![]() |
Nutritional
Strategies and Opportunities for the Broiler Industry in South Africa
By
Rick Kleyn, SPESFEED (Pty) Ltd,
Introductio
Broiler
production the world over is similar - or is it?
We may all use similar genotypes but differences in climate, available
resources, market conditions and human nature often mean that production
systems can vary considerably from country to country.
The
Structure of the South African Poultry Industry
Coetzee
(2005) reported that the broiler industry is
Most
of the major companies are “integrated” to some extent.
However, these integrated organizations are structurally different from
similar organizations in other parts of the world.
The first major difference is that feed is supplied by
“sister” companies who also supply feed to other customers, rather than a
wholly owned subsidiary company or cost centre of the poultry company.
This sometimes leads to divergent objectives amongst the management
team and it is questionable if this is always the best way to maximize
shareholder value. The other major
difference between the South African industry and other companies is that some
80 to 90% of all broilers are produced on farms owned by the processors,
rather than by contract growers.
In
order to be world class producers feed ingredient
prices need to be competitive when compared to the world’s two most
efficient producers, namely
Last
year (2004) the average price paid for maize was around R 1050.00/ton (US$
175.00). This year (2005) we will
be paying between R 500.00 and R 650.00/ton (US$ 83.00 – US$ 108.00).
As recently as 2003, the ruling price for maize was R 1450.00/ton (US$
240.00). The maize price tends to
impact on the price of other ingredients as well.

Figure
1. Long term maize price on the
South African Futures Exchange (SAFEX) and the import and export parity
prices. (Source, Grain SA, 2005)
Feeding
and Nutrition
It
is as a consequence of what are generally perceived to be uncompetitive feed
prices that cause South African nutritionists and producers to be very focused
on maximizing returns (profit) in the poultry industry. There
are a number of areas that any nutritionist can focus on in order to maximize
returns, and the remainder of this paper will deal with each of these areas in
turn.
Early
Chick Nutrition
Worldwide
the poultry industry has come to realize the importance of feeding and
managing the young chicken. Indeed,
the performance results achieved during the first week of life have been shown
to have a correlation on the final performance of the flock (Kenny, 2005).
When a chick hatches it has an undeveloped gastro intestinal tract
(GIT) in terms of it anatomy, physiology and enzymatic capacity (Sklan, 2001).
In addition, the newly hatched chick has what is essentially a sterile
gut and it needs to develop a healthy GIT microflora for both digestive and
health reasons (Lan, et al., 2005).
Batal and Parsons (2002) clearly demonstrated that feed utilization,
both in terms of energy and amino acids is severely compromised in young
birds. By 10 days of age the
utilization of protein has achieved normal or mature levels, but it takes
until 15 days of age for energy utilization to normalize.
There are a number of farm management interventions that can be used to ensure a good start, but ultimately the birds should have early access to feed and water and their intake during the first week of life is ciritcal. Early access to feed and water is important so that the transition from using the nutrient (largely lipid) contained in the yolk sac to a cereal based (largely carbohydrate) diet that serves as the trigger for both the physiological and enzymatic development of the GIT (Sklan, 2001). For this reason it is essential to get the newly hatched chick onto the farm as soon after hatching as possible. Ribeiro & Penz (2005) were able to demonstrate how increasing feed and water intake resulted in higher 7 day weights. This clearly illustrates the importance of on farm management.
From
the nutritionist’s perspective there are a number things that can be done to
ensure that the newly hatched chick achieves its potential;
nutrient content of the diet can be altered, digestibility
of the diet can be improved; or additives
can be used that will stimulate GIT development, aid digestion or enhance the
development of the microflora ecology. The
scope of this paper precludes a discussion as to the importance of the various
additives, but it is this area that possibly represents one of the greatest
opportunities for all nutritionists.
There
are many ways in which the digestibility of the diet can be improved.
This can be achieved through the use of highly digestible ingredients
such as brewers yeast, prime gluten, milk components or the simple sugars such
as glucose or dextrose. It would
make sense to use high protein, low ash fishmeal, and vegetable protein
sources low in fiber for example. Recent
work by Applegate (2005) demonstrates that increasing the digestibility of
maize by de-hulling and de-germing it lead to a significant improvement in
broiler growth.
The
feed specifications used in any broiler diet are derived through an initial
determination of the birds’ nutrient requirements. Expected nutrient
requirements, recommended allowances and ultimately feed specifications are
available from many sources. These include the sets of tables published by in
the American NRC (1994). Increasingly, commercial companies such as Adessio
(2003) and Ross Breeders (2004) are also publishing values. Often these
publications do not allow for the derivation of circumstance-unique
recommendations. Simply put, the question that needs to be asked is not
“what recommendation as to the daily allowance of nutrients should be made
in order to maximise profit?” but rather, “what is the target response
needed for maximum returns?” and “how is that response satisfied in terms
of nutrients?” Put another way,
what recommendation as to the daily allowance of nutrients should be made to
achieve this target (Whittemore, 1983)?
The
determination of the energy level of poultry diets is perhaps the most
important decision that has to be made by the nutritionist. Energy contributes
approximately 60 to 70% of the cost of a broiler diet, making the selection of
an energy level that will maximise profit all-important. It is widely accepted
that nutrient requirements should be expressed in terms of grams of nutrient
per unit of energy contained in the diet. By deriving functions of broiler
response to energy density, it is possible to determine the optimum energy
level of a diet. Saleh et
al. (2004) and Guevara (2004) have both studied the effects of nutrient
density on the modern broiler. In
figure 2, a simple set of polynomial models was fitted to the data of Saleh et
al. (2004).
By
making use of a standard feed formulation program, Format International
(2005), for example, the ideal amino acid profile as published by Lemme et
al., (2004), standard ingredient costs and an estimated value for a live
broiler, it is possible to calculate the return at the different energy
densities (figure 4).
Whilst
this data is useful, it was determined using very low stocking densities (10
birds/m2). The work of
Berri et al, (2004) demonstrates clearly that at higher stocking densities
birds respond to nutrients, total lysine in this case, in a different manner.
The consequences of this are that often experimental data may not apply
to commercial conditions. Where stocking densities are higher the expected
growth on lower density diets may well be over-estimated.
It is
of interest that Saleh et al. (2004)
reported that there was no increase in mortality or leg disorders when feeding
high-density diets. Abdominal fat was not adversely affected by increasing
nutrient density when protein was maintained in ratio to energy.
Breast meat yield and percentage remained constant as the nutrient
density changed.
Phase
Feeding
The
choice of diet at any particular stage in the production process can have an
important impact on the overall profitability of a broiler operation, both in
terms of input costs and technical efficiency. As birds grow, so their energy
requirement increases relative to their protein (specifically lysine)
requirement. Feeding different diets leads to over or underfeeding of these
two critical and expensive components of the diet.
This is illustrated in figure 4.
In addition, if
it is accepted that some form of early chick diet should be offered to
broilers, then the phases that should be considered should go beyond the
simple provision of protein and energy.
Figure
3: The change in lysine (protein) and energy requirement as broilers age
Emmert
& Warren (2000) compared the NRC (1994) recommendation to three diets
formulated on an Ideal Protein basis to meet the weekly requirements for a
flock of broilers. The specifications used in these diets are summarised in
table 1 and the results are shown in table 2. Both of these tables are below.
As
can be seen, phase feeding had an impact on not only FCR (which was not
significant), but also on lysine utilisation. Although not shown, any
reduction in lysine usage would ultimately lead to a reduction in cost.
Further experiments conducted on birds of different ages showed
improved performance in addition to improved amino acid utilisation (Pope et
al., 2004).
|
|
NRC
Treatment 1-3
weeks |
Week
1 |
Week
2 |
Week
3 |
|
ME
(MJ/kg) |
13.27 |
13.06 |
13.18 |
13.27 |
|
ME
(Kcal/lb) |
1438 |
1415 |
1428 |
1438 |
|
Lysine
(g/kg) |
11.2 |
11.9 |
11.2 |
10.5 |
Table
2: Results of Experiment 0 to 21 days (Emmert & Warren, 2000)
|
|
NRC |
Phase
Feeding |
|
Weight
Gain (g) |
566 |
566 |
|
Feed
Intake (g) |
855 |
809 |
|
FCR
(g/g) |
1.51 |
1.43 |
|
Gain:Digestible
Lysine (g:g) |
59.2 |
63.2 |
Table
3 shows what the impact of changing not only the number of phases, but also
the manner in which the different phases are offered to the birds. It
can be seen that the total nutrient allocation to each bird remained
effectively the same. It is
important to point out that in this worked example it was assumed that the
growth and feed conversion ratio remain the same. The work of Emmert et
al. (2000) illustrates that it is likely that FCR will improve and
practical experience has shown us that body weights generally improve when
more phases are fed.
Table
3: The effect of phase feeding on both cost and nutrient allocation in
broilers.
|
|
Cost
per ton (R) |
2
Phase (g/bird) |
3
Phase (g/bird) |
3
Phase (g/bird) |
|
Starter |
2321.00 |
1000 |
800 |
500 |
|
Grower/Finisher |
2166.00 |
2400 |
|
|
|
Grower |
2222.00 |
|
1200 |
1200 |
|
Finisher |
2009.00 |
|
1400 |
1700 |
|
Cost
per bird (R) |
|
7.52 |
7.34 |
7.25 |
|
Cost
per bird (US$) |
|
1.16 |
1.13 |
1.11 |
|
Saving
(vs. 2 Phase) |
|
|
-
2.39% |
-3.72% |
|
Nutrient
Intakes |
|
|
|
|
|
Lysine
(g) |
38.00 |
38.63 |
37.50 |
|
|
ME
(MJ) |
44.48 |
44.84 |
45.00 |
|
Alternative
Ingredients
The
choice of alternative feed ingredients represents what is possibly the
greatest opportunity for the nutritionist.
Traditionally, the value of an ingredient is determined by four things;
the price and nutrient content of the ingredient itself; the price and
availability of the other ingredients; the diet in which it is to be used and
lastly, it must conform to the physical and quality standards that the
nutritionist sets.
The
other ingredient that South African nutritionists are using in increasing
quantities is Full Fat Soybean Meal (FFS). Many feed millers now have their
own manufacturing facilities. FFS
is seen as having a number of important advantages; the beans are easy to
store and handle, and FFS can be manufactured on demand using cheap equipment;
it provides the nutritionist with a pure fat source which is easy to handle
and contains low levels of oxidized fats; it provides a means of increasing
the nutrient density of the diet which in many cases leads to an improved
return of the feeding operation.
Traditionally,
Other
animal byproducts may and are used in poultry diets in
The
decision as to the value and use of either sunflower meal, FFS or fish meal
for that matter in a typical broiler diet needs to take into account the
parameters set out above. In
addition, considerations as to the limits (bounds) set on the inclusion of
either ingredient needs to be taken. In
the case of sunflower meal considerations as to the maximum amount of fiber
that should be included in any diet need to be taken.
Although FFS is an effective way of adding oil to the diet, many feed
millers restrict it’s use to some extent as they believe that it has a
negative impact on pellet quality. Perhaps
the most important component of the evaluation process is a consideration of
the ingredient/nutrient density interaction.
Using the data published by Saleh et
al. (2004) and the same iterative methodology as described above, the use
of both cheap sunflower meal and FFS was evaluated.
The results of this evaluation (Figure 4) illustrate that should
sunflower be available, it may well pay the nutritionist to reduce nutrient
densities. On the other hand,
should FFS become freely available, it will pay to use more dense diets.
The nutritionist should be aware that birds held at high stocking
densities may respond differently to nutrients, Berri et al, (2004).
South
African broiler producers find themselves in a competitive environment.
This is for two reasons. Firstly,
our feed ingredient prices are high. Secondly,
we are a part of the global market and to compete against the more efficient
broiler producers in the world. We therefore need to remain as efficient as
possible. In order to measure the efficiencies of any production system, it is
essential that the return per unit of production per unit time be measured and
maximized.
The
biggest challenge facing South African poultry producers has to do with
ingredients. As a country we are
not self sufficient in terms of protein. Secondly,
our grain price is extremely unstable. When
the effects of an erratic currency are added to both of the above factors,
long term management becomes difficult.
In
broad terms, the strategies that are employed to maximize returns are the use
of high broiler stocking densities, the use of diets of the optimal nutrient
density and the employment of phase feeding regimes.
Acknowledgements
I
would like to thank Cobb-Vantress Inc., for making it possible for me to
attend this meeting. Thanks also
to Dr Mark Jackson for help with some of the translations.
References
|
Anon, (2003). Rhodimet nutrition guide. Adisseo, Anthony France. |
|
Berri,
C., Relandeau, C., le Bellego, L. and
Picard, M., (2004). Effect of
dietary lysine and stock density on broiler performance and breast meat
quality. Ajinimoto Eurolysine
Information 27. Ajinimoto
Eurolysine S.A.S, |
|
Coetzee,
Z., (2005). South African Poultry Association, Congress, | |
|
Feddes, J.J.R., Emmanuel, E.J., Zuidhof, M.J., (2002) Broiler Performance, Bodyweight Variance, Feed and Water Intake, and Carcass Quality at Different Stocking Densities. Poultry Science 81: 774-779 | |
|
Format
International Ltd., (2005). Single-Mix.
http://www.formatinternational.com. | |
|
Grain
SA., (2005). Long term grain parity prices. http://www.grainsa.co.za
| |
|
Guevara, V. R., (2004). Use of non-linear programming to optimise performance response to energy density in broiler feed formulation. Poultry Science 83: 147-151. | |
|
Kenny,
M., (2005). Changing paradigms
in poultry nutrition and mangement. IDEA Seminar, Schering-Plough, | |
|
Kleyn, F.J., (2004). The impact of technical efficiency in the poultry industry on the animal feed industry, AFMA Matrix, March 2004. | |
|
Koch, F., Wijtten, P. J. A, Lemme, A. and Langhout, D. J., (2002). Impact of a balanced amino acid profile on broiler performance. Veterinarija Zootechnika 19: (41). | |
|
Lan, Y., Verstegen, M.W.A., Tamminga, S. and Williams, B.A.,(2005). The role of the commensal gut microbial community in broiler chickens. World’s Poultry Science Journal 61: 95-104. | |
|
Lemme,
A., Ravidran, V., and Bryden, W.L., (2004). Illeal digestibility of amino
acids in feed ingredients for broilers.
World’s Poultry Science Journal 60: 423-438. | |
|
Leeson,
S. and Summers, J.D., (2001). Scott’s
nutrition of the chicken. University Books, | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Ribeiro,
A.M. and Penz, A.M., (2005). Maximizing
development of the intestinal tract and immune system.
IDEA Seminar, Schering-Plough, | |
|
Saleh,
E. A., Watkins, E. A., Waldroup, A. L. and Waldroup, P. W., (2004). Effects of
nutrient density on performance and carcass quality of male broilers grown for
further processing. International J Poultry Science 3: 1-10. | |
|
Sklan,
D., (2001) Small intestinal development in the posthatch bird. WPSA,
Southern African Branch, Proceedings of the 20th Scientific Day. | |
|
Warren,
W. A. and Emmert, J. L., (2000). Efficiency of phase-feeding in supporting
growth performance of broiler chicks during the starter and finisher phases.
Poultry Science 79: 764-770. | |
|
| |
|
Wijtten,
P.J.A., Prak, R., Lemme, A., and Langhout, D.J., (2004a).
Effect of different dietary ideal protein concentrations on broiler
performance. British Poultry
Science, 45: 504-511. | |
|
|
Appendix
A: Fact sheet on the South African
broiler Industry
1.
The Industry
| Total
production 12 mil broilers/week. | |
| 810
000 of broiler meat produced a year. | |
| Growing
at 6 to 8% annually | |
| Per capita
annual consumption of broiler meat is 21 kg (46 lb). | |
| Value
R 8 bil. (US$ 1.2 bil). | |
| Most
production from large integrators, most of whom own their own farms. | |
| Much
of the current expansion in production is being achieved through contract
growing. | |
| 18%
of local consumption is imported, largely from | |
| Very
little poultry product is exported. | |
| Use
largely Ross and Cobb genotypes. Hubbard
and Hybro are available. |
2.
Production
| Most
birds produced at an altitude higher than 1500m (5000 ft) above mean sea
level. | |
| Hot
summers, mild winters but with large temperature variations.
20°C (70°F) difference between minimum and maximum are not
unusual. | |
| Producers
use high stocking densities 18 birds /m2 (0.6 sq ft/bird) in
open sided houses. 22 birds/m2
(0.49 sq ft/bird) in ventilated houses. | |
| Short
cleanout periods (often less than 14 days).
Litter completely renewed, using either wood shavings or sunflower
hulls. | |
| Use
complete range of AGP’s and ionophores. | |
| Slaughter
weights 1.7 – 1.95 kg (3.7-4.3 lb) | |
| Mostly
unsexed birds are used. | |
| Slaughter
age 35 to 40 days. | |
| Feed
Conversion (lb/lb) 1.7 –
1.85 | |
| European
Performance Efficiency Factor
< 220 poor 240-260
average > 280 good. | |
| Phase
feed high density diets (see Appendix B). |
3.
The Market
| It
is estimated that South African’s become 3% more affluent with each
passing year. | |
| The
market is still largely driven by cheap chicken. | |
| There
is a small market for alternative products (free range, organic, drug
free, further processed). | |
| Some
birds being sold live, but this is a decreasing market. | |
| The
market is largely for frozen product, but demand for fresh product is
growing. | |
| Ideal
carcass weight 1.2 to 1.5 kg (2.6.to 3.3 lb) | |
| No
big price differentiation between different cuts. | |
| The
Individually Quick Frozen (IQF) market growing rapidly. |
Appendix B: Typical Feeds used in South Africa
|
|
Pre-Starter |
Starter |
Grower |
Finisher |
Withdrawal |
|
Age
fed (Days) |
1-7 |
7-14 |
15-28 |
29-35 |
Last
5 days |
|
Feed
Form |
Crumble |
Crumble |
First
load crumble – 3 – 4.5 mm pellet |
4
– 4.5 mm pellet |
4-
4.5 mm pellet |
|
Nutrient
Specifications |
|||||
|
ME
MJ/kg |
12.5 |
13.0 |
13.2 |
13.4 |
13.6 |
|
ME
Kcal/lb |
1361 |
1406 |
1429 |
1584 |
1608 |
|
Total
Lysine (g/kg) |
14.5 |
13.25 |
11.5 |
10.5 |
10.0 |
|
Calcium
(g/kg) |
12 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
|
Available
Phos (g/kg) |
4.6 |
4.4 |
4 |
3.8 |
3.5 |
|
Sodium
(g/kg) |
2.1 |
2 |
1.8 |
1.8 |
1.8 |
|
Vitamin
A (mg/kg) |
13000 |
12000 |
10000 |
8000 |
8000-optional |
|
Vitamin
E |
80
– 100 |
60 |
40 |
30 |
30-optional |
|
Vitamin
B1 |
6 |
3 |
2.5 |
2 |
2-optional |
|
Zinc
(mg/kg) |
120 |
100 |
80 |
60 |
40-optional |
|
Additives |
|||||
|
AGP |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
Optional |
|
Coccidiostats |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
Optional |
|
Pre-biotic |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Optional |
|
Pro-biotic |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Optional |
|
Enzymes |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Optional |
|
Ingredient
Limits (%) |
|||||
|
Maize |
0-100 |
0-100 |
0-100 |
0-100 |
0-100 |
|
Soybean
Meal |
0-30 |
0-30 |
0-30 |
0-30 |
0-30 |
|
Fish
Meal |
5-10 |
2.5-10 |
0-7.5 |
0-5 |
0 |
|
Sunflower
(38% protein) |
0-5 |
0-7.5 |
0-10 |
0-15 |
0-15 |
|
Full
Fat Soya |
0-5 |
0-10 |
0-15 |
0-17.5 |
0-20 |
|
Poultry
Byproduct Meal |
0 |
0 |
0-2.5 |
0-5 |
0-6 |
|
Added
Fat/oil |
0 |
0-3 |
0-3 |
0-3 |
0-3 |