| Literature DB >> 30011894 |
Zora Dajić Stevanović1, Jasna Bošnjak-Neumüller2, Ivana Pajić-Lijaković3, Jog Raj4, Marko Vasiljević5.
Abstract
The inconsistency of phytogenic feed additives' (PFA) effects on the livestock industry poses a risk for their use as a replacement for antibiotic growth promoters. The livestock market is being encouraged to use natural growth promotors, but information is limited about the PFA mode of action. The aim of this paper is to present the complexity of compounds present in essential oils (EOs) and factors that influence biological effects of PFA. In this paper, we highlight various controls and optimization parameters that influence the processes for the standardization of these products. The chemical composition of EOs depends on plant genetics, growth conditions, development stage at harvest, and processes of extracting active compounds. Their biological effects are further influenced by the interaction of phytochemicals and their bioavailability in the gastrointestinal tract of animals. PFA effects on animal health and production are also complex due to various EO antibiotic, antioxidant, anti-quorum sensing, anti-inflammatory, and digestive fluids stimulating activities. Research must focus on reliable methods to identify and control the quality and effects of EOs. In this study, we focused on available microencapsulation techniques of EOs to increase the bioavailability of active compounds, as well as their application in the animal feed additive industry.Entities:
Keywords: bioactivity; livestock industry; microencapsulation; phytogenic additives; terpenoids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30011894 PMCID: PMC6100314 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23071717
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Examples of studies on phytogenic feed additives impact on meat and egg quality and production.
| Feed Additive | Dose | Major Components | Animal Product | Treatment Effects (Difference with Untreated Group) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
|
| 24 mg essential oils/kg complete feed | Not specified | Consumable eggs | Increased egg production and decrease incidence of broken-cracked eggs | [ |
|
| 36 mg essential oils/kg complete feed | carvacrol, thymol, 1:8-cineole, | Consumable eggs | No effects in hen-day egg production, egg weight, egg mass, feed intake, feed conversion ratio, livability, liveweight gain (LWG) and cracked-broken egg ratio and tendency to increase egg weight | [ |
|
| 24 mg essential oils/kg complete feed | carvacrol, thymol, 1:8-cineole, | Consumable eggs (Lohmann LSL-classic) | No effects on egg production, egg weight, egg mass, feed consumption, feed conversion ratio (g feed/g egg), and shell-less egg | [ |
|
| 0.1% | Not specified | Consumable eggs | improved means of egg weight | [ |
| 0.2% | increased egg yolk color as well as blood lymphocyte counts and decreased egg shell weigh | ||||
|
| 0.5, 10, 15, 20 g/kg | Not specified | Consumable eggs (Hy-Line Brown) | Improved egg shell percentage, eggshell thickness and Haugh units. | [ |
|
| 1, 2, 3% | Not specified | Consumable eggs (Hyline-5 White) | Yolk weights of the eggs from hens fed diets containing 1, 2, and 3% black cumin were higher, 2 and 3% increased egg weight and shell thickness and 3% increased egg production and shell strength. | [ |
|
| 100 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg | Not specified | Consumable eggs | No effects on egg production, feed consumption, feed conversion ratio, egg weight and shape, yolk diameter, height and color, Haugh units, and shell thickness | [ |
|
| |||||
|
| 1 g/kg | Not specified | Pork meat | No effects on sensory properties or carcass characteristics | [ |
| 10 g/kg | |||||
|
| 1 g/kg | Slightly better carcass feed conversion ratio (kg/kg) | |||
| 10 g/kg | Better sensory properties of cooked pork | ||||
|
| 2% | Not specified | Poultry meat | No effect on carcass quality parameters | [ |
|
| 5 mg verbascoside/kg feed | Verbascoside | Pork meat | No effects on carcass characteristics, | [ |
|
| As substitution for inert material | Not specified | Poultry meat | Higher carcass yield, no effects on abdominal fat | [ |
|
| 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5 g/kg | Not specified | Poultry meat | No effects on carcass dressing | [ |
Figure 1A schematic view of limitations of essential oils as feed additives and benefits of using different microencapsulation strategies.