Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Can the rumen protect the dairy from mycotoxins? Naturally ahead Hilmar Gerhardt, MSc Ruminant Application Champion, Biomin.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Can the rumen protect the dairy from mycotoxins? Naturally ahead Hilmar Gerhardt, MSc Ruminant Application Champion, Biomin."— Presentation transcript:

1 Can the rumen protect the dairy from mycotoxins? Naturally ahead Hilmar Gerhardt, MSc Ruminant Application Champion, Biomin

2 Total number of samples analyzed ~1384 Analysis from 2 perspectives: – By Geographical Regions – By Commodity Types All Analysis done by Romer Labs Singapore Analytical Data & Criteria

3 Geographical Regions North Asia – China, Japan, Korea & Taiwan SouthEast Asia – Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand & Vietnam South Asia – IndiaOceania – AustraliaAmericas – North America - South America

4 Commodity Types Corn Soybean Meal Wheat/bran Corn Gluten Meal Rice/bran DDGS Feed Straw/silage Other feed ingredients –fishmeal, canola meal, cassava, sorghum, cottonseed meal, copra meal, peanut meal etc.

5 Method of Analysis MYCOTOXIN* Method of Analysis Limit of detection (LOD) Afla totalHPLC< 1 µg/kg (=ppb) ZONHPLC< 32 µg/kg (=ppb) DONHPLC< 50 µg/kg (=ppb) FUM totalHPLC< 100 µg/kg (=ppb) OTAHPLC< 2 µg/kg (=ppb) * Due to the high LOD of T-2 toxin analysis (<125 µg/kg) it was chosen not to analyze this toxin to avoid false negative results. However, this mycotoxin is toxic at levels below 125 µg/kg. Therefore, its absence from the results of this survey is not an indicative of its inexistence in the feedstuffs.

6 Summary Oct Sept MYCOTOXINn% Positive Average of positive µg/kg Max. µg/kgCommodityCountry Afla total CornPakistan ZON Corn China DON Finished feedChina FUM CornChina OTA CornIndia

7 Summary Oct – June 2009 MYCOTOXINn% Positive Average of positive µg/kg Max. µg/kgCommodityCountry Afla total CornIndia ZON CornJapan DON DDGSChina FUM Corn Gluten Meal Malaysia OTA Finished feedPakistan

8 Occurrence of Mycotoxin by Geographical Regions Oceania: Afla-7% ZON-15% DON-24% FUM-8% OTA-9% Americas: Afla-9% ZON-28% DON-54% FUM-52% OTA-2% North Asia: Afla-18% ZON-45% DON-63% FUM-55% OTA-10% South-East Asia: Afla-52% ZON-39% DON-31% FUM-59% OTA-15% South Asia: Afla-78% ZON-24% DON-18% FUM-50% OTA-38%

9 Importing concerns? Importing commodities also means importing mycotoxins! Different geographic regions present different climates therefore different mycotoxins will be present.

10 Yes, Some rumen microbes (and protozoa) detoxify myxotoxins Naturally ahead

11 BUT : How much? Naturally ahead.

12 Rumen Degraded No Rumen Degradation Aflatoxin 0-42 %58 – 100 % Zearalenone 90 % -Zearalenol 10 x more oestrogenic 10 % BUT oestrogenic metabolites Deoxynivalenol 35 % Rumen-pH sensitive 65 % Ochratoxin A completely? ? Natural Bioconversion in the Rumen Doerr 2003 Jouany and Diaz 2005 Ruminal Detoxification

13 Yesterday`s feed Today`s feed Gases

14 Detoxifying Capacity: Factors reducing the detoxifing capacity of rumen microbes: High dry matter intake –High passage rate –Little time for detoxifying Nutrient dense ration (NFC, Fat, Protein) –Risk for acidosis –Maintain rumen activity? –Maximum mycotoxin-inactivation in the rumen? Naturally ahead.

15 Negative Effects of Mycotoxins depend on: Contamination-level in the feeds Different mycotoxins – different degradation rate Duration of mycotoxin contamination Milk/Reproduction performance levels (metabolic stress) –Immune function –Rumen health? Cow comfort –SCC (milking routine, bedding) –Lameness occurrence (floor design, hygiene) Naturally ahead.

16 Remember ! After the Rumen nothing stops Mycotoxins !! immunesuppressive