April 2013 - AFMA

APRIL 2013
Volume 22 No 1
Matrix
Quarterly magazine of the Animal Feed Manufacturers Association
Global Feed & Food Congress 2013 • Voluntary feed intake
Feed outlook • SA feed industry • Top companies 2012

A hearty welcome to Africa
By De Wet Boshoff, executive director of AFMA and chairman of the
GFFC 2013 organising and hosting committee
It is indeed a pleasure and a great honour for AFMA to host the
prestigious 4th Global Feed & Food Congress (GFFC) in partnership
with IFIF and the FAO. It is an even greater pleasure
welcoming you to South Africa, as this leading global event
will be hosted on the African continent for the very first time
from 10 to 12 April 2013 at Sun City in the North West province.
What makes this special, is the fact that this 4th GFFC coincides
with AFMA’s very own successful and internationally recognised
AFMA Forum, which is hosted on a triennial basis (eight AFMA Forums
over a 21-year period, starting in 1992). At the same time, we
are also celebrating AFMA Matrix’s 21st anniversary as our official
industry magazine, which will henceforth open new frontiers as it
is now published in cooperation with Plaas Publishing.
General
Across borders
Hosting the 4th GFFC in Africa lends itself towards acting as a vehicle
to build closer ties among members in the region. Therefore
AFMA will be taking the initiative by hosting the launch meeting
of the Southern African Feed Manufacturers Association (SAFMA)
during the congress. This will lay the foundation for future cooperation.
This might also be a groundbreaking opportunity not only for
feed, but also for the food value chain as a whole in the region.
The global challenge of having sufficient, safe and affordable food
available for all people, fits in well with the 4th GFFC’s theme – “Safe
Feed & Food for All”.
To keep up the production of sufficient food for a rapidly increasing
world population, means that we will have to produce more with
less every year and that we will have to keep doing this. In order to
achieve this goal, we will have to keep on improving in all areas of
the food value chain. Successful application of new and innovative
technologies in all the feed and food disciplines has indeed become
a reality.
Sufficient food
We have already exceeded performance targets previously thought
of as biologically impossible and today we believe that this progress
can be maintained. Global trade is a major aspect in the sufficient
supply of food and compliments the notion of producing more food
in areas where land and water is available, for consumption in areas
that are deprived of land and water. Both the GFFC and AFMA Forum
programmes support the principle of producing sufficient food globally.
The variety of sophisticated high quality traceability systems applied
by the feed and food industries globally, is testimony to the
commitment towards supplying safe feed and food. Technological
improvements increase our ability to identify and manage safety risks
in the food chain. Important safety risks are not limited to, but include
global trade, higher yields, higher stocking densities, pollution
(air, land and water) and adulteration.
Whereas governing bodies in the past directed the what, where
and how of production, their role in assisting the safe production of
feed and food has now become crucial. Governing bodies need to
improve their efforts in this regard because safety issues are often
misused as trade barriers and sometimes ignored, thus increasing
the safety risk for the importing country. The GFFC programme allows
for a platform where different governing bodies and industries
can debate these issues with the expectation of positive outcomes
for all involved.
Affordability
The concept of affordable food for all is not new, but to truly say
that we have reached our goals in the supply of sufficient, safe and
affordable food means that it must be sustainable, which is not
possible if it increases unemployment. If affordability does not enjoy
the same focus and attention as sufficient and safe food, we are
not solving the problem but are in fact contributing to it.
The GFFC would furthermore aim to leave a legacy behind in
the form of an action plan for sub-Sahara Africa facing the challenges
going forward. This promises to bring an interesting end to
the congress with unique solutions and action plans for a unique
continent.
On behalf of IFIF, the FAO and AFMA – I trust you will have a most
enjoyable time in Africa!
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 1

Editor’s note
A
battling world economy, escalating commodity
prices continuing its volatile trend, cheap imported
products and livestock at low prices (subsidised
producers), climate change and governments
with somewhat insensitive policies and legislation,
make it very difficult to effectively and economically produce
agricultural products.
Consumers ultimately not only dictate the quality of the
final food product, but are also becoming more concerned
about the methods used to produce it. From a producer’s point
of view, escalating input costs necessitate research to find even
more efficient and sustainable means to increase output, thus
decreasing environmental impact, but also maintaining (or
even increasing) the quality of that same product.
Producers are blessed with livestock that can convert
valuable and even invaluable feed sources into quality proteins
(food products). Maintaining herd/flock health and acquiring
feed sources which comply with minimum quality standards,
should ensure produce safe for human consumption.
The new Matrix
AFMA Matrix has undergone some changes following the joint
venture of AFMA and Plaas Publishing. Although keeping its
well-established reputable technical angle of reporting, more
sections have been added to complement and expand the
scope of AFMA Matrix: feed industry and processing matters,
client focus and industry economics.
On the technology front, there is currently a lot of interesting
and promising research being conducted in the world. Just by
reading through the Global Feed and Food Congress (GFFC)
2013 programme, and a lot of impressive resumés of invited
speakers, we are expecting a knowledge and information
feast.
On that note, the South African animal science and livestock
production community welcomes all delegates, local and
foreign, to the 4th Global Feed and Food Congress hosted by
AFMA at Sun City in the beautiful North-West province. The
programme promises to provide a meticulous insight into
new technologies and innovations, good feed manufacturing
practices and technologies, meeting the sustainability
challenge, the latest developments in livestock nutrition,
managing feed safety, various seminars and workshops, as well
as the way forward.
On behalf of the AFMA Matrix team and animal science
colleagues, I would like to extend a warm welcome to all
local and international speakers at the Global Feed and Food
Congress/AFMA Forum 2013. May the slogan of “Safe Feed
& Food for All” remain the common denominator dictating
the way we as scientists, producers, industry role-players and
governments manage each sector to a common and attainable
purpose of food security.
Ockert Einkamerer, editor
Email: EinkamererOB@ufs.ac.za
Editorial Committee
Editor: Ockert Einkamerer
072 302 0930 · EinkamererOB@ufs.ac.za
Associate editor: De Wet Boshoff
+27 12 663 9097 · dewet@afma.co.za
Published by: Plaas Publishing (Pty) Ltd
217 Clifton Ave, Lyttelton, Centurion, RSA
Private Bag X2010, Lyttelton, 0140, RSA
Tel: +27 87 808 9776 · www.veeplaas.co.za
Chief editor: Lynette Louw
+27 84 580 5120 · lynette@veeplaas.co.za
Sub-editor: Elizabeth Kruger
+27 87 808 9776 · elizabeth@veeplaas.co.za
Senior writer: Izak Hofmeyr
+27 82 402 4494 · izak@veeplaas.co.za
Design & layout: Melani de Beer
+27 87 808 9776 · melani@veeplaas.co.za
Advertising: Karin Changuion-Duffy
+27 82 376 6396 · karin@veeplaas.co.za
Advertising: Susan Steyn
+27 82 657 1262 · susan@veeplaas.co.za
Accounts: Marné Anderson
+27 72 639 1805 · marne@veeplaas.co.za
Subscriptions: Rochelle Mabebe
+27 74 153 8380 · rochelle@veeplaas.co.za
Printed and bound by: Business Print
Tel: +27 12 843 7600 · www.businessprint.co.za
AFMA Matrix, Plaas Publishing and its staff and contributors
do not necessarily subscribe to the views expressed in this
publication.
© Copyright: No portion of this magazine may be reproduced
in any form without the written consent of the publishers.
Published on behalf of:
PO Box 8144, Centurion, 0046, RSA
Embankment Road, 194 Kwikkie Crescent, Centurion 0157
Tel: +27 12 663 9097 · admin.@afma.co.za
· www.afma.co.za
2 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

11
CONTENTS
General
General
Preface 1
Editor’s note 2
News & views 4
Feed industry
State of the SA feed industry 7
Feed outlook for 2013 11
17
Processing
Heat stress in dairy cattle and poultry 17
Biofuel co-products as livestock feed 23
Factors affecting voluntary feed intake 29
Pellet quality and broiler growth rate 35
Feed science
Anti-nutritional factors and enzymes 41
E. coli, Salmonella and other pathogens 45
Amino acid formulation and the dairy cow 48
Avoid second parity slump in sows 53
53
Client focus
Importance of the man on the ground 56
Top feed companies: 2011-2012 60
Last but not least 63
On the cover:
Meadow Feeds,
tel +27 (0)11 991 6000;
fax +27 (0)11 475 5752;
www.meadowfeeds.co.za
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 3

News & views
China doubles corn purchases
Chinese feed mills bought 600 000 metric
tons of US corn in March, in nine cargoes
for delivery starting in October, twice as
much corn as they purchased in February.
The purchase brings total imports to
roughly 900 000 metric tons of corn so far
for 2013, according to industry experts.
Corn on the Dalian Commodity
Exchange traded at 2 447 yuan per
metric ton (about $10 per bushel) at 1:39
pm local time on 13 March, while grain
on the Chicago Board of Trade was at
$7,1525 per bushel. Global demand will
exceed supply by 13,7 million metric tons
in the 2012–2013 season, according to
the US Department of Agriculture.
China bought a record 5,23 million
metric tons of corn from overseas in the
marketing year ended 30 September
2012, and shipments for 2013 are forecast
to fall to 2,5 million metric tons, according
to the USDA. – www.wattagnet.com
Feed Manual now in Chinese
The International Feed Industry Federation
(IFIF) together with the Food
and Agriculture Organisation of the
UN (FAO) have launched the Chinese
language version of the Feed Manual
of Good Practices for the feed industry.
The manual, the first of its kind, was
published by the IFIF and the FAO to
increase safety and feed quality at the
production level, and was officially presented
in Rome at FAO headquarters to
the Chinese Feed Manufacturers Association
(CFIA).
Alexandra de Athayde, IFIF executive
director, explains: “The Feed Manual
is designed to increase safety and feed
quality at the production level both for
industrial production and on farm mixing.”
Ms de Athayde added: “We are very
pleased that we have launched the Chinese
language version of the Feed Manual.
China is the number one producer
Towards global feed guidelines
Brussels – The European Feed Manufacturer’s
Federation (FEFAC) and the American
Feed Industry Association (AFIA) set up a
consortium in 2011 with the view to collaborate
on environmental footprinting.
The FEFAC and AFIA consortium together
with the International Feed Industry Federation
(IFIF), has joined the UN FAO-led
Partnership on benchmarking and monitoring
the environmental performance of
livestock supply chains. The consortium
expects to reach a first milestone in 2013
with the publication of the first version
of the Feed LCA Recommendations and
guidance document.
“With the need to reduce the impact
of livestock products on the environment,
being able to measure the impacts
associated with feed using a sound and
harmonized methodology is a first step
to initiate mitigations options” says Joel
Newman, AFIA’s president and CEO.
“These recommendations are meant
to respond to the need of feed operators
and to the demand of feed customers
such as the dairy and meat sectors,” says
Patrick Vanden Avenne, FEFAC’s president.
The interim version of the FEFAC and AFIA
Feed LCA Recommendations will be presented
at the occasion of the 4th Global
Feed and Food Congress organised by
IFIF in South Africa in April 2013. – Issued
by IFIF / AFIA / FEFAC
of animal feed today and only by working
together can we continue to ensure feed and
food safety, while meeting the demands of
60% more food for 9 billion people by 2050
and to do so sustainably.”
An Arabic, French and Spanish language
version of the manual will be launched later
in 2013. The English and Chinese versions
of the Feed Manual are available for download
using the link http://ifif.org/pages/t/
IFIF+FAO+Feed+Manual
Novus rewarded for excellence
Novus International, Inc. has received the
2012 North American Animal Feed Ingredients
Product Differentiation Excellence
Award for its trace mineral product
MINTREX®. Novus was selected from an
elite group of competitor companies by
Frost & Sullivan, a 50-year-old global research
organisation that specialises in
helping clients accelerate growth and
achieve best-in-class positions in growth,
innovation and leadership. This is the second
award Novus has received from Frost &
Sullivan in 2012. The company also was the
recipient of the 2012 New Product Innovation
Award in Prebiotics for its product PRE-
VIDA® in September 2012.
“We are so proud that Frost & Sullivan is
recognising Novus and MINTREX with this
distinguished award,” stated Thad Simons,
president and CEO of Novus. “When we develop
animal health and nutrition products,
it is always with the goal of fulfilling our
mission to make a clear difference in sustainably
meeting the growing global need
for nutrition and health. Receiving awards
for what we truly perceive as ‘doing our job’
is a wonderful and much appreciated affirmation
of our efforts.” – Press release
2013 IPPE sets new record
The 2013 International Production and
Processing Expo had a record attendance
with 26 393 poultry, meat and feed
industry leaders from all over the world.
The expo is the world’s largest annual
poultry, meat and feed industry event of
its kind and is one of the 50 largest trade
shows in the United States. In the August
2012 issue, Trade Show Executive ranked
the expo as #35 in its “Fastest 50 Trade
Shows” listing for percentage of growth in
net square feet of paid exhibit space. The
event is sponsored by the US Poultry &
Egg Association (USPOULTRY), the American
Feed Industry Association (AFIA),
and the American Meat Institute (AMI).
– www.afia.org
4 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

AB Vista shines light on phytate
analysis
Animal and feed producers can count
on precise predictions of phytate levels
in feed, thanks to AB Vista’s phytate
analysis service. Working in partnership
with Aunir, the leading developer
and supplier of software for near infrared
reflectance (NIR) spectroscopy, this
service enables AB Vista’s customers to
have the phytate content of feed samples
analysed. For even greater precision,
Aunir has recently updated the
equations that underpin this analysis
with data from 3 000 samples. NIR
spectroscopy uses light waves to analyse
nutritional, chemical and physical
properties at a molecular level, including
the presence of phytate. Found
in many plant-based feedstuffs, the
anti-nutritional effects of phytate cost
animal producers up to $2 billion every
year in lost performance. When excreted,
it can also harm the environment –
but can be eliminated from the diet by
applying the enzyme phytase to feed.
– www.allaboutfeed.com
First true PGR for oilseed rape
Most oilseed rape crops are further behind
than in recent years, but using a growth
regulator still offers benefits in achieving
the right canopy to maximise the number
of seeds. Growers are in a very different
situation this spring, says Agrovista technical
manager, Mark Hemmant. “Crops are
much more variable, some are forward
and will need holding back while most are
backwards.”
Manipulating growth to achieve the
ideal canopy is set to become easier this
season with a new growth regulator. But
unlike other growth regulators, BASF’s
Cow behaviour can predict heat stress
The standing and laying behaviour of
cows can predict their heat stress, according
to a study conducted by the
University of Arizona and Northwest
Missouri State University.
The researchers used two tools to study
the relationship between behaviour and
temperature. They fitted each cow with
an intra-vaginal sensor to measure core
body temperature, and fitted each cow
with a special leg sensor to measure the
angle of the leg and track whether the
cow was standing or lying. After comparing
data from cows in Arizona, California
and Minnesota, the researchers concluded
that standing behaviour and core body
New management for SAFA
The South African Feedlot Association recently
elected its new executive council
during its annual congress held on 6 and 7
March at Kievits Kroon just outside of Pretoria.
Louw van Reenen of the Beefmaster
Feedlot just outside Christiana, was reelected
as chairman of the association. Willem
Whetmar of Chalmar Beef at Bapsfontein
was elected as vice-chairperson. On the
Caryx has been specifically designed for
oilseed rape instead of being an existing
cereal fungicide that has had the label extended
for use on rape, explains BASF field
crops manager Will Reyer. “In addition, it is
the only true growth regulator, rather than
being a fungicide that happens to have
growth regulatory properties.”
temperature are strongly correlated.
Dr Jamison Allen said cows stood for
longer bouts of time as their core body
temperatures rose from 101 degrees
Fahrenheit to above 102 degrees.
According to Allen, dairy producers
could use standing behaviour to improve
well being and efficiency in their herds.
He said producers could use coolers and
misters to target a specific core body
temperature. By encouraging cows to
lie down, producers will also help their
cows conserve energy. Allen recommended
future studies to see how cows
respond to different cooling systems. –
www.wattagnet.com
photograph is the new executive council of
SAFA. From the left is Dave Ford, managing
director, Louw van Reenen, chairperson,
Calvin Topkin, Kallie Calitz, Johan Cronjé,
Theo Coetzee, Willem Whetmar, vice-chair,
and Tony da Costa. Two members were
absent when the photograph was taken,
namely Riaan Roothman and Robin Watson.
– Izak Hofmeyr, AFMA Matrix
Caryx has three key effects on the plant;
it helps promote a better canopy, protects
against lodging and promotes rooting. It
fundamentally manages the use of energy
in the plant, changing the hormone balance
in two ways, inhibiting gibberellins
and stimulating cytokinin production.
– www.allaboutfeed.com
New standards after dioxin scare
The German Cabinet recently unveiled a
new set of rules aimed at raising standards
in the country’s animal feed industry after
the discovery of toxic chemical dioxin, a
possible carcinogen, triggered heath alerts
worldwide and forced the shut down of
thousands of German farms.
“We want to make the food chain more
secure,” Germany’s food and agriculture
minister, Ilse Aigner, said Wednesday.
“Boosting surveillance is a key part of this.”
Aigner said the new set of rules require
feed production companies to report the
results of all the tests conducted on their
products to German authorities, thereby
creating an “early warning system”. Previously,
the companies were required to
report only the test results that showed
excessive levels of toxic chemicals in their
products. Under the new rules, private laboratories
will also have to report suspicious
results concerning dangerous substances
such as dioxin.
Dioxins are a by-product of industrial
processes and burning of waste. Consumption
of food products contaminated with
high levels of dioxins have been found to
promote cancer and adversely affect pregnant
women.
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 5

Benchmarking is a crucial aspect
of business – how else will you
form an idea of how you compare
to the rest of the players
in your particular industry?
With this in mind, we asked a few industry
leaders to compare the local animal feeds
industry to the rest of the world.
Terry Wiggill, Zeno Bester, Tim Horne
and Jackie Tucker from Chemuniqué
International
The South African feed industry has been
challenged this past year by a multitude of
factors. The increase in soy oilcake prices
around June/July 2012 caused an increase
in feed prices, resulting in escalated production
costs in the poultry industry in
particular.
“The South African feed
industry is proud to have
a number of world-class
nutritionists who have
years of experience in
the industry whilst keeping
abreast of international
developments in the
science of animal nutrition”
The import of “cheap” poultry meat from
countries such as Brazil meant producers
could not increase meat prices to offset the
increased feed prices and as a result, many
poultry operations suffered greatly. Much
of this can be prevented, should the government
strive to protect our local poultry
industry against imported meat produced
more cost-effectively in countries abroad
where producers are receiving government
grants.
State of the South African
animal feed industry
By Izak Hofmeyr
On a positive note, it has to be mentioned
that the South African feed industry
is on par with other feed manufacturers
and producers in the international arena.
All South African feed manufacturers are
governed by strict legislation such as the
Fertilisers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies
and Stock Remedies Act (Act 36 of 1947), and
adhere to these regulations by constantly
scrutinising and analysing feed before it
enters the food chain. An example is the
regulations on undesirable levels as stipulated
by the Feeds Act, of which all feed
manufacturers are aware, as these substances
could affect the entire feed and
food chain.
Experts and technology
South African feed manufacturers, as members
of the Animal Feed Manufacturers Association
(AFMA), are also governed by the
AFMA Code of Conduct, which ensures that
all members adhere to the strictest regulations
and implement the necessary control
measures to ensure safe feed for safe food
are produced at all times.
The South African feed industry is
proud to have a number of world-class nutritionists
who have years of experience in
the industry whilst keeping abreast of international
developments in the science of
animal nutrition. Poultry, pork, meat and
dairy producers in this country are skilled
and well informed about the nutritional
requirements of their animals, making use
of state-of-the-art modern equipment and
applying the necessary financial principles
to ensure that their operations are profitable.
These producers insist on only the
best animal feed, advice and support to
feed the nation.
However, it is unfortunate that we have
so many eager, knowledgeable producers
and feed manufacturers, but have to rely
on information and knowledge generated
abroad. A very limited amount of research
is performed within our borders and in order
for this industry to stay current, adaptable
and progressive, we need to focus on
and invest in local research to ensure we
evaluate and develop our feed products,
farming practices etc. under local conditions.
It is essential to invest in local research
to allow our feed industry to keep
up with the ever growing demand for food
in South Africa.
Effect of input cost
The continued pressure driving down margins
for livestock producers has predominantly
been due to the import of foreign
produce, relatively high raw material costs,
significant increases in electricity costs
and the recent lift in the minimum wage
within the agricultural sector. The result of
this is that many of the smaller business
operations no longer have a viable business
model, and have been forced to exit
the market.
This is particularly apparent in the dairy
sector, where over the last 20 years the
number of commercial producers has decreased
dramatically, but total cow numbers
have increased. Thus the sector is
dominated by fewer producers over time.
The other livestock production enterprises
show similar trends, and this will significantly
impact the feed industry and its interaction
with the market in the future.
Another one of the main challenges we
see facing the future of the industry, is the
distribution of agricultural land. Some of
the most productive agricultural land in
South Africa is state-owned and has been
redistributed to rural farmers. However,
the challenge is that these farmers do not
own this land to use as collateral for bank
loans and are therefore not able to use it to
its full potential.
This limits investment in possible expansion
of production buildings, purchasing
cheaper animal feed in the cities and
Feed industry
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 7

having transport to get products to local
markets and therefore reduces the potential
to be profitable and continue productive
farming. This increases the risk of
cheaper imported products remaining in
the market and reduces future growth of
the feed industry and agricultural products.
Land transfer remains a reality and
we need to find ways to help these rural
farmers become more effective.
Andy Crocker, Meadow Feeds
The South African feed industry is under
pressure, as the competitive intensity has
increased in direct relation to growing
overcapacity in the industry. In addition,
demand for our customers’ animal protein
products, across all species sectors, has
softened considerably as economic pressure
comes to bear on the South African
consumer.
“A growing middle-class is
furthermore developing an
appetite for value-added
foods, including all forms of
meat. The production resources
for feeding this world are
concentrated, amongst very
few other countries, in Africa”
This pressure has been amplified by rising
input costs which reached record levels
last year, and after a temporary reprieve
in the first quarter, 2013 have resumed the
upward trend. Despite this, astute feed
businesses have increased efficiencies and
controlled costs to ensure that they remain
positioned to service the food sector of
the future, which undoubtedly faces rising
demand in the longer term as the world
charges toward a population of nine billion
people.
A growing middle-class is furthermore
developing an appetite for value-added
foods, including all forms of meat. The production
resources for feeding this world
are concentrated, amongst very few other
countries, in Africa. This is a good place
to be for feed manufacturers who can
deliver consistent traceable quality to a
more quality-conscious market that is fed
up with poor or adulterated foods, and increasingly
protected by legislation such as
our own Consumer Protection Act (CPA).
Consistent performance
South African feed manufacturers compare
favourably with their counterparts
elsewhere in the world. Most major manufacturers
in the country have some kind
of relationship with international leaders,
giving them a direct link to the latest technology.
In many cases our technology and
manufacturing capability is in line with
world standards.
At the same time, however, there are
some factories that are aged and, although
they are maintained and operated well,
they simply are not capable of adapting
to the latest standards all the time. On the
other hand, we are building new facilities
in the country, such as Meadow Feeds’ new
Standerton Mill, which is based on the latest
and best technologies.
The bottom line is that we know how to
make feeds that perform consistently. Our
broiler performance, for example, is in line
with the rest of the world.
Looking at the technical advisory services
we offer here, I believe that our technical
advisors, on the whole, are right up
there with the best. On the same basis that
we are linked to international companies
to guide us in terms of technology, our
technical staff is also being exposed to international
expertise and developments.
What has to be said, though, is that our
local research capability has unfortunately
been compromised, with the result that
we are dependent on research results that
were generated elsewhere. Our local institutional
support for the industry has weakened
over time, which is very unfortunate.
Koos Kooy, De Heus South Africa
“The South African feed
industry is furthermore operating
within an environment that is
not equal to our counterparts
in the global village. Import
and export legislation relating
to feed industry raw materials
and animal products, is not
facilitating a level playing field”
South Africa has a developed first-world
and professional animal husbandry industry
with farmers being able to compete
with the best in the world. This is largely
supported and facilitated by an animal
feed industry that is able to supply nutrition
to livestock to produce animal proteins
at a competitive price and to achieve
the genetic potential of animals under the
unique circumstances of a very diverse
South Africa.
The animal feed industry operates
within a South African environment with
unique challenges. Our industry still operates
within an outdated feed law which is
not only outdated with regards to the latest
nutritional developments of the world,
but also does not facilitate development
and quick product implementations required
to fulfil the demands of animal producers.
So in essence we are moving too
slow to be able to keep up with global and
local needs and developments.
The South African feed industry is furthermore
operating within an environment
that is not equal to our counterparts in the
global village. Import and export legislation
relating to feed industry raw materials
and animal products, is not facilitating a
level playing field. This hampers the industry’s
growth potential, the nation’s food
security and the capacity of the industry to
create jobs.
Under the leadership of AFMA the South
African feed industry has taken huge leaps
to ensure “safe feed for safe food”, and contributed
to the new proposed feed bill to
be approved by Parliament. The challenge,
however, remains a bigger inclusion of
feed-producing entities over the complete
spectrum to participate within AFMA to
ensure the global long-term competitiveness
of our industry as a whole.
Feed industry
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 9

Feed industry
Feed outlook for 2013
Compiled by Izak Hofmeyr
The year 2012 was surely one of
the most difficult years for agriculture
globally, says De Wet
Boshoff, executive director of
the Animal Feed Manufacturers
Association (AFMA). The year was characterised
by a struggling world economy, the
European debt crisis, attempts by the USA
to stimulate the local economy and expectations
of a revival from the East. In addition
to these factors the drought, especially in the
USA, had a major influence on grain markets,
leading to worldwide food inflation.
“South Africa couldn’t escape the effect
of these events, especially with regard to
commodity prices which necessitated feed
companies to relay increases to their clients.
Meanwhile a price ceiling was created by
wholesalers who imported products, especially
poultry, at very low prices and against
which the local South African industry had
to compete.”
The reason for the lower price of imports
from Brazil, he explains, is possibly because
these products were being dumped onto
the local market at a lower price than in the
country of origin – thus contravening the
rules of the World Trade Organisation. In the
case of higher imports from the European
Union (EU) at lower prices, the main reason
seems to be the European financial crisis
which necessitated consumers in the EU to
spend less on proteins such as poultry, pork
and red meat. As a result the surplus was exported
in order to maintain the profitability
of their industries.
“It is generally known that the EU agricultural
industry is subsidised through a
common agricultural policy, which makes
it difficult for our local farmers to compete.
In addition, there is an EU-SA free trade
agreement in place and these products are
therefore imported to South Africa with no
import levies. In both cases (Brazil and the
EU) it will be very difficult to raise the price
ceiling and bring relief to the local processor.
It will be interesting to see which option
the government will consider once the
protection of an industry under pressure is
weighed against cheaper food for the consumer.”
It is against this background that AFMA
Matrix spoke to a few role-players in the
South African feed industry to find out what
the industry can expect in 2013.
Wessel Lemmer, senior economist
market research, Grain SA
The outlook for maize and soybean production
is very promising. Should the production
circumstances of the previous production
season in South Africa repeat itself,
2013 prices should be trading at export
price levels.
The total maize production for white
and yellow maize amounts to 11,83 million
tons for the 2012/13 marketing year, which
closes on 30 April 2013. The expected end
supply on 30 April 2013 should amount
to approximately 1,9 million tons. Given a
pipeline requirement of 1,1 million tons, the
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 11

surplus above the pipeline should amount
to 777 000 tons. This explains why maize is
currently trading at export price levels. The
projected exports for the current marketing
year amounts to almost 1,3 million tons.
It is interesting to note that white maize
is largely being utilised in the animal feeds
market. During the current marketing year
approximately 642 000 tons of white maize
should be utilised by the animal feed market.
During the previous marketing year
white maize consumption amounted to 1,2
million tons, while in the year before it was
1,66 million tons. Consumption of yellow
maize in the animal feeds market amounts
to 3,6 to 3,7 million tons, while the commercial
supply of yellow maize can amount
to between 4,7 and 4,8 million tons.
Producers have indicated that they will
plant 2,7 million hectares of maize for the
2013/14 marketing year. With an expected
yield of 4,57 tons per hectare, the total production
in 2013/14 should amount to 12,5
million tons. With carry-over stock of almost
1,9 million tons, commercial supply should
amount to approximately 12 million tons in
2013/14.
Considering that the total commercial
consumption amounts to approximately
8,8 million tons, we could expect an end
supply of a substantial 3 million tons on
30 April 2014, once possible exports of 1,4
million have been brought into the calculation.
The end stock of yellow maize should
be between 1,2 and 1,3 million tons on 30
April 2014.
Based on the prospect that local supplies
could build up until the end of April 2014,
maize prices should trade at close to export
parity price levels. Good export figures can,
however, contribute towards a decline in local
stocks and the support of higher prices
above export parity price levels.
Maize prices are mostly the leader of
other price commodities such as soybeans.
The transferred amount of soybeans at the
end of 2012 should amount to approximately
200 000 tons. With the expected
increased soybean planting for 2013, production
at a yield of 1,75 tons per hectare
should amount to approximately 880 000
tons. With provision made for exports of
160 000 tons and an increased consumption
of oil and oilcake at 400 000 tons, the
end supply at the end of December 2013
can amount to approximately 230 000 tons.
The higher local soybean supply can lead to
soybeans also trading at export price levels
by the end of 2013.
The local price of maize and soybeans
should trade at export parity price levels
until the end of the next marketing year. Local
factors that can support South African
prices in trading at higher levels include
the export tempo in the coming marketing
year and weather problems in our production
regions during planting and pollination
seasons.
International factors that can determine
prices include the immediate effect of
rainfall patterns on crop production in
South America and whether sufficient rains
will fall during the US spring season to
supplement underground moisture in the US
production areas. International production
circumstances can recover within six
months, and under these circumstances the
international price of commodities could
decline during the second half of 2013. This
can cause local prices in the second half of
2013 to also drop.
Dr Erhard Briedenhann, MIDS
Regarding the availability of protein sources,
the international situation is the deciding
factor if one wants to summarise the
local situation. It is very important that the
South American soybean crop is successful
so that world supplies can be supported.
World supplies are very low due to poor
yields, especially in America.
Initially there was concern over the
fact that South America will be getting
too much rain, but the current situation is
looking very promising. With regard to international
prices, the current world economy
still has a depressive effect on prices,
despite low global supplies.
In respect of the local situation, we are
expecting (according to the crop estimate)
increased plantings of soy and sunflower.
However, these plantings do not indicate
earth-shattering yields. The new season
nevertheless looks promising for both consumers
and producers of protein seeds.
A matter that also deserves attention is
the increased pressing capacity currently
available in respect of soybeans in the
country. By 2014 we should have a pressing
capacity of two million tons of high
protein soybean oilcake, which could put
the country on the road towards self-sufficiency.
Heiko Köster, feed consultant
In order to determine what the year ahead
holds in store in terms of the availability
of animal feeds, one should view the main
components of animal feed individually.
With regard to maize, we have enough
stock in the country, but due to the fact
that the world supply is under pressure,
prices on the Chicago Board of Trade
(CBOT) will probably remain under pressure.
The current price is in the order of
$7,50 per bushel for March and July. Our
local prices are also high because of the
fact that we are moving around import
parity. Furthermore, the exchange rate will
have a determining influence on the price.
With regard to the new season, prices
will be strongly influenced by the climate.
At the end of the planting season it
seemed as though enough rain had fallen
in the production areas to ensure relatively
wide planting.
Regarding soy oilcake, prices are determined
by import parity. Prices should
remain relatively high up until April/May,
when we should see a drop of up to R800
per ton. Sunflower, on the other hand,
is a cause for concern. Relatively large
amounts are imported, but at high prices.
Other products such as cotton oilcake are
simply following the soy and sunflower
trends.
With regard to by-products such as
broken maize and wheat bran, supplies
are substantially lower than usual due to
low milling figures. Our milling figures reflect
the purchases of human consumers
and it is clear that the economy has had
a negative effect on the consumer’s buying
power. There has also been a change
towards other food types due to the high
maize price.
The lower availability of broken maize
and bran is a problem, especially for the
feedlots. Lower availability means that
prices are higher than usual. Good local
yields can cause the price to drop during
the year and good yields in South America
might even cause prices to drop even further.
On the other hand, American climatic
conditions during May, June and July could
cause relative volatility in the market.
Feed industry
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 13

