24 June 2022 – With raw material prices forecast to continue rising – at least for the remainder of the year – feed makers are feeling the pinch and are being forced to reassess their formulations to unlock possible savings. But are they looking closely enough?
According to Dr. Davi Brito De Araujo, Global Trace Mineral Programme Manager at Nutreco’s feed additive brand, Selko, some feed producers may be overlooking the importance that trace mineral sources can play in saving crucial dollars during the raw material price crisis.
The right source, Dr. Araujo told Feedinfo during a recent chat, could help producers maximize their returns in the face of raising ingredient prices. And it all boils down to chemistry. More accurately, as he explained, it’s all about the bonds; how trace minerals, like copper, zinc, and manganese are linked to the ligand or carrier molecule. This influences their stability in the diet, bioavailability to the animal, nutrient digestibility, and performance and is what can really make a difference to feed producers’ return on investment
In this Industry Perspectives, Dr. Araujo talks us through the various trace mineral sources and details why IntelliBond trace minerals should be of particular interest to producers looking to soothe hurting profits.
[Feedinfo] Dr. Araujo, can you explain to us how choosing the right trace mineral source can contribute to unlocking feed formula savings?
|
[Davi Brito De Araujo] Because the various mineral sources – oxides, sulphates, organics and hydroxys – range in quality and cost, when raw material prices go up (like the industry is experiencing today) most nutritionists try to reduce the final cost of compound feed or total diets by reducing diet input cost. Cost per metric ton of trace mineral-vitamin premix is evaluated and supplementing inorganic sources (sulphates and oxides) can leave dollars on the table. It is important to understand the value of utilizing the proper source of trace mineral to maximize your return on investment. |
Dr. Davi Brito De Araujo |
By using high quality and stable trace mineral sources, nutritionists can improve nutrient stability (i.e. vitamins, lipids) and trace mineral bioavailability. In other words, there is a need to quantify the value of more nutrients to the animal in addition to the animal performance benefits. Trace mineral sources can also affect enzyme and probiotic stability—both of which are widely used throughout the world in livestock diets.
In the last 25 years, our research with IntelliBond has shown improvements in nutrient stability, bioavailability, rumen function, and improvements in performance in swine and poultry. So, reviewing the use of trace mineral sources and utilizing IntelliBond trace minerals provides an optimal return when considering diet costs and milk, meat and egg prices.
[Feedinfo] Let’s talk numbers. Considering their relatively small amount in final feed, how impactful can trace minerals really be in helping feed makers save on costs?
[Davi Brito De Araujo] This is an important question. Feedstuffs, such corn, soybean meal and others, are evaluated as cost per metric ton. A couple of examples of how IntelliBond can improve diet cost consist of the 3 to 5 point improvement in FCR in broilers and the 2 to 4 point improvement in NDFd in dairy cows when compared to sulphate based Cu, Zn, and Mn. Looking beyond your trace mineral premix cost per ton and putting your cost on a per animal basis shows a measurable return on investment by using products like IntelliBond.
[Feedinfo] So, what in your opinion constitutes an effective trace mineral strategy? What objectives should the modern nutritionist keep in mind when developing theirs?
[Davi Brito De Araujo] It is important to look at this from a ruminant perspective and a monogastric (swine and poultry) perspective as trace mineral metabolism and responses in animals differs across species.
For ruminants there are several factors to consider:
1) What is the basal level of Cu, Zn, and Mn in the diet? What is the level of Cu antagonists such as molybdem, sulphur and iron? These are factors to consider when determining the optimal level of trace mineral.
2) Remove sulphate based Cu, Zn, and Mn from the diet to maximize rumen function.
For swine and poultry factors to consider include:
1) From a geographical perspective, can I feed high levels of Cu? There are a number of studies demonstrating that feeding levels of IntelliBond C above the requirement (>125 ppm Cu) improves feed conversion in broilers and improves hot carcass weight in grow-finish pigs.
2) Feeding IntelliBond provides an improved source of trace minerals with high bioavailbility which is especially important in geographies where total levels are regulated. Supplementing IntelliBond Zn and Mn improves the performance of broilers, layers, and swine.
[Feedinfo] OTM sources are known for their increased bioavailability in animals. So, what are the main differences between them and HTMs? And what do these differences mean for producers’ pockets?
[Davi Brito De Araujo] Both OTMs and HTMs have covalent bonds, unlike inorganics such as sulphates. This is important to note because covalent bonds are stronger. A great way to think about this is when you dissolve salt in water compared to sugar in water. Because of their weaker ionic bonds, salt and other sulphates break up into their various components when dissolved in water. Sugar, like organics and HTMs, have stronger covalent bonds, meaning they do not break up into their various components when mixed with water.
The difference between OTMs and HTMs, however, boils down to their structure. OTMs have covalent bonds that use amino acids, peptides and other carbon/nitrogen compounds linked to the metal. Amino acids and peptides are large molecules, so by producing OTMs the concentration of the metal in the molecule is reduced. To compare, in sulphates you will find metal concentration ranging from 25 to 36%, in the case of copper and zinc. With the addition of amino acid chelates or proteinates, that can drop down to around 8 to 15%. Utilizing IntelliBond in diets allows for more space in the diet for ingredients and other additives given their higher metal concentration (IntelliBond CII 54%, IntelliBond Z 55%, and IntelliBond M 44%) .
Another important point is that organic ligands, such as amino acids, are a very expensive type of molecule due to their nutritional and biological value, which can push OTM prices higher. This is why the animal nutrition industry has never been able to have 100% OTM diets, because this would result in trace mineral costs in feed jumping 5 to 15 times higher. This is also the reason why OTMs only make up 15 to 30% of the total trace mineral profile in diets. Even this can raise the trace mineral cost per animal by 4 to 5 times.
Lastly, our relative bioavailability studies in ruminants and broilers would indicate that IntelliBond is at least equal to organic equivalents when utilizing published bioavailability models.
[Feedinfo] Besides the current raw material situation, the environmental impact of trace minerals is another area of concern. What can you tell us about the environmental impacts of HTMs?
[Davi Brito De Araujo] Bioavailability and chemical characteristics are key in this case. Getting more available mineral into the animals results in less being excreted in the environment. Animal impacts consist of improved performance and feed conversion, reproduction, and immunity. Globally we need to produce more with less so anything we can do maximize inputs and productivity will maximize returns. Trace mineral source matters, and there are many ways beyond bioavailability that one may quantify environmental impacts.
Published in association with Selko Feed Additives
