Feedipedia
Animal feed resources information system
Feedipedia
Feedipedia

Sponsored by

Adisseo

Automatic translation

Did you find the information you were looking for? Is it valuable to you? Feedipedia is encountering funding shortage. We need your help to keep providing reference-based feeding recommendations for your animals.
Would you consider donating? If yes, please click on the button Donate.
Any amount is the welcome. Even one cent is helpful to us!

Sunflower meal

Datasheet

Description
Click on the "Nutritional aspects" tab for recommendations for ruminants, pigs, poultry, rabbits, horses, fish and crustaceans
Sunflower meal with hulls, France
Sunflower meal, dehulled
Common names 
  • Sunflower meal, sunflower oil meal, sunflower oilmeal, sunflowerseed meal, sunflower seed meal
  • Sunflower cake, sunflower oil cake, sunflower oilcake, sunflower seed cake, expeller sunflower meal
  • Dehulled sunflower meal, dehulled sunflower cake, decorticated sunflower meal, decorticated sunflower cake
  • Undecorticated sunflower meal, undecorticated sunflower cake, non-dehulled sunflower meal, undehulled sunflower meal, unhulled sunflower meal
Species 

Helianthus annuus L. [Asteraceae]

Feed categories 
Related feed(s) 
Description 

Sunflower meal is the by-product of the extraction of oil from sunflower seeds. In terms of production, it is the 4th most important oil meal after soybean meal, rapeseed meal and cottonseed meal (Oil World, 2011). A wide variety of products are available on the market, from low-quality straw-like meals to high-quality flours. Sunflower meals can be made from whole or decorticated seeds, and can be mechanically and/or solvent-extracted. The quality of sunflower meal depends on the plant characteristics (seed composition, hulls/kernel ratio, dehulling potential, growth and storage conditions) and on the processing (dehulling, mechanical and/or solvent extraction) (Golob et al., 2002; NRC, 1973). While solvent-extracted sunflower meal remains the main type of sunflower meal commercially available, oil-rich sunflower meals obtained by mechanical pressure only have become more popular since the 2000s, with the development of organic farming and on-farm oil production.

Distribution 

Sunflower meal is available worldwide. World production was estimated to 21.8.5 million tons in 2019 (IndexMundi, 2019). Ukraine and Russian federation are the main producers with respectively 6.3 and 5.1 million tons produced in 2019.  The European Union (EU-27) is the 3rd producer with 4.8 million t in 2019 (IndexMundi, 2019). EU-27 also imported 3.4 million t sunflower meal in 2019 (IndexMundi, 2019). 

Processes 

Dehulling

Sunflower seeds from oil types contain about 20-30% hulls, which are often removed before oil extraction. This is because of their deleterious effects on oil presses: they hinder lower oil extraction and reduce the quality of both oil and meal (Kartika, 2005). Reducing the hull content by 1% improves pressing capacity by 2.5%. A well-managed dehulling process yields seeds with 8-12% hulls remaining on the kernels (Campbell, 1983). Dehulling is done after cleaning the seeds and drying them down to 5% moisture, which facilitates kernel-hull separation (Kartika, 2005). The usual process consists in cracking the seeds by the mechanical action of centrifugal or pneumatic shellers. It can also be done by abrasion (Carré, 2009). The resulting blend is winnowed to separate the hulls from the kernels. Some sunflower varieties have thinner hulls that are more difficult to remove. In this case, dehulling is not recommended as it may result in oil loss, and increases extraction costs without enhancing oil and sunflower meal quality (Grompone, 2005; Campbell, 1983).

Oil extraction

Once winnowed, the kernels undergo mechanical pressing through screw-presses (expellers), resulting in a "cake" containing 15-20% of oil. This cake can subsequently be extracted with a solvent (usually hexane) to yield more oil. While pressing followed by solvent extraction is the most common industrial process, mechanical extraction is used by producers of specialty oils and smallholder farmers in both developed and developing countries (for example in Zimbabwe; Mandibaya et al., 1999). In the European Union, regulations forbid the use of solvents for the production of feed ingredients used in organic farming (European Commission, 2007), so only mechanically-extracted sunflower meals can be used for organic animal production.

Conditionning

Fresh sunflower meal must be dried for optimal storage. It can be ground, broken into small pieces or pelletized, for easier handling and storage by adding a suitable binder such as molasses or fats under high pressure in an pelletizer or extruder (Grompone, 2005).

Quality

Solvent extraction results in a lower fat content, while dehulling decreases the fibre content, yielding a meal richer in protein. There are fully decorticated meals (high protein, low fibre), partially decorticated meals and non-decorticated meals (low protein, high fibre) with no clear separation between these grades. Like other protein feeds such as fish meal or soybean meal, sunflower meal is usually graded and sold on the basis of its protein content, for example "28", "29", "37", etc. In the USA, protein level and process of manufacture must be mentioned in order to inform users about the quality of the sunflower meal (NCPA, 2008). The colour of sunflower meal ranges from grey to black depending on the degree of dehulling (meals with less hulls are lighter) and on the extraction process (Naidu, 2008).

Though it contains less protein and much more fibre than soybean meal, sunflower meal is a valuable livestock feed, particularly for ruminants and rabbits, and under certain conditions for pigs and poultry.

Nutritional aspects
Nutritional attributes 

Sunflower meal is one of the major protein meals used for livestock feeding, particularly for ruminants. It is generally a valuable and safe product, whose protein, fibre and oil contents are highly variable and driven by variations of the oil extraction process. Its protein content ranges from 23% DM for some non-dehulled, mechanically-extracted meals, to more than 40% for highly decorticated, solvent-extracted meals. However, usual ranges for protein are 29-33% DM for non-dehulled meals and 35-39% DM for dehulled and partially dehulled meals. The fibre content is directly linked to the presence of hulls: crude fibre ranges from 27 to 31% DM for non-dehulled meals and from 20 to 26% for dehulled and partially dehulled sunflower meals. The lignin content is important, in the 9-12% range, even for dehulled meals. Solvent-extracted sunflower meals contain about 2-3% DM of residual oil, but mechanically-extracted meals may contain up to 30% oil depending on the amount of pressing. This oil content gives expeller meals a higher gross energy (22 MJ/kg DM or more vs. 19 MJ/kg DM for solvent-extracted meals), but these meals contain less protein than solvent-extracted ones.

One particularly interesting trait of sunflower meal is the absence of intrinsic antinutritional factors: unlike other oil meals, including those of soybean, rapeseed or cotton, it does not require heating or special attention before being fed. Its amino acid profile is richer in sulfur-containing amino acids, particularly methionine, than other protein sources, but its lysine content is much lower than that of soybean meal (3.5 vs. 6.1% protein). Sunflower meal is considered to be lysine-deficient for several monogastric species (Poncet et al., 2003; Steen, 1989; Villamide et al., 1998; McNab, 2002). Sunflower meal is also a valuable source of calcium, phosphorus and B vitamins (Grompone, 2005).

The high fibre and lignin content of sunflower meal tends to reduce nutrient digestibility, and its energy values are lower than those of soybean meal. It is suitable for ruminants and rabbits, but only for pigs and poultry with low energy requirements (animals at maintenance, laying hens) or specific fibre requirements (sows) (CETIOM, 2003). In other monogastrics, such as broilers or growing pigs, the cost-effectiveness of including sunflower meal depends on the quality of the meal and on the availability and price of better sources of protein and lysine. It must be reiterated that sunflower meal is a highly variable ingredient where protein, fibre and fat cover a much larger range than in many common feeds. When formulating diets with sunflower meal, one should always take into account the actual analytical composition of the batch used, rather than table values. It must be noted that, unfortunately, many trials involving sunflower meal fail to mention the processes involved (dehulling and extraction type).

Potential constraints 

A major benefit of sunflower meal is that it does not have antinutritional factors such as those found in soybean, cottonseed and rapeseed meals. For that reason, it is considered to be a safe feed for all species, its only limitations being its fibre content and amino acid deficiencies. However, residues and contaminations from sunflower cultivation, harvest and post-harvest operations may be of concern.

Copper toxicity

The use of fertilizers containing copper occasionally result in high copper levels in sunflower products. Sheep are more susceptible to chronic copper poisoning than other livestock. In south-eastern Spain, deaths have been reported in lambs that had consumed sunflower meal with moderate Cu content (up to 14 mg/kg), but with high copper:molybdenum ratio (over 6:10), making toxicosis very likely. Sunflower products should be fed to sheep in combination with sources of molybdenum, such as green forage, that may help to prevent excessive accumulation of Cu in the liver (Garcia-Fernandez et al., 1999).

Contaminations during processing

Sunflower meal may be contaminated during harvest and post-harvest operations: risk factors are pesticides residues, hexane residues, dioxin contamination resulting from the utilization of anticaking agents, mycotoxin development due to poor drying before storage and salmonella (FEDIOL, 2010).

Eggshell staining

Chlorogenic acid, a phenolic compound present in sunflower meal, causes eggshell staining when eggs come in contact with sunflower meal dust. Feeding poultry with sunflower meal pellets and frequent egg collection alleviate this problem (Daghir, 2008).

Ruminants 

Sunflower meal has been used to feed ruminants for a long time and was appreciated in the 19th century as an excellent ingredient (Cornevin, 1892). Numerous experiments have since confirmed that, even in its non-dehulled form, sunflower meal can be used without problems as a protein supplement in ruminant diets. Sunflower meal can replace soybean meal (and other oil meals with a higher protein content, such as cottonseed meal or groundnut meal), provided that the diet is properly balanced for protein and fibre. Due to its high variability, users should allow for the precise protein, fibre and oil content of the sunflower meal used in the diet.

Nutritional value

Digestibility

In vivo OM digestibility of sunflower meal varies from 52 to 74% and is negatively correlated to fibre content: dehulled meals tend to be more digestible (about 66%) than non-dehulled meals (61%) (Economides, 1998; Irshaid et al., 2003; Molina Alcaide et al., 2003; Woods et al., 2003a; Arroyo et al., 2005; Beran et al., 2005; Mondal et al., 2008; Marcondes et al., 2009; Goes et al., 2010). ME values range from 8.6 to 11 MJ/kg DM.

Protein value

Sunflower meal protein is more degradable than that of other oil meals (Poncet et al., 2003). Values are usually in the 70-80% range though lower values as well as values over 90% have been reported (Sauvant et al., 2004; Domingues et al., 2010; Economides, 1998; Gonzalez et al., 1999; Molina Alcaide et al., 2003; Pop et al., 2006). In animals fed sunflower meal, rumen ammonia rapidly increases within 4 hours after feeding, which facilitates microbial synthesis and OM digestion (Shayo et al., 1997a). Heat treatment or toasting increases the proportion of rumen undegradable protein (Anderson, 2002). A treatment combining acid and heat reduced protein degradability from 80% to 34-38% (Arroyo et al., 2005). Fibrolytic enzymes may be used in the ration to break down sunflower fibres, releasing more energy and protein (Titi, 2003).

