Criteria for Choosing Alternative Feed Ingredients – Part II

• Price

The primary challenge in using alternative feeds is finding cost-effective options that can substitute corn and soybean meal in animal diets.

These traditional feeds are known for their high nutritional quality and high inclusion rates in diets, while alternative ingredients generally have some limitations.

Finding substitutes for soybean meal is particularly desirable, as dietary protein is the most expensive component in feed.

While most by-products are generally more economical than traditional feed ingredients, lower nutritional quality in some cases can limit their use.

The product’s price is not only about production costs but also the nutritional quality and performance benefits it offers animals.

• Economic viability

[register]Economic viability examines a feed’s characteristics alongside its use and market value. A lower-cost feed isn’t beneficial if its inclusion does not maintain production levels.

• Regional and Year-Round Availability

Alternative feeds tend to be available in specific regions, and the abundance of grains and industrial by-products can be highly valuable economically, strengthening the supply chain.

However, the seasonality of some feeds necessitates greater planning for diet diversification.

Brazil’s vast territory also complicates the use of certain ingredients produced only in specific regions.

• Nutritional value

To use an ingredient in formulations, it’s essential to know its physical and chemical properties to optimize its utilization efficiency in animals.

The nutritional composition will define the ingredient’s classification for animal feed use. Ingredients with a high fiber content (>18%) are considered roughages, while those with less than 18% crude fiber (CF) are considered concentrates. Concentrates can be protein-rich (over 20% crude protein, CP) or energy-dense (under 20% CP).

• Antinutritional Factors

These are compounds or compound classes present in plant-based feeds that reduce nutritional value, interfere with digestibility, absorption, or nutrient utilization, and impact the efficiency of animals’ biological processes.

Knowledge of harmful substances present in ingredients and their effects on digestibility is crucial to evaluate usage—assessing inclusion limits or adopting methods to inhibit these substances’ effects.

• Inclusion Levels

These depend on the feed’s chemical nature, the animal species it’s intended for, the growth stage, and production costs.

In feeds with low digestibility or high fiber content, replacement levels are lower.

• Digestibility

In some species, a feed’s nutritional composition may affect passage rate.

In non-ruminants, increased fiber leads to more peristaltic movements, accelerating passage rate and reducing contact time with enzymes, thus decreasing absorption.

Knowing the digestibility coefficient is crucial for decision-making, as it aids in selecting appropriate feeds based on the species and feed type to be produced.

Choosing nutrient-rich feeds without knowing their digestibility rate risks compromising feed efficiency. Low digestibility in animal nutrition can cause weight loss and nutritional deficiencies, even if nutrients are present.

• Research

Research on alternative ingredients has allowed their use while maintaining performance (with cost reduction). Thus, choosing an alternative feed should always be based on consistent research results.

Many alternative feeds meet performance, animal welfare, and system sustainability criteria but remain economically unviable for industrial-scale production. An example is insect meals, which are being studied for poultry nutrition.

Research is essential for this sector’s development, assessing the economic viability of production as insect farming and meal processing evolve.

• Sustainability

Optimizing feed utilization can make the activity more sustainable, improving feed efficiency, reducing resource demands for animal protein production, and limiting nutrient losses through waste, which can harm the environment.

Technologies like enzymes are being used to maximize nutrient use, reduce nutrient loss, and lessen pollution from nutrient-rich waste.

In Brazil, research on insect-based feeds is growing due to sustainability benefits, as they require little energy and water, do not compete with other crops, and can be converted into high-nutritional biomass.

• Limitations of Feed Mills

Challenges extend beyond balancing an efficient diet; alternative feed use is also limited by feed mills’ capacities to handle and store new ingredients. This may require dedicated silos, storage spaces (e.g., for bulk bags), and even dispensers (for different fat sources).

Thus, choosing a new raw material also depends on the feed mill’s ability to handle and store it.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The search for alternative feeds aims to reduce feeding costs.