Information on Feed Additives

What is a feed additive?

All animals need to be well fed and healthy if they are to grow to their potential. The nutrition of an animal is therefore of great importance if this is to be achieved in practice. Much of the nutrition of farm animals is derived from the major feed ingredients such as maize, wheat and soybean meal, but if these were the only ingredients then the animal would not grow particularly well and would likely become deficient in some essential nutrients. In the case of animals in the wild, such deficiencies are either tolerated or moderated by selection of a wide variety of dietary ingredients (many of which are only available on a seasonal basis). In modern-day farming, the nutritional requirements of farm animals are well understood and all requirements can be met through direct dietary supplementation of the limiting nutrients in concentrated form. Nutritional quality of a feed is influenced not only by nutrient content but also by many other aspects such as, feed presentation, hygiene, content of anti-nutritional factors, digestibility, palatability and effect on intestinal health to name a few. Feed additives provide a mechanism by which such dietary deficiencies can be addressed which benefits not only the nutrition and thus the growth rate of the animal concerned, but also its health and welfare.

Readers may be interested in what types of additives are used in animal nutrition, how their use is regulated in the EU (i.e. Reg. (EC) No 1831/2003 and Community Register of Feed Additives) and the benefits that accrue from their use.

Types of feed additives

In general a feed additive is a product which provides a particular effect/need in a relatively concentrated form. An example that most people would recognise would be a vitamin. Vitamins may be of mineral, animal or vegetable origin and used either in their natural state or more usually in processed, concentrated format. Some are produced through fermentation processes. Feed additives tend to fall into certain categories which describe their action in the feed or in the animal, these categories being given below along with some examples of additives which fall into these groups.

1. Technological additives. This classification refers to a group of additives which influences the technological aspects of the feed. This does not directly influence the nutritional value of the feed but may do indirectly by improving its handling or hygiene characteristics, for example. An example of such an additive would be an organic acid for preservation of feed.

2. Sensory additives. This refers to a group of additives which improve the palatability (i.e. voluntary intake) of a diet by stimulating appetite, usually through the effect these products have on the flavour or colour of the diet. For example, a vanilla extract may well encourage piglets to eat a ration.

3. Nutritional additives. Such additives supply specific nutrient(s) required by the animal for optimal growth. An example would be a vitamin, amino acid or trace mineral. In most cases, such additives are simply concentrated forms of nutrients supplied in natural ingredients in the diet.

4. Zootechnical additives. These additives improve the nutrient status of the animal, not by providing specific nutrients, but by enabling more efficient use of the nutrients present in the diet. An example of such an additive would be an enzyme or direct fed microbial product, both of which enhance the conditions of the intestinal tract, thus enabling more effective nutrient extraction from the diet. In this respect they are often referred to as pro-nutrients, ie products which improve the nutritional value of a diet without necessarily providing nutrients directly. Other additives are used for environmental benefits that they provide to animal husbandry and others are targeted for specific physiological functions.

5. Coccidiostats and Histomonostats. These products are used to control intestinal health of poultry through direct effects on the parasitic organism concerned. They are not classified as antibiotics.

Regulation of feed additives

All feed additives placed on the market in the European Union must be approved under the auspices of the Reg. (EC) No 1831/2003.

The principal aim of this regulation is to ensure that all additives approved for use in the EU are safe not only for the animals which are the intended target, but also for those involved in its handling and the ultimate human consumer of the products from animals which have been offered the additive. As a result each additive has to undergo a series or test to demonstrate it is safe to use and handle, and furthermore data is required to demonstrate the efficacy of the additive in its intended use BEFORE it can be marketed in the EU. Such data is presented in the form of a comprehensive dossier which is forwarded to and reviewed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which needs to approve the content of the dossier prior to permission to sell being granted after a vote at the EC level.

Additives are authorised for use under specific conditions of use to ensure that it is not used outside of the terms of reference for which data demonstrating its safety and efficacy has been supplied. In this regard, there may be limitations on the species or category of animal for which the additive can be used, or the maximum dose which can be employed in the marketplace.

If the additive is approved, the conditions of its use are put into the feed additive register which is a public document. In this way the use of an additive in the EU is seen to be transparently reviewed prior to permission to market being granted.

Applications for authorising the placing and use of feed additives on the market in the EU are regulated under Reg. (EC) No 1831/2003 since October 18th, 2004. As mentioned hereabove, EFSA is responsible for the scientific assessment of the feed additives and has set a table (published for the first time on May 19th, 2005) displaying information related to the applications received by EFSA. Here is the link pointing to the table published on the official EFSA web site and updated on a regular basis: http://registerofquestions.efsa.europa.eu/roqFrontend/questionsListLoader?panel=ALL.

Benefits of feed additives

Exposure of the public to the word “additive” is usually within a news article relating to human nutrition in which the additive is described in not too flattering a light, and as a result all additives are seen as products which have little value to the end consumer. This is a gross misrepresentation of the vast majority of these compounds used in both animal and human nutrition. Additives in animal feed are used to perform one of the five functions as mentioned above in “types of feed additive”. They are functions which provide considerable value either for the animal, the producer, or in most cases both. In fact additives are only used if the net benefit outweighs the cost. Through use of several types of additive there can be highly significant benefits to the wider environment. For example:

1. The environment. The use of nutritional and many zootechnical additives allow the formulator of animal feed to deliver the nutritional requirements of an animal in a very precise manner. Ultimately this means that diets can be formulated which minimise waste. For example, a young growing animal requires a diet rich in vitamins, minerals and amino acids. These could be supplied from use of high nutrient density ingredients such as soybean meal, rapeseed meal and fishmeal. However it is impossible to blend such ingredients in a manner which supplies all nutrients at exactly the level required by the animal. They are either deficient in some nutrients or excessive in others. If no additives were used then the resultant diet will invariably supply far more protein, for example, than is required by the animal in order to satisfy the requirement for the most limiting nutrient. This excess protein is excreted in the manure as nitrogen which becomes a major pollutant in many parts of the globe. Nitrogen (and associated ammonia production) and phosphorus pollution can be markedly reduced when the relevant additives are used in animal diets. The result is less pollution with simultaneous less wasteful use of ingredient resources, which is of particular interest if the resource is scarce.

2. Welfare. Many zootechnical, nutritional, technological and coccidiostats/histomonostats are used in such a manner as to improve the nutritional and hence the health and welfare status of the animal concerned. Reductions in ammonia production from the manure of animals not only improves the environment at large and in particular in the case of housed animals, but also improves air quality and thus welfare status of such animals.

It is clear that balanced and complete diets play a major role in maintaining optimal nutritional, environmental and welfare status of animals. The examples given above are literally the tip of the iceberg with respect to benefits that have been attributed on use of additives. There is a vast amount of scientific research which highlights the mode of action and benefits of additives in animal nutrition. Use of many feed additives results in direct benefits not only to the producer, but also to the environment at large and the animals themselves.

What is a premixture?

A premixture is:

- a mixture of one additive (which may be formulated as a preparation) with feed material or water used as a carrier (in any proportion) or
- two or more feed additives (which may be formulated as preparations), with or without feed materials or water used as a carrier (in any proportion).

A premixture is intended for incorporation in compound feedingstuffs, feed materials or water and not meant for direct feeding to animals. The function of the premixture is to optimize mixing of feed additives in feedingstuffs. The incorporation rate shall not in any way distinguish a premixture from an additive.

By application of Article 13 of Directive 70/524 establishing specific use of certain additives (antibiotics, coccidiostats, vitamins A and D, cupper and selenium), the minimum inclusion rate of premixture containing these substances is set at 0.2 %. Lower inclusion rates (down to 0.05 %) for this type of premixture may be used under specific approval from the local authorities. For liquid premixture, the incorporation rate shall take into account its specific gravity. A premix is not a defined entity. It does not have any legal meaning.

-		Annual Report 2007-08, 2009, FEFANA Asbl
-		Annual Report 2006, 2007, FEFANA Asbl
-		Annual Report 2005, 2006, FEFANA Asbl
-		Methods of analysis of Vitamins, provitamins and chemically well defined substances having a similar biological effect - 1st Part "Tel Quel", 2006, FEFANA Asbl
-		Probiotics in animal nutrition, ISBN 2-9524354-0-5, EAN 9782952435406, FEFANA Asbl

1.		Technological additives. This classification refers to a group of additives which influences the technological aspects of the feed. This does not directly influence the nutritional value of the feed but may do indirectly by improving its handling or hygiene characteristics, for example. An example of such an additive would be an organic acid for preservation of feed.
2.		Sensory additives. This refers to a group of additives which improve the palatability (i.e. voluntary intake) of a diet by stimulating appetite, usually through the effect these products have on the flavour or colour of the diet. For example, a vanilla extract may well encourage piglets to eat a ration.
3.		Nutritional additives. Such additives supply specific nutrient(s) required by the animal for optimal growth. An example would be a vitamin, amino acid or trace mineral. In most cases, such additives are simply concentrated forms of nutrients supplied in natural ingredients in the diet.
4.		Zootechnical additives. These additives improve the nutrient status of the animal, not by providing specific nutrients, but by enabling more efficient use of the nutrients present in the diet. An example of such an additive would be an enzyme or direct fed microbial product, both of which enhance the conditions of the intestinal tract, thus enabling more effective nutrient extraction from the diet. In this respect they are often referred to as pro-nutrients, ie products which improve the nutritional value of a diet without necessarily providing nutrients directly. Other additives are used for environmental benefits that they provide to animal husbandry and others are targeted for specific physiological functions.
5.		Coccidiostats and Histomonostats. These products are used to control intestinal health of poultry through direct effects on the parasitic organism concerned. They are not classified as antibiotics.

1.		The environment. The use of nutritional and many zootechnical additives allow the formulator of animal feed to deliver the nutritional requirements of an animal in a very precise manner. Ultimately this means that diets can be formulated which minimise waste. For example, a young growing animal requires a diet rich in vitamins, minerals and amino acids. These could be supplied from use of high nutrient density ingredients such as soybean meal, rapeseed meal and fishmeal. However it is impossible to blend such ingredients in a manner which supplies all nutrients at exactly the level required by the animal. They are either deficient in some nutrients or excessive in others. If no additives were used then the resultant diet will invariably supply far more protein, for example, than is required by the animal in order to satisfy the requirement for the most limiting nutrient. This excess protein is excreted in the manure as nitrogen which becomes a major pollutant in many parts of the globe. Nitrogen (and associated ammonia production) and phosphorus pollution can be markedly reduced when the relevant additives are used in animal diets. The result is less pollution with simultaneous less wasteful use of ingredient resources, which is of particular interest if the resource is scarce.
2.		Welfare. Many zootechnical, nutritional, technological and coccidiostats/histomonostats are used in such a manner as to improve the nutritional and hence the health and welfare status of the animal concerned. Reductions in ammonia production from the manure of animals not only improves the environment at large and in particular in the case of housed animals, but also improves air quality and thus welfare status of such animals.