by Madalina Diaconu, Business Development Manager, EW Nutrition GmbH, and Maria Angeles Rodriguez, Gut Health Platform Manager, EW Nutrition GmbH

ABSTRACT
Avian coccidiosis, caused by intracellular protozoan parasites of the genus Eimeria, remains one of the most economically damaging diseases in commercial poultry production, costing the global industry an estimated USD 10–14 billion annually. For decades, disease management relied on seven recognized Eimeria species infecting chickens. However, the formal characterization in 2021 of three previously cryptic species – Eimeria lata, Eimeria nagambie, and Eimeria zaria – has fundamentally altered this landscape. These newly described parasites are pathogenic, capable of compromising bodyweight gain, and critically, they evade immunity induced by all currently available commercial anticoccidial vaccines. This white paper reviews the biology and epidemiology of these emerging species, examines the limitations of conventional control strategies, and presents the scientific rationale for phytogenic compounds as a complementary, resistance-resilient solution. Specific attention is given to the mechanisms of action of saponins, tannins, thymol, cinnamaldehyde, cumin, licorice, and others against Eimeria infection, intestinal inflammation, and secondary pathogen susceptibility.

1. Introduction: A shifting coccidiosis landscape

Coccidiosis, driven by Eimeria spp. infection of the intestinal epithelium, causes morbidity through hemorrhagic or malabsorptive diarrhea, disrupted gut microbiota, and impaired immune responses. Even subclinical infections exert measurable production costs through reduced bodyweight gain, deteriorated feed conversion ratios (FCR), and heightened susceptibility to secondary pathogens – most notably Clostridium perfringens (necrotic enteritis). The disease is ubiquitous: Eimeria oocysts are environmentally resilient, highly reproductive, and transmitted via fecal-oral routes in all commercial production systems.

For more than seven decades, the field recognized seven Eimeria species as the causative agents of avian coccidiosis in chickens: E. acervulina, E. brunetti, E. maxima, E. mitis, E. necatrix, E. praecox, and E. tenella. Each species infects a distinct region of the intestinal tract and produces characteristic pathological signatures. This taxonomy formed the basis for all commercial coccidiosis vaccines and the design of anticoccidial rotation programs.

In 2021, this foundational assumption was overturned. A landmark study by Blake et al. formally named three cryptic species – previously described only as operational taxonomic units (OTUs) x, y, and z – as Eimeria lata, Eimeria nagambie, and Eimeria zaria. This discovery, enabled by next-generation genomic sequencing, has critical implications for every layer of coccidiosis control: diagnostics, vaccination, and pharmacological management.

Economic context
Avian coccidiosis costs the global poultry industry approximately £10.4 billion annually at 2016 prices (Blake et al., 2020). These losses include poor growth performance, treatment costs, increased feed consumption, increased replacement of chicks, and enhanced susceptibility to concurrent infections such as necrotic enteritis.

2. The three new Eimeria species: Biology, pathogenicity, and global spread

2.1 Discovery and formal classification

The three cryptic Eimeria OTUs were first identified through molecular epidemiological surveys in Australia in 2007–2008 (Cantacessi et al., 2008). Initially named OTU-X, OTU-Y, and OTU-Z, these genotypes showed consistent genetic divergence from the seven recognized species but lacked formal biological characterization. Blake et al. (2021), working at the Royal Veterinary College (UK), conducted an exhaustive characterization combining oocyst morphology, pre-patent periods, pathology, and draft genome sequence assemblies. The conclusion was unambiguous: all three OTUs possess sufficient genetic and biological diversity to constitute new species.

The three new species were named:

Eimeria lata n. sp. (formerly OTU-X): Named for its unusually wide oocyst morphology – the broadest average oocyst width of any Eimeria species infecting chickens.

Eimeria nagambie n. sp. (formerly OTU-Y): Named after Nagambie, Victoria, Australia, the location of the first isolate.

Eimeria zaria n. sp. (formerly OTU-Z): Named after Zaria, Nigeria, reflecting the geographic origin of its initial isolation.

Figure 1. Sporulated oocysts of the Eimeria Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) genotypes x, y, and z collected from domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). Photomicrographs of sporulated oocysts are shown for (A) OTUx, (B) OTUy and (C) OTUz. Composite line drawings are shown for (D) OTUx, (E) OTUy and (F) OTUz. RB, residual body; SB, stieda body; PG, polar granule. Scale bars = 10 µm. © 2021 Blake et al., Int J Parasitol. 2021 Jul;51(8):621–634. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2020.12.004

2.2 Pathogenicity and production impact

Experimental infection trials demonstrated that all three new species are capable of compromising broiler bodyweight gain, a direct measure of economic impact. Unlike historically recognized species such as E. acervulina and E. tenella, whose pathological signatures are well-characterized, the intestinal tropism and precise pathological mechanisms of E. lata, E. nagambie, and E. zaria remain under active investigation. Their clinical presentation may overlap with existing species, complicating field diagnosis through standard lesion scoring alone.
The Eimeria-gut microbiota interaction is particularly relevant here. Research has demonstrated that Eimeria infection disrupts intestinal bacterial communities, reducing beneficial taxa and creating dysbiosis conditions that facilitate opportunistic bacterial overgrowth – most critically by C. perfringens. The bidirectional interaction between coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis leads to cumulative economic burdens. However, it remains to be determined whether the newly identified species possess distinct microbiota-modulating profiles.

2.3 Geographic distribution and diagnostic blind spots

Initially considered geographically restricted to the Southern Hemisphere, detection has since expanded significantly. One or more of the three new species have now been confirmed in Australia, multiple sub-Saharan African countries, India, Venezuela, the United States, and – as of 2023 – Europe, with the first reported detection of E. zaria in European broiler flocks (Jaramillo-Ortiz et al., 2023). The heavy reliance of existing diagnostic protocols on oocyst morphology and PCR panels developed for the original seven Eimeria species raises concerns that newly identified species are routinely underdetected in field surveillance.

Critical diagnostic gap
Standard coccidiosis diagnostics – including lesion scoring, oocyst morphology, and many commercial PCR kits – were designed around the seven classical Eimeria species. E. lata, E. nagambie, and E. zaria may circulate undetected in flocks, contributing to unexplained performance losses and vaccine failures. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) targeting 18S rRNA is currently the most reliable identification tool (Blake et al., 2021).

2.4 Vaccine evasion: The central challenge

The most commercially disruptive characteristic of the three new species is their demonstrated ability to evade immunity induced by all currently available commercial anticoccidial vaccines. Live attenuated coccidiosis vaccines, the cornerstone of antibiotic-free coccidiosis control programs, are designed against the original seven species. Experimental challenge studies confirmed that prior vaccination provides no protective immunity against E. lata, E. nagambie, or E. zaria (Blake et al., 2021). This creates a significant vulnerability in integrated coccidiosis control programs, particularly in broiler production systems where vaccination programs are used as the primary long-term resistance management strategy.

The inability of current vaccines to address these new species underscores a critical need for broad-spectrum, mechanism-resilient complementary tools. Phytogenic compounds, acting through multiple simultaneous mechanisms, represent an ideal candidate for this role.

3. Current control strategies and their limitations

3.1 Chemical anticoccidials and ionophores

Chemical anticoccidials (e.g., diclazuril, toltrazuril, amprolium) and ionophore antibiotics (e.g., monensin, salinomycin) remain the primary pharmaceutical tools for coccidiosis control globally. These compounds target specific metabolic or ion transport mechanisms in Eimeria and have historically been highly effective when deployed in rotational shuttle programs. However, decades of continuous use have driven the emergence of resistance across multiple drug classes. Field resistance to monensin, robenidine, salinomycin, maduramicin, and diclazuril has been extensively documented across multiple geographic regions (Ferdji et al., 2022; Flores et al., 2022).

Resistance development occurs through multiple mechanisms: altered cell membrane permeability reducing drug uptake, use of alternative biochemical pathways, mutations at drug target sites, and genetic recombination within Eimeria populations. Crucially, resistance to one drug class does not necessarily confer resistance to compounds with different mechanisms – providing the theoretical basis for rotation programs. However, field conditions, partial compliance, and concurrent use often undermine the protective effects of rotation strategies.

3.2 Vaccines: Effective but incomplete

Live attenuated and live non-attenuated coccidiosis vaccines have represented a major advance in resistance management, offering cycle-by-cycle immunity development without driving pharmacological resistance. In broiler production, their use has grown significantly in recent years, particularly in no-anticoccidial or antibiotic-free production systems. However, as established in Section 2.4, no current commercial vaccine confers immunity against E. lata, E. nagambie, or E. zaria. This gap is not a minor caveat – it means that a vaccinated flock may be fully protected against classical species while remaining completely susceptible to the three newly described ones.

3.3 The regulatory and consumer pressure context

Across the European Union and in growing markets globally, regulatory restrictions on preventive antibiotic use, ionophore limitations in organic systems, and consumer demand for residue-free products have created strong incentives to explore alternatives. The combination of resistance pressure, vaccine limitations against new species, and regulatory trends makes the case for phytogenic integration both scientifically and commercially compelling.

4. Phytogenics as a multi-mechanism solution

4.1 Why phytogenics are relevant for coccidiosis control

Phytogenic compounds – plant-derived bioactive molecules including essential oil components, polyphenols, saponins, tannins, alkaloids, and bitter glycosides – have gained substantial scientific attention as a class of natural feed additives with demonstrated antimicrobial, antiparasitic, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory properties. Their relevance to coccidiosis management is grounded in three complementary properties: (1) direct antiparasitic action against Eimeria oocysts, sporozoites, and intracellular stages; (2) protection and restoration of intestinal mucosal integrity following Eimeria-induced damage; and (3) modulation of host immune responses to improve resilience against both Eimeria and secondary pathogens.

A key advantage of phytogenic compounds over conventional anticoccidials is their multi-target mode of action. Because each active molecule typically acts on multiple biological pathways simultaneously, the probability of resistance development through a single mutation is substantially lower than for single-target drugs. Furthermore, the inclusion of phytogenic blends in programs alongside vaccines or anticoccidials can provide synergistic or additive coverage – particularly relevant now that three new Eimeria species fall outside the protective scope of all available vaccines.

4.2 Compound-specific mechanisms of action

The following section reviews the scientific evidence for eight key phytogenic compounds relevant to coccidiosis control. A summary table is presented at the end of this section.

Saponins

Saponins are amphiphilic glycosides found in diverse plant species including Quillaja saponaria and Yucca schidigera. Their anticoccidial activity is primarily attributable to their capacity to interact with and disrupt lipid bilayer membranes. In the context of Eimeria, this membrane-disrupting action weakens the structural integrity of the parasite’s outer protective layers, rendering it more vulnerable to host immune effectors. Importantly, saponins also impair Eimeria attachment to intestinal epithelial cells, interrupting the invasion cascade. Bafundo et al. (2020) demonstrated that broilers receiving Quillaja/Yucca-derived saponin diets showed significantly reduced oocyst counts and improved weight gain compared to untreated controls challenged with Eimeria spp. Abbas et al. (2012), in a comprehensive botanical review, concluded that saponins significantly reduce both oocyst shedding and intestinal lesion scores, with efficacy approaching that of conventional anticoccidials.

Tannins

Tannins are polyphenolic compounds classified as condensed (proanthocyanidins) or hydrolysable (ellagitannins, gallotannins), found in chestnut, quebracho, and oak, among others. Their antiparasitic action against Eimeria involves protein precipitation at the parasite cell membrane – a non-specific mechanism that does not readily lend itself to resistance development. Tannins also exert strong antioxidant activity, directly reducing oxidative stress in intestinal tissue damaged by Eimeria – a crucial function given that lipid peroxidation is a primary driver of mucosal injury in coccidiosis. Masood et al. (2013) confirmed that tannin supplementation reduced intestinal oxidative stress and improved performance in broilers challenged with Eimeria. Abbas et al. (2012) further established their equivalence to chemical anticoccidials in reducing lesion severity and oocyst output.

Thymol (Thyme, Thymus vulgaris)

Thymol, the principal bioactive phenol of Thymus vulgaris essential oil, has been extensively studied for its anticoccidial properties. In vitro work by Remmal et al. (2013) demonstrated that thymol disrupts oocyst structural integrity and inhibits sporulation at concentrations of ≥2%, with maximal oocyst degeneration rates reaching 96% at 10%. At the level of intracellular parasite development, thyme essential oil was shown to inhibit the first round of schizogony in E. tenella with efficacy comparable to commercial anticoccidial drugs. Beyond direct antiparasitic action, thyme essential oil significantly downregulates pro-inflammatory mediators in Eimeria-challenged systems, reducing immune-mediated intestinal damage without suppressing protective immunity (Felici et al., 2024).

Cinnamaldehyde (Cinnamon, Cinnamomum verum)

Cinnamaldehyde, the principal aldehyde constituent of cinnamon bark, inhibits E. tenella sporozoite invasion of Madin-Darby bovine kidney (MDBK) epithelial cells in vitro, as part of a broader phenolic compound class with documented anti-invasion activity against Eimeria (Sidiropoulou et al., 2020). It reduces oocyst sporulation by approximately 79% in vitro (Remmal et al., 2013). Particularly notable is the synergistic effect between cinnamaldehyde and carvacrol (the active component of oregano oil): when used in combination, they achieve approximately 90% reduction in oocyst viability – substantially superior to either compound alone. This synergism supports the formulation of multi-compound blends. Cinnamaldehyde also demonstrates significant antimicrobial activity against Clostridium perfringens, providing simultaneous protection against the primary secondary pathogen associated with coccidiosis-driven necrotic enteritis.

Cumin (Cuminaldehyde, Cuminum cyminum)

Cumin seed contains cuminaldehyde as its primary bioactive compound, alongside cymene and other phenolic constituents. The anticoccidial relevance of cumin derives from multiple overlapping mechanisms: phenolic compounds interact with Eimeria oocyst membranes in a manner analogous to tannins, disrupting cytoplasmic membrane integrity and causing parasite cell death. Antioxidant properties protect intestinal epithelial cells from oxidative damage following Eimeria invasion. Broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against common poultry pathogens, including C. perfringens, Salmonella spp., and E. coli, addresses the bacterial gateway mechanisms that amplify Eimeria-associated pathology. El-Shall et al. (2022) and the phytochemical coccidiosis control review (El-Shall et al., 2022) confirm cumin among the botanicals with documented anticoccidial and mucoprotective activity.

Licorice (Glycyrrhizin, Glycyrrhiza glabra)

Licorice root, through its primary bioactive compound glycyrrhizin and associated flavonoids (liquiritin, isoliquiritigenin), exerts potent immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects particularly relevant to Eimeria-associated pathology. Glycyrrhizin stimulates T-cell mediated immune responses – the primary adaptive immune mechanism governing protective immunity against Eimeria – while modulating excessive inflammatory cascades that cause collateral intestinal damage. This dual action (immune stimulation + anti-inflammatory) is uniquely valuable in coccidiosis: it supports the development of parasite-specific immunity while limiting tissue destruction. Licorice compounds also support intestinal epithelium repair following Eimeria-induced villous atrophy, contributing to faster restoration of absorptive surface and productive performance. The immunomodulatory profile of licorice makes it particularly relevant as a complement to anticoccidial vaccination programs – supporting the immune priming process against classical species while potentially reinforcing innate defenses against the new, vaccine-evading species.

The right phytogenics can support coccidiosis control

Fig. 1 Lesion scores by intestinal segment. All treatments reduced lesion scores significantly compared to the positive control, but the Phytogenic was the clear winner overall, especially dominant in the caeca (E. tenella). Notably, the phytogenic products outperformed the coccidiostat on total lesion score, which is a strong result, particularly because the coccidiostat struggled against E. tenella in the caeca, where Phytogenic excelled.

Fig. 2 Microbiota recovery by day 18 pi. All four treatment groups performed similarly and dramatically better than the untreated positive control, reducing the dysbacteriosis score by roughly 45–49% compared to the positive control. The differences between the treated groups are minor and likely not statistically significant, meaning the phytogenic products performed on par with the coccidiostat in protecting gut health after Eimeria infection.

4.3 Summary: Phytogenic compound mechanisms at a glance

Compound	Plant Source	Anticoccidial Mechanism	Key Evidence
Saponins	Quillaja, Yucca	Disrupt Eimeria cell membranes; impair attachment to intestinal epithelium; reduce oocyst viability	Allen et al., 1997; Abbas et al., 2012
Tannins	Chestnut, Quebracho, Oak	Protein precipitation; reduction of oocyst shedding; anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity protecting intestinal mucosa	Abbas et al., 2012; Masood et al., 2013
Thymol (Thyme)	Thymus vulgaris	Disrupts oocyst integrity and inhibits sporulation; reduces first round schizogony; downregulates pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IFN-γ)	Remmal et al., 2013; Felici et al., 2024
Cinnamaldehyde	Cinnamomum verum	Inhibits Eimeria sporozoite invasion of intestinal epithelial cells; synergistic with carvacrol; reduces oocyst sporulation by ~79%	Sidiropoulou et al., 2020; Remmal et al., 2013
Cumin (Cuminaldehyde)	Cuminum cyminum	Antiparasitic phenolic compounds interfere with oocyst membrane; antioxidant protection of intestinal epithelium; antimicrobial against secondary bacterial pathogens (NE gateway)	El-Shall et al., 2022; Saeed & Alkheraije, 2023
Licorice (Glycyrrhizin)	Glycyrrhiza glabra	Immunomodulatory activity; stimulates T-cell mediated immunity against Eimeria; anti-inflammatory; supports gut epithelium repair post-infection	El-Shall et al., 2022; Saeed & Alkheraije, 2023

5. Integration into coccidiosis control programs

5.1 Phytogenics in combination with vaccines

The ideal integration model for phytogenics in the context of the new Eimeria species is as a permanent background layer within any coccidiosis control program – regardless of whether that program is vaccine-based, chemical-based, or a shuttle combination. For vaccinated flocks, phytogenics provide complementary activity against E. lata, E. nagambie, and E. zaria – species against which vaccines offer no protection – while supporting the immune priming process for species covered by the vaccine. Their immunomodulatory effects (particularly licorice and thyme) optimize T-cell responses during the vaccination window.

5.2 Phytogenics in chemical anticoccidial programs

In flocks managed with chemical anticoccidials, phytogenics serve a dual function: reducing the parasite load and oocyst environmental contamination (through saponins, tannins, cinnamaldehyde, and anise), and protecting intestinal integrity during chemotherapy-related periods when mucosal recovery is needed. Given the documented resistance issues with current chemical classes, the multi-mechanism action of phytogenic blends provides coverage that complements rather than competes with pharmacological programs.

5.3 Resistance management and sustainability

A defining advantage of multi-component phytogenic blends is their resistance resilience. Because compounds such as saponins, tannins, essential oil phenols, and bitter glycosides act on multiple biological targets simultaneously – membrane integrity, cell adhesion, sporulation, immune activation, oxidative balance – the probability of Eimeria developing resistance to a well-formulated phytogenic blend is fundamentally lower than for single-target anticoccidials. As regulatory pressure on chemical anticoccidials increases globally, particularly in the EU, phytogenic integration offers a scientifically grounded pathway to sustainable, long-term coccidiosis management.

Key message for integrators and veterinarians
The characterization of E. lata, E. nagambie, and E. zaria creates a non-negotiable gap in current vaccine-based control programs. No available commercial vaccine provides protection against these three new species. Phytogenic blends – specifically those combining saponins, tannins, thymol, cinnamaldehyde, and supporting compounds (cumin, licorice, etc.) – offer the only currently available broad-spectrum complementary tool capable of addressing this gap while simultaneously managing drug-resistant classical species.

6. Conclusions

The formal naming of Eimeria lata, Eimeria nagambie, and Eimeria zaria in 2021 represents the most significant taxonomic development in avian coccidiosis in decades. Beyond nomenclature, these new species present concrete operational challenges: they are pathogenic, performance-impairing, capable of global spread, and invisible to all currently available commercial vaccines and most routine diagnostic protocols.

This discovery reinforces the case for moving beyond single-mechanism control strategies. Phytogenic compounds, through their complementary and multi-target mechanisms of action, provide a scientifically validated layer of broad-spectrum coccidiosis management. The compound portfolio reviewed in this paper – saponins, tannins, thymol, cinnamaldehyde, cumin, licorice, etc. – collectively addresses direct parasite suppression, intestinal barrier protection, immune modulation, oxidative stress reduction, and secondary pathogen control. These mechanisms operate independently of vaccine-induced immunity and without the resistance trajectories associated with conventional anticoccidials.

As the global poultry industry adapts to a coccidiosis landscape that now includes ten recognized Eimeria species infecting chickens, phytogenic integration is no longer an optional enhancement – it is a fundamental component of resilient, future-proof flock health management.

For more information on EW Nutrition’s phytogenic solutions supporting coccidiosis control,
contact your EW Nutrition regional representative or visit ew-nutrition.com

References

Abbas, R.Z., Colwell, D.D., Gilleard, J. (2012). Botanicals: an alternative approach for the control of avian coccidiosis. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 68(2), 203–215.

Abbas, R.Z., Iqbal, Z., Blake, D., Khan, M.N., Saleemi, M.K. (2011). Anticoccidial drug resistance in fowl coccidia: the state of play revisited. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 67(2), 337–350.

Bafundo, K.W., Johnson, A.B., Mathis, G.F. (2020). The effects of a combination of Quillaja saponaria and Yucca schidigera on Eimeria spp. in broiler chickens. Avian Diseases, 64(3), 300–304.

Blake, D.P., Knox, J., Dehaeck, B., Huntington, B., Rathinam, T., Ravipati, V., Ayoade, S., Gilbert, W., Adebambo, A.O., Tiambo, C.K., Tomley, F.M. (2020). Re-calculating the cost of coccidiosis in chickens. Veterinary Research, 51, 115.

Blake, D.P., Marugan-Hernandez, V., Tomley, F.M. (2021). Spotlight on avian pathology: Eimeria and the disease coccidiosis. Avian Pathology, 50(3), 209–213.

Blake, D.P., Vrba, V., Xia, D., Jatau, I.D., Spiro, S., Nolan, M.J., Underwood, G., Tomley, F.M. (2021). Genetic and biological characterisation of three cryptic Eimeria operational taxonomic units that infect chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). International Journal for Parasitology, 51(8), 621–634.

Cantacessi, C., Riddell, S., Morris, G.M., Doran, T., Woods, W.G., Otranto, D., Gasser, R.B. (2008). Genetic characterization of three unique operational taxonomic units of Eimeria from chickens in Australia based on nuclear spacer ribosomal DNA. Veterinary Parasitology, 152(3–4), 226–234.

El-Shall, N.A., Abd El-Hack, M.E., Albaqami, N.M., Khafaga, A.F., Taha, A.E., Swelum, A.A., El-Saadony, M.T., Salem, H.M., El-Tahan, A.M., AbuQamar, S.F., El-Tarabily, K.A., Elbestawy, A.R. (2022). Phytochemical control of poultry coccidiosis: a review. Poultry Science, 101(1), 101542.

Felici, M., Tugnoli, B., De Hoest-Thompson, C., Piva, A., Grilli, E., Marugan-Hernandez, V. (2024). Thyme, oregano, and garlic essential oils and their main active compounds influence Eimeria tenella intracellular development. Animals, 14(1), 77.

Ferdji, F., Zahraoui-Mehadji, M., Baazizi, R., Meghit-Boumediene, K. (2022). Anticoccidial drug resistance in Eimeria field isolates from broiler farms in western Algeria. Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports, 32, 100733.

Flores, M.I., Saldana, B., Orozco, M.M., Quijada, N.M., Bersosa, F., Mateo, E. (2022). Anticoccidial resistance to chemical compounds and ionophores in Eimeria field isolates from commercial broiler farms. Poultry Science, 101(11), 102180.

Hailat, A.M., Abdelqader, A.M., Gharaibeh, M.H. (2024). Efficacy of phyto-genic products to control field coccidiosis in broiler chickens. International Journal of Veterinary Science, 13(3), 266–272.

Jaramillo-Ortiz, J.M., Burrell, C., Adeyemi, O., Werling, D., Blake, D.P. (2023). First detection and characterisation of Eimeria zaria in European chickens. Veterinary Parasitology, 323, 109857.

Masood, S., Abbas, R.Z., Iqbal, Z., Mansoor, M.K., Sindhu, Z.U.D., Zia, M.A., Khan, J.A. (2013). Role of natural antioxidants for the control of coccidiosis in poultry. Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 33(4), 401–407.

Mesa-Pineda, C., Navarro-Ruiz, J.L., Lopez-Osorio, S., Chaparro-Gutierrez, J.J., Gomez-Osorio, L.M. (2021). Chicken coccidiosis: from the parasite lifecycle to control of the disease. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 8, 787653.

Remmal, A., Achahbar, S., Bouddine, L., Chami, F., & Chami, N. (2013). Oocysticidal effect of essential oil components against chicken Eimeria oocysts. International Journal of Veterinary Medicine: Research & Reports, 2013, 599816.

Saeed, Z., Alkheraije, K.A. (2023). Botanicals: a promising approach for controlling cecal coccidiosis in poultry. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 10, 1157633.

Sidiropoulou, E., Skoufos, I., Marugan-Hernandez, V., Giannenas, I., Bonos, E., Aguiar-Martins, K., Lazari, D., Blake, D.P., Tzora, A. (2020). In vitro anticoccidial study of oregano and garlic essential oils and effects on growth performance, fecal oocyst output, and intestinal microbiota in vivo. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 7, 420.

The post Beyond the classic seven: New Eimeria species in poultry – and the phytogenic solution appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Choosing the right strategy

During global client visits, I frequently observe that the primary objective of a process is disconnected from the subsequent steps and final actions. Choosing a strategy is sometimes done paradoxically – like putting worn-out winter tires on a vehicle just because they are cheap and available in your garage, and then attempting to race in the Paris-Dakar rally. To succeed, you must choose the right race or use the proper equipment; anything else is a waste of time and energy without meaningful results. Let’s examine heat treatment and Salmonella control in feed processing as a prime example.

Moisture is not merely a percentage point in the final product; it is a fundamental component of high-quality feed. While much has been written about its influence on pellet quality, energy efficiency, and starch gelatinization, its role extends much further. Moisture is one of the most critical parameters influencing the effectiveness of Salmonella control in feed manufacturing. Its impact is observed across multiple stages, including thermal treatment, chemical control using organic acids, and post-processing stability during storage and handling.

Thermal processing and microbial resistance

From a thermal processing perspective, moisture directly affects the heat resistance of Salmonella. In low-moisture environments, such as dry feed (10–11% moisture), Salmonella cells exhibit significantly increased thermal resistance. This is primarily because reduced moisture stabilizes cellular structures and limits heat-induced damage. As demonstrated by Gautam et al. (2020), decreasing moisture leads to increased survival of Salmonella during heat exposure. Consequently, higher temperatures or longer retention times are required to achieve equivalent microbial reduction in dry feed.

In contrast, the presence of moisture – especially in the form of steam during conditioning – enhances heat transfer and increases microbial susceptibility. Coe et al. (2022) showed that effective reductions (>6 log₁₀) of Salmonella in feed could be achieved under hydrothermal conditions, confirming that temperature, moisture, and time must be considered together. Moisture facilitates protein denaturation within bacterial cells and disrupts membrane integrity, significantly improving the lethality of heat treatment.

The role of organic acids

Moisture also plays a key role in the efficacy of organic acids used for Salmonella control. Organic acids act primarily through their undissociated form, which penetrates bacterial cell membranes. This mechanism is highly dependent on the presence of water. Liquid acids, already in an aqueous phase, are immediately active and capable of rapid antimicrobial action. Powder acids, on the other hand, require moisture for dissolution, diffusion, and activation. Under dry conditions, their antimicrobial effect is delayed or reduced; however, in conditioned feed, they can approach the efficacy of liquid acids.

When comparing powder versus liquid acids, it is important to distinguish between immediate efficacy in feed hygiene and biological efficacy in the bird. Liquid acids are typically more effective for rapid feed decontamination because they distribute more readily and do not require the same degree of moisture activation. Powder acids and salts may be less aggressive, easier to handle, and more stable during storage, providing a longer-lasting effect against recontamination. However, their performance depends heavily on feed moisture, conditioning, and release characteristics.

In the bird, protected or coated acids may outperform free liquid acids in later gut segments because they are designed to survive the upper digestive tract. Therefore, the definition of ‘better’ depends on the target: surface/feed kill, residual feed hygiene, or gut modulation. Direct comparative evidence remains limited, so this distinction should be viewed as a mechanistic interpretation rather than a universal ranking.

Balancing hygiene and nutritional quality

The interaction between heat treatment and organic acids also affects broiler performance. Research by Goodarzi Boroojeni et al. indicates that thermal processing severity changes nutrient digestibility. Their work shows that harsh conditioning can reduce ileal nutrient digestibility, while organic acid inclusion can improve early feed efficiency and help maintain performance. This is a vital practical point: the most aggressive hygienization strategy is not necessarily the best biological strategy. A feed mill can reduce microbial risk but may lose nutritional value if the thermal load is excessive.

Additionally, moisture improves the distribution and penetration of acids into microenvironments where bacteria may be protected, such as within dust particles or organic matrices. However, excessive moisture can dilute acids and reduce their local concentration. As in many aspects of processing, balance is the key.

Post-process hygiene and recontamination

Reviews of Salmonella in feed manufacturing emphasize that even heat-treated feed may become contaminated again via dust, coolers, conveyors, or storage. While moisture and heat determine the success of the initial ‘kill step,’ post-process hygiene determines whether those gains are maintained. This is why chemical control measures are usually discussed as complements to – not replacements for – hydrothermal processing and mill hygiene.

Practical conclusions

Moisture acts as both an enabler and a risk factor. It enhances heat and acid efficacy during processing but can increase microbial risk if not properly managed after production. Effective Salmonella control requires an integrated approach. The research supports three practical conclusions:

• Moisture significantly enhances the effectiveness of heat treatment; dry feed protects Salmonella and increases its thermal resistance.
• Moisture influences acid efficacy, with powder forms being more moisture-dependent than liquid forms for rapid action.
• Organic acids can support animal performance, particularly body weight gain and feed efficiency.

With products like Surf-Ace, we can achieve increased pellet output, improved conditioning, enhanced durability of the pelleted feed, reduced fines formation, and improved overall quality of the final feed product. However, the best feed hygiene strategy is not to rely on one tool alone, but to also integrate controlled moisture, appropriate thermal treatment, organic acid application, and strict post-pellet hygiene into a single cohesive system. We just need to select the right tools to achieve the results we want.

References

Abd El-Ghany, W. A. (2024). Applications of organic acids in poultry production: An updated and comprehensive review. Agriculture, 14(10), 1756. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14101756

Coe, N., Wei, S., Little, C., & Shen, C. (2022). Thermal inactivation of Salmonella surrogate, Enterococcus faecium, in mash broiler feed pelleted in a university pilot feed mill. Poultry Science, 104(5), 104998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2025.104998

Gautam, M., Lian, K., Jin, Y., Steinbrunner, P., & Tang, J. (2020). Water activity influence on the thermal resistance of Salmonella in soy protein powder at elevated temperatures. Food Control, 113, 107160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107160

Goodarzi Boroojeni, F., Mader, A., Knorr, F., Vahjen, W., & Zentek, J. (2014). The effect of different thermal processing methods and carbohydrate sources on performance, nutrient digestibility and the intestinal microbiota of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 93(5), 1152–1162. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2013-03632

Polycarpo, G. V., Burbarelli, M. F., Carão, A. C., Merseguel, C. E., Dadalt, J. C., Magalhães, R., … & Albuquerque, R. (2017). Effects of organic acids, probiotics and antibiotics on performance, gastrointestinal pH, and intestinal morphology of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 96(1), 127–134. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew270

Tomičić, Z., Čabarkapa, I., Čolović, R., Đuragić, O., & Tomičić, R. (2019). Salmonella in the feed industry: Problems and potential solutions. Journal of Agronomy, Technology and Engineering Management, 2(1), 130–139.

Van Immerseel, F., Russell, J. B., Flythe, M. D., Gantois, I., Timbermont, L., Pasmans, F., … & Ducatelle, R. (2006). The use of organic acids to combat Salmonella in poultry: A mechanistic explanation of the efficacy. Avian Pathology, 35(3), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/03079450600711045

The post The influence of moisture on salmonella control in feed processing appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Every week, a new story promises to change how we eat. Lab-grown steaks. Vertical farms fed by LED lights. Cricket flour. The algae revolution. Regenerative everything.

Meanwhile, somewhere in Iowa, a farmer is managing soil drainage at 4 a.m. In the Yangtze River Delta, flooded paddy fields are being leveled by laser-guided equipment. In the Sahel, sorghum is being harvested by hand under brutal heat. In the Netherlands, greenhouse engineers are coaxing eight tomato harvests a year from hydroponic systems. Such professionals, such practices are, collectively, the reason 8 billion people ate today.

How we got here, and why we cannot go back

The density problem nobody talks about

In his 2024 book How to Feed the World, Czech-Canadian professor and researcher Vaclav Smil notes that, across 300 forager societies that persisted into the 19th and 20th centuries, the mean population density was 0.25 persons per square kilometer.¹ The most productive forager groups, those with access to salmon runs or seal hunting on Pacific coastlines, could reach just above one person per square kilometer. By contrast, intensive agricultural systems in southern China during the Qing dynasty supported more than 500 people per square kilometer of farmland.¹ Contemporary industrial agriculture can support between 500-900.

In Smil’s analysis, agriculture is not slightly more efficient at feeding people than foraging. Agriculture is between 500 and 2,000 times more efficient than foraging.

The thought experiment Smil runs through disposes of several popular fantasies at once, including those in which humans go back to a primitive way of eating. For instance, an adult human eating like a chimpanzee (roughly 80 percent fruit by mass) would need four to five kilograms of ripe fruit daily, requiring hours of foraging and providing almost no fat or protein.¹ To supply just the European Union’s 450 million people with adequate protein via this dietary route would require more than half a billion tons of figs per year, roughly 400 times the entire 2020 global fig harvest.¹ The chimp model, like other primitive models (whether purely foraging or hunting or a mixed model), cannot scale.

In other words, in a world currently trying to feed 8.3 billion people, the transition to agriculture cannot be undone.

The rule of 20: Why we eat so few plants

One of the more counterintuitive facts in food systems science is how narrow our dietary base actually is. Botanists have classified nearly 400,000 species of vascular plants. Roughly 12,000 of those are grasses capable of producing nutritious seeds. Of these, humanity has domesticated a tiny fraction. Just 20 plant species account for 75 percent of all annually harvested crops by weight. Two of those species, rice and wheat, alone supply 35 percent of global food energy.¹

This is not a failure of agricultural imagination but the result of stringent selection criteria that operated over thousands of years. Smil calls these criteria the “entry requirements” for staple crops: fast maturation, high yield, long shelf life, resistance to pests, and high energy density. Wheat, for example, contains roughly 350 kilocalories per 100 grams. Tomatoes contain fewer than 20 kcal/100g. Wheat is 18 times more energy-dense per unit weight.¹

The early civilizations that independently discovered the cereal-legume combination (corn and beans in the Americas, rice and soybeans in Asia, wheat and lentils in the Middle East) were solving an amino acid optimization problem without knowing it. Cereals are low in the essential amino acid lysine. Legumes are high in it. Together, they provide a complete protein profile. The world’s great cuisines, from Mexican rice and beans to Japanese miso soup over rice, are not accidents. They are dietary solutions that natural selection, mediated through human survival and culture, arrived at over millennia.¹

What the economy doesn’t count

The GDP illusion

In standard economic accounting, agriculture contributes roughly 1 to 4 percent of GDP in developed countries and somewhat more in developing ones. This number is cited constantly as evidence that farming is a residual sector, economically marginal, safely neglected in favor of “shinier” industries.

Smil dismantles this framing methodically. When you add food processing, food manufacturing, beverages, food retail, and food service, the food system in the United States accounts for approximately 5 percent of GDP and more than 10 percent of total employment.¹ But even this number, broad as it is, underestimates the true scale, because it fails to capture the full infrastructure dependency: the fuel and energy consumed by agricultural machinery, the chemical industry built to supply fertilizer, the logistics networks dedicated to food transport and cold chain management, and the healthcare costs tied to diet-related disease.

When Smil attempts a full-system accounting of global food, including production, processing, transportation, wholesale, retail, storage, and consumption, he concludes that the food system’s true share of global economic activity is on the order of 25 to 30 percent of respective totals, with standard economic accounts attributing less than 5 percent representing “grossly inaccurate and highly misleading quantifications.”¹

The energy picture is similarly startling. Smil calculates that the global food system consumes between 20 and 25 percent of the world’s annual primary energy supply.¹ This includes the energy to grow, harvest, process, refrigerate, transport, package, cook, and dispose of food. It is the single largest category of energy use in human civilization, larger than personal transportation, larger than industrial manufacturing of most goods, and yet it rarely appears in climate policy discussions with the prominence its scale demands.

Smil offers one striking comparison that has only sharpened since his original analysis. The global smartphone market in 2024 generated approximately $441 billion in wholesale revenue, calculated from approximately 1.24 billion units shipped at a record average selling price of $356.³⁴ In that same year, the global wheat harvest, some 799 million tons, was worth approximately $215 billion at reference export prices, and the global rice harvest of roughly 541 million tons was worth approximately $318 billion.^{32 33} Combined, just these two crops generated an estimated $533 billion, roughly 20 percent more than the entire global smartphone market. Two crops, grown on a fraction of Earth’s farmland, produced economic value that exceeds the most ubiquitous consumer technology device in human history.

Revolutions usually come from empty stomachs

A history lesson worth remembering

The historical relationship between food insecurity and political instability is one of the most robustly documented relationships in social science. The French Revolution of 1789 was preceded by catastrophic grain harvests in 1788. Bread prices in Paris in early 1789 consumed up to 88 percent of a worker’s daily wage.² The Arab Spring of 2010-2011 was triggered, at least in part, by a spike in global food commodity prices. Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian street vendor whose self-immolation catalyzed a regional uprising, was a food vendor who had his produce confiscated.³

The research is consistent. A 2011 preprint study published by Marco Lagi and colleagues at the New England Complex Systems Institute found that global food price spikes, as measured by the FAO Food Price Index, were a consistent precursor to social unrest and political instability events across multiple continents.³ A 2015 paper in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics extended this analysis, finding statistically significant relationships between cereal price levels and social unrest.⁴

The baseline condition for social order is that people have access to food. Everything else, including the liberal democratic institutions, the tech economies, and the climate negotiations that dominate contemporary policy attention, depends on that foundation being intact. Smil makes this point in structural rather than historical terms. When he asks whether smartphones or food matter more, the answer is obvious to him: “A world without smartphones would be poorer and less convenient. A world without food would not exist.”¹

The 9%

According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, approximately 733 million people, roughly 9 percent of the global population, were undernourished in 2023.⁵ This is not primarily a production problem. As Smil notes and the FAO confirms, global food production averages around 3,000 kilocalories per person per day, which is substantially above the roughly 2,500 kilocalories required by an average active adult.¹⁵ The world produces enough calories to feed everyone.

The problem is access, poverty, and distribution. Hunger is a political economy failure, as price spikes hit the poor first and hardest. But if global food production fell by 10 percent, the 9 percent who are currently undernourished would not be the only ones suffering. Supply shocks ripple through markets and a globalized world does not allow for compartmentalized impact as much as it used to.

The real environmental cost: Agriculture and alternatives

Some immediate problems have immediate solutions

Agriculture accounts for approximately 72 percent of global freshwater withdrawals.¹ Cropland and permanent pastures together cover about 36 percent of non-glaciated land.¹ The food system is responsible for approximately 34 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, based on the most comprehensive analysis available.⁶ These figures are often presented as indictments. They should instead be understood as measures of necessity. The question is not “why does food production use so much?” but “what would we use it on instead, and would that work?”

The FAO’s global assessment of livestock’s climate impact, the famous 2006 report Livestock’s Long Shadow, attributed 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions to livestock. A revised methodology in 2013, applying the same accounting framework used for other sectors, reduced this figure to approximately 14.5 percent.⁷

The nitrogen story is more nuanced. Smil notes that global nitrogen use efficiency (the share of applied fertilizer that ends up in harvested crop rather than escaping to air or water) averages around 40 percent globally, and has been falling in intensively farmed regions.¹ In China, over-fertilization has driven efficiency from 37 percent down to 29 percent, with the difference escaping as nitrous oxide (a potent greenhouse gas), ammonia (an air pollutant), and nitrates (which contaminate groundwater and create coastal dead zones).¹ This is a genuine problem with practical and affordable solutions: better timing of fertilizer application, matching fertilizer type to soil need, and precision agriculture technologies that reduce over-application.

The problems of industrial agriculture are, to a large extent, engineering problems. They have technical solutions that can be implemented incrementally, at scale, within existing agricultural systems. They do not require abandoning food production as we know it; they require improving it.

What “organic” actually means at scale

The appeal of organic farming as an environmental solution is real but its limits are underappreciated. A 2012 meta-analysis in Nature by Seufert and colleagues found that organic farming produces, on average, 25 percent lower yields than conventional farming across all crops, with the gap widening to 43 percent below conventional yields for some cereal crops.^x8 A subsequent 2017 analysis in Agronomy for Sustainable Development by Lesur-Dumoulin and colleagues examining more than 50 studies found yield gaps of 19 to 25 percent, with significant variation by crop and region.^x9

The implication is straightforward. Feeding the current global population on fully organic agriculture would require converting an additional 16 to 30 percent of the world’s remaining non-agricultural land to farmland, in order to compensate for lower yields.^x10 The biodiversity loss from that land conversion would likely exceed the biodiversity gains from reduced pesticide use on existing farmland. This does not make organic farming in any way bad, it simply makes it a context-specific tool instead of a global solution.

Smil notes that in the centuries before synthetic fertilizers, when all farming was “organic” by definition, 80 percent of people worked in farming, doing physically exhausting work for marginal returns. The “liberation” of the majority of humanity from agricultural labor, one of the most profound quality-of-life improvements in history, was made possible by the Haber-Bosch process, the synthesis of ammonia from atmospheric nitrogen, invented in 1913. Without synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, global crop yields would fall by roughly 40 to 50 percent, and roughly half of the current human population could not be fed on existing farmland.^x11

The alternatives don’t add up

Cultured meat: Promising, not a solution

The first cultured beef burger was produced in 2013 in the Netherlands at an estimated cost of $330,000.¹ By 2020, Singapore approved the first commercial sale of cultured chicken nuggets, produced by Eat Just, at a price point still far above commodity chicken. By 2021, total investment in the sector had reached approximately $2 billion.¹

The fundamental challenge is not biological but a matter of thermodynamics. Cultured meat production requires maintaining cells in a growth medium at controlled temperature and pH, with continuous oxygen supply, nutrient input, and waste removal. A 2023 preprint study by Risner and colleagues at UC Davis found that, under current production processes, the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of cultured beef could actually be higher than conventional beef over a 1,000-year time horizon, because the production of growth media requires large amounts of purified water and energy-intensive pharmaceutical-grade inputs.^x12

The energy demand is particularly problematic. A 2019 analysis in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems by Lynch and Pierrehumbert (Oxford) found that cultured meat’s climate advantage over cattle depends heavily on whether energy production is decarbonized. Because cultured meat emissions are almost entirely CO₂ (which accumulates indefinitely) rather than methane, which breaks down within a decade, the long-term warming impact of cultured meat can exceed that of cattle under scenarios of continued high consumption. The energy advantage of cultured meat over monogastrics (pigs and poultry) is marginal at best and may reverse under realistic production conditions.”¹³

None of this means cultured meat has no future. It may eventually serve specific markets, particularly as a supplement to conventional production in regions where land is extremely constrained. But Smil’s verdict is clear: it is currently “pilot scale” technology, commercially unproven at mass market pricing, and it cannot meaningfully contribute to feeding up to 10 billion people in the next two to three decades.¹

The vegan transition?

Beef is by far the largest emitter of CO₂ equivalent per kilogram of protein, compared to chicken or pork.¹⁴ A diet shift from beef to other proteins in high-income countries would measurably reduce the food system’s climate impact.

But Smil flags an important caveat that often goes unmentioned in advocacy for plant-based diets: mass adoption of veganism in wealthy countries, if it leads to increased consumption of out-of-season fruits, nuts, avocados, and specialty protein crops, may not reduce and could even increase total environmental pressure.¹ Almonds require approximately 12 liters of water per nut.¹⁵ Avocados, with their supply chains running from Mexico to Europe, have water footprints of approximately 320 liters per fruit and contribute to deforestation in growing regions.¹⁶

There is also a structural argument that rarely gets made: production animals serve functions beyond meat (and not even mentioning milk or eggs). Approximately 57 percent of current global livestock feed consists of materials that are not edible by humans: crop residues, grass from land unsuitable for cropping, and food processing byproducts such as oilseed cakes, bran, and distillers’ grains.¹⁷ Animals convert non-human-edible biomass into high-quality protein and fat. This is not waste but efficiency.

What Would Actually Work

First target waste

Global food waste amounts to approximately 1,000 kilocalories per person per day, roughly one-third of total food production.

The FAO estimates that approximately one-third of all food produced for human consumption, roughly 1.3 billion tons per year, is lost or wasted annually.¹⁸ Losses occur throughout the supply chain, from post-harvest spoilage in developing countries (where cold chain infrastructure is inadequate) to consumer behavior and retail overproduction in wealthy ones. The environmental cost of this waste is itself enormous: the production of food that is ultimately not eaten accounts for approximately 8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.¹⁹

The N fix that is already possible

Improving global nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) from its current 40 percent average to 60 to 65 percent, a target achievable through existing precision agriculture technologies (as mentioned before), would reduce the amount of synthetic nitrogen required to produce the current food output by roughly a third.²⁰ This single change would decrease nitrous oxide emissions (which are 273 times more potent than CO₂ over a 100-year timescale as a greenhouse gas, according to AR6, 2021 ²⁸), reduce freshwater nitrate contamination, and shrink coastal dead zones.

The technologies required are not exotic. Split nitrogen application (applying fertilizer in multiple smaller doses timed to crop uptake rather than one large dose at planting) can increase NUE by 15 to 20 percent with no change in yield.²¹ Soil testing and variable rate application technology, where GPS-guided equipment applies different fertilizer rates across a field based on measured soil nutrient levels, can improve NUE by a further 10 to 15 percent.²² These are available now, at commercially viable cost, for large-scale farming operations.

The barrier is not technical but rather economic and behavioral: fertilizer is cheap relative to its yield benefit, so farmers have limited financial incentive to apply it precisely. Policy tools, whether taxes on nitrogen over-application, payments for NUE improvements, or tighter limits on fertilizer application near waterways, could close this gap.

Meat mix and moderation

Smil estimates that approximately one-third of global cereal production and two-thirds of the US grain harvest are currently fed to animals.¹ Feedlot beef carries a feed conversion ratio of roughly 30 kilograms of feed per kilogram of edible product at the high end.¹ Poultry and pork convert feed to protein far more efficiently, and pasture-raised ruminants on land unsuitable for cropping represent a different calculation entirely.

The case for moderating high-end beef consumption in wealthy countries rests primarily on efficiency and emissions, not on the nutritional dispensability of meat as a food category. Meat, including beef, is a nutritionally dense and difficult-to-replicate protein source. It provides all essential amino acids in highly bioavailable form, along with heme iron, which is absorbed at rates of 15 to 35 percent compared to 2 to 20 percent for non-heme iron from plant sources, as well as zinc, vitamin B12, selenium, and conditionally essential compounds such as creatine and carnitine that are absent or negligible in unfortified plant foods.²⁹ For populations in low- and middle-income countries where protein deficiency, iron deficiency, and micronutrient gaps remain widespread public health problems, the argument for reducing meat consumption requires a different cost-benefit analysis than it does in the United States or Northern Europe, where the concern is overconsumption rather than inadequacy.

The appropriate policy lever for high-income countries is therefore not elimination of meat categories but a shift in the composition of meat consumption toward more efficient and lower-emissions sources (more poultry and pork, less feedlot beef) while maintaining total protein adequacy. This is consistent with both the environmental evidence and updated dietary guidelines in major consuming nations. A 2016 analysis by Springmann and colleagues at Oxford, published in PNAS, found that transitioning toward diets in line with standard dietary guidelines could reduce global mortality by 6 to 10 percent and food-related greenhouse gas emissions by 29 to 70 percent compared with a 2050 reference scenario. ³⁰ A subsequent 2018 modelling study by the same group in Nature confirmed that the dietary-guidelines scenario alone (without requiring full elimination of animal products) achieves a 29 percent reduction in food-related GHG emissions relative to projected baseline consumption.²³ The gains are concentrated in high-income countries, and the modelling explicitly notes that applying the same dietary shift logic to low-income countries would in several cases increase land and water use rather than reduce it.³¹

Smil’s preferred framing holds: the goal is meat moderation and mix optimization, not categorical elimination.

What happens to everything else if the food system fails?

The answer is: everything collapses. Food insecurity at scale produces predictable cascades: political instability, refugee flows, conflict over resources, public health crises, and the breakdown of governance institutions that depend on social legitimacy. The Arab Spring, which reshaped the politics of a continent (and arguably the world), was triggered in part by a global food price spike following the 2010 Russian wheat export ban and droughts in major grain-producing regions.³

By contrast, the collapse of the smartphone market, while economically painful, would likely not produce famine, mass migration, or state failure. The collapse of social media platforms, though consequential for public discourse, would not endanger human life. The collapse of the global financial system, as catastrophic as the 2008 crisis demonstrated it could be, is survivable in ways that the collapse of food production is not.

The world needs to feed 9.7 billion people in 2050, according to the UN medium-population projection.²⁴ The cultured meat industry cannot scale to meaningful market share within that timeframe under any realistic projection. Precision nitrogen management can, and is already beginning to, because it requires only incremental adoption of existing technology by existing farmers working existing land.

The nutritional transition that high-income countries have largely completed, from adequate calories to excess calories to dietary choice, is not yet available to much of the world’s population. Agricultural development policy that ignores this gradient would impose wealthy-world concerns on people or categories for whom adequate nutrition remains an unsolved problem.

Sustainability discourses must get priorities right

Food production is the prerequisite for everything else. Applying regulatory pressure to it without carefully calibrating the effects on output, price, and access is different in kind from applying regulatory pressure to other sectors. When a factory closes due to regulatory non-compliance, workers lose jobs and consumers pay more for a product. When a region’s agricultural capacity declines due to poorly designed policy, people go hungry.

The European Union’s Farm to Fork strategy, adopted in 2020, proposed reducing synthetic pesticide use by 50 percent and synthetic fertilizer use by 20 percent, while increasing organic farmland to 25 percent of total agricultural area, all by 2030.²⁵ These are admirable environmental goals. But a 2021 analysis by Beckman and colleagues at the USDA Economic Research Service found that full implementation of the Farm to Fork targets would reduce EU agricultural output by 7 to 12 percent and increase consumer food prices by 5 to 11 percent.²⁶ A JRC (Joint Research Centre of the European Commission) report from the same year found that global adoption of Farm to Fork-style policies would actually increase GHG emissions by up to 6 percent, because production displaced from Europe would move to regions with less efficient farming systems and weaker environmental controls.²⁷

Agricultural environmental policy is essential; so is designing it carefully, with quantitative impact assessment, realistic timelines, and protections for the most vulnerable consumers.

What actually reduces food system emissions

The research literature on food system decarbonization converges on a consistent set of effective interventions, none of which involve dismantling existing agricultural production:

Reducing food waste. A 30 percent reduction in food loss and waste globally would reduce food system GHG emissions by roughly 8 to 10 percent.¹⁹ This is achievable through infrastructure investment (cold chains in developing countries), behavioral change (consumer education in wealthy ones), and regulatory reform (relaxing cosmetic standards for produce that create waste at the retail level).

Sustainable diets in high-income countries with a smart mix of protein sources, including poultry, pork, legumes, and dairy. Agriculture systems, including livestock production, should indeed operate at the lowest emissions level possible and with reduced antibiotic use to protect the environment, animals, and ultimately humans.

Improving agricultural productivity in low-income countries, particularly sub-Saharan Africa. Smil notes that average nitrogen application rates in sub-Saharan Africa are approximately 3 kilograms per hectare, compared to 50 kilograms in China and 30 kilograms in Europe.¹ Increasing yields in Africa to levels achievable with modest fertilizer application and better seed varieties would allow the same food output from less land, reducing pressure on forests and biodiversity.

Improving nitrogen use efficiency in high-input farming systems through the technologies described earlier in the article.

None of these interventions require a technological revolution. They require investment, policy reform, and the political will to treat food production as the strategic priority it is.

References

1. Smil, V. (2024). How to Feed the World. Viking/Penguin Random House. (US edition 2025.)

2. Labrousse, E. (1944). La crise de l’économie française à la fin de l’Ancien Régime et au début de la Révolution. Presses Universitaires de France. Cited in McPhee, P. (2012). Liberty or Death: The French Revolution. Yale University Press.

3. Lagi, M., Bertrand, K.Z., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2011). The food crises and political instability in North Africa and the Middle East. New England Complex Systems Institute Preprint, arXiv:1108.2455. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1108.2455

4. Bellemare, M.F. (2015). Rising food prices, food price volatility, and social unrest. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 97(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aau038

5. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO (2024). The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2024. FAO. https://www.fao.org/publications/sofi/2024/

6. Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N., & Leip, A. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food, 2, 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9

7. Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A., & Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling Climate Change Through Livestock: A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities. FAO. https://www.fao.org/3/i3437e/i3437e.pdf

8. Seufert, V., Ramankutty, N., & Foley, J.A. (2012). Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature, 485, 229–232. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11069

9. Lesur-Dumoulin, C., Malézieux, E., Ben-Ari, T., Langlais, C., & Makowski, D. (2017). Lower average yields but similar yield variability in organic versus conventional horticulture: a meta-analysis. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 37, 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0455-5

10. Ponisio, L.C., M’Gonigle, L.K., Mace, K.C., Palomino, J., de Valpine, P., & Kremen, C. (2015). Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 282, 20141396. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1396

11. Erisman, J.W., Sutton, M.A., Galloway, J., Klimont, Z., & Winiwarter, W. (2008). How a century of ammonia synthesis changed the world. Nature Geoscience, 1, 636–639. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo325

12. Risner, D., Kim, Y., Nguyen, D., Simons, C.W., & Spang, E. (2023). Preliminary techno-economic assessment of animal cell-based meat. bioRxiv. https://10.1101/2023.04.21.537778

13. Lynch, J., & Pierrehumbert, R. (2019). Climate impacts of cultured meat and beef cattle. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00005

14. Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987–992. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216

15. Mekonnen, M.M., & Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010). The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 15, 1577–1600. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1577-2011

16. Carrasco, L.R., Papworth, S.K., Reed, J., et al. (2017). High trade-offs between local and global demand for avocados. Nature Plants, 3, 1–3. See also Kibria, M.G., & Behrooz, M. (2022). Water footprint and environmental impact of avocado production. Sustainability, 14(2), 888.

17. Mottet, A., de Haan, C., Falcucci, A., Tempio, G., Opio, C., & Gerber, P. (2017). Livestock: On our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate. Global Food Security, 14, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.01.001

18. FAO (2011). Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent, Causes and Prevention. FAO. https://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e00.htm

19. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2019). Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL). Chapter 5: Food Security. https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-5/

20. Zhang, X., Davidson, E.A., Mauzerall, D.L., Searchinger, T.D., Dumas, P., & Shen, Y. (2015). Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature, 528, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15743

21. Cassman, K.G., Dobermann, A., & Walters, D.T. (2002). Agroecosystems, nitrogen-use efficiency, and nitrogen management. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 31(2), 132–140.

22. Robertson, G.P., & Vitousek, P.M. (2009). Nitrogen in agriculture: Balancing the cost of an essential resource. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34, 97–125. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.032108.105046

23. Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Wiebe, K., Bodirsky, B.L., Lassaletta, L., de Vries, W., Vermeulen, S.J., Herrero, M., Carlson, K.M., Jonell, M., Troell, M., DeClerck, F., Gordon, L.J., Zurayk, R., Scarborough, P., Rayner, M., Loken, B., Fanzo, J., Godfray, H.C.J., Tilman, D., Rockstrom, J., & Willett, W. (2018). Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562, 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0

24. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2022). World Population Prospects 2022. UN DESA. https://population.un.org/wpp/

25. European Commission (2020). Farm to Fork Strategy: For a Fair, Healthy and Environmentally-Friendly Food System. COM(2020) 381 final. https://ec.europa.eu/food/horizontal-topics/farm-fork-strategy_en

26. Beckman, J., Ivanic, M., Jelliffe, J.L., Burfisher, M.E., & Scott, S.M. (2020). Economic and Food Security Impacts of Agricultural Input Reduction Under the European Union Green Deal’s Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies. USDA Economic Research Report EIB-30.

27. Barreiro-Hurle, J., Bogonos, M., Himics, M., Hristov, J., Pérez-Domínguez, I., Sahoo, A., Salputra, G., Weiss, F., Baldoni, E., and Elleby, C. (2021). Modelling environmental and climate ambition in the agricultural sector with the CAPRI model. JRC Technical Report EUR 30317 EN.

28. IPCC (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. https://10.1017/9781009157896

29. Estévez, M., & Rui Alves Soares, C. (2025). Nutrient equivalence of plant-based and cultured meat: Gaps, bioavailability, and health perspectives. Nutrients, 17(24), 3860. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17243860

30. Springmann, M., Godfray, H.C.J., Rayner, M., & Scarborough, P. (2016). Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(15), 4146–4151. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1523119113

31. Springmann, M., Wiebe, K., Mason-D’Croz, D., Sulser, T.B., Rayner, M., & Scarborough, P. (2018). Health and nutritional aspects of sustainable diet strategies and their association with environmental impacts: a global modelling analysis with country-level detail. Lancet Planetary Health, 2(10), e451–e461. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30206-7

32. World Bank (2025). Commodity Markets Price Data (The Pink Sheet), December 2025. World Bank Group. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/18675f1d1639c7a34d463f59263ba0a2-0050012025/related/CMO-Pink-Sheet-December-2025.pdf

33. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (2026). World Agricultural Production, April 2026. United States Department of Agriculture. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pdf

34. Counterpoint Research (2025). Global Smartphone Revenues Resume Growth in 2024 After Two Years, ASP Hits Record High, January 31, 2025. https://counterpointresearch.com/en/insights/global-smartphone-market-2024

The post What happens to everything else if the food system fails? … And why we should make sure that doesn’t happen appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Achieving high performance and superior meat quality with preferably low investment – and here, we speak about feed costs, which account for up to 70% of the total costs – is a considerable challenge for pig producers. The following will focus on the effects of genetic enhancements and nutrient quality on overall pig performance.

Effect of body weight and gender on protein deposition

Based on Schothorst Feed Research recommendations for tailoring nutritional strategies to enhance feed efficiency and overall productivity, the following facts must be considered:

• Castrates, boars, and gilts have significantly different nutritional requirements due to variations in growth rates, body composition, and hormonal influences. For instance, testosterone significantly impacts muscle development and protein metabolism, increasing muscle mass in males. In contrast, ovarian hormones may inhibit muscle protein synthesis in females, contributing to differences in overall protein deposition. Boars, therefore, require higher protein levels to support muscle growth. Castrates typically have a higher FCR compared to gilts and boars due to higher feed intake. Split-sex feeding allows for diet adjustments to optimize growth rates and reduce feed costs per kilogram gained.
• Different body weight ranges: because puberty is delayed in modern genetics, we can produce heavier pigs without compromising carcass quality. Given that a finisher pig with 80-120 kg bodyweight consumes about half of the total feed of that pig, Dr. Fledderus concluded that extra profit could be realized with an extra feed phase diet for heavy pigs. Implementing multiple finisher diets can help reduce feed costs by allowing for lower nutrient concentrations, such as reducing the net energy and standardized ileal digestible lysine in later phases, without compromising performance.

Decision-making according to feedstuff prices

Least cost formulation is commonly used by nutritionists to formulate feeds for the lowest costs possible while meeting all nutrient requirements and feedstuff restrictions at the actual market prices of feedstuffs. However, diet optimization is more complex. The real question is, “How do you formulate diets for the lowest cost per kilogram of body weight gain?” You must always consider your specific situation, as economic results vary greatly and depend mainly on the prices of pork and feed and pig growth performance (e.g., feed efficiency, slaughter weight, and lean percentage).

How can you optimize your feeding strategy? Reducing net energy (NE) value will result in more fiber entering the diet. This makes sense if fiber by-products are cheaper than cereals. In contrast, an increase in the NE value will increase the inclusion of high-quality proteins and synthetic amino acids. It will use more energy from fat and less from carbohydrates.

The effects of diet composition on meat quality and fat composition also need to be considered.

How can nutrition improve meat quality?

Nutritional strategies not only improve the sensory attributes of pork but also enhance its shelf life, ultimately leading to higher consumer satisfaction and better marketability. Some of the factors Dr Fledderus considered included:

Improving fat quality

The source of dietary fat significantly impacts the quality of pork fat. Saturated fats tend to produce firmer fat, while unsaturated fats can lead to softer, less stable fat deposits. Diets high in unsaturated fats are more prone to lipid oxidation, negatively affecting shelf life and overall meat quality. The deposition of polyunsaturated fatty acids is only from dietary fat. Saturated fats in pork, partly originates from dietary fat and are also synthesized de novo. So, the amount of polyunsaturated fatty acids in pork depends on the content and composition of dietary fat, which can negatively affect the shelf life and perception of pork meat.

The iodine value (IV) is a measure of the degree of unsaturation in fats. A higher IV indicates a higher proportion of unsaturated fatty acids, leading to softer fat. Pork fat with an IV lower than 70 is considered high quality, as it tends to be firmer and more desirable for processing.

As per the American Oil Chemists Society, IV is calculated as:

IV = [C16:1] × 0.95 + [C18:1] × 0.86 + [C18:2] × 1.732 + [C18:3] × 2.616 + [C20:1] × 0.785 + [C22:1] × 0.723

(brackets indicate concentration (%) of C16:1 palmitoleic acid, C18:1 oleic acid, C18:2 linoleic acid, C18:3-linoleic acid, C20:1 eicosenoic acid, C22:1 erucic acid per crude fat)

Implications

Dr. Fledderus concluded that the pigs’ nutritional requirements are dynamic and influenced by factors such as required meat and fat quality, heat stress, slaughter weight, and genetic developments. Tailoring diets based on gender and body weight is crucial for optimizing protein deposition. Accurate information is essential to formulate diets that achieve optimum economic results, not just the least cost.

Continuous monitoring of feedstuff prices and nutritional content allows for timely adjustments in diet formulations, ensuring that producers capitalize on cost-effective ingredients while maintaining nutritional quality.

EW Nutrition’s Swine Academy took place in Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok in October 2024. Dr. Jan Fledderus, Product Manager and Consultant at the S&C team at Schothorst Feed Research, with a strong focus on continuously improving the price/quality ratio of the diets for a competitive pig sector and one of the founders of the Advanced Feed Package, was a reputable guest speaker in these events.

The post Consequences of genetic improvements and nutrient quality on production performance in swine appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Essential oils, secondary plant compounds, phytogenics – all these expressions can be found in the context of animal feed. In the following, Dr. Sabiha Kadari, Regional Technical Director Southeast Asia/Pacific at EW Nutrition, will show the difference between essential oils and phytomolecules and the science behind phytogenics.

Essential oils and phytomolecules– not the same

Let us first show what are essential oils using the example of oregano oil. Essential oils are extracted from plants and unpurified mixes of different phytomolecules. The raw oregano oil extract contains carvacrol, thymol, P-cymene, and several other phytomolecules. The concentration and composition of these phytomolecules can vary significantly, depending on factors such as geographical origin, seasonal variations, plant part, plant growth stage and harvest time, extraction methods, and post-harvest processing. As a result, there can be significant batch-to-batch variations, resulting in differences in animal performance. Furthermore, there is the potential for the presence of undesirable contaminants.

In contrast, phytomolecules are the active ingredients in essential oils or other plant materials. They are clearly defined as one active compound (IUPAC name/CAS number) by their unique chemical structures, such as carvacrol. By focusing on specific active compounds, standardized products don’t have batch-to-batch variation, enhancing consistent animal performance.

Stringent screening processes

To yield the best phytogenic formulations for animal production, a rigorous screening process is required:

The initial screening process consists of ensuring the bioactives are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the US Department of Agriculture and approved by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). This step is crucial to ensure that any compounds used in formulations do not pose health risks to animals or humans.

In addition to being selected for their chemical-physical properties, which play a significant role in determining how well the phytogenics will perform in various applications, and a thorough cost-benefit analysis, the phytogenics are mapped for their following biological activities.

Antioxidant

Phytomolecules exert their antioxidant effects through various mechanisms, including scavenging free radicals. The ORAC (Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity) test is widely regarded as a gold standard for measuring the antioxidant potential of phytomolecules. It quantitatively assesses the ability of compounds to scavenge free radicals, providing a reliable comparison against a known standard, specifically Trolox, a vitamin E analog. Trolox has well-documented antioxidant properties, making it a reliable benchmark for evaluating the effectiveness of other antioxidants.

Antimicrobial

Incorporating a comprehensive approach to testing the antibacterial properties of phytogenics is essential for developing effective feed additives. The antibacterial properties should not only be tested against harmful enteropathogenic bacteria, such as Clostridium perfringens, E. coli, and Salmonella. It should also be evaluated if beneficial species such as Lactobacilli, the proliferation of which is wanted, are preserved.

By evaluating both pathogenic and beneficial bacteria, researchers can ensure that phytogenic formulations support optimal gut health and reduce the reliance on antibiotics.

Anti-inflammatory

Anti-inflammatory properties also help to modulate the gut-associated immune system and mitigate excessive immune response so that animals can allocate more energy towards growth and production. This shift is vital for optimizing feed conversion ratios and overall performance.

Dr. Kadari noted that “EW Nutrition uses nuclear factor kappa beta (NFkß), which regulates the expression of various pro-inflammatory cytokines, and interleukin 6 (pro-inflammatory) and 10 (anti-inflammatory) cytokines as biomarkers, for measuring anti-inflammatory activity. A reduction in NFkß and the ratio of IL-6/ IL-10 indicates a decrease in inflammatory response.”

Anti-conjugation

Conjugation is a common mechanism of horizontal gene transfer that is instrumental in spreading antibiotic resistance between bacteria. “Most resistance genes are found on mobile genetic elements named plasmids and primarily spread by conjugation,” explained Dr. Kadari.

Cell stress of bacteria modulates the conjugation frequency. Among these stressors are antimicrobial phytogenics. The goal is to keep the conjugation frequency below the one that could occur under unchallenged conditions.

Figure 1: High throughput screening allows EW Nutrition researchers to quickly conduct millions of chemical, genetic, or pharmacological tests

Delivery mechanism

Lastly, to optimize the benefit of the selected phytogenics and deliver consistent results, the substances must be protected by, e.g., encapsulation to ensure homogenous distribution in feed and thermostability in pelleted feed. A special delivery system provides for the targeted release of the active ingredients within the organism, specifically ensuring that these compounds are effectively utilized within the body rather than eliminated through the feces. This is crucial for optimizing their benefits in animal production.

Phytomolecules are an essential support in antibiotic reduction

“Phytogenics are increasingly recognized as effective alternatives in antimicrobial reduction programs. The combination of stringent screening processes alongside rigorous in vitro and in vivo testing is essential for ensuring that phytogenics deliver optimal and consistent performance in animal production,” noted Dr. Kadari.

EW Nutrition’s Swine Academies took place in Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok in October 2024. Dr. Sabiha Kadari, Regional Technical Director at EW Nutrition SEAP, was one of the highly experienced speakers of EW Nutrition. With expertise in feed cost optimization, feed additive management, audits, and lab support, she provides customized technical solutions and troubleshooting challenges for customers.

The post The Science Behind Phytogenics appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Heat stress poses a significant challenge to pig production, particularly in Asia, due to the region’s warm and humid climate. In the following, Dr. Merideth Parke, Global Application Manager Swine at EW Nutrition, discusses effective management strategies to mitigate the adverse effects of heat stress on pig health and productivity.

Understanding Heat Stress

Pigs are particularly vulnerable to heat stress due to their limited ability to dissipate heat. “This is because they lack functional sweat glands, have relatively small lungs, a thick subcutaneous fat layer, and a narrow thermoneutral zone. The pigs’ thermoneutral or ‘comfort’ zone varies by age and weight. For instance, sows require 18-22°C, grow-finish pigs less than 25°C, while newborn piglets need a much warmer 35°C,” she explained.

Furthermore, today’s lean and efficient pigs have higher metabolic demands and produce more body heat, making them more susceptible to heat stress than pigs from the 1980s.

Symptoms of heat stress include:

• Increased respiration rates (>50/minute)
• Elevated rectal temperature (>39.5 oC)
• Decreased feed intake
• Reduced growth rates
• Lower reproductive performance
• Lower reproductive performance

Pigs naturally reduce their feed intake as a response to heat stress, which is a mechanism to decrease metabolic heat production from digestion. For example, research on sows has shown that for each 10°C increase between 25-27°C at 50-60% relative humidity, they reduce their feed intake by 214 g/day.

Managing Heat Stress

Managing heat stress is complex. It requires a combination of solutions specific to each production system. Additionally, it must be considered that heat stress is not only about temperature. Its impact can be exacerbated by relative humidity, which hinders heat dissipation through evaporation. The heat index chart below demonstrates the relationship between temperature, humidity, and comfort levels for a grow-finish pig. Pigs require an environment where the heat index is within the thermoneutral zone, enabling them to shed heat and maintain efficient feed utilization and growth.

While we often initially look to nutritional interventions, such as reducing dietary crude protein levels, increasing fats, or adding feed additives such as betaine, the effectiveness of these heat mitigation strategies is limited if the pigs are not eating well. Therefore, we must first focus on environmental management to reduce external heat absorption and increase heat load shedding. Pigs with the highest metabolic demands – lactating and gestating sows and finisher pigs – are especially susceptible to heat stress and should be given priority.

Several strategies to effectively manage heat stress can be used:

1. Misters and sprinklers

   Misters or sprinklers can help cool pigs through evaporation. However, these should be used strategically – running them for short periods followed by breaks – to maximize cooling effects without creating excessive moisture and wet conditions that could lead to other health issues, such as skin lesions or respiratory problems.

   However, water-based cooling systems can inadvertently raise the heat index in humid environments. When water is sprayed into a humid environment, it will further increase the moisture levels in the air, exacerbating the heat stress situation. If humidity is too high, alternative cooling methods, such as evaporative cooling pads or high-pressure fogging systems, may be more effective.

   Snout and flank drip systems deliver water directly onto the pig’s body, mainly targeting areas more sensitive to heat. This localized approach enables heat dissipation without excessively increasing humidity in the surrounding environment.

2. Ventilation and airflow

   Increased air movement, combined with misting or sprinkling (in low-humidity environments), can enhance the cooling effect by enhancing evaporative and convective heat loss. This combination helps reduce the temperature the pigs ‘feel’, making them more comfortable.

   Producers should assess their ventilation systems and consider modifications to improve air circulation. This can be achieved by installing additional fans. However, the fans must be maintained – clean fan blades and louvers can increase efficiency by 30%. Furthermore, it must be evaluated if there are dead spots and drafts at the pig level, not along the walkways.

   Using suspended ceilings can effectively reduce the airspace that needs cooling and can lead to lower energy costs for cooling systems.

3. Housing and surroundings

   Adding insulation to roofs and walls can help reduce heat transfer inside the pig housing. Applying reflective coatings (such as white paint) to rooves and walls can help deflect solar radiation, reducing heat accumulation inside the shed by several degrees.

   Dense vegetation surrounding a piggery can provide shade and reduce reflective heat. However, it can also obstruct airflow and trap moisture, increasing local humidity and exacerbating the pigs’ heat index and heat stress.

4. Drinking water

   Providing fresh, chilled drinking water (10°C) is a highly effective method for mitigating heat stress in pigs and increasing feed intake to improve overall performance. Insulating header tanks and water pipes can help to maintain cool temperatures.

   Regular checks on water supply systems are essential to ensure they function correctly and provide adequate flow rates to the end of the line. For example, lactating sows need a flow rate of 4 L/minute.

5. Stocking density and body condition

   Higher stocking densities can exacerbate heat stress in pigs. Increased animal density leads to higher ambient temperatures due to the combined metabolic heat produced by the animals and reduced airflow at the pig level. Lower stocking densities can allow pigs to manage their body temperature better.

   Pigs with higher body condition scores (more body fat) may be more susceptible to heat stress. Excess fat can hinder effective heat dissipation, making it more difficult for these pigs to regulate their body temperature during hot weather.

6. Monitoring and evaluation

   Continuous monitoring of temperature, humidity levels, and airflow is vital to adjust cooling strategies as necessary. A common mistake when monitoring the pigs’ thermal environment is placing sensors in walkways at head height for workers because they are easier to read than at pig level in the pens. Sensors should be positioned in several locations throughout the shed. Regardless of sensor readings, stockpersons need to observe behavioral changes that provide immediate insights into the welfare and comfort of pigs during high-temperature periods.

7. Husbandry

   Pigs must be regularly observed for signs of heat stress, such as rapid breathing, reduced activity and feeding, lateral recumbency, and changes in vocalization. Aggressive behaviors may increase among pigs during heat stress as they compete for cooler spaces and water. Early detection of behavioral changes allows for timely interventions.

   “Schedule feeding during cooler parts of the day, such as early mornings or late evenings. This practice helps minimize additional heat production from digestion during peak temperatures”, according to Dr. Parke.

   “When moving pigs, especially pregnant sows, to the farrowing room, do so during the coolest times of the day and allow them to walk at their own pace.”

Conclusion

In conclusion, in the first run, each aspect of a production system must be critically evaluated, and existing housing or husbandry procedures must be modified to reduce the severity of the adverse effects of high temperatures on pig health and performance.

EW Nutrition’s Swine Academies took place in Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok in October 2024. Dr. Merideth Parke, Global Application Manager, Swine, was one of the highly experienced speakers of EW Nutrition. She is a veterinarian who strongly focuses on swine health and preventive medicine.

The post Managing heat stress in pigs in Asia appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Gut health is pivotal to profitable poultry production, as the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) enables nutrient digestion and absorption while acting as a defense against pathogens. A healthy gut improves feed conversion, boosts immune resilience, and reduces reliance on antimicrobials—critical in the fight against antimicrobial resistance (AMR). With AMR posing significant threats to public health and animal agriculture, strategies like biosecurity, sustainable management, and effective dietary interventions are gaining traction. Feed enzymes have emerged as essential tools for managing feed costs, mitigating anti-nutritional factors, and improving nutrient utilization. Among these, feed enzymes like xylanase stand out. By breaking down xylan, a major component of non-starch polysaccharides (NSPs) in plant-based feed ingredients, xylanase reduces gut viscosity, enhances nutrient utilization, and supports optimal gut health and productivity. This article explores the innovative application of novel GH10 xylanases, such as Axxess XY, as a sustainable solution for improving feed efficiency and gut health in poultry production.

Xylanase in Poultry Nutrition

Xylanase plays a pivotal role in enhancing nutrient availability by addressing the limitations of endogenous enzyme synthesis in poultry. Xylanase enzymes belong to the carbohydrase class, catalyzing the breakdown of xylan, a major NSP in plant-based feed ingredients. They hydrolyze xylan into simple sugars like arabino-xylo-oligosaccharides (AXOs) and xylo-oligosaccharides (XOs), reducing the encapsulation of nutrients and digesta viscosity. These actions improve overall nutrient digestibility and bird performance.

Fig.1: Arabinoxylans – anti-nutrient mode of action in chicken

The primary benefit of feed xylanase lies in its ability to reduce digesta viscosity. By partially hydrolyzing NSPs in the upper digestive tract, xylanase ensures better nutrient absorption in the small intestine. Studies (Matthiesen et al., 2021; Choct & Annison, 1992) confirm that reduced viscosity enhances feed digestibility, leading to improved performance in poultry. Further, to realize the optimum benefits, it is crucial that xylanase efficiently degrades both soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans. The insoluble arabinoxylans are part of the cell wall structure of plant cells, resulting in a cage effect, entrapping nutrients like starch and protein. Effectively breaking down insoluble arabinoxylans ensures that the nutrients trapped in plant cell walls are released for growth and production.

Mechanisms Supporting Gut Health

Viscosity Reduction

High NSP content increases digesta viscosity and slows digestion and nutrient absorption. Soluble arabinoxylan is not digested in the small intestine of broilers. It produces a viscous chime, leading to the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria, intestinal inflammation, impairment of barrier function in the intestine, and severe intestinal lesions (Teirlynck et al., 2009). Xylanase mitigates this by breaking down xylans, a major component of NSPs in common feed ingredients. This results in a better flow of digesta and reduced energy losses.

Microbial Metabolites

Xylo-oligosaccharides (XOS) can also be produced in the intestine of monogastric animals to some extent when exogenous enzymes, such as xylanase, are added to the feed (Baker et al., 2021).

The XOS generated by xylanase action on arabinoxylans can act as prebiotics, fostering beneficial bacteria like Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium, which can outcompete harmful species. XOS can positively impact the gut microbiota, enhance short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) production, stimulate immune activity in the gastrointestinal tract, and improve energy utilization.

Fig. 2. Axxess XY improved beneficial microbes and reduced the clostridial population in broilers.

Barrier Function

By lowering inflammation and irritation in the intestine, xylanase helps maintain gut integrity, reducing the risk of pathogen translocation from the intestinal lumen. In a broiler study, xylanase decreases epithelial apoptosis index, up-regulates tight junction gene expression, and inhibits mucin synthesis in the small intestine, likewise alleviating the intestinal mucosal barrier impairment from Clostridium perfringens challenge (Liu et al., 2012).

Practical Considerations for Xylanase Use

Enzyme Stability

Enzymes are proteins that tend to lose their catalytic activity at high temperatures. When exposed to excessive heat, an enzyme’s protein structure can irreversibly unfold, disrupting its active site and causing loss of function. Therefore, ensuring enzyme stability during feed processing is critical for maintaining its activity in the intestine. Intrinsically heat-stable enzymes have an inherent ability to withstand higher temperatures without the need for a protective coating and are immediately available for action upon ingestion.

Feed Composition

Xylanase efficacy is influenced by diet composition, particularly the NSP content and the presence of xylanase inhibitors in common feedstuffs. It is important to choose a xylanase that can resist the activity of xylanase inhibitors and is effective against both soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans.

The recommended energy matrix value for the xylanase enzyme should be used while formulating the feeds to create energy-deficient diets to reap the full benefits of xylanase use.

Optimal Dosage

Proper dosing is essential to maximizing the benefits of feed enzymes while avoiding unnecessary costs. It is important to follow manufacturers’ recommendations and avoid underdosing an enzyme.

GH10 Xylanases: The Superior Choice for Animal Nutrition

Most feed xylanases are classified into glycoside hydrolase families 10 (GH10) and 11 (GH11) based on their substrate specificity, catalytic action, and structural features.

Why GH10 Xylanases Are More Effective

1. Broader Substrate Specificity:

   Unlike GH11 xylanases, GH10 xylanases can effectively hydrolyze both soluble and insoluble xylan substrates. This broader activity ensures an efficient breakdown of xylans in a wide range of feed ingredients.

2. Higher Catalytic Efficiency:

   GH10 enzymes cleave xylan at substituted regions, yielding shorter xylo-oligosaccharides that can positively impact gut health and maximize nutrient availability.

3. Thermostability:

   Feed processing often involves high temperatures during pelleting. Axxess XY, a GH10 family xylanase, demonstrates remarkable thermostability, maintaining over 85% activity even at 95°C for extended conditioning times. This resilience ensures consistent enzyme performance during feed manufacturing and digestion.

Fig.3: Optimum recovery of Axxess XY at elevated conditioning time and temperatures

Novel Applications of Axxess XY: A GH10 Xylanase

Axxess XY exemplifies the advantages of GH10 xylanases in poultry nutrition. Its ability to efficiently act on both soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans makes it a versatile feed enzyme. The enzyme’s high thermostability ensures efficient enzyme activity in the gut and subsequent optimum nutrient utilization under challenging processing conditions, promoting gut health and maximizing performance.

Key Benefits of Axxess XY

1. Enhanced Nutrient Utilization:

   By unlocking nutrients trapped in NSPs, Axxess XY promotes better feed conversion ratios (FCRs).

2. Improved Gut Health:

   Reducing the digest’s viscosity reduces gut health challenges and predisposition to gut infections. Further, the short-chain oligosaccharides released by Axxess XY support beneficial gut microbiota, improving digestive health.

3. Economic Efficiency:

   Enabling the optimum use of high-fiber, cost-effective, locally available feed ingredients without compromising performance makes Axxess XY an asset for profitability.

In a recently conducted 42-day trial at a commercial farm, Axxess XY maintained the average body weight of broilers with a 100 kcal/kg reduction in metabolizable energy while significantly reducing feed cost/kg body weight. The diets were based on corn, DDGS, and soybean meal.

Figures 4 and 5: Body weight and cost of feed in broilers fed a diet reduced by 100 kcal/kg in metabolizable energy compared to a standard diet without Axxess XY

Conclusion

Xylanase exemplifies how feed enzymes can transcend their traditional role in feed cost reduction to support enhanced gut health. Xylanase supports reduced antimicrobial use in poultry production by improving nutrient utilization, reducing digesta viscosity, and fostering healthy microbiota. Its integration into comprehensive gut health management strategies offers a sustainable pathway to combat AMR and ensure the long-term viability of poultry farming. By targeting NSPs, these enzymes enhance nutrient digestibility, reduce feed costs, and support sustainable production practices.

GH10 xylanases, particularly Axxess XY, stand out for their superior substrate specificity, catalytic efficiency, and thermostability. By incorporating Axxess XY into feed formulations, poultry producers can unlock the full nutritional potential of feed ingredients, ensuring optimal performance and profitability. As the poultry industry continues to evolve, adopting advanced enzyme technologies like Axxess XY represents a strategic step toward sustainable and efficient animal nutrition.

References:

Baker, J.T.; Duarte, M.E.; Holanda, D.M.; Kim, S.W. Friend or Foe? Impacts of Dietary Xylans, Xylooligosaccharides, and Xylanases on Intestinal Health and Growth Performance of Monogastric Animals. Animals 2021, 11, 609.

Choct, M., and G. Annison. “Anti‐nutritive Effect of Wheat Pentosans in Broiler Chickens: Roles of Viscosity and Gut Microflora.” British Poultry Science 33, no. 4 (September 1992): 821–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071669208417524.

Liu D, Guo S, Guo Y. Xylanase supplementation to a wheat-based diet alleviated the intestinal mucosal barrier impairment of broiler chickens challenged by Clostridium perfringens. Avian Pathol. 2012;41(3):291-8.

Matthiesen, Connie F., Dan Pettersson, Adam Smith, Ninfa R. Pedersen, and Adam. C. Storm. “Exogenous Xylanase Improves Broiler Production Efficiency by Increasing Proximal Small Intestine Digestion of Crude Protein and Starch in Wheat-Based Diets of Various Viscosities.” Animal Feed Science and Technology 272 (February 2021): 114739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2020.114739.

Teirlynck, E.; Haesebrouck, F.; Pasmans, F.; Dewulf, J.; Ducatelle, R.; van Immerseel, F. The cereal type in feed influences Salmonella enteritidis colonization in broilers. Poult. Sci. 2009, 88, 2108–2112.

The post Enhancing Poultry Gut Health with Novel Xylanase: A Sustainable Path to Reduced Antimicrobial Use appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Unlike humans and most mammals, piglets do not receive any maternal immunoglobulins (antibodies) via the placenta. Therefore, it is vital for piglets to receive maternal antibodies via the colostrum within 24 hours of birth. Otherwise, they are more vulnerable to illnesses in their early stages of life. In situations where piglets do not receive enough colostrum, such as due to large litter sizes or weak sows following a prolonged farrowing — supplemental colostrum or IgY products can provide essential immune protection.

In the following, Dr. Shofiqur Rahman describes the innovative role of IgY – yolk immunoglobulins in enhancing swine health.

IgY – modes of action

IgY is an antibody found in egg yolk. It is an entirely natural product; each egg contains approximately 100 mg of IgY. These egg-derived antibodies primarily function in the gut through several mechanisms:

• Adherence inhibition – IgY antibodies bind to specific structures on the surface of pathogens (such as fimbriae, flagella, and lipopolysaccharides), preventing them from adhering to the intestinal mucosa and blocking the initial stages of infection. This is particularly significant for enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), which causes piglet diarrhea by attaching to intestinal cells.
• Neutralization – IgY can neutralize toxins produced by pathogens, preventing them from exerting harmful effects on host cells.
• Agglutination – IgY promotes the clumping of pathogens by binding them together, effectively immobilizing them, and facilitating their removal from the animal’s gut.
• Cell damage – IgY can damage the integrity of bacterial cell walls leading to cell lysis and reduced bacterial viability.

Furthermore, because these pathogens are bound in complexes with IgY and eliminated through feces in an inactivated form, IgY helps prevent environmental re-infection through manure.

IgY and IgG – functional differences

Both IgY and Immunoglobulin G (IgG) (IgG, the most abundant immunoglobulin in mammals) are antibodies. They, however, exhibit significant differences due to their distinct structural characteristics. “IgY, for instance, does not activate the complement system, a key function of IgG that enhances immune responses against infections. Additionally, IgY promotes more rapid phagocytosis and reduces inflammation compared to IgG. These effects contribute to energy conservation, thereby facilitating improved animal growth performance,” he explained.

IgY is more hydrophobic than IgG, which increases its stability and resistance to proteolytic degradation. This property is beneficial for maintaining its functionality in the gastrointestinal tract.

Production and quality control

IgY develops in hens in response to the pathogens they encounter, regardless of their relevance to the hens themselves. For instance, hens immunized with an infectious pathogen affecting pigs can produce IgY, effectively preventing the disease caused by that pathogen.

There are different methods of IgY production. One possibility is to hyperimmunize the hens simultaneously with multiple antigens. This method seems convenient, but it does not produce products with standardized levels of immunoglobulins for each antigen.

Another approach involves immunizing different groups of hens, each with a single antigen (e.g., transmissible gastroenteritis virus, rotavirus, E. coli) that commonly challenges piglets during the first weeks of life. The immunoglobulin content is then quantified, and the resulting egg powders are spray-dried, pasteurized, and mixed. This process yields an IgY product with standardized amounts of specific immunoglobulins that exhibit high affinity for the target pathogens.

One health application in swine

“The benefits of IgY have been demonstrated through extensive trials and commercial experiences, highlighting its potential for various applications not only in swine but also in other animals and humans,” said Dr. Rahman.

Due to concerns about antibiotic resistance, regulatory and consumer scrutiny increased over the use of in-feed antibiotics. IgY can serve as an effective and natural alternative for improving overall gut health, reducing the incidence and severity of diarrhea, reducing morbidity during the critical pre- and post-weaning periods, and, thereby, increasing performance.

Unlike antibiotics, which can indiscriminately kill both harmful and beneficial bacteria, IgY selectively targets specific pathogens. This selective action helps maintain a balanced gut microbiome, which is crucial for overall health and digestion in piglets. Disruption of the gut microbiota by antibiotics can lead to issues such as antibiotic-associated diarrhea and increased susceptibility to opportunistic infections due to the loss of beneficial microbes.

In contrast to antibiotics, IgY targets multiple antigenic sites on pathogens, requiring various genes for their protection, thereby avoiding resistance issues among pathogenic microorganisms. Additionally, IgY is effective not only against bacteria but also demonstrates significant efficacy against viruses and coccidia.

Conclusion

Dr. Rahman concluded that “the use of IgY as a passive immunization strategy, incorporated into a holistic approach to reducing piglet diarrhea, offers a safe and natural alternative to traditional antibiotics, particularly in the light of rising antibiotic resistance and the need for effective treatments also for viral diseases.”

EW Nutrition’s Swine Academy took place in Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok in October 2024. Dr. Shofiqur Rahman, Senior Researcher at the Immunology Research Institute Gifu (IRIG) in Japan was one of the highly experienced speakers of EW Nutrition. Originally a microbiologist, Dr. Rahman focuses on researching and developing IgY products for Human, Animal, Pet, Fish, Plant, and Environmental health.

The post Immunoglobulins – Novel solutions for swine health appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Nowadays, climate change is an omnipresent topic. Extreme weather events, such as high temperatures and heavy rainfall, are becoming more frequent, and there has been a rapid increase in greenhouse gas concentrations since the 1850s. Climate change will also have consequences for the pig industry. Dr. Jan Fledderus, Schothorst Feed Research, discussed upcoming issues for the pig industry at EW Nutrition’s Swine Academy.

Shift in mycotoxin-producing fungi

Climate change is likely to expand the geographical range of mycotoxin-producing fungi, exposing new crops and areas previously considered low risk to higher contamination levels. For instance, regions in South and Eastern Europe have reported increased occurrences of aflatoxins due to hotter and drier conditions favoring Aspergillus flavus over Fusarium species.

European Green Deal

The European Commission has adopted the European Green Deal, a comprehensive policy initiative to address climate change and promote sustainability within the European Union (EU). It sets ambitious targets and outlines a roadmap for reducing greenhouse gases by at least 55% by 2030, compared to 1990 levels, and achieving climate neutrality by 2050. The EU’s primary goal is to ensure food security while reducing environmental and climate footprint.

The EU regulation on deforestation-free products includes soybeans and palm oil. The objective is to guarantee that the products EU citizens consume do not contribute to deforestation or forest degradation worldwide. Effective 1 January 2026, all imported soy must be free of deforestation. This means soybeans must be from areas not deforested since 1 January 2021.

The Green Deal will affect pig production

While it is still early to fully assess the impacts of the European Green Deal on pig farmers, it is clear that regulatory changes, economic pressures, and shifts in consumer behavior will shape the future of pig farming in the EU. Several potential consequences are still being assessed, including:

• Halving nutrient losses, particularly nitrogen, influences the eutrophication of natural areas and surface water, which will likely require pig farmers to adjust their feeding strategies and potentially reduce herd sizes.
• The use of food waste and by-products, such as wheat bran, in pig diets will be encouraged, promoting a circular economy approach that minimizes waste and enhances resource efficiency.
• Costs (notably related to feed) are likely to increase due to manure management and a reduction in crop production due to stricter environmental regulations.
• Farmers may need to invest in more sustainable practices and technologies to comply with new regulations, which could strain finances unless supported by subsidies or compensatory payments.
• Reduced supply and higher consumer prices for pigmeat products.
• Encouraging a shift towards plant-based diets in humans, which may reduce demand for pork (and other animal proteins).
• There may be opportunities for the pig industry to develop premium products that meet sustainability criteria or cater to specific consumer preferences.

Defining sustainability

It is necessary to apply a uniform method to calculate sustainability parameters and define objectives for “sustainable pig feed.” The Global Feed LCA Institute (GFLI) is the global standard for raw material parameters. It gives data by different methods to calculate carbon dioxide (feed/food), with detailed data per country of origin, including peat oxidation. It includes 16 environmental impact categories.

Climate-neutral pig production

How does this impact pig production? Firstly, feed contributes 50-70% of CO₂ equivalents/kg of pigmeat. Secondly, it is essential to have a uniform method to calculate the CO₂ equivalents/kg of pigmeat. Currently, there are no financial benefits for pig farmers to improve sustainability.

Based on scenario calculations, Dr. Fledderus concluded that it is challenging to realize ‘zero emissions’ and that improving on all environmental impact parameters is not realistic. Formulating pig diets to reduce CO2 equivalents to produce ‘green pork’ increases feed costs. The obvious question is, who will pay for this?

EW Nutrition’s Swine Academy took place in Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok in October 2024. Dr. Jan Fledderus, Product Manager and Consultant at the S&C team at Schothorst Feed Research, one of the founders of the Advanced Feed Package and with a strong focus on continuously improving the price/quality ratio of the diets for a competitive pig sector, was a reputable guest speaker in these events.

The post Sustainability: The Road Ahead appeared first on EW Nutrition.

Sow mortality critically impacts herd performance and efficiency in modern pig production. Keeping the sows healthy is, therefore, the best strategy to keep them alive and productive and the farm’s profitability high.

Rising mortality rates are alarming

In recent years, sow mortality has increased across pig-raising regions in many countries. Eckberg’s (2022) findings from the MetaFarms Ag Platform (including farms across the United States, Canada, Australia, and the Philippines) determined an increase of 66.2% between 2012 and 2021.

What can be done to decrease mortality rates?

Several measures can be taken to reach a particular stock of healthy and high-performing sows. In the following, the main remedial actions will be explained.

1. Determination of the cause of death

If a sow is dead, it must first be clarified why it has died. If the sow is culled, the reason for this decision is usually apparent. If the sow suddenly dies, investigations, including a thorough postmortem, are extremely valuable to determine the cause of death. Kikuti et al. (2022) provided a collection of the most-occurring causes of death in the years 2009 to 2018. As often, no necropsy is conducted, and the causes of death remain unclear, as shown by the high numbers of “other”. Locomotory (e.g., lameness) and reproductive (e.g., prolapse, endotoxemic shock from retained fetuses) incidents account for approximately half of the recorded sow mortalities (Kikuti et al., 2022), especially during the first three parities. (Marco, 2024).

Evaluating detailed breeding history together with the cause of death will provide perspective and assist veterinary, nutritionist, and husbandry teams with interventions to prevent similar events and early sow mortality.

Selection of the gilts

After selecting the best genetics and rearing the gilts under the best conditions, further selection must focus on physical traits such as structure, weight, height, leg, and hoof integrity.

Additionally, as we have more and more group housing for sows, the selection for stress resilience can positively impact piglet performance (Luttmann and Ernst, 2024). The following table compares stress-resilient and stress-vulnerable sows concerning piglet performance and shows the piglets of the vulnerable sows with worse performance.

Table 1: Influence of stress resilience on performance (Luttmann and Ernst, 2024)

Least square means and standard error of stress resilient (SR) and stress vulnerable (SV) for each trait; significance threshold of p<0.05 with * indicating 0.01

How to manage the gilts best

The management of the gilts must consider the following:

1. Age at first estrus should be <195 days:
   Gilts having their first estrus earlier show higher daily gain and usually higher lifetime productivity. In a study conducted by Roongsitthichai et al. (2013), sows culled at parity 0 or 1 exhibited first estrus at 204.4±0.7 days of age, while those culled at parity ≥5 exhibited first estrus at 198.9±2.1 days of age (P=0.015).
2. Age at first breeding should lay between 200 and 225 days:
   If the sows are bred at a higher age, they have the risk of being overweight, leading to smaller second-parity litters, longer wean-to-service intervals, and shorter production life.
3. The body weight at first mating should be between 135 and 160 kg:
   To reach this target within 200-225 days, the gilts must have 600-800 g of average daily gain. Breeding underweight gilts reduces first-litter size and lactation performance. Overweight gilts (>160 kg) face higher maintenance costs and locomotion issues.
4. The number of estruses at first mating should be 2 or 3:
   Accurately track estrus and breed on the second estrus. Research shows that delaying breeding to the second estrus positively affects litter size. Only delay breeding to the third estrus to meet minimum weight targets.

Housing

Gestating sows are more and more held in groups. Understanding the process of group housing is essential for success. The following graphic shows factors impacting successful grouping.

If the groups are not well-established yet, the stress levels among sows are higher, leading to

• More leg injuries due to aggressive behavior or fighting for resources
• Higher rates of abortions and returns to service
• Reduced sow performance, including decreased productivity, lower milk yield, and poor piglet growth due to compromised immune function and overall health

To mitigate stress in group housing, it is crucial to implement proper group management practices, which include gradual introductions, maintaining stable social structures, and ensuring adequate space and resources. This helps promote a calmer environment, improving animal welfare and herd performance.

Responsible on-farm pig care

Caregivers must be well-trained and equipped to provide high-quality care. Insufficient or unskilled pig caregivers can significantly affect the growth and development of prospective replacement gilts, ultimately influencing their suitability for the breeding herd:

• Growth Rates: Suboptimal nutrition and health management result in slower growth rates and poor body condition.
• Health Issues: Unskilled handling may increase the risk of disease transmission, injuries, and stress, all of which can adversely affect growth and overall development.
• Behavioral Problems: Poorly managed environments can increase aggression and competition among animals, hindering growth and health.
• Selection Criteria: Ineffective growth and health monitoring can result in misjudging the potential of gilts, leading to the selection of less suitable candidates for the breeding herd.

Table 2: Influence of handling on growth performance and corticosteroid concentration of female grower pigs from 7-13 weeks of age (Hemsworth et al., 1987)

Responsible on-farm pig care is crucial to keep sows healthy and performing. Poor sow observations (e.g., failure to identify stressed, anorexic, or heat-stressed sows) or inappropriate farrowing interventions can directly influence sow health and potentially reduce subsequent performance or mortality. On the contrary, rapid and proactive identification of sows needing intervention can save many animals that would otherwise die or need to be culled.

Keeping sows healthy and performing is manageable

The maintenance of sows’ health is a challenge but manageable. Observing all the points mentioned, from selecting the right genetics over rearing the piglets under the best conditions to managing the young gilts, can help prevent disease and performance drops. For all these tasks, farmers and farm workers who do their jobs responsibly and passionately are needed. The following article will show nutritional interventions supporting the sow’s gut and overall health.

References:

Eckberg, Bradley. “2021 Sow Mortality Analysis.” National Hog Farmer, February 3, 2022. https://www.nationalhogfarmer.com/hog-health/2021-sow-mortality-analysis.

Hemsworth, P.H., J.L. Barnett, and C. Hansen. “The Influence of Inconsistent Handling by Humans on the Behaviour, Growth and Corticosteroids of Young Pigs.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17, no. 3–4 (June 1987): 245–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(87)90149-3.

Kikuti, Mariana, Guilherme Milanez Preis, John Deen, Juan Carlos Pinilla, and Cesar A. Corzo. “Sow Mortality in a Pig Production System in the Midwestern USA: Reasons for Removal and Factors Associated with Increased Mortality.” Veterinary Record 192, no. 7 (December 22, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.2539.

Marco, E. “Sow Mortality: How and Who? (1/2).” Pig333.com Professional Pig Community, March 18, 2024. https://www.pig333.com/articles/sow-mortality-how-are-sows-dying-which-sows-are-dying_20105/.

Luttmann, A. M., and C. W. Ernst. “Classifying Maternal Resilience for Improved Sow Welfare, Offspring Performance.” National Hog Farmer, September 2024. https://informamarkets.turtl.co/story/national-hog-farmer-septemberoctober-2024/page/5.

Roongsitthichai, A., P. Cheuchuchart, S. Chatwijitkul, O. Chantarothai, and P. Tummaruk. “Influence of Age at First Estrus, Body Weight, and Average Daily Gain of Replacement Gilts on Their Subsequent Reproductive Performance as Sows.” Livestock Science 151, no. 2–3 (February 2013): 238–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.11.004.

The post The big challenge: Keeping sows healthy and productive – Part 1 General aspects to be observed appeared first on EW Nutrition.

As the poultry industry seeks economical and nutritious feed ingredients, distillers’ dried grains with solubles (DDGS), a co-product of grain-based ethanol production, presents a valuable option providing beneficial protein, energy, water-soluble vitamins, xanthophylls, and linoleic acid. However, the inherent variability in DDGS nutrient composition and high fiber content can pose challenges for consistent inclusion in poultry feeds. The strategic use of feed enzymes has become a significant area of focus to overcome these limitations and further enhance the nutritional value of DDGS in poultry diets. This article will explore the optimization of DDGS utilization in poultry feeds by emphasizing the inclusion of xylanase enzyme that can efficiently degrade the insoluble arabinoxylans. By understanding the factors affecting DDGS quality and strategically employing xylanase, poultry producers can potentially achieve higher inclusion rates of this readily available byproduct, aiming to reduce feed costs while maintaining or even improving production performance and overall health.

Price competitiveness of DDGS

The price of DDGS relative to other feed ingredients, primarily corn and soybean meal, is a significant factor in its global utilization. DDGS often partially replaces these traditional energy (corn) and protein (soybean meal) sources in animal feeds, leading to significant diet cost savings for poultry producers. DDGS contains a high amount of a combination of energy, amino acids, and phosphorus. However, it is usually undervalued as its price is mainly determined based on the prevailing prices of corn and soybean meal.

Variability in the nutritional quality of DDGS

The nutrient composition of DDGS varies based on the starting grain, ethanol production methods, and drying processes. Generally, DDGS contains high levels of protein, fiber, and minerals, with varying amounts of fat and starch depending on the type of grain used and how it is processed. DDGS has a reputation for having variable nutrient composition, protein quality, and a high content of mycotoxins (Stein et al., 2006; Pedersen et al., 2007; Anderson et al., 2012). High quantities of DDGS in feed increase dietary fiber, adversely affecting nutrient digestibility.

The variations in production methods lead to significant differences in the following nutritional components of DDGS:

Crude Fat: This is one of the most variable components, ranging from 5 to 9 percent in reduced-oil DDGS and greater than 10 percent in traditional high-oil DDGS.

Energy: The apparent metabolizable energy (AMEn) for poultry varies among DDGS sources. Fiber digestibility and the digestibility of the extracted oil also contribute to this variability. The high temperatures during the drying stage of DDGS production accelerate lipid peroxidation, forming breakdown products from the fats. This peroxidation contributes to the changes and variability observed in the fat component of DDGS and is a factor that can affect nutrient digestibility and overall energy value.

Crude Protein and Amino Acids (especially Lysine): While crude protein content might not always increase inversely with fat reduction, the digestibility of amino acids, especially lysine, can be affected by drying temperatures. Lysine digestibility of DDGS is a primary concern of poultry nutritionists due to the susceptibility of this amino acid to Maillard reactions during the drying process of DDGS, which can reduce both the concentration and digestibility of lysine (Almeida et al. 2013). Prediction equations have been developed to accurately estimate actual AMEn and standardized ileal digestible amino acid content of DDGS sources based on chemical composition.

Phosphorus: The phosphorus content can vary depending on the amount of Condensed Distiller’s Solubles (CDS) added. The bioavailability of phosphorus can also be influenced by processing. The phosphorus content in the corn DDGS may vary from 0.69 to 0.98 % (Olukosi and Adebiyi, 2013).

Fiber: The neutral detergent fiber (NDF) content is another variable component. Differences in processing conditions among ethanol plants can lead to variations in fiber digestibility.

Table 1. Variation in composition of corn DDGS sources (dry matter basis; adapted from (Pederson et al., 2014)

Nonstarch Polysaccharides (NSP) in DDGS

Non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) are a significant component of DDGS. The NSP profile of DDGS is crucial for understanding its digestibility and energy content.​ The corn DDGS has a complex fiber structure that may limit its digestibility in swine and poultry. NSPs in corn DDGS represent 25-34% of its composition, primarily insoluble (Pedersen et al. 2014). The complexity of the fiber structure in corn DDGS makes it more challenging to degrade with enzymes than wheat DDGS. Therefore, while including DDGS in the poultry feeds, choosing an exogenous xylanase enzyme that is highly efficient in breaking down both soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans is essential for maximum energy utilization.

Use of xylanase in DDGS diets for poultry

Supplementing exogenous enzymes in swine and poultry diets have numerous potential benefits including: reduction of digesta viscosity to enhance lipid and protein digestion; increase the metabolizable energy content of the diet; increase feed intake, growth rate and feed conversion; decreased size and alter the microbial population of the gastrointestinal tract; reduce water consumption and water content of excreta in poultry; reduce the amount of excreta as well as ammonia, nitrogen and phosphorus content (Khattak et al., 2006). The selection of a specific enzyme must be based on the type and availability of the target substrate in the diet.

The improved energy utilization of DDGS in poultry can be achieved through the enzymatic degradation of fiber (NSP). Nonstarch polysaccharides within DDGS exist in matrices with starch and protein, so NSP degradation via exogenous enzymes can also release other nutrients for subsequent digestion and absorption (Jha et al. 2015).

The cell wall matrix in corn DDGS is more complex. Moreover, the most readily degradable arabinoxylan for the fiber-degrading enzymes is modified during DDGS production (Pedersen et al. 2014). Many studies reported a greater branch density and complexity of corn arabinoxylan than wheat (Bedford, 1995; Saulnier et al.,1995a; Jilek and Bunzel, 2013; Yang et al., 2013). These observations indicate that the fiber-degrading enzymes applied for the degradation of corn DDGS need to be targeted towards highly complex substrates. This calls for selecting xylanase, which effectively breaks down the insoluble arabinoxylans in diets.

Axxess XY: Highly effective xylanase in breaking down soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans

A bacterial GH10 family xylanase, like Axxess XY, is more beneficial in animal production due to their efficient mechanism of action, broader substrate specificity, and better thermostability. Generally, the GH10 xylanases exhibit broader substrate specificity and can efficiently hydrolyze various forms of xylan, including soluble and insoluble substrates. GH10 xylanases exhibit higher catalytic versatility and can catalyze the cleavage of the xylan backbone at the non-reducing side of substituted xylose residues, whereas GH11 enzymes require unsubstituted regions of the xylan backbone (Collins et al., 2005; Chakdar et al., 2016).

Fig.1. Activity of a bacterial GH10 xylanase against soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans

Axxess XY facilitates DDGS use and reduces the cost of broiler production.

Including xylanase enzyme, which is highly effective in breaking down soluble and insoluble arabinoxylans in poultry feeds, can reduce feed costs, allowing higher inclusion of DDGS while maintaining the bird’s commercial performance.

In a recently conducted 42-day trial at a commercial farm, Axxess XY maintained broiler performance with a 100 kcal/kg reduction in metabolizable energy and 8% use of Corn DDGS in a corn-SBM based diet (Figure 2). This significantly reduced feed cost/kg body weight.

Incorporating DDGS into poultry diets presents a sustainable and cost-effective solution, but its full potential is often limited by variability in nutrient composition and high fiber content. Xylanase enzymes, particularly those in the GH10 family like Axxess XY, can overcome these barriers by breaking down complex arabinoxylans and unlocking inaccessible nutrients. With proven benefits in energy utilization, nutrient digestibility, and overall production efficiency, xylanase inclusion emerges as a strategic approach to optimize DDGS usage, ultimately supporting economic and environmental sustainability goals in poultry production.

References

Almeida, F.N.; Htoo, J.K.; Thomson, J.; Stein, H.H. Amino acid digestibility of heat-damaged distillers’ dried grains with soluble fed to pigs. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2013, 4, 2–11.

Bedford, M.R., 1995. Mechanism of action and potential environmental benefits from the use of feed enzymes. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 53, 145–155.

Chakdar, Hillol, Murugan Kumar, Kuppusamy Pandiyan, Arjun Singh, Karthikeyan Nanjappan, Prem Lal Kashyap, and Alok Kumar Srivastava. “Bacterial Xylanases: Biology to Biotechnology.” 3 Biotech 6, no. 2 (June 30, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-016-0457-z.

Collins, Tony, Charles Gerday, and Georges Feller. “Xylanases, Xylanase Families and Extremophilic Xylanases.” FEMS Microbiology Reviews 29, no. 1 (January 2005): 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsre.2004.06.005.

Jha, R.; Woyengo, T.A.; Li, J.; Bedford, M.R.; Vasanthan, T.; Zijlstra, R.T. Enzymes enhance degradation of the fiber–starch–protein matrix of distillers dried grains with solubles as revealed by a porcine in vitro fermentation model and microscopy. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 1039–1051.

Jilek, M.L., Bunzel, M., 2013. Dehydrotriferulic and dehydrodiferulic acid profiles of cereal and pseudocereal flours. Cereal Chem. J. 90, 507–514

Jones, C.K., Bergstrom, J.R., Tokach, M.D., DeRouchey, J.M., Goodband, R.D., Nelssen, J.L., Dritz, S.S., 2010. Efficacy of commercial enzymes in diets containing various concentrations and sources of dried distillers’ grains with solubles for nursery pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 88, 2084–2091.

Khattak, F.M., T.N. Pasha, Z. Hayat, and A. Mahmud. 2006. Enzymes in poultry nutrition. J. Anim. Pl. Sci. 16:1-7.

Olukosi, O.A., and A.O. Adebiyi. 2013. Chemical composition and prediction of amino acid content of maize- and wheat-distillers’ Dried Grains with Soluble. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 185:182-189.

Pedersen M. B., Dalsgaard S., Bach Knudsen K.E., Yu S., Lærke H.N., Compositional profile and variation of Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles from various origins with focus on non-starch polysaccharides, Animal Feed Science and Technology, Volume 197, 2014, Pages 130–14.

Saulnier, L., Vigouroux, J., Thibault, J.-F., 1995a. Isolation and partial characterization of feruloylated oligosaccharides from maize bran. Carbohydr. Res. 272,241–253.

Yang, J., Maldonado-Gómez, M.X., Hutkins, R.W., Rose, D.J., 2013. Production and in vitro fermentation of soluble, non-digestible, feruloylated oligo- andpolysaccharides from maize and wheat brans. J. Agric. Food Chem.

Yoon, S.Y., Yang, Y.X., Shinde, P.L., Choi, J.Y., Kim, J.S., Kim, Y.W., Yun, K., Jo, J.K., Lee, J.H., Ohh, S.J., Kwon, I.K., Chae, B.J., 2010. Effects of mannanase and distillers’ dried grain with solubles on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and carcass characteristics of grower-finisher pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 88,181–191.

The post Optimizing the Use of DDGS in Poultry Feeds with Xylanase appeared first on EW Nutrition.