Processing
The technical and practical
application of heat stress knowledge
in dairy cattle and poultry
By Marco A Rebollo, Research and Nutritional Services, Zinpro Corporation
Heat stress is an extreme condition
in which the animals
are unable to dissipate excessive
heat stored in their
bodies caused by hot weather.
Standard behavioural, physiological
and biochemical thermoregulatory mechanisms
are not sufficient to release the
heat leading to reduced feed intake, reduced
fertility and mortality, with the consequent
decline in performance (Daghir,
1998; West, 2003; Renaudeau et al., 2011).
With the use of advanced technology,
farmers have been able to adapt their facilities
to improve comfort: Providing shade,
increasing airflow and improving evaporative
heat loss. Thermo-tolerance is an
interesting topic that has been studied by
geneticists, but it will still take some time
to achieve an effective solution.
Acclimation is also a resource that naturally
happens when animals are born and
grow in hot weather (West, 2003; Renaudeau
et al., 2011). Some producers intentionally
expose their animals to artificial
hot conditions to prepare them before the
hot season in order to prevent heat stress
losses (Yalçin et al., 2000; Yahav & McMurty,
2001; Yahav, 2009).
Heat stress is one of the leading causes
of decreased production and fertility
around the world. Approximately 50% of
meat and 60% of milk is produced in tropical
or subtropical countries (Daghir, 1998;
FAO, 2010).
From a nutritional point of view, changes
in feed formulations have been useful
in reducing heat production (reducing
energy, replacing starch with fat in poultry
diets and reducing the fibre content of
ruminant diets) with the adequate supply
of essential nutrients for production (especially
a good balance of amino acids).
Besides increasing the supply of some
vitamins like vitamin A, C and E, minerals
like zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), copper
(Cu) and chromium (Cr) have also proven
to reduce the negative impact caused by
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 17

18 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

a stress condition and compensate imbalances
created (Guo et al., 1999; Sahin et al.,
2009; Renaudeau et al., 2011; Sahin et al.,
2009).
Even considering the use of protective
facilities and auxiliary control devices, producers
experience high economic losses
when high humidity is present or heat
waves are hitting their production complexes
(West, 2003).
The best approach is to use all the elements
available – considering assortment
of facilities, installing proper equipment
and control devices. All these are being
designed by qualified professional agricultural
engineers. Also, the nutritional
approach should be considered, as well as
trying to take some advantage of acclimation.
Sharp common sense and customised
management should never be left aside for
technology to give its best performance.
Dairy cows
During heat stress, cows display reduced
activity, reduced dry matter intake (DMI),
increased respiratory rate, sweating and
seeking shade. The primary heat dissipation
mechanisms become less effective
as temperature rises and then the cow
relies more on the evaporative cooling in
the form of sweating and panting (West,
2003).
In high relative humidity (RH) conditions
this means that cooling is restricted
to limited times in the day, then the deficiency
in heat loss leads to reduction in dry
matter intake (DMI) and consequently lower
milk production. The critical values for
minimum, mean and maximum thermal
humidity index (THI) obtained in a study
were 64, 72 and 76 respectively (Igono et
al., 1992).
It is difficult to separate what influences
reduced milk production more – either
low feed intake or direct effect of heat on
hormones. Thyroid hormone levels are
reduced by hot weather and therefore
metabolic activity is reduced. Respiratory
alkalosis derived from prolonged panting
later becomes metabolic acidosis by the
compensatory loss of bicarbonates.
This affects the acid-base balance of the
cow, especially when high grain feeds are
fed. In one study done in Florida, USA, milk
yield declined by 0,2kg per unit increase
in THI when THI exceeded 72 (Ravagnolo
et.al., 2000). The immune system can also
be compromised during heat stress (Renaudeau
et al., 2011, Roth et al., 1982).
The following approaches are classified
by the target objectives pursued when
cows are exposed to heat stress conditions:
Reducing exposure
The use of shade is an important resource
to mitigate heat stress. Shade is a requirement
in any environmental management
programme for dairy. In an experiment
cows under shade yielded 10% more milk,
had lower rectal temperatures and slower
respiratory rates (Roman-Ponce et al.,
1977).
It is recommended to provide shade
in all areas, at least 4m 2 /cow oriented to
cover most of the sun path during the hottest
season. It can be provided either by
solid roofs or by tensed sheds. Feeding and
watering areas should always be covered
by shade. All open areas should provide
a shade refuge – holding pens, maternity
pens, cows in lactation, managing area
and if possible also pathways.
Less body heat production
Reformulate diets to account for reduced
DMI, adjust increased requirements to
cope with heat, reduce heat increment
and avoid any excess in nutrient supply.
Avoid excess nitrogen as energy might be
distracted to produce NH 3
. Feed low fibre
diets since acetate is not efficiently used in
hot weather conditions (West, 2003).
Low forage and higher concentrate
diets increase total DMI, so measures to
manage a low DMI should be taken as it
is the key factor to effectively reduce heat
increment and provide the right amount
of nutrients. To compensate this, the dietary
neutral detergent fibre (NDF) content
needs to be adjusted to keep DMI at the
desired level.
Reduced DMI requires an increase in
the dietary mineral concentrations. Cationanions
should be increased (Na, K; West,
2003), as well as trace minerals (Zn, Mn,
Cr, Cu; Renaudeau et al., 2011) to reinforce
the antioxidant status and also to prevent
problems derived from tissue weakness
like pododermatitis.
In facilities with low mechanised cooling
capacities, try to feed cows at a time
when temperature is comfortable, early
and later in the day. Provide a well-balanced
diet with accurate energy supply
calculated according to the production
stage and weather (DMI).
Increasing airflow
Mechanised ventilation has shown to be
a useful resource to improve comfort, especially
when combined with the use of
sprinklers or foggers. Fans running at 6,5 to
9,7km per hour, depending on the season
and the facilities, would provide sufficient
cooling. Fans should be placed at the most
efficient height (2,40 to 2,50m; Brouk et al.,
2004). Fan companies provide the service
of calculating the optimal capacity for the
requirement of the area.
Remember to provide frequent maintenance
to fans. All must be running fine before
the hot season. A thermostat should
be calibrated and cleaned frequently.
Evaporative heat loss
The use of sprinklers on the cows has
shown to provide comfort as they increase
their evaporative heat loss. Low pressure
coarse droplets sprinklers (1,8 to 2,8l/min,
1,25l/cow) are preferred, as the less the air
is moving the more times the cow needs
to be soaked. Once the cow is wet, time
should be allowed for the water to evaporate.
Humid weather requires more frequent
soaking. An 11,6% improvement in
milk yield was obtained when cows were
sprayed for 1,5 minutes every 15 minutes
(Strickland et al., 1988). Give proper maintenance
to nozzles and flush pipes.
Care must be taken to avoid manure
accumulation creating muddy areas. Due
to metabolic acidosis that develops during
heat stress, vasoactive changes usually
weaken claws (hooves). Lameness can result
from the softening and later wear of
the claw (Tomlinson et al., 2004; Tomlinson
et al., 2008).
Compensating the negative effects
in the animal
Provide full water access (linear water access:
1-1,20m/cow), preferably in shaded
areas, in free stall barns and parlour exit
lanes. Keep water tanks clean and check
water flow rates at peak hot times.
Supplementation of vitamins A and C,
and trace minerals lost and depleted dur-
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 19

ing heat stress, would be helpful. Minerals
can be provided from high bio-available
sources like complex trace minerals, Zn,
Cu, Mn and Cr. This would also help to reinforce
the immune system and reduce infectious
problems (Tomlinson et al., 2008). By
providing sodium bicarbonate to replenish
the carbonates lost in the urine would also
prevent metabolic acidosis.
It is desirable that animals have the
benefit of being exposed to lower temperatures
during night time. Despite high
ambient temperatures during the day, a
cool period of less than 21⁰C for three to
six hours will minimise the decline in milk
yield (Igono et al., 1992).
Poultry
When chickens are exposed to hot weather,
they seek comfort in the house, stop eating
and pant. Birds do not have sweat glands
like mammals and the body is covered by
a thick feather cover. They display ruffled
feathers when kept under these conditions
(Daghir, 1998; Reece et al., 1972). Panting
starts off by being fast and superficial, but
if exposure is prolonged it becomes deep
and slower and then respiratory alkalosis is
developed. Capillary beds are dilated.
The immune response is compromised
during heat stress (Gross & Siegel, 1983; Lin
et al., 2005; Tirawattanawanich et al., 2011),
so care must be taken to avoid exposure
to infectious agents. Mortality can happen
within minutes once birds have reached
this point of alkalosis and hundreds or
thousands of birds can die. Performance
losses in these birds reaching market age
include poor performance and losses in
processing plant yield (Ryder et al., 2004;
Renaudeau et al., 2011).
The following approach classifies the
actions to be taken considering the target
objectives pursued to minimise losses during
heat stress:
Reducing body heat production
Reducing stocking density is strongly
recommended in hot climates – below
35kg/m 2 in cases of tunnel ventilated
houses and below 12 birds/m 2 (25kg/m 2 )
in open-sided houses. During the brooding
phase, try to give birds full access to
the space of the house.
Proteins in the diet cause the highest
heat increment, so accurate amounts are
recommended according to feed consumption,
providing a good amino acid
balance (Daghir, 1998; Lu et al., 2007).
Feed restriction is probably the most
used practice in broilers to avoid mortality
(Daghir, 1998; Zulkifli et al., 2000). It is
mostly used in non- or incomplete technified
operations. Tunnel ventilated houses
do not use it unless facing an unusual
situation. It is recommended mostly during
the beginning of the hot season when
birds are being exposed to heat during the
first few weeks. Feed access is removed
for six hours during the peak hot time and
then two hours of light during the night
are given to compensate. Midnight feeding
is also practiced with broilers, especially
in open-sided houses (Daghir, 1998;
Renaudeau et al., 2011).
Increasing airflow
New production systems consider the use
of tunnel-ventilated houses with negative
pressure provided by a set of fans
(132cm) on one extreme of the building
that pull the hot stale air out. The air enters
the building on the other extreme of the
building through a filter that can be wet
or dry, depending on the need of the micro-environment
inside the house (Lacy &
Czarick, 1992). Approximately 152 to 244m
per minute is commonly used in these kinds
of houses (Lacy & Czarick, 1992). These systems
imply good sealing, quality of materials
and construction, as well as high-energy
use (dependable power supply).
Open-sided houses are still being used
in tropical countries and in some cases performance
is efficient enough to keep in production.
These systems exploit the adaption
process of the chicken. However, in the case
of a heat wave that exceeds the adaption
limit, big mortalities may occur. In this case
the money saved by cheaper facilities and
lower energy consumption is exceeded by
the losses. Many layer farms have these systems
with some comfort provided by some
fans and sprinklers/foggers.
Evaporative heat loss
The use of wet panels in the inlets of poultry
houses is a common practice. The comfort
sensation when humidity is incorporated
increases substantially. The use of foggers
is also very common at the peak time of
hot weather condition. In dry hot weather,
this evaporative cooling is essential and accounts
for the main heat loss mechanism.
Soaking of birds is not a common practice,
but it is still done in some hot weather
producing areas. It is done manually as an
emergency measure and it has shown good
results.
Compensating for negative effects
Full water access must be provided as birds
increase water consumption during hot
weather. A major problem in poultry production
is the reduction in feed intake, but
also the reduced efficiency derived from
the compensation process in the body.
As mentioned, from a nutritional standpoint
some changes in the diet have proved
to provide great value: Increase in nutrient
density, replace as much energy as possible
by fat sources, improve amino acid balance,
increase vitamins E, C and A, as well as trace
mineral fortification. Do not increase protein
– just provide a good amino-acid balance,
as an increase in protein has proved
to increase fat deposits in the carcass.
The use of electrolytes in water also
helps to replace the main ions lost. Solutions
of NaCl and KCl can be added when
heat waves are hitting.
Acclimation to high ambient temperatures
happens to animals chronically exposed
to hot weather conditions (Yalçin
et al., 2000; Yahav & McMurty, 2001; Yahav,
2009). It consists of anatomical and physiological
changes developed by the body
of the animal to reduce heat production
and increase heat loss, preventing a longer-term
exposure. Studies need to be done
to learn to what extent the animals can be
tested, the type of acclimation processes
and the nutritional plane they would require.
Given the physiological adaption processes,
profitable and competitive performance
still needs to be obtained. Providing
maximum comfort can become extremely
costly to achieve. However, taking advantage
of some adaption process could help
to make production feasible in tropical and
subtropical countries.
References are available from AFMA on
request.
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 21

Biofuel co-products as livestock feed
– opportunities and challenges
by Harinder PS Makkar, Livestock Production Systems Branch,
Animal Production and Health Division, FAO, Rome, Italy
Distillers grains (DG), a by-product of the alcoholic
drink and beverages production, have been fed to
livestock for several years, initially to pigs and dairy
cows. The upsurge in the use of DG was spearheaded
by the search for transport fuel other than that from
fossil fuels, which in recent years has been supported by a large increase
in research funding into the use of co-products.
The co-products are the residues after extraction of the biofuel –
ethanol or biodiesel. Currently, these co-products are an important feed
resource in over 50 countries, for ruminants, non-ruminants and fish.
Biofuels contribute to the twin objectives of increasing fuel security
and as a tool in the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As
the majority of currently used feedstocks to produce biofuels are crops
grown on agricultural land, the requirements for food, feed and fuel
must be balanced so that the quest for biofuels does not result in an
inflationary rise in the cost, or shortage, of food or feed.
This raises the question of second-generation feedstocks from
cellulosic sources, the use of crop residues and stubbles and woody
material grown on marginal land with a minimum of resources, including
irrigation. It also raises the potential for promoting littleused
feeds from non-conventional feedstocks, of which some may
require detoxifying to produce safe livestock feed.
Processing
Feedstocks for ethanol production
Cereal feedstocks: In the USA corn or maize is the dominant source.
The USA has also built an export trade in dried distillers grains with
added solubles (DDGS), initially to Canada for beef production, but
now expanded to a wider market with an emphasis on pig and poultry
production. In the Southern Great Plains of the USA sorghum is
an important feedstock, thus giving rise to considerable quantities of
co-products based on this cereal.
In Canada the major cereal contributing to the industry is wheat.
In Europe the dominant feedstock for ethanol production is also
wheat, although some other cereals, especially barley, may be added
to the mix. Rye is also used as a feedstock, but it is restricted to colder
areas.
Sugar cane and other non-cereal feedstocks: Sugar cane is also
a major feedstock for ethanol production. On a global scale 90% of
ethanol output is accounted for by corn and sugar cane. Other feedstocks
include tropical sugar beet, sweet potato, cassava and sweet
sorghum.
Ethanol co-products
In the USA there are now 200 plants producing 35 million tons of
co-products annually, an increase of more than 13-fold compared
with 2000. Ethanol production was estimated at 51 billion litres in
2010, over three times as much as in 2005.
Currently, in the USA, the beef industry uses 66% of the
available distillers grains, the dairy industry 14%, pigs 12%
and poultry 8%; at the present time there is little evidence of
meaningful amounts is used in aquaculture. However, due to
the high price of the traditional protein sources, fishmeal and
soya bean meal, and the comparatively low price of DDGS, its
use is expected to increase.
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 23

In Western Canada the current demand
for DDGS is estimated at 1,4 million tons
but the local industry, based on wheat, can
only produce around half a million tons,
the shortfall being met from the USA. Important
co-products obtained during ethanol
production from sugarcane and sweet
sorghum are bagasse and vinasse.
Nutritive value of ethanol
co-products
Ruminants
Distillers grains are regarded as a cost-effective
energy feed that also contains substantial
amounts of crude protein (CP) with
useful amounts of amino acids (although
supplementary lysine may need adding for
high-yielding dairy cows), and are also rich
in digestible phosphorus (P) compared to
other feeds.
Because the process of producing ethanol
reduces the energy content, but not
the fibre content, of the residue, distillers
grains are higher in fibre than the whole
grain from which they originated, although
roughage should still be included in the
diet because of the fineness of the fibre
particles of that coming from the grains.
There is also evidence that the rumen
degradability of crude protein is reduced,
but this can be ignored if the distillers
grains (DG) do not exceed 30% of the diet,
at which point some supplementary urea
may be necessary.
The corn co-products are seen primarily
as a source of dietary protein in feedlot
diets, although at high levels of inclusion,
when they replace substantial amounts of
whole grain, the fat and fibre will contribute
meaningful amounts of energy. The
corn gluten feed (a product of wet milling)
and distillers grains with added solubles
(DGS) have a low starch content, thus removing
the negative effects of diets containing
large amounts of whole grain on
fibre digestibility, and also reducing the
acidosis challenge of grain-rich feedlot diets.
Non-ruminants
A shift from the traditional use of DDGS
as a substitute for the higher priced corn
and soya bean in cattle diets towards
pigs, poultry and fish has been recorded,
although the optimum levels of inclusion
are still being determined. Distillers grains
with solubles or with added protein (HP-
DDGS) can be fed to pigs at all stages of
the production chain.
The energy of DDGS is similar to corn,
unless the oil has been removed, but the
energy of HP-DDGS is higher. The digestibility
of P in DDGS is high. Growing pigs,
from two to three weeks after weaning,
can be fed diets containing 30% DDGS
(gestating sows 50%) as long as all amino
acid requirements are met.
With finishers it may be necessary to
withdraw DDGS three to four weeks before
slaughter because the higher iodine content
could reduce fat quality. Diets for lactating
sows can contain 30% DDGS, thus
replacing all the soya bean in the diet.
It has been observed that DDGS up
to 20% of the diet of pigs did not affect
growth, fattening and carcass composition.
With laying hens, inclusion levels between
15 and 30% DDGS had no effect on laying
intensity, egg quality and hen health, but
with broilers there was a suggestion that
levels above 10% may reduce performance
unless non-polysaccharide degrading enzymes
are added to the diet.
Wheat DDGS are seen as sources of energy,
protein and P for poultry and pigs.
Crude protein of DDGS can be as high as
30%, but lysine levels are low and variable,
with digestibility lower than with whole
wheat, especially if the DDGS has any heat
damage.
The energy value of wheat DDGS is also
lower than whole wheat, the difference
being dependent on the fibre content of
the DDGS – however, wheat DDGS can be
included at up to 30% in poultry and pig
diets as long as the diet meets the criteria
for the desired output.
Whereas with ruminants H 2
S can be
a major problem, in non-ruminants H 2
S
formed in the gastro-intestinal tract is
largely excreted or absorbed and detoxified
in the liver, although there may be a link
between inorganic S and chronic intestinal
disease.
Feedstocks for biodiesel production
In 2010 a total of 140 plants produced 1,2
billion litres of diesel. Europe is the world
leader in biodiesel production from vegetable
oils, although currently rape seed
supported by imported soybean meal is the
backbone of the industry. In the USA soya
bean is the major feedstock for biodiesel.
The importance of the oil palm industry
to the Malaysian economy cannot be understated,
with palm oil and palm kernel
oil in 2008 being 30% of the total global
production from 4,498 million hectares of
land. There are also potentially productive
sources of biodiesel, but for their residues
to contribute fully as livestock feed detoxification
is required, examples being Jatropha
and Castor.
Camelina sativa, also known as false
flax, is an oil seed crop of the brassica family.
It survives well on marginal land, needs
very few inputs and no irrigation, thereby
keeping conflict for scarce resources of
land, water and fertiliser at a minimum.
Pongamia pinnata are low rainfall oilseed
crops. With the increased use of algae for
oil production, research into technical aspects
of using these sources is needed.
Currently there is no commercial activity
with algae.
Biodiesel co-products
The two major co-products from the
biodiesel process are protein-rich cakes/
meals and glycerol. In the USA in 2010,
48% of glycerol was sold for high-value
uses, while 33% went to the livestock feed
industry. Mature cattle can consume one
kilogram of glycerine per day, as a source
of rapidly fermentable carbohydrate.
Glycerine also has humectant properties
beneficial in both food and feed production
systems, in the latter for texturing
properties and dust control, although reduced
production costs of pellets and improved
hygiene have also been noted.
The two major by-products from palm
oil processing are palm kernel cake (PKC),
also known as palm kernel expeller (PKE)
and expeller palm kernel meal (PKM).
camelina meal and castor cake are highprotein
products, but latter’s use as livestock
feed is restricted because of toxins,
especially ricin. Castor cake could be a major
source of protein for livestock in major
producing countries such as China, India
and Brazil.
This article was edited and
shortened. For the full article and
references please email
Harinder.Makkar@fao.org.
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 25

28 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

Factors affecting the
voluntary feed intake of livestock
By Foch-Henry de Witt and Ockert Einkamerer, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein
We often assume that
because there is 15%
protein or 60% carbohydrate
in a ration,
that the animal has to
use all of it. This assumption is not true.
In fact, we must consider that even the
ingested nutrients are still “outside” the
body until it has been absorbed. When
any animal is presented with food, for
some reasons that may not be known,
the animal may consume 95 units of this
material and refuse the balance.
Increasing intake of high-producing
animals is essential, but care must be
taken to prevent metabolic disorders
and excessive fat accumulation closer to
the end of the feeding period. Feeding is
a complex activity which includes such
actions as the search for food, recognition
and movement towards it, sensory
appraisal, the initiation of eating and ingestion.
It is necessary to consider why, in
most mature animals, body weight is
maintained more or less constant over
long periods of time, even if feed is available
ad libitum. Hence, the concepts of
short- and long-term control of food
intake must be considered. The former
concerns initiation and cessation of individual
meals, and the latter the maintenance
of a long-term energy balance.
Although thought to be similar, there are
important differences between species.
This depends mainly on the structure
and function of their digestive tracts.
Non-ruminants
The most problematic factor in diet formulation
for monogastric animals is
probably the correct prediction of voluntary
feed intake (VFI). Although diet formulators
are normally skilled in the use
of software programmes for “least-cost”
formulation, they should continuously
strive to improve their biological knowledge
regarding the factors influencing
VFI. The followings aspects will be briefly
discussed to indicate their importance in
VFI of pigs and chickens.
Feed
Due to the limited nutrient contribution
of microbial fermentation in monogastric
animals, pigs and chickens normally consume
feed in accordance with the diet’s
first limiting nutrient – thus any shortage
of amino acids, minerals, vitamins and
energy would provoke an increase in VFI.
Additionally, the amino acid profile as
well as the lysine against apparent metabolisable
energy (AME) ratio, must concur
with the requirements of the specific
requirements of the animal.
Generally, it is assumed that a decrease
in dietary energy would result in
an increase in VFI to compensate for the
energy loss, until GUT capacity becomes
the limiting factor. It is indicated that the
threshold energy value for poultry is between
10,1 and 10,8 MJ AME/kg, depending
on the environmental temperature,
thereby suggesting that an energy intake
below these values would negatively influence
lean protein growth in favour of
adipose tissue deposition.
The physical form of the diet (wet/dry
mash, crumbs and pellets), as well as particle
size and the distribution of particles
(% particles ≥1,0 mm & ≤3,5 mm), would
not only influence VFI but also total available
nutrient intake, rate of passage and
digestibility coefficients of a given diet.
Nutrient density or “bulkiness” of diets,
which are mostly linked to the AME and
crude fibre (CF) concentration of diets,
plays an important role in VFI, especially
in young animals with limited GUT capacity
and a high rate of passage due to
the rate of nutrient metabolism.
In addition to that, the water-holding
capacity (WHC) and non-starch polysaccharide
(NSP) component of certain feed
sources (especially if no synthetic enzymes
are included and the diet was not
exposed to heat/steam treatment) will
impede VFI due to its interference with
the rate of passage and digesta viscosity.
“It is highly unlikely that feed
with such a high PV will be fed to
pigs and chickens under
commercial conditions.
It is also known in poultry that
the relationship between water
consumption and feed intake is
linear”
Feed acceptability due to rancidity
“off odours” or “sourness” from wet fermentation
of diets represent a classical
interaction between “feed qualities versus
animal tolerance” which will influence
VFI – mostly in a negative manner.
Although some literature indicates that a
dietary peroxide value (PV) of 75 to 150
milli-equivalent peroxide per kilogram
fat had no negative effect on feed intake
and production performances of birds, it
remains open for debate.
It is highly unlikely that feed with
such a high PV will be fed to pigs and
chickens under commercial conditions.
It is also known in poultry that the relationship
between water consumption
and feed intake is linear. Any factor that
influences water intake (WI) would subsequently
influence VFI. Simultaneously,
water quality in terms of chemical and
microbial contaminants will influence WI
and eventually VFI of the animals due to
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 29

enal osmotic malfunction and/or digesta
viscosity in the GUT.
Animals
It is common knowledge that most genetic
strains/lines within pigs and poultry are
directly selected for enhanced feed efficiency
(FE), as well as an improved protein
deposition rate (PDR) and subsequently
lean growth. This selection for improved
FE might result in direct selection of a
lower VFI due to the lower maintenance
requirements of the genetically improved
animals.
VFI also depends on the age and production/reproduction
stage of the animal
due to the physical development of the
GIT. Young rapidly growing broiler birds
would most probably consume as much
feed as physically possible, while laying
hens will regulate their VFI according to
their nutrient requirements in terms of
egg output.
Although chickens have fewer taste
buds than pigs (300 versus 15 000) in their
oral cavity, it doesn’t necessarily make
them less selective when it comes to feed
acceptability, and they have a well-developed
feed perception method. Certain
putative taste genes have been identified
in chickens and their ability to select feed
by means of sensory perception (particle
size, colour, hardness/flexibility of pellets
etc.), is well-known.
A condition called “neophobia” could
occur when the physical appearance in
terms of size and colour of a diet suddenly
changes, resulting in the refusal of feed.
Feed ingredients may reduce palatability,
while mycotoxins/moulds would result
in a significant depression of VFI. Additionally,
chickens prefer to eat “meal size”
portions, which mean they will eat a “full
meal” every hour if they are allowed to
do so. However, with an increase in stocking
density (>30kg/m 2 ) and growth rate,
a subsequent increase in competition for
space at feeder trays and drinker nipples
develops, which negatively influences VFI.
Some of the other animal factors that
might influence the VFI of pigs and chickens,
include social behaviour and dominance
or pecking order, and the availability
of “cage/pen” enrichment to reduce
boredom and stimulate exercise.
One aspect that is often neglected when
it comes to predicting VFI during diet formulation,
is the immune status of animals.
The general health of animals could either
render them incapable to obtain or ingest
feed due to physical strength/fever, or the
body’s own response to antigen formation
would increase the maintenance requirements
of the animal since nutrients
(amino acids) and energy are diverted for
this process. Therefore the general nutritional
status of animals must be borne in
mind when vaccinating animals, since a
few hours’ response might result in a few
grams lost within a 35-day growing period.
Environmental constraints
Environmental temperature (and relative
humidity) is probably the most important
environmental factor that influences VFI.
An increase in temperature above the upper
critical temperature (UCT) would decrease
VFI, especially if the CF of the diet
is high. This drop in VFI could partly be
offset by an increase in nutrient density,
but would only be a short-term method
to enhance nutrient consumption.
Also, the increase in feed price due to
an increased nutrient density would most
probably not warrant this practice for
broilers in the current financial climate.
Although cold temperatures would also
result in a poorer FE, the magnitude might
be less than that of hot temperatures.
Lastly, cleanliness, wind draught and
speed, floor isolation, NH 3
gas, photoperiod,
feeder and water line design could
all play a less important role in the prediction
of VFI for pigs and chickens. Years of
experience in terms of animal husbandry
and plenty of common sense will ensure
that you develop a set of rules for a specific
species and its specific nutrient requirements.
Ruminants
Chemostatic control
Control of intake by effects of blood metabolytes
on the appetite centre is known
as chemostatic regulation of feed intake.
An energy deficit is thought to generate
hunger signals, the intensity which is
directly related to the size of the deficit.
The signals controlling feed intake at the
metabolic level in ruminants are likely to
be different from those in monogastric
animals. Therefore it would seem unlikely
that a glucostatic mechanism of intake
control could apply to ruminants.
A more likely mechanism might involve
the volatile fatty acids (VFA) absorbed
from the rumen. Intra-ruminal infusions
of acetate and propionate have been
shown to depress VFI of concentrate diets
for ruminants. These same infusions into
the hepatic portal vein may also reduce
intake via signals send by the liver to the
hypothalamus.
Butyrate seems to have less of an
effect on feed intake than acetate and
propionate. With diets consisting mainly
of roughages, infusions of VFAs have had
less of a definite effect on VFI.
Effect of food characteristics
Ruminants are adapted to utilise “bulky”
feeds, hence fibrous foods have remain in
the digestive tract longer in order for their
digestible components to be extracted. If
foods are detained in the digestive tract,
the animal’s throughput (daily intake)
will be reduced. It is postulated that the
digesta load generates satiety signals, the
intensity of which is directly related to the
size of the load beyond a threshold value.
It has long been recognised that in
ruminants there is a positive relationship
between the digestibility of foods (resistance
to degradation) and their intake. In
previous experiments it was found that
dietary intake of lambs more than doubled
as the energy digestibility of the food
(hay source) increased from 0,4 to 0,8.
When supplementing a roughage
source with concentrates, the concentrate
added to a roughage source of low
digestibility tends to be eaten in addition
to the roughage, but when added to
roughage of high digestibility it tends
to replace the roughage. Therefore food
that is digested rapidly, and is also highly
digestible, promotes high intakes.
Neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) is in this
regard the primary chemical component
of foods that determines their rate of
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 31

digestion. As a consequence of this, foods
equal in digestibility, but which differ in
NDF content, will promote different feed
intakes. The more NDF a diet contains, as
well as level of lignification, the more VFI
will be depressed.
“Another important concept
is that ruminant animals
consume feeds to maintain a
constant amount of DM in the
rumen”
Mechanical grinding of roughage
accelerates breakdown by destroying
the structural organisation of cell walls,
thereby accelerating their breakdown in
the rumen and increasing intake. Note
that fine particles pass rapidly out of the
rumen, leaving room for more food, but
allowing some digestible material to
escape undigested.
The deficiency of essential nutrients
or the presence of deleterious substances
that reduce the activities of rumen microorganisms,
are liable to reduce feed intake.
The most common is a protein/nitrogen
deficiency. Other nutrients whose deficiencies
are liable to restrict food intake
in ruminants are phosphorus, sulphur, sodium
and cobalt.
Although the concept of palatability
is not easily defined, it is not thought to
be an important factor determining intake,
except where the food is protected
against consumption or contaminated in
some way. However, if a particular flavour
of food becomes associated in the minds
of ruminants with unpleasant consequences
(especially sheep), they tend to
avoid food with that flavour.
Animal factors
Consumption of feed dry matter (DM)
usually ranges from 1,5 to 2% of body
weight in older animals on a maintenance
ration, to about 2,5 to 3,5% for finishing
lambs and beef cattle. It may also be as
much as 3,8 to 4% for dairy cows during
peak production.
Intake seems to be restricted due to
the capacity of the gastro-intestinal tract,
i.e. rumen, with stretch and tension receptors
in the rumen wall signalling the degree
of “fill” to the brain. What constitutes
the maximum (critical) fill of the rumen
is still uncertain. Circumstances that may
change the relationship between the size
of the rumen and the size of the whole
animal (abdominal fat depots, stage of
pregnancy, proportionality to metabolic
body weight, W0.75) are likely to affect
intake as well.
The notion that voluminous foods (hay
and straw) will fill the rumen to a greater
degree than concentrates has received
some attention, although after rumination,
these voluminous foods are not as
“bulky” as in the feeding trough. There is
also evidence that foods with high water
content (about 900g/kg) promote a lesser
DM-intake than comparable foods with
lower water content.
Another important concept is that ruminant
animals consume feeds to maintain
a constant amount of DM in the
rumen. Ruminants appear to limit feed intake
in relation to its capacity to dispose
of energy via the pathways of oxidation
and synthesis. Prolonged under-nutrition
results in an enhanced capacity to utilise
energy, as often reflected in compensatory
growth, and its attendant increase in
feed intake.
The feed intake of pregnant (hormonal
changes) or lactating animals, apart from
volume restrictions mentioned above,
may increase due to the increased need
for nutrients, the latter being mainly
physiological in origin.
According to food choice, when two
feeds differ in the concentration of one
nutrient in relation to energy requirements,
the animal’s interests are best
served by eating the two in such a ratio
that the intake of the nutrient in question
is optimised. As mentioned above,
ruminants may also exhibit “neophobia”,
a reluctance to accept a new food.
Regarding extensive production systems,
ruminants attempt to graze for the
shortest period of time possible because
the energy expenditure in eating is related
to time rather than to ingested mass.
Environmental factors
Voluntary intake of pasture by grazing
ruminants is not only influenced by
chemical composition and digestibility,
but also by its physical structure and
spatial distribution (walking distance).
Therefore its intake is primarily determined
by bite size, bite rate and grazing
time. Ruminants tend to choose long
fibrous foods rather than finely ground
foods for normal rumen functions, as a
lack of fibre leads to fluctuations in rumen
pH and an absence of rumination.
Grazing animals also tend to prefer
rapidly digested leaves to more slowly
digested stems. Some plants may be
rendered unpalatable and ultimately
be rejected due to protected spines or
contamination with excreta. In intensive
systems, frequent feeding of a total
mixed ration (TMR) does not necessarily
increase VFI, but may help to stabilise rumen
fermentation.
Another feature regarding the environment
is the effect of day length on VFI.
Small ruminants tend to decrease their intake
as day length declines, where short
days coincide with a shortage of food.
Like in monogastric animals, feed
intake is also influenced by environmental
temperatures, water intake and ill health.
Prediction of intake
Animals are commonly fed according to
appetite, and it is not possible to predict
their performance using feeding standards
without an intake estimate. For pigs
and poultry it may be relatively simple,
but predictions for ruminants are more
difficult as many food variables have to
be taken into account.
There will always be a significant proportion
of variation in behaviour of individuals
that cannot be predicted from
knowledge of their physiological state
and the composition of foods on offer.
Due to the complexity of modulation and
prediction equations, it cannot be fully
discussed here (animal features and environmental
effects).
References available from the authors.
Please email EinkamererOB@ufs.ac.za
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 33

The way feed is presented will affect
energy and time required
to consume it. Poultry activity
or behaviour has not received
as much research attention as
other areas when considering performance.
In our modern production environments,
there has traditionally been little
perceived economic value in understanding
or monitoring bird behaviour.
Most of the focus in broiler production
has been on genetic progress, strain selection,
feeding programmes and management
systems rather than on how the bird
responds to such changes. However, bird activity
is responsible for the major energy loss
between consumed dietary metabolisable
energy and the amount of energy retained
as tissue, and so it merits consideration.
Using pellet quality to
improve broiler growth rate
and feed conversion
By Dr Chet Wiernusz, director of world feed milling and nutrition at Cobb-Vantress
Activity and energy consumption
Depending on the management system in
place, 20% of metabolisable energy intake
(MEI) is used for activity. In other words,
assuming that 14,287 Kcal ME must be
consumed to produce a 2,5kg broiler, approximately
2,858 Kcal ME is used for activity.
Therefore, reducing activity energy expenditure
by approximately 6% would save
a considerable amount of energy.
Pelleting poultry feeds has been long
recognised as a method to enhance bird
performance. Pelleting is known to increase
body weight, to reduce feed wastage and to
improve feed conversion.
Its exact mode of action, however, has
been speculative. Work reported by Jensen
et al. (1962) indicated that pelleting did indeed
elevate bird performance through
increased body-weight gain and improved
feed conversion. Additionally, Jensen et al.
(1962) noted that broilers fed pellets spent
less time eating and more time resting than
those fed mash.
Furthermore, the same study reported
that digestibility was not a factor in the improved
broiler performance. Consequently,
bird behaviour may well be a critical factor
for defining the mode of action for pelleting.
If true, then pelleting would also offer an avenue
to manipulate bird energy expenditure
for activity.
Observing behaviour
The importance of bird behaviour and feed
form were examined by Dr Robert Teeter at
Oklahoma State University in the following
two experiments.
Behavioural observations were conducted
by walking past each cage five times
spaced throughout the day and classifying
the broilers into one of nine behaviour categories.
These included eating, drinking,
standing, resting, pecking, preening, walking,
dust bathing and other activity. The five
observations for each bird were then put on
a percent-time basis to create results for data
analysis.
As described by McKinney and Teeter
(2004), bird body weight and feed conversion
values were transformed into effective
caloric value. The effective caloric value represents
the caloric density that would be
needed to achieve the same body weight
and feed conversion result under low stress
conditions. As such, effective caloric value
enables evaluation of calorie savings when
viewed as the difference between values
created by varying nutritional and/or nonnutritional
production scenarios.
In the first study, birds were offered two
feed forms – mash vs. pellets – with treatments
also including birds switched from
one feed form to the other. All birds were
offered the same ration composition, independent
of feed form, and allowed to consume
feed ad libitum.
Despite the fact that all birds were provided
a 3,050 Kcal ME/kg ration, the range
of an effective caloric value for individual
birds was from 2,450 Kcal when a bird spent
20% of its time resting to 3,550 Kcal when
a bird spent 85% of its time resting, creating
a spread of 1,100 Kcal of effective caloric
value/kg ration.
Encouraging quick consumption
The importance of bird activity as a source
of energy wastage is clear. Yet another factor
impacting bird behaviour appears to be
Processing
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 35

feed form variety. Although mash and pelleting
impacted effective caloric value, the
greatest effect of feed form was in birds experiencing
a feed form change.
Birds being switched from mash to pellet,
or vice versa, exhibited the most voracious
eating. Indeed, birds that were switched to
a different feed form, independent of form,
spent half the time eating more feed than
these not having their feed switched.
Consequently, variety may also be an
important aspect of behaviour-influencing
efficiency in the production environment,
as the highest effective caloric value energy
come from birds eating quickly and then
resting.
In the second study, the influence of
feed form on bird behaviour and effective
caloric value was again examined so that responses
to varying pellet quality might be
better defined.
Six feed form treatments were used:
Heat-processed mash served as a negative
control; 20% pellets: 80% pellet fines; 40%
pellets: 60% pellet fines; 60% pellets: 40%
pellet fines; 80% pellets: 20% pellet fines;
and 100% pellets.
The daily body weight and feed conversion
data were transformed into dietary caloric
density as effective caloric value and
then examined as deviations from the mash
diet to produce an estimate of the Kcal/kg
efficiency added by pellet quality.
The results
As expected, pelleting of the feed improved
body weight, feed conversion and
effective caloric value. When the effective
caloric value is examined, relative to the
mash ration, it progressively increased to
+187 Kcal/kg of diet for the highest pellet
quality. Note also that effective caloric
value and bird behaviour were highly correlated.
When viewed together, resting and effective
caloric value form nearly parallel
lines, both increasing as pellet quality improves.
Any combination of management
factors that decreases time spent eating
and increases time spent resting, appears
to offer the potential to increase the effective
caloric value of the diet fed.
In an effort to make data from the second
study field applicable, effective caloric
value differences are expressed as that
achieved by making a switch to higher (caloric
density gain) or lower (caloric density
loss) pellet quality.
What change in pellet quality would be
needed to compensate for a 55 Kcal ME/kg
ration reduction? Increasing pellet quality
from 30 to 70% will exactly counter the effect
of reducing the feed energy by 55 Kcal
ME/kg.
Considering the above example, to have
equivalent bird performance, expressed
as equivalent body weight and feed conversion
for the flock, the producer would
need to add the equivalent of 55 Kcal ME/
kg ration – this will achieve another 225
Kcal MEI.
This may be achieved via improving pellet
quality as long as the initial pellet quality
is equal to or less than 70%. Since the
pellet quality response curve is not linear,
it is necessary to examine the relationships
at specific points.
Observable benefits
Results indicated that broilers typically
spend their time in the following order
(from greatest to least): resting, eating,
standing, drinking, preening, walking,
dust bathing, pecking and other activity. It
was common for the combination of eating
and resting to account for 60 to 85% of
broiler activity.
Broilers respond to pelleted feed by
spending less time to eat the same or
more feed. This decreased time spent eating
is then spent resting, which decreases
animal energy expenditure, leaving more
energy available for gain.
Changing the feed form presented to
the broiler results in more voracious eating
and may offer additional advantage.
Depending on the current producer pellet
quality, it appears possible to compensate
for a reduction in feed energy by improving
pellet quality.
Processing

Lynn Phillips Consulting cc
CK 88/20800/23
Serving the SADC
Animal Feed Industry
for 25 years
Supplying Solutions from World Class
Suppliers across the Species:
• Poultry
• Dairy
• Beef
• Swine
• Aquaculture
• Companion Animals
• Specialty Animals
Through a broad spectrum of products:
Methionine
Choline Chloride
Mono Calcium Phosphate
Magnesium Oxide
Lithothamne
Threonine
Lysine
Exciting new Liquid Micro Dosing
applications for:
Large, Medium & Small Animal
Feed Manufacturers
Home mixer operations
Please contact:
Lynn Phillips
LPC
(Lynn Phillips Consulting)
P O Box 340, Fourways, 2055, South Africa
Mob: +27 (0)82 413 2843
Fax: + 27 (0)86 689 8947 or
+27 (0)11 464 1085
Email: lpc1@vodamail.co.za
Email: tcm@iafrica.com
40 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

How to overcome anti-nutritional
factors using a range of enzymes
By J-P Ruckebusch, DSM Nutritional Products Ltd, Kaiseraugst, Switserland; I. Knap,
DSM Nutritional Products, Village-Neuf, France & M Umar Faruk and E Upton Augustsson,
Novozymes A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark
Anti-nutritional factors (ANFs)
are substances generated
in natural feedstuffs by the
normal metabolism of plant
species (Kulmar, 1992). Cereal
grains and vegetable proteins are the
main ingredients used to meet the energy
and protein requirements in poultry and
swine diets. However, these ingredients all
contain varying levels of ANFs which interfere
with the optimal utilisation of dietary
nutrients. ANFs act by reducing protein digestibility,
binding to various nutrients, increasing
gut viscosity and thereby reducing
digestive efficiency (Lange, 2000).
There is a continuous effort to fully
characterise and understand the full impact
that ANFs have in feed, and also the
full impact that the removal of these factors
will have on animal production.
Exogenous feed enzymes
Exogenous feed enzymes have been used
in commercial diets for several decades
to increase the nutrient value of feed ingredients
by the targeted degrading or
modification of ANFs such as phytin and
non-starch polysaccharides (NSPs), and
more recently protease inhibitors and
lectin present in soybean meals – leading
to substantial cost savings in animal feed
formulations. The use of feed enzymes furthermore
does not only provide flexibility
in feed formulation, allowing for cheaper
raw materials to be used in animal diets,
but also improves the sustainability of livestock
production.
An enzyme can only be a valuable solution
if the substrate that it can degrade
is causing a problem, for example, an antinutritional
factor, or if the substrate is a nutrient
that is not utilised in the optimal way.
Commercially available products may contain
single (mono-component) enzymes,
a blend of several mono-components or a
cocktail of enzymes which contains guaranteed
levels of certain enzymes together
with unspecified enzymes’ so-called side
activities.
Phytic acid
The most well-known ANF in non-ruminant
nutrition is phytic acid, of which the
content in various feedstuffs as well as its
effect on phosphorous availability have
been well documented. It is also well documented
that the anti-nutritional effect of
phytic acid goes beyond that of reducing
phosphorus (P) and calcium (Ca) availability,
and its destruction leads to a lift in digestibility
of minerals, energy and amino
acids availability. The use of phytase is now
a standard practice in swine and poultry
diets.
The negative effects of non-starch polysaccharides
(NSPs) on digestibility and the
rate of absorption of nutrients from starch,
proteins and fats have been demonstrated
in several studies (Choct et al., 1992; Cowieson,
2005). The effect of NSPs on the availability
of nutrients is three-fold:
• Increasing of the gut viscosity.
• Reducing the flow of available nutrients
into the duodenum.
• Physically hindering the access of digestive
enzymes to nutrients enclosed
by the NSPs present in the plant cell
walls (cage effect).
Specifically in poultry, the NSP content of
cereal grain or vegetable protein and its
effects on both increasing the intestinal
viscosity as well as entrapping nutrients
by cage effect, have been shown to have
a negative effect on the nutritive value of
the feed. An increase in viscosity by the
soluble fibre fraction in plant cell walls,
such as arabino-xylans, beta-glucans and
pectinsis, is negatively associated with nutrient
availability. This is particularly true
for grains with a high level of soluble NSPs,
such as wheat and barley.
Effect of viscosity
The contribution of NSP’s degrading enzymes
on the effect of viscosity has been
measured in vitro. These in vitro results are
used in predictive models to estimate the
ME content of the grain as well as the contribution
of NSP’s degrading enzymes (or
carbohydrates). Recently a balance study
and growth studies on broilers receiving
a mono component endo-xylanase in
wheat-based diets confirmed significant
beneficial effects on the digestibility of dry
matter, protein, lipids, the feed conversion
ratio and the AME of diets. Viscosity alone
was reduced by an average 50% (Francesch
et al., 2012).
The effect of the insoluble NSP fraction
has, however, been more abstract and
makes it difficult to predict the value of the
entrapped nutrients (starch and protein)
within the starchy endoderm. It has been
shown that even small reductions in xylans
content of grains can result in improved
feed conversion and animal performance.
By puncturing the arabino-xylan cell
wall cages, the diet digestibility is increased
by either intact nutrient released from the
“cages” available for further enzymatic digestion,
or digestive enzymes could enter
and degrade the substrates within the cells.
Digests from stomach samples of piglets
showed the presence of intact plant cells
resulting in the contents of some cells escaping
digestion after feeding (Le et al.,
2013). It is a common misconception that
the feed grinding and pelleting process
opens all the cell walls of the endosperm or
the aleurone.
Feed science
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 41

Figure 1: Fluorescence microscopy showing that both the aleurone and starchy endosperm cell walls were
degraded after three hours of treatment with xylanase (Le et al., 2013).
a
Table 1: The pure feed protease degrades ANFs more effectively than
endogenous trypsin.
Recently, refined fluorescence microscopy
techniques used for the visualisation of
xylanase action on milled wheat and corn
indicated that both starchy endosperm
and aleurone cell walls are broken down
by a commercially available pure xylanase.
Such techniques increase the likelihood
for future prediction of the solubilisation
of the insoluble NSP fraction, thereby also
explaining the effect that xylanase and its
combination with phytase has on non-viscous
cereals such as corn and sorghum. The
full economic benefit of these enzymes can
only be realised if the energy and amino
acid contribution in total is taken into account
(Kleyn, 2013).
As an example, Figure 1 showed that
both the aleurone and starchy endosperm
cell walls were degraded after three hours
of treatment with xylanase, allowing the
release of encapsulated nutrients (Le et al.,
2013).
Effect of lectins
Variability within soybean meals with regards
to the content trypsin inhibitors and
lectin in the final meal is known, but seldom
accounted for in diet formulation. Kunitz
trypsin inhibitor (KTI) and Bowman-Birk
(BBI) and lectins are important anti-nutritional
proteins in soy. Commercial soybean
meals are toasted to reduce the effect of
these heat-labile components.
However, the heat treatment in the toasting
process is a compromise between inactivating
the trypsin inhibitors and obtaining
high protein solubility, hence commercial
soybean meals differ significantly in level of
e.g. trypsin inhibitors. This can influence the
potential performance of a specific feed by
indirect and direct effect on the animal (De
Coca-Sinova et al., 2008).
KTI and BBI both pose a challenge to the
pancreas and may cause reduced protein
digestibility. Lectin causes irritation of
epithelial tissue by binding carbohydratecontaining
molecules on the epithelial cells,
thereby challenging the immune system.
The ANFs also constitutes an important
part of the amino acids in soybean meals in
that BBI accounts for ~50% of the cysteine
pool, critically important when keeping in
mind that in soy, sulphurous amino acids
(cysteine and methionine) are growthlimiting
factors in poultry diets (Vollmann
et al., 2003).
The potential of a commercial pure feed
protease to degrade the trypsin inhibitors
and lectin in a soybean meal, as well as its
ability to degrade different qualities of soy,
was investigated in in vitro studies. An understanding
of the effect of an exogenous
protease on the most important ANFs in
soy makes it possible to more accurately
predict the efficacy of such an enzyme to
the feed.
The studies showed that the pure
feed protease was able to degrade
lectin, KTI and BBI inhibitors to a large
extent (Table 1). A substantially lower
degradation was detectable by pancreatic
trypsin. Furthermore, in the presence of a
commercial dose of this pure feed protease,
the same degree of protein hydrolysis was
obtained with only 50% of the equivalent
pancreatic protease (Figure 2) (Nielsen
et al., 2013).
42 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

Figure 2: Addition of the pure feed protease enhances the efficacy of endogenous
pancreatic protease (trypsin and chymotrypsin) about two-fold.
By the degradation of the trypsin inhibitors
and lectin in soy, the feed protease
possibly enhances the efficacy of the
pancreatic proteases (trypsin and chymotrypsin).
The potential in vivo impact is a
reduced challenge on the pancreas, better
access to sulphur-containing amino acids
and less stress on the immune system in
general, thereby reducing the sensitivity
of animal performance to a low quality
soybean meal. However, the exact magnitude
of the contribution of enzyme is
highly dependent on the interaction with
other feed enzymes and the interaction of
other feed ingredients on each other and
on the exogenous enzyme.
Other studies demonstrated that this
pure feed protease did not influence negatively
the efficacy of phytase. On the contrary,
an overall positive effect on phytate
degradation was observed when feed
protease was added together with different
phytases. It was also shown that this
pure feed protease did not influence the
efficacy of xylanases. The feed protease
can therefore be added to the diet to specifically
attack the protein fraction, while
simultaneously using a phytase and a xylanase
to degrade phytate and the NSPs
fraction (Pontoppidan et al., 2012).
Conclusive thoughts
Enzymes are highly specific and decades
of research are contributing to a better
understanding of the substrates they are
targeting. The choice of commercial feed
enzymes must be made based on the best
knowledge available, not only on the enzyme
activity itself, but on the substrate
it is targeting. Studies on ANFs in feed
ingredients provide a better understanding
of the mode of action of specific feed
enzymes.
It is also the key in predicting the
nutritional contribution a single enzyme or
a combination of enzymes can make to the
value of a diet. Estimating the nutritional
contribution of an enzyme is a complex
task and confounded by the interaction of
feed ingredients and metabolic dynamics.
Although many reports exist that
describe the effect of feed enzymes,
sufficient information on the combined
effects of these enzymes on nutrient
utilisation and animal performance is
still lacking. The exact effect of phytase,
protease and carbohydrate combinations
in terms of animal performance can only be
evaluated under proper in vivo conditions.
Therefore this remains one of the biggest
challenges for scientist and commercial
nutritionist alike.
The full reference list is available upon
request.
Feed science

Control of E. coli, Salmonella
and other potential pathogens
By Dr Peter Theobald, Addcon Europe GmbH, Germany
Contamination of animals with
pathogenic bacteria creates
enormous social and economic
costs worldwide. The annual
costs of Salmonella alone to the
UK economy are more than 46 million British
pounds, with estimated 2,8 billion euro
losses across the European Union (World
Health Organisation, 2005). New management
and dietary strategies to counteract
intestinal pathogens in animal production
are therefore of great interest.
Preventing the spread of E. coli and Salmonella
to the consumer requires special
control measures during slaughter and
processing. Improving gut health has been
shown to be effective against intestinal
pathogens (Eidelsburger et al., 1992). While
biosecurity and hygiene in the feed mill and
on the farm are essential, the acidification of
feed ingredients or finished feeds with organic
acids also offers considerable benefits
in E. coli and Salmonella control.
Feed acidification is not only effective
within the feed – possibly its biggest benefit
occurs within the pig itself. In different European
case studies diformates have proven
their high effectiveness to decrease potential
pathogens in monogastric farm animals.
Literature review
The positive effect of organic acids and their
salts in preserving feed from microbial and
fungal destruction is known for decades.
Also, the positive effect on improved buffering
capacity of the diet with an increased
digestibility of nutrients, especially protein
digestibility and thereby reducing pathogen
colonisation, is often described (Eidelsburger
et al., 1992; Kirchgessner et al., 1992;
Eidelsburger & Kirchgessner, 1994; Freitag,
2007).
Strauss and Hayler (2001) showed under
in vitro conditions the strong antibacterial
effects for formic acid, in comparison to
propionic and lactic acids. Considering the
mode of action of organic acids, it is a precondition
to have contact between the acid
Table 1: The effect of different types of feed additives in weaners
Parameter Control K-diformate (KDF)
(1,2%)
Colistin
(120 ppm)
ZnO
(2500 ppm)
Feed intake (g/day) 760 787 791 778
Weight gain (g/day) 543ab 565a 565a 537b
FCR# 1,40a 1,40a 1,40a 1,45b
Diarrhoea (%) 39,6a 0,7b 14,6c 12,5c
Means in rows bearing unlike superscripts differ significantly (P

Table 5: Effect of sodium diformate dosage on
Campylobacter inhibition (% positive samples)
Control NDF 0,3% NDF 0,6%
Crop (microbiol.) 60 0 0
Intestine (microbiol.) 80 20 0
Meat (serol.) 80 0 0
Table 6: Intestinal microbial counts (cfu/g) in broilers
Microbial group Control NDF 0,6%
Enterobacteria 107 105
Lactobacilli 107 108
Bifidobacteria 105 106
molecule and the pathogenic bacteria, which is easily representable
under in vitro conditions. This means that as much as possible of
the active ingredient of an organic acid has to reach the site where
pathogens are located.
Most pathogenic bacteria, such as E. coli and Salmonella, are located
in the small intestine. Under in vivo conditions and by using a
practical dosage of 5kg liquid formic acid per ton of compound feed,
Kirsch (2010) only found 5,5% of the active ingredient present in the
small intestine of pigs. In addition, Maribo et al. (2000) detected 4,4%
of the active ingredient in the small intestine by using a dietary dosage
of 0,7% liquid formic acid, whereas 85% of the active ingredient
of a diformate passed through the stomach and reached the duodenum
(Mroz et al., 2000).
This high bypass effect of diformates leads to a high efficacy in
reducing the incidence of E. coli-associated diarrhoea, even in comparison
with antibiotics and zinc oxide, as described by Portocarero-
Kahn (2006) in a trial on weaned piglets (Table 1). A total of 576 weaners
were assigned to four experimental groups and observed over a
period ranging from 28 to 60 days of age.
Overland (1998) observed a significant reduction in E. coli numbers
in the duodenum and the jejunum of piglets fed potassium
diformate (KDF). Jorgensen (2000) confirmed this E. coli-reducing effect
of KDF also in the porcine caecum.
This pronounced antibacterial effect was also particularly well
illustrated by data collected on eight farms in Ireland (Lynch et al.,
2007). The main objective of this investigation was to evaluate the
efficacy of Salmonella control measures on highly infected farms.
Salmonella control has been compulsory under Irish law since 2002,
and the farm status is categorised by the percentage of positive pigs
in a herd according to the Danish mix-ELISA test.
Category 3 (>50% positive) farrow-to-finish farms and their associated
fattening units were selected for the study. Five farms were
selected where diets supplemented with KDF (0,6%) alone were
tested. All but one farm, on which KDF was used, finished the trial
period with a significantly improved Salmonella status (serological
prevalence), whereas the bacteriological prevalence was low on
most farms.
As another treatment, a formic-propionic acid blend (0,5%) was
tested, but no effect on the reduction of Salmonella numbers was
detected, neither on bacteriological prevalence nor on serological
prevalence (Table 2). These findings were expected and can be
explained by the low proportion of such active ingredients passing
through the stomach into the intestine (Maribo et al., 2000; Kirsch,
2010).
However, this was not the first time that this effect was observed.
Studies by Dennis and Blanchard (2004) in the UK, as well as most recently
in France by Correge et al. (2010), concluded potassium diformate
to be an effective tool in Salmonella control strategies on commercial
farms (Table 3).
These antibacterial effects can also be observed in poultry. Lückstädt
and Theobald (2009) clearly showed the beneficial effects of
sodium diformate (NDF) against pathogenic bacteria in broilers. No
positive samples of Salmonella were found in meat from broilers fed
the additive. Furthermore, there were no Salmonella-positive samples
from the gastro-intestinal tract of diformate-fed groups (Table 4), and
no positive samples for Campylobacter in the diformate group if used
at 0,6% (Table 5).
Notably, lower enterobacteria counts and distinctly higher lactobacilli
and bifidobacteria numbers provided further evidence of the
beneficial impact of diformate on the intestinal microbiota in broilers
(Table 6).
The reduced impact of pathogenic bacteria on the broiler, as well
as the improved gut microflora, leading to a state of eubiosis in treated
chickens, implies that including diformate in broiler diets will also result
in improved bird performance (Lückstädt et al. 2010, Lückstädt &
Theobald, 2011).
Since only field data on infection rates under practical conditions
are available, Goodarzi et al. (2013, in press) performed a challenge
trial with laying hens to test the effects of 0,6% NDF on the Salmonella
colonisation of different organs. A total of 40 Lohmann birds, divided
equally into two groups, were inoculated orally with a single dose of
1 x 109 CFU/ml Salmonella enteritidis (SE).
Between day 26 and 28 post inoculation, the birds were euthanised,
and the SE concentration in liver and caeca samples determined. The
use of NDF led to a highly significant reduction of the frequency of colonisation
within the liver and caeca (P

The impact of amino acid
formulation on the dairy cow
By TP Tylutki, PhD Dpl ACAN, AMTS LLC, USA
What does a cow need to
survive, reproduce, grow
and produce milk? Typically
the answers would
be energy, protein, fat
and minerals/vitamins. But let’s take a step
back and look where these come from.
Energy in the cow is going to come from
fermentable carbohydrates, fatty acids, and
the biggest one, volatile fatty acids (VFAs),
from the rumen. The rumen takes all these
fermentable products and the rumen microbes
produce VFAs. These VFAs are used
to produce glucose and fat (both body fat
and milk fat). Protein is more difficult.
Supply
Everyone is used to the terms crude protein,
soluble protein, degradable protein and
non-degradable protein. None of these are
correct though. The underlying problem is
that animals do not use protein. Protein is
a collective term for nitrogen-containing
compounds. When feed is sent to the laboratory
for analysis, they do not analyse for
protein. Rather, they analyse for nitrogen.
This methodology goes all the way back to
the developer, Johan Kjeldahl, in 1883.
There are a couple of newer methods
commercially used that rely on combustion
to determine how much nitrogen is
in a sample, but the resulting compound
(nitrogen) quantified is the same. It is then
assumed that all proteins contain 16% nitrogen.
This is not true either. A product
such as maize protein may contain 16%
nitrogen, milk 15,7% and wheat 17,5%. A
great example of this is urea. Urea is 46% nitrogen.
Using the standard 6,25 multiplier,
this gives a crude protein of 287,5%.
What should be measured, is either total
amino acids or each amino acid AND ammonia
nitrogen. Commercially this is not
viable as it is cost-prohibitive. The cost per
sample to do amino acids instead of crude
protein, is between 15 and 20 times higher.
Table 1: Amino acid composition of tissue, milk, microbes and several
feeds (g/100g)
Amino
acid
Tissue Milk Microbes Soya
48
Blood Alfalfa Maize
gluten meal
60
MET 1,82 2,71 2,68 1,30 1,07 0,73 2,09
LYS 6,29 7,62 8,20 6,49 9,34 6,02 1,24
HIS 2,45 2,74 2,69 2,69 6,45 2,62 2,45
PHE 3,65 4,75 5,16 5,22 7,86 6,32 6,48
TRP 1,18 1,51 1,63 1,41 1,88 1,84 0,37
THR 3,83 3,72 5,59 4,83 4,73 5,00 2,93
LEU 6,96 9,18 7,51 8,66 13,40 9,26 16,22
ILE 2,94 5,79 5,88 3,99 0,88 6,01 4,34
VAL 4,28 5,89 6,16 4,39 9,08 7,14 5,04
ARG 6,65 3,40 6,96 7,74 5,01 6,39 3,17
Figure 1: Overview of amino acid flow in cattle
48 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

Figure 2: Nitrogen intake and excretion from rations varying in crude protein
levels from 13,5% to 19,4% dry matter
starting to show much greater impact beyond
these simple output measurements.
Table 1 contains the amino acid content of
milk, tissue, microbes and several feeds.
Ignoring amino acids while formulating
results in diets that are typically more
expensive will result in higher levels of
nitrogen excretion. As reported by Olmos
et al. (2006), varying the crude protein
content of diets in lactating cows had
no effect on milk nitrogen output or milk
protein (Figure 2). As illustrated, at each
incremental increase in crude protein
intake, all extra nitrogen was excreted as
manure. Figure 3 splits manure into faecal
and urinary nitrogen, where it is very clear
that excess nitrogen is going to urine.
Feed science
Figure 3: Nitrogen excretion via faeces and urine from diets varying in crude
protein content
Ammonia will be used in the rumen to help
meet the nitrogen requirements of the rumen
microbes. The amino acids consumed
will be degraded in the rumen (and used for
ammonia and energy sources by the rumen
microbes), or escape the rumen and be
potentially available to the cow to absorb
directly.
As the cow consumes a meal, the total
amino acids plus ammonia enter the rumen.
Figure 1 illustrates the generic flow
through the cow. Ammonia (either consumed
or from the degradation of amino
acids in the rumen) is either captured by
rumen microbes, recycled to the rumen via
saliva, or is excreted either via urine or milk
(MUN). The rumen microbes supply a large
mass of amino acids to the cow (anywhere
from 40-80% of the total supply), with the
rest coming from non-degradable as well as
digestible amino acids.
All the productive processes of the cow
or heifer are driven by amino acid supply.
Amino acids are used for milk protein and
muscle (growth) as outputs. Equally important,
though, are their uses in enzymes, energy
for the fetus and immune function. Unfortunately,
when most people talk about
amino acid nutrition, they focus on the
output side of milk protein only. Research is
Getting it to the cow
Given these results, how do we get amino
acids to the cow? Dr Larry Chase at Cornell
University has been collecting data on herds
fed low crude protein diets. In this dataset
(14 herds in the Northeast USA), milk production
averaged 38,6/fed diets averaging
15,7% crude protein and MUNs averaging
9,5 mg/dl. Commonalities regarding diets
were a high level of fermentable carbohydrates
(28,2% starch, 4,5% sugar) and 55,7%
roughage (with a range of 48 to 60,4%). In
other words, these diets are formulated to
maximise microbial yield.
Going back to Table 1, if we compare the
amino acid content of microbes to that of
milk, we find that they are very similar. It
is safe to say that rumen microbes are the
perfect food for cows! Thus, the first step in
amino acid nutrition is to maximise rumen
microbial yield. That is accomplished by
feeding high levels of fermentable carbohydrates,
ensuring enough degradable nitrogen,
and some free amino acids to feed
the rumen microbes.
Our current carbohydrate recommendations
for maximising microbial protein (MP)
output are shown in Table 2. The microbes
require nitrogen as well. This is relatively
simple to accomplish as microbes require
ammonia and some true amino acids. A
standard diet of maize silage, alfalfa hay
(silage, green chop), ground maize, soy
meal and minerals will typically supply ade-
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 49

