ISSUE FOCUS FEED & ADDITIVE MAGAZINE September 2024 71 the gut to stimulate digestive functions, enhance gut integrity, and support immune functions, ultimately optimizing energy and nutrient utilization and boosting feed efficacy and farm profitability. RESEARCH EVALUATES THE GAP BETWEEN OLD AND NEW PHYTOGENICS This new technology has gained substantial market share in recent years. From both a technical and economic standpoint, formulators and nutritionists have recognized the value of this new generation of phytogenic feed additives. This has been confirmed by numerous trials and publications across Asia, Europe, North America, the Middle East, and Latin America. A recent trial conducted at the University of Berlin compared the effects of 2 established phytogenic products (A & C) with NQ Technology. The researchers observed that this technology not only improved digestibility (+1.7% fat, +0.9% starch, +1.8% protein, +10% ash, +9% calcium, +7% phosphorus) but also increased overall performance compared to the negative control. The other two solutions improved the digestibility of certain nutrients and minerals but to a lesser extent than NQ. Performance results at 21 days aligned with the observed effects on digestibility. The NQ treatment had the most significant impact on digestibility (cf Fig.1) and the highest improvement in performance, with better weight gain and improved feed conversion ratio (FCR) compared to all other treatments. Another field trial compared an ‘old’ non-encapsulated phytogenic solution (D) with the NQ technology in poultry over 39 days. The results showed that the NQ technology maintains target final body weight, improved feed conversion (FCR -2.7), reduced mortality, and enhanced bird quality by reducing meat rejection and footpad incidence (cf Fig.2). This trial demonstrated the significant differences in animal performance between two phytogenics with different formulations and manufacturing technologies. Additional results from a trial made in the USA further confirmed the benefits of the NQ technoloFig.2 Performance 1,560 1,580 1,600 1,620 1,640 1,660 FCR -2,7% 2,5% 3,0% 3,5% 4,0% 4,5% 5,0% Mortality -1,1% 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 Final BW, g 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 = no lesion 1 = mild lesion 2 = severe Footpad Incidence D NQ Fig.1 Digestibility 80 82 84 86 88 90 Crude Fat +1,7% 90 92 94 96 98 100 Starch +0,9% * Digestibility (%) Digestibility (%) Digestibility (%) Digestibility (%) * 40 45 50 55 Digestibility (%) Digestibility (%) Crude Ash +10% 40 45 50 55 Calcium +8% * * * * * * 50 55 60 Phosphorus +7% * 75 80 85 Crude Protein +1.8% * NC A NQ C
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUxNjkxNQ==