free flowing agent and works in that case by binding water; this can provide physical benefits by helping to produce a better quality pellet but also gives benefits to the animal by increasing the dry matter content of the faeces. Trial results especially in poultry and pigs clearly demonstrate the positive effect of AmmoMIN on better litter quality which results in reduced problems with foot pad lesions. The unique ammonia binding effect of AmmoMIN also assists in lessening the negative impact of foot pad lesions and environmental ammonia emissions are also reduced.
UKAS
21–47 High Street, Feltham Middlesex TW13 4UN Tel: +44 (0)20 8917 8400 E-mail:
info@ukas.com Fax: +44 (0)20 8917 8500
The United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) is the sole national accreditation body recognised by government to assess, against internationally agreed standards, organisations that provide certification, testing, inspection and calibration services. Accreditation by UKAS demonstrates the competence, impartiality and performance capability of these evaluators. UKAS is a non-profit-distributing company, limited by guarantee, and operates under a Memorandum
of Understanding with the Government through the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills. For further information on UKAS please visit the UKAS website
www.ukas.com
CHANGES IN RAW MATERIAL AND
CO-PRODUCT ANIMAL FEEDS BETWEEN 1990/92 AND 2010
By J M Wilkinson, School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham
Summary Changes in raw material animal feeds and in the use of co-product feeds for livestock between 1990/92 and 2010 are described using data from national statistics. There were increases in the production of silage and compound feeds in the period, despite reductions in the populations of cattle, sheep and pigs. There was also a large reduction in the total number of animal feed mills in the period. The use of cereal grains, cereal co-products and soyabean meal increased, whilst there were reductions in the use of pulses, sugar beet co-products, oils and fats, and animal-derived co-products. These changes were reflected in an increase from 0.52 to 0.55 in the “human-edible” proportion of raw material and co-product feed use in the period.
Introduction Livestock, particularly ruminants, can eat a wider range of biomass than humans. Thus the feeding of livestock involves using raw materials which are potentially human-edible (such as cereal grains) and inedible such as grazed pasture and conserved forages. Other inedible feeds include co-product feeds and crop residues such as straws. Co-product feeds, derived mainly from the production of human foods and drinks and more recently from biofuels, represent a useful way of reducing reliance on food sources for livestock which potentially compete with the needs of the human population; they also represent a valuable and important route for reducing waste and environmental pollution. Changes in the production and use of different animal feeds occur
as a result of several factors including price fluctuations reflecting variations in the supply of raw materials and co-products, the introduction of new regulations, fluctuations in the populations of different classes of livestock and the evolution of livestock systems and their management. There is a need to decrease the carbon footprint of the animal feed industry by reducing reliance on those raw material animal feeds, such as soyabean and palm kernel meals, which are considered to be produced unsustainably from land recently converted from rainforest (Audsley, 2009; Round Table on Responsible Soy, 2012). Changes in the use of raw material and co-product feeds may
indicate changes in the carbon footprint of the livestock and animal feed industries. For example, increased use of soyabean meal might indicate an increase in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) associated with animal feed production, especially if that soyabean meal was sourced from regions where recent land use change had occurred. Greater reliance on conserved forages at the expense of grazed pasture might indicate an increase in GHGE per unit of animal feed produced, but not in GHGE per unit of animal product if there is a proportionate increase in output of animal product per head. Methane emissions from ruminants might decrease if there is an increase in concentrate feed as a proportion of total dietary dry matter (DM) intake (Yates et al. 2000; Tamminga et al. 2007). In this article changes between 1990/92 and 2010 in the production
of conserved forages, compounds and blends and in the use of raw material and co-product feeds used by the animal feed industry are
FEED COMPOUNDER MARCH 2012 PAGE 29
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52