Dairy and beef cows

Sunflower meal can be the sole source of supplementary protein in diets for dairy cows (Blair, 2011). Milk production was similar when partially dehulled (Schingoethe et al., 1977) or fully dehulled sunflower meal (Parks et al., 1981) replaced soybean meal in dairy cow diets (Blair, 2011). In the USA, sunflower meal has been widely used in beef cow supplementation programs (Anderson, 2002). The following table presents examples of utilization of sunflower meal in dairy diets around the world:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
United States Lactating Holstein cows Replaced soybean meal (partially dehulled) 31% No effect on milk yield and composition Schingoethe et al., 1977
United Kingdom Lactating Friesian cows Compared to soybean meal and rapeseed meal (with maize silage). Sunflower meal supplemented with fish meal and meat and bone meal 76% No effect on milk yield and composition Vincent et al., 1990
France High yielding dairy cows Replaced rapeseed meal 15% No effect on milk yield (31.9 kg) and composition Brunschwig et al., 2002
Tanzania Crossbred zebu cows Sunflower meal added to maize bran,
4 kg/d		 31% Increased milk yield (8.1 vs. 6.6 l/d),
no effect on milk composition		 Mlay et al., 2005
Tanzania Mpwapwa cows Sunflower added to maize bran, 2 kg/d 50% Increased milk yield (5.5 kg/d vs. 4.6 kg/d) Shayo et al., 1997b
Zimbabwe Jersey,
Red Dane, crossbred cows		 Farm-made concentrate with maize and expeller sunflower cake, 4.5 kg/d + pasture + urea-treated maize stover 39% No effect on maize stover DMI, milk yield (5.8-6.0 kg/d) and milk protein (3.5-3.7%) but lower milk fat content (4.0 vs. 4.3%) which may be due to lower rumen acetic and butyric acids Ngongoni et al., 2007
India Crossbred cows Replaced groundnut and mustard meal in concentrate (3.6-3.8 kg/d) + oat forage 19-38% No effect on forage DMI (120 g/kg W0.75 ), DM digestibility (64-66%), milk yield (7.1-7.5 kg/d), milk fat (4.2-4.7%), milk protein (3.4-3.8%) Sharma et al., 2003
India Crossbred cows Replaced 50 or 75% cottonseed meal   Lower milk yield at 75% replacement (9.12 kg/d) but no effect at 50% (9.77 kg/d) Bade et al., 2008
Pakistan Lactating crossbred cows Replaced cottonseed meal concentrate (1kg/2kg of milk) 18-40% No effect on milk yield (9.15 vs. 9.59 kg/d) and milk fat (4.5%) but lower weight gain Jabbar et al., 2008

Sunflower meal is also used in the diet of dairy buffaloes:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
India Dairy buffaloes Replaced groundnut and mustard meal in concentrate (3.6-3.8 kg/d) + oat forage 19-38% No effect on DMI, DM and OM digestibility, milk yield (5.4-5.6 kg/d), milk fat (7%) and milk protein (3.7%) Sharma et al., 2003
Pakistan Lactating
Nilli-Ravi buffaloes		 Replaced 38% cottonseed meal 15% Increased milk yield (8.2 vs. 7.4 kg/d) and fat content (6.32 vs. 6.20%) Jabbar et al., 2009
Ibid. Ibid. Replaced 100% cottonseed meal 28% Decreased milk yield (7.4 vs. 7.8 kg/d) and increased fat content (6.31 vs. 6.20%) Ibid.

Growing cattle

Sunflower meal can be used as the sole source of protein in beef rations. In trials comparing sunflower meal with other protein sources, a similar performance was commonly observed in animals receiving isonitrogenous diets from different sources (Richardson et al., 1981; Anderson, 2002). The following table presents examples of utilization of sunflower meal in diets for growing cattle from around the world:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
Australia Weaned beef calves 3 kg sunflower meal + cereal grains + hay   1200 g/d over 70 d Dove et al., 2008
Zimbabwe Heifer calves, 26 d Farm-grown calf meal, TMR 39% No effect on DMI and daily weight gain Mandibaya et al., 1999
Pakistan Buffalo calves, 10-11 m, 100 kg Replaced up to 100% cottonseed meal Up to 36% Decreased DMI, diet digestibility and ADG (990 to 330 g/d), possibly due to increase in dietary lignin (3.5 to 6.4% DM) Yunus et al., 2004
Pakistan Male calves, 9-10 m,
70-90 kg		 Replaced up to 100% cottonseed meal;
2.5 kg forage		 Up to 28% No effect on DMI (5.5 kg) and ADG (720 g/d) Jabbar et al., 2006
Italy Steers,
700 kg		 Supplemented diet based on hay, straw and fam-mixed compound feed   No effect on daily weight gain (1200-1300 g/d) and carcass parameters Mattii et al., 2009
Texas, USA Steers,
270 kg		 Diet based on hay and urea Up to 20% No effect on DM, OM and protein digestibility Richardson et al., 1981
Ibid. Steers,
296 kg		 Replaced cottonseed meal in TMR 10.8% protein 5.5-11% No effect on diet digestibility and N retention Ibid.
Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. but TMR 13% protein 22% Higher DM and protein digestibility Ibid.
Brazil Steers, 20 m, 370 kg 55-60% maize silage + sunflower meal + energy source (maize grain, soybean hulls, maize germ meal) 20-25% No effect on DM digestibility, carcass quality and ADG (1110-1170 g/d) for all energy sources; higher microbial efficiency with soybean hulls or maize germ meal Mendes et al., 2005a; Mendes et al., 2005b; Mendes et al., 2006
Brazil Bulls, 380 kg Replaced 0 to 100% cottonseed cake in diet based on sugarcane silage Up to 41% diet DMI decreased at 75% and 100% (112-107 g/kg W0.75 vs. 119-125 g/kg 0.75). No effect on rumen pH and NH4 Domingues et al., 2010
Brazil Growing dairy cattle, 285 kg Replaced soybean meal (with maize silage) Up to 45% No effect on diet digestibility and silage DMI, but ADG tended to increase (1055-1211 g/d) Garcia et al., 2004; Garcia et al., 2006

Sheep

Dairy ewes

Sunflower meal can replace other protein sources in the diets of dairy ewes. Expeller sunflower cake (16% oil) tend to increase milk concentration of the c9,t11-CLA isomer and of unsaturated fatty acids (Amores et al., 2010). The following table summarises findings in dairy ewes fed sunflower meal:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
Spain Latxa,
60-65 kg		 Replaced 15% soybean meal (with hay and pasture)   No effect on milk yield (1.2 kg/d) and milk fat content (6.1%) Mandaluniz et al., 2010
Cyprus Chios,
61-63 kg		 Replaced 100% soybean meal 20% No effect on milk yield (1.5 kg/d) and milk fat content (5.7%) Economides, 1998
Jordan Awassi,
55-59 kg		 Replaced up to 100% soybean meal in TMR 20-38% Lower milk yield (0.26 vs. 0.31 kg/d) but same mik fat content (6.9-7.0%) Irshaid et al., 2003
India Ewes, 29 kg Replaced groundnut meal as sole concentrate (with straw)   No effect on DMI (44-46 g/kg W0.75) and digestibility of DM (55-57%), OM (58-60%) and protein (51%) Dutta et al., 2002
Fattening lambs

Sunflower meal was also found to promote better wool growth than cottonseed meal due its higher content in sulfur-containing amino acids (Richardson et al., 1981). The table summarises trials which have tested successfully the inclusion of sunflower meal in fattening lamb diets as a substitute for soybean meal, cottonseed meal or groundnut meal:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
Texas, USA 27 kg Replaced cottonseed meal in sorghum-based diet (12% protein) 5.5-22% No effect on ADG (0.230-0.260 g/d) and wool growth (6.2-6.9 g/cm²) Richardson et al., 1981
Ibid. Ibid. Replaced cottonseed meal in sorghum-based diet (8% protein) 5% No effect on ADG but higher wool growth (6.95 vs. 5.90 g/cm²) Ibid.
Brazil 14 kg Replaced 50 or 100% soybean meal in lambs fed low quality forage   ADG decreased from 140 g/d to 88-101 g/d, carcass characteristics linked to body weight decrease, but proportions (meat, fat) stayed the same Louvandini et al., 2007
Portugal 20 kg, 3 m Fed 90% maize grain and rye-grass pasture 10% ADG 167 g/d Santos-Silva et al., 2003
Sudan 21.4 kg Compared to groundnut, sesame and cottonseed cake in TMR (14.5% protein) 30% No effect on ADG (183 g/d) and DMI (1.18 kg/d). Some carcass composition parameters lower than with groundnut cake or sesame cake Suliman et al., 2007
Jordan Awassi,
40-43 kg		 Replaced 50 or 100% soybean meal 17-35% No effect on ADG and diet digestibility Irshaid et al., 2003
India 9-10 m,
27.6 kg		 Replaced groundnut meal in TMR, 115 d ad libitum 13% No effect on DMI (1-1.2 kg), digestibility (DM 56-59%, OM 59-62%, protein 59-62%), ADG (75-83 g/d) and carcass traits Nagalakshmi et al., 2011
Pakistan 18.5 kg,
9-12 m		 Replaced up to 100% cottonseed meal in TMR (17% protein), ad libitum 12-36% No effect on weight gain (6-6.8 kg), higher DMI: 3.7 vs. 2.7 kg/d Yagoub et al., 2009

Goats

There is limited information on the use of sunflower meal in goats, but it is generally possible to replace some of the main diet ingredients with sunflower meal without degrading performance, as summarized in the table below:

Country Animals Experiment Inclusion rate Results Reference
Spain Dairy goats Replaced soybean meal in TMR, 22 weeks 9% No effect on milk yield, milk composition Fernandez et al., 2004
Spain Dairy goats,
1 kg milk/d,
43 kg		 Comparison with cottonseed, faba beans or corn gluten feed 20% Higher milk production but lower milk protein Sanz Sampelayo et al., 1999
Spain Dairy goats, 38 kg Replaced soybean meal in TMR, 30 days 9% No effect on milk yield, milk composition, higher DMI Fernandez et al., 2003
Cyprus Dairy goats,
2 kg milk/d		 Replaced part of soybean meal
and 50% straw		 20% No effect on milk yield, milk composition Economides, 1998
Jordan Growing kids Replaced soybean meal in TMR (15% protein) 20% No effect on DMI and ADG Titi, 2003
India Male goats, 25 kg Replaced groundnut meal 20% No effect on DMI, DM and OM digestibility but lower N digestibility Dutta et al., 2002

 

Pigs 

In pig diets, the use of sunflower meal is limited by its high level of fibre and its deficiency in several amino acids including lysine, threonine and tryptophan. Sunflower meal has a much lower energy value than soybean meal: the net energy value for growing pigs of a dehulled, high-protein sunflower meal is about 64% of that of low-protein soybean meal (6 vs. 9.3 MJ/kg DM respectively). The total energy range for sunflower meal is very wide: in a experiment comparing various levels of dehulling, NE estimates went from 5.4 to 7.9 MJ/kg DM for normal processes, and experimental products went from 3.5 to 9.0 MJ/k DM (Perez et al., 1986).

Growing pigs

Opinions differ on whether sunflower meal should be used or not for growing pigs. Some authors state that it should be completely avoided for all classes of growing pigs (CETIOM, 2003). Others recommend that while starter pigs should not receive sunflower meal, it can be fed up to 25-33% of the protein source to older animals (Blair, 2007; Chiba, 2001). Sunflower meal, unless it is of exceptional quality, is certainly not very suitable for growing animals with high energy and protein requirements. Sunflower meal used as soybean meal replacer in piglets and growing pigs diet resulted in lower feed intake, lower growth performance and lower carcass quality when the level of sunflower meal in the diet was above 10-11% (Lipinski et al., 2002; Shelton et al., 2001; Li DeFa et al., 2000; Cuca et al., 1974). Sunflower meal also resulted in lower feed efficiency than soybean meal (Shelton et al., 2001). Different studies showed that this problem could be alleviated, but not totally eliminated, by lysine and oil supplementation (Shelton et al., 2001; Cortamira et al., 2000; Wetscherek et al., 1993; Aherne et al., 1985), even when high-quality sunflower meal (twice-decorticated) was used (Cortamira et al., 2000). Sunflower meal used as the only protein source and supplemented with lysine yielded inconsistent growth performance, sometimes resulting in higher growth rate, sometimes in similar or lower ones (Akdag et al., 2008; Shelton et al., 2001; Wahlstrom, 1985). However, the utilization of sunflower meal for growing pigs will depend on its cost-effectiveness and local conditions. For example, in Turkey, sunflower meal supplemented with lysine gave similar results to soybean meal and successfully replaced kitchen wastes in piglet diets, resulting in better animal performance and feed efficiency (Akdag et al., 2008).

Finishing pigs and sows

Sunflower meal can be used at higher rates in diets for finishing and adult pigs (Blair, 2007; Chiba, 2001). In finishing pigs, inclusion rates up to 16-21% did not hamper growth performance and carcass quality (Carellos et al., 2005; Silva et al., 2002). Male animals had better growth performance than females when offered sunflower meal (Silva et al., 2002). However, higher inclusion levels may also result in lower performance and meat quality (soft backfat with higher linoleic acids) (Blair, 2007).

Sows and adult boars have lower lysine requirements and sunflower meal can be used as the sole protein source, provided that the total diet provides the required amount of digestible lysine. Sunflower meal did not impair reproductive performance of sows (Kleisiari, 2005). It was recommended for feeding to lactating sows provided that they were given a protein source rich in lysine (Blair, 2007).

