Zootecnica International - World's Poultry Journal - English edition - 10 October 2024
Competitive exclusion improves the performance of broilers vaccinated against coccidiosis
A dozen egg abnormalities Is insect protein a sustainable option for poultry diets?
Feeders Gió: the originals without grill
Specifically developed for great poultry farms, thanks to the easiness in the regulation of the feed and to the absence of grill (that avoid chicks perching) have many advantages: they are easy to use and their cleaning is extremely easy and fast too, leading to an overall reduction in labour costs.
for the rearing phase (first 30 days of life) for the growing phase (no anti-waste ring)
EDITORIAL
The word democracy derives from the Greek language, meaning “power of the people.” Zingarelli defines democracy as “a form of government in which sovereignty rests with the people, who exercise it through the individuals and institutions they elect to represent them.”
Throughout the centuries, democracy has taken on various forms, each evolving with countless nuances in an attempt to address the shortcomings of its predecessors. Yet, the deeper meaning of democracy now seems almost utopian, elusive to the post-modern mind that has largely forgotten the foundational lessons of ancient Greek culture, the birthplace of the first democracy. Even the millions who sacrificed their lives for democracy were not enough to firmly establish its principles.
Public affairs have now been handed over to an elite, a ruling class placed in power by the will of the people, yet governed through cumbersome and bureaucratic procedures. We have witnessed a proliferation of political parties. Communication now outweighs substance, with image and representation taking precedence. Politics has become a form of entertainment, playing out in arenas of sports, television, and social media. Unfortunately, Italy's current form of government appears to offer no alternative solutions – though alternatives do exist. Achieving true democracy, one that genuinely represents the community of citizens to which we all belong, is possible if there is a genuine will to create it.
BREEDAZA THE RATIONING SYSTEM FOR BROILER BREEDERS AND
LAYERS
Leader in livestock feeding systems
ADJUSTABLE ANTI-COCK GRID
NO OBSTACLE INSIDE
EASY ACCESS TO FEED
System designed for equal, controlled and immediate distribution throughout the line.
The obstacle-free linear trough feeder allows an easy access for the animals which can easily spot the feed.
Easy cleaning and no residual feed inside the trough.
USPOULTRY and Foundation approve $570,000 in new research grants through the comprehensive research program
USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation have approved $570,000 for five new research grants at four institutions through the comprehensive research program.
The boards of directors for both organizations approved the research funding following recommendations from the Foundation Research Advisory Committee. This committee assesses research proposals for their relevance to the industry and advises the boards on funding decisions. Its members are professionals from various segments of the poultry and egg industry, bringing diverse expertise to the evaluation process.
The Association’s comprehensive research program dates to the early 1960s when funds were first approved for poultry disease research. It gradually grew into an all-inclusive
program incorporating all phases of poultry and egg production and processing. Since the inception of the research program, USPOULTRY has reinvested more than $36.7 million into the industry in the form of research grants, with 50-plus universities and federal and state facilities receiving the grants over the years.
“Funding research in critical areas for the industry is a key part of USPOULTRY’s and the Foundation’s commitment to supporting the poultry and egg industry. The Foundation Research Advisory Committee members dedicate countless hours to reviewing and evaluating research
proposals before making their funding recommendations. We deeply appreciate their efforts and contributions,” said Mikell Fries, Claxton Poultry Farms, and USPOULTRY chair
The research grants for each institution include:
• Discerning lot-to-lot independence, variability and commercial feasibility of a lot definition using statistical approaches and biomapping data in the secondary processing
Texas Tech University
• Development of live attenuated and killed vaccines for emerging avian Metapneumovirus subgroup B
South Dakota State University
• Utilizing carbonized feathers in visible light-responsive photocatalytic reactors for poultry odor control
Georgia Southern University
• Effects of phytase and dacitic tuff breccia supplementation programs to support extended lay in laying hens
North Carolina State University
• Novel multivalent vaccines for broad protection against avian Metapneumovirus infection
USDA – Agricultural Research Service
Source: USPOULTRY
FEFAC releases 4th Feed Sustainability Charter Progress Report
On 13 September 2024, FEFAC, the European Compound Feed Manufacturers’ Federation, published its 4th Feed Sustainability Progress Report, providing an overview of the past year’s FEFAC activities and deliverables in relation to the five ambitions that were included in the FEFAC Feed Sustainability Charter 2030, released in September 2020.
2029 legislative mandate of the European Commission. We demonstrate that that the European feed industry is setting its own objectives to boost sustainable feed production and look forward to engage with policy makers on these topics”.
The five ambition chapters are also linked up with the aspirational targets of the EU Code of Conduct for Responsible Business & Marketing Practices, of which FEFAC is a signatory since 2021.
Source: FEFAC - www.fefac.eu
These five ambitions jointly provide a comprehensive approach on how the European Feed Industry can contribute to the development of more sustainable livestock and aquaculture value chains. The past year was marked by discussions on the implementation of the EU Deforestation Regulation and the views on Open Strategic Autonomy for feed ingredients, while the FEFAC Annual Event in June 2024 was largely dedicated to market & regulatory drivers to increase the circularity and reduce carbon emissions of EU livestock production.
In the 4th Progress Report, FEFAC also looks forward and included new commitments pertaining to each of the five ambitions for the years towards 2030. FEFAC considers that the initial commitments it included in the original Feed Sustainability Charter 2030 publication have been successfully delivered on and were subject to an update. FEFAC President Pedro Cordero: “Our updated commitments are well-timed with the start of the new, 2024–
GIORDANO presents HCS ProLife® a game-changer in Chicks Early
Feeding
Giordano presents an eye-catching game-changer in the field of Early Feeding for dayold-chicken during the Eurotier Exhibition (Hannover, Germany, November 2024). The system is called HatchCargoSystem – ProLife® (HCS ProLife®).
HCS ProLife ® is the unique system in the world that provides day-old chicken with fresh drinking water and feed inside the hatchery and during road transport. A smart solution leading fresh drinking water through the hatching crates. In addition to these internal drinking gutters, the trays are also equipped with feeding gutters. Both drinking and eating are positioned on two sides of the tray so that the chicks have maximum access.
A smart tray has been designed for customers who want to hatch the day-old-chicken on trays. This hatching tray can be placed alternately between the crates and offers space for 74 hatching eggs. The trays have a unique framework that allows the day-old-chicken to easily and without damage find their way to the underlying crate immediately after hatching. There they have direct access to fresh drinking water and feed. The design of the tray provides an overflow of the fresh drinking water from the crate above to the crate below the tray. Calmly flowing
down and zero splashing. Extensive testing has shown that HCS ProLife ® keeps the water quality within all current standards, right down up to and including the last crate.
HCS ProLife ® can be used in all existing incubators with very minor adjustments. With HCS ProLife ® you meet the desires of your customer but also law and legislation at very low costs.
Come to our stand [hall 23 - stand E23] and see HCS ProLife ® with your own eyes. www.giordanoglobal.com - info@giordanoglobal.com
High strength and quality materials
Excellent seal, zero water wastage, dry litter
Easy and fix regulation of min and max feed levels
Fast pan filling without any waste of feed
Avoiding the step in by the animals in the pan
Anti-UV and chemical resistance
Use a QR code scanner on your device to access our website.
Corti Zootecnici
Corti Zootecnici’s Feeder
Cheggy’s U.S. launch marks a new era in hatchery innovation
Agri Advanced Technologies (AAT), a leader in poultry breeding technologies, and part of the EW Group, is excited to introduce its Cheggy technology to the U.S. market.
As the first advanced non-invasive in-ovo sex determination system available at the end of this year in America, Cheggy sets a new benchmark for speed, efficiency, and sustainability in animal welfare, providing a transformative solution for the poultry industry
The U.S. poultry industry, particularly within the brown egg sector, is witnessing a growing consumer preference for organic and free-range eggs. Cheggy’s non-invasive and efficient technology aligns with this trend, offering a welfare solution of sexing embryos before hatch.
Jörg Hurlin, founder and CEO of AAT, expressed his excitement about the U.S. launch, stating, “the launch of Cheggy in two U.S. hatcheries marks a giant step forward for non-invasive in-ovo sex determination technology. This is more than just a technical innovation – it’s a transformative approach that aligns with the growing demand for welfare and sustainable practices in the poultry industry.”
Cheggy enables the determination of chick sex before hatching, using advanced hyperspectral imaging to accurately identify the sex of an embryo based on feather color. With the capability to process up to 25,000 eggs per hour, Cheggy is one of the fastest and most efficient solutions on the market, meeting the high demands of modern hatcheries while upholding the highest standards of animal welfare. This scalability makes Cheggy not only a technological innovation but also a practical solution for large-scale operations seeking to improve both efficiency and ethical standards.
Cheggy is already operational in seven hatcheries with 12 machines across Europe, including in countries such as France, Germany, and Italy. Cheggy’s introduction to the U.S. market reflects AAT’s commitment to advancing the global poultry industry towards more sustainable and humane practices.
2024 Chicken Marketing Summit: chicken will continue to meet the needs of consumers in 2035
In the decade ahead, fast prep time, easy-to-prepare, single-serve packaging and other time savers will be priorities for Gen Z and younger Millennials who buy fresh chicken, according to research presented at the 2024 Chicken Marketing Summit.
The National Chicken Council (NCC) and WATT Global Media presented the results of a study that focused on current and anticipated U.S. consumer behavior, specifically, to bet ter understand the consumer of 2035 with regards to consumption of fresh chicken and other proteins. Circana provided supporting data from its retail databases. The results compared and contrasted generational cohorts, spanning ages 18-67, and suggested several opportunities for chicken to maintain customer satisfaction through 2035. The study was commissioned by NCC and conducted online by Circana June 28 – July 5, 2024, among 620 U.S. adults. Funding was provided by Elanco Animal Health, Evonik Animal Nutrition, NCC and WATT Global Media.
Based on research findings, at tendees were given recommendations to:
• make it easy for consumers to choose, buy and prepare chicken meals fast;
• reinforce the established benefits of chicken; consumers are resistant to plant-based and labgrown meat alternatives; and
• offer transparency for sustainable practices and other practices related to social causes and the environment.
Convenience is a driver for the younger generations in choosing, buying and preparing fresh meat. Online channels will continue to be a growth driver for fresh meat pur-
Food prep priorities in the next 5 Years
chases. Nearly half (45%) of all respondents repor ted purchasing fresh meat products online in the past six months. This behavior was more prevalent among younger generations; more than half of Gen Z and Millennials, compared to 25% of younger boomers. Almost two-thirds (63%) of those who don’t buy online said that product safety, staying cold and safe, during delivery would encourage them to buy. Nearly half cited free or low-cost delivery as a motivator. More than two-thirds (71%) of consumers surveyed said they now spend more than 30 minutes preparing a typical evening meal.
Gen Z spends the most time preparing dinner, with almost a third spending an hour or more on a typical evening meal. 67% of Gen Z say that fast prep will be a priority in five years. “Beyond speed, Gen Z indicates a future need for advance meal prep, global flavors and minimal cleanup,” according to Joyce Neth, WATT Global Media. “Meal kits, packaging that offers no mess and labels with information on nutrition are especially appealing to Gen Z who in five years will likely be in a different stage of lifestyle, balancing work and families.
Artificial intelligence (AI) plays a growing role in grocery purchases. A third of fresh chicken consumers use AI tools now.
“Unsurprisingly, adoption is highest among Gen Z,” said Erkin Peskoz, Circana. “This generation of digital natives does everything on their phones. Voice-activated assistants such as Siri can tell them what to make and where to buy it .” More than half (52%) of Gen Z repor ted using AI for food purchase information compared to 35% and 12% of Gen X and younger boomers, respectively. Peksoz reminded attendees that smart phones have been the catalyst for changes in consumer behavior, “e-commerce has
become m-commerce – making purchases directly from mobile phones – in less than ten years.”
Aside from convenience, health & wellness and sustainability matter to the generations who will be spending the most in 2035. But when it comes to plant-based and lab-grown meats, there is reluctance to adopt. While the percentage of chicken buyers who have purchased plantbased meat alternatives in the past six months has increased to 34% compared to 10% in 2019, 60% of those who have not purchased say they will not buy in the next six months. While younger chicken consumers are open to plant-based alternatives if they can be assured of taste, availability and low price compared to fresh meat, there is more resistance to lab-grown meat among all generations. Half (50%) of all chicken buyers say they will definitely or probably not buy lab-grown meat alternatives. “When asked what might increase the likelihood of buying labgrown meat, nearly 4 in 10 said nothing would,” said Neth. While Gen Z shows slightly less resistance, just 28% said they definitely/probably will buy lab-grown meat. Motivators are the same as with plant-based: lower price and better taste than conventional fresh meat products and wider availability in stores. Three-quar ters (76%) of consumers indicated that corporate responsibility matters to their purchase decisions for food. Gen Z is most likely to care about social causes; Gen Z and Younger Millennials are most likely to care about transparency in sustainability initiatives. “From the farm to the supermarket, chicken companies have a great sustainability story to tell,” according to Tom Super, National Chicken Council. “In addition to health, taste and value, this can firmly establish the relationship with the younger generation of consumers, maintaining chicken’s
as the preferred protein.”
Table 1 – National Chicken Council Conference Survey 2024 - Question: When it comes to food preparation, which of these are a priority for you and your household? (Source: Circana, LLC).
A. Leary1, V. Pain2, E. Chevaux3, F. Barbe3, M. Castex3, E. Altinbas3 and A. Sacy 3
1 Lallemand Animal Nutrition, Maroochydore, Australia
2 SOCSA, L’Union, France
3 Lallemand Animal Nutrition, Blagnac, France
Competitive exclusion improves the performance of broilers vaccinated against coccidiosis
Using vaccination to reduce the risk of coccidiosis, a major threat to poultry production, is becoming increasingly common in Australia and around the world. However, the vaccine itself has been reported to potentially have a negative effect on bird performance as it requires repeated cycling of coccidia within the bird to develop immunity.
DOSSIER
The current study investigates the impact of high levels of coccidiosis vaccines on bird performance and also the ability of using early, avian-specific microbiota development through a competitive exclusion product, to alleviate this negative impact on performance.
Introduction
Rapid development of an appropriate microbiota within a chicken gut is critical for its ongoing gut health and immunity. In natural circumstances the hen would pass her microbiota onto the chick, but in commercial conditions where eggs are set and hatched in a sterile hatchery this transfer is not possible and microbiota development is often from sources such as the environment. Development of a microbiota influenced by the environment rather than an avian-specific bacteria source has been shown to have detrimental effects on bird development and can result in colonisation of pathogenic bacteria. Application of a competitive exclusion product derived from a healthy adult hen has been shown to alleviate some of the risks.
Coccidiosis remains the major threat to the poultry industry in Australia and around the world. Added to this a recent concern of Eimeria isolates becoming resistant to anticoccidial drugs along with the societal demand for less antibiotic use have led to the development of alternative solutions, like live coccidiosis vaccines. Vaccination stimulates immunity to prevent coccidiosis, but several studies have repor ted the negative impact on zootechnical performances. In this context, in a pilot study, we have investigated a new way to mitigate the negative impact of a coccidiosis vaccine on performances using the early application of a competitive exclusion (CE) product.
Method
One hundred and fifty day-old, mixed sex ROSS 308 broilers were randomly allocated to 3 treatments: negative control (NC), vaccine group (VG) and vaccine group with a microbial solution (AviGuard ® + Optiwall ® - Lallemand SAS, CE). Each group consisted of 3 floor- pens of 15 chicks, except the NC with 4 replicates. Star ter crumbles diet without anticoccidials were formulated and offered throughout the trial from 1 to 33 days.
Birds were vaccinated with EVALON ® (HIPRA) at 5x the recommended application rate to get an accurate count
“The competitive exclusion tested in this study contributed to alleviate vaccination side effects. Competitive exclusion is based on a well-established concept aiming at reinforcing the immune status of the birds, especially through a faster mature and balanced microbiota establishment”
of oocysts in droppings. The vaccination was performed immediately af ter the allocation of the birds to their respective pens by individual gavage and to prior feed access. The CE group was also administered by gavage with the vaccine. The NC group received 1 ml of mineral water.
Chicks were individually weighted at d1, d5, d10, d25 and d33. Oocysts were counted in faeces at d10 & d25, as a proposed marker of vaccinal oocysts recycling. Eimeria gut lesions were evaluated according to Johnson & Reid (1970) scales. Treatment group comparison was performed using a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test (SPSS Statistics 27.0, IBM). Pairwise comparison was established as an indication of the dietary effect even if a trend was depicted.
Results
Detailed results are presented in Table 1. The vaccine induced a significant reduction in body weight (BW) at d33 of age (-6.6%), and even from d25 (-8.8%). The average daily gain (ADG) from d1 to d33 was also significantly
altered (-7.5%). Feed intake was not influenced by any treatment. Consequently, the feed conversion ratio (FCR) was negatively impacted (+12.3%). Results indicated that CE vaccinated birds at d25 had significantly bet ter performances (BW, ADG, FCR) than VG birds. Non-significant differences were found between non vaccinated birds and vaccinated birds inoculated with the competitive exclusion product except at d25 where CE birds’ performances were intermediate between NC and VG group. Oocyst shedding was identical between both vaccinated groups on d10 and d25, suggesting that a normal cycling of the vaccine oocysts had occurred. The average oocysts per gram of faeces (OPG) was 2,617 OPG at d10 and 767 OPG at d25. No oocysts were found in the NC. Coccidiosis-induced lesions were only score 1 at d5 and scores 1 and 2 at d33. No statistical difference between groups was depicted at d5 (P=0.312) and at d33 (P=0.603). Despite the low number of lesions at both time points, CE vaccinated birds was the group having the smallest number of lesions scored 1 at d5 and no lesions scored 2 at d33.
a,b,c: P≤0.05).
Discussion
The CE tested in this study contributed to alleviate vaccination side effects. CE is based on a well-established concept aiming at reinforcing the immune status of the birds, especially through a faster mature and balanced microbiota establishment. Associating a live vaccine and CE has been already tested for Salmonella with positive effect of the CE. Use of CE early in chick life shapes the gut microbiota, thus creating a favourable physiological environment for beneficial bacteria and reducing the possibility of opportunistic bacteria to develop.
Another explanation is linked to the modulation of inflammation in the gut, which would minimize nutrients diversion towards an inflammatory response, to the benefit of performance. Here, in the context of cocci vaccine, this study presents an interesting strategy to compensate the previously repor ted negative effects of live cocci vaccines on performance. The OPG remained at the same level in both vaccinated groups, indicating that the CE did not alter the mode of action of the live vaccine while negating some of the vaccines impact on bird performance measured by weight gain and FCR.
From these results, it can be concluded that the CE is compatible with coccidiosis vaccines and could be a viable solution to alleviate the negative effect of coccidiosis vaccine on broiler performances.
References are available on request
From the Proceedings of the Australian Poultry Science Symposium 2024
Table 1 – Zootechnical performance, mean and (standard deviation), per period for the 3 groups (A,B,C: P≤0.10;
Mobile Poultry Shed
60 m2 Surface Mobile Poultry Shed. Professional design, made in Italy, suitable for free range poultry breeding.
5 unassembled sheds in one truckload
Agritech s.r.l. Via Rimembranze, 7 25012 Calvisano (BS) Italy
Enhancing laying hen performance and gut health in high-stress commercial settings through targeted glycan supplementation
F. Petranyi12, Y. Bajagai1 and D. Stanley1
1 Institute for Future Farming Systems, Central Queensland University
2 dsm-firmenich
In the dynamic landscape of commercial poultry production, there are persistent challenges related to disease control (especially emerging diseases), animal welfare, and the requirement to meet antibiotic-free standards. The effective management of gut microbiota stands as a crucial factor influencing poultry health and performance. The introduction of precision glycans as feed additives presents a promising dimension within this complex scenario. These glycans assume a vital role in strengthening gut health and immunity, thereby holding the potential to reduce antibiotic usage.
This study explored precision glycans as feed supplements for commercial layer hens within the Australian egg industry. The outcomes of this trial revealed significant improvements
across various performance metrics, including a reduction in cumulative mortality, increased hen-housed egg production and improved feed conversion rates without significantly altering egg quality. Microbiota and histology analysis revealed significant alterations in the gizzard, ileum content, ileum mucosa, and the caecal and cloacal regions, with specific genera demonstrating noteworthy changes in abundance. In summary, the findings showed that precision glycans possess the capacity to strengthen poultry egg production, especially in the face of challenging farming conditions.
Introduction
Commercial poultry production faces persistent challenges related to disease and welfare, which are exacerbated
The complex interactions of gut microbiota assume an essential role in poultry health, which is significantly shaped by raw materials and feed additives. While the antimicrobial effects are ex tensively documented, their impact on beneficial bacteria and disease susceptibility remains uncertain. A noticeable need exists for antibiotic alternatives that uphold microbiome equilibrium. In this context, polysaccharides, inclusive of glycans, can stimulate mucin production and contribute to gut health by forming protective layers along the gastrointestinal tract, serving as a physical barrier between the gut epithelial cells and the luminal contents. Additionally, glycans play vital roles in immunological processes, influencing pathogen recognition and triggering immune system responses. Recent improvements in biotechnology enable precision glycan synthesis tailored for specific in-vivo
Evisceration enters the digital era. Nuova-i‘s innovation and connectivity offer data-driven optimum performance.
• Highest yield and quality in eviscerated carcass and giblets
• Best-in-class pack removal, with uniform, compact viscera packs
• SmartBase machine health monitoring for performance insight
• More efficient and easy operation and maintenance Contact us to find out more: +31 485 586 111 info.poultry@marel.com marel.com/nuova-i
Nuova-i
FOCUS
Figure 1 - Performance parameters summarising data collected from early lay at 22 weeks to 72 weeks (differences between PB and CT). Performance measures are shown as hen housed eggs (A) and feed conversion in kg/dozen (B). P<0.0001 for both parameters.
duction of short-chain fatty acids, which are beneficial molecules for gut epithelial cells. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of precision glycans on intestinal health in layer hens, with a focal point on disease resistance, animal welfare, management, and sustainability.
Method
The study was conducted in a commercial aviary freerange system, using Hy-Line Brown layer hens. A single flock of pullets originating from the same rearing shed was used to ensure birds of the same age, management practices and feed diets were used. The layout of
the two sheds at point of lay allowed for the division of the transferred pullet flock into two sides with independent silos and feed lines, enabling one side to receive the glycan treatment (PB) from 17 weeks of age, while the other served as the control group (CT), composed each of 20000 birds placed. A specific glycan product (a blend of gluco-oligosaccharide and silicon dioxide known commercially as Symphiome in Europe) was used.
The dose used of PB was 900 grams per tonne of feed (as per manufacturer recommendations). Identical diets were used in both groups; composed mainly of sorghum, wheat and soybean meal with nutritional levels recommended by breed standard in each stage and age of egg production.
Three sampling points were defined at 28 weeks (early lay), 50 weeks (mid-lay), and 72 weeks (late lay) of age. Each point sampled a total of 40 birds, 20 from each group (commonly accepted sample number for DNA analysis since requires euthanizing). Gut scoring was performed by a certified poultry veterinarian, intestinal samples were collected for 16S amplicon sequencing and ileum histology. Each sampling point analysed ileum content and ileum mucosa-associated microbiota, cecal and gizzard content microbiota, as well as microbiota from 100 cloacal swabs from both groups (higher sampling size compared to other gut sections given its non-invasive nature). Performance indicators such as mortality, feed conversion, egg quality, and egg production were collected daily and analysed using Paired Wilcoxon test.
Results
At the end of the trial, PB outperformed CT in several key performance indicators. PB had a significant lower cumulated mortality, 0.36% lower compared to control (P<0.0001). In both groups, there was a rise in mortality from 40 weeks until 50 weeks, predominantly due to smothering events randomly occurring per week. Henhoused eggs (HHE) were significantly higher in the PB group at the end of the trial, producing 3.55 more HHE (Figure 1, P<0.0001). There were significant differences in the cumulative feed conversion ratio (FCR; P<0.0001). At the end of the experiment at 72 weeks, there was a reduction of 9 FCR points feed kg/dozen eggs (Figure 1) and 15 FCR points feed kg/egg kg produced in the PB. There were no significant differences between groups on the average rate of lay (ROL; P>0.22) or egg quality indicators (P>0.52) at the end of the trial. Ileum histology showed at
FOCUS
28 and 50 weeks a significantly higher number of goblet cells in PB (P=0.005 and P<0.0001, respectively). No sig nificant differences were detected at 72 weeks. Gut scor ing showed significant differences with higher dysbiosis scores in CT at 28 and 50 weeks (P=0.001 and P<0.0001, respectively); CT birds had a higher presence of undi gested feed and loss of gut integrity. No significant differ ences were found at 72 weeks. Specific taxonomic varia tions were observed in different gastrointestinal sections; Lactobacillus, Escherichia-Shigella and Campylobac showed notable changes in both CT and PB groups. tobacillus showed a consistently higher presence in PB at 28 weeks across all gut sections. At 50 weeks we ob served similar results, except in ileum mucosa and cloacal swabs where CT presented a higher presence of Lacto bacillus, and at 72 weeks, there were no apparent differ ences between groups.
Campylobacter levels were marginally altered at 28 weeks in both groups, but it was higher in ileum content in CT. At 50 weeks, there was a low occurrence of Campylobac except in ileum content and mucosa, where CT had a no tably higher presence. Variable results were observed in different origins at 72 weeks but considerably higher in ileum content and mucosa in CT and higher in PB in cae ca. It was observed that Escherichia-Shigella had a low presence at 28 weeks, except in ileum content and cloacal swabs, which were higher in CT. At 50 weeks, it showed a similar low abundance except in ileum content and clo acal swabs, where it was highly abundant and higher in CT than in PB. During late lay, Escherichia-Shigella had a higher abundance in PB cloacal swabs than in CT.
Discussion
This study investigated the potential of precision glycans to influence the microbiota composition in commercial layer hens, ultimately enhancing their performance during the demanding peak production phase. Initially, both groups of hens exhibited expected performance levels described in the breed standard. However, as the trial progressed, significant differences emerged between the two groups.
The group receiving precision glycans displayed an im provement in feed conversion, a critical factor in poultry production economics. This improvement can be attributed to enhanced gastrointestinal tract function, as suppor ted by several key observations. First, there was a clear macroscopic enhancement in gut functionality, charac -
CHOOSE HOW YOU WANT
TO ENJOY
It’s been 50 years since Zootecnica International started serving the poultry industry and professionals. Today the magazine is edited in three languages (English, Italian and Russian) and delivered monthly in 120 countries, reaching around 30.000 readers all over the world
The target of Zootecnica International includes farmers, egg producers, breeding companies, hatcheries, feed mills, poultry and egg processing companies.
Magazine and website offer a broad overview on the poultry industry, providing in-depth news on international markets, business management, trends and much more.
PRINT ONLY
(print magazine delivered to your door)
ONLY (digital magazine sent to your mailbox)
for other payment methods, email us at subscription@zootecnicainternational.com Subscribe online by PayPal or Credit Card
terised by a well-preserved intestinal structure, reduced undigested feed, and less abnormal content detected. Additionally, histological findings revealed improved gut health in the PB group, with a significantly increased goblet cell count observed at 28 and 50 weeks. Goblet cells play a vital role in producing mucin, a protective layer that can establish a favourable environment for commensal microbiota, which can utilise these glycoproteins as major nutrition source. This symbiotic relationship between goblet cells and commensal microbiota is crucial for maintaining gut health.
Interestingly, PB not only outperformed the CT in terms of feed conversion but also exhibited higher egg production, especially considering the increased mortality experienced by both groups due to sporadic smothering events, which impacted more the CT group. Smothering events are complex and not yet fully understood but can be influenced by factors such as age, time of day, temperature fluctuations, and lit ter conditions. Nevertheless, none of these factors were repor ted and it can be assumed that both groups shared similar conditions for potential smothering occurrence. Furthermore, the performance differences could not be related to these events, as it was found by Herbert et al., 2021. When analysing 28 weeks results, clear differences emerged between PB and CT in various gut sections. PB exhibited a prevalence of lactic-acid bacteria, commonly associated with probiotics. In contrast, CT showed a prevalence of potential pathogenic groups, such as Escherichia-Shigella and Campylobacter.
In summary, this study demonstrated the potential of precision glycans as a practical and commercially viable tool to improve poultry egg production, even in challenging free-range environments. The use of precision glycans could help achieve the genetic potential of poultry breeds for optimum performance while offering economic benefits to poultry producers. However, further research is warranted to gain a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms and to optimise the application of precision glycans in poultry production for sustainable and efficient outcomes.
References are available on request From the Proceedings of the Australian Poultry Science Symposium
MIXTA THE FEED PAN FOR TURKEYS, DUCKS AND MIXED CYCLES
No chick inside the pan.
Automatic feed level setting with the window opening system.
ONE SECOND immediate opening and closing of the bottom pan for complete and fast washing.
DUO THE SUITABLE COMBINED FEEDING AND DRINKING SYSTEM FOR BROILERS
Only one winching system for two lines with more space in the shed.
Designed from one-day old to slaughtering age.
Automatic feed level setting with the window opening system.
Cal-Maine Foods: a portrait of the world’s largest egg producer
In this article, the author tells the story of Cal-Maine Foods, its recent acquisitions, and the changes it has had to face in recent years.
A preliminary remark
Hans-Wilhelm Windhorst
The author is Professor Emeritus of the University of Vechta, Germany
I first met Fred Adams, the founder of the company, during a research trip to the USA in Jackson (Mississippi) in 2001. He gave me detailed information about the early years of the company. In the years that followed, we met frequently at meetings of the International Egg Commission, for which I was working as a statistical analyst at that
time. I followed the development of CalMaine with great interest. Through his successor in the company management since 2012, Adolphus Baker (son-in-law of Fred Adams), I was able to follow the progress of the company’s development through personal contacts. In March 2024, I visited him at the new company headquarter in Ridgeland, Mississippi. In 2022, he handed over his position as CEO to Sherman Miller, who
The new headquarter of Cal-Maine Foods in Richland (Mississippi) (Photo: Cal-Maine)
has been with the company for a long time. In a long conversation, they informed me about the latest acquisitions, the changes in housing systems for laying hens and the challenges they are facing as a company.
A brief history of the company
At the age of 10, Fred Adams was already selling milk from two cows, which his father had given him, in the neighborhood of the farm. In 1957, when he was just 25 years old, the story of the company that would one day become Cal-Maine began. Using a second-hand lorry, he distributed feed for Ralston-Purina to farmers in Mississippi and Louisiana. He built his first commercial layer farm in 1958 in Mendenhall, Mississippi.1 The merger of his Adams Egg Company with Dairy Fresh Products in California and Maine Egg Farms in 1959 led to the com
1 A ccording to a newspaper report (Simpson County Newspaper) from January 7th, 1960, it had over 140,000 hen places.
OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS FOR EGGS TRANSPORT
LUBING Conveyor-Systems offer safe transport solutions for every plant layout and house design.
•Curve conveyor for turns up to 90°.
• Steep Conveyor Climber for inclines and declines up to 60°.
• Stable, proven Rod Conveyor for the effective overcoming of any length.
•Integrable transfers and cleaning unit.
• Worldwide uncompromising quality and reliable service.
Via Marco Polo, 33 - 35011 - Campodarsego (PD) ITALIA +39 0499202290 - lubingsystem.com - info@lubing.it
Table 1 – Major acquisitions of egg companies by Cal-Maine Foods between 1972 and 2024 (source: Cal-Maine Investor Presentation April 2024).
Company
pany name Cal-Maine. Four years later, recognizing the market opportunity for high quality eggs, he began the construction of the largest egg farm worldwide at one location in Edwards, Mississippi, producing 700,000 eggs per day. 2, 3
In the years that followed, the company grew very rapidly, both through the construction of own farms and, above all, through the acquisition of other egg companies (Table 1). In order to finance these acquisitions, Cal-Maine went public in 1996.
Investment in Meadowcreek began in October 2021. In March 2023, the company began operations with a focus on being a leading provider of hard-cooked eggs. Prior to the investment in Meadowcreek, Texas Egg Products and American Egg Products were a part of Cal-Maine. Meadowcreek was, however, a first strategic investment related to cooked egg products and is now a majority-owned subsidiary of Cal-Maine.
A total of 24 companies have been acquired and integrated into the group since 1989. The strategy behind the acquisitions was on the one hand, to achieve synergy
effects by integrating breeding and pullet farms as well as feed mills and, on the other hand, to gain access to the egg markets in the south-central and south-eastern regions of the USA (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 – Operating locations and market regions of Cal-Maine Foods (source: Cal-Maine Foods).
The acquisition of larger units since the middle of the last decade was primarily aimed at reducing the gap between the quantity of eggs sold and those produced in own farms and to be able to meet the growing demand for cage-free eggs. The latter aspect in particular has become increasingly important. Over 700 million $ have been invested in the transformation of farms with the conventional cage systems to cage-free systems and in the construction of new farms, such as the Delta Egg Farm in Utah (Windhorst 2023).
The farm, which has 3.3 million hen places, is primarily aimed at supplying the agglomerations in Southern California. As eggs from hens, which are kept in conventional cages, cannot be sold in California since 2022, the company felt compelled to respond by transforming or building new facilities, if it did not want to lose this attractive market. Future acquisitions will align with the company’s growth strategy and focus on synergistic acquisitions, cage-free opportunities and value-added products.
2 H owever, it was not yet the largest egg-producing company at that time, as the Egga Landei GmbH u. Co. KG (headquartered in Vechta in Lower Saxony) already kept over 2.5 million laying hens in 13 farms in Germany at the beginning of the 1970s, the largest of which had 260,000 hen places. The company produced around 500 million eggs per year (Windhorst 1975, p. 119 ff.).
3 S impson County News, September 23, 1971, p. 12: “Headquartered at Edwards, Adams Egg Farms, Inc, is the world’s largest egg farm. The farm has the phenomenal production of 700,000 eggs per day, or approximately 225 million eggs annually. Fred Adams, Jr., the 38-years-old president of the corporation, began the enterprise in 1958. The farm now includes 134 laying houses, 25 growing houses, 26 brooder houses, feed mill, hatchery, and egg grading and packing plant, all on 1065 acres of land.” Note: as the article was published in 1971, when Fred Adams was already 39 years old, it is not clear
refer.
MARKETING
Vertical integration - the model for success
With 44.3 million laying hens, Cal-Maine Foods was by far the largest egg producing company in the world in 2022 (Table 2). The continuous expansion of the flocks, the associated production and processing facilities as well as their spatial arrangement are indicative of the underlying strategy.
Table 2 – The ten largest egg producing companies in 2022 (source: WATTPoultry). Egg
Cal-Maine Foods
Proteina Animal
Rose Acre Farms
CP Group
Beijing DAT Co.
Versova Holdings
Hillandale Farms
Ise Inc.
Daybreak Foods
ACOLD
To achieve the best possible utilization of all units of the company, the elements involved in production, processing and marketing were combined in a production network (Table 3).
Table 3 – The vertical integration of Cal-Maine Foods (values as of fiscal year 2023; source: personal information, Investor Presentation April 2024).
3 breeding farms
2 hatcheries
29 pullet growing farms
44 laying hen farms
44 grading and packing plants
3 egg product processing facilities
26
Because of the company’s size, it is absolutely necessary to coordinate the complex control processes.
Adaptation to changing markets
The per capita consumption of eggs fell from almost 360 eggs in the 1960s to less than 250 eggs at the beginning of the 1990s. The company took this development
into account and tried to counter the downward trend. The marketing strategy was targeted towards continuous changes in the quantity and specification of eggs. The development in per capita consumption on the one hand and the demand for certain eggs (size, color, enriched with omega-3 or vitamins) on the other played a decisive role.
For example, food retailers are increasingly demanding eggs in size class L (= large), or eggs with a lower cholesterol and fat content or from cage-free farms. In contrast, the processing industry continues to favor eggs from conventional cage systems due to their lower price. While eggs were predominantly sold as an unspecified product in the past, there have been significant changes since the 1990s. The discussion about the negative effects of cholesterol on health, particularly heart diseases, played an important role. Cal-Maine reacted with the acquisition of the license for the Eggland’s Best4 label in 1992 and several other brands.
Eggland’s Best eggs are sold under various labels. Figure 2 shows that about half of the eggs sold by Cal-Maine
4 Eggland’s Best LLC, the licensor, was founded in 1990 by Charles Lanktree in Cedar Knolls (New Jersey) and is currently based in Malvern, Pennsylvania.
go to private label brands. Of the total egg sales, Walmart and Sam’s Club take 34%, the top three grocery chains 50%. The premium product, Eggland’s Best, has a share of 13% and the company’s own brands 14%. Unbranded eggs share 24%, they are sold to various customers, including the egg processing industry.
Dynamic development in production and operating results
The company has developed very dynamically since 2000. Figure 3 shows that between fiscal years 2000 and 2023, egg production continuously increased from 4.7 billion to 12.7 billion pieces or by 127%.
As a result, the company’s self- production share in total sales grew from 73.8% to 92.3%. Of the 94 billion eggs produced in the USA in 2023, Cal-Maine accounted for 13.5%.5
During the Covid-19 pandemic, people prepared more food at home and the egg demand decreased. This led to an oversupply and a decline in market prices while the production costs increased due to supply chain issues, labor shortage and inflation. Figure 4 documents the decrease in net profit per egg from 8.7 cents to 8.1 cents between 2019 and 2021 and the remarkable increase to 22.8 cents in 2023 (cf. Windhorst 2024).
Figure 3 – The development of Cal-Maine’s egg production and egg sales between 2000 and 2023 (data of fiscal years) (design: A.S. Kauer based on Cal-Maine’s Investor Report April 2024).
Figure 4 – The development of Cal-Maine’s net profit and production cost per egg between 2019 and 2023 (design: A.S. Kauer based on Cal-Maine’s Investor Report April 2024).
Table 4 reveals that the pandemic resulted in a shortterm stagnation of the sales volume and a decrease in EBITDA6 and net profit of the company.
Table 4 – The development of Cal-Maine’s net sales, EBITDA and net profit in mill. $ between fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2023 (source: Investor Presentation April 2024).
With the end of the Covid-19 pandemic and the impact of the massive AI outbreaks in 2022, which caused the loss of over 44 million laying hens in the USA, sales increased to $3.1 billion and net profit from just $2.1 million in fiscal
6 Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization.
Figure 2 – Labels of Cal-Maine's egg marketing (design: A.S. Kauer based on Cal-Maine's Investor Report April 2024).
year 2021 to $758 million in fiscal year 2023 (Table 4).
Despite the significantly higher production costs, the company achieved the highest net profit in its history. This financial basis opens up opportunities to acquire or build additional layer farms or processing plants.
Data sources and additional literature
Cal-Maine Foods: Fiscal Year 2022 Sustainability Report: https://irp.cdn-website.com/79e86203/files/uploaded/calmainesustainability_12.pdf.
WATTPoultry; World’s Top 10 Egg Producers. https://www. wattagnet.com/egg/egg-production/article/15534947/ the-worlds-top-10-egg-producers.
Windhorst, H.-W.: Spezialisierte Agrarwirtschaft in Südoldenburg. Eine agrargeographische Untersuchung (=Nordwestniedersächsische Regionalforschungen, Band 2). Leer 1975.
Windhorst, H.-W.: Die Industrialisierung der Agrarwirtschaft. Ein Vergleich ablaufender Prozesse in den USA und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Frankfurt am Main 1989.
Windhorst, H.-W.: A new milestone in US egg production. In: Poultry World 38 (2022), no. 9, p.26-28.
Windhorst, H.-W.: Impacts of the 2022 AI epidemic in the USA on laying hen inventories, egg production and egg prices. In: Zootecnica International 46 (2024), no. 2, p. 20 -24.
Domestic egg production, whether on a large scale or in small and backyard flocks, will often result in some odd-looking eggs. This publication discusses 12 of the more common oddities seen in poultry egg production and explains why the abnormalities occur. Some of these deviations from normal-looking eggs impact egg quality and result in eggs that should be discarded.
It takes a chicken approximately 24-26 hours to complete the egg laying process, from the release of the yolk from the ovary to the actual laying of the egg. At the end of the process, a perfectly oval-shaped egg is expected – but this is not always what the hen lays.
C.S. Dunkley, Extension Poultry Scientist
University of Georgia
Poultry
Science Department
1. Shell-less eggs
A shell-less egg, as the name implies, does not have a shell. Instead, the interior con-
tents of the egg (i.e., yolk and albumin) are protected only by the shell membranes. There are numerous reasons why this may occur. The shell gland is the section of a hen’s reproductive tract where the shell is deposited onto the ex terior of the shell membrane. If the shell gland is immature, there’s a greater chance that shell-less eggs may occur.
Diseases such as Avian Influenza, Newcastle disease, infectious bronchitis, and egg drop syndrome ’76 can cause flocks to
lay shell-less eggs, and it also may happen if the birds’ diet is deficient in calcium, phosphorus, manganese, or vitamin D3.
A shell-less egg cannot be processed or packaged because it lacks the rigidity and shape of a well-formed eggshell.
2. Soft-shelled eggs
Soft-shelled eggs are different from shell-less eggs. A soft-shelled egg has a thin layer of calcium deposited onto the shell membrane, and the egg has a paper-like feel. If a soft-shelled egg is held, it caves to the touch.
Soft-shelled eggs are more likely to be observed in older hens. Other potential causes of soft-shelled eggs include YOUR CHOICE
Photo: Mark D. McConnell
too much phosphorus in the diet, moldy feed, salty water, or feed contaminated with mycotoxins.
A soft-shelled egg cannot be processed because of its poor eggshell quality.
3. Calcium deposits on eggs
Irregularly shaped excess calcium deposits sometimes can be seen on the surface of an egg’s shell. This can occur if the shell gland is defective or if there are disturbances during the calcification process during egg formation, and deposits can be observed on eggs of any color. Too much calcium and/or vitamin D in the diet also can cause calcium deposits on eggs.
The size of the calcium deposit determines whether excess calcium affects eggshell quality. Based on United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) standards for grading eggs, an egg with a calcium deposit that is smaller than 1/8 in. can be categorized as a Grade A egg. Any calcium deposit larger than 1/8 in. would downgrade the egg to Grade B.
4. White or brown speckled eggs
While some breeds lay speckled eggs, the speckled eggs described here are abnormal. Abnormally speckled eggs have smaller speckles than are observed with excess calcium deposits, although these spots also are formed by small calcium deposits.
These deposits are laid down before the formation of the cuticle, which is the last layer of the egg. This process occurs in the shell gland. Speckled eggs can happen if the shell gland is defective or if there are disturbances in the chicken house during the calcification process of egg formation. Too much calcium in a hen’s diet also can result in speckled eggs.
These eggs are still salable, and speckling does not negatively affect the quality of the egg.
5. Pimpled eggs
Pimpled eggs have small, raised lumps of calcium on the shell, and feel rough and sandpaper-like to the touch. The severity of the pimples depends on the amount of foreign material present during calcification.
As with calcium deposits, these eggs would still be Grade A eggs in ex terior quality if each pimple is smaller than 1/8 inch. Any one pimple larger than 1/8 of an inch would make that egg a Grade B egg.
6. Slab-sided eggs
A slab-sided egg occurs when a second egg enters the shell gland before the first egg leaves. Because the second egg is not yet completely calcified, the side that touches the first egg is flat tened.
TECHNICAL COLUMN
This can occur if there are changes in the chicken house lighting or if the bird is stressed. Diseases also can cause this anomaly. This abnormality has a negative impact on overall eggshell quality because of the thinness of the slabbed area.
7. Cracked eggs
These eggs have large cracks, star cracks, or hairline cracks that sometimes result in holes in the shell; these
holes can allow the contents of the egg to leak. This is more likely to be observed in older hens. It also can occur in younger flocks if the water is salty or if there is a calcium or vitamin D deficiency. Mycotoxins (especially zearalenone) in the diet or heat stress also can cause cracked eggs.
Eggs with cracks or thin spots are compromised, and this reduces the quality of the egg. Eggs with broken or cracked shells are considered a loss and should not be sold to consumers.
8. Wrinkled eggs
These eggs appear to have ridges or wrinkled surfaces. Overcrowding, which results in stressed hens, can cause this abnormality. It also can be seen when a hen’s shell gland is defective or if the flock has infectious bronchitis. Wrinkles can result in weakened shells.
Based on USDA standards for ex terior eggshell quality, a wrinkled egg is downgraded to Grade B.
9. Corrugated eggs
These eggs have a very rough, corrugated-looking surface. This happens during plumping, the process where nutrient-rich fluids are pumped into membrane-covered eggs before the shell is laid over the shell membrane.
When plumping is not controlled properly and terminates before the process is completed, corrugated eggs result. This abnormality is more common in older hens, but can be seen in younger birds. Heat stress, salty water, poor nutrition, and mycotoxin-contaminated diets all can cause corrugated eggs.
Depending on the severity of the roughness in these eggs, they may be downgraded to Grade B because of eggshell quality.
10. Mottled eggs
Mottled eggs have a spotty appearance to the naked eye. The spots, which are more translucent than the other areas of the shell, can be seen clearly when candled. This condition occurs when the shell fails to dry out quickly.
It is common in overcrowded houses with high humidity. Manganese deficiency, disease, and mycotoxins also can cause mottled eggs.
This condition of the egg does not alter the grade for exterior shell quality.
11. Dirty eggs
Every egg producer knows that eggs can get dirty if they are not collected from the nests in a timely manner. However, eggs can be stained with excreta when the flock has wet, pasty droppings. Large amounts of indigestible
compounds in their feed, poor gut health, or salty water can cause wet droppings, as can ingredients such as cassava (yucca or tapioca), wheat, barley, or rye. Based on USDA standards for ex terior eggshell quality, any egg with slight to moderate stains can be classified as Grade B or dirty depending on the size and number of stains. The eggs pictured here are classified as dirty and would not be sold for human consumption.
12. Bloodstained eggs
Bloodstained eggs are more common in young flocks in early lay, especially if the hens are overweight. Poor hygiene and sudden increases in day length also can cause
bloodstains on eggs. Eggs with bloodstains cannot be sold, but these eggs can be cleaned to remove the stains.
References
Alltech Digital Marketing. (2018, November 15). Twenty common egg shell quality problems and causes. https:// store.alltech.com/blogs/poultry/20-common-egg-shellquality-problems-and-causes
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2000). United States standards, grades, and weight classes for shell eggs (Publication No. AMS 56). https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/ files/media/Shell_Egg_Standard%5B1%5D.pdf
By courtesy of The University of Georgia. Firstly published by the University of Georgia in cooperation with Fort Valley State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and counties of the state in UGA Cooperative Extension Circular 1255 | A Dozen Egg Abnormalities: How they affect egg quality. April 2022. Photos by C. S. Dunkley, unless otherwise noted.
Tom Tabler, Department of Animal Science, University of Tennessee
Yi Liang, Departments of Biological and Agricultural Engineering/Poultry Science, University of Arkansas
Victoria Ayres, School of Agriculture, Tennessee Tech University
Jessica Wells, Department of Poultry Science, Mississippi State University
Pramir Maharjan, Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Tennessee State University
Jonathan Moon, Department of Poultry Science, Mississippi State University
Attention needed on poultry drinking water
Even though water is the most critical nutrient for our birds, for the most part it remains the most neglected. That must change. For far too long, if the drinker lines had water when the chickens wanted a drink and the cool cell pads got wet when the evaporative cooling system kicked on, neither producers nor service technicians nor the poultry industry in general gave much attention to water. However, it’s a different poultry world today than it was five, ten or twenty-five years ago.
Change is never easy, but we must change the way we think and place greater importance on the quality of water our birds are drinking today. Failure to do so is costing producers and the poultry industry money in the “No Antibiotics Ever” (NAE) environment we find ourselves in
today. In the past, a little antibiotic at the hatchery and in the feed allowed producers and the industry to get a little soft on water management in general and, specifically, on water treatment programs, but those days are gone now because, for the most part, antibiotics are gone. The industry and its growers must realize that drinking water quality for poultry has never been more important than it is today. We’ve become spoiled where water is concerned and must focus more attention on poultry drinking water quality in the future.
Focus on basics
High levels of minerals, bacteria and other pollutants in poultry drinking water can cause detrimental effects on normal poultry physiological functions resulting in poor performance. Quality drinking water for poultry can be difficult to comprehend because standards have often been derived from recommendations for other animal species or perhaps from human standards. Guidelines may have initially been established based on sickness or mortality and not on a deficiency in performance. In addition, the water quality of an aquifer can change over time. Therefore, it is important to submit a water sample on an annual basis for analysis as part of a water management program. The results of these annual analyses should be used to guide the water treatment program over the next year. If you are uncomfortable interpreting your water analysis, seek assistance for someone that can help you; a water expert from the Extension service or from various water treatment companies can assist you in understanding your analysis.
Look for patterns that may indicate possible water quality problems. If you see issues like high mortality rates, poor flock performance on a regular basis, enteric issues (loose droppings, gut sloughing, excess feed passage, etc.), flock after flock that breaks with disease, or low flock water consumption compared to neighboring growers, the cause is most likely related to water quality. Water quality does not play favorites, and growers with good or excellent management practices are as much at risk as those who may be less concerned about management practices. Perhaps even more so because good managers may be willing to try multiple alternatives to fix the problem as quickly as possible. However, it’s important to never try more than one thing at a time on any one flock. If you try three things at once and the flock per-
forms better, you won’t know which product made the difference. Also, products can work against each other. Perhaps one product would have worked, but when you tried three things at once, they all worked against each other and nothing changed, or perhaps things may have gotten worse because the products weren’t compatible. Poultry houses may have been designed to grow chickens and turkeys, but they are notorious for growing other things as well. The water system (regulators, drinker lines, nipples, etc.) in these houses can grow bacteria, biofilm, mold, algae, yeasts, parasites and viruses — particularly when chicks are small, water movement is slow and water in the lines is warm because the house is warm for the chicks. Bacteria, mold, fungi, minerals and water additives can interact in the water source and within the piping and drinkers to complicate management practices necessary to guarantee the best quality water for optimum performance. While one thousand bacteria per milliliter may be the acceptable standard for poultry drinking water, up to one million bacteria per milliliter have been found in contaminated water supplies. The warm moist poultry water system environment is ideal for bacterial
+39 0543 975311 info@valli-italy.com
growth in the water lines. That’s why it’s critical to 1) know what’s in your water, 2) change filters regularly and flush water lines frequently, and 3) educate yourself about any products you may be considering using to counteract what’s in your water. Do these products have side effects? Will these products cut loose slime, biofilm or hard water scale/deposits that can clog nipple drinkers?
Under ideal conditions, bacteria should not be present in poultry drinking water. Their presence often indicates contamination by organic materials. For example, presence of coliform bacteria in drinking water is often related to fecal contamination resulting from runoff to surface or ground water supplies. Table 1 lists established guidelines for poultry drinking water quality. Be aware that factors such as bird age, lighting programs and environmental temperature can affect water consumption. As birds age they consume more water, but overall consumption relative to body weight decreases. When environmental temperatures are high, water intake increases, with perhaps as much as two to three times or more greater intake under heat stress conditions. In houses with a lighting program in place, growers see peak water consumption occurring just after the lights come on and again just prior to the lights going out.
NAE has changed things
NAE production programs have removed most antibiotics from the hatchery and the feed and changed the way chickens are grown today. This removal of antibiotics has revealed several things we could not see before. Many of these issues were likely present for some time but were being masked by a small amount of antibiotic use or else were thought to be unimportant. However, without antibiotics, those issues have made themselves known and must be addressed. Were antibiotics our solution to poor drinking water quality in the past? Did we medicate our way out of poor water quality and less-than-ideal management practices with a little help from antibiotics? On many poultry farms today, the answer to those questions is yes.
Therefore, we now have a variety of new products on the market hoping to fill the void left when antibiotics were removed and offering integrators, growers additives and supplements that may enhance flock performance and recapture some of the production benefits that antibiotics offered. The water system is often the easiest way
to deliver many of these products to baby chicks (Figure 1) and older birds (Figure 2), and, as a result, we are seeing a huge increase in water line issues, from leaking and clogged nipples to increased bacterial and biofilm challenges to decreased water intake and reduced flock performance.
NAE production is a different way of growing chickens, and we are still learning how best to do it. It is a big change and change is hard. It’s as big a change as going from bell-type or eight-foot trough drinkers to nipple drinkers or from curtain-sided, natural ventilation to solid-walled, tunnel ventilation.
With the host of supplements and additives available today, including probiotics, prebiotics, organic acids, essential oils, vitamins, minerals, electrolytes, etc., it is diffi-
Figure 1 – Baby chicks often receive product through the drinker system.
Figure 2 – Older birds may also receive supplements/additives through the water system.
MANAGEMENT
Table 1 – Poultry water quality standards and treatment options (adapted from Watkins, 2008).
quality
Total bacteria (TPC)
Total coliforms Fecal coliforms
pH
Calcium (Ca) 60 mg/l
Dirty system, may taste bad and could have pathogens in the water system. Water with >50 total coliforms or any fecal coliform has been in contact with feces
Below 5 — metal corrosion Above 8 — water sanitizers work poorly; “bitter” taste
Associated with bicarbonate, sulfates and calcium carbonate; can give water a bitter taste that is undesirable to the birds; difficult to lower pH at high levels. Corrosive to cool cell pads
Hardness causes scale, which reduces pipe volume and makes drinkers hard to trigger or leak (main factors are calcium and magnesium, but iron and manganese contribute a small amount)
No upper limit; if values are above 110 mg/l, may cause scaling
Magnesium (Mg) 14 mg/l 125 mg/l May cause flushing because of laxative effect if high sulfate is present
Birds tolerant of metallic taste. Drinkers may leak from Fe deposit. Can promote bacteria growth (E. coli and Pseudomonas).
Clean the system between flocks with approved sanitizing cleaners and establish a daily water sanitation system when birds are present; shock chlorinate as well
Raise pH with soda ash, lime or sodium hydroxide. Lower pH — phosphoric acid, sulfuric acid and hydrochloric acid (strong alkalinity); citric acid or vinegar (weak alkalinity)
Acidification. Anion exchange dealkalizer can be reduced by removing free carbon dioxide through aeration.
If water is high in sodium, do not use water softener unless potassium chloride is used instead of sodium chloride. Polyphosphates will tie up hardness and keep in solution. Water acidification to pH below 6.5
Treatment same as for hardness
Treatment same as for hardness
Treatment: addition of one of the following; chlorine, chlorine dioxide, or ozone then filtration removal with proper sized mechanical filtration
Manganese (Mn)
Sodium (Na)
Zinc (Zn)
mg/l
Can result in black grainy residue on filters and in drinkers
Combined with high Na levels, can cause flushing and enteric issues. Can promote Enteroccoci bacterial growth.
Can cause flushing in combination with high Cl levels. Can promote Enteroccoci bacterial growth
Can cause flushing
Hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg smell) indicates sulfur-loving bacterial growth; can cause flushing and air locks in water system; sulfides can gas off, so test results may underestimate actual levels present
Poor growth and feed conversion may indicate fecal contamination; test for coliform bacteria
Can cause weak bones and fertility problems in broiler and turkey breeders
High levels may cause oral lesions or gizzard erosion
Growth may be reduced at high levels
Similar to iron; can be more difficult to remove due to slow reaction time Chlorination followed by filtration most effective in 8.5 pH range, needs extended contact time with chlorine prior to filtration unless using Iron X media
Reverse osmosis, mix with non-saline water, keep water clean and use daily sanitizers such as hydrogen peroxide or iodine to prevent microbial growth
Treatment same as chlorine
Aerate water into holding tank to gas off sulfur. Anion exchange (chloride based) Treat with oxidizing sanitizers. Then filtration. If rotten smell is present, shock chlorination of well is recommended plus daily water sanitation while birds are present
Reverse osmosis Anion exchange
Not naturally occurring. Check for pipes, fittings or solder that contain lead. Can be reduced by water softeners and activated carbon
Most likely results from corrosion of pipes or fittings
Water softener and activated carbon will reduce adsorption
Table 2 – Guidelines for poultry for the suitability of water with different concentrations of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) (National Research Council, 1974).
TDS (ppm)
Less than 1,000
1,000-2,999
3,000-4,999
5,000-6,999
7,000-10,000
Comments
These waters should present no serious burden to any class of poultry.
These waters should be satisfactory for all classes of poultry. They may cause watery droppings (especially at the higher levels) but should not affect health or performance.
These are poor waters for poultry, often causing watery droppings, increased mortality and decreased growth (especially in turkeys).
These are not acceptable waters for poultry and almost always cause some type of problem, especially at the upper limits, where decreased growth and production or increased mortality probably will occur.
These waters are unfit for poultry but may be suitable for other livestock.
More than 10,000 These waters should not be used for any livestock or poultry.
cult to know where to begin. Some of these products have shown promise — at least some of the time — in poultry health programs, but there is a downside to running them through the water system. For example, essential oils are being used by many integrators today as a natural alternative to antibiotics. There are hundreds of essential oils and essential oil combinations currently being tested by the poultry industry. However, essential oils are some of the slimiest and stickiest products used by the industry, and, if delivered through the water system, they are some of the most difficult supplements to clean up. If you run essential oils through the water system, you must have a thorough water line cleaning program between flocks.
Probiotics are live bacterial microorganisms intended to provide health benefits. While these are good bacteria, all bacteria can clog the drinker system. Prebiotics are carbohydrate- or plant- based nutrients used to enhance growth of bacteria in the gut. However, they will also enhance growth of bacteria in the water lines when given through the water system. Vitamins, minerals and electrolytes are often given to encourage and improve bird health; however, they also encourage bacteria health in the water lines as well and further enhance line and nipple clogging. High levels of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) are also harmful to poultry production.
Calcium, magnesium and sodium salts are the primary components that contribute to TDS. Table 2 gives guidelines suggested by the National Research Council (1974) for the suitability for poultry of water with varying levels of TDS. There is likely no such thing as pure drinking water today. There is always something in the water such as minerals, bacteria or some other contaminant. A water analysis is the only way to know what is in the water your
flock is drinking. Once you know what’s in the water, it will be easier to build an effective treatment program.
Treatment options
Chlorine and hydrogen peroxide are the two most common water treatment options. Chlorine comes in various forms, and it’s important to understand each of them:
• Liquid chlorine is often misused because of the pH of the water source. If pH of the water is low (<6.0), chlorine escapes as a gas, decreasing its effectiveness and increasing equipment corrosion. If pH is high (>8.5), the amount of hypochlorous acid formed is greatly reduced, and the water will not be satisfactorily disinfected.
• Gas chlorine is the most effective of all the chlorine forms, but chlorine gas is dangerous and requires special knowledge and handling practices.
• Chlorine dioxide is more effective than liquid chlorine and less dangerous than chlorine gas but requires mixing time and special handling
Even though chlorine is a popular treatment option, liquid chlorine can damage rubber components of the drinker system, especially the rubber seals on nipple drinkers if mixed too strongly. Strive to maintain a level of around 3 ppm at the end of the drinker line farthest from the control room. Be aware that chlorine breaks down quickly and does not compete well with other additives. In addition, bacteria tend to build a resistance to liquid chlorine over time. If liquid chlorine seems to no longer be working, switch to an alternative (i.e., hydrogen peroxide) for a few flocks. Before starting any treatment program, visit with
your integrator to determine what products are allowed and always follow label instructions. Always filter the incoming water supply. Depending on the source, you may need a cotton, charcoal or greensand filter. Reverse osmosis, while expensive, is another option in extreme cases, although it uses large amounts of water.
Hydrogen peroxide products are available on the market in several different strengths, ranging from 20% to 50%. Different integrators may likely use different strengths. Check with your service technician, flock supervisor or live production manager to determine what is recommended. Some products have additives that enhance the stability of hydrogen peroxide. In most cases, generic, technical-grade or food-grade hydrogen peroxides do not contain these added ingredients and may not be as effective. The enhanced grades of hydrogen peroxide may only be available at select locations such as poultry supply houses or through distributors.
Summary
More attention must be focused on poultry drinking water quality in the future. NAE programs are not forgiving and will not tolerate management mistakes or poor water quality. Every grower should know what is in the water their chickens are drinking. This requires, at minimum, a water mineral analysis and perhaps a bacterial analysis as well. You can’t fix a problem until you know what the problem is. Therefore, a water analysis is a must. Some universities will do a water mineral analysis for around $20. That’s cheap insurance to know whether you have a poultry water quality issue. NAE production requires that we be proactive, rather than reactive, with any water treatment program. Simple is best, so if you don’t need to run something through your water system, don’t. The water system will stay cleaner that way and safe, clean water is what’s best for your birds. If you are having flock health and performance issues and have ruled out other causes, consider the possibility that drinking water quality could be the problem. Water quality problems won’t get better with time so take whatever steps necessary to address the issue.
References are available on request By courtesy of the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture and UT Extension
CARFED INTERNATIONAL LTD
Italian headquarters: Piazza Oberdan 3, 20129 Milano (Italy)
Italian warehouse: Via Basilicata 10, 20098 San Giuliano Milanese (Italy) Ph.: +39 02 9881140 – Fax: +39 02 98280274 Email: carfed@carfed.it – Website: www.carfed.it
Is insect protein a sustainable option for poultry diets?
Sustainability comprises three distinct components (the environment, ethical issues and economic robustness), and any strategy adopted by the poultry industry needs to be considered in this light.
Rick Kleyn
1 Spesfeed Consulting (Pty) Ltd, South Africa
Insects are of ten claimed as a sustainable protein source for poultry production. How it forms a part of the circular economy and reduces the environmental footprint bears testimony to
NUTRITION
this. Small-scale insect production is relatively simple, but commercial production will always be challenging because, with few exceptions, the setup costs of production facilities are high. In addition, the energy demand for running intensive insect production facilities is high. For insects to be transformed into acceptable feedstuff, some form of rendering is required, which is both energy-demanding and expensive. Using “cheap” waste streams as feedstock will be challenging from both food safety and production economic perspectives. Hence, the true sustainability of insect protein should probably be viewed in two dimensions. Small-scale production and the feeding of live insects to chickens that are deprived of protein is undoubtedly sustainable, but large-scale commercial production is less likely to be so.
Introduction
Sustainability comprises three principal components: the environment (demand for resources and potential for environmental pollution), ethical issues (welfare of man and his animals), and economic robustness. At first glance, insect protein is a sustainable alternative to traditional protein sources such as soybean meal. Insect production requires less land, water and other resources than traditional protein sources, and they can be raised on “upcycled” material from the human food supply chain (vegetable waste), or on decomposing organic mat ter not typically consumed by humans. The waste stream of insect production (frass) can be a fertilizer source for crop production.
Insects provide a favourable supply of AA for broiler chickens together with adequate energy, although levels depend on the processing method. However, the costs associated with insect protein production can be high, bringing any benefits in terms of financial robustness into doubt. Insect production remains small and is faced with problems that beset most start-ups. These include a lack of investment in research and development, the problems associated with engineering controls and scaling up and an inconsistent regulatory environment. Despite this, the industry has the potential to provide insects to production animals. This paper explores insect production and will consider its possible role in sustainable poultry production.
Insects as nutriment
Although several species of insect have been used as a source of insect protein, this paper will focus on the production of Black Soldier Fly (BSF) larvae and the meal produced from them. BSF is a source of protein, fat, metabolizable energy (AME), phosphorus, and fibre, which can be used as a replacement for other protein sources, such as soybean meal (SBM) and fishmeal. The protein quality of BSF was comparable with fish meal and SBM. It is contented BSF can be used to replace fish meal in poultry diets, but it should be remembered that very little fish meal is used in modern poultry diets because of its cost. Of interest, BSF meal produced in East Africa is expor ted to Europe for use by the pet food industry. For a nutritionist to utilise any ingredient, details of its energy and digestible amino acid content are required. It has been established that insect meals contain high levels of energy and digestible AA compared with ingredients commonly used in poultry diets, and although excellent values for BSF have been published, the nutritionist is still faced with the variability which exists in products from different production facilities, and indeed, on which feedstock was used in their production.
Several proteins expressed by insects serve as antimicrobial peptides and may serve as an alternative to antibiotics, enhancing immunocompetence and gut health in production animals. Insects also contain high concentra-
INTRA HYDROCARE DOES COMPLY WITH THE LATEST REGULATIONS
BE SMART, CHOOSE SAFETY! Pioneers in future proof solutions
tions of chitin and medium-chain fatty acids (lauric and myristic acid), which are thought to improve both gut and immune health in broiler chickens through prebiotic and antimicrobial properties, reducing the reliance on antibiotics and coccidiostats in the poultry industry.
Growth performance responses to the replacement of SBM with BSF are been variable, with some research finding that when less than 30% SBM was replaced, no change or improvement in broiler performance was measured. In cases where replacement exceeded 50%, reduced performance was experienced. Higher relative weights of the gizzard, small intestine, pancreas, and liver were observed at higher BSF inclusion, giving rise to health concerns. In laying hens, the substitution of fish meal with BSF did not affect the laying rate, feed intake, or FCR, although an increase in body weight was recorded (3% BSF meal).
Approximately 2.5 billion people depend on small farms globally, many living below the poverty line. These small farmers, only contribute 8% of global egg and 2% of poultry meat production. Despite the many benefits of intensive production, small-scale, local production is crucial in any move towards global sustainability and poverty alleviation. Small-scale farmers of ten face a challenge when trying to source protein for their poultry, and the protein provided by feeding insects will address this shortfall and improve performance. In addition, they will help reduce organic waste and pollution.
Insect production
Several aspects of insect protein production ought to be considered. First, insect production requires some form of production facility. These can range from small-scale, subsistence systems on farms to sophisticated modern climate -controlled ones. Second, before any product of animal origin can be used in poultry diets, rendering is required before a ‘safe’ product is available to be marketed. This involves high temperature and pressure (usually 3.5 Bar for 30 minutes), and then most of the remaining moisture needs to be driven off.
Commercial BSF production is high-intensity animal production, a methodology familiar to poultry producers. Climate control entails well-insulated growing rooms, which determine the quantity and quality of insect meal. Several parameters must be controlled, including food stock
(substrate) and room temperature, humidity, ammonia and CO2 levels. The process requires energy-efficient technologies and sophisticated climate control computers. An idea of the production scale is given by Farrugia, 2022. A minimum viable level for onsite production would be approximately 2,000 tons of wet larvae a year (7 tons a day), representing about 2 tons on a dry mat ter basis. The use of non-conventional substrates is being explored for mass production of insects. These include food waste streams, agricultural by-products or manure from livestock farms. This application of the circular economy reduces the environmental footprint and economic costs associated with insect production. However, edible insects can also be associated with several food safety hazards, including biological agents (bacterial, viral, fungal) and chemical contaminants (pesticides, toxic metals, pharmaceuticals). Farming insects under controlled hygienic conditions and implementing sanitary processing techniques reduces some hazards, but any production system should include mechanisms to prevent, detect, identify and mitigate such food safety concerns.
The nutrient content and the performance aspects of reared insects depend on the substrate used. Spranghers et al., (2017) offered BSF larvae three different vegetable waste substrates and chicken feed (17.5% CP) as a control. They found that the protein level and AA profile were constant regardless of the substrate fed, but that the fatty acid profile and mineral content differed. Despite the finding that they could effectively rear fly larvae on waste streams, the difference between feeding vegetable waste and chicken feed is insightful. The larvae fed chicken feed required 12.3 days to pupate, achieving a mass of 220 mg (17.9 mg/day), whereas larvae fed restaurant waste required 19 to pupate and weighed 154 mg (8.1 mg/day). In this authors opinion it should be questioned whether it is financially sustainable to throttle the output of an expensive animal production facility by using cheap inputs? Is it sensible to risk contamination in any waste stream when ‘clean’ feed could be used instead?
Sustainability
Measuring sustainability is complex because the entire value chain must be considered. This would include aspects such as the source of the substrate, any impact on the built environment, energy costs and the cost of logistics. In the case of feeding BSF, assessment is com -
plicated by the multitude of different systems used, both to produce the insects and in terms of the poultry that will ultimately consume them. Where locally available waste streams are used on farm, and live insects fed on the same farm using insects as poultry feed is sustainable.
The higher the bioconversion efficiencies, defined as the proportion of nutrients provided in the substrate which are incorporated into the insect biomass, the bet ter the sustainability performance of a system will be. The efficiencies of nutrient conversion and gaseous emissions during BSF production were measured to quantify bio conversion efficiency. Bioconversion efficiencies ranged from 14% (potassium) to 38% (nitrogen). Direct GHG emissions associated with BSF rearing were 16.8 ± 8.6 g CO2eq per kg of dry larvae, without considering the en ergy used in its production. By comparison, a value of 0.580 g CO2eq is given for locally produced SBM.
Conclusions
The use of insect protein in the poultry industry is in its preliminary stages. Insects can convert waste streams, unfit for human consumption, into a nutrient and energy source for animal feeding, although the risk of contami nation with rogue chemicals may be high. Insect protein is useful in subsistence poultry production, where it of ten forms the only dietary protein source. High-intensity, com mercial insect production requires sophisticated facilities. Few proper assessments of the sustainability of commercial insect production have been published, however, the existent data would indicate that the carbon footprint of insect protein is likely higher than alternative ingredients. It has been shown that feeding insects a balanced feed, more than doubles their growth rate, so using low-density waste streams in high-intensity production systems may be questionable. Relative to the requirements of the poultry industry, the output of insect products is small. Perhaps the true sustainability of insect protein should be viewed in two dimensions. Small-scale production and the feeding of live insects to chickens that are probably deprived of protein is most undoubtedly sustainable, but large-scale commercial production is unlikely to be so.
References are available on request From the Proceedings of the Australian Poultry Science Symposium
KEEP UP ON TRENDS AND CHALLENGES of poultry industry with
It’s been 50 years since Zootecnica International started serving the poultry industry and professionals. Today the magazine is edited in three languages (English, Italian and Russian) and delivered monthly in 120 countries, reaching around 30.000 readers all over the world.
The target of Zootecnica International includes farmers, egg producers, breeding companies, hatcheries, feed mills, poultry and egg processing companies.
Magazine and website offer a broad overview on the poultry industry, providing in-depth news on international markets, business management, trends and practices in poultry, genetics, incubation, nutrition, veterinary and management.
zootecnicainternational.com
World leader in incubators & complete hatchery solutions
www.petersime.com
INCUBATORS SPECIALIST SINCE 1924
Incubators for all types of eggs. Specialists for partridges, pheasants and ostriches. Via Bancora e Rimoldi 3 – 22070 Guanzate (COMO), Italy 39-031.352.91.22 – 031.352.91.29 – Fax: 39-031.352.95.91
E-mail: victoria@victoria-srl.com
Automatic and digital incubators from 18 to 10.000 eggs of capacity Via G.Galilei 3 – 22070 Guanzate (COMO), Italy Fax: +39-031.899.163
E-mail: fiem@fiem.it
www.agritech.it – e-mail: commerce@agritech.it
Leader in pig & poultry equipment
Via Roma 29, 24030 Medolago (BG) Italy - Phone +39 035 901240 Fax +39 035 902757 info@azainternational.it www.azainternational.it
CARFED INTERNATIONAL LTD
Italian Headquarters: Piazza Oberdan, 3, 20129 Milano (Italy)
Italian Warehouse: Via Basilicata, 10, 20098 San Giuliano Milanese (Italy) Tel.: +39 02 9881140 - Fax: +39 02 98280274 Email: carfed@carfed.it - Website: www.carfed.it
UK Headquarters: 2nd Floor Gadd House, Arcadia Avenue London, England N3 2JU, United Kingdom Тel.: + 44. 20. 7660.0987- Email: carfed@carfed.co.uk
Registrazione Tribunale di Firenze n.3162 Spedizione in A.P. Art.2 comma 20/B legge 662/96 - Filiale di Firenze
ISSN 0392-0593
Subscription Rates (1 year / 11 issues): Europe Euro 100 Rest of the World Euro 120
Subscribe online by Credit Card or Paypal: zootecnicainternational.com/subscription
Subscribe by money transfer: 1. effect a money transfer to: Zootecnica International, Vicolo Libri, 4
50063 Figline Incisa Valdarno (FI) Italy; bank: UNICREDIT, BIC: UNICRITM1OU9 Iban: IT 81 H 02008 38083 000020067507
2. send us your complete shipping address by email: amministrazione@zootecnica.it.
Art Direction & Layout
Laura Cardilicchia – elleciwebstudio.com
Printed Nova Arti Grafiche, Florence
English Edition Year XLVI October 2024
CHOOSE HOW YOU WANT TO
ENJOY
It’s been 50 years since Zootecnica International started serving the poultry industry and professionals. Today the magazine is edited in three languages (English, Italian and Russian) and delivered monthly in 120 countries, reaching around 30.000 readers all over the world.
The target of Zootecnica International includes farmers, egg producers, breeding companies, hatcheries, feed mills, poultry and egg processing companies.
Magazine and website offer a broad overview on the poultry industry, providing in-depth news on international markets, business management, trends and practices in poultry, genetics, incubation, nutrition, veterinary and management.
Subscribe by money transfer:
1. effect a money transfer to: Zootecnica International, Vicolo Libri, 4 50063 Figline Incisa Valdarno (FI), Italy; bank: UNICREDIT, BIC: UNICRITM1OU9 Iban: IT 81 H 02008 38083 000020067507
2. send us your complete shipping address by email: subscription@zootecnica.it.
PRINT ONLY
DIGITAL ONLY
(digital magazine sent to your mailbox)
(print magazine delivered to your door) € 49
FARMFARMINGEQUIPMENT
TRANSPORTTRANSPORT
Serving the poultry world
ANIMALVETERINARYHEALTH
In line with its Vision and therefore always looking to anticipate the evolution of its offer, Giordano Global has continuously strengthened the relationship between its Research and Development department and the market.
This approach has allowed it to achieve and then consolidate its leadership in the production of poultry equipment and drug administration products.
All products in the whole Giordano Global range have been divided into four areas of use:
- transport - farm equipment - eggs handling - animal health
The range of products of Giordano Global is constantly focused on technological change and every day closer to the growing needs of farming.
