ISSUE FOCUS 40 FEED & ADDITIVE MAGAZINE September 2025 tives found in clove oil do not kill bacteria in the gut. Instead, they strengthen the mucosal barrier, preventing pathogens from adhering to the intestinal wall. Another example is turmeric, known for its immunomodulatory properties. In trials, turmeric-containing PhytoComplexes increased antibody levels in sow and cow colostrum and improved vaccine responses in poultry. These effects are mediated through conserved receptors that span species, allowing plant compounds to influence animal physiology in meaningful ways. THE ART OF PRECISION IN PHYTOTECHNOLOGY Another critical, and often misunderstood, aspect of phytotechnology is the relationship between dose and effect. Unlike many conventional feed additives, plant-derived compounds rarely follow a linear dose-response curve. This means that increasing the dose does not necessarily amplify the benefit. In fact, the opposite can occur. At low inclusion levels, plant molecules can trigger beneficial physiological responses such as improved digestion, immune modulation, or anti-inflammatory effects. These effects are mediated through subtle interactions with receptors in the gut. However, as the dose increases, these positive effects may plateau, diminish, or even reverse. At higher concentrations, the same compounds that once calmed inflammation may begin to provoke it. This phenomenon is known as a biphasic or hormetic response, and it’s well-documented in both plant and pharmaceutical sciences. A helpful analogy is the bee sting. In small, controlled doses, bee venom can be used in immunotherapy to desensitize allergic individuals, training the immune system to tolerate the allergen. But a full-strength sting in a sensitized person can trigger a severe allergic reaction. The same compound — bee venom — can either heal or harm, depending on the dose and context. Plant bioactives behave similarly. Take carvacrol, a well-known compound from oregano. At low levels, it may act as an anti-inflammatory agent, calming the gut and supporting mucosal integrity. But at higher levels, it can irritate tissues and even promote inflammation. This is why more is not always better in phytotechnology. The goal is not to flood the system with actives, but to send the right signal at the right strength — a concept we call “whispering, not shouting”. In trials with a broiler-targeted PhytoComplex, significant performance improvements were observed at a remarkably low inclusion rate of just 25 g/ton. At higher dosages, the effects plateaued and began to decline as the dosage increased. At the optimal dose of 25 g/ton, broiler chicks consumed only a few particles per day during their first week of life, when feed intake is minimal. This highlights the critical need for precision in production technology to ensure that each particle consistently delivers the intended amount of active compounds. Despite the astonishingly low inclusion level, the animals showed consistent improvements in body weight gain — averaging +52 grams — and feed conversion ratio — averaging 4 points across multiple studies (Figure 1). PhytoComplex Dosage (g/ton) Linear Dose Response, P < 0.05 FCR Points (PhytoComplex vs Control) 25 50 100 200 5 0 -5 -10 Figure 1. Dose-response curve for feed conversion ratio (FCR), presented as difference between the PhytoComplex group and the control group. Data points with an asterisk (*) are significantly different from the control group (P < 0.05).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUxNjkxNQ==