Performance enhancement through the use of diformates in broiler
Published:February 1, 2010
By:Helen Behn & Christian Lückstädt
Gastrointestinal diseases pose a serious threat to industrial poultry breeding. Infections are caused by proliferation of naturally occurring intestinal microorganisms and their subsequent translocation to other organs and tissues of the birds. The consequences are a deterioration of feed conversion ratio, an increase in mortality and fnally a reduc- tion in productivity. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) this leads to a markedly increased risk of alimentary toxic infections by consumption of eggs and meat. In the past this hazard was controlled by the preventive use of antibiotics. Since the EU ban on antibiotics in 2006, which at frst led to higher infection rates and lower productivity, new strategies against gastrointestinal diseases in livestock have been developed. One of the new groups of compounds are acidifer. These supplements include organic acids and their salts, including diformates. Recently, a number of stud- ies has proven to enhance nutritional and growth parameters of poultry and thereby economic proftability. In a new study recently conducted at the All-Russian Scientifc Research and Techno- logical Institute of Poultry Breeding (VNITIP) in Moscow the effects of diformate on per- formance parameters of poultry (livestock viability, live weight, feed consumption, feed conversion ratio and digestibility of nutrients) were examined. In order to fnd out the optimal dosage concerning the mentioned parameters, diformate was tested in three concentrations (0.1, 0.3 and 0.5%). For comparison an acid blend, consisting of mainly formic acid and lactic acid, was employed at the dosage of 0.3%. A negative control group received the basic diet without supplement. Each of the fve treatment groups, 0.1% diformate, 0.3% diformate, 0.5% diformate, 0.3% acid-blend and negative con- trol, consisted of 35 1- to 38-day-old birds. On day 26 and 38 after hatching livestock viability, live weight, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio were determined. In an additional digestibility trial use of proteins and nitrogen was examined. Addition of diformate was found to enhance individual live weight with increasing dos- age. By the end of the experiment (day 38) male broiler reached a weight gain of 4.69 to 8.86%, whereas female birds had augmented by 3.89 to 6.99% compared to the control group. Treatment with 0.3% acid-blend resulted only in an increment by 4.39% (both sexes, Fig.1). Regarding feed consumption, diformate induced a reduction by 1.5% (dosage: 0.1%), 3.7% (0.3%) and 2.1% (0.5%). Consequently, feed conversion ratio was clearly improved by the use of diformate (5.4 to 11.0%). In comparison, the acid-blend (0.3%) led only to a reduction in feed consumption and feed conversion ratio by 1.2 and 5.2%, respectively. Altogether diformate turned out to be most effective at a dosage of 0.3%. A dosage of 0.1% diformate still proved to be more effective than the competitive acidifer used at a dosage of 0.3%. The digestibility trial has shown that diformate considerably improves nitrogen use.
Table 1: Mean live weight and feed conversion ratio of broiler on day 38 (and % deviation from control group).
Fig. 1: Live weight of broiler cockerels and chicks in fve different treatment groups on day 38 post-hatch (mean±SD).
Conclusions
The present fndings lead to the conclusion that addition of diformate considerably improves performance parameters of poultry by increasing live weight and improving feed convertion ratio, compared against a negative and a positive control. The best results in respect of these parameters were obtained for a dosage of 0.3% diformate.
Dear Dr. Trifale,
the concentrations of diformate used in the trial were 0.1[percent], 0.3[percent] as well as 0.5[percent] - trial data suggested, that the use 0.3[percent] diformate in broiler was most economic. Diformate has been used in India since late last year and field experience is supporting the aforementioned data.
Dear Mr. Ngyen and Ul Haq,
since phosphoric acid has no direct anti-bacterial effect against pathogenic bacteria, but only a pH decreasing effect its use in poultry is limited. The pH in the proventriculus of a bird is already below 2 - which is low enough for any necessary enzyme action (in pigs the pH may be as high as 4.5... therefore phosphoric acid plays a role there).
The diets used in the trial consists mainly of soybean meal, corn and wheat (ca. 80[percent]), while sunflower cake and fish meal from minor parts (each 5[percent]).
As to the butyrates... they have been found useful especially in the lower digestive tract, while diformates have proven effects from the crop/proventriculus till till the small intestine.
Dear Dr. Ali,
yes - diformates have also been used in western Europe as well as Asia/Australia - for instance at the BARC and other universities in Thailand and at Sydney University. And the general result from those trial is as well an improved weight gain and FCR, as well as reduced mortality rates. The trials have been published at several poultry conference and were made available to the broader public for instance at the Asian Poultry magazine.
Dear Dr. Rehman,
thank you for your supporting words. The trial in question used diformates over the whole life span of broilers - in the mentioned case over a period of 38 days. It is highly suggested to include diformates into the diet during the whole time since pathogenic bacteria, which is a main focus of diformate usage, may re-appear as soon as the effect of the acid salt is gone.
It has been shown furthermore that the continuous use of diformates in poultry shows a clear economic benefit, since the most crucial parameters - weight gain, feed conversion as well as survival rate are improved. It has been demonstrated, for instance in the published trial that the survival rate in diformate treated groups was 100[percent], while the negative control had a mortality rate of 5.7[percent]. Calculating the economic benefit, based on available prices in Europe, leads to the conclusion that the use of diformate in the aformentioned trial has a return of investment ROI of 4.8 - clearly showing the economic impact of the additive.
Combination of Organic acids low pKa value fortified with Potassium Diformate (KDF) 4.50 gm/Kg has given antimicrobial activity effects which depends on the dietary properties of the dissociation kinetics of Organic acids & KDF.
Kirchgessner & Roath et al. have also illustrated that the above combination acts by dissociating in the gut & produces Hydrogen ion – Modifies the pH of GI tract & passes through the cell wall of bacteria, dissociate within the bacterial cytoplasm, increasing the cellular hydrogen ion concentration.
RAAFRES the dietary acidifier has same mode of action and is one of the well accepted dietary Non-Antibiotic Growth Promoter in India & Nepal poultry market.
Dear Dr.Christian Luckstadt,
Thanks for the wonderful article giving all details.I will be thankful to you if you provide details on concentration to be used.
Dear Sir,
Its a nice written article about the use of the diformates in the poultry,I would appreciate if the nutritional profile of the birds under the trial could be mentioned.
Please also let us know how the diformates are technically differentiated from the Butyrates on the basis gut dynamics especially the hepatic.
Overall its very useful
Dear sir,
Thanks for your nice article! Im very interested in using acidifier in animals feed. Some products in recent marketing include acid phosphoric. Acid phosphoric (AP) is usefull for lowing pH in gastrointestine. Author can tell me that where AP can action in gastrointestine, there are any weak points of AP in intestine, limitation of APs dose and why authors product dont include AP. Thank you very much!
Nice article and in a very simple way it has shown the benefits of Diformate.
It would be nice if author can tell economics of diformate vis a vis acidifier and its source.
Dera Sir,
Very nice article. Generally it is believed that use of acidifiers increases body weight and improves FCR and reduces mortality. But some experiments/trials did not support it. This trial was done in Russia. Can we see some other trials in rest of the World?. We will appreciate if author provides some other trials other than Russia.
Best wishes and regards
Dr. Munawar Ali
Recommend
Reply
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.