production costs. The experts agreed that nutrition and


EXPERTS ADDRESS CHALLENGES


IN TURKEY SECTOR As in many poultry sectors, turkey producers face numerous challenges. To address these concerns, Kemin Industries assembled a panel of experts to discuss the profitability, nutrition, digestive health and welfare of the turkey industry. According to the experts, it is important


that producers understand the digestive differences between turkeys and broilers. Dr. Corinne Morvan, poultry nutritionist from Aviagen, explained that turkey amino acid digestibility is significantly different than that of broilers. These differences also vary by age. For example, at five days of age lysine and cysteine digestibility is lower in turkeys than broilers. However, at 21 days of age the functions are reversed and turkeys show higher lysine and cysteine levels. Morvan emphasized the need to reduce soya and include synthetic amino acids in diet formulations. Furthermore, new research from Olztyn


University studied a partial replacement of soya bean meal in turkey feed with rapeseed meal, sunflower meal and lupine seeds. Presenting the information was Dr. Kristof Kozlowski, scientist from the University, who stated that these novel ingredients, which can lower feed costs, should be administered through the use of a multiple enzyme complex. Enzymes promote efficient animal


production because they assist with the breakdown of complex and varying substrates coming from wheat or corn/soya based diets, and they can help alleviate the variation of raw materials, said Dr. Mauro Di Benedetto, veterinarian for the Kemin animal nutrition and health division. He further explained that wheat, based on its origin and variety, can have varying levels of non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) fraction. These fluctuations can result in feed energy value differences of up to 260 kcal/kg when compared to calculated diets. This, in turn, can compromise growth and feed conversion ratio as well as production plan. KEMZYME™ Plus Dry can significantly reduce the variability of wheat, according to data presented by Di Benedetto. Similarly, oils and fats present a wide


variability in apparent metabolisable energy (AME) levels. Numerous analyses performed by Kemin scientists showed 30 percent variations for a single oil type, said Di Benedetto. A natural biosurfactant, such as LYSOFORTE™ Booster Dry, has been shown to reduce these differences and enhance the utilization of energy from oils and fats Therefore, leading to improved feed conversion ratios and, consequently, lower


digestive health are closely tied to profitability. Dr. Jocelyn Marguerie, veterinarian for Reseaux Cristal, presented data showing more than 4,000 clinical cases where nearly half of the turkeys had digestive disorders that were primarily caused by necrotic enteritis and dysbacteriosis. According to Marguerie, most pathogens in turkeys are concentrated from week 4-6 of production. However, dysbacteriosis may continue throughout the rearing period, leading to potential economic losses. In addition, animal welfare is an


important topic of debate. Dr. Hartmut Meyer, research area manager for turkey breeders from Moortgut Kartzfhen, explained that the behavioral and physiological responses of animals exposed to beak trimming are under review to determine its effects on well-being. According to Meyer’s field observations, CLOSTAT™, an active microbial with a unique proprietary strain of Bacillus subtilis PB6, not only positively impacts intestinal health but also helps to make turkeys restful.


Furthermore, Meyer explained that foot


pad lesions and leg disorders of turkeys are directly linked to litter quality, which can be prevented by avoiding wet litter through litter management. The experts concurred that nutrition,


intestinal health and animal welfare are key factors that impact profitability in today’s turkey production.


HEALTHY AND EFFICIENT NUTRITION FOR A GROWING


WORLD POPULATION According to a United Nations estimate, the world’s population is growing by about 80 million annually. How will all these people be adequately fed in the future? How will the increasing demand for meat, for example, be satisfied? Evonik offers one solution in the form of amino acids as animal feed supplements. This not only ensures balanced animal nutrition but also protects the environment and conserves valuable resources. By 2050 it will be necessary to feed


9 billion people, 70 percent of whom will live in cities. With increasing affluence and urbanization, dietary habits will move in the direction of more meat, fish, dairy products, and eggs. “We want to delink increasing meat consumption from resource consumption,” says Dr. Reiner Beste, Head of Evonik’s Health & Nutrition Business Unit. “Only in this way can a growing world population be assured of a healthy diet over the long term.” In the “What if…” brochure, Evonik


shows how this can be done. The brochure examines in detail various aspects of the nutrition question, including ecological footprint, overfishing, biodiversity, and


land use. A study of the various possible scenarios clearly indicates that future meat requirements can be met sustainably—that is, in an environmentally, economically, and socially compatible way—only by the use of improved technologies in meat production. Evonik’s solution is based on the


composition of animal feeds. To be able to produce vital proteins, the organism requires amino acids in a certain ratio. If a particular component is missing the animal cannot use the food optimally. For example, corn, wheat, and soy meal as feeds for poultry and pigs are short of the amino acids methionine, lysine, and threonine. If these are selectively added to the feed, factors such as emission of ammonia, nitrate, and greenhouse gases during meat production can be drastically reduced. Evonik has confirmed this by means of a life cycle assessment. The “What if…” brochure is available in


English and can be ordered by e-mail from: feed-additives@evonik.com


IFIF JOINS FEED SCHEMES OBSERVATORY (FSO) TO CREATE BENCHMARK SYSTEM FOR FEED


SAFETY ASSURANCE SCHEMES The International Feed Industry Federation (IFIF) has joined as a partner in the Feed Schemes Observatory (FSO), a global initiative between the feed industry, Feed Assurance Schemes, as well as the International Trade Center (ITC), which aims to create an independent, transparent and impartial benchmark system for feed safety assurance schemes. Alexandra de Athayde, IFIF Executive


Director, says: “We are delighted to join as a partner of the FSO, and to contribute to creating a benchmark system for feed safety assurance schemes for the global feed chain, as well as to build bridges of communication within the value chain and with regulators.” Dr. Reinder Sijtsma, IFIF Board of


Directors member, explains the benchmarking scheme should “improve the comparability of the main principles and requirements that concern feed safety assurance schemes and reduce technical barriers to trade in the feed chain. The project also aims to transfer knowledge and capacity building and raise awareness of the importance of the auditing and certification for safety in the feed sector.” The FSO is an international platform of


cooperation and project partners include the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC), the Brazilian Feed Industry Association (Sindirações), DSM, Evonik Industries, FAMI- QS, the EU Association of Specialty Feed Ingredients and their Mixtures (FEFANA), GMP+ International, HSL Certification Service (China), the International Feed Industry Federation (IFIF), the International Trade Centre (ITC), Nutreco and SGS Nederland B.V.


PAGE 42 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2014 FEED COMPOUNDER


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  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68