Table 2: AMTS recommended carbohydrate levels for lactating cows
Value
Units
Sugar >6 % DM
Starch 25-32 % DM
Total NFC 37-43 % DM
Fermentable starch >20 % DM
Physically effective NDF 21-23 % DM
Forage NDF 0,8 – 1,0 % Body weight
Figure 4: Lysine digestibility versus rumen undegraded protein digestibility
of blood meal (Boucher et al., 2010)
and a mix of raw materials, limitations from
other amino acids are of little concern.
Requirements
Amino acid requirements can be very confusing.
People will talk about grams of amino
acid supply, amino acid ratios, the use
of different units, etc. And amino acids are
used in many different roles in the body.
The simplest way to think about the amino
acid requirements is purely on a gram basis.
For example, if we look at the methionine
composition of milk (2,7g/100g milk protein),
then we can do the following: 40 litres
of milk at 3% true protein = 1 200g milk true
protein x 2,7% = 32,4g methionine excreted in
the milk.
This 32,4g methionine is what is called
“net”. For each amino acid, there is an efficiency
factor too. This efficiency factor is
the efficiency of absorbing the amino acid
from the blood stream and it being converted
to milk protein. For milk production,
it varies from 34% for arginine to 100% for
methionine. The proportion that does not
end up in milk protein is used for enzymes,
converted to non-essential amino acids, or
converted to energy.
quate ammonia and free amino acids to the
rumen. Typical diets actually over-supply
these nutrients.
A problem that occurs, though, is when
people try to be “cheap diet feeders”. A
cheap diet will include high levels of maize
protein: ground maize, gluten feed, gluten
meal, distillers’ grains and hominy chop.
Relying heavily on maize protein will cause
a deficiency in rumen microbial requirements
and amino acid supply to the cow.
As nutritionists and producers, we must remember
that our first objective needs to be
feed and care for the rumen! Then we can
supplement amino acids to achieve the desired
level of performance.
Processing feeds can have a large effect
on undegraded amino acid content and digestibility.
A good example of this is blood
meal. When blood meal is processed, the
speed and temperature at which it is dried
greatly alters the lysine content and digestibility.
Figure 4 (adapted from Boucher
et al., 2010, Cornell Nutrition Conference
Proceedings) illustrates this. As rumen nondegradable
protein (RUP) digestibility decreases,
lysine digestibility decreases at a
faster rate.
When it comes to RUP sources, the old
saying “you get what you pay for” holds
true. Cheap RUP products are either high
maize protein, poorly processed or highly
variable. And remember, we do not really
care about how much RUP there is, but
we should rather be asking “how much
metabolisable lysine and methionine does
this supply”, and calculate the cost per gram
of amino acid.
Much discussion regarding amino acids
in cows focuses on lysine. This is because
research has identified lysine as the first
limiting amino acid with methionine being
second limiting. Recent research would suggest
both lysine and methionine are equally
limiting. In certain diets, other amino acids
may be limiting but with good formulation
The total metabolisable amino acid
requirement calculated this way would
then be:
Amino Acid (i) required = lactation +
pregnancy + growth + maintenance.
[Where (i) represents each amino acid.]
While this method is known to work, it
is impossible to feed each amino acid in
“balance” exactly with requirement. Swine
and poultry have known this for years, and
the dairy industry has been working on defining
this since the mid-1980s. Research
has shown that if the amino acid supply
is not balanced, performance is less then
ideal. Basically, if we feed a diet that meets
the amino acid requirements as calculated
above, but the relationship between amino
acids is poor, we will limit milk production
and composition. This is where the discussion
of amino acid ratios comes in.
Amino acid ratios
Working with amino acids (either in grams
50 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

or as ratios) is difficult as we have to think
multi-dimensional. The good news is that
the vast majority of diets are deficient in
both lysine and methionine. Thus, if we
begin adding lysine sources, we will typically
see an increase in milk production.
At the same time, adding methionine first
will typically result in an increase in both
milk production and milk protein concentration.
But these responses do not occur all the
time. Why? First, it appears that there is a
minimum milk protein concentration, and
that is approximately 2,8% true protein (or
about 3% crude protein). The relationship
between milk protein yield and milk yield
is nearly perfect (correlation coefficient of
0,94). This makes a lot of sense given that
several amino acids (namely methionine
and cysteine) are required in the production
of lactose.
Thus, it appears the cow may regulate
milk protein yield and milk yield very tightly
to maintain a minimum milk protein to
lactose relationship. At these low points,
the response to either lysine or methionine
could be substantial (3-10 litres milk reported).
Regardless of the starting point, it
appears that milk volume and milk protein
concentration is maximised when lysine is
supplied at 6,3 to 6,6% of metabolisable
protein and methionine at 2,35 to 2,55% of
metabolisable protein.
Several studies from the early 1990s,
and more recently research from the University
of Illinois (Loor et al., 2011), demonstrate
a health and production response.
Methionine was supplemented during the
pre-partum and fresh period. Incidence of
fresh cow metabolic disease (namely ketosis
and fatty liver) were reduced in excess
of 50%. Cows fed the methionine supplemented
diet increased dry matter intake
faster and by day seven in milk, significant
differences in milk production were reported.
Based upon this research, we are recommending
that at least 25g of metabolisable
methionine should be supplied in the diet
for pre-partum cows. Anecdotal evidence
supports improved immune response in
calves and heifers as well to amino acid
formulation.
Summary
Amino acids are not additives and should
not be thought of as such. They are critical
building blocks of proteins and enzymes,
and result in milk protein, volume, muscle
and immunity. Nutritionists must evaluate
diets for amino acid adequacy and forget
meaningless numbers such as crude protein.
The first step in amino acid formulation
is maximising microbial yield from the rumen.
This requires a good mix of fermentable
carbohydrates, physically effective NDF
and adequate degradable nitrogen to support
microbial growth. The second step is
to select the most economical sources of
by-pass amino acids. This could be from
soy-based products, blends of soy and
sunflower, etc.
And then work with your nutritionist
to evaluate the different synthetic by-pass
amino acids to achieve the desired levels
of amino acids. These levels should be:
for lactating cows, lysine > 6,1% MP and
methionine greater than 2,1% MP; for the
pre-partum cow, lysine > 6,1% MP and at
least 25g total methionine. And finally,
ingredients (such as sunflower, soy or any
maize protein product) must be valued
on an amino acid basis.
Feed science
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 51

Feed science
Sow nutrition:
Avoiding second parity slump
By Dr Lia Hoving, technical services manager, Provimi (Article courtesy of Pig International)
Sow studies show that weight
loss from first lactation results in
smaller litter sizes and farrowing
rates. About 50% of all sows have
a lower litter size in their second
parity, compared with their first parity – and
recent studies indicated that second parity
litter size could be related to subsequent litter
sizes and farrowing rates.
However, by altering management and
sow nutrition, pig producers may be able
to reverse this trend and improve second –
and subsequent – parity reproductive performance.
Sow body condition
Reduced reproductive production in second
parity sows has been related to excessive
weight loss during the first lactation.
During the past decade, litter size and
number of piglets weaned have increased.
As a result, this has increased the metabolic
demands on first litter sows.
However, due to genetic selection on
lean grower and finisher pig traits, sow feed
intake has not increased. This discrepancy
can easily result in a high sow weight loss
during lactation, which can reduce follicle
development and oocyte quality. As a result,
subsequent farrowing rate, litter size
and litter quality can be affected.
The effects of weight loss on sow reproductive
performance seem to have shifted
over the years. Studies from the 1980s and
1990s show that lactation weight loss had
a big influence on weaning to oestrus interval,
while more recent studies show that
sow weight loss during the lactation affects
ovulation rate and embryonic survival.
The results of two recent studies on the
effect of sow lactation weight loss on reproductive
performance are discussed below.
Gilt feed intake studies
In the first study, gilts’ feed intake was restricted
to 60% and 90% of ad libitum feed
intake during the last week of a 20-day lactation
period. Feed allowance was not different
in the weaning to oestrus interval
and gestation.
In the second study, gilts were only mildly
restricted, which is different from most
experiments on the effects of weight loss
on subsequent reproductive performance.
Feed allowance (kilogram) was calculated
based on 1% of body weight plus 0,4kg/
piglet, with a maximum of 7kg.
Maximum feed intake was reached on
day 14 after farrowing. The sow lactation
length was 26 days. Results from both stud-
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 53

54 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

ies showed that weight loss had a negative
effect on either embryonic weight (Study 1)
or embryonic survival (Study 2).
The lack of effect on embryonic survival
in Study 1 could be due to the relative
low weight loss of sows, compared with
Study 2. This indicates that weight losses of
up to 11% probably do not influence embryonic
survival and eventually litter size in
second parity sows.
Piglet birth weight can, however, be affected.
The conclusion is that weight loss of
more than 11% negatively affected embryonic
survival and possibly embryonic weight,
and should be prevented.
Sow reproductive issues
Weight loss during lactation consists mainly
of losses of body fat, body protein and body
water. Of these three, body protein losses
have been reported to have the largest effect
on reproductive performance (Clowes et
al., 2003ab; Willis et al., 2003).
Therefore, in Study 2 back fat depth, as
a measure for fat loss, was measured. In addition,
loin muscle depth as a measure of
protein loss was measured. Although high
weight loss sows lost more weight than low
weight loss sows, back fat loss was similar at
4,6mm and 4,8mm respectively.
Loin muscle depth loss was 4,2mm higher
for high weight loss than for low weight loss
sows. These results indicate that weight loss
was more related to loin muscle depth loss
(r = 0,6; P

The importance of the
man on the ground
By Izak Hofmeyr
Feed companies employ a corps of technical advisors in
the field with the aim, in the first place, of convincing
clients to buy their particular brand of animal feed. But
there is more to it than that. The more a client thrives,
the more feed he is likely to buy, and the better the feed
company is likely to perform. It is therefore important that the
technical advisors on the ground are knowledgeable specialists,
who are able to provide good advice, tailor-made for that specific
client, rather than trying to sell a batch of feed at all costs.
Profile of an advisor
So what characteristics in a technical advisor should a farmer look
for? Here is what Kenneth Botha, managing director of NutriGenics,
believes: “Firstly it is very important that a technical advisor
acts within the prescriptions of the law. This implies that the person
should be registered with the South African Council for Natural
Scientific Professions (SACNASP). Members are not only bound
to the law, but also to the ethical code of the organisation.
“Membership also implies that the technical advisor should
have an applicable B.Sc. Agric. qualification that enables them to
provide advice that will be to the advantage of the farmer and
his stock.”
The next point Botha mentions is to use an advisor who will
be able to add value to the objectives of the particular farming
operation with passion in such a way that the farmer would not
be forced to pay school fees for mistakes made in the process.
Objective advice
“The advisor should at all times try to make use of home-produced
raw materials. This will have a significant effect on the cash
flow because the farmer will have to buy in much less raw materials
from outside. It obviously implies that the technical advisor
should have a good knowledge of these home-grown raw materials,
that he should evaluate it regularly and also that he put
systems in place so that the farmer can use the best quality feed
at the lowest possible costs.”
Many farmers, he says, are quite content to just order their feed
off the shelf, but a good advisor will try to assist his client to buy in
as little as possible, as long as it remains cost-effective. There are
many excellent technical advisors in the field who provide excellent
service by teaming up with other specialists such as agronomists
and veterinarians to make a specific herd more successful.
Formulating objectives
“These days there are various technological aids to evaluate a
farming business and in the process to challenge the objectives
Technical advisors on the ground must be knowledgeable specialists, able to
provide good advice that is tailor-made for that specific client, rather than trying
to sell a batch of feed or products at all costs.
56 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

of both the advisor and the farmer in order
to increase profits. These models are being
used to formulate realistic but challenging
objectives to advance the operation.”
Objectives should therefore be formulated
annually in conjunction with the advisor
and the farm management team and
be revised every three months.
“A good advisor thinks in the same way
about a farming business than the farmer
himself and does not only consider his own
company’s turnover and profit. A technical
advisor who is knowledgeable, looks
after your interests in a responsible way
and conducts his job with passion, is most
probably the right advisor for you. Look for
passion, energy, availability, knowledge,
experience and the ability to set objectives
and achieve them.”
After confirming that the farmer is happy
with his technical advisor, it is time to
turn the focus on the approach the advisor
should take to providing the best service
as efficiently as possible. Eugene Viljoen,
chief operating officer of Meadow Feeds’
central region, has compiled a protocol for
technical advisors.
First visit to a farm
When first visiting a new client, there
is certain paperwork that has to be
completed by the technical advisor.
This includes a credit application
and a farm report, including logistical
information such as the quantities
of feed the farm can manage at one
time, the truck access situation, daily
feed usage as well as delivery times.
The next step is to agree on the
level of involvement of the technical
advisor on the farm. This includes the
frequency of visitations and to what
extent the advisor will be involved
during such a visit. Most feed companies
would set a minimum of one
visit per month per customer to their
advisors.
Key performance responsibilities
Obviously the key performance responsibilities
(KPRs) will cover a very wide range,
but it starts right at home, with basic issues
such as adherence to the company dress
code and code of conduct.
Next in line are data collections and
analysis. In the case of an intensive milk
production operation, for example, this
revolves mainly around analyses of total
mixed rations, where the rations of all
groups of cows have to be analysed at
least every month. In the case of pastures
the next pasture to be grazed should be
analysed per visit. Obviously every species
has its own challenges.
Water analysis is equally important and
chemical and pH analysis should be done
“Technical advisors on
the ground must be
knowledgeable specialists,
able to provide good advice
that is tailor-made for that
specific client, rather than
trying to sell a batch of feed or
products at all costs”
as necessary. Using the right formulation
programmes is the next issue. There are
many programmes available. The main issue
is to apply the programme consistently
and effectively. Fine-tuning the rations
to account for seasonal climatic fluctuations
will increase efficiency, but will also
demand more management inputs. With
the information collected through an onfarm
weather station, rations can be finetuned
with even more precision that could
increase efficiency greatly.
Record-keeping
It is extremely important that meticulous
reports are maintained regarding every
farm visit. This ensures effective continuity
and integrity.
A farm visit should be preceded by
proper preparation. This includes studying
the farmer’s purchase and payment history
over the preceding months, the delivery
history as well as the reports of the previous
visits.
A proper appointment has to be made
and a clearly defined objective set that
should be achieved during the visit. The
visit should be well-structured to ensure
that time and travel is effectively utilised
and that the visit is effective and meaningful.
The visit
A visit should be divided into phases, starting
with a brief discussion of the previous
months’ history, such as the volumes of
feed purchased per month, total volume
of milk/eggs/meat produced, income over
feed cost (IOFC), butter fat and protein
concentration (percentage) as opposed to
butter fat and protein yield (kilogram). This
phase should be concluded with an assessment
of the feeding practice and protocol
of all groups of animals on the farm.
The next phase is an assessment of the
animals:
• Availability of meal/pellets, water
and roughage.
• Assess comfort.
• Overall hygiene.
• Feed intake, especially at weaning.
At the end of the visit, a detailed report
should be written, reflecting critical information
on the main points of discussion,
and production records such as
milk production, egg and meat production.
Record any tasks or expectations
of the client as well as the advisor and
give feedback on diet changes within 24
hours. Other recorded actions must be
completed within seven days of the last
visit and feedback must be provided in
a formal, written form with copies sent
to all the appropriate managers, such as
the sales and technical managers.
Learn to communicate
Because farmers are all individuals with
unique personalities, it would benefit the
technical advisor to study effective communication
with various personality types. Effective
communication forms a significant
part of the task of a technical advisor and
understanding personality types will undoubtedly
benefit the ambitious technical
advisor.
Client focus
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 57

