Common mistakes using enzymes in poultry nutrition
Dear Piotr, thank you very much for your point of view. It helps me use enzymes correctly, depending on the available substrates contained in the feed. I think that attention should also be paid to the methods of feed enzymes application, which have historically been used in different countries, this is 1) "over the top" of complete feed (for maximum absorption of nutrients) and also 2) "down specification" to reduce the cost of feed. The risk factor from using of the matrix values in the first case will be lower than in the second. The desire of some manufacturers to achieve maximum enzyme matrix values increases the degree of commercial risk. A good methodical technique for determining the real effect of enzymes is model experiments on the effect of enzymes on grain mixtures. I conduct such experiments in the laboratory of our enterprise. In this way, we can compare the effectiveness of various enzymes on various feed rations.
The best way to use an enzyme product would be to know how each bulk ingredient is affected by the product. That prevents us from limiting the choices we have when formulating in changing ingredient markets. We cannot be sure that the enzyme product will provide the same value if we see reducing one energy source or protein source for another when the prices are favorable unless we know how each ingredient will be affected.
In my opinion, companies marketing enzyme products should have a set of nutrient values for each ingredient the user may feed. Without this, we lose the ability to accurately formulate feeds. As bulk ingredient costs change, the formulas change. If more energy is released from maize, we will undervalue maize in a formulation because we fail to give it credit for the additional energy our chosen enzyme product releases. Then, when costs dictate that we replace maize with a suddenly less expensive source of energy and protein, we cannot be sure that we get the same benefit from the enzyme product.
The difficulty is knowing the actual contribution from each ingredient. The fact that the percentages of each bulk ingredient in each diet we use does vary allows us to begin to interpret the results. The only piece of data that we need to determine an enzyme product impact, after feeding, is to know what nutritional values must have been fed to get the observed outcome. Accurate prediction of flock growth from nutrition is the key and can come from accurate growth programs that do that prediction.
Obviously, the amount of energy released from maize in a starter feed cannot be the same as the energy released from maize in a finisher diet. Also, the sum of energy released from the different ingredients must be equal to the energy required to match the growth. So, a series of simultaneous equations are required, finding the matching energy expression that fits the minimum nutritional change that gives the growth.
This is the challenge, and, in my opinion, the results should be expressed and percent change of the initial ingredient values. Now, the ingredient plus its share of enzyme product cost can be fairly evaluated in formulations. Obviously, the formulation cannot contain native products and enzyme enhanced products together as the decision to add the enzyme impacts all ingredients.
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
It is respectfully recalled that according to the results of the experiment using multi-enzyme with barley in the diet of laying hens, the quality of eggs, especially the shell, decreased. Please, if your scientific colleagues have observed such results and scientific articles in their farm or research experiments, please send them to the email below. Thanks
Yaqabfar@yahoo.moshatahe
E.S.E. & INTEC
Hi Everyone. Thanks for addressing the good and the bad about formulating multiple enzymes in the same diet. As a result of the great improvements in Enzymes and other Additives, people like Dr. Frank Ivey with his Broiler Opt, and others who know how to model animals have in effect taken the problem out of the structured Linear Programs that i and others have developed over the last 40 years. And, basically, they have demonstrated that one cannot just put matrix values into the Formulation Program and hope that one gets a "usable solution" let alone a "Better Solution".
In effect we have to change the tools to allow the knowledge to get into the solution with a useable result. The good news is this is relatively easy.
The problem is not the "Better Solution". The problem is integrating your "Better Solution" with the existing Formulation Systems since they do a very good job before and after a solution is arrived at.
Looking back, it comes down to providing a way to get needed data into the matrix, adding a capability to review a solution automatically, and then, keeping a solution that somebody says is a "Better Solution".
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)