Réduction des coûts alimentaires des lapins (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.) par la distribution de l'herbe de lait (Euphorbia heterophylla (L.) Klotz. & Garcke) associée à l'herbe de Guinée (Panicum maximum Jacq.) Lam...

Full French Title: Réduction des coûts alimentaires des lapins (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.) par la distribution de l'herbe de lait (Euphorbia heterophylla (L.) Klotz. & Garcke) associée à l'herbe de Guinée (Panicum maximum Jacq.) Lam. en élevage semi-intensifObjectif: Le présent travail vise à comparer l'effet de deux modes de supplémentation par Euphorbia heterophylla d'un régime à base d'un aliment concentré sur les paramètres d'ingestion et de croissance des lapins et sur les charges alimentaires nécessaires à la production d'un kilogramme de carcasse.Méthodologie et Résultats: Le premier mode (MOD1) a consisté à supplémenter le régime témoin (MOD0) durant les trois mois de vie des lapins. Le second mode a consisté à distribuer le supplément seulement durant la phase d’engraissement de 30 jours (MOD2). Les poids et le rendement carcasse à 3 mois d’âge, étaient de 2117,6±282 g, 1650,6±110,4 g et de 1693,2±116,9 g puis de 57,1±0,7%, 51,8±1,6% et de 56,8±1,2% respectivement pour MOD0, MOD1 et MOD2. MOD2 a induit un meilleur rendement carcasse des lapins (P<0,05). Cependant, MOD1 a induit une réduction de 26 % des charges alimentaires par rapport au MOD0.Conclusion et Application des résultats: Les résultats de cette étude permettent de conclure que Euphorbia heterophylla peut être recommandée comme supplément alimentaire dans l'élevage des lapins lorsqu'elle est disponible.Mots clés: Lapin, fourrage, Euphorbia heterophylla, Panicum maximum, croissance, carcasseEnglish Title: Reduction of rabbit food costs (Oryctolagus cuniculus L.) by distribution of milkweed (Euphorbia heterophylla) associated to Guinea grass (Panicum maximum Jacq.) Lam. in semi-intensive livestockEnglish AbstractObjective: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of two methods of supplementation by Euphorbia heterophylla of a commercial based feed on ingestion and growth parameters of rabbits and on food expenses for the production of a carcass kilogram.Methodology and Results: The first mode (MOD1) consisted in the supplementation of the control diet (MOD0) during the three months of life of the rabbits. In the second one, it consisted in the distribution of the supplement only during the final 30 days of fattening (MOD2). Body weight and carcass yield at 3 months of age, were 2117.6±282 g, 1650.6±110.4 g and 1693.2±116.9 g then 57.1±0.7%, 51.8±1.6% and 56.8±1.2% respectively for MOD0, MOD1 and MOD2. MOD2 induced a better carcass yield of rabbits (P<0.05). However, MOD1 induced 26% of reduction of food expenses compared to MOD0.Conclusions and Application of Results: This study indicated that Euphorbia heterophylla could be recommended as a dietary supplement where it is present.Keywords: Rabbit, feed, Euphorbia heterophylla, Panicum maximum, growth, carcas

Essai préliminaire de production d’oeufs des poules pondeuses (ISA Warren) enrichis en acides gras polyinsaturés oméga 3 avec les graines de Euphorbia heterophylla L.

 En Afrique, la notion de qualité nutritionnelle des oeufs de poules pondeuses semble être  abstraite. Afin d’y remédier, cette étude vise à déterminer l'impact d'un régime supplémenté en graines de Euphorbia heterophylla sur la qualité nutritionnelle d'oeufs de poules pondeuses. A cet effet, vingt-quatre poules (ISA Warren) de 1,4 kg ont reçu durant 28 jours soit un régime contrôle (RC) (100% d'aliment commercial), soit un régime expérimental (R15) (80% de RC, 5% de complément minéral vitaminé et 15% de graines de Euphorbia heterophylla). Les dosages effectués ont montré que le régime R15 a conduit à une baisse significative des proportions d’acides gras saturés, monoinsaturés, polyinsaturés n-6 et a induit à une augmentation significative de la proportion en acides gras polyinsaturés n-3. Les proportions des acides gras C18:3 n-3, C20:5 n-3, C22:5 n-3 et C22:5 n-3 des jaunes des oeufs issus de R15 ont été multipliées respectivement par 31, 10, 4 et 3. Une réduction significative de 18% du taux de cholestérol total a été observée avec le régime expérimental R15. La consommation de ce type d'oeuf permettrait d'améliorer la prévention des maladies cardiovasculaires, principales causes de mortalité dans les pays africains à revenu faible ou intermédiaire.© 2015 International Formulae Group. All rights reserved.Mots clés: Oeufs, acides gras, cholestérol, nutrition, santéEnglish AbstractIn Africa, notion of nutritional quality of layers’ eggs seems to be abstract. To remedy it, this  study aims to determining the effect of a diet supplemented with seeds of Euphorbia heterophylla on the nutritional quality of layers’ eggs. For this purpose, twenty-four hens (ISA Warren) 1,4 kg for 28 days received either a control diet (RC) (100% food marketed) or an experimental diet (R15) (80% RC, 5% vitamin and mineral supplement 15% seeds of Euphorbia heterophylla). The analysis showed that R15 diet has significantly led to adecline in proportions saturated fatty acids, monounsaturated fatty acids, omega-6 PUFA and induced an significantly increase of the proportion of n-3 PUFA. The proportions of fatty acids C18:3 n-3, C20:5 n-3, C22:5 n-3 and C22:5 n-3 of yellow eggs from R15 have increased respectively by 31, 10, 4 and 3. A significantly reduction of 18% to cholesterol the egg yolk was observed with the experimental diet R15. The consumption of this type of egg will allow improve prevention of cardiovascular disease, leading cause of death in low- and middle-income.© 2015 International Formulae Group. All rights reserved.Keywords: Eggs, fatty acid, cholesterol, nutrition, healt

Etude Préliminaire De La Valorisation Des Tourteaux D’hévéa, D’anacarde Et De Pourghère Chez Les Porcs Durant La Gestation Et La Lactation

The enhancement the cake of cashew kernels downgraded (Anacardium occidentale) (TA), the detoxified cake of kernels rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) (TH) and jatropha (Jatropha curcas) (TJ) in pig feed, was study on 21 pregnant gilts (73.4±8.1 kg). These females randomly distributed by group of three, received control diet (RT) and six other diets containing 7.5% or 15% of TA (RTA7.5 and RTA15), 7.5% or 15% of TH (RTH7.5 and RTH15) or 7.5% or 15% of TJ (RTJ7.5 and RTJ15). During the trial of 152 days, gilts under RTJ15 regime and two gilts under RTJ7.5 regime were withdrawn after respectively 14 and 21 days’ supply due to a persistent diarrhea. The latest gilt under RTJ7.5 had aborted at 90 days of gestation. No significant difference was observed on the average litter size (9.2 piglets). The average weight of piglets at birth ranged from 1.3±0.2 kg (RTA15) and 1.1±0.2 kg (RTH7.5), while the average daily gain (ADG) o

Safety and efficacy of bentonite as a feed additive for all animal species

The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) received a request from the European Commission to assess the safety and efficacy of bentonite when used as a technological feed additive (substances for reduction of the contamination of feed by mycotoxins) for all animal species. The applicant, EUBA aisbl (European Bentonite Association) representing six companies, submitted to EFSA a technical dossier to support the application. The applicant proposes to use bentonite at the maximum level of 20,000 mg/kg complete feed. The additive apparently interferes with the analysis of aflatoxin B1 in feed. The safety of the additive was already evaluated by the Panel in an opinion delivered in 2012. Bentonites are safe for all animal species, the consumers and the environment when used at a maximum level of 20,000 mg/kg complete feed. The results of a new genotoxicity study reinforced the previous conclusion that smectites are non-genotoxic. Bentonites are not skin irritants but might be mildly irritant to the eye; based on a new study submitted, the additive is not a skin sensitiser. Owing to its silica content, the additive is a hazard by inhalation for the users. The in vitro study showed that the di- and tri-octahedral smectites tested can adsorb aflatoxin B1 at different concentrations and at pH 5; however, no adequate in vivo studies were available. Therefore, the Panel cannot draw conclusions on the additive\u2019s efficacy. The Panel further considers the safety and efficacy conclusions to apply equally to the di- and tri-octahedral smectites under assessment. The FEEDAP Panel posted some recommendations regarding the maximum content of other minerals in the additive and the incompatibilities of the additive with other medicinal substances. The Panel also drew a remark concerning the denomination of the additive and the current regulatory definition of Bentonite

Safety and efficacy of a preparation of algae interspaced bentonite as a feed additive for all animal species

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a preparation of algae interspaced bentonite when used as a flatoxin B1 binder for all animal species. The additive is composed of bentonite and algae belonging to Ulva spp. The additive is considered safe for weaned piglets, dairy cows and chickens for fattening at the maximum recommended dose of 125 mg/kg complete feed (a wide margin of safety is established in weaned piglets and dairy cows); this conclusion is extrapolated to all animal species. The additive is not genotoxic. As bentonite is essentially not absorbed from the gut lumen and algae from Ulva spp. are not expected to be of concern for human consumption, the FEEDAP Panel considers that the use of the additive in animal nutrition is safe for consumers. The additive is not an irritant to the skin or the eyes and it is considered to have low inhalation toxicity. However, the additive has a high dusting potential and contains a high proportion offine particles. A high level of inhalation exposure to an inert dust may be hazardous. In the absence of data, the Panel could not conclude on dermal sensitisation. As the components of the additive are of natural origin (soil and marine environment), it is not expected that the use of the additive in animal nutrition would adversely affect the environment. The FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for all animal species

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Bacillus velezensis PTA‐6507, B. velezensis NRRL B‐50013 and B. velezensis NRRL B‐50104 (Enviva® PRO 202 GT) for turkeys for fattening (Danisco Animal Nutrition)

[EN]Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the additive consisting of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens PTA-6507, B. amyloliquefaciens NRRL B-50013 and B. amyloliquefaciens NRRL B-50104 (trade name: Enviva® PRO 202 GT) for turkeys for fattening. The product under assessment is based on viable spores of three strains originally identified as B. amyloliquefaciens which, in the course of the current assessment, were reclassified as Bacillus velezensis. The bacterial species B. velezensis is considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The identity of the active agents was established. The active agents do not harbour acquired antimicrobial resistance genes and lack toxigenic potential and the capacity to produce aminoglycosides. Following the QPS approach, the three bacterial strains are presumed safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. Since no concerns are expected from the other components of the additive, Enviva® PRO 202 GT is also considered safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. Enviva® PRO 202 GT is non-irritant to skin and eyes and is not a dermal sensitiser. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active agents, the additive should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. In a previous opinion, it was concluded that Enviva® PRO 202 GT has a potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in chickens for fattening at the recommended level of 7.5 × 107 CFU/kg complete feed. It is considered that conclusions on efficacy of Enviva® PRO 202 GT in chickens for fattening can be extrapolated to turkeys for fattening. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that Enviva® PRO 202 GT has the potential to be efficacious in turkeys for fattening at 7.5 × 107 CFU/kg complete feed.S

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of lactic acid produced by Weizmannia coagulans (synonym Bacillus coagulans) DSM 32789 for all animal species except for fish (Jungbunzlauer SA)

©2022EuropeanFoodSafetyAuthority.EFSAJournalpublishedbyWiley-VCHGmbHonbehalfofEuropeanFoodSafetyAuthority.[EN] Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of lactic acid produced by a non-genetically modified strain of Weizmannia coagulans (synonym of Bacillus coagulans) (DSM 32789) for all animal species except for fish. The production strain qualifies for the QPS approach for safety assessment. Although uncertainty remains concerning the possible presence of viable cells and/or spores of the production strain in the final product, this does not raise safety concerns for the target species, humans and the environment. The lactic acid is safe at 50,000 mg/kg complete feed for functional ruminants and pigs and at 20,000 mg/kg feed for all the other animal species and categories except for pre-ruminants for which a safe level cannot be established. The corresponding safe levels in water for drinking would be 15,000 mg/L water for pigs and 8,000 mg/L for other non-ruminant species. Although no safe concentration of lactic acid in water for drinking for ruminants can be derived, the Panel considers that the use in water for drinking is safe in ruminants when the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of the additive under assessment in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers and for the environment. It is considered corrosive to the skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Lactic acid is used in food as a preservative. It is reasonable to expect that the effect seen in food will be observed in feed when it is used at comparable concentrations and conditions. However, the FEEDAP Panel has reservations about its effectiveness as a preservative in complete feed with a moisture content of ≤ 12%.SIThe Panel wishes to acknowledge the contribution to this opinion of Martina Reitano, Joana Revez, the experts of the Microbiology and of the Animal Nutrition Working Groups of the FEEDAP Panel

Safety of the fermentation product of Aspergillus oryzae NRRL 458 (Amaferm®) as a feed additive for dairy cows (Biozyme Inc.)

[EN] Amaferm® is a fermentation product produced by Aspergillus oryzae NRRL 458, containing alpha-amylase and cellulase enzyme activities, authorised for use as a feed additive for dairy cows. In 2016, the applicant requested for the renewal of the authorisation and the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) issued an opinion at that regard in 2020. In that opinion, the Panel could not confirm the previously drawn conclusions (EFSA, 2006) regarding the safety of the production strain, and consequently could not confirm the safety of the additive for the target species and consumers. In the current submission, the applicant provided supplementary information that allowed the Panel to conclude on the identity of the production strain, redefine the specifications of the additive, and finally to conclude on its safety. Therefore, the new data provided permit to conclude that Amaferm® complies with the conditions of the authorisation. However, the Panel noted that there is the need to change the specification and description of the cellulase and amylase units in the authorisation act. The data provided in the previous (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2020) and the current assessments support that Amaferm® remains safe under the approved conditions for target species, consumers and the environment. The additive is non-irritant to skin and eyes, or a dermal sensitiser but should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser.SIThe Panel wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output (in alphabetical order of the last name): Working Group on Animal Nutrition and Working Group on Microbiology, Rosella Brozzi, Christina Cuomo and Jordi Tarres Call