ADVERTORIAL
The economic
value of Rovabio ®
By Pascal Thiery, technical manager for Africa and Middle East Region, Adisseo
A
recent study based on the monthly optimisation
of a “broiler grower” formula proves the economic
interest of non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) enzymes,
whatever the context of raw material prices and the
nutritional levels required.
NSP enzymes are known to increase the digestibility of raw
materials for monogastrics, such as rapeseed meals and distillers
dried grains with soluble (DDGS), offering an alternative to soybean
meals when prices shoot up, thus allowing the offset of higher
feedstuff costs. A study led by Adisseo shows that the economic
interest of the versatile enzyme, Rovabio®, is all the greater as
raw materials are more expensive, whatever the country and the
availability of local ingredients.
The study is based on the monthly optimisation of a “broiler
grower” formula whose nutritional constraints and the raw
materials offered, are specific to the five countries surveyed: South
Africa, Poland, Turkey, Tunisia and France. Starting from a monthly
summary of the prices of raw materials, Pascal Thiery, technical
manager for Africa and the Middle East region, optimised this set
of formulas, both using and then not using Rovabio® in order to
measure the consequences of the formulation and to calculate
return on investment (ROI).
The study allowed him to assess the economic interest of
Rovabio® in formulas of which nutritional levels differ. For instance,
some countries set energy levels over 3 100 Kcal/kg of apparent
metabolised energy (Turkey, South Africa, Poland), while Tunisia
only requires 2 950 Kcal/kg. Likewise, the levels of proteins and
amino acids cover a wide range of values, from 18,5% to 22% of
crude protein and from 1,07% to 1,30% of lysine.
Soybean meal prices have almost doubled during, bringing
about a general increase in the price of available raw materials.
The formulation of feeds based on the initial criteria entailed a
noticeable increase in raw material cost, even when using locally
available substitutes for soya.
But whatever the country, the use of Rovabio® allows the
manufacturer to cut down on the extra costs, thanks to the
possibility of increasing the value of some raw materials: sunflower
or rapeseed meals, DDGS, but also cereals as in the case of Tunisia,
where Rovabio® allowed for a decrease in the shadow price of
barley compared to corn, and for the introduction of some barley
in the feed, leading to sustainable and significant benefits.
For example, using Rovabio® in a French formula in the price
context of August 2012, allowed the shadow price of barley to drop
by more than 50€/t. This in turn allowed for a decrease in its rate,
Figure 1: Evolution of the costs of “broiler grower”
formula
Figure 2: Saving with Rovabio® from November 2011 to
September 2012 (€/t)
with a final formula cost reduced by 16€/t.
More particularly, the study found that the economic interest
of Rovabio® is always established and improves within the context
of higher raw material prices. In France, the savings on material
costs reached 20€/t in August 2012 when the price of soya reached
a peak, against 10€/t in November 2011. In Tunisia the savings
exceeded 20€/t for a maximum formula price of 390€/t.
If one were to follow Adisseo’s recommendations, the return on
investment would be 8:1 on average during this period in which
the five countries were surveyed and can even reach 20:1, as was
the case in the Tunisian context in August 2012.
Therefore, whatever the context of raw material prices and
the nutritional level of the formulas, the return on investment of
Rovabio® is clearly demonstrated.
For more information, contact the author at email
pascal.thiery@adisseo.com.
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 59

Special report:
Top feed companies 2011-2012
By Peter Best and Ken Jennison
While Asia continues to
dominate the market in
number of companies
and production, several
players in other parts of
the world continue to increase their market
share. The volatility of grain prices made the
past year a tumultuous one as feed producers
worldwide worked to secure raw materials
in an environment of fierce competition.
For many companies, this was a time to hold
on to current market share. However, some
players – both large and small – used this
past year to increase their share of the market
by taking advantage of shifts in animal
production in their region, through mergers
or acquisitions, or increased capital investment.
Growth in the US
When one of the world’s largest manufacturers
of animal feeds announces a 13%
increase in annual volume, it is time to take
notice. That was the scale of the growth
reported in the US by Land O’Lakes Purina for
its livestock feed business in 2011. According
to the company, after several years of being
a segment under stress, farm feeds finally
benefitted last year from increases in the
US markets for dairy, beef and pork. For
this reason Land O’Lakes Purina has been
moved from the number five to the number
four slot in the overall rankings, specifically
in the 25 to 10 million metric tons category
(Table 1).
60 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013
Other North American notes
Other names on the Top 10 of big North
American feed players also have been making
news headlines over the past twelve
months. For example, Cargill added premix
and specialty feed interests internationally
by buying Provimi from equity fund Permira
for EUR 1,5 billion. Grains-to-feeds operator
Viterra of Canada became the takeover target
of the commodities giant Glencore.
There was activity in the US liquid feed
market when Westway Group agreed to sell
its 1,8 million metric tons per year Westway
Feed Products liquid feed supplements business
to the company’s largest shareholder.
And Archer Daniels Midland subsidiary ADM
Alliance Nutrition moved into the liquids
market by acquiring assets of the US-based
supplements manufacturer Liquid Feed
Commodities.
Elsewhere in the US, there was the announcement
of a new joint venture involving
major players JD Heiskell and Kent Nutrition
Group, between them representing about
4,5-million metric tons of annual feed manufacturing
capacity at North American locations.
They are joining forces to operate four
Kent-owned mills in the northeastern states
of New York and Vermont that specialise in
producing feeds for dairy cows. This signifies
an extension of territory for Heiskell, whose
feed interests until now have related mainly
to western states.
Movement in Asia
Not to be outdone, there has been activity
throughout Asia as well. In general this is
not a surprise, as the vast majority of the
top 63 feed manufacturers are based in Asia
(Figure 1).
Once again Charoen Pokphand of Thailand
is ranked as the top producer globally,
with China-based New Hope Group holding
the third spot after US-based Cargill. Following
that, of particular note is Guangdong
Wen’s Group, a mover since the 2010 rankings.
Founded in 1983, Guangdong Wen’s
Group has business operations in 20 of
China’s provinces and has established more
than 110 integrated companies. In 2010 it
reported sales revenue of RMB 21,94 billion,
and for 2011 it indicated its feed production
approached 10 million metric tons.
In June 2012 it signed an agreement with
Deya Agriculture Corporation for Deya to
supply Guangdong Wen’s Group with raw
corn for four of its feed mills in southwestern
China on a non-exclusive basis. The four
feed mills use approximately 200 000 tons of
raw corn per year. Based on this information
the company has been moved from its 2010
ranking of number eleven to number seven
in the 10 to 5 million metric tons category,
and moves to number three among Asian
feed producers (Table 2).
Expansion through acquisition
Major moves since the middle of 2011 also
have been taking place in Europe. The most
obvious of these has involved a double
acquisition by ForFarmers, a private company
that is majority-owned by a Dutch farm
co-operative. Until 2011, the ForFarmers
operation consisted of production and sales
of feed in the Netherlands, Belgium and
Germany, with five production locations in
the central eastern part of the Netherlands
and five in Germany. In 2011 ForFarmers
produced nearly 2,5 million metric tons of
compound feed.
In November 2011 ForFarmers signed an
agreement to purchase Hendrix UTD from
Nutreco for EUR 92,5 million. Hendrix UTD operates
ten mills in the Netherlands, Belgium
and Germany. In 2011 the mills produced
2,9 million metric tons of feed. The purchase
was approved by authorities in April 2012.
In March 2012 ForFarmers signed an
agreement for the purchase of UK-based
BOCM Pauls for EUR 85 million, becoming
Europe’s largest feed manufacturer in the
process. BOCM Pauls operates eleven feed

Table 1: World feed manufacturers making more than
one million metric tons per year of complete feeds in
2011, ranked in descending order by size
Rank Company Headquarters
1 Charoen Pokphand (CP
Group)
25,0-10,0 million metric tons
Thailand
2 Cargill USA
3 New Hope Group China
4 Land O’Lakes Purina USA
5 Brazil Foods Brazil
6 Tyson Foods USA
10,0-5,0 million metric tons
7 Guangdong Wen’s Group China
8 Cofco China
9 East Hope Group China
10 Zen-noh Co-operative Japan
11 Nutreco Netherlands
12 ForFarmers Netherlands
13 Hunan Tangrenshan Group China
5,0-2,5 million metric tons
14 Tongwei China
15 Twins Group Shuangbaotai China
16 AB Agri UK
17 Agrifirm Feed Netherlands
18 De Heus Netherlands
19 DLG Denmark
20 Glon France
21 Smithfield Foods USA
22 DaChan/East Asia Group China
23 Agravis Raiffeisen Germany
24 ADM Alliance Nutrition USA
25 Zhengbang China
26 Veronesi Italy
27 Bachoco Mexico
28 InVivo NSA France
29 Frangosul Brazil
30 Kent Nutrition Group USA
2,5-1,5 million metric tons
31 Marubeni-Nisshin Japan
32 DTC Deutsche Tiernahrung
Cremer
Germany
33 Perdue Farms USA
34 Seara Brazil
35 Dabeinong China
36 Betagro Thailand
37 JD Heiskell USA
38 San Miguel Philippines
39 Zuellig Gold Coin Malaysia
40 Mitsubishi Nosan Japan
41 Wellhope Agri-Tech China
42 Chubu Japan
43 Japfa Comfeed Indonesia
44 Kyodo Shiryo Feed Japan
45 Meadow Feeds South Africa
46 Zhenghong China
1,5-1,0 million metric tons
47 Hengxing Evergreen China
48 NNA France
49 Southern States Co-op USA
50 Viterra Canada
51 Aveve Belgium
52 Ridley Agriproducts Australia
53 Bröring
Unternehmensgruppe
Germany
54 CJ Cheil Jedang Korea
55 Ridley Inc Canada
56 Easy Bio System Korea
57 Myronivsky Hliboproduct Ukraine
58 Nippon Formula Feed Japan
59 Proconco Vietnam
60 Lantmännen Lantbruk Sweden
61 Epol South Africa
62 Itochu Japan
63 Mega Tierernahrung Germany
There are 63 companies on this year’s top feed companies list. However,
as more companies move to become integrators, this number will likely
increase.
mills. The purchase was approved by the authorities in July 2012.
The ForFarmers Group now has 8,8 million metric tons of feed
production, of which 6,5 million metric tons is compound feed
and 2,3 million metric tons are single products and co-products.
These acquisitions enabled ForFarmers to leap from number 31
in the previous rankings to number 12 and a stone’s throw away
from being in the top 10.
Capital investment
Another company with Dutch roots, De Heus, was also a mover
in this year’s rankings. De Heus is a family-run company with its
headquarters in Ede-Wageningen, Netherlands. It has 30 feed
mills in eight countries and exports to over 45 countries. In June
this year De Heus opened a new feed mill in Dong Nai, its fourth
in Vietnam. The plant was built at a cost of USD $15 million and
has a capacity of 300 000 metric tons per year. De Heus moves
from number 20 to number 18 in the overall list, and it now
ranks as number five among feed producers located in Europe
(Table 3).
We would be remiss if we did not mention that while Nutreco
did divest itself of Hendrix UTD this past year, it is still a major
player both in the Netherlands and in the global arena, simply
Client focus
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 61

Table 2: Asian companies in the top world feed manufacturers
(Listed in descending order by production
volume)
Rank Company Headquarters
1 Charoen Pokphand (CP Group) Thailand
2 New Hope Group China
3 Guangdong Wen’s Group China
4 Cofco China
5 East Hope Group China
6 Zen-noh Co-operative Japan
7 Hunan Tangrenshan Group China
8 Tongwei China
9 Twins Group Shuangbaotai China
10 DaChan/East Asia Group China
11 Zhengbang China
12 Marubeni-Nisshin Japan
13 Dabeinong China
14 Betagro Thailand
15 San Miguel Philippines
16 Zuellig Gold Coin Malaysia
17 Mitsubishi Nosan Japan
18 Wellhope Agri-Tech China
19 Chubu Japan
20 Japfa Comfeed Indonesia
21 Kyodo Shiryo Feed Japan
22 Zhenghong China
23 Hengxing Evergreen China
24 CJ Cheil Jedang Korea
25 Easy Bio System Korea
26 Nippon Formula Feed Japan
27 Proconco Vietnam
28 Itochu Japan
A total of 28 of the world’s top feed manufacturers are located in Asia,
nine are in the top 20
Table 3: European companies in the top world feed
manufacturers (listed in descending order by production
volume)
Rank Company Headquarters
1 Nutreco Netherlands
2 ForFarmers Netherlands
3 AB Agri UK
4 Agrifirm Feed Netherlands
5 De Heus Netherlands
6 DLG Denmark
7 Glon France
8 Agravis Raiffeisen Germany
9 Veronesi Italy
10 InVivo NSA France
11 DTC Deutsche Tiernahrung
Germany
Cremer
12 NNA France
13 Aveve Belgium
14 Ridley Agriproducts Australia
15 Bröring Unternehmensgruppe
Germany
16 Myronivsky Hliboproduct
Ukraine
17 Lantmännen Lantbruk Sweden
18 Mega Tierernahrung Germany
As the result of recent mergers and acquisitions, the Netherlands are rapidly
becoming the centre for feed production in Europe.
Figure 1: Locations of top feed companies, by percentage
with an adjusted focus. Nutreco welcomed a new chief executive
in August 2012 and announced during the past 12 months a series
of initiatives in the aqua-feeds and premixes sectors.
What to expect
A final observation for readers is that many of the top players
listed here are integrators – a sign of the way things are going
internationally. More integrated companies look certain to enter
the one million metric tons (or more) category soon.
One company people can look at as an example of this is Miratorg
Agribusiness Holding in Russia. Miratorg is already the largest
pork producer in Russia, and its pig enterprises required an
estimated 720 000 metric tons of feed in 2011. The company has already
invested to increase its annual feed production capacity from
270 000 metric tons to 630 000 metric tons, and is building another
plant that will add another 360 000 metric tons to that number. People
can expect to see more companies making similar moves in the
years ahead.
The lion’s share of top feed companies are located in Asia, followed
by Europe and then North America.
Please note: Data used in this article came from public sources or directly
from the companies mentioned. All companies mentioned in this article were
asked, via email, for production information. For those that did not respond,
the staff of Feed International used their best estimates for rankings. If your
company is listed and you believe the data being used is incorrect, please contact
Peter Best at pbest@wattnet.net or Ken Jennison at kjennison@wattnet.
net so that future content may be corrected.
62 AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013

Client focus
Last, but not least
By Loutjie Dunn, Afma-board, & Franscois Crots and Ernest King, Nutri Feeds
The chairman of the Animal Feed
Manufacturers Association
(AFMA) noted in his address at
the 2012 Symposium that the
world feed industry has gone
through various evolutionary phases over
the past decade. Some of the major advances
were due to improved predictions of energy,
amino acids as well as vitamin and mineral
requirements.
It was later discovered that some of the
minerals share complex interactions that
should be kept in mind when formulating a
balanced feed for optimum animal production.
Based on the number of publications
published over the past ten years, scientists
have identified two areas of opportunities in
an effort to reduce feed cost and/or alternatively
enhance animal performance.
Enzyme development
The first focused on enzyme development. It
appears that we have only scratched the surface
and that these organic catalysts present
a multitude of benefits but also some risks,
if not properly evaluated. It is almost as if
the future is telling us that, although we all
had some exposure to microbiology at some
stage during our educational upbringing, it
would not be enough to guarantee our place
in the future.
Some deeper level of understanding is
needed to fully capitalise on the full potential
of enzymes, their interactions with each
other as well as the mode of action inside the
animal’s intestines.
Raw material and quality
Additionally, raw material processing and
the quality improvement thereof have also
been awarded some focus. It follows therefore,
that the special GFFC/AFMA forum’s
editions have also presented the reader with
more insight into the interesting world of
feed milling from a scientific, though commercial
sensitive perspective.
AFMA have always tried to keep its members
scientifically informed, and this special
edition has certainly not strayed from its
original mandate. With global feed and food
competitiveness ever changing, we would
like to inspire our readers through the borrowed
words of Charles Darwin to keep
abreast with the latest science by virtue of
the “tried and tested” AFMA Matrix: “It is not
the strongest of the species that survive, nor
the most intelligent that survives. It is the ones
that is the most adaptable to change.”
AFMA MATRIX ● APRIL 2013 63