| Literature DB >> 30838217 |
Elijah G Kiarie1, Alisha Mills1.
Abstract
The aim is to give an overview of available literature data on the role of feed processing on gut health and function with specific focus on particle size and hydrothermal processing. In addition, influence of feed processing on efficacy of exogenous feed enzymes will be discussed. The current feed processing technologies are such that ingredient choices and diet form are refined to improve feed intake and nutrient utilization efficiency. Finer feed particle size enables optimal nutrient utilization and enhances animal performance due to increased surface area allowing better contact with digestive enzymes. Moreover, adequate diminution of feed ingredients is beneficial to feed manufacturing processes such as mixing and hydrothermal treatments including pelleting, extrusion, and expansion. However, emerging trends in consumer and regulatory demands for restriction or cessation of animal production practices such as use of antimicrobial growth promoters are challenging current approaches to feed processing. There is limit as to the fineness of the particle size, as very fine particles negatively affect gut health due to higher incidences of stomach ulceration in pigs and gizzard dysfunction in poultry. Coarse particle size increases stomach and hindgut acidification which may be beneficial in controlling proliferation of enteric pathogens such as salmonella and E. coli. Optimal particle size could be designed in the grinding process using roller or hammer mill. However, since most commercial pigs and poultry diets are subjected to hydrothermal processes, additional reduction of feed particle size is inevitable. The need to achieve high physical quality and to reduce potential levels of feed-borne pathogens such as Salmonella has led to the application of relatively high conditioning temperatures during conventional hydrothermal processes, a practice that does not favor high nutrient utilization and stability of heat sensitive feed additives such as feed enzymes. Therefore, with evolving pig and poultry production practices, the regimens for feed processing will no longer be appreciated only in terms of optimizing nutrients utilization, but also in terms of impact on feed hygienic status, efficacy of feed additives, animal health, and food safety.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic-free feeding programs; exogenous feed enzymes; feed particle size and hydrothermal processing; gut health and function; nutrition; pigs; poultry
Year: 2019 PMID: 30838217 PMCID: PMC6390496 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Impact of feed particle size on gastrointestinal physiology in pigs and poultry.
| 21–42 | 0.34–1.12 mm, corn | Increased gizzard weight and duodenal VH and CD | ( |
| 1–21 | 0.84–1.16 mm, wheat | Increased, crop, gizzard, small intestine, and ceca weight | ( |
| 1–21 | 0.59–0.95 mm, corn | Increased gizzard weight, no effects on ceca weight | ( |
| 1–42 | 0.65–1.3 mm, corn | No effects on gizzard and small intestine weight | ( |
| 20 | 0.15–2.5 mm, corn, wheat | Increased gizzard and GIT weight. No effects on histomorhology | ( |
| 5–18.0 | 0.30–0.90 mm, corn, hard sorghum | Reduced stomach ulcerations. No effects on intestinal histomorphology | ( |
| 5–18.0 | 0.30–0.90 mm, soft sorghum | Reduced stomach ulcerations and no effects on SI histomorphology | ( |
| 50–100 | 0.40–1.00 mm, corn | Reduced stomach keratosis | ( |
| 30–60 | 0.43–1.10 mm, barley | Reduced stomach ulcerations, no effect on SI histomorphology | ( |
| 60–90 | 0.40–1.30 mm, wheat | Reduced stomach ulceration | ( |
| 5–100 | 0.50–1.25 mm, corn | Reduced stomach ulcers | ( |
Impact of hydrothermal processing on gastrointestinal physiology in pigs and poultry.
| 21–42 | Pelleting, corn | No effect on gizzard but increased duodenal villi height and crypt depth | ( |
| 1–21 | Pelleting, corn | Reduced gizzard weight, but increased ceca weight | ( |
| 1–21 | Pelleting, wheat | No effect on gizzard but increased duodenum and jejunum villi height and crypt depth | ( |
| 1–42 | Pelleting, corn | Reduced gizzard weight but no effects on small intestine weight | ( |
| 1–21 | Pelleting, wheat and sorghum | Reduced gizzard and small intestine weight | ( |
| 20 | Expansion, corn and wheat | Reduced gizzard weight. Reduced duodenal villi height but increased ileal villi height | ( |
| 50–100 | Pelleting, corn | Increased stomach keratosis | ( |
| 5–100 | Pelleting, corn | Increased stomach ulcers | ( |