June 12, 2007

Danisco's new-generation phytase increases feed cost savings
 

Press release
 

Danisco Animal Nutrition announced Jun 11 that its new-generation phytase produces additional net cost savings in pig and poultry diets of at least US$1.50/tonne of feed  (EUR1.35/tonne of feed) compared with traditional phytase products, generating total savings of approximately US$5.00/tonne of feed (EUR4.50/tonne of feed), based on new data the company collected.

Danisco claims that since the launch of Phyzyme XP in 2003, the new-generation microbial phytase has delivered average advantages in feed intake, bodyweight gain and FCR response of 32 percent, 44 percent and 65 percent respectively. The company concludes that Phyzyme XP offers much greater potential value for replacing phosphorus, calcium, energy and amino acids in broiler diets than conventional phytases.

Data recently released by the company following the latest series of product trials highlighted that the product's improved efficacy and value extended to both layer and pig feeds. Seven trials conducted in universities and research institutes around the world compared the performance of pigs to market age when fed diets supplemented with either the new-generation phytase or a traditional phytase.

According to Danisco, the trials demonstrated that the new-generation product was 47 percent more effective at increasing bodyweight gain and 73 percent more effective in improving feed conversion, a similar trend to that observed in broilers.

Danisco attributed the trial results to Phyzyme XP's ability to liberate phosphorus and calcium from dietary phytate, while reducing the anti-nutritive properties of phytate affecting energy and amino acid availability at the same time.

Andrea Barletta, Danisco Animal Nutrition's global marketing manager, commented that when formulating pig or poultry feeds, the product provided at least a 20 percent greater potential replacement of dietary phosphorus, energy and amino acids compared with traditional phytases. However, this figure was lower than the actual performance improvements which were recorded because it incorporated a "safety margin" for nutritionists.