TOWARDS OPTIMAL USE OF GUT HEALTH SUPPORTING FEED ADDITIVES

Dr. Daniel Ramirez

Gut health

=

Performance

Effective digestion

& absorption

- Nutritional status

- Absorption of feedwater, minerals.

- Fecal consistency Gut mucosa

- Mucus layer

- Epithelium

- GALT

Microbiota

- Complex

composition

- Activity (exc)Effective Immune

system

- GI Barrier

- Mucus production

- HDP production

- IgA activity

Homeostasis

- Normal physiological function

Diet

- Macro micro nutrient

- Additives

- Antinutritional factor

- Indigestible fractions

Gut health is important formaximizing the health, welfare,and performance of poultry.

Defining gut health

“Gut health” could be defined asthe correct interactions amongthese physiological functions.

Functional feed additives can improve intestinal development and function

FFA positively affect microbiota, maximizing poultry health, and growth whilstenhancing the efficiency of feed conversion.

Among feed additives alternatives Precision Delivery Coated Butyrate (PDCB)and some Phytogenic Components (PC) probably represent the best potential toapproach the balance of the gut health ecosystem.

What is butyrate?

salt of naturally occurring short-chain fatty acid

many beneficial effects in the gut

How does butyrate mediate all these effects?

+

-

animal host cell

(e.g. gut epith. cell, immune

cell,...)

bacterium

(e.g. Salmonella)

+

-

Functional feed additives can improve intestinal development and function

12

3

increased secretion of digestive fluids

energy source for liver

villi development

gut empowerment; intestinal barrier

reduction of inflammation

triggers enteric endocrine system

energy source for colonic cells

prevention of colonisation by pathogens

better absorption of water → dryer faeces

Phytogenic feed additives: the secret is in selecting the best molecules aiming at several targets, as good as possible

feed intake

digestion

antibacterial

anti-oxidation

Quorum Sensing

Phytogenic feed additives: the secret is in selecting the best molecules aiming at several targets, as good as possible

Selection of efficacious anti-oxidativecompounds via literature study anddatabase analysis

Mode of action: antibacterial effect

Neg. ctrl AGP APEX

Ec O149 Ec O157 Lb pl Lb casei

1E+00

1E+01

1E+02

1E+03

1E+04

1E+05

1E+06

1E+07

Phytogenic feed additives: Mode of action: Quorum Sensing

A form of bacterial communication dependent on population-density

Phytogenic feed additives: Mode of action: Quorum Sensing

• 2 QS signal systems tested (with Univ. of Ghent)

• bioactive components from botanicals:

tested separately and in mixes,

at concentrations well-below MIC

...

strength of QS signal 1 (%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

no EO

+ EO 1

+ EO 2

+ EO 3

strength of QS signal 2 (%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

no EO

+ EO 1

+ EO 2

+ EO 3

no botanical added

+ botanical 1

+ botanical 2

+ botanical 3

PC + EO core

PC components

shuts down QS!

p < 0.0001

Performance effect of precision delivery coated butyrate ( PDCB) and Phytobiotics

784 day-old male Cobb 500® chicks, 4 treatment groups 7 replicates of 28 birds.

Effect of different concentrations of PDCB 0.25, 0.5, 1 kg/ton

Effect of PDCB + Phytobiotics in the grower and finisher rations, on top of adding PDCB in the starter feed.

Zootechnical parameters measured at: 21,35, 42 days

Material & Mthods

GroupPhases

Pre-starter Starter Growth withdrawal

1 AGP + AA AGP + AA AGP + AA AGP

2 AA AA AA

3 PDCB 1 kg/t + AA PDCB 1 kg/t + AA PDCB 0,5 kg/t + AA PDCB 0,25 kg/t

4 PDCB 1 kg/t + AA PDCB 1 kg/t + AA PC 0,15 kg/t + AA PC 0,15 kg/t

AA - anticoccidiostat

AGP - Growth promoter

Material & Mthods Fa

cilit

ies

Experiment 1 - Figure 1Technical parameters - PDCB levels in starter at 21 day

1291

1297

1318

1273

1250

1260

1270

1280

1290

1300

1310

1320

1330

1-21 (d)

feed intake (FI) FCR Weight (AW)

1.37

1.34

1.33

1.30

1.26

1.28

1.3

1.32

1.34

1.36

1.38

1-21 (d)

943

968

993978

910

920

930

940

950

960

970

980

990

1000

1-21 (d)

P = 0.04 P = 0.05 P = 0.08

NC PDCB 0,50-0-0 PDCB 0,75-0-0 PDCB 1,00-0-0

Experiment 2 - Figure 2Technical parameters - PDCB levels in starter at 42 day

3162

3173

32503218

3100

3120

3140

3160

3180

3200

3220

3240

3260

1-42 (d)

feed intake (FI) FCR Weight (AW)

5219

5245

53025292

5160

5180

5200

5220

5240

5260

5280

5300

5320

1-42 (d)

1.65

1.64

1.63

1.64

1.62

1.625

1.63

1.635

1.64

1.645

1.65

1-42 (d)

P = 0.05

NC PDCB 0,50-0-0 PDCB 0,75-0-0 PDCB 1,00-0-0

Experiment 2 - Figure 3Performance at day 21 - PDCB+BO in grower

943

993

979

999

910920930940950960970980990

10001010

1-21 (d)

feed intake (FI) 21 d FCR (corrected) 21d Weight (AW) 21 d

1291

1299

1304

1313

1280

1285

1290

1295

1300

1305

1310

1315

1-21 (d)

1.42

1.37

1.39

1.37

1.34

1.35

1.36

1.37

1.38

1.39

1.4

1.41

1.42

1.43

1-21 (d)

b a ab a

Control AGP PDCB PDCB+BO

P = 0.05

Experiment 2 - Figure 4Performance at day 21 - PDCB+BO in grower

feed intake (FI) 42 d FCR (Corrected) 42 d Weight (AW) 42 d

3191

3217

3249

3274

3140

3160

3180

3200

3220

3240

3260

3280

3300

1-42 (d)

5227

5163

5280

5396

5000

5050

5100

5150

5200

5250

5300

5350

5400

5450

1-42 (d)

1.64

1.621.62

1.62

1.61

1.615

1.62

1.625

1.63

1.635

1.64

1.645

1-42 (d)

ab b ab a b ab a a

Control AGP PDCB PDCB+BO

Conclusions

An improvement of feed intake at day 42 (p=0.01)

With increasing PDCB inclusion levels, we found an improvement in feed intake(FI) (p=0.04), body weight (BW) (p=0.08) and feed efficiency (FCR) (p=0.05) atday 21,

Better weight gain (p=0.05) at the end of the trial (42d).

The best result on final weight was observed for the treatment combiningPDCB in the starter feed with PC in the grower and finisher rations.

Integral program to prevent and control disease

Particle size

Digestibility macro & micro nutrients

Mycotoxin control

Nutrition

Diagnostics

Prevention (vaccination)

Programas AF

Veterinary medicine

Growth promoters

Prevention

Challenges

Intestinal health

Hygiene

Biosecurity

Vaccination

AF programs

AB reduction in phases

i. 20%

ii. 40%

iii. 60%

Management

Nutrition

Veterinary medicine

Inmune response

Intestinal integrity

Increase in HDP

Microbiome control

Nutrients maximization

(enzymes)