Enzyme Technology in Animal Feed Production: Current Market and Future Trends, Notas de estudo de zootecnia

Baixe Enzyme Technology in Animal Feed Production: Current Market and Future Trends e outras Notas de estudo em PDF para zootecnia, somente na Docsity! C. SheppyThe Current Market and Likely Trends1 Global Animal Feed Production As with any publication dealing with the application of a particular technology to a certain industry, it is important to assess the commercial environment in which the technology is being applied. Despite the general euphoria and enthusiasm surrounding the dawn of a new millennium, the challenges faced by the global animal feed industry have a familiar feel. Human health, environmental safety and animal welfare are all issues that continue to be to the fore of consumers’ minds and are at the top of the agenda of the media and politicians alike. Although tending to emerge in Europe and North America these issues are now of worldwide importance, a development that mirrors the increasing globalization of the food chain and feed industry. Recent controversies surrounding genetically modified crops, antibiotic growth promoters and dioxin- contaminated feedstuffs provide some very real examples of this. A direct result of these ‘health scares’ has been the adoption, and in some cases the imposition, of increased regulatory, testing and quality control procedures aimed at maintaining and improving the trust between animal producers and the ultimate consumers of their products. Faced with these challenges, how is the industry currently faring? Although global compound feed production actually fell by 5% in 1998 to 575 Mt (the first such fall in over 50 years), 1999 experienced something of a recovery, albeit small, to 586 Mt (Table 1.1). The Asian economic crisis of 1997–1998 saw the collapse of the feed industry in many previously booming markets and with the benefit of hindsight it is probably fair to say that the previous rates of growth were unsustainable. As demand for meat, milk and eggs tumbled, so did feed production: Indonesian feed output plummeted by 40%; Korean production fell by 30%; Thai output was down nearly 25%. Even the Chinese market appeared to stumble, with an approximate 2% decline in industrially manufactured feed to below 55 Mt. These Asian falls were followed by a general stagnation of the global feed market in 1998, with EU feed production falling by 6% and the non-EU European countries witnessing a 12% decline. Only North ©CAB International 2001. Enzymes in Farm Animal Nutrition (eds M.R. Bedford and G.G. Partridge) 1 A3882:Bedford:AMA:First Proof: 04/09/00 CHAP-1 The Current Feed Enzyme Market and Likely Trends C. SHEPPY Finnfeeds, PO Box 777, Marlborough, Wiltshire, SN8 1XN, UK 1 11 Z:\Customer\CABI\A3882 - Bedford + Partridge - Enzymes\A3957 - Bedford - Enzymes #P.vp 17 November 2000 14:57:21 Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen America (+1%), Latin America (+1%) and the Middle East and African countries (+10%) experienced any growth in their feed industries in 1998. As clearly seen in Table 1.1, the recovery in 1999 was global, with all major regions showing some growth as the Asian economies improved and demand picked up in other markets (Gill, 2000). Despite the fall, or correction, in feed production seen in 1998, one trend within the feed industry continues unabated – the rationalization of capacity and the concentration and integration of production into the major food-producing companies. Driven by the need for cost reduction, increased regulatory requirements and hygiene and safety standards, fewer than 3800 feed mills now manufacture more than 80% of the world’s compound feed. However, there is still plenty of room for further consolidation and rationalization as the ten largest feed manufacturers still only account for approximately 9–10% of global output. Although pioneered in the poultry industry, food company integration now extends to most of the major farmed species – poultry, swine, beef, dairy cattle and aquatic. Swine feed is still the largest proportion of feed produced but broiler feed production continues to grow at the expense of beef cattle feeds (Table 1.2), spurred on by increased consumer demand for cheap, safe and healthy meat products (Gill, 2000). So what does the future hold for the feed industry? Most informed commentators believe that the drop in feed production seen in 1998 was a ‘one-off’ or correction caused by the dramatic collapse experienced by the Asian economies. Muller (1999) comments that: in the last 25 years compound feed production has always grown parallel with the increase in world population. The decline in per capita ‘consumption’ of compound feed from 104 kg to 97 kg in 1998 does not represent a reverse trend in global com- pound feed production, but instead must be categorized correctly in conjunction with the Asian crisis. With the world population set to grow from the current 6 billion to approximately 7.8 billion over the coming two decades, the demand for food, including animal 2 C. Sheppy A3882:Bedford:AMA:First Proof: 04/09/00 CHAP-1 1998 production (Mt) 1999 production (Mt) Percentage difference (1999/1998) North America Asia-Pacific European Union Latin America Non-EU Europe Middle East and Africa Other Total 159.8 128.1 114.9 63.3 47.4 21.6 39.9 575.0 160.7 132.2 116.4 65.4 48.6 24.0 38.7 586.0 +0.6 +3.2 +1.3 +3.3 +2.5 +11.1 −3.1 +2.0 Table 1.1. Global animal feed production, 1998 and 1999. Source: Gill (1999, 2000). 12 Z:\Customer\CABI\A3882 - Bedford + Partridge - Enzymes\A3957 - Bedford - Enzymes #P.vp 17 November 2000 14:57:22 Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen the non-specific digestive upsets that are frequently provoked by fibre components in the feed. Of increasing importance and relevance to the feed industry are the environ- mental benefits of harnessing enzyme technology. Since the animal better utilizes the feed, less is excreted. This results in manure volume being reduced by up to 20% and nitrogen excretion by up to 15% in pigs and 20% in poultry. As significant is the opportunity for enzymes to reduce phosphorus pollution. How do they work and how are they used in animal feeds? Broadly speaking, four types of enzymes currently dominate the animal feed market: enzymes to break down fibre, protein, starch and phytic acid. Fibre-degrading enzymes One of the main limitations to digestion is the fact that monogastrics (pigs and poul- try) do not produce the enzymes to digest fibre. In diets containing ingredients such as wheat, barley, rye or triticale (the main ‘viscous’ cereals), a large proportion of this fibre is soluble and insoluble arabinoxylan and β-glucan (White et al., 1983; Bedford and Classen, 1992). The soluble fibre can increase the viscosity of the contents of the small intestine, impeding the digestion of nutrients and thereby reducing the growth of the animal. It has also been linked with the incidence of digestive disorders such as non-specific colitis in swine, and sticky litter and hock burns in poultry. The fibre content of wheat and barley can vary considerably according to variety, growing location, climatic conditions, etc. This in turn means that there can be considerable variability in the nutritional value of these ingredients and hence diets containing them. In breaking down the fibre, enzymes (e.g. xylanase targeting arabinoxylans, β-glucanase targeting β-glucans) can reduce this variability in nutritional value, giving rise to improvements in the performance of the feed and the consistency of the response. An added benefit is the reduced incidence of certain digestive disorders. Protein-degrading enzymes Various raw materials contribute to the protein content in the diet and ultimately the amino acids that fuel lean meat deposition. There is considerable variability in the quality and availability of protein from the different raw materials typically found in monogastric diets. Within the primary vegetable protein sources such as soybean meal, certain anti-nutritional factors (ANFs), such as lectins and trypsin inhibitors, can lead to damage to the absorptive surface of the gut, impairing nutrient digestion. In addition, the underdeveloped digestive system of young animals may not be able to make optimal use of the large storage proteins found in the soybean meal (glycinin and β-conglycinin). The addition of a protease can help to neutralize the negative effects of the proteinaceous ANFs in addition to breaking down the large storage protein molecules into smaller, absorbable fractions. The Current Market and Likely Trends 5 A3882:Bedford:AMA:First Proof: 04/09/00 CHAP-1 15 Z:\Customer\CABI\A3882 - Bedford + Partridge - Enzymes\A3957 - Bedford - Enzymes #P.vp 17 November 2000 14:57:24 Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen Starch-degrading enzymes To many nutritionists maize is viewed as the ‘gold standard’ of raw materials. Most nutritionists do not consider maize digestion as being poor: in fact most would argue that it is better than 95% digested. However, recent evidence presented by Noy and Sklan (1994) suggests that, at the ileal level, starch digestibility rarely exceeds 85% in broilers between 4 and 21 days of age. The addition of an amylase to animal feed can help to expose the starch more rapidly to digestion in the small intestine, and in doing so lead to improved growth rates from enhanced nutrient uptake. At weaning, piglets often suffer a growth check because of changes in their nutrition, environment and immune status. The addition of an amylase, usually in conjunction with other enzymes, to augment the animal’s endogenous enzyme production has been shown to improve nutrient digestibility and absorption and, hence, growth rate for a range of diets (Close, 1995). Phytic acid-degrading enzymes Phosphorus is required for bone mineralization, immunity, fertility and growth and is an essential mineral for all animals. Swine and poultry digest only about 30–40% of the phosphorus found in feedstuffs of vegetable origin, with the remainder being tied up in a form inaccessible to the animal – phytic acid. In many instances additional phosphorus must be added to the diet to meet the animal’s requirement. More than half of the phosphorus consumed from such feedstuffs is excreted in the faeces, which can result in major environmental pollution. By adding a phytase to the diet, the phytic acid is broken down, liberating more of the phosphorus for use by the animal. The two main benefits of phytase supplementation are, firstly, the reduction in feed costs from the reduced additional supplementation of phosphorus to the diet and, secondly, environmental from reduced excretion of waste products and the threat of pollution. The Current Feed Enzyme Market It should come as no surprise that the adoption of enzyme technology by the animal feed industry has, to a large degree, been driven by the mode of action of these four particular types of enzymes. Taken in conjunction with the different structure of the various segments of the animal feed industry, the background to the adoption of the technology becomes even clearer. The global poultry industry, particularly the broiler industry, is highly integrated and dominated by a relatively small group of large companies. For example, Tyson’s alone in the USA is estimated to produce some 2 billion broilers per year, considerably larger than the entire annual production of the UK poultry industry. The company controls every step of the production chain from the growing of the raw materials and the breeding of the birds through to the processing of the meat and ultimately the retailing of the finished product. This integration and concentration of the majority of industry capacity in a relatively small number of 6 C. Sheppy A3882:Bedford:AMA:First Proof: 04/09/00 CHAP-1 16 Z:\Customer\CABI\A3882 - Bedford + Partridge - Enzymes\A3957 - Bedford - Enzymes #P.vp 17 November 2000 14:57:24 Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen hands makes the adoption of new technology a rapid occurrence, particularly when the value of the opportunity is significant. The value of enzyme addition to broiler feeds will typically deliver a return on investment (ROI) well in excess of 2 : 1. By contrast the swine industry is considerably more fragmented, with many more producers and steps in the chain. In addition, the efficacy response to enzyme addition has been more variable and harder to measure commercially. Although first considered in the 1950s, it was not until the 1980s that the animal feed industry really began to understand how to harness the power of enzyme technology properly. As already discussed, feed grains such as wheat and barley contain relatively high levels of fibre that monogastrics are unable to digest. If the problem element of the fibre can be broken down, the animal has greater access to the available nutrients, so overcoming the negative impacts of incorporating the ingredient in the diet. Spurred on by a plentiful supply of cheap barley, European poultry nutritionists and enzymologists investigated the opportunity to reduce the negative impact of including barley in broiler diets by adding β-glucanase to the diet. This proved to be a success with the ‘rule of thumb’ being adopted that ‘barley + β-glucanase = wheat’. Encouraged by the outstanding success of this approach, wheat became the next target for enzymatic enhancement via the use of xylanase. Work this time concentrated on the hypothesis that ‘wheat + xylanase = maize’. Again this approach was successful and the mid-1990s saw the rapid acceptance of the application of enzyme technology to the animal feed industry. It is probably no exaggeration to say that by 1996 in excess of 80% of all European broilers diets that contained a viscous cereal (wheat, barley, etc.) would have also contained a fibre- degrading enzyme – certainly an impressive adoption rate for a new technology in the feed industry. Taking a global perspective across all species and diet segments, current estimates of market penetration suggest that approximately 65% of all poultry feeds containing viscous cereals also contain a fibre-degrading enzyme. Given the very different structure of the industry and the difficulties in accurately measuring an efficacy response, it is no surprise that current penetration into the swine industry is considerably lower, approaching 10%. In terms of geographical spread, the utilization of fibre-degrading enzymes is concentrated on those regions where viscous cereals are the predominant energy source, namely Europe, Canada and Australia/New Zealand. (This is not to discount completely the USA, South America and the rest of Asia-Pacific, where there are reg- ular ‘window’ opportunities depending on the post-harvest price ratio between maize and, for example, wheat.) It is for this reason that fibre-degrading enzymes are largely seen as a ‘European’ niche product. To gain global acceptance it will be necessary for the enzyme manufacturers to break significantly into the North American and Asia-Pacific maize–soybean markets. Maize–soybean diets are historically regarded as the ‘gold standard’ in terms of consistency of animal response, though most nutri- tionists recognize that these raw materials are more variable than is often presumed. There is increasing evidence and acceptance that this ‘gold standard’ can be improved upon and that there is a role for enzymes in these diets that do not The Current Market and Likely Trends 7 A3882:Bedford:AMA:First Proof: 04/09/00 CHAP-1 17 Z:\Customer\CABI\A3882 - Bedford + Partridge - Enzymes\A3957 - Bedford - Enzymes #P.vp 17 November 2000 14:57:25 Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen