Manure odour eaters
Not all pit additives are created equal, say the expertsBY ROBERT IRWIN
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) environmental bio technology researcher Daniel Masse suspects most additives don't work. Many additive claims are false or exaggerated, he says: "We have a bottle on the shelf here which claims a few drops will increase phosphorous by 100 per cent. That's ridiculous!"
Because the products aren't regulated the way drugs or pesticides are no one knows exactly how many are on the market. Masse recalls a recent private Quebec survey found about 50 brands being sold in that province.
OMAFRA nutrient management specialist Don Hilborn says approaches to his office from additive manufacturers have cooled off lately: "For a while we were getting about one a month."
He suspects some that don't meet producers' expectations are simply put back on the market with new names and packaging. "I don't have proof of that," he stresses.
"There is no scientific verification of those products," Masse warns. Suppliers often keep formulas secret.
Hilborn agrees more science is needed to back up claims but "we have to keep an open mind," he urges. He says some additives may play an important role "in breaking up crust, making manure more workable in barns to keep pits flowing, or in making nutrients more available."
Masse worries some products are "very strong oxidants. In a farm building. Will products like that have an impact on workers or animal health?"
High copper compounds pose serious cropping concerns as well as posing risk for grazing livestock.
Some products increase volatization of ammonia by modifying the surface tension of liquid manure. "If you decrease odour but increase the volatization of ammonia you just displace the problem," Masse asserts.
Despite misgivings in some quarters, testimonials and supporters of pit additives abound. Ontario Pork's environmental officer Sam Bradshaw recalls a situation where a neighbour was overjoyed by the odour reduction that resulted when her producer neighbour tried an additive in response to her complaints.
Bradshaw says a year later the lady is still pleased with the improvement. What she doesn't know is that the farmer hasn't used the additive for a long time.
"The point is she's willing to put up with a lot more when she thinks he's trying," Bradshaw concludes.
Masse heads up a Hog Environmental Manure Management Environmental Strategy project at AAFC's Lennoxville research station aimed at developing testing standards for additives. He admits objective evaluation is challenging.
He hopes, however, to have standards and new specialized equipment in place within two years. "Once a standard methodology is developed it could be used by private labs," Masse suggests.
He says eventually savvy producers will know to avoid any additive that hasn't been evaluated under the standard. European and American researchers have conducted numerous tests on additives in recent years with contradictory results caused by differing methodology.
One problem with controlled testing to date is that the process often lasts a short time, while Canadian farmers typically store manure for six months to a year. "Those tests are not representative of farm conditions," Masse explains.
Temperatures and air movement vary between lab and field conditions, he says.
Jeffery Lorimor, Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering at Iowa State University, conducted field demonstrations on some products previously found during University lab tests to reduce odour. Lorimor has reservations about additives, too. "Basically, our experience with the field demos was that the additives made a little difference, but not a lot," he reveals.
Lorimor speculates that there is a discrepancy between field and lab results because "air is drawn past the animals, manure on the floor, [and] the feeders in the field...not just through the pit headspace.
"Dust accounts for some of the odour; it isn't present in the lab tests. Distribution in the pit is a factor.
"If a product is just dumped at one location, it may not disperse throughout the whole pit. Feed additives would be better from this standpoint."
Large lagoons may require different treatment rates than pits with four to five-per cent solids that were tested at Iowa State. "With large volumes of very dilute manure like lagoons have, we don't have any info on whether they work or not," Lorimor says.
Masse insists even the basic tools relied upon by odour researchers are suspect. Manure is often diluted thousands of times and introduced to a panel that confirms the dilution level at which they first smell it. Masse says this approach can be skewed.
"As an extreme example, you can't smell high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide," he relates.
Farm safety experts warn farmers that low levels of hydrogen
sulphide have
a potent smell, but at deadly levels the offensive manure
component, which
is one of about 150 odour causing organic compounds in manure,
actually
paralyzes olfactory nerves.
back
Look before you leap
Iowa State U's Jeffery Lorimor suggests producers ask
themselves three questions when considering a pit additive:
1. Does it work? "Our demos say, 'Maybe a little.' None of them is a complete solution yet."2. What does it cost? Costs seem to run from about $0.25 to $1 per head and more.
3. What management is required? Some need to be introduced only once; others may need to be introduced several times a day, requiring installation of spray equipment under the slats. "Extra equipment expense is a negative to me."
back
Feed fat for leaner pigs
Strange but true, thanks to a new wonder-fat feed additive
discovered by Wisconsin cancer research
Have you heard the news? In the future, adding fat to a hog ration could actually reduce fat in the carcass - as long as you have the right type of fat.
Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) is an anti-cancer compound that was identified at the University of Wisconsin, almost by accident, in the search for carcinogenic substances in grilled beef. CLA is a fatty acid found primarily in meat and dairy products which has some remarkable properties.
How could a product known for its potential use in bodybuilding and cancer treatment be applied to hog production?
CLA has been cautiously referred to as a fat burner, a muscle builder and an immune enhancer. The testing of CLA in mice and humans has been a topic of research for some time. CLA is touted to enhance muscle size and strength gains in bodybuilders. It has also shown the ability to increase production of cells involved in the immune system.
You can even order CLA from health food stores on the Internet. A little surfing will also tell you that CLA is reported to reduce voluntary feed intake, resulting in less body fat. According to research findings, CLA not only reduces the amount of fat which is deposited in fat stores, it appears to increase the rate at which fat is broken down and burned in muscle cells. Put this all together and CLA looks like a valuable weapon in the battle of the bulge.
Recently, research into CLA for swine has really taken off. Typically, older pigs have been limited to one to two-per cent fat in the diet because of negative impacts on carcass fat. The world's first swine experiment with CLA, in Wisconsin, showed that CLA had the ability to reduce carcass fat, increase muscle, improve feed efficiency and increase gain in pigs.
Subsequent research at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's Lacombe Research Centre has also reported positive results. Finishing pigs fed two-per cent CLA tended to consume less feed (2.92 vs. 3.08 kg/day), have better feed conversion (2.89 vs. 3.07), significantly more lean (618 vs. 604 g) and less fat (206 vs. 221 g) in the carcass.
Research in pigs to date has been very positive, but it is still too early to make concrete recommendations. Research continues at universities in Alberta, Iowa and Wisconsin in the race to discover the secret behind this fatty acid's mode of action. Other priorities include determining the best inclusion rate, impact on the carcass, and potential for value-added anticarcinogenic properties.
Another important question that has yet to be answered is whether
or not
feeding CLA will be cost-effective. Until more information is
available,
these and other questions will go unanswered. Stay tuned for more
on this
exciting area of research, whether you walk on two or four legs!
Janice Murphy is an OMAFRA swine nutritionist based in
Fergus
back
Phytase + Acid = A One-Two Punch
It is well known that 60 to 80 per cent of the phosphorus (P) in
grains
and oilseed meals is present in the form of phytate, a compound
that pigs
are unable to use well.
In order to make phytate P available for use by pigs, it must be hydrolyzed by phytase, an enzyme, into inorganic P. Research has shown that supplementing phytase increases the digestibility of P in feed, therefore decreasing P excretion by 20 to 30 per cent.
Organic acids have been successfully used as feed preservatives and acidifiers in pig diets for many years. Recent research at Cornell University and BASF has shown that the combined effect of adding phytase and organic acids, such as citric and formic acid, to grower pig diets outshines their individual effects.
For example, in one trial, a 25-per cent P digestibility in control pigs improved to 30 and 42 per cent respectively when formic acid and phytase were added individually. The combination of the two additives, however, achieved a 51-per cent P digestibility.
An additional benefit of adding organic acids is the effect on E. coli bacteria, since increasing levels of acid results in a reduction in the incidence of diarrhea.
On the down side, however, the corrosive nature of formic acid
can make
working with it a headache unless the feed mill is properly
equipped. The
transition may be expensive, requiring installation of stainless
steel
pumps, pipes and nozzles to handle organic acids. According to
BASF,
several plants in Europe have already been refitted to
accommodate such
acids in light of recent research results.
back
Silver lining in that dark cloud
In the midst of hog prices at quarter-century lows, some exciting economic developments are quickly taking place.* The European Common Agricultural Policy is under increasing pressure both from within Europe and America and the Australian-led Cairns Group of medium-sized food-exporting countries. Subsidies for farm exports and production are at risk, and if removed should stimulate demand for meat and grain imports to Europe.
* Introduction of the Euro, Europe's new single currency, will replace 11 national currencies, from the D-mark to the Portuguese escudo, on Jan. 1. Trade (including farm products) with Europe should be much simpler with foreign exchange rate risk minimized.
* Financial panic in East Asia (where it all started) has subsided. Reflecting the growing optimism, East Asia is home to the world's best-performing stock markets (up 25 to 45 per cent from their lows).
* Interest rates have been slashed dramatically in Asia and now in North America.
* Foreign currencies have stabilized and even strengthened against the U.S. dollar. For example, the Japanese yen has rallied as much as 30 per cent from its late August low. This alone creates a lot of buying power for our food products.
* Japan is injecting US$500 billion into a much-needed bank reform plan.
* The International Monetary Fund is being replenished. The U.S. is supplying almost US$18 billion and the other members are providing another US$74 billion.
None of these events will lower today's burdensome supply of hogs, but the worst of the demand malaise should be ending.
The supply side of the market continues to be staggering, but certainly well-documented over the last 12 months. Commercial U.S. hog slaughter will be nine per cent above last year, nearing 100 million head. Slaughter during 1999 is expected to be one to two per cent higher than 1998.
If producers start liquidating the breeding herd in earnest this fall, look for slaughter in late 1999 to wind up below the 1998 level and prices above this year's level. Producers have avoided liquidation pressures because of:
* Collapsing feed costs.
* Price premiums for quality carcasses.
* Succesful forward contracting decisions made earlier.
* Penalties or losses incurred from exiting the industry.
Kevin Simpson is a financial consultant with Merrill Lynch Canada
Inc.
1-888-417-4459. The views expressed are those of the author and
not
necessarily those of Merrill Lynch Canada Inc. The information
contained in
this report is believed to be reliable, however we cannot
represent that it
is accurate or complete.
back