Have you thought about your trace mineral Completed over 100 research projects with Universities, Private Research, Nutritionists and produced in the

Transcription

1

2 Have you thought about your trace mineral Completed over 100 research projects with Large, All respected to support Because team program the of MOST we PhD lately? have!!! Poultry INNOVATIVE Universities, Private Research, Nutritionists and and specialized cost effective in Customers trace source mineral of trace nutrition minerals produced in the last 20 years

3 Mineral Definitions Inorganic Salts Sulfates, carbonates, chlorides (Soluble, medium RBV, low cost) Organic Chelates AA, Proteins, Carbohydrates (Mixed Solubility, highest RBV, highest cost) Hydroxy Trace Minerals IntelliBond Minerals (Not soluble, highest RBV, medium cost)

4 Inorganic Salts are Highly Soluble and REACTIVE H 2 O Cu 2+ Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu 2+ Cu 2+ So when feeding Sulfates compared with IntelliBond Trace Minerals Protect your feed and your animals with IntelliBond 20% decrease (P < 0.05) in duodenum and proximal jejunum villi heights 40% 15% 245% less (P more (P < 0.05) (P < P 0.05) vitamin released lipid E in from oxidation liver phytate (Luo in et feed (Pang al., (Miles 2005) and Applegate, et al., 1998) 2006) (Fry et al., 2012)

5 Why are IntelliBond minerals less reactive??? IntelliBond Minerals HCl and H 2 O as ligand

6 Slow Release, Less Reactive, Maximum Effectiveness 2.00 Solubility of IBC vs CuSO4 in Acetate Buffer Solution (ph = 4.7) Copper vs Time 1.80 Amount of Copper Dissolved (g/l) IBC CuSO Time (Hours)

7 IntelliBond Z Relative Bioavailability 60 Slope Ratio Analysis Tibia Zn, μg/tibia ZnSO4 IBZ Common Intercept: Slope ZnSO 4 : / 0.58 Slope IBZ: / 0.53 R 2 = 0.76 RBV relative to SO4 IBZ = 143.5% Supplemental Zn, ppm Slow Delivers Better release Zn more RBV prevents means Zn to blood better nutrient and health tissues antagonism and to performance!!! maximize growth Parsons et al., 2012

8 Improved Performance with IntelliBond Minerals

9 IntelliBond Minerals. Making Smart Choices in Feed 9

10 Better Handling and Mixing Better mixing! 10

11 Less vitamin degradation in feed Feed Vitamin E (mg/kg) 70 Control (18 ppm) Cu sulfate (200 ppm) 60 IntelliBond C (200 ppm) * * * * Cu sulfate reduces vitamin E in mash feed (broiler diet) compared to IntelliBond C. Diets contained 3.6% added fat and dl-αtoc. acetate. Diets were stored at 18º C. Feed levels correspond to lower liver and plasma vit. E in CuSO4 fed chicks (p<0.05) Storage time (d) * Within a time point, mean is significantly different from Control (p<0.05). Data adapted from Lu et al., Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 138:181-9.

12 Basic Copper Chloride: Less phytase degradation 500,0 Copper Sulfate IntelliBond C Phytase Activity (U/kg) 450,0 400,0 350,0 300,0 250,0 a b Cu sulfate reduced phytase retention in a layer mash diet by 12% vs IntelliBond C. Diet contained 417 U/kg phytase from Natuphos, and was stored at 40º C for 21 days. 200,0 150,0 100,0 195 ppm Cu Data adapted from Liu et al., JAPR. 14:

13 In vivo: Bifidobacteria DNA from OptiBac Duodenum a a b b IntelliBond C CuSO4 Main effect means IntelliBond 33.6 a CuSO b a b Jejunum a b IntelliBond C CuSO4 Main effect means IntelliBond 17.5 a CuSO b

14 More Phytate Phosporus Hydrolysis % Phytate P hydrolysis * * * Cu sulfate reduces the conversion of phytate to available P in the GI tract compared to IntelliBond C. Phytate-P release measured in vitro. * Within a copper source, starred bars are significantly different from 0 ppm Cu (p<0.05). Data adapted from Pang and Applegate. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54:

15 Research Location Tested Compared Test Measure Parameter Improvement Using Intellibond C Feed Stability Summary Parc Institute Feed CuSO C Vitamin A +6.2% Parc Institute Feed CuSO4 21 days@ 37C Riboflavin +3.8% Parc Institute Broiler CuSO4 21 days Vitamin E +55% Livers Parc Institute Broiler CuSO4 21 days Vitamin E +16.9% Livers Chinese Broiler CuSO4 21 days Vitamin E +22.1% Academy Livers Purdue U In Vitro CuSO4 Phytate hydrolysis Insoluble Cu phytate 25.5% Less Purdue U Broiler Feed CuSO4 7 40C Phytase Activity +47.8% Auburn U Layer Feed CuSO C Phytase Activity +67.8% Chinese Broiler Feed CuSO C Phytase Activity +78.5% Academy U of Florida Broiler Feed CuSO C Lipid Oxidation 23.8% Less

16 Little Cost, Big Reward 0.094/MT or /bird. IntelliBond C To justify this cost: Lower FCR by pts or Increase BW by 0.18 g/bird Calculations based on replacement of 15ppm Cu in the diet 54% Cu

17 Linear Improvement with IBC as Feeding Level is Increased: IB C vs. IBC ll FCR, 0 21d 1,48 1,46 IBC IBC-II 1,44 1,42 1,40 1,38 1,36 1,34 1,32 1, Cu from IBc (ppm) P>0.05

18 Linear Improvement with IBC as Feeding Level is Increased: C vs. C ll 21 day Intestinal Lesions 1,40 1,20 Lesion Score IBC IBC-II 1,00 0,80 0,60 0,40 0,20 0, Cu from IBc (ppm) P>0.05

19 Research Location Mineral Comparison Level Compared Improvement using IntelliBond C AH Pharma CuCO pts AH Pharma CuCO pts AH Pharma CuSO pts AH Pharma CuSO pts Ghislaine Roch CuSO pts Parc Institute CuSO pts (Cobb) Parc Institute CuSO pts (Ross) Integrator CuSO pts Southern Poultry CuSO pts Southern Poultry CuSO pts TAMU CuSO pts Southern Poultry CuCO pts UC Davis CuSO pts AH Pharma CuCO pts AH Pharma CuSO pts #1 Brand of Cu in US Poultry Diets Southern Poultry CuSO pts Southern Poultry CuCO pts Chinese Agric. U CuSO pts U Florida CuSO pts AH Pharma CuSO pts Purdue University CuSO pts Southern Poultry CuSO pts Foster Farms CuSO4 4.0 pts U Maryland / USDA CuSO4 175 enzymes 5.0 pts U Maryland / USDA CuSO enzymes 12.0 pts FCR >5x ROI alone!!!

20 Little Cost, Big Reward < 0.57/MT or 0.003/bird. IntelliBond Z To justify the cost: Lower FCR by 0.55 pts or Increase BW by 1.4 g/bird 55% Zn

21 #1 - Comparison of Zinc Source on Performance Treatments: 40 ppm ZnSO 4 60 ppm ZnSO 4 80 ppm ZnSO 4 40 ppm IntelliBond Z (IBz) 60 ppm IBz 80 ppm IBz 20 ppm ZnSO ppm Availa Z 30 ppm ZnSO ppm AvZ 40 ppm ZnSO ppm AvZ 20 ppm IBz + 20 ppm AvZ 40 ppm IBz + 20 ppm AvZ 60 ppm IBz + 20 ppm AvZ Design: 12 treatments x 10 replications x 50 chicks/pen; 42-d trial (6,000 birds) Built-up litter (from at least three previous growouts) and moderate levels of E. acervulina and E. coli challenge were placed in the litter on Day 7 in order to place some field condition stress on the birds. All chicks were vaccinated with Cocci-Vac (Merck s) at the hatchery. Performance measured at 21 and 42 days of age All diets contained 125ppm IBc AH Pharma, 2013

