The “ideal protein” concept is not ideal in animal nutrition

Abstract

Amino acids (AAs) are required for syntheses of proteins and low-molecular-weight substances with enormous physiological importance. Since 1912, AAs have been classified as nutritionally essential amino acids (EAAs) or nonessential amino acids (NEAAs) for animals. EAAs are those AAs that are either not synthesized or insufficiently synthesized de novo in the organisms. It was assumed that all NEAAs (now known as AAs that are synthesizable in animal cells de novo [AASAs]) were formed sufficiently in animals and were not needed in diets. However, studies over the past three decades have shown that sufficient dietary AASAs (e.g. glutamine, glutamate, glycine, and proline) are necessary for the maximum growth and optimum health of pigs, chickens, and fish. Thus, the concept of “ideal protein” (protein with an optimal EAA pattern that precisely meets the physiological needs of animals), which was originally proposed in the 1950s but ignored AASAs, is not ideal in animal nutrition. Ideal diets must provide all physiologically and nutritionally essential AAs. Improved patterns of AAs in diets for swine and chickens as well as zoo and companion animals have been proposed in recent years. Animal-sourced feedstuffs supply abundant EAAs and AASAs (including glutamate, glutamine, glycine, proline, 4-hydroxyproline, and taurine) for diets of swine, poultry, fish, and crustaceans to improve their growth, development, reproduction, and health, while sustaining global animal production. Nutritionists should move beyond the “ideal protein” concept to consider optimum ratios and amounts of all proteinogenic AAs in diets for mammals, birds, and aquatic animals, and, in the case of carnivores, also taurine.