Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A pig trial was performed to analyze the effect of different dietary phytase levels on bone mineralization and ileal phytate degradation in 2 different growing stages. Fifty-six postweaned piglets were fed 4 diets differing in P, Ca, Na, and phytase contents. Diets contained either recommended (positive control [PC]) or reduced (negative control [NC]) mineral levels and phytase was added to NC diets at 500 or 2,000 phytase units/kg feed (NC500 and NC2000, respectively). At d 42 and 98, samples (n = 7) were taken for analyses in rib bones (Ca, P, Fe, Mg, Mn, Se, and Zn) and in ileal digesta (myo-inositol phosphates [myo-inositol hexakisphosphate {InsP6}, myo-inositol pentakisphosphate {InsP5}, myo-inositol tetrakisphosphate, and myo-inositol trisphosphate] were analyzed by high-pressure ion chromatography and inositol was analyzed by HPLC). Data were analyzed by ANOVA and means were separated by the Tukey's test with significance set at P < 0.05. Dietary mineral reduction reduced bone mineral content, except in ribs collected at d 42 (P < 0.05). The NC500 diet compared with the NC improved all minerals except Se in ribs (d 98; P < 0.05). The higher phytase dose (NC2000) restored nearly all bone minerals to the level of PC pigs (P > 0.05). Phytate degradation up to the proximal ileum was not influenced by dietary mineral level (PC compared with NC, P > 0.05) whereas phytase reduced InsP6 and InsP5 levels in ileal digesta (P < 0.05 for NC and PC at both phytase application rates) with the lowest levels seen in NC2000 (d 98; P < 0.05). The efficient phytate degradation could explain the improvements in bone mineralization, especially at high phytase application level, probably due to improved mineral availability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kühn et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: