www.globalfeed.es

At Global Feed we have spent over 15 years producing and commercialising Iron Phosphates and Sulphate. In the last two years, we have also seen an increase in human and economic re-sources devoted to research into and development of Nutraceutical products, based on vegetable extracts with nutritional and anti-microbial activity, commercialised through our ADIBIO brand.

In phosphate production, Global Feed was the first company in Spain to apply its own techno-logy (Globalphos®), based on a direct reaction between phosphoric acid and a calcium source - a system that is respectful towards the environment as it generates no chemical waste.

In the phosphate market field, Global Feed has begun to develop new Phosphates which nu-tritionally provide new possibilities in optimising feed formulae and include interesting nutrients.

On these lines, a Sodium Calcium Phosphate (SOCALPHOS 20/5) has been developed who-se nutritional values provide a high percentage of Digestible Phosphorus, in addition to Sodium, while consequently providing an Electrolyte Ba-lance that is of great interest in current fowl and pig formulae.

In this publication, we reveal both the economic benefit (a notable difference) in feed for-mulae with SOCALPHOS 20/5 for lactating sows compared to Dicalcium Phosphate and what it provides in terms of other nutrients (Na & Electrolyte Balance) not normally supplied by the typical phosphates in use.

The restrictions in the two formulae in terms of ingredients and nutrients are the same, the only difference is that SOCALPHOS 20/5 has a price of some €125/MT higher than dicalcium phosphate.

With the two formulae - including a very similar Digestible Phosphorus provision cost per unit between the two phosphates - it can be seen that the different level of Digestibility of the phos-phorus provided (72% compared to 84% with SOCALPHOS 20/5) determines the inclusion of each in the formula: some 23.5% less in SOCALPHOS 20/5. This difference in inclusion gives added value to SOCALPHOS 20/5 thanks to the reduction in Phosphorus excreted into the environment.

Pig feed formulae:

Sodium Calcium Phosphate versus Dicalcium PhosphateAndrés Donadeu González – Coviella

Technical Manager GLOBAL FEED

SOCALPHOS 20/5Composition Values

Total P 20,0%Available P 18,0%

Ca 18,0%Na 5,0%

P soluble in citrus >95%P soluble in water >45%

EspeciesPIGS FOWLS

Digestibility 84% 79%Digestible P 17 15,8

Electrolyte Balance 2.180 mEq/kg

www.globalfeed.es

There is also a considerable decrease in Sodium Chloride inclusion between the two formulae (some 18% less with SOCALPHOS 20/5). This difference may also be of considerable interest to farms with briny water (high salt content), where an excess level of chlorides ingested may induce well-known problems in fowls and pigs: dirty eggs, softening of stools, etc.

Company GlobalFeed Company GlobalFeed

Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Dicalcium Phosphate Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Socalphos 20/20/5

Date 20/12/2016 Date 20/12/2016

Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 229,799 Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 226,740

Code Ingredients Solution Price Code Ingredients Solution Price

1466 Barley 48,545 154,00 1466 Barley 50,432 154,00

3208 Soy 47 17,101 363,60 2866 Bran 9/22 16,000 144,40

2866 Bran 9/22 13,000 144,40 3208 Soy 47 15,185 363,60

1287 Corn CAN 5,000 177,30 1287 Corn CAN 5,000 177,30

1301 Wheat CAN 5,000 166,30 1301 Wheat CAN 5,000 166,30

9248 Lard 2,518 780,00 9248 Lard 2,410 780,00

2991 Beet Pulp 1,161 170,00 9804 Calcium Carbonate 1,286 33,20

9804 Calcium Carbonate 1,027 33,20 2991 Beet Pulp 1,219 170,00

9373 Fat 3/5 1,000 712,10 9373 Fat 3/5 1,000 712,10

9241 Dicalcium Phosphate 0,960 400,00 9471 Socalphos 20/5 0,735 525,00

9246 Lysine 50 Liq. 0,506 805,00 9246 Lysine 50 Liq. 0,595 805,00

9260 Salt 0,493 58,00 9260 Salt 0,404 58,00

9394 Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300 3.560,00 9394 Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300 3.560,00

9348 Methionine OH 0,113 2.182,00 9348 Methionine OH 0,133 2.182,00

9239 L-Threonine 0,106 1.597,00 9239 L-Threonine 0,131 1.597,00

9430 Additive 0,160 8.690,00 9430 Additive 0,130 8.690,00

9437 Liquid Phytase 0,010 4.600,00 9437 Liquid Phytase 0,010 4.600,00

100,000 100,000

In the area of nutritional analysis for the two formulae, there is a clear lower cost across almost all restrictions when using SOCALPHOS 20/5 compared to dicalcium phosphate, which strongly and collectively impacts on the final savings between the two formulae.

As noted above, in the matter of Digestible Phosphorus, the explanation lies in the difference in Digestibility between the phosphates and the amount provided per kilo of product, even when the cost per unit of Digestible P is very similar.

Company GlobalFeed Company GlobalFeed

Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Dicalcium Phosphate Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Socalphos 20/20/5

Date 20/12/2016 Date 20/12/2016

Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 229,799 Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 226,740

Nutrient Value Minimum Maximum Restrn. Cost Nutrient Value Minimum Maximum Restrn. Cost

Weight 100,000 100,000 100,000 -0,017 Weight 100,000 100,000 100,000 -0,016

Moisture 10,437 100,000 Moisture 10,446 100,000

Gross Protein 17,559 17,000 18,000 Gross Protein 17,000 17,000 18,000 0,051

Gross Fat 5,525 4,000 8,000 Gross Fat 5,421 4,000 8,000

ADF 6,456 6,000 100,000 ADF 6,468 6,000 100,000

NDF 18,002 18,000 100,000 NDF 18,182 18,000 100,000

Starch 45,000 45,000 -0,002 Starch 45,000 45,000 -0,009

Ash 5,385 100,000 Ash 5,316 100,000

Calcium 0,900 0,900 1,100 0,053 Calcium 0,900 0,900 1,100 0,053

Total P 0,758 0,680 100,000 Total P 0,731 0,680 100,000

Dig Pork Phosph. 0,350 0,350 100,000 0,353 Dig Pork Phosph. 0,350 0,350 100,000 0,326

Phytic P 0,337 100,000 Phytic P 0,333 100,000

In Sow (Mcal/Kg) 2.350 2.350 100,000 1,244 In Sow (Mcal/Kg) 2.350 2.350 100,000 1,226

Dig Pork Lysine 0,950 0,950 100,000 0,165 Dig Pork Lysine 0,950 0,950 100,000 0,101

Met Dig Pork 0,315 0,285 100,000 Met Dig Pork 0,322 0,285 100,000

Met+Cys Dig Pork 0,570 0,570 100,000 0,269 Met+Cys Dig Pork 0,570 0,570 100,000 0,234

Treo Dig Pork 0,608 0,608 100,000 0,152 Treo Dig Pork 0,608 0,608 100,000 0,113

Trypt Dig Pork 0,181 0,171 100,000 Trypt Dig Pork 0,173 0,171 100,000

Potassium 0,838 1,100 Potassium 0,808 1,100

Sodium 0,200 0,200 0,300 0,078 Sodium 0,200 0,200 0,300 0,059

Chlorine 0,359 0,150 100,000 Chlorine 0,304 0,150 100,000

Chlorides 0,578 0,400 0,800 Chlorides 0,498 0,400 0,800

ELECTROLYTE BALANCE 200,000 200,000 1.000,000 0,003 ELECTROLYTE BALANCE 207,705 200,000 1.000,000 0,003

www.globalfeed.es

Examining Sodium and Electrolyte Balance (EB) more in depth, when using SOCALPHOS 20/5 compared to the Dicalcium, we can see that each of the nutrients achieve the levels required - per the provision of all the raw materials used in the two formulae.

The case of Na shows, through an analysis of this nutrient provided by each raw material highlighted below, that in the Dicalcium formula, 90% of the Na required comes from salt. Com-pare this with the approximately 73% with the SOCALPHOS 20/5 formula. The Na levels achie-ved in the two formulae both lie within the MIN values necessary.

The Dicalcium formula, where 90% of the Na required comes from salt, means the Chloride level will also be much above the formula with SOCALPHOS 20/5. Thus, having checked the Chloride levels in the two formulae, while both lie within the established MIN and MAX thres-holds, there is a reduction from 0.578% to 0.493% in the SOCALPHOS 20/5 formula. This gives the formula with SOCALPHOS 20/5 a greater digestive stability margin in the challenging situa-tions occasionally encountered by farms.Company GlobalFeed Company GlobalFeed

Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Dicalcium Phosphate Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Socalphos 20/20/5

Date 20/12/2016 Date 20/12/2016

Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 229,799 Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 226,740

Nutrient SODIUM Nutrient SODIUM

Raw material % in solution MP Nutren Contrib. % Raw material % in solution MP Nutren Contrib. %Barley 48,545 0,010 0,004 2,42 Barley 50,432 0,010 0,005 2,52

Soy 47 17,101 0,020 0,003 1,71 Bran 9/22 16,000 0,020 0,003 1,60

Bran 9/22 16,000 0,020 0,003 1,60 Soy 47 15,155 0,020 0,003 1,51

Corn CAN 5,000 0,010 0,000 0,25 Corn CAN 5,000 0,010 0,000 0,25

Wheat CAN 5,000 0,011 0,000 0,27 Wheat CAN 5,000 0,011 0,000 0,27

Lard 2,518 Lard 2,410

Beet Pulp 1,161 0,150 0,001 0,87 Calcium Carbonate 1,286 0,060 0,000 0,38

Calcium Carbonate 1,027 0,060 0,000 0,30 Beet Pulp 1,219 0,150 0,001 0,91

Fat 3/5 1,000 Fat 3/5 1,000Dicalcium Phosphate 0,960 0,100 0,000 0,47 Socalphos 20/5 0,735 0,100 0,000 18,37

Lysine 50 Liq. 0,506 0,070 0,000 0,17 Lysine 50 Liq. 0,595 0,070 0,000 0,20Salt 0,493 36,600 0,180 90,21 Salt 0,404 36,600 0,180 72,86

Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300 Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300

Methionine OH 0,113 Methionine OH 0,133

L-Threonine 0,106 L-Threonine 0,131

Additive 0,160 3,380 0,003 1,69 Additive 0,160 3,380 0,003 1,69

Liquid Phytase 0,010 Liquid Phytase 0,010

0,200 100,00 0,200 100,00

In the area of EB, an analysis of the provision of this nutrient through the raw materials used in each of the two formulae shows that the MIN level required in the formula is achieved with the Dicalcium, while the formula with SOCALPHOS 20/5 more than fulfils the MIN level (thus without restriction costs) with a slightly higher value.

The positive effect of high EB requirements in the formulae for Fowls and Pigs are well known through production results, with improved feeding efficiency. The EB provision from each of the raw materials has also been assessed in databases and nutritional matrices; in all cases, these were calculated based on Na, K and Cl levels, per the Mongin equation (1981).

Although all the raw materials which could supply EB are given values, these are not fre-quently evaluated or contrasted, and in a few cases - such as fishmeal, for example - they are the reason for rejection or restricted use when brought into the factory.

Performing the same analysis undertaken previously with Na on the EB levels from each of the raw materials in the two formulae, we can see that the major difference lies in the percen-tage of soy included - one of the highest EB values among all the ingredients.

Thus, in the Dicalcium formula, Soy raises inclusion by nearly 2% compared to the formula with SOCALPHOS 20/5 to achieve the MIN EB level required, where the basis of the formula with Soy, justification and interest lie principally in the level and quality of the Protein and Amino Acids that it can add to the feed, not its level of EB - high or not.

The availability of SOCALPHOS 20/5 in the formula ensures a guaranteed measurable Na (and, therefore, EB) source linked to its key provision of Digestible Phosphorus. This quality indi-

www.globalfeed.es

rectly optimises the inclusion of the remaining raw materials to provide the nutritional values for which they are known, and not for their EB values.

Company GlobalFeed Company GlobalFeedFormula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Dicalcium Phosphate Formula 400 c: Lactating Sows w/ Socalphos 20/20/5Date 20/12/2016 Date 20/12/2016

Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 229,799 Formula Price (Euros/Tm) 226,740Nutrient ELECTROLYTE BALANCE Nutrient ELECTROLYTE BALANCE

Raw material % in solution MP Nutren Contrib. % Raw material % in solution MP Nutren Contrib. %Barley 48,545 96,339 46,768 23,38 Barley 50,432 96,339 48,682 23,51Soy 47 17,101 534,472 91,400 45,70 Bran 9/22 16,000 324,238 51,878 25,06

Bran 9/22 16,000 324,238 51,878 25,93 Soy 47 15,155 534,472 81,178 39,22Corn CAN 5,000 76,934 3,846 1,92 Corn CAN 5,000 76,934 3,846 1,65

Wheat CAN 5,000 84,458 4,222 2,11 Wheat CAN 5,000 84,458 4,222 2,04Lard 2,518 Lard 2,410

Beet Pulp 1,161 151,144 1,755 0,87 Calcium Carbonate 1,286 40,915 0,526 0,24Calcium Carbonate 1,027 40,915 0,420 0,21 Beet Pulp 1,219 151,144 1,842 0,87

Fat 3/5 1,000 Fat 3/5 1,000Dicalcium Phosphate 0,960 62,902 0,603 0,30 Socalphos 20/5 0,735 2.186,421 16,070 7,73

Lysine 50 Liq. 0,506 18,877 0,100 0,05 Lysine 50 Liq. 0,595 18,877 0,118 0,05Salt 0,493 -159,019 -0,783 -0,39 Salt 0,404 -159,019 -0,642 -0,30

Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300 Premix Sows 0.3% 0,300Methionine OH 0,113 Methionine OH 0,133

L-Threonine 0,106 L-Threonine 0,131Additive 0,160 -212,138 -0,212 -0,10 Additive 0,160 -212,138 -0,212 -0,10

Liquid Phytase 0,010 Liquid Phytase 0,010200,000 100,00 207,705 100,00

The formula evaluated in this study using Dicalcium can be optimised at a similar cost to the formula with SOCALPHOS 20/5 with the inclusion of a raw material not previously considered (Sodium Bicarbonate), with the problems this raises: an extra raw material in the formula, in the procurement logistics, to be handled in the factory, etc.

Conclusions about the use of SOCALPHOS 20/5 compared to DICALCIUM PHOSPHATE (DCP)

• SCP 20/5 provides a greater quantity of digestible P/kilo of product, so a lesser quanti-ty is needed in the formula to fulfil the MIN requirements necessary. A consequence of this is more space to optimise the remaining raw materials with other nutrients and reduce the level of Phosphorus excreted into the environment.

• SCP 20/5 provides Na in a quantity that is measurable and guaranteed. As this is linked toits provision of Digestible P, it is the most economic Na source compared to other raw materials.

• Equally, the high EB provision, for the same reasons as noted for the link with DigestibleP, makes it the most economic source of this nutrient and prevents the remaining raw mate-rials from being adjusted in the optimisation of the formula by a collection of nutrients (Na, K and Cl) which present great variability and do not cleave to the primary interest in the formula.

• Using SCP 20/5 enables Salt inclusion to be minimised, down at or close to the Chloriderestriction threshold, minimising the risks where required.

• In many formulae, SCP 20/5 ensures another raw material (Sodium Bicarbonate) is notused or is only present in a much reduced quantity, meaning SCP 20/5 is always a more eco-nomic source of Na and EB.