Elizabeth Doughman, editor, WATT PoultryUSA and Poultry Future: Hello and welcome to WATT Poultry Chat. I'm Elizabeth Doughman, the editor of WATT PoultryUSA and Poultry Future.
This Watt Poultry Chat is brought to you by Selko. Selko, a Nutreco brand, provides specialty feed additives to optimize animal performance and customer value. Our offerings consist of unique products backed by sound science, expertise to help customers win, and products that are manufactured at the highest quality standards. We add value for our customers with proven solutions for trace mineral optimization and animal health and performance. Learn more at www.selko.com.
Joining us today is Marcos Rostagno, R&D director at Selko.
Thanks for joining us, Marcos.
Can you give us a high-level overview of phytogenics and where they are today?
Marcos Rostagno, R&D director, Selko: Phytogenics are – starting with the basic definition – plant-derived products. In this case, with application as feed additives to use an animal production. They've been known for centuries in human health, but on the animal side, the application of this type of technology is relatively recent and is still evolving very rapidly.
The very first products were very simple. They were essentially a single plant or very limited, simple extracts. But over time, as I mentioned, they're evolving very rapidly. The complexity is increasing Amazingly, over the last few years, this area – what we call phytotechnology – is growing a lot of interest, a lot of opportunities, and, of course, new advances.
Just a quick example, we can talk about our product, Fytera Perform. It's a combination of three different plant extracts. You can see the complexity right there. It includes this extract of cinnamon, clove and oregano, and each one of them has multiple phytochemicals, or what we call chemical entities, with bioactive effects in their composition. You can see the multitude of effects.
The target for these phytochemicals, it's essentially specific receptors along the mucosa of the intestinal tract of the birds with the purpose of inducing increased nutrient absorption, improved barrier function as well as reduce inflammation. That gives you a sense of essentially what they are, how they started very simple and how they are becoming very complex and sophisticated.
Doughman: What is your view on the role of phytogenic feed additives in commercial poultry production?
Rostagno: This is an area with tremendous potential. As I said, we are just starting the animal side, so there is a lot to explore. I truly believe we are just scratching the surface in this. There is a lot still to explore.
Of course, like any technology in our industry, there are constraints, which is a topic for a different discussion. There is a particularly important point that I would like to make, which is an inherent bias that we have that’s been kind of limiting the potential that we could explore with these products, not only phytogenics, but multiple other technologies.
They've been developed and applied primarily with a focus on replacing existing technologies, primarily antimicrobials or antibiotics. Well, that creates a problem because it creates a narrow or a tunnel vision or what we can do with this type of technologies.
We need to understand that they are very broad, as I mentioned in the first question, and that they are phytochemicals entities with bioactive effects. They will have a variety of different effects, and we can play with this very, very broadly.
Specifically, in this case, we need to understand also that phytogenics are not primarily antimicrobials. Yes, there is plenty of evidence in vitro that they do have antimicrobial and multi-bacterial effects, however, in vitro is one thing. When you take it to the animal, it changes completely the rule of the game, and we need to look also is how we use these products. The concentrations evaluated in vitro tend to be much higher – 100 times, 200 times, even more times – of what we will include of these compounds in the feed for the animals.
That leads to the point that it is very likely that their primary effect in the intestinal tract of the birds is not going to be antimicrobial. There might be microbial changes in populations, but those tend to be more secondary due to changes in the physiology, immunology and many other factors within the intestinal tract. It's very important to make that distinction so people understand that they are not the same, and by understanding that, it opens up a whole different view. If they are different technologies with different modes of action, then they don't become exclusive which they don't want. They're not mutually exclusive. They, in fact, should be seen as complementary to each other. We could play with them depending on what the goal is.
For instance, you can use phytogenics with or without antimicrobials or antibiotics. In the U.S., there is this push back of ionophores in the industry. We've done some tests on this, and we are investigating further on different ways of combining these two technologies, the phytogenics, in this case, Fytera Perform, with some ionophores in different ways. They can be combined. Our interest was mostly in developing programs in different diet phases that we can use to really maintain performance, but optimize cost and gain more value and benefits from them.
Doughman: How should phytogenic feed additives be evaluated and implemented in the field?
Rostagno: Wow, this is a very good question and an area that I think we still have a lot of work to do in the industry.
The very first point on this discussion should be the mindset. We should not go in to do an evaluation or implement the products and whatever technology with the mindset of a magic bullet, right? The industry wants something that will fix every problem and every circumstance possible. We know that's not true and it's not going to happen.
The biological system that we have, the birds, the production systems inside the birds, the GI tract and so forth are very complex. So, the solutions are going to be complex, and they usually will be multi-pronged.
What I like to always stress is this mindset of magic bullet and switch that to broader way of using these products in what I call the mix and match type of approach. Let's start with the assumption that the producer already did their homework, and they know exactly where – or at least they have narrowed down what problem they're trying to solve or what value they're trying to capture and what opening opportunity they're trying to go after. Assuming that is already defined, then it comes down to defining what technology do I need, what mode of action, what type of product I need, or products or technologies, right?
When you get to that point, I think the very first step is then select products of quality and vendors that will provide you with a solid development data package, which is all the studies that were done with these products during the period of their development. It's always good to look at the good and the bad results, or the positives and negatives. We all know that there is no such thing as a feed additive that works everywhere, every time, under any condition. It’s about seeing the positive and negatives. That is very helpful.
We've been learning that from our experience, particularly with this product. We've been exactly doing that with our customers, presenting them with ‘hey, this is the whole body of development we've done. And yeah, we found these positive results and negative results, but when we put everything together, they will give you a sense of in your production system what should I expect because I know they're not going to work in every single flock the exact same way. I should expect some variation on those results.’
Then it becomes then a matter of how do I take this to the field, to my conditions? That is a tricky part, because that's what needs to be done very well, and we know that the vast majority of the field evaluations of commercial products have a lot of flaws.
Why? Because it's hard. The control conditions of a university research center experimental farm are very different than what you're going to take this product to the field. But the problem is that if you don't try your best to get as close as possible or control as many variables as you can to really do a good assessment, what happens is you end up creating a lot of noise, missing opportunities or making decisions based on flawed outcomes or data.
You can miss a good opportunity, or you can actually make a decision not get the deliverable what you expected, and waste time and money with that. I tell folks to not just put a product in the field and say, oh, let's put it in the house and see what happens. It needs some statistics behind it. That's when the statistics needs to become our friend and not our enemy.
I know a lot of people don't understand it or don't like it, but it's something that is important. We need to understand that in our industry, we deal with large populations. We deal with a lot of complexity. If we don't know at least the bare basics of statistics, experimental design and how to look at data, it's very difficult to make decisions. That affects tremendously how you're going to set up that field trial an the probability of success. I think in our industry, we still need to do a lot of work. We still need to improve a lot, particularly considering that we are making decisions that will cost a lot of money or potentially uncover a lot of new value and opportunities.
Doughman: Thank you so much for sharing these insights. For more information on the solutions discussed here today, visit Selko at www.selko.com.
Thanks again, Marcos, and thanks to you for tuning in.
