Challenges in Feeding Birds in India - by Dr. D Chandrasekaran

2. Feed Requirement (MMT)
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
2016 2020 2025
93.4
102.0
127.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
Dairy Poultry Aqua
66.0
24.2
3.2
69.3
29.0
3.7
86.6
36.3
4.5
2016 2020 2025

3. Ingredientsrequirement (MMT)
2016 2020 2025
26.4
30.1
37.6
GRAINS
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
2016 2020 2025
19.5
21.4
26.6
Oilmeals

4. Grainspresent andfutureAvailability& Requirement(MMT)
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
21.7 21.8
22.3
24.3 24.2
21.0
24.5
7.0
6.0
5.3 5.5 5.5
4.6
5.5
13.0 12.7
10.8
11.7 11.6
10.5
11.5
Maize Jowar Millet
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
2016 2020 2025
41.5 41.5 41.5
24.9 24.9 24.9
26.4
30.1
37.6
Grain production Grain Available for feed Grain requirement of feed

5. Oil Meal Present and FutureAvailability and Requirement(MMT)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
7.4
7.7
8.0
6.6
5.4
4.7
6.1
3.8
3.4 3.5 3.5
2.5
3.0
3.4
3.8
3.9 4.0
4.3 4.3
4.1 4.0
1.6
1.4 1.3
1.5
1.4
1.1
1.2
0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4
SBM RSM CSM GN Others
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
2016 2020 2025
15.1 15.1 15.1
19.5
21.4
26.6
Oil meal production Requirement

6. Status
• The present situation is itself is on the negative
• The production for the last 5 years seems to be constant or declining
• If this situation continues then the future seems to be bleak
• Can import help us in overcoming the situation?
• Definitely not as our need is huge

7. PerHa Production of Corn and Soybean comparedtoother countries
0 2 4 6 8 10
United States:
Egypt:
Canada:
France:
Italy:
Argentina:
Poland:
China:
Hungary:
Thailand:
Ukraine:
Brazil:
Serbia
Russia:
South Africa:
Mexico:
Romania:
India:
Indonesia:
Philippines:
Zimbabwe:
18
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Italy:
Argentina:
Brazil:
United States:
Paraguay:
Canada:
Bolivia:
Serbia
China:
South Africa:
France:
Japan:
Uruguay:
Indonesia:
Vietnam:
Ukraine:
Thailand:
Korea, North:
Uganda:
India:
Russia:
20

8. Per Ha Production of Corn and Soybean compared to other
countries
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
2197
7000
2314 2452 2353
4000
3087
9970
8699
3430
Corn
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
1550
201
979
1174
722
1695
2915
3387
Soybean

9. Arable Land (M Ha) and Renewable Water Resource (Cu M /Ha)
0
50
100
150
200
USA
India
Russia
China
Brazil
Australia
Canada
Ukraine
Nigeria
Argentina
174
160
122
103
59
49 46
32 31 28
Arable Land
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
139542
72273
36935
2917627366
17593
119509384 8056
4299
Water resource

10. How to proceed
• India Number two in arable land availability
• Renewable water resource higher than several high producing countries
• Increasing the per hectare production by 10%per annum will be able to meet the deficit
• This can be achieved with the help of the Government and the state Agriculture departments, as for
now their concentration is only on food grains andpulses

11. Quality

12. Maize Quality
Moisture
(%)
Fungus (%)
Grains in
100gms
10.6 5.5 378
10.8 2.2 388
10.9 0.5 352
11.4 2.6 354
11.5 3.6 380
11.6 4.5 374
11.9 3.2 354
12.3 4 358
12.6 1 380
12.6 6.5 378
12.8 0.5 356
13.8 2.1 355

13. Oil meal quality
Protein
supplement
Mean
Crude protein(%ADB)
Range
Min Max
DOGN 40.81 30.15 47.05
Soya 45.18 33.07 52.14
SFOC 26.77 22.14 34.9
Fish meal 37.4 22.59 58.65
Rape seed meal 36.4 30.08 38.64 0
5
10
15
20
25
90.0&> 85.0-89.9 80-84.9 75.0-79.9 70-74.9 60-69.9 59.9 &<
10
16.9
21.3
21.7
13.3
10
6.8
Soybeanmeal Solubilityof protein
56.3%

14. Quality
Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1& G2,
Citrinin
Cyclopiazonic acid
Fumonisins
Ochratoxin
Oosporin
Patulin
Sterigmatocystin
Trichothecenes:- T2, DON & DAS
Zearalenone

15. Incidenceof Aflatoxin
+ve Total % +ve
Maize 4464 9803 45.5
Bajra 664 1148 57.8
JOWAR 765 1619 52.7
DOGNC 11024 11097 99.3
SFOC 12944 14824 87.3
SOYA 3089 10297 30.0
RICE 1288 2442 52.7
RSM 468 2247 20.8
FEED 16604 19921 83.3
Total 51310 71597 69.9

16. Mycotoxin Contamination the major Challenge
18%
54%
28%
Cereals Oilcakes Feed
Multi-toxinAnalysed
13532
10%of thesamples containedAFT + 1 Toxin
5%of thesamples containedAFT +2Toxins
Commonothertoxins were OA, Citrinin, Zearalenone,
StregmatocystinandT2