22 Trial 1: Effect of Zn on d 42 BW 2,30 50 grams Live weight, kg 2,25 2,20 2,15 2,10 2,05 g f cdef ef bcde ab 2,00 ZnSO4, 40ppm ZnSO4, 60ppm ZnSO4, 80ppm IntelliBond Z, 40ppm IntelliBond Z, 60 ppm IntelliBond Z, 80 ppm 22

23 Trial 1: Effect of Zn on 42 d FCR 1,84 1,82 d 3,5 points FCR (6.4 : 1 ROI) FCR 1,80 1,78 1,76 cd bc abc abc ab 1,74 1,72 1,70 ZnSO4, 40ppm ZnSO4, 60ppm ZnSO4, 80ppm IntelliBond Z, IntelliBond Z, IntelliBond Z, 40ppm 60 ppm 80 ppm ***Corrected for mortality ***Corrected for mortality 23

24 Trial 1: Effect of Zn on 42 d FCR weight corrected 1,86 1,84 d 4,5 points FCR FCR weight corrected 1,82 1,80 1,78 1,76 1,74 1,72 cd ab ab ab a 1,70 1,68 ZnSO4, 40ppm ZnSO4, 60ppm ZnSO4, 80ppm IntelliBond Z, 40ppm IntelliBond Z, 60 ppm IntelliBond Z, 80 ppm 24

25 Trial 1: Breast meat yield (% HCW) 17,80 17,70 17,60 17,50 0,21% % 17,40 17,30 17,20 0,36% 17,10 17,00 16, SO4 IBz 25

26 Zinc Source Economic Comparison of Zinc Source Inclusion level, ppm Cost of Zn Inclusion/ton FCRwc* Zn Sulfate IntelliBond Z ZnSO4 + AvZ IntelliBond Z + AvZ $ AvZn price $1.53/lb, concentration 10% ZnSO4 $ 0.615/lb, concentration 35.5% IBz $ 2.80/lb, concentration 55% Feeding 80 ppm IBz or 60 ppm IBz + 20 ppm AvZ resulted in better efficiency and lower cost than 40ppm ZnSO4 + 40ppm AvZ *FCR corrected for weight (4.86 lbs); 1 pt = 0.12# AH Pharma, 2013

27 Comparison of alternative Zn sources Ross 708 Birds 10 replicates x 25 birds/pen (21d) x 20 birds/pen (21-49d) Floor pens with dirty litter 49-d trial 21 and 49-d performance measures day 50 Hot carcass weights Breast yield CQR; IPE 2013 Abstract

28 49d Body Weight Gain *Contrast P<0.05 7,200 7, Kgs 3.25 Kgs * Pounds 7,000 6, Kgs 3.11 Kgs 6,800 6,700 6,600 (0.35#) (0.43#) (1.0#) (0.52#) (0.69#) b a CQR; IPE 2013 Abstract

29 49d FCRwc* 1,840 1,820 1, Pts FCR (13.1 : 1 ROI) Pound:pound 1,780 1,760 1,740 1, ,700 1,680 1,660 1,640 (0.35#) (0.43#) (1.0#) (0.52#) (0.69#) b a *Feed conversion corrected for weight (6.9 lbs); 1 pt = 0.06# CQR; IPE 2013 Abstract

30 Breast Meat Yield *Contrast P<0.05 1, Kgs 1,680 1, Kgs * 1,640 Pounds 1,620 1, Kgs.723 Kgs 1,580 1,560 1,540 1,520 1,500 (0.35#) (0.43#) (1.0#) (0.52#) (0.69#) b a CQR; IPE 2013 Abstract

31 Trial 3. Comparison of IntelliBond vs Sulphates (2016) Hypothesis 1: That broilers fed IntelliBond Z would have equal or better performance when fed at 80 ppm compared to ZnSO4 Trial location: ITRA Diets were fed from d replicates of 44 males Preliminary data Treatments Cooper Source Copper Level (ppm) Zn Source Zn Level (ppm) 1 CuSO 4 15 ZnSO CuSO 4 15 ZnSO IntelliBond C 15 IntelliBond Z 80 4 IntelliBond C 15 IntelliBond Z 20 31

32 Trial 3. Daily gain d ,50 39,00 Source : P = 0,002 IntelliBond > SO 4 Level : P = 0,700 Source x Level: P = 0,11 38,50 Daily gain, g 38,00 37,50 37,00 36,50 36,00 Sulphate 80 ppm Sulphate 20 ppm IntelliBond Z 80ppm IntelliBond Z 20ppm 32

33 Trial 3. Daily feed intake d ,50 51,00 Source : P = 0,027 IntelliBond > SO 4 Level : P = 0,700 Source x Level: P = 0,11 Daily feed intake, g 50,50 50,00 49,50 49,00 48,50 48,00 Sulphate 80 ppm Sulphate 20 ppm IntelliBond Z 80ppm IntelliBond Z 20ppm 33

34 Trial 3. FCR d ,35 a 1,34 4 points FCR a Source : P = 0,36 Level : P = 0,280 Source x Level: P = 0,021 Feed conversion ratio, g/g 1,33 1,32 1,31 1,30 1,29 ab b Breakeven.55 pts Results = 4.0 pts ROI = 7.3:1 1,28 1,27 Sulphate 80 ppm Sulphate 20 ppm IntelliBond Z 80ppm IntelliBond Z 20ppm 34

35 IntelliBond Z Research Summary Research Location Comparison Level Compared Improvement Using IntelliBond Z Body Weight, g Feed Conversion AH Pharma, 2013 IBZ vs. ZnSO4 80ppm pts Colorado Quality, 2012 IBZ vs. ZnSO4 80ppm pts Texas A&M, 2016 IBZ vs. ZnSO4 80ppm pts AH Pharma, 2013 IBZ/Org vs. ZnSO4 80ppm pts Colorado Quality, 2012 IBZ vs. ZnSO4/Org 80ppm pts Texas A&M, 2015 IBZ vs. ZnSO4/ZnO 100 vs. 90ppm pts Virginia Diversified, 2014 IBZ/Org vs ZnSO4/Org 100 vs. 120ppm pts FCR and BWG ROI >10x!!!

36 IntelliBond Layer Update

37 Layer Trial TAMU Determine effects of different Mn and Zn sources and inclusion levels on egg production and quality 60ppm zinc and 80ppm Mn; either oxide or IntelliBond 62 week layer trial (layers 73 weeks old) 504 Hy line W36 pullets, 11 weeks of age 3 hens x 21 reps x 2 treatments

38 Lay Rate, weeks 85,5 P < ,0 a Lay rate, % 84,5 84,0 83,5 ab abc b d e 83,0 a 82,5 Oxide IntelliBond

39 Average Egg Weight (g) weeks Egg weight, g 56,63 56,62 56,61 56,60 56,59 56,58 56,57 56,56 56,55 56,54 Oxide P > 0.05 IntelliBond

40 Egg FCR, weeks FCR, g feed/egg a b Oxide IntelliBond

41 Economics Item Oxide IntelliBond Difference (Oxide IntelliBond) Cost for trace minerals in 1t diet Feed intake per 100,000 layers, t 4,726 4, Eggs per 100,000 layers 36,195,600 36,976, ,200 Sales from eggs per 100,000 layers + 1,324, ,353, ,592 Cost for feed per 100,000 layers 1,195,744 1,164, ,372 Sales feed costs per 100,000 layers + 129, , ,964 Sales feed costs per layer ( 0.043) Assumptions: Price for 100 eggs = 3.66; cost of feed (oxide) = ZnO = 1.33; MnO = 0.62 Intellibond Z = 6.00; IntelliBond M =

42 Conclusions IB minerals are inexpensive! A very small increase in performance pays for the mineral source change. IntelliBond trace minerals protect essential nutrients in the feed IBZ is additive with Ionophores and growth promoters Recommended feeding applications: IntelliBond C IntelliBond Z IntelliBond M* Broilers Cu 15 ppm Zn 80 ppm Mn 80 ppm Layers Cu 15 ppm Zn 60 ppm Mn 80 ppm Let our products and experts work for you. 42

43 Thank you