Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 1;1(3):255–260. doi: 10.2527/tas2017.0030

Table 3.

Effect of target conditioning temperature and phytase product on actual conditioning temperature, throughput, and residual phytase activity1

Conditioning temperature, °C Probability, P <
Item 65 75 85 95 SEM Product × temperature Linear temperature Product main effect
Conditioning temperature, °C
    Quantum Blue G2 66.8 75.2 85.5 93.8 1.11 0.992 0.001 0.761
    Ronozyme Hi Phos GT3 66.1 75.4 85.2 93.4
    Axtra Phy TPT4 66.4 74.7 85.5 93.2
    Microtech 5000 Plus5 66.6 75.8 85.3 93.7
Throughput, kg/h
    Quantum Blue G 65 61 55 57 3.9 0.621 0.001 0.916
    Ronozyme Hi Phos GT 63 65 58 52
    Axtra Phy TPT 66 57 59 50
    Microtech 5000 Plus 64 57 62 57
Residual phytase activitiy,6%
    Quantum Blue G 99.0a 78.2 a 37.9 a 21.1ab 8.80 0.385 0.001 0.001
    Ronozyme Hi Phos GT 87.5a 59.7 a 43.3 a 22.9ab
    Axtra Phy TPT 80.6a 62.0 a 36.2 a 33.1a
    Microtech 5000 Plus 37.6b 21.4b 3.5b 3.5b
a,b

Means within a column with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05).

1

Four replicate conditioning runs were completed for each product at each temperature. Within conditioning run, a composite sample consisting of 4 subsamples was used for analysis. Samples were taken as feed exited the conditioner.

2

Quantum Blue G (AB Vista, Plantation, FL).

3

Ronozyme Hi Phos GT (DSM Nutritional Products, Parsippany, NJ).

4

Axtra Phy TPT (Dupont, Wilmington, DE).

5

Microtech 5000 Plus (Guangdong Vtr Bio-Tech Co., Ltd., Guangdong, China).

6

Stability was measured as the analyzed phytase concentration divided by phytase concentration prior to conditioning.