17. Quality of Ingredients
• Variabilityis theNormin India
• Formulationsometimes isanightmareas wehavetoassumevalues manyatimes
• Averaging valuesofdifferentlotsis a practice
• In aUS studyaveraging for48,49and50%CP forSBMandformulatingforeach lot separatelyFCR difference
0.02
• CostimpactforanIntegratorof1lakh/weekwill be61 lakh/annum

18. Quality continued
VariationinMaize qualitythe variationindensityaffectsthe ME
Moistureabove11% forevery1% increaseME reducedby 33kcal/kg
Grainno/100 gmhighly variable
Testweightvariedfrom720 to800gm/litforevery10gm reductionbelow
750gm ME reducedby30kcal
Mould count isalwayshigheventhoughtoxinmay belowbutitaffectsthe
nutrientcontent
LevelofE.Coli and Clostridium?
Grouping
Lysine
(%)
%
Reduction
Meth
(%)
%
Reduction
No mould 1.355 100 0.537 100
L mould 1.344 1 0.435 19
M mould 1.329 2 0.419 22
H mould 1.317 3 0.397 26
Influenceof mouldonaminoacidcontentinpoultryfeed

19. FeedManufacturing
• We talk that the feed cost is 70% of the production cost
• If so what is the daily focus is on feed manufacturing
• Most farmers are under the impression that getting a formula from a good Nutritionist is
enough
• The formulation is only 2% of the whole process

20. Storage inDifferent Mills

21. Batching

22. Feed manufacturingcontinued
• Except Feed manufacturers the on farm mixing is mostly manual batching
• Each bag is mostly not weighed just dumped
• The nameof the nutritionist is depends not on the owner or the bird but on the labourer in the feed
mill
• If he weighs properly and dumps the material as per the formula I get a good name else I am
dumped

23. How are wegoingtodeliverthe nutrientintothecell

24. Gut Health
• Maintaining the optimal guthealth is the greatest challenge
• Under field conditions the high variation in the FCR can be attributed the derangement in the gut
mucosa
• In a layer farm the feed/egg varied from 118gm to 135gm intwo different batches causing a
difference of Rs.100/bird in the production cost
• In my experience the gutlesion score ranged between 1.5 to 1.75both in layers and Broilers

25. EnhancingNutrientAvailability
• Takingcare ofguthealth
• Creatingconditionsforbetterperformanceoftheenzymes
• Enhancingnutrientabsorbtion

26. Impact of infectionin first two weeks

27. Gut Health

28. Undigested Protein on Performance
29.1
32.4
34.2
36.3
67.7 67.1 65.5
63.7
1.63
1.67
1.69
1.72
1.58
1.60
1.62
1.64
1.66
1.68
1.70
1.72
1.74
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4
Undigested protein g/kg Weight gain g/d FCR

29. Gut Health Leison Score
2
4
1
3

30. Impact of Gut Health
Maintenance ME increase over 0
lesion group
ME consumption/day (Kcal) Average Daily Gain g/d
100 100 100
119 115 111
122 117
110
124 119
108
227
165
112
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
230
250
14-20 28-34 42-48
Kcal
0
1
2
3
4
Age
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
14-20 28-34 42-48
386
562
701
364
516
628
342
477
570
318
440
522
300
420
482
Age in days
0
1
2
3
4
50.5
92.6
97.3
45.2
72.2
61
35.6
54.3
32.7
23.7
38.2
10
15.7
27.3
-7
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
14-20 28-34 42-48
0
1
2
3
4

31. Cellular Loss
FARMER
Udhayakumar
Control
No of Birds 2670
Coenzyme Q10 group
No of Birds 2670
Age AVG.WT F.C.R AVG.WT F.C.R
8 0.18 0.87 0.17 0.84
15 0.38 1.15 0.4 1.14
22 0.81 1.28 0.85 1.22
29 1.27 1.47 1.26 1.45
36 1.75 1.72 1.72 1.65
40 2.03 1.796 2.03 1.7
1. If 1 mole (180gms)
glucose enters the cell
673 Kcal enters
2. Energy harvested
as ATP’s rage
between 380 to 456Kcal
3. Energy Loss 33 to 45%
• Glucose Metabolism
• Mitochondria O2 leak
• Field trial

32. Nightmare of a Nutritionist
Year
Average
Egg cost `.
Average
Feed cost
`/kg
Feed cost
Paise/egg
Percentage
of feed
cost/egg
income
Aug-04 1.3 5.85 73.1 56
Aug-09 2.09 11.87 148.4 73
Aug-10 2.41 14.05 175.6 73
Aug-12 2.86 20.12 252 88
Aug-13 2.98 20.31 254 85
Aug-14 2.70 18.94 237 88
March - 15 2.80 17.02 213 76
Housed 126125
Mort% 4.2
FCR 1.640
C.FCR 1.572
Avg.Wt 2.3
Avg Rt 57.3
P&L/Kg -11.83

33. Conclusions
Constraints
• Availability of ingredients is expected to go from bad to worse
• Quality of ingredients over the period deteriorating
• Feed manufacturingprocess revamping needed
• Bird enhancing the nutrient utilization