Poultry 

In poultry feeding, sunflower meal is considered as a protein-rich but lysine-deficient and high-fibre ingredient, whose fibre fraction is mainly composed of insoluble sugars, resulting in low ME values that depend on the actual fibre content (Villamide et al., 1998). As a consequence, sunflower meal is a more suitable ingredient for laying hens than for birds with higher protein and energy requirements, such as broilers and turkeys (CETIOM, 2003). It may also be cost-effective to use sunflower meal for poultry diets in countries where soybean meal is not available or too expensive (Senkoylu et al., 1999).

Dehulled sunflower meals have higher ME values than non-dehulled meals, as they contain more protein and less fibre. Mechanically-extracted sunflower meal has a higher ME value due to its larger oil content, but it is less valuable as a protein source due to its lower protein. Processing may have complex effects, positive and negative, on the nutritional value of sunflower meal (San Juan et al., 2000; Zhang et al., 1994). While lysine content is low, its digestibility is good. The addition of crystalline lysine may be economically profitable, but eventually depends on the price of lysine at any given time. The use of exogenous enzymes for alleviating the negative effects of sunflower fibre has been intensively tested but without consistent results (Attia et al., 2003; Mushtaq et al., 2006).

Poultry feed formulators limit the use of high-fibre ingredients by adding the maximum level of crude fibre as a constraint. When this constraint is removed and when adequate levels of lysine and other amino acids are supplied in broiler diets, inclusion rates of sunflower meal can reach up to 30% without detrimental effects on performance (Mushtaq et al., 2009; Rao et al., 2006; Senkoylu et al., 2006). Diets containing large amounts of sunflower meal, including high-oil meal, tend to be bulky, resulting in lower feed consumption. Reducing bulkiness by pelleting increases feed intake and performance (gain and feed conversion ratio) (Senkoylu et al., 2006).

In layer diets, it is possible to introduce up to 30% sunflower meal without affecting performance (Deaton et al., 1979). In other bird species, pelleting may also improve feed efficiency by decreasing the bulkiness of sunflower meal-based diets, for example in diets for waterfowl (Vetesi et al., 1998). In turkey diets, the inclusion rate of sunflower meal seems to be more limited (less than 14%), as turkeys have higher requirements for protein and amino acids, and because sunflower meal may induce undesirable effects (decrease in the mass of small intestine and caecal tissues, and inhibition of the fermentation processes in the caeca) (Juskiewicz et al., 2010).

Rabbits 

In rabbit feeding, sunflower meal is a dual purpose raw material, being both a source of (more or less) balanced protein and a source of lignin-rich fibre. It is an ingredient suitable for rabbit feeding without technical restriction provided that protein level, protein quality and fibre composition are taken into account in diet formulation. Sunflower meal only supplies about 70% of the lysine requirements for growing and breeding rabbits, but exceeds the requirements for sulfur-containing amino acids, threonine and tryptophan (Lebas, 2004). Due to its lysine deficiency, sunflower meal is frequently used together with soybean meal or legume grains (Carabaño et al., 1992). Lignin content is very high, even in dehulled sunflower meal, and for that reason sunflower meal can be considered as a "safety" ingredient for maintaining digestive health in growing rabbits (Gidenne et al., 2010).

Sunflower was used in 33 out of 58 experimental diets described in the papers published at the 9th World Rabbit Congress in 2008, with an average inclusion rate of 12% (Lebas et al., 2009). However, many feeding studies in growing rabbits mention much higher acceptable inclusion rates, usually 20-25% (Martina, 1976; Aduku et al., 1988; Bhatt et al., 1999; Ismail et al., 1999; Kpodekon et al., 2009). In some experiments sunflower meal was incorporated at 38% or even 45% of the diet (Siddaramanna et al., 2009; Masoero et al., 1990). Because it is considered as a safe ingredient, sunflower meal is often included at 12-20% in the control diet in studies that test alternative ingredients or investigate the effects of fibre in rabbit nutrition (Lebas et al., 1977; Villena et al., 2008; Volek et al., 2008; Molette et al., 2009). Studies on rabbit reproduction often include sunflower meal at 12-16% in the control diet (Lebas, 1978; Lebas et al., 1996; de Blas et al., 1995; Alvarez et al., 2007).

Fish 

Sunflower meal is a valuable source of protein for fish species, particularly in its dehulled form. It is often used to replace soybean meal since it is free of trypsin inhibitors and has a higher vitamin content than soybean meal (Hertrampf et al., 2000).

Tilapia

Sunflower meal can be a cost-effective alternative to fish meal in tilapia, as shown by several experiments. Sunflower meal replaced 10 to 25% fish meal in the diets of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) (hulled meal; El-Saidy et al., 2002), and redbreast tilapia fingerlings (Tilapia rendalli) (Olvera-Novoa et al., 2002). In the latter study, the most cost-effective diet included 20% sunflower meal (Olvera-Novoa et al., 2002). L-methionine and lysine supplementation have been suggested to obtain optimal results (El-Saidy et al., 2002). A blend of sunflower meal, cottonseed meal, linseed meal and soybean meal (1:1:1:1) totally replaced fish meal and gave a better economic return without detrimental effect on animal performance and feed efficiency (El-Saidy et al., 2003). It was also shown that decorticated sunflower meal could replace a high proportion of fish meal provided that tilapia received adequate energy supplementation (Maina et al., 2002). Feeding tilapia sunflower meal increased the content in linoleic acid (18:2 ω6) in the fish, but resulted in low levels of desirable eicosapentaenoic acid (20:5 ω3) and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6 ω3) (Maina et al., 2003).

Indian Carp (Cirrhinus mrigala)

In a comparison between sunflower meal, maize gluten meal and wheat bran in diets for Indian carp fingerlings fed each ingredient at 4% (wet fish weight twice a day), sunflower meal gave the highest average body weight (Shabir et al., 2003).

Salmonids

Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

There have been many studies aiming at determining the possible replacement of fish meal or soybean meal in rainbow trout diets. Early trials found that increasing sunflower meal from 0% to 36.5% resulted in lower DM intake and lower performance (Tacon et al., 1984 cited by Hertrampf et al., 2000). However, later works reported inclusion rates up to 40% without deleterious effects on performance (growth, feed intake, feed efficiency and survival) (Gill et al., 2006).

Salmon (Salmo salar L.)

An experimental high-protein (41% DM) and extruded sunflower meal replaced about 33% of the protein provided by fish meal in the diet of post-smolt salmons, without any adverse effects on their performance (Gill et al., 2006).

European eel (Anguilla anguilla)

When sunflower meal replaced up to 50% fish meal in eel diets it decreased intake and growth performance, unless supplemented with essential amino acids (Higuera et al., 1999; Garcia Gallego et al., 1998).

Gilt-head bream (Sparus aurata)

Juveniles of gilt-head bream were fed up to 36% undecorticated sunflower meal. However, animal performance and feed efficiency were higher at 10-12% sunflower meal inclusion and the best economic return was obtained at 14% (Sanchez Lozano et al., 2007).

Other species 

Abalone (Haliotis midae)

Sunflower meal could be included at 20-30% of the diet for abalones. However, its apparent protein digestibility was lower than that of soybean meal (92 vs. 96%) (Sales et al., 2002; Sales et al., 2003). The inclusion of 30% sunflower meal had no effect on growth performance (Shipton et al., 2001).

Nutritional tables
Tables of chemical composition and nutritional value 

Avg: average or predicted value; SD: standard deviation; Min: minimum value; Max: maximum value; Nb: number of values (samples) used

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Dry matter % as fed 89.0 1.4 85.1 94.3 14806  
Crude protein % DM 32.4 3.1 23.9 44.7 14755  
Crude fibre % DM 27.9 3.3 16.1 37.4 14519  
NDF % DM 45.0 4.4 31.6 54.3 647 *
ADF % DM 32.0 3.6 21.0 39.4 644 *
Lignin % DM 10.7 1.6 6.1 13.6 540 *
Ether extract % DM 2.2 0.9 0.4 5.6 9688  
Ash % DM 7.1 0.7 5.5 9.4 5882  
Total sugars % DM 6.1 0.8 4.3 7.7 166  
Gross energy MJ/kg DM 19.4 0.3 18.7 20.2 75 *
               
Minerals Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Calcium g/kg DM 4.4 0.7 3.0 6.6 1017  
Phosphorus g/kg DM 11.6 1.7 8.6 16.5 1143  
Potassium g/kg DM 16.9 1.4 13.6 19.1 35  
Sodium g/kg DM 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 154  
Magnesium g/kg DM 5.6 0.5 4.7 6.4 27  
Manganese mg/kg DM 38 8 25 56 24  
Zinc mg/kg DM 96 9 81 114 24  
Copper mg/kg DM 32 5 25 44 23  
Iron mg/kg DM 271 52 207 361 8  
               
Amino acids Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Alanine % protein 4.3 0.3 3.9 5.1 54  
Arginine % protein 8.1 0.5 7.2 9.1 54  
Aspartic acid % protein 8.8 0.4 8.0 9.7 56  
Cystine % protein 1.7 0.2 1.4 2.1 68  
Glutamic acid % protein 18.9 1.4 17.0 22.4 56  
Glycine % protein 5.6 0.3 5.2 6.5 60  
Histidine % protein 2.4 0.2 2.1 3.0 52  
Isoleucine % protein 4.1 0.2 3.6 4.6 67  
Leucine % protein 6.2 0.3 5.6 7.0 67  
Lysine % protein 3.5 0.2 3.1 4.0 86  
Methionine % protein 2.3 0.2 1.9 2.5 70  
Phenylalanine % protein 4.4 0.2 3.9 4.9 64  
Proline % protein 4.2 0.4 3.5 4.9 26  
Serine % protein 4.2 0.2 3.7 4.6 56  
Threonine % protein 3.6 0.2 3.3 4.0 67  
Tryptophan % protein 1.3 0.0 1.2 1.3 19  
Tyrosine % protein 2.3 0.3 1.7 2.8 40  
Valine % protein 4.9 0.3 4.3 5.6 67  
               
Secondary metabolites Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Tannins (eq. tannic acid) g/kg DM 16.0 4.5 11.1 20.6 5  
Tannins, condensed (eq. catechin) g/kg DM 3.9       1  
               
Ruminant nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
OM digestibility, ruminants % 62.1 7.0 52.4 74.2 17 *
Energy digestibility, ruminants % 61.1 7.6 52.4 74.1 14 *
DE ruminants MJ/kg DM 11.8 1.3 10.4 14.3 8 *
ME ruminants MJ/kg DM 9.1 1.0 8.6 11.0 6 *
Nitrogen digestibility, ruminants % 84.5 3.6 78.2 88.9 16  
a (N) % 27.3 10.0 13.7 39.5 9  
b (N) % 60.3 17.4 34.6 79.0 11  
c (N) h-1 0.148 0.080 0.059 0.273 10  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=4%) % 80 9 70 92 8  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=6%) % 75 7 62 83 20  
               
Pig nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Energy digestibility, growing pig % 53.4 12.7 41.1 89.2 18 *
DE growing pig MJ/kg DM 10.3 2.1 8.1 15.1 17 *
MEn growing pig MJ/kg DM 9.4 1.1 9.0 11.2 3 *
NE growing pig MJ/kg DM 5.3         *
Nitrogen digestibility, growing pig % 78.4 4.3 70.0 88.1 18  
               
Poultry nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
AMEn cockerel MJ/kg DM 8.6 1.2 6.3 9.9 15  
               
Rabbit nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Energy digestibility, rabbit % 59.2 11.2 51.9 76.0 4 *
DE rabbit MJ/kg DM 11.5 1.7 10.0 14.4 5  
MEn rabbit MJ/kg DM 10.1         *
Nitrogen digestibility, rabbit % 81.0 3.8 75.5 84.0 4  

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

ADAS, 1987; ADAS, 1988; AFZ, 2011; Anderson et al., 1991; Arroyo et al., 2005; Aufrère et al., 1991; Bach Knudsen, 1997; Batterham et al., 1981; Beran et al., 2005; Bourdon et al., 1979; Calabro et al., 2000; Carré et al., 1986; Chaudhry et al., 1993; Cilliers et al., 1998; CIRAD, 1991; CIRAD, 1994; CIRAD, 2008; De Boever et al., 1988; De Boever et al., 1994; De Vuyst et al., 1963; Devegodwa et al., 1986; Dewar, 1967; Djouvinov et al., 1998; Economides, 1998; Erasmus et al., 1994; Fekete et al., 1986; Fernandez Carmona et al., 1996; Freer et al., 1984; Goes et al., 2010; Green et al., 1987; Green et al., 1989; Guillaume, 1978; Hadjipanayiotou et al., 2003; Irshaid et al., 2003; Jongbloed et al., 1990; Jorgensen et al., 1984; Kamalak et al., 2005; Karunajeewa et al., 1989; Knabe et al., 1989; Lekule et al., 1990; Lessire, 1990; Lund et al., 2008; Madsen et al., 1984; Maertens et al., 1985; Maertens et al., 2001; Mahabile et al., 2000; Marcondes et al., 2009; Mariscal Landin, 1992; Masoero et al., 1994; Maupetit et al., 1992; Mlay et al., 2006; Molina Alcaide et al., 2003; Moloney et al., 1998; Mondal et al., 2008; Nadeem et al., 2005; Nengas et al., 1995; Noblet et al., 1989; Noblet, 2001; Patterson et al., 1999; Perez et al., 1984; Perez et al., 1986; Pozy et al., 1996; Rao et al., 2000; San Juan et al., 1993; Sanz et al., 1994; Sauvant et al., 1985; Schingoethe et al., 1977; Skiba et al., 2000; Susmel et al., 1989; Swanek et al., 2001; Tamminga et al., 1990; Tiwari et al., 2006; Vérité et al., 1990; Walker, 1975; Weisbjerg et al., 1996; Whitehead et al., 1982; Wiseman et al., 1992; Woods et al., 1999; Woods et al., 2003

Last updated on 13/02/2014 10:45:00

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Dry matter % as fed 89.8 1.3 86.9 93.3 1911
Crude protein % DM 37.7 2.4 32.4 43.6 1928
Crude fibre % DM 22.8 2.6 17.0 29.3 1866
NDF % DM 38.7 3.6 30.2 43.8 73 *
ADF % DM 26.6 3.0 20.3 29.5 72 *
Lignin % DM 8.6 1.2 6.0 10.0 92 *
Ether extract % DM 1.8 0.6 0.5 4.1 1649
Ash % DM 7.7 0.6 6.3 9.1 823
Total sugars % DM 5.9 1.5 3.8 8.5 17
Gross energy MJ/kg DM 19.3 0.3 19.1 20.3 25 *
 
Minerals Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Calcium g/kg DM 4.6 0.7 3.3 6.4 277
Phosphorus g/kg DM 13.0 1.7 9.8 16.6 295
Potassium g/kg DM 17.7 0.8 16.7 19.1 16
Sodium g/kg DM 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 16
Magnesium g/kg DM 5.9 0.6 5.1 7.2 17
Manganese mg/kg DM 42 11 33 64 8
Zinc mg/kg DM 95 23 58 116 8
Copper mg/kg DM 51 42 9 126 8
Iron mg/kg DM 253 43 207 300 5
 
Amino acids Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Alanine % protein 4.3 0.3 3.8 4.9 17
Arginine % protein 8.5 0.6 7.6 10.1 19
Aspartic acid % protein 8.7 0.6 8.0 9.6 20
Cystine % protein 1.7 0.2 1.4 2.1 29
Glutamic acid % protein 18.8 1.9 17.0 23.9 19
Glycine % protein 5.8 0.5 5.2 6.5 20
Histidine % protein 2.5 0.3 2.1 3.0 17
Isoleucine % protein 4.1 0.2 3.7 4.6 22
Leucine % protein 6.2 0.4 5.5 7.0 22
Lysine % protein 3.5 0.2 3.1 4.0 35
Methionine % protein 2.3 0.2 1.9 2.5 28
Phenylalanine % protein 4.4 0.3 3.9 4.8 21
Proline % protein 4.1 0.5 3.3 4.7 15
Serine % protein 4.1 0.2 3.7 4.5 17
Threonine % protein 3.6 0.2 3.3 4.0 23
Tryptophan % protein 1.2 0.0 1.2 1.3 4
Tyrosine % protein 2.4 0.3 1.7 2.7 17
Valine % protein 4.9 0.4 4.2 5.4 22
 
Secondary metabolites Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Tannins (eq. tannic acid) g/kg DM 14.0 4.9 11.1 19.6 3
 
Ruminant nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
OM digestibility, ruminants % 66.4 4.4 64.0 74.2 5 *
Energy digestibility, ruminants % 65.6 4.8 63.4 74.1 5 *
DE ruminants MJ/kg DM 12.7 12.1 13.9 2 *
ME ruminants MJ/kg DM 9.6 8.6 10.4 2 *
Nitrogen digestibility, ruminants % 87.7 1.0 86.4 88.9 5
a (N) % 38.2 1
b (N) % 61.8 1
c (N) h-1 0.025 1
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=6%) % 79 4 74 82 3
 
Pig nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Energy digestibility, growing pig % 60.1 7.6 53.3 74.8 8 *
DE growing pig MJ/kg DM 11.6 1.3 10.5 14.3 8 *
MEn growing pig MJ/kg DM 10.6 *
NE growing pig MJ/kg DM 6.0 *
Nitrogen digestibility, growing pig % 81.2 3.2 77.2 88.1 9
 
Poultry nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
AMEn cockerel MJ/kg DM 8.8 1.4 5.8 10.9 19
 
Rabbit nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Energy digestibility, rabbit % 74.4 *
DE rabbit MJ/kg DM 14.4 1

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

ADAS, 1987; ADAS, 1988; AFZ, 2011; Aufrère et al., 1991; Bach Knudsen, 1997; Batterham et al., 1981; De Boever et al., 1994; Erasmus et al., 1994; Freer et al., 1984; Green et al., 1989; Guillaume, 1978; Knabe et al., 1989; Lekule et al., 1990; Lessire, 1990; Mariscal Landin, 1992; Masoero et al., 1994; Mondal et al., 2008; Perez et al., 1986; San Juan et al., 1993; Sanz et al., 1994; Schingoethe et al., 1977; Wiseman et al., 1992

Last updated on 13/02/2014 10:51:41

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Dry matter % as fed 88.9 1.3 85.5 93.7 8052  
Crude protein % DM 31.3 1.9 24.4 36.7 8045  
Crude fibre % DM 29.1 2.2 22.6 37.2 7925  
NDF % DM 46.4 3.1 40.3 53.2 188 *
ADF % DM 33.2 2.4 27.9 38.9 189 *
Lignin % DM 11.2 1.1 8.8 13.5 222 *
Ether extract % DM 2.3 0.8 0.6 5.3 5279  
Ash % DM 7.0 0.6 5.6 8.9 3054  
Total sugars % DM 5.9 0.7 4.4 7.5 97  
Gross energy MJ/kg DM 19.4 0.2 19.1 20.2 17 *
               
Minerals Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Calcium g/kg DM 4.3 0.6 3.2 6.2 582  
Phosphorus g/kg DM 11.1 1.3 8.7 14.5 628  
Potassium g/kg DM 16.0 1.8 12.5 18.8 9  
Sodium g/kg DM 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.5 85  
Magnesium g/kg DM 5.3 1.0 3.0 6.4 9  
Manganese mg/kg DM 43 7 35 53 7  
Zinc mg/kg DM 92 4 88 97 7  
Copper mg/kg DM 30 3 25 33 8  
Iron mg/kg DM 274   248 299 2  
               
Amino acids Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Alanine % protein 4.3 0.4 3.9 5.1 17  
Arginine % protein 8.0 0.7 7.1 9.8 19  
Aspartic acid % protein 8.9 0.6 8.2 10.5 18  
Cystine % protein 1.7 0.1 1.4 1.9 17  
Glutamic acid % protein 19.2 1.6 16.6 22.6 18  
Glycine % protein 5.7 0.3 5.0 6.5 18  
Histidine % protein 2.5 0.3 2.0 3.4 19  
Isoleucine % protein 4.2 0.2 3.8 4.5 18  
Leucine % protein 6.2 0.3 5.9 7.1 18  
Lysine % protein 3.6 0.2 3.3 3.9 21  
Methionine % protein 2.3 0.1 2.1 2.5 17  
Phenylalanine % protein 4.4 0.2 4.1 5.0 18  
Proline % protein 4.2 0.4 3.7 4.9 5  
Serine % protein 4.3 0.2 3.9 5.0 18  
Threonine % protein 3.7 0.2 3.3 4.1 19  
Tryptophan % protein 1.2 0.1 1.2 1.3 8  
Tyrosine % protein 2.3 0.5 1.8 3.3 15  
Valine % protein 5.0 0.4 4.5 5.9 18  
               
Ruminant nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
OM digestibility, ruminants % 61.2 6.8 54.4 72.5 5 *
Energy digestibility, ruminants % 60.1 7.2 53.2 72.8 5 *
DE ruminants MJ/kg DM 11.7 1.1 11.7 14.3 4 *
ME ruminants MJ/kg DM 8.9 1.0 8.6 11.0 4 *
Nitrogen digestibility, ruminants % 85.8 2.2 82.3 88.3 5  
a (N) % 26.6   13.7 39.5 2  
b (N) % 35.6 1.0 34.6 36.6 3  
c (N) h-1 0.172 0.089 0.104 0.273 3  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=4%) % 91   91 92 2  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=6%) % 75 21 44 90 4  
               
Pig nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Energy digestibility, growing pig % 51.9 5.2 41.1 56.5 7 *
DE growing pig MJ/kg DM 10.1 1.1 8.1 11.3 7 *
MEn growing pig MJ/kg DM 9.2   9.0 10.5 2 *
NE growing pig MJ/kg DM 5.1         *
Nitrogen digestibility, growing pig % 73.3 4.3 66.6 79.3 7  
               
Poultry nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
AMEn cockerel MJ/kg DM 6.2   6.2 6.3 2  
               
Rabbit nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Energy digestibility, rabbit % 56.2         *
DE rabbit MJ/kg DM 10.9   10.3 11.5 2  
MEn rabbit MJ/kg DM 9.6         *
Nitrogen digestibility, rabbit % 81.6       1  

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

ADAS, 1987; ADAS, 1988; AFZ, 2011; Aufrère et al., 1991; Bach Knudsen, 1997; Beran et al., 2005; Carré et al., 1986; CIRAD, 2008; De Boever et al., 1988; De Boever et al., 1994; Fernandez Carmona et al., 1996; Goes et al., 2010; Green et al., 1987; Green et al., 1989; Karunajeewa et al., 1989; Lekule et al., 1990; Marcondes et al., 2009; Nengas et al., 1995; Noblet et al., 1989; Noblet, 2001; Perez et al., 1986; San Juan et al., 1993; Walker, 1975; Wiseman et al., 1992

Last updated on 13/02/2014 10:58:26

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Dry matter % as fed 91.8 1.5 88.9 94.9 179  
Crude protein % DM 27.9 3.6 22.7 37.5 186  
Crude fibre % DM 26.2 3.7 17.9 34.6 176  
NDF % DM 42.9 4.3 32.2 45.3 6 *
ADF % DM 30.2 4.8 23.1 37.2 6 *
Lignin % DM 10.0 1.8 6.6 12.2 7 *
Ether extract % DM 13.8 3.9 7.7 23.1 97  
Ash % DM 5.7 0.7 4.5 7.2 126  
Total sugars % DM 4.4 0.9 3.4 7.6 22  
Gross energy MJ/kg DM 21.8 0.6 20.1 22.0 8 *
               
Minerals Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Calcium g/kg DM 3.9 1.5 1.8 7.8 16  
Phosphorus g/kg DM 9.2 1.8 5.6 12.5 20  
Potassium g/kg DM 11.2 1.4 10.2 12.8 3  
Sodium g/kg DM 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 4  
Magnesium g/kg DM 3.6 0.8 2.8 4.8 5  
Zinc mg/kg DM 77   64 90 2  
Copper mg/kg DM 26   24 27 2  
Iron mg/kg DM 422       1  
               
Amino acids Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Alanine % protein 4.4       1  
Aspartic acid % protein 7.8       1  
Cystine % protein 1.5       1  
Glutamic acid % protein 15.6       1  
Glycine % protein 4.7       1  
Isoleucine % protein 3.8       1  
Leucine % protein 6.0       1  
Lysine % protein 3.3   3.1 3.4 2  
Methionine % protein 2.3       1  
Phenylalanine % protein 4.3       1  
Serine % protein 3.8       1  
Threonine % protein 3.3       1  
Valine % protein 4.8       1  
               
Ruminant nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
OM digestibility, ruminants % 63.6         *
Energy digestibility, ruminants % 64.1         *
DE ruminants MJ/kg DM 14.0         *
ME ruminants MJ/kg DM 10.9         *
ME ruminants (gas production) MJ/kg DM 4.1       1  
Nitrogen digestibility, ruminants % 75.0       1  
a (N) % 91.1   89.5 92.8 2  
b (N) % 5.3   4.0 6.6 2  
c (N) h-1 0.162   0.156 0.167 2  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=4%) % 95   95 96 2  
Nitrogen degradability (effective, k=6%) % 95   94 96 2  
               
Pig nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
Energy digestibility, growing pig % 55.6         *
DE growing pig MJ/kg DM 12.1         *
MEn growing pig MJ/kg DM 11.1         *
NE growing pig MJ/kg DM 6.2         *
Nitrogen digestibility, growing pig % 78.0       1  
               
Poultry nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb  
AMEn cockerel MJ/kg DM 10.8 0.5 10.4 11.4 3  

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

Adamidou et al., 2009; AFZ, 2011; Albar, 2006; Beran et al., 2005; Bredon, 1957; CIRAD, 1991; CIRAD, 2008; Gowda et al., 2004; Guillaume, 1978; Jacob et al., 1996; Khanum et al., 2007; Lekule et al., 1990; Neumark, 1970; Pozy et al., 1996; Sibanda et al., 1993; Vermorel, 1973

Last updated on 30/09/2013 13:10:51

References
References 
Abas, I. ; Ozpnar, H. ; Kutay, H. C. ; Kahraman, R. ; Eseceli, H., 2005. Determination of the metabolizable energy (ME) and net energy lactation (NEL) contents of some feeds in the Marmara Region by in vitro gas technique. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 29: 751-757 web icon
Abdel-Hakim, N. F. M. ; Lashin, M. E. ; Al-Azab, A. A. ; Nazmi, H. M., 2008. Effect of replacing soybean meal protein by other plant protein sources on growth performance and economic efficiency of mono sex Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) cultured in tanks. Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture, October 12-14, 2008: 739-755. Cairo, Egypt web icon
Aduku, A. O. ; Dim, N. I. ; Aganga, A. A., 1988. Note on a comparative evaluation of palm kernel meal, peanut meal and sunflower meal in diets for weanling rabbits. J. Appl. Rabbit Res., 11 (4): 264-266
Akande, K. E. ; Doma, U. D. ; Agu, H. O. ; Adamu, H. M., 2010. Major antinutrients found in plant protein sources: their effect on nutrition. Pakistan J. Nutr., 9 (8): 827-832 web icon
Akdag, F. ; Elmaz, O. ; Kutay, C. ; Demir, H., 2008. Effect of different diets on growth performance and feed efficiency in early weaned piglets. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 32 (1): 7-11 web icon
Alvarez, J. L. ; Marguenda, I. ; García-Rebollar, P. ; Carabaño, R. ; De Blas, C. ; Corujo, A. ; García-Ruiz, A. I., 2007. Effects of type and level of fibre on digestive physiology and performance in reproducing and growing rabbits. World Rabbit Science, 15: 9-17 web icon
Amores, G. ; Virto, M. ; Arranz, J. ; Barrón, L. J. R. ; Abilleira, E. ; Ruiz de Gordoa, J. C. ; Nájera, A. I. ; Ruiz, R. ; Albisu, M. ; Pérez-Elortondo, F. J. ; Larronde, E. ; Mandaluniz, N. ; de Renobales, M., 2010. Oil-cake’s supplementation on dairy sheep. (2) Effect on milk fatty acid content. Proc. 7th Int. Seminar FAO-CIHEAM Network on Sheep and Goats Sub-Network on Production Systems Economic, social and environmental sustainability in sheep and goat production systems, Zaragoza, Spain, 10-12 Nov. 2010
Anderson, V., 2002. Sunflower meal in beef cattle diets. North Dakota State University Extension Service web icon
Arroyo, J. M. ; González, J. ; Alvir, M. R. ; Rodríguez, C. A. ; Ouarti, M., 2005. Protection of protein from sunflower meal by treatments with acid solutions and heat. XI Jornadas sobre Produccion Animal, Zaragoza, Spain, 11-12 Mayo, 2005: 542-544 web icon
Attia, Y. A. ; Al-Harthi, M. A. ; El-Deek, A. A., 2003. Nutritive value of undehulled sunflower meal as affected by multienzyme supplementation to broiler diets. Arch. Geflügelk. , 67 (3):97-106 web icon
Aureli, R. ; Guggenbuhl, P. ; Broz, J., 2015. Effects of protease supplementation on the amino acid standardized ileal digestibility in sunflower, sorghum, wheat middling and fish meal in broiler chickens. 11e J. Rech. Avicole et Palmipèdes à Foie Gras, Tours, 25-26 mars 2015, 650-655 web icon
Babiker, M. S., 2012. Chemical composition of some non-conventional and local feed resources for poultry in Sudan. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 11 (4): 283-287 web icon
Bade, R. N. ; Kank, V. D. ; Patil, M. B. ; Gadegaonkar, G. M. ; Jagadale, S. D. ; Phondba, B. T., 2008. Effect of replacement of cottonseed cake with sunflower extraction on lactation performance of cows. Anim. Nutr. Feed Technol., 8 (2): 279-284 web icon
Bandemer, S. L. ; Evans, R. J., 1963. Nutrients in seeds, amino composition of some seeds. J. Agric. Food Chem., 11 (2): 134 web icon
Bedingar, T. ; Degefa, G., 1990. Feed values and feeding potential of major agro-byproducts. In: Trends in agro-byproducts and their feeding potential in sub-Saharan Africa. Working document No. 14, LED, ILRI web icon
Beran, F. H. B. ; Siliva, L. D. F. ; Ribeiro E. L. A. ; Castro V. S. ; Correa R. A. ; Kagueyama E. O. ; Rocha M. A., 2005. In situ ruminal degradability of dry matter, organic matter and crude protein of some concentrated supplements used in the feeding of bovines. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, Londrina. 26 (3): 405-418 web icon
Berwanger, E. ; Nunes, R. V. ; Pozza, P. C. ; Oliveira, T. M. M. de ; Scherer, C. ; Frank, R. ; Bayerle, D. F. ; Henz, J. R., 2014. Nutritional and energy values of sunflower cake for broilers. Semina: Ciências Agrárias (Londrina), 35 (6): 3429-3438 web icon
Bhatt, R. S. ; Sawal, R. K., 1999. Effect of replacement of groundnut cake with sunflower cake on the biological performance of broiler rabbits. Egyptian J. Rabbit Sci., 9 (1) : 43-52
Blair, R., 2007. Nutrition and feeding of organic pigs. Cabi Series, CABI, Wallingford, UK web icon
Blair, R., 2011. Nutrition and feeding of organic cattle. CAB Books, CABI web icon
Bonetti, B. ; Lapierre, O. ; Tran, G., 1994. 4ème rapport intermédiaire d'exécution: Les farines de viande, les tourteaux d'extraction de tournesol, la luzerne déshydratée, le blé, l'orge, le maïs, le pois. In: Contribution à la définition d'un cahier des charges pour l'identification et la caractérisation des matières premières. Convention Sypram/ Banque de données de l'alimentation animale - AFZ
Bredon, R. M., 1957. Feeding of livestock in Uganda. Uganda Protectorate. Department of Veterinary Services and Animal Industry. Occasional Bulletin No. 1
Brunschwig P. ; Lamy, J. M., 2002. Utilisation de féverole ou de tourteau de tournesol comme sources protéiques dans l’alimentation des vaches laitières. Rencontres Recherches Ruminants, 9: 316 web icon
Campbell, E. J., 1983. Sunflower oil. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc., 60 (2): 339A web icon
Carabaño, R.; Fraga, M. J., 1992. The use of local feeds for rabbits. Options Méditerranéennes - Série Séminaires, 17: 141-158 web icon
Carellos, D. de C. ; Lima, J. A. de F. ; Fialho, E. T. ; Freitas, R. T. F. de; Silva, H. O. ; Branco, P. A. C. ; Souza, Z. A. de; Vieira Neto, J., 2005. Evaluation of sunflower meal on growth and carcass traits of finishing pigs. Ciencia e Agrotecnologia, 29 (1): 208-215 web icon
Carré, P, 2009. Review and evaluation major and most promising processing technologies for oil seed pretreatment and extraction.Sustoil. D2.1: Report about dehulling, the first step of oilseeds bioreffining. Sustoil: Developing advanced Biorefinery schemes for integration into existing oil production/transesterification plants. WP 2: Optimisation of primary processing (e.g. oil extraction and refinery). Creol web icon
CETIOM, 2003. Sunflower meal: quality protein and fibre. Fiches Techniques Octobre 2003. Edition CETIOM web icon
Chandrasekharaiah, M. ; Sampath, K. T. ; Thulasi, A. ; Anandan, S., 2001. In situ protein degradability of certain feedstuffs in the rumen of cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 71 (3): 261-264
Chandrasekharaiah, M. ; Sampath, K. T. ; Praveen, U. S. ; Umalatha, 2002. Evaluation of chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of certain commonly used concentrate ingredients and fodder/top feeds in ruminant rations. Indian J. Dairy Biosci., 13 (2): 28-35
Chapoutot, P., 1998. Étude de la dégradation in situ des constituants pariétaux des aliments pour ruminants. Thèse Docteur en Sciences Agronomiques, Institut National Agronomique Paris-Grignon, Paris (FRA), 1998/11/17.
Chaudhry, A. S. ; Webster, A. J. F., 2001. Nutrient composition and the use of solubility to estimate degradability of food proteins in cattle. J. Sci. Food Agric., 81 (11): 1077-1086 web icon
Chiba, L. I., 2001. Proteins supplements. In: A. J. Lewis and L. L. Southern (eds.) Swine nutrition (second edition). p 35. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C. web icon
Cilliers, S. C.; Sales, J.; Hayes, J. P.; Chwalibog, A.; Du Preez, J. J., 1999. Comparison of metabolisable energy values of different foodstuffs determined in ostriches and poultry. Br. Poult. Sci., 40 (4): 491—494 web icon
Cornevin, C., 1892. Des résidus industriels dans l'alimentation du bétail. Firmin-Didot, Paris web icon
Cortamira, O. ; Gallego, A. ; Kim, S. W., 2000. Evaluation of twice decorticated sunflower meal as a protein source compared with soybean meal in pig diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 13 (9): 1296-1303 web icon
Cuca, G. ; M. ; Bernal, H. ; A., 1974. Sunflower meal (Helianthus annuus) in diets for growing and finishing pigs. Asoc. Latinoam. Prod. Anim. Mem., 9: 281-287
Daghir, N. J., 2008. Poultry production in hot climates. Second Edition, Cabi Series, CABI web icon
Danesh Mesgaran, M. D. ; Jahani-Azizabadi, H. ; Heravi Moussavi, A. R., 2008. Comparison of techniques to determine the ruminal and post ruminal protein disapperance of various oilseed meals. Res. J. Biol. Sci., 3 (9): 1028-1033 web icon
de Blas, J. C. ; Taboada, E. ; Mateos, G. G. ; Nicodemus, N. ; Mendez, J., 1995. Effect of substitution of starch for fiber and fat in isoenergetic diets on nutrient digestibility and reproductive performance of rabbits. J. Anim. Sci., 73 (4): 1131-1137 web icon
de Vuyst, A. ; Vervack, W. ; Van Belle, M. ; Arnould, R. ; Moreels, A., 1963. Amino acids in oil cakes. Agricultura, Louvain, 11:385-390
Deaton, J. W. ; Mc Naughton, J. L. ; Burdick, D., 1979. High fibre sunflower meal as a replacement for soyabean meal in layer diets. Br. Poult. Sci., 20:159-162. web icon
Domingues, A. R. ; Silva, L. D. F. ; Ribeiro, E. L. A. ; Castro, V. S. ; Barbosa, M. A. A. F. ; Mori, R. M. ; Vieira, M. T. L. ; Sliva, J. A. O., 2010. Intake, ruminal parameters and plasmatic urea concentration in beef cattle fed diets with different levels of sunflower cake in substitution to the cotton meal. Ciências Agrárias, Londrina, 31 (4): 1059-1070 web icon
Dove, H. ; Freer, M. ; Axelsen, A. ; Donnelly, J. R., 2008. Responses to grain: sunflower meal supplements by weaned calves grazing mature pasture or eating hay in pens. Aust. J. Exp. Agric., 48 (6/7): 811-817 web icon
Dutta, N.; Sharma, K.; Naulia, U., 2002. Use of undecorticated sunflower cake as a critical protein supplement in sheep and goats fed wheat straw. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 15 (6): 834-837) web icon
Economides, S., 1998. The nutritive value of sunflower meal and its effects on replacing cereal straw in the diets of lactating ewes and goats. Livest. Prod. Sci., 55: 89-97 web icon
El-Saidy, D. M. S. D. ; Gaber, M. M. A., 2002. Evaluation of hulled sunflower meal as a dietary protein source for Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus (L.), fingerlings. Annals Agric. Sci., 40 (2): 831-841
El-Saidy, D. M. S. D. ; Gaber, M. M. A., 2003. Replacement of fish meal with a mixture of different plant protein sources in juvenile Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus (L.) diets. Aquacult. Res., 34 (13): 1119-1127 web icon
European Commission, 2007. Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91. Official J. European Union, L 189, 20.7.2007, 1-23 web icon
Ewing, 1997. The Feeds Directory Vol 1. Commodity Products. Context Publications, Leicestershire, England. web icon
FAS, 2011. Sunflowerseed and Products World Supply and Distribution. Foreign Agricultural Service - USDA web icon
FEDIOL, 2010. Risk assessment of the chain of sunflower seed meal and oil products. FEDIOL web icon
Fernandes, R. T. V. ; Arruda, A. M. V. de ; Melo, A. da S. ; Marinho, J. B. M., 2017. Digestibility, protein digestible and metabolizable energy of grain and sunflower meal for growth slow roosters. PUBVET, 11 (5): 482-488 web icon
Fernández, C. ; Sánchez-Seiquer, P. ; Sánchez, A., 2003. Use of a total mixed ration with three sources of protein as an alternative feeding for dairy goats on Southeast of Spain. Pakistan J. Nutr., 2 (1): 18-24 web icon
Fernández, C. ; Rubert-Alemán, J. ; Sánchez-Séiquer, P., 2004. Effect of two sources of protein on performance in Murciano-Granadina goats during lactation. Options Méditerranéennes : Série A, 59: 79-83 web icon
Garcia, J. A. S. ; Vieira, P. de F. ; Cecon, P. R. ; Melo, G. M. P. de; Martins, A. de S. ; Setti, M. C., 2004. Apparent digestibility of sunflower meal in growing dairy cattle feeding. Ciência Anim. Bras., 5 (3): 123-129 web icon
Garcia, J. A. S. ; Vieira, P. de F. ; Cecon, P. R. ; Setti, M. C. ; McManus, C. ; Louvandini, H., 2006. Performance of growing cattle fed sunflower meal. Ciência Anim. Bras., 7 (3): 223-233 web icon
García-Gallego, M. ; Akharbach, H. ; Higuera, M. de la, 1998. Use of protein sources alternative to fish meal in diets with amino acids supplementation for the European eel (Anguilla anguilla). Anim. Sci., 66 (1): 285-292 web icon
Garcia-Fernandez, A. J. ; Motas-Guzman, M. ; Navas, I. ; Maria-Mojica, P. ; Romero, D., 1999. Sunflower meal as cause of chronic copper poisoning in lambs in southeastern Spain. Can. Vet. J., 40: 799-801 web icon
Gidenne, T.; García, J.; Lebas, F.; Licois, D., 2010. Nutrition and feeding strategy: interactions with pathology. In: Nutrition of the rabbit - 2nd edition. de Blas, C.; Wiseman, J. (Eds). CAB International, UK web icon
Gill, N., 2006. Nutritive value of partially dehulled and extruded sunflower meal for post-smolt Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in sea water. Aquacult. Res., 37 (13): 1348–1359 web icon
Goes, R. H. T. B. ; Souza, K. A. ; Patussi, R. A. ; Cornelio, T. C. ; Oliveira, E. R. ; Brabes, K. C. S., 2010. In situ ruminal degradability of crambe, sunflower and soybean seeds and their by-products in sheep feeding. Acta Scientiarum - Animal Sciences Maringá, 32 (3): 271-277 web icon
Göhl, B., 1982. Les aliments du bétail sous les tropiques. FAO, Division de Production et Santé Animale, Roma, Italy web icon
Golob, P. ; Farrell, G. ; Orchard, J. E., 2002. Crop Post-harvest: Principles and practice, volume 1. In: Golob, P.; Farell, G.; Orchard, J. E. Crop Post-harvest: Science and Technology. John Wiley & Sons web icon
Gonzalez, J. ; Sanchez, L. ; Alvir, M. R., 1999. Estimation of intestinal digestibility of undegraded sunflower meal protein from nylon bag measurements. A mathematical model. Reprod. Nutr. Dev., 39: 607-616 web icon
Green, S. ; Bertrand, S. L. ; Duron, M. J. C. ; Maillard, R., 1987. Digestibilities of amino acids in soyabean, sunflower and groundnut meals, determined with intact and caecectomised cockerels. Br. Poult. Sci., 28 (4): 643-652 web icon
Green, S. ; Kiener, T., 1989. Digestibilities of nitrogen and amino acids in soya-bean, sunflower, meat and rapeseed meals measured with pigs and poultry. Anim. Prod., 48 (48): 157-179 web icon
Grompone, M. A., 2005. Sunflower oil. In: Bailey’s Industrial Oil and Fat Products, Sixth Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc web icon
Hertrampf, J. W.; Piedad-Pascual, F., 2000. Handbook on ingredients for aquaculture feeds. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 624 pp. web icon
Higuera, M. de la; Akharbach, H. ; Hidalgo, M.C. ; Peragon, J. ; Lupianez, J. A. ; Garcia-Gallego, M. , 1999. Liver and white muscle protein turnover rates in the European eel (Anguilla anguilla): effects of dietary protein quality. Aquaculture, 179 (1–4): 203–216 web icon
Hurt, E. F., 1947. Sunflower for food, fodder and fertility. London, Faber and Faber
Hyman, E. L., 1992. Local agro-processing with sustainable technology. Sunflower seed oil in Tanzania. Gatekeeper series No. SA 33 1992 web icon
IndexMundi, 2019. Agricultural production, supply, and distribution charts. IndexMundi, North Carolina, USA web icon
Irshaid, R. H. ; Harb, M. Y. ; Titi, H. H., 2003. Replacing soybean meal with sunflower seed meal in the ration of Awassi ewes and lambs. Small Rumin. Res., 50 (1): 109-116 web icon
Ismail, F. S. A. ; Gippert, T., 1999. Using sunflower by-product in growing rabbit diets. Egyptian J. Rabbit Sci., 9 (2): 285-295
Jabbar, M. A. ; Anjum, M. I. ; Rehman, S. ; Shahzad, W., 2006. Comparative efficiency of sunflower meal and cottonseed cakes in the feed of crossbred calves for meat production. Pakistan Vet. J., 26 (3): 126-128 web icon
Jabbar, M. A. ; Ahmad ,S. ; Riffat, S., 2008. Effect of replacing cotton seed cake with sunflower meal in the rations of lactating crossbred cows. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 1: 11-13 web icon
Jabbar, M. A. ; Marghazani, I. B. ; Saima, 2009. Effect of replacing cotton seed cake with sunflower meal on milk yield and milk composition in lactating nili-ravi buffaloes. J. Anim. Plant Sci., 19 (1): 6-9 web icon
Jordan, R. M. ; Hanke, H. E., 1970. Antibiotics, ensiled corn, Ralgro, sunflower hulls, and self feeding all increase lamb gains. Feedstuffs, 42 (17): 44
Juskiewicz, J. ; Jankowski, J. ; Lecewicz, A. ; Slominski, B. ; Zdunczyk, Z., 2010. Effect of diets with different contents of sunflower meal without or with exogenous enzymes supplementation on gastrointestinal tract response of growing turkeys. J. Anim. Feed Sci., 19 (3): 468-483 web icon
Kajuna, F. F. ; Temba, B. A. ; Mosha, R. D., 2013. Surveillance of aflatoxin B 1 contamination in chicken commercial feeds in Morogoro, Tanzania. Livest. Res. Rur. Dev., 25 (3): 51 web icon
Kamalak, A. ; Canbolat, O. ; Gurbuz, Y. ; Ozay, O., 2005. In situ ruminal dry matter and crude protein degradability of plant- and animal-derived protein sources in Southern Turkey. Small Rumin. Res., 58 (2): 135-141 web icon
Kartika, I. A., 2005. Nouveau procédé de fractionnement des graines de tournesol: expression et extraction en extrudeur bi-vis, purification par ultrafiltration de l’huile de tournesol. Thèse de doctorat. Institut national polytechnique de Toulouse, spécialité: Sciences des Agroressources web icon
Kleisiari, M. N. Editor(s): Krynski, A. ; Wrzesien, R., 2005. Effect of different types of proteins on the reproduction performances in sows. Animals and environment, 1: Proceedings of the XIIth ISAH Congress on Animal Hygiene, Warsaw, Poland, 4-8 September 2005: 364-366 web icon
Kozlowski, K. ; Helmbrecht, A. ; Lemme, A. ; Jankowski, J. ; Jeroch, H., 2011. Standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids from high-protein feedstuffs for growing turkeys – a preliminary study. Arch. Geflügelk., 75 (3): 185–190 web icon
Kpodekon, T. M.; Youssao, A. K. I.; Koutinhouin, G. K.; Fayomi, J.; Fagbohou, A.; Djago, Y., 2009. Substitution of palm kernel cake by sunflower seed cake in the feeding of fattening rabbits. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 21 (6): 92 web icon
Lebas, F. ; Colin, M., 1977. Rapeseed oilmeal in feeds for growing rabbits. Effect of husking. Ann. Zootech., 26 (1): 93-97 web icon
Lebas, F. ; Fortun-Lamothe, L., 1996. Effects of dietary energy level and origin (starch vs oil) on performance of rabbit does and their litters: average situation after 4 weanings. 6th World Rabbit Congress, Toulouse, 1: 217-222 web icon
Lebas, F.; Renouf, B., 2009. Raw materials utilization and feeding techniques: new contributions in the 9th World Rabbit Congress. Journée d'étude ASFC « Vérone - Ombres & Lumières » 5 février 2009: 30-36 web icon
Lebas, F., 1978. Le tourteau de colza, source de protéines pour les lapines reproductrices. 2e Journées Rech. Cunicole en France, 1 : communication 12, 12.1-12.4
Lebas, F., 2004. Reflections on rabbit nutrition with a special emphasis on feed ingredients utilization. Proceedings of the 8th World Rabbit Congress, September 7-10, 2004, Puebla, Mexico 2004 web icon
Leroy, A. M. ; François, A. ; Maîtrejean, H. ; Péronne, B., 1949. The chemical composition and nutritive value of animal feeds. Annls agron., 19: 791-797
Lessire, M., 1990. Effect of feeding technique, ad libitum, dry or wet force feeding, on the metabolisable energy values of raw materials for poultry. Br. Poult. Sci., 31 (4): 785-793 web icon
Lević, J. D. ; Sredanović, S. A. ; Đuragić, O. M., 2005. Sunflower meal protein as a feed for broilers. Acta periodica technologica, 36: 3-10 web icon
Li DeFa; Yi, G. F. ; Qiao, S. Y. ; Zheng, C. T. ; Xu, X. X. ; Piao, X. S. ; Han, I. K. ; Thacker, P., 2000. Use of Chinese sunflower meal as a non-conventional protein feedstuff for growing-finishing pigs. Asian-Aust. J. Anim.Sci., 13 (5): 666-672 web icon
Liebowitz, Z. ; Ruckenstein, C., 1986. Processing and utilization of sunflower meal and sunflower residues. In: Baldwin, A. R., World Conference on emerging technologies in the fats and oils industry. American Oil Chemists' society web icon
Lipinski, K. ; Bruzdzinski, S. ; Tywonczuk, J. ; Antoszkiewicz, Z., 2002. Use of sunflower meal in the feeding of growing pigs. Annals Anim. Sci., Suppl. 2: 253-256 web icon
Liu, J. ; Li, Q. ; Zeng, Z. ; Li, P. ; Xu, X. ; Wang, H. ; Zhang, S. ; Piao, X., 2015. Determination and prediction of the amino acid digestibility of sunflower seed meals in growing pigs. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci., 28 (1): 86–94 web icon
Louvandini, H. ; Nunes, G. A. ; Garcia, J. A. S. ; McManus, C. ; Costa, D. M. ; Araujo, S. C. de, 2007. Performance, carcass characteristics and body measurements of Santa Ines sheep fed diets with different proportions of sunflower meal and soybean meal. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 36 (3): 603-609 web icon
Maina, J. G. ; Beames, R. M. ; Higgs, D. ; Mbugua, P. N. ; Iwama, G. ; Kisia, S. M., 2002. Digestibility and feeding value of some feed ingredients fed to tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (L.). Aquacult. Res., 33 (11): 853-862 web icon
Maina, J. G. ; Beames, R. M. ; Higgs, D. ; Mbugua, P. N. ; Iwama, G. ; Kisia, S. M., 2003. Partial replacement of fishmeal with sunflower cake and corn oil in diets for tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (Linn): effect on whole body fatty acids. Aquacult. Res., 34 (8): 601-608 web icon
Mandaluniz, N. ; Larronde, E. ; Amores, G. ; Virto, M. ; Arranz, J. ; Barrón, L.J.R. ; Ruiz de Gordoa, J.C. ; Ruiz, R. ; Nájera, A.I. ; Albisu, M. ; Pérez-Elortondo, F.J. ; de Renobales, M., 2010. Oil-cake’s feeding supplementation on dairy sheep. (1) Effect on milk yield and composition. Proc. 7th Int. Seminar FAO-CIHEAM Network on Sheep and Goats Sub-Network on Production Systems Economic, social and environmental sustainability in sheep and goat production systems, Zaragoza, Spain, 10-12 Nov. 2010
Mandibaya, W. ; Mutisi, C. ; Hamudikuwanda, H., 1999. The nutritive value, intake, digestibility and nitrogen balance of farm-grown and prepared sunflower-based dairy calf meals. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 31 (5): 321-331 web icon
Mantovani, C. ; Furlan, A. C. ; Murakami, A. E. ; Moreira, I. ; Scapinello, C. ; Santolin, M. L. da R., 2000. Chemical composition and energetic values of sunflower meal and seed for broiler chickens. Acta Scientiarum, 22 (3): 745-749 web icon
Marcondes, M. I. ; Valadares, S. D. ; Detmann, E. ; Valadares, R. F. D. ; Silva, L. F. C. E. ; Fonseca, M. A., 2009. Rumen degradation and intestinal digestibility of crude protein in feeds for cattle. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 38 (11): 2247-2257 web icon
Martina, C., 1976. Mixed feeds based on plant protein for feeding young rabbits. Lucrarile Stiintifice Institut. Cercetari Nutr. Anim., 6: 157-165
Masoero, G. ; Toscano, G. P. ; Rosso, L. C. ; Bergoglio, G., 1990. Use of sunflower meal in ground or pelleted mixed feeds for fattening rabbits. Riv. di Coniglicoltura, 27 (10): 51-56
Mattii, S. ; Priori, S. ; Trombetta, M. F., 2009. Influence of sunflower cake supplementation on Marchigiana carcass and meat quality. Italian J. Anim. Sci., 8 (Suppl. 2): 513-515 web icon
McNab, J. M., 2002. Poultry Feedstuffs: Supply, Composition and Nutritive Value. CABI Publishing web icon
Mendes, A. R. ; Ezequiel, J. M. B. ; Galati, R. L. ; Bocchi, A. L. ; Queiroz, M. A. A. ; Feitosa, J. V., 2005. Intake, total and partial digestibility of diets with sunflower meal and three energy sources in confined steers. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 34 (2): 679-691 web icon
Mendes, A. R. ; Ezequiel, J. M. B. ; Galati, R. L. ; Feitosa, J. V., 2005. Performance, plasma parameters and carcass traits of steers fed diet with sunflower meal and different energy sources, in feedlot. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 34 (2): 692-702 web icon
Mendes, A. R. ; Ezequiel, J. M. B. ; Galati, R. L. ; Nascimento, V. F. ; Queiroz, M. A. A. ; Oliveira Pereira, E. A., 2006. Digestion kinetics and efficiency of microbial protein synthesis on beef steers fed sunflower meal and different energy sources. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 35 (1): 264-274 web icon
Mlay, P. S. ; Pereka, A. E. ; Balthazary, S. T. ; Phiri, E. C. J. ; Hvelplund, T. ; Weisbjerg, M. R. ; Madsen, J., 2005. The effect of maize bran or maize bran mixed with sunflower cake on the performance of smallholder dairy cows in urban and peri-urban area in Morogoro, Tanzania. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 17 (1): 2 web icon
Mlay, P. S. ; Pereka, A. ; Phiri, E. C. ; Balthazary, S. ; Igusti, J. ; Hvelplund, T. ; Weisbjerg, M. R. ; Madsen, J., 2006. Feed value of selected tropical grasses, legumes and concentrates. Veterinarski Arhiv, 76 (1): 53-63 web icon
Molette, C. ; Nicot, M. C. ; Coulmier, D. ; Farizon, Y. ; Gidenne, T., 2009. Impact d'une incorporation élevée de drèches de distillerie de blé, dans un aliment à formulation simplifiée, sur la croisance, la qualité de la carcasse et la composition en acides gras de la viande de lapin. 13èmes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole, 17-18 novembre 2009, Le Mans, France: 14-17 web icon
Molina Alcaide, E.; Yanez Ruiz, D. R.; Moumen, A.; Martin Garcia, A. I., 2003. Ruminal degradability and in vitro intestinal digestibility of sunflower meal and in vitro digestibility of olive by-products supplemented with urea or sunflower meal. Comparison between goats and sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 110 (1-4): 3-15 web icon
Mondal, G. ; Walli, T. K. ; Patra, A. K., 2008. In vitro and in sacco ruminal protein degradability of common Indian feed ingredients. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 20 (4): 63 web icon
Mushtaq, T. ; Sarwar, M. ; Ahmad, G. ; Nisa, M. U. ; Jamil A., 2006. The Influence of exogenous multienzyme preparation and graded levels of digestible lysine in sunflower meal-based diets on the performance of young broiler chicks two weeks posthatching. Poult. Sci., 85: 2180-2185. web icon
Mushtaq, T. ; Sarwar, M. ; Ahmad, G. ; Mirza, M. A. ; Ahmad, T. ; Noreen, U. ; Mushtaq, M. M. H. ; Kamran, Z., 2009. Influence of sunflower meal based diets supplemented with exogenous enzyme and digestible lysine on performance, digestibility and carcass response of broiler chickens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 149 (3-4): 275-286 web icon
Nagalakshmi, D.; Dhanalakshmi, K.; Himabindu, D., 2011. Replacement of groundnut cake with sunflower and karanj seed cakes on performance, nutrient utilisation, immune response and carcass characteristics in Nellore lambs. Small Rumin. Res., 97 (1-3): 12–20 web icon
Naidu, S., 2008. Irrigation management, Volume 5. In: Sethuraman, G., International Encyclopaedia of Agricultural Science and Technology, Mittal Publications web icon
NCPA, 2008. Trading rules of the NATIONAL COTTONSEED PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION, INC. Adopted at the 112th Annual Session of the Association Held at Destin, Florida, May 3 - 6, 2008 with Charter and By-Laws, Lists of Committees and Members and Other Information. National Cottonseed Products Association, Florida web icon
Neumark, H., 1970. Personal communication. Volcani Institute of Agricutural Reseach, Israel
Ngongoni, N. T. ; Mapiye, C. ; Mwale, M. ; Mupeta, B., 2007. Effect of supplementing a high-protein ram press sunflower cake concentrate on smallholder milk production in Zimbabwe. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 39 (4): 297-307 web icon
Nouri-Emamzadeh, A. ; Yaghobfar, A. ; Sadeghi, A. A. ; Mirhadi, S. A. ; Chamani, M., 2008. Determination of metabolizable energy in soybean, sunflower and canola meals using caecectomised and intact adult cockerels. J. Anim. Vet. Adv., 7 (3): 235-238 web icon
NRC, 1973. Alternative sources of protein for animal production: proceedings of a symposium. National Research Council, Committee on Animal Nutrition and American Society of Animal Science, USA web icon
NSA, 2011. Sunflower statistics. National Sunflower Association web icon
Nys, Y., 2001. Trace elements as related to growth and health in chickens. Inra Prod. Anim., 14 (3): 171-180 web icon
OECD, 2007. Consensus document on compositional considerations for new varieties of sunflower: key food and feed nutrients, anti-nutrients and toxicants. Environment directorate, Joint meeting of the chemicals committee and the working party on chemicals, pesticides and biotechnology. Series on the Safety of Novel Foods and Feeds, No. 16 web icon
Oil World, 2011. Major meals, World summary balances. Oil World Weekly, February 28, 2011, 54 (8): 95-104
Olvera-Novoa, M. A. ; Olivera-Castillo, L. ; Martinez-Palacios, C. A., 2002. Sunflower seed meal as a protein source in diets for Tilapia rendalli (Boulanger, 1896) fingerlings. Aquacult. Res., 33 (3): 223-229 web icon
Ørskov, E. R. ; Nakashima, Y. ; Abreu, J. M. F. ; Kibon, A. ; Tuah, A. K., 1992. Data on DM degradability of feedstuffs. Studies at and in association with the Rowett Research Organization, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, UK. Personal Communication
Parks, C. S. ; Edgerly, G. M. ; Erickson, G. M. ; Fisher, G. R., 1981. Response of dairy cows to sunflower meal and varying dietary protein and fiber. J. Dairy Sci., 64 (Suppl. 1), 141
Perez, J. M. ; Bourdon, D. ; Baudet, J. J. ; Evrard, J., 1986. Prediction of the energy value of sunflower meal from their cell wall contents. Journées Rech. Porc., 18: 35-46 web icon
Poncet, C. ; Rémond, D. ; Lepage, E. ; Doreau, M., 2003. Comment mieux valoriser les protéagineux et oléagineux en alimentation des ruminants. Fourrages, 174: 205-229 web icon
Pop, S. ; Dragomir, C. ; Criste, R. D. ; Nicolae, M. ; Vlassa, M. ; Stoica, G., 2006. The variability of the degradability of protein meals used within Romanian market: its influence on their nutritive value. Archiva Zootechnica, 9: 57-64 web icon
Prolea-Cetiom, 2003. Le tourteau de tournesol: des protéines de qualité et des fibres. Prolea-Cetiom, Fiche technique web icon
Rao, S. V. R. ; Raju, M. V. L. N. ; Panda, A. K. ; Reddy, M. R., 2006. Sunflower seed meal as a substitute for soybean meal in commercial broiler chicken diets. Br. Poult. Sci., 47 (5): 592-598 web icon
Riccobene, I. C. ; Fernandez, M. B. ; Nolasco, S. M., 2001. Effect of moisture content in the dehulling capacity of sunflower seeds. Informacion Technologica, 12 (1): 3-8 web icon
Richardson, C. R. ; Beville, R.N. ; Ratcliff, R. K. ; Albin, R. C., 1981. Sunflower meal as a protein supplement for growing ruminants. J. Anim. Sci., 53: 557-563 web icon
Rodriguez, N. M. ; Sousa; L. F. ; Castro, K. J., 2009. Utilization of agro-industrial by-products in ruminant feeding. Brazil experience. Anais Zootec., Palestras, 31p web icon
Sales, J. ; Britz, P. J., 2002. Evaluation of the reference diet substitution method for determination of apparent nutrient digestibility coefficients of feed ingredients for South African abalone (Haliotis midae L.). Aquaculture, 207 (1-2): 113-123 web icon
Sales, J. ; Britz, P. J., 2003. Apparent and true availability of amino acids from common feed ingredients for South African abalone (Haliotis midae L.). Aquacult. Nutr., 9 (1): 55-64 web icon
San Juan, L. D. ; Villamide, M. J., 2000. Nutritional evaluation of sunflower seed and products derived from them. Effect of oil extraction. Br. Poult. Sci., 41 (2): 182-192 web icon
Sanchez Lozano, N. B. ; Vidal, A. T. ; Martinez-Llorens, S. ; Nogales Merida, S. ; Espert Blanco, J. ; Monino Lopez, A. ; Pla Torres, M. ; Cerda, M. J., 2007. Growth and economic profit of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata, L.) fed sunflower meal. Aquaculture, 272 (1/4): 528-534 web icon
Santos, Z. A. de S. ; Freitas, R. T. F. de ; Fialho, E. T. ; Rodrigues, P. B. ; Lima, J. A. de F. ; Carellos, D. de C. ; Branco, P. A. C. ; Cantarelli, V. de S., 2005. Nutritional value of feedstuffs for pigs determined at the University of Lavras. Ciencia e Agrotecnologia, 29 (1): 232-237 web icon
Santos-Silva, J. ; Bessa, R. J. B. ; Mendes, I. A., 2003. The effect of supplementation with expanded sunflower seed on carcass and meat quality of lambs raised on pasture. Meat Science, 65: 1301-1308 web icon
Sanz Sampelayo, M. R. ; Perz, M. L. ; Gil Extremera, F. ; Boza, J. J. ; Boza, J., 1999. Use of different dietary protein sources for lactating goats: milk production and composition as functions of protein degradability and amino acid composition. J. Dairy Sci., 82: 555-565 web icon
Sauvant, D.; Perez, J. M.; Tran, G., 2004. Tables INRA-AFZ de composition et de valeur nutritive des matières premières destinées aux animaux d'élevage: 2ème édition. ISBN 2738011586, 306 p. INRA Editions Versailles web icon
Sayda, A. M. A.; Hyder, O. A.; Abasaid, M. A., 2011. Sunflower meal as an alternative protein source to groundnut meal in laying hens’ ration. Egypt. Poult. Sci., 31 (4): 745-753 web icon
Schingoethe, D. J. ; Rook, J. A. ; Ludens, F., 1977. Evaluation of sunflower meal as a protein supplement for lactating cows. J. Dairy Sci., 60 (4): 591-595 web icon
Seker, E., 2002. The determination of the energy values of some ruminant feeds by using digestibility trial and gas test. Revue Med. Vet., 153 (5): 323-328 web icon
Senkoylu, N. ; Dale, N., 1999. Sunflower meal in poultry diets: a review. World Poult. Sci. J., 55: 153-174 web icon
Senkoylu, N. ; Dale, N., 2006. Nutritional evaluation of a high-oil sunflower meal in broiler starter diets. J. Appl. Poult. Res., 15 (1): 40-47 web icon
Shabir, S. ; Salim, M. ; Rashid, M., 2003. Study on the feed conversion ratio (FCR) in major carp Cirrhinus mrigala fed on sunflower meal, wheat bran and maize gluten. Pakistan Vet. J., 23 (1): 1-3 web icon
Sharma, K. ; Dutta, N. ; Pattanaik, A. K. ; Hasan, Q. Z., 2003. Replacement value of undecorticated sunflower meal as a supplement for milk production by crossbred cows and buffaloes in the Northern plains of India. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 35: 131-145 web icon
Shayo, C. M. ; Ogle, B. ; Uden, P., 1997. Comparison of water melon (Citrullus vulgaris) seed meal, Acacia tortilis pods and sunflower-seed cake supplements in central Tanzania. 1. Nutritive value and influence on the rumen environment. Trop. Grassl., 31 (2): 124-129 web icon
Shayo, C. M. ; Ogle, B. ; Uden, P., 1997. Comparison of water melon (Citrullus vulgaris) seed meal, Acacia tortilis pods and sunflower-seed cake supplements in central Tanzania. 2. Effect on hay intake, milk yield and composition of Mpwapwa cows. Trop. Grassl., 31 (2): 130-134 web icon
Shelton, J. L. ; Hemann, M. D. ; Strode, R. M. ; Brashear, G. L. ; Ellis, M. ; McKeith, F. K. ; Bidner, T. D. ; Southern, L. L., 2001. Effect of different protein sources on growth and carcass traits in growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci., 79 (9): 2428-2435 web icon
Shipton, T. A. ; Britz, P. J., 2001. The partial and total replacement of fishmeal with selected plant protein sources in diets for the South African abalone, Haliotis midae L.. J. Shellfish Res., 20 (2): 637-645 web icon
Siddaramanna; Reddy, B. S. V. ; Madhusudhan, H. S. ; Manjunatha Prabhu, B. H. ; Mohan, K. ; Jayashankar, M. R., 2009. Effect of dried brewers’ grains as a source of fibre in the diet of Angora rabbits on the growth performance. Pakistan J. Nutr., 8 (8): 1167-1169 web icon
Silva, C. A. da; Pinheiro, J. W. ; Fonseca, N. A. N. ; Cabrera, L. ; Novo, V. C. C. ; Silva, M. A. A. da; Canteri, R. C. ; Hoshi, E. H., 2002. Sunflower meal as feed to swine during the growing and finishing phase: digestibility, performance and carcass quality. Rev. Bras. Zootec., 31 (2) Suppl.: 982-990 web icon
Singh, K.S.; Prasad, C.M., 1979. Feeding value of sunflower and groundnut cakes for broilers. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.,4 (2): 143–159 web icon
Singh K. S.; Prasad, C. M.; Brahmakshatriva, R. D., 1981. Feeding value of sunflower- and groundnut-cakes for laying hens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 6 (1): 63–71 web icon
Steen, R. W. J., 1989. A comparison of soya-bean, sunflower and fish meals as protein supplements for yearling cattle offered grass silage-based diets. Anim. Prod., 48 (1): 81-89 web icon
Suliman, G. M. ; Babiker, S. A., 2007. Effect of diet-protein source on lamb fattening. Res. J. Agric. & Biol. Sci., 3 (5): 403-408
Tavernari, F. C.; Morata, R. L.; Ribeiro Júnior, V.; Albino, L. F. T.; Dutra Júnior, W. M.; Rostagno, H. S., 2010. Nutritional and energetic evaluation of sunflower meal in broiler diets. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec., 62 (1): 172-177 web icon
Tavernari, F. C., 2008. Digestibility of amino acids and the energy value of sunflower meal and inclusion in diets for broiler chickens. Dissertation, Departamento de Zootecnia, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Brazil web icon
Titi, H. H., 2003. Replacing soybean meal with sunflower meal with or without fibrolytic enzymes in fattening diets of goat kids. Small Rumin. Res., 48: 45-50 web icon
Todorov, N. ; Simeonov, M. ; Yildiz, E., 2016. Rumen degradability of dry matter and protein in four protein sources and their relationships with milk protein yield in dairy cows. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci., 22 (2): 278–285 web icon
Tufarelli, V. ; Dario, M. ; Laudadio, V., 2009. Milk yield and composition of lactating Comisana ewes fed total mixed rations containing nitrogen sources with different ruminal degradability. Livest. Sci., 122: 349-353 web icon
Umucalilar, H. D. ; Coskun, B. ; Gülsen, N. ; Polat, E. S. ; Inal, F., 2003. Determination of protein ruminal degradabilities of some protein sources. Revue Med. Vet., 154 (7): 477-482 web icon
Van Cleef, E. H. C. ; Ezequiel, J. M. B. ; Fontes, N. A. ; Faturi, C. ; Oliveira, P. N. ; Stiaqui, M. G., 2011. Intake and digestibility of diets containing energy sources associated with sunflower meal or urea in feedlot steers. Acta Scientiarum - Animal Sciences, Maringá, 33 (2): 163-168 web icon
Van Wyk, H. P. D. ; Oosthuizen, S. A. ; Basson, I. D., 1951. The nutritive value of South African feeds. Part II. Hay and Pasture Crops. Union of South Africa. Department of Agriculture and Forestry. Science Bulletin No. 298
Vargas, M.; Urbá, R.; Enero, R.; Báez, H.; Pardo, P.; Visconti, C., 1965. Composición de alimentos chilenos de uso en ganadería y avicultura. Santiago. Ministerio de Agricultura. Instituto de Investigación Veterinaria.
Vetesi, M. ; Mezes, M. ; Kiss, L., 1998. Using sunflower meal in waterfowl diets. Arch. Geflügelk., 62 (1): 7-10
Vieira, S. L. ; Penz, A. M., Jr. ; Leboute, E. M. ; Corteline, J., 1992. A nutritional evaluation of a high fiber sunflower meal. J. Appl. Poult. Res., 1 (4): 382-388 web icon
Villamide, M. J. ; San Juan, L. D., 1998. Effect of chemical composition of sunflower seed meal on its true metabolizable energy and amino acid digestibility. Poult. Sci., 77 (12): 1884-1892 web icon
Villena, P. ; García-Rebollar, P. ; Rebollar, P. G. ; Núñez, N. ; Nicodemus, N. ; Margüenda, I. ; Carabaño, R., 2008. Effect of a high fibrous diet in the finishing period on carcass yield and meat quality of rabbits. 9th World Rabbit Congress – June 10-13, 2008 – Verona – Italy, 1462-1465 web icon
Vincent, I. C. ; Hilla, R. ; Campling, R. C., 1990. A note on the use of rapeseed, sunflower and soyabean meals as protein sources in compound foods for milking cattle. Anim. Prod., 50 (3): 541-543 web icon
Volek, Z. ; Marounek, M., 2008. White lupin (cv. Amiga) seeds as a protein source in diet for growing rabbits: effect on growth performance, digestibility of nutrients and carcass traits. 9th World Rabbit Congress – June 10-13, 2008 – Verona – Italy: 831-835 web icon
Wahlstrom, R. C., 1985. Sunflowers in pig nutrition. Pig News and Info, 6 (2): 151-154 web icon
Waititu, S. M.; Kim, J. W.; Sanjayan, N.; Leterme, P.; Nyachoti, C. M., 2018. Metabolizable energy and standardized ileal digestible amino acid contents of a high-protein sunflower meal fed to broiler chicks. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 98 (3): 517-524 web icon
Walker, C. A., 1975. Personal communication. Central Research Station, Mazabuka, N. Rhodesia
Wetscherek, W. ; Lettner, F.;Knaus, W., 1993. Using decorticated sunflower oilmeal in pig feeding. Förderungsdienst, 41: 292–296 web icon
Woodman, H. E., 1945. The composition and nutritive value of feeding stuffs. United Kingdom. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Bulletin No. 124
Woods, V. B. ; Moloney, A. P. ; Mulligan, F. J. ; Kenny, M. J. ; O'Mara, F. P., 1999. The effect of animal species (cattle or sheep) and level of intake by cattle on in vivo digestibility of concentrate ingredients. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 80 (2): 135-150 web icon
Woods, V. B.; O'Mara, F. P.; Moloney, A. P, 2003. The nutritive value of concentrate feedstuffs for ruminant animals. Part I: In situ ruminal degradability of dry matter and organic matter. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 110 (1/4): 111-130 web icon
Woods, V. B. ; Moloney, A. P. ; O'Mara, F. P., 2003. The nutritive value of concentrate feedstuffs for ruminant animals. Part II: In situ ruminal degradability of crude protein. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 110 (1/4): 131-143 web icon
Yaghobfar, A., 2013. Effects of bioassay and age on amino acid digestibility and metabolizable energy of soybean, sunflower and canola meals. Iran. J. Appl. Anim. Sci., 3 (2): 249-261 web icon
Yagoub, M. Y. ; Talha, E. E. A., 2009. Effect of replacement of groundnut cake with decorticated sunflower cake on the performance of sudanese desert lambs. Pakistan J. Nutr., 8 (1): 46-48 web icon
Yunus, A. W. ; Khan, A. G. ; Alam, Z. ; Sultan, J. I. ; Riaz, M., 2004. Effects of substituting cottonseed meal with sunflower meal in rations for growing buffalo calves. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 17 (5): 559-562 web icon
Zatari, I. M. ; Sell, J. L., 1990. Sunflower meal as a component of fat-supplemented diets for broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 69 (9): 1503-1507 web icon
Zhang, Y. E. ; Parsons, C. M., 1994. Effects of overprocessing on the nutritional quality of sunflower meal. Poult. Sci., 73 (3): 436-442 web icon
194 references found
Datasheet citation 

Heuzé V., Tran G., Hassoun P., Lessire M., Lebas F., 2019. Sunflower meal. Feedipedia, a programme by INRAE, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO. https://feedipedia.org/node/732 Last updated on September 25, 2019, 14:17

English correction by Tim Smith (Animal Science consultant) and Hélène Thiollet (AFZ)
Image credits