 3, Bonn.

ABEL, HJ., SOMMER, W., WEIß, J. (2004): Inhaltsstoffe, Futterwert und Einsatz von Ackerbohnen in der Nutztierfütterung. In: UFOP-Praxisinformation, page two to eight. AGRA-EUROPE (2009a): Gespaltene Reaktion auf jüngste GVO-Zulassungen. In: Agra-Europe 50 (46), Europe-News, page four to five. AGRA-EUROPE (2009b): Brasiliens Farmer setzen verstärkt auf Sojabohnen. In: Agra-Europe 50 (51), exchange and argument, page three to four. AGRA-EUROPE (2009c): Mehr als 21 Millionen Tonnen Rapssaat in der EU geerntet?

In: Agra-Europe 50 (52), exchange and argument, page four to five. AGRA-EUROPE (2010a): Weltmarkt für Sojabohnen.

In: Agra-Europe 51 (4), exchange and argument, page two. AGRA-EUROPE (2010b): Baisse am Welt-Sojamarkt gebrochen?

In: Agra-Europe 51 (8), exchange and argument, page one. AGRARZEITUNG (2010): Förderung für Eiweiß vom Acker.

In: Agrarzeitung 61 (8), page nine.

39

ALPMANN, L., BENNINGER, M., BOCKEY, D., BOTHE, C., BRENNDÖRFER, M., FEIF- FER, A.,GERTZ, A., GRAF, T., HAASE, A., HEGER, M., HUMPISCH, G., KLAA- ßEN, H.,KURPJUWEIT, H., MAYLANDT, M., MIELKE, T., MOHR, R., REMMELE, E., SCHÄFER, B., SCHNEIDER, K., SCHÖNE, F., SCHÖNHAMMER, A., SCHÜ- ^MANN, U.,SINEMUS, K., STEMANN, G., THEISSEN, H., WEIßEN, E. (2006): Raps- Anbau und Verwertung einer Kultur mit Persepktive. Agricultural Publishing Company, Münster.

ANDREE, H., BRETTSCHNEIDER, J., BURGSTALLER, G., DÄNICKE, S., HENKEL, H., JEROCH, H., ROTH, E., SÜDEKUM, K. (1997): Rapssaat und fettreiche Rapsprodukte in der Tierfütterung. UFOP, Book 4, Bonn.

ASSE, M., ZACHARIAS, B. (2009): Erste Ergebnisse zur Schweinemast aus dem Schweinereport Baden-Württemberg 2008/2009.

http://www.landwirtschaft-mlr.badenwuerttemberg.de/servlet/ PB//show/1277103_l1/LSZ_Schweinemast_Schweinereport2009.pdf (Call date: 18th March 2010). BÖHLER, D., DIERAUER, H. (2005): Lupinen. In: Merkblatt, FiBL page one to six.

https://www.fibl-shop.org/shop/pdf/mb-1308-lupinen.pdf (Call date 16th March 2010)

BÖHLER, D., DIERAUER, H. (2009): Bioackerbohnen. In: Merkblatt, FiBL, page one to five.

https://www.fibl-shop.org/shop/pdf/mb-ackerbohnen.pdf (Call date 16 ^th March 2010).

BREITKREUZ, S. (2008): Welche Auswirkungen haben die neuen Bedarfswerte in der Schweineernährung auf die Zusammensetzungen der Futtermischungen.

Thesis at the Academy for Economy and Environment of Nürtingen-Geislingen, page four to 73.

40

DEGNER, J., GÖTZ, R., GUDDAT, C., REICH, J., RICHTER G. (2007): Leitlinie zur effizienten und umweltverträglichen Erzeugung von Ackerbohnen. In: Document of the Thuringian State Office for Agriculture, page four to 23.

DIEMER, M., EGLER, H., ENGERT, E., FEILMEIER, J., HOFER, B., LEIDWEIN, A., ZIMMERMANN, J. (2005): Verantwortungsvolle Soja-Produktion: Nicht auf Kosten der Tropenwälder und frei von Gentechnik.

In: State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (Ed.): Conference transcript from the WWF Business-Seminar, Pfäffikon SZ (Switzerland), 10 ^th June 2005 page 13 to 15.

FISCHER, U. (2008): Rapsschrot: Ein Futtermittel auf Erfolgskurs. Euro Tier 2008, Hannover, November 2008. FUNK, H. (2010): Chancen auf günstigen Einkauf. In: DLZ 60 (3), page 142 to 143.

GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FÖRDERUNG DER LUPINE (2007): Lupinen-Verwertung und Anbau.

Corporation to promote the lupine, page four to 37. http://www.mil.brandenburg.de/sixcms/media.php/4055/lupine07.pdf (Call date: 22th March 2010).

GRANZ, S., PABST, W., STRACK, K., WEIß, J., (2005): Tierproduktion. Parey Publishing Company, Stuttgart. M. (2010): So tickt der Rapsmarkt. HARES,

In: Neue Landwirtschaft 14 (3), page 121 to 123. HART, V., KÜHL, R. (2010): Marktstruktur- und Verwendungsanalyse von Öl-und Eiweißpflanzen. In: UFOP Schriften 20 (1), page 17 to 342.

41

HOLLMICHEL, K. (2008): Die Lupine das Soja des Nordens. http://www.gartenbauberatung.de/llhhessen/landwirtschaft/tierproduktio n/schweine/fuetterung/KH_Blaue_Lupine_Artikel_080611_V1.1.pdf (Call date: 20 ^th March 2010).

HOLLMICHEL, K. (2010): Preiswürdigkeit proteinreicher Futtermittel und Lysin. Table from the Agricultural State Office of Hesse, Lippstadt, received per E-mail on 14 ^th April 2010.

INFORMATION BIOWISSENSCHAFTEN (2000): BSE-Folgen: Steigende Futtermit-telimporte. Gen-Soja statt Tiermehl.

http://www.transgen.de/aktuell/archiv_2000/38.doku.html (Call date: 17th February 2010).

INFORMATION BIOWISSENSCHAFTEN (2008a): Steckbrief Soja. Vom Kleinanbau in Asien zum Welt-Proteinlieferanten.

http://www.transgen.de/aktuell/archiv_2008/182.doku.html (Call date: 17 ^th February 2010).

INFORMATION BIOWISSENSCHAFTEN (2008b): Anbau, Handel, Verarbeitung. Weltmarkt Soja.

http://www.transgen.de/aktuell/archiv_2008/181.doku.html (Call date: 17 ^th February 2010).

JAHN, C. (2009): Schweinemast mit Sojaalternativen? Wirtschaftlichkeit der Schweinehaltung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Futterauf-wandes. Saxon State Office for Environment, Agriculture and Geology, Döbeln, 17 ^th September 2009.

JOST, M. (1996): Rapsschrot- und Kuchen auch in der Schweinezucht verfüttern.

In: Agrarforschung 3 (5), page 219 to 222.

42

KAGELS (2010): Sojabohnen-Future (Soybeans): Technische Chartanalyse des Jahrescharts.

http://www.ross-trading.de/a/technische-chartanalysen/chartanalysesojabohnen.htm (Call date: 22 ^th March).

KEMMERLING, A. (2010): Verbal message about the development of soy cultivation from a Canadian farmer.

Lippstadt, telephone call on 25 ^th February.

KNEES, M., MUELLER, K. (2009): Schweinemast im Wirtschaftsjahr 2008/2009. In: Landpost 63 (50), page 41 to 42.

LANDWIRTSCHAFTLICHES WOCHENBLATT (2010): Diese Woche-Diese Mischung für Ostwestfalen.

In: Landwirtschaftliches Wochenblatt 167 (16), page 57. LANDWIRTSCHAFTSKAMMER SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN (2010): Erzeugerpreise Getreide, Raps frei Lager, ab 2T. http://lwksh.de/cms/index.php?id=2854 http://lwksh.de/cms/index.php?id=2855 (Call date: 14 ^th April 2010). LINKER, S. (2003): Preisexplosion am Sojamarkt.

http://www.agrarberatung-hessen.de/markt/aktuell/2003q4/ 01012003102001.html (Call date: 17th March 2010). LINKER, S. (2006): Rekordernten-Rekordbestände-Preisdruck. http://www.agrarberatung-hessen.de/markt/aktuell/0101_2006q1 /01012006021602.html (Call date: 17 ^th March 2010).

43

LINKER, S. (2007): Soja: Im Höhenrausch.

http://www.agrarberatung-hessen.de/markt/aktuell/0101_2007q4/ 01012007120701.html (Call date: 17 ^th March 2010). LINKER, S. (2008): Hausse in vollem Galopp.

http://www.agrarberatung-hessen.de/markt/aktuell/0101_2008 q1/01012008010903.html (Call date: 17 ^th March 2010).

LYSSENKOV, A. (2005): Versorgung der EU mit Futtermitteln. Term paper of the University of Kassel, page two to eleven. MAIER-LOEPER, O., SOMMER, W. (2004): Ackerbohnen und Erbsen in der Schweinefütterung.

http://www.landwirtschaftskammer.de/landwirtschaft/tierproduktion/schw einehaltung/fuetterung/leguminosen.htm (Call date: 15 ^th March 2010). OVID (2010): Tagesaktuelle Ölschrotpreise.

http://www.proteinmarkt.de/markt/markt-aktuell/ (Call date: 23 ^th April 2010). OVID (2010): Aktuelle Marktberichte

http://www.proteinmarkt.de/markt/marktberichte/ (Call date: 16 ^th April 2010).

PAULICKS, R., ROTH-MAIER, A.,STEINHÖFEL, O., WEIß, J. (2004): Inhaltsstoffe, Futterwert und Einsatz von Lupinen in der Nutztierfütterung. In: UFOP-Praxisinformation, page two to ten.

44

QUANZ,G., SCHÖNE F., WEIß, J. (2004): Rapsschrot-eine Alternative zu Sojaschrot in der Schweinemast.

www.susonline.de/.../66-vb-neu-ulrichstein-ins-mastfutter-15rapsschrot- mischen.php (Call date: 5 ^th March 2010). RHEDER, E. (2010): Handel nimmt wieder zu.

In: Neue Landwirtschaft 20 (3), page 123 to 126.

SCHÖNE, F., WEIß, J. (2008): Rapsextrationsschrot in der Schweinefütterung. In: UFOP-Praxisinformation, page two to 13.

SPECHT, M. (2009): Anbau von Körnerleguminosen in Deutschland-Situation, limitierende Faktoren und Chancen.

Fachgespräch: Anbau und Züchtung von Leguminosen in Deutschland, Braunschweig, 22 ^th April 2009.

STALLJOHANN, G. (2010): Soja: Auf steigende Preise beim Extrationsschrot reagieren.

http://www.landwirt.com/Soja-Auf-steigende-Preise-beim-Extraktionsschrot-reagieren,,7816,,Bericht.html (Call date: 17 ^th February 2010).

TOEPFER INTERNATIONAL (2010): Der internationale Markt für Ölsaaten im Wirtschaftsjahr 2009/10. In: Marktbericht 2010 2 (3), page four to 15. TOP AGRAR (2009): Erneut GVO-Spuren im Soja: Lösung gefordert. http://www.topagrar.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id =12652&Itemid=519 (Call date: 22 ^th March 2009).

45

UFOP (2010): Erzeugung und Verwendung von Raps in Deutschland. In: Information Union to promote Oil- and Protein Plants e.V., page one to two.

http://www.ufop.de/downloads/10_Rapsverwendung.pdf (Call date: 20 ^th April 2010).

V. RICHTHOFEN, J. (2006): Was Körnerleguminosen in Anbausystemen leisten.

In: RAPS 24 (1), page 35 to 39.

WETSCHEREK, W. (1994): Einsatz von getoasteten und extrudierten Ackerbohnen in der Schweinemast.

Manuscript of the Institute of the sciences of farm animals, Wien, page 331 to 335.

WINDHORST, H. (2008): Verlagerung des globalen Zentrums der Schweinehaltung und Schweinefleischproduktion. In: Nutztierpraxis Aktuell 4 (3), page 26 to 32.

46

Addition

The following figure shows the course of the price for soy on the world market in the last 30 years. This demonstrates the worldwide importance of soy and helps to understand the necessity of alternative protein plants on the protein market to cover the demand of protein (regarding to chapter 2).

Figure 9: Development of prices for soybeans at CBOT

47

Declaration

Hereby I, Jan-Frederik Berglar, assure that I have done the instant work by myself. I did not use any others than the mentioned and at quotation named origins or other facilities

Soest, 2010-05-06

48