presentation

Overview of the Sonac products for Aquafeed
May 2013
Carine van Vuure, MSc.
Manager Nutrition & Regulatory Affairs
Table of content
• Feed applications of animal
by products
• Sustainability, quality and
©istock.com
safety
• Conclusions
2
Feed applications of animal by products
•
•
•
•
•
Animal fat
Blood meal and Blood products
Hydrolysates (non ruminant)
Di and tri calcium phosphates
Processed animal proteins
3
Animal Fats: -> FFA, PO, origin
(Sonac portfolio)
4
Fats
Max FFA (%)
Max peroxide
(meq/kg)
Specific Characteristics
Poultry fat
5% / 10%
6
Poultry origin
Animal fat
15%
6
Porcine / bovine origin
Pork fat
1% / 2% / 5% / 15%
3/6
Porcine origin
Lard
1% / 2%
3/6
Porcine origin, food grade
Tallow
1% / 2%
3/6
Bovine origin, food grade
4
Fatty acid composition of edible fats
Source: NPR Guideline (some typical FA)
Name
<C12
Rape
Soya
Linseed
Palm
Fish
0
0
0
0
0
Poultry
Pork
Bovine
Danish 0.2
0.2
0.2
C12:0
Lauric
0.2
0
0
0.2
0
0.5
0.2
0.2
C14:0
Myristic
0
0.2
0.2
1
6
1
1.5
2.5
C16:0
Palmitic
4.5
10.5
6.5
43
13.5
21
24
24.5
C16:1
Palmitol
eic ω7
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
7.5
5
3
3.5
C18:0
Stearic
1.5
4
4.5
5
2.5
6
14
19
C18:1
Oleic ω9
58
22
18.5
38.5
14
42
43
40
C18:2
Linoleic
ω6
20
54.5
14
11
1.5
21
9.5
3.5
C18:3
αLinolenic
ω3
9
7.5
55
0.2
1
1
1
0.5
C20:5
EPA ω3
0
0
0
0
8.5
0
0
0
C22:6
DHA ω3
0
0
0
0
8.5
0
0
5
0
5
Lipids from animal origin
Apparent digestibility coefficients (ADC, %) of oils and fats fed at different
water temperatures to rainbow trout (overview)
Water Temperatures
Oils and Fats
Low/high melting point °C
Fish Oil
5°C
10°C
15°C
80
81
81
Rapeseed Oil
0/-12
85
89
90
Soybean Oil
-7/-8
92
93
91
Linseed Oil
-18/-27
92
95
95
Lard
28/48
70
76
78
Tallow
45/48
58
64
66
Remark:
Lard
normally
38ºC
6
Poultry fat: a nice alternative for plant oils
7
Also no
organoleptic
differences
(taste panel)
Average weight (g)
Trial 2008: 5% fish oil replaced by Porc Bone Oil and
poultry oil in diets for rainbow trout (kept at 16ºC)
120
Growth of Trout receiving different Oils
110
100
90
80
Fish Oil
70
Porc Bone Oil
Poultry Oil
60
Poultry/Fish Oil
Porc oil 15ºC
Poultry oil 2ºC
50
Days
40
30
0
15
29
42
57
Further trial: 9 % rapeseed oil replaced by poultry fat* max 5 FFA: no differences!
* NB. Poultry fat = Melting point 30 C
8
Terpstra, 2008
Feed applications of animal by products
•
•
•
•
•
Animal fat
Blood meal and blood products
Hydrolysates (non ruminant)
Di and tri calcium phosphates
Processed animal proteins
9
Drying systems for blood
meal/products
Mink digestibility:
digestibility
Remarks:
Spray dryer
>90%
Drying is costly
Flash dryer
?
Drying is costly
Paddle dryer
Drum dryer
84%
70%
50%
Drying is cheap
Disk dryer
10
Experiments in Seabream 2010
Influence of drying method:
HGP = Haemoglobin powder
=> spray dried
PBM = Poultry blood meal
=> drum dried
SPAROS Lda.
Centro Regional para a Inovação do
Algarve
Universidade do Algarve – Campus
Gambelas
8005-139 Faro
Portugal
Apparent digestibility coefficients (%) protein, in gilthead seabream fed the
various experimental diets. Bars are means ± standard deviation (n=2).
11
Feed applications of animal by products
•
•
•
•
•
Animal fat
Blood meal and blood products
Hydrolysates (non ruminant)
Di and tri calcium phosphates
Processed animal proteins
12
Non-Ruminant Hydrolyzates
• Gelatine Hydrolysate:
• Source of amino acids and peptides
• High Hydroxyproline content (12%)
• Mucosa Hydrolysate:
• Intestinal ‘growth’ factors (agriculture literature)
• Source of amino acids and peptides
• Juvenile fish
• Meat Soluble Hydrolyzate
•
•
Palatant and Attractant
Fish Meal replacement
• Hydrolyzed Feather Protein
•
•
Extrusion improves digestibility
Versatile application in fish diets
• Phosterol (a new product, samples available)
•
•
Natural combination of cholesterol and phospholipids
Shrimps relay on cholesterol for optimal molting
13
Hydrolyzed Gelatin in Aqua Diets
• 12% Hydroxyproline
content
• Hydroxyproline improves
growth in Salmon
(Fiskenforskning June
2007 – Feedinfo Service)
• Hydroxyproline improved
muscle firmness 5 – 10%
after 1 to 2 weeks of
storage (Nofima, Sirnes
E., July 2009)
14
Hydroxyproline – a forgotten nutrient
HYP can be a limiting factor
15
MucoPro® - improved feed intake of young animals
• Type of product
• Hydrolyzed protein with high
content of amino acids and
peptides
• Raw material
• Porcine mucosal tissue from
intestines
• Als available as a Mix:
• Palapro = Mucopro + Plasma
• or Mucodigest = Mucopro + soya
• Application
MucoPro®
• Feed: Mainly young animals
16
16
Production of Hydrolyzed mucosa proteins
17
18
amino acid profile of different high quality protein sources
20
in % of N
15
MucoPro
whey
10
fish meal
soya
5
potato protein
0
lys met cys thr trp ile val arg his leu glu
19
Piglets prefer the taste of hydrolyzed mucosa
Dried porcine solubles
= hydrolyzed mucosa
20
Sola-Oriol, 2008
Effect of the inclusion of MucoPro in trout
starter diets (CRC, Netherlands)
Experimental set up:
80 trout larvae of 0,2 g per tank
of 45l.
3 replicates per group
Temperature was 15°C
Diets were fed for 54 days
Feed gift was adjusted daily
according to an expected
growth
Oxygen levels of the tanks
were measured regularly and
were between 8.4-8.9 ppm
21
Results
Terpstra, 2008
22
Effect of the inclusion of MucoPro in trout
starter diets
Preference
MucoPro2.5
MucoPro5
Initial weight (g)
0.19
0.19
0.19
Final weight (g)
7.73
7.70
8.14
Initial total biomass (g/tank)
15.2
15.2
15.2
Final biomass (g/tank)
618
615
649
Feed intake (g/tank)
353
348
366
FCR
0.59
0.58
0.58
There was no growth difference between the group fed the reference diet
and the group fed a diet with 2.5 % MucoPro.
The group fed the 5 % MucoPro diet had faster growth, although
differences were not significantly different.
Remark: The sodium/sulphite/sulphate content proved to be an upper limit
for the use of Mucopro60 for young trout (larvae) nb 10% was too high
Sonac has been investing in a unique de-salting technique.
Terpstra, 2008
This desalted Mucopro 80 is available as from 2012!
23
Effect of the inclusion of MucoPro in trout
grower diets
Referenc
e
Initial weight (g)
MucoPro2
MucoPro4
MucoPro6
61
62
60
60
170
172
168
168
Initial total biomass
(g/tank)
4607
4666
4525
4494
Final biomass (g/tank)
8105
8163
8052
8121
Feed intake (g/tank)
6883
6909
6853
6850
Daily growth Coefficient
3,80
3,80
3,79
3,83
FCR
0,85
0.85
0.85
0.85
Final weight (g)
There was no growth or FCR difference between the group fed the reference
diet (fish meal) and the groups fed a diet with 2, 4 or 6 % MucoPro.
No statistical differences were observed in mortality.
Terpstra, 2009
24
MucoPro and Pro-Bind Plus in low fish meal
diets for juvenile shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei
MucoPro and ProBind Plus in comparison with hydrolyzed fish proteins (CPSP) in low
fish meal diets for juvenile Litopenaeus vannamei.
7
Growth L.vannamei
6
5
4
g
Ref
3
MucoPro2
MucoPro5
2
CPSP2
PBP2
1
days
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
25
De Muylder, 2009
Gelko (Hydrolzyed Meat Solubles) in Aqua Diets
Production Steps:
(1) Protein and fat removed from food-grade porcine bones
(2) Hydrolyzed protein solution condensed to 40% solids
(3) Spray dried into powder form
Nutrients:
68% Protein 18% Fat
Studies:
Able to partly replace fish meal in shrimp (Hertrampf et al, 2006)
and grouper diets (Milamena et al, 2001)
Hydrolyzed Proteins:
Free peptides act as palatants and attractants
Digestibility:
Ingredient
CP(%) Digestibility (DH%)
Meat Solubles (liquid)
Meat Solubles (flash-dried)
Soybean meal (as reference)
Fish Meal (Anchovy)
32
68
46-48
64-69
8.34
8.74
3.38-5.16
2.70-4.40
26
Digestibility study with trout
CRC, Terpstra 2012
% of total protein derived from:
MucoPro 50%
% protein from fishmeal
47,4 (6% oil)
Gelko 50%
Fish meal 100%
46,2
93,9
soy concentr.
100%
0
Body weight Initial
130,1 ±
3,1
140,8 ±
0,5
171,1 ±
4,5
156,3 ±
4,9
Body Weight Final
151,1 ±
2,2
158,9 ±
0,2
193 ±
3,9
176,1 ±
5,9
0,80 ±
0,05 a
1,10 ±
0,04 b
1,08 ± 0,05 b
1,10 ±
0,03 b
Gross Energy conversion ratio
17,53 ±
0,99
25,26 ±
1,01
24,8 ± 1,22
Protein Digestibility % (n=6)
94,64 ±
0,47 ab
93,4 ±
0,34 bc
92,34 ± 0,76 b 95,24 ±
0,57 ac
Gross Energy Digestibility % (n=6)
89,37 ±
0,61 a
85,93 ±
0,69 c
91,07 ± 0,53 e 87,97 ±
0,44 b
Feed Conversion Rate
25,80 ±
0,67
FCR: the lowest FCR was observed on the MucoPro diet, and this low FCR
could not solely be explained by the energy digestibility of the MucoPro. It
appears that the energy in the MucoPro diets was more efficiently used than in
the other diets as reflected in the low energy conversion ratio (ECR).
27
Shrimp trial (Gamberoni farm, Italy)
Initial
% Weight
REF
Gelko 2%
FCR
1,31
10,81
1,58
9,53
1,18
0,9
1,17
10,25
1,51
5,94
0,99
2
1,26
10,56
1,55
6,41
1,07
-
Cholesterol/Phospholipid hydrolysate *
Final
Growth
Weight (G/week) Mortality
De Muylder, 2012
* Phosterol
28
Kerapro in aqua feeds
• Hydrolyzed feather proteins:
• High protein content >> 80%
• Pepsin digestibility >> 70%
29
Kerapro in aqua feeds: effect of extrusion
Crude Crude Crude Pepsin HCl Boisen
fat
ash
protein digestibility digestibility
Hydrolysed Feather Protein Sonac 1
5.8
5.2
1.7
86.7
75
84
Moisture
Raw
material
Final
11.3
4.2
1.8
79.9
Product
Hydrolysed Feather Protein Sonac 2
Raw
3.8
6.9
2.1
86.4
material
Final
8.6
8.5
2.1
79.6
Product
82
88
80.1
85
86
89
Extrusion: > 7% pepsin digestibility improvement
Hydrolysed Feather Protein has already high pepsin digestibility (75 – 80%)
30
Apparent digestibility in gilthead seabream
(Sparus aurata)
•
•
•
•
Apparent digestibility coefficients of dry matter, protein, fat, energy and
phosphorus in seabream fed the various experimental diets.
HD: feathermeal HD
EX: feathermeal extruded
Trial 2013
Dry matter, %
Protein, %
Fat, %
Energy, %
REF
69.0 ± 0.2 a
90.3 ± 0.1 ab
93.3 ± 0.1 ab
88.3 ± 0.3 c
HD10
69.6 ± 0.2 a
90.3 ± 0.1 ab
94.0 ± 1.2 abc
87.1 ± 0.4 bc
HD30
72.8 ± 1.5 b
91.3 ± 1.0 b
94.0 ± 1.1 abc
88.4 ± 0.9 c
EX10
70.5 ± 0.4 ab
90.5 ± 0.2 ab
94.5 ± 0.1 abc
87.6 ± 0.2 bc
EX30
69.7 ± 1.8 a
89.4 ± 0.9 a
92.7 ± 1.4 a
88.4 ± 0.5 c
Responsible at SPAROS: Luís Conceição
SPAROS Lda.
31
Phosterol
33
Phosterol
(a new product, samples available)
• Natural combination of cholesterol and phospholipids
• Shrimps relay on cholesterol for optimal molting
34
Phosterol
(a new product, samples available)
35
Feed applications of animal by products
•
•
•
•
•
•
Animal fat
Blood meal
Blood products (porcine)
Hydrolysates (non ruminant)
Di and tri calcium phosphates
Processed animal proteins
36
Issues on di and tri calcium phosphates
• Di
•
•
•
Calcium phosphate:
Low level heavy metals
Used in diets for all food producing animals
Usage in aqua feed?
• In diets with low levels of animal / fish proteins?
• Tri
•
•
•
Calcium phosphate (Hydroxy apatite = bone matrix):
Contains 12% of protein (collagen)
High biological value for laying hens
Usage in aqua feed?
• In diets with low levels of animal / fish proteins?
37
Bone Minerals: -> Ca, P
•
Complete range of animal origin minerals (co-product gelatine):
* Negative means: no increased radiation compared to background
Delfos, DCP
** Derived from database contaminants DOS (Netherlands)
Calfos, TCP (Hydroxy apatite)
•
•
Contaminant
Units
Max
Delfos
Calfos
Phosphate**
Arsenic
mg/kg
10
<1
1,7
5
Cadmium
mg/kg
10
<1
0,13
5
Fluorine
mg/kg
2000
550
<10
1.004
Lead
mg/kg
15
<0,2
<0,2
5
Aluminium
mg/kg
n.a.
<10
0,8
12.000
Dioxin
ngTEQ/kg
0,5
<0,11
<0,11
0,17
Radio-activity*
Bq/unit
n.a.
•
Cadmium 109
Negative
Negative
1,8*104
•
Radium 226
Negative
Negative
1,1*104
•
Americanum 241
Negative
Negative
8*103
38
Animal proteins: -> wide range CP, CFat, C Ash
C protein
C fat
C ash
90
80
70
%
+ specialties
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
BM 37
MBM 50 MM 65 PMM 63
GM 83
FM 80
BM 90
BM = Bone Meal, M(B)M = Meat (Bone) Meal, PMM = Poultry Meat
Meal, GM = Greaves Meal, FM = Feather Meal and BM = Blood Meal40
Nutritional Considerations: Poultry meal 70
Pork Meal has a light colour and has been stabilized with
Antioxidants
Crude protein
(NEN- ISO 5983: 1998)
70,5 %
Soluble in pepsin HCL
(NEN-ISO 6655:1997)
87 %
Crude fat (after acid hydrolysis)
8,4 %
ME (poultry)
13,9 MJ/kg
Ash
12,7 %
Calcium / Phosphorus
3,3 % / 2,7 %
PO / Rancimat
2 meq/kg / > 48 hours
41
Nutritional Considerations: Pork meal 60
Pork Meal has a light colour and has been stabilized with
Antioxidants
Crude protein
(NEN- ISO 5983: 1998)
60 %
Soluble in pepsin HCL
(NEN-ISO 6655:1997)
90 %
Crude fat (after acid hydrolysis)
14,5 %
ME (poultry)
13,7 MJ/kg
Ash
18 %
Calcium / Phosphorus
7.2 % / 3.8 %
PO / Rancimat
Max. 6 meq/kg / > 20 hours
42
Nutritional Considerations: Porcine
Blood Meal (Paddle dried)
A lysine source
Mink digestibility
84%
Crude protein
(NEN- ISO 5983: 1998)
97 %
Lysine
8.9 g/16g N
Methionine
0.8 g/16 g N
Cystine
1.3 g/16g N
Threonine
3.6 g/16 g N
Tryptophane
1.6 g/16 g N
Iron
2400 mg/kg
43
Nutritional Considerations
Advised
incorporation
Pork meal/
Poultry meal
BM
Hydroysed
Feather Meal
Compound feed
(on finished
feed level)
About 10-15 %
About 5 %
5%
Pet food
20-40 %
depending on
age, type of
animal, etc.
5 – 10 %
5%
Aqua feed
About 15 %
About 5 %
15 %
44
Nutritional Considerations
Pbloodmeal
Kerapro
PMBM
MIX
Fish meal
cp
89
85
50
68
66
lys tot
8,3
2,0
2,4
5,2
5,0
P
0,5
0,2
6,2
3,5
2,1
 A mix of Poultry Products can act as a fish meal
replacer
 Especially Kerapro and blood meal are good to
balance isoleucine levels
45
Content of the presentation
• Feed applications of animal
by products
• Sustainability, quality
and safety
• Conclusions
48
Quality and safety
• Quality
• PO value (stability, anti oxidants)
• FFA (freshness of the raw materials)
• Biogenic amines
• Digestibility
• In vitro (pepsin, Boisen)
• In vivo (mink, trout, etc.)
• Consistent
• Absence of ‘foreign materials’ and contaminants
• No ruminant DNA (PCR-test)
• Quality programs (HACCP, ISO, GMP+)
• Safety
• EU legislation (999/2001 and 1774/2002& 1069/2009)
• GMP ‘attitude’
49
Sustainability:
Valorisation of animal by-products is sustainable!
• Foot print
• footprint is a metaphor for the
total impact of a product
• Carbon
• Carbon is all the different
greenhouse gases that contribute
to global warming
• CO2
• CH4 (methane)
• N2O
• In short
• a product carbon footprint is the
full climate change impact of a
product
50
Carbon Footprint. What is it about?
CF aims to systematically study the environmental impacts of a system (product/service/etc)
Raw
materials
Transport
Product
Processing
Transport
Product use
Example impact calculation
CO2eq
CO2fossil
CO2biogenic
CH4
N2O
kg
1
0
25
298
51
Production Chain of Hemoglobin
Included in the carbon footprint of haemoglobin and plasma powder
Animal husbandry
(incl. feed supply chain,
transport, and manure
management)
Electricity from grid
Fresh meat
Slaughtering process
Natural gas
Slaughter by-products
Blood
Economical
allocations
Transport
Diesel
Separation process and
wastewater treatment
Electricity (general)
Electricity (specific)
Natural gas
Electricity (specific)
Haemoglobin
production
31%
Haemoglobin powder
Plasma
production
Natural gas
69%
Plasma powder
52
Sustainability  Carbon footprint per kg protein
Cat 3 poultry meal
Cat 3 mixed meal
Carbon footprint cat 3 meal
Soybean meal
Carbon footprint vegetable meal
LULUC emissions cat 3 meal
Palm kernel meal
LULUC emissions vegetable meal
Rapeseed meal
0
1
2
3
4
Ponsioen&Blonk 2010
Carbon footprint (kg CO2eq per kg protein)
Figure 4.2: Carbon footprints of cat 3 poultry and mixed meal and three different vegetable meals per kg protein
The carbon footprint of cat 3 mixed meal is much lower than the vegetable meals’
footprints and the carbon footprint of cat 3 poultry meal is in the same range of the
vegetable meals’
The emissions related to land use and land use change (LULUC) are higher for the
53
vegetable meals
Sustainability  Carbon footprint per tonne
Food grade fat
Cat 3 poultry fat
Cat 3 mixed fat
Carbon footprint of fat
Carbon footprint of oil
Soybean oil
LULUC emissions of fat
Palm oil
LULUC emissions of oil
Rapeseed oil
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Carbon footprint (kg CO2 eq per tonne)
Ponsioen&Blonk 2010
Figure 4.1: Carbon footprints of cat 3 poultry and mixed fat and food grade fat and three different vegetable oils
per tonne of product
The carbon footprints of cat 3 poultry and mixed fat and food grade fat are much
lower than the vegetable oils’
The emissions related to land use and land use change (LULUC) are higher for the
vegetable oils
NB. The comparison is only to provide indicative information. The figures of the vegetable oils are
based on average situations or on hypothetical situations
54
Sustainability  Carbon footprint per kg protein
Calculated (upstream)
Fish meal
Calculated (transport & processing)
Best case
Worst case
Haemoglobin
powder (pig)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Carbon footprint (kg CO2eq per kg of product)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Land use change (kg CO2eq per kg of product)
Ponsioen&Blonk 2011
Fish meal is made from complete fish or from fish by-products resulting in a
large difference between best and worst case carbon footprints
Carbon footprint of fish meal is larger
55
Content of the presentation
• Feed applications of animal
by products
• Sustainability, quality and
safety
• Conclusions
56
Conclusions
ANIMAL BY-PRODUCTS ARE:
• A sustainable source of proteins,
fats and minerals
• Highly nutritional
• Available in substantial quantities
• Safe
• Excellent price / value ratio!
57
Final remarks / Questions
58