ARTICLE 64 FEED & ADDITIVE MAGAZINE March 2023 poultry broiler. Table 3 is the summary of two preliminary poultry trials by using GABA and IAB in closed poultry farm in Thailand. The results show that GABA and IAB working together can give a significant improvement in feed conversion ratio (FCR) for broiler chicken, although the body weights between the control and treatment group did not show difference. In my study, I found out that GABA and IAB along did not give FCR reduction in trial II. But this does not trouble me as I am sure if more studies performed and the idea dosage could come out under the particular situation that I am doing the trial, as many other research reported many good results by using either GABA or IAB along in poultry broiler and other food animals. However, considering the improvement of 5.4 – 7.1% in FCR based on my preliminary trail result, and the fact that 2/3 of meat production costs is the feed, the reduction of FCR by using GABA and IAB together is definitely worthy for conducting more investigations. It is also interesting to know that our results are mostly in line with the trial results with other similar study, such as Chen (2015), Chand (2016), El-Naggar (2019), Zhong (2020), who reported an 8 – 9% FCR reduction by using GABA in poultry feeds when the birds were raised at warm or high temperature environment. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK We believe that using postbiotic approach, metabolites such as GABA and IAB produced in GMP factory for the purpose of GBA modulation is a better choice, than probiotic approach, as microbiota is unlikely to be easily controlled inside the GI track. Therefore, I think the postbiotic approach has better future in poultry production. CP-Bio has the world class fermentation capacity which ensures the quality and the quantity needed for healthier animals and the safer food production for mankind. References are available on request. Table 1. Some examples of GBA research in both probiotic and postbiotic approach Models: I = Probiotic, II = Postbiotic References García-Cabrerizo, et al., 2020 Greenham et al., 2011 Liu et al., 2022 la Paz et al., 2021 Hepsomali et al., 2020 Ngo et al., 2019 Chand et al., 2016 Chen et al., 2021 Villageli˜u et al., 2017 Alwakeel et al., 2017 Chen et al., 2015 El-Naggar, 2019 Zhong et al., 2020 Xie et al., 2012 Susca, 2019 Model used I I I II II II II I I II II II II II I Area Human Food Animals Pets Table 2. Comparison of probiotic and postbiotic as GBA modulators Probiotic Indirect Difficult May have Postbiotic Direct Easy None Active Ingredients Quality Control by end-users Safety Issues
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUxNjkxNQ==