Competing with antibiotic growth promoters the issues... Aoife Corrigan, Ph.D. Alltech Bioscience Centre Ireland November 2012

Transcription

1 Competing with antibiotic growth promoters the issues... Aoife Corrigan, Ph.D. Alltech Bioscience Centre Ireland November 2012

2 Are we ready for 9 billion??? The World needs to double the meat production in the next 50 years

3 What are the challenges? Changes in the world economy Impact of the transportation of foods Food security: Food chain safety and traceability Food sufficiency: Efficiency of food production Effective nutrient utilization EU ban on AGPs

4 Who has the responsibility? a farm-to-fork approach. the responsibility for the production of safe food lies with the primary animal producer up through the food chain to the consumer

5 In the past we used antibiotics to mask the underlying problems related to optimum gut health and function.. and food safety!

6 Why do we worry? Antibiotic Resistance Food safety Gut health

7 Antibiotics AGPs have a long history of prophylactic use in animal feed to improve animal performance and health status by targeting and destroying the intestinal microflora. interfering with the bacteria's ability to reproduce damaging cell membranes disrupting essential cellular activities Most AGPs target gram-positive organisms that are commonly associated with poor health and reduced animal performance Economic benefit of feeding prophylactic AGPs improvement of growth, health and uniformity The size of response to AGPs is dependent on: farm management, exposure to pathogens, environmental stresses and diet.

8 Alternatives to AGPs must meet the same expectations and also meet regulatory requirements Safe Cost effective Non toxic Cannot become resistant??? Efficacious

9 Where do we start? Education and information Slaughter house hygienic measures Breeders Pathogen free feed Biosecurity Internal and External Holistic approach Focus on gut health and immunity More research needed

10 What s happening? What are our options with out AGP s Animation by Alltech

11 Healthy gut Gut wall morphology, integrity and inflammation Balanced intestinal microflora Optimal gut health Optimal animal performance Nutrition and management

12 What feed intervention strategies are available? Heat treatment Organic acids Physical characteristics Probiotics Competitive Exclusion Glycans Medium chain fatty acids Essential oils Prebiotics

13 Alternatives, How do they work? Altering gut ph Maintaining protective gut Mucin Selection for beneficial intestinal organisms or against pathogens Enhancing fermentation acids, Enhancing nutrient uptake Increasing the humoral immune response.

14 Mannan-oligosaccharides Salmonella contain mannose-specific lectins (Type 1 fimbriae) on the bacterial surface that binds to glycoproteins (rich in mannose) on the intestinal surface. Mannose sugars can thereby compete with the intestinal glycoproteins for attachment sites and prevent colonization. Salmonella binding has been demonstrated with mannanoligosaccharide (Bio-Mos) at significantly lower concentrations than that required for purified mannose. (Spring 2000)

15 Does it address the specific issues Safe - when looking for an AGP Cost effective - Non toxic - alternative? Unlikely to become resistant - Efficacious - Does it achieve the same aims of an AGP?

16 % Salmonella positive samples Disease control Reduction Salmonella infection rate Improvement in FCR Control Bio-Mos Control Bio-Mos Improvement in mortality % MOS reduced the average mortality by 27% Bio-Mos used 62 g less feed to produce 1 kg of body weight, corresponding to an improvement of 3.24% With MOS, the infection rate decreased to 1/8 of the previous rate in the previous cycles 0.0 Control Bio-Mos

17 Works as an alternative in terms of performance But also has added effects on Intestinal structure Mucin production Digestion Immune modulation

18 Goblet cells and Mucin Mucin is a mucous gel secreted by epithelial goblet cells that acts as a protective barrier against harmful intraluminal components such as: Abrasive action of feedstuffs Bacteria colonization Toxins

19 How do MOS affect intestinal structure? Reduction in pathogenic bacteria Leads to a reduction in cell sloughing on the villi Less energy expended maintaining GI tract Mannan may aid in tissue repair

20 Focusing on specific genomic effects: Individual gene markers

21 Average signal intensity Average signal intensity MUC2 P = 0.08 MUC5B Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen Regulation of mucin associated genes in intestinal tissue of broilers by MOS

22 SI SI HSP90 NS W C BM ACT Effects of MOS on gene expression: Decreased expression of stress protein and indicators of tissue damage in the small intestine P<0.01 Both supplements decreased expression of stress related genes Both supplements decreased expression genes associated with tissue damage CLU MST1R HSP P<0.01 P<0.01 W C BM ACT P<0.01 P<0.01 P<0.01 P<0.01 Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen Biomarkers: Less tissue stress and damage

23 SI SI SI Effects of MOS on gene expression: Increased expression of genes for digestive enzymes in the small intestines Lipase Sucrase-isomaltase P<0.05 W C BM ACT P<0.01 Increased digestive capacity P<0.01 P<0.05 W C BM ACT Omega Peptidase P<0.01 P<0.01 W C BM ACT

24 MOS also has an effect on immunity Innate immunity attenuated mucus secretion Acute Phase response suppression of the fever response Humoral immunity enhanced antigen presentation to immune cells modulated antibody production

25 Average signal intensity Average signal intensity Effects of MOS on genes related to immune related genes LYZ * * * B2M * * Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen Wheat Corn Bio-Mos Actigen

26 Benefits to the consumer and the animal.

27 Salmonella Positive Meat Juice Samples Bio-Mos 1kg/T Bio-Mos reduced the number of Salmonella positive samples from 28 to zero % in 5 months 5 0 May- 07 Jun- 07 Jul- 07 Aug- 07 Sep- 07 Oct- 07 Nov- 07 Dec- 07 UK, 2007

28 Log Gene Copy Number Log Gene Copy Number Reduction in the levels of AB resistance genes being carried in the intestine Significant reduction in levels of tet A gene (p 0.05) and tet B gene (p 0.037) seen following 42 days supplementation with MOS Control Day 28 Bio-Mos Day28 Control Day 35 Bio-Mos Day 35 Control Day 42 * Bio-Mos Day Control Day 28 Bio-Mos Day28 Control Day 35 Bio-Mos Day 35 Control Day 42 * * Bio-Mos Day 42

29 Conclusions There will always be a need for antibiotic use Need to try and minimise and conserve their use No silver bullet approach Combined approach

30 Three key strategies for limiting the use of Antibiotics on farm Infection control Good hygiene Operate an all-in all-out policy Minimise mixing of animals Good hygiene practices, especially production phases Ensure all pens & feeders are disinfected between batches Nutritional support Mos inclusion to reduce colonization and alleviate disease pressure

31 Can we switch to AGP alternatives - yes Safe - Cost effective - Non toxic - Unlikely to become resistant -???? Efficacious -