HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Thiex, N. Articles by Richardson, C. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Thiex, N. Articles by Richardson, C. R.

Challenges in measuring moisture content of feeds

N. Thiex^*,1 and C. R. Richardson^,2

^* South Dakota State University, Brookings 57007; and Texas Tech University, Lubbock 79409

¹ Correspondence: Box 2170, ASC 133 (phone: 605-688-5466; fax: 605-688-6295; E-mail: nancy_thiex{at}sdstate.edu).

Accurate determination of the moisture (water) content in individual feed ingredients and mixed feeds is critical throughout the feed industry. Most analytical methods used to determine apparent water content of feedstuffs are empirical, estimating water by evaporation and loss of weight on drying (oven drying methods). These methods differ greatly in effectiveness, resulting in bias. Bias associated with measuring the water content of feedstuffs is a concern not only because of the lack of confidence in the moisture value itself, but also because moisture determinations affect accurate quantification and expression of other nutrient values. Methods for determining moisture in feeds have frequently been borrowed from the cereal, forage, or other applications without validating the extension of the method. Methods such as Karl Fischer titration measure water by direct comparison to a calibration standard for water and can be used as reference methods for the evaluation of empirical methods. The objective of this paper is to review methods for determining moisture, review comparisons among moisture methods for various feedstuffs, make recommendations for a reference method, and make general recommendations toward improving the results of moisture testing. The need to evaluate and improve moisture methods and standardize practices in laboratories is evident from this study. It also is evident that the methods appropriate for a specific feed ingredient or feed should not be extended to all feeds without proper validation to the new matrices. Part of the validation for empirical methods should be comparison to Karl Fischer or other the direct methods. It also is recommended that the results obtained using oven methods not be termed "moisture;" rather, they should be termed "loss on drying," and the drying conditions should become part of the term.

Key Words: Analytical Methods • Drying Methods • Feeds • Moisture Content • Ovens

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. DiLorenzo, C. R. Dahlen, F. Diez-Gonzalez, G. C. Lamb, J. E. Larson, and A. DiCostanzo Effects of feeding polyclonal antibody preparations on rumen fermentation patterns, performance, and carcass characteristics of feedlot steers J Anim Sci, November 1, 2008; 86(11): 3023 - 3032. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]