Reducing the economic impact of


coronavirus in animal nutrition through targeted application of enzymes


By Diego Parra, Technical Manager EMEA, AB Vista


Covid-19 has posed and continues to pose a wide range of challenges for the agri-food industry. The relationship between supply and demand for animal protein has been clearly affected due to the closure of regions and countries, lockdowns, the loss of tourism and the closure of the HORECA (hotel, restaurant and catering) channel. In recent months, we have seen the impressive way the agri-food industry has managed to adapt to this changing situation in supply chains, shifting supply from HORECA to retail for instance. In many other sectors, companies have had to close down


temporarily or permanently. However, agri-food production has continued, with all the efforts that this has entailed, due to the essential nature of this sector. Not only have we learned to live in lock down, besides that we


have also adapted to the so-called “new normality”. In this context, companies have also had to adapt to the new situation, because to a greater or lesser extent, it has affected the economic results of most of the sector. As for the animal nutrition companies, our main function is to be


able to provide strategies, services and products in order to produce high quality animal protein in the most efficient way possible. This has always been the objective, but it is even more accentuated in these particularly difficult times. Livestock feed accounts for between 65% and 70% of the total


cost of production, so it is a parameter to be constantly and thoroughly scrutinised by producers. In the current context of the pandemic, the strategy of using enzymes to increase the maximum level of nutrient release from raw materials becomes even more important. The use of phytases, to break down phytate molecules, as


well as the use of carbohydrases, namely xylanases to break down arabinoxylan (AX) chains, is of particular interest in order to achieve cost reduction in the manufacture of compound feed. That is why AB Vista offers the Maximum Matrix Nutrition (MMN)


strategy instead of a more conservative matrix use that is normally employed and consists of an “over the top” way of using NSP enzyme products and just using the mineral matrix for phytases. This strategy consists of the joint use of phytase at high doses


with xylanase in order to extract the maximum amount of nutrients from the raw materials, using a mineral, energy and amino acid matrix in the formulation. This reduces the cost of the diet without penalizing the performance results. Thanks to the action between phytase and xylanase, as well as


the greater knowledge that we have of substrates today, this allows us to eliminate the anti-nutritional factors in the diet and consequently improve the digestibility of most nutrients. This is achieved mainly though the combined destruction of phytate, reduction in viscosity and improved fermentation of fibre. In this way it is possible to include a mineral, energy and amino


acid matrix when formulating, which will significantly reduce the price per ton of feed, without affecting the production performance of the animals and therefore making the final production cost per kilogram of animal protein cheaper. It also allows for greater environmental sustainability by reducing


CO2e, nitrogen and phosphorus emissions, due to a more efficient use of raw materials due to the use of enzymes. When using the MMN strategy, large economic savings can be


achieved due to the full release of nutrients present in the materials. However, most nutritionists are reluctant to use the full matrix values supplied by additive suppliers, often applying significant “safety” margins. Furthermore, it is clear that although a matrix value for an additive may be 100% correct, it does not mean that the matrix can be applied in diets where more than one additive is used: additive matrix values are not additive! This is because the first additive in use improves nutrient utilisation, which then leaves less room for improvement of the second additive and so on. A typical practical approach is to use 80% of the combined matrix values of an additive combination, for example when calculating with nutrients from both phytase and xylanase in a diet. As a practical example of the MMN strategy, extensive validation


trials have been carried out worldwide with broilers and the results show, on average, a saving between a conservative strategy and an MMN strategy of about 8 pounds per tonne of feed, depending on the raw material price at the time.


FEED COMPOUNDER MARCH/APRIL 2021 PAGE 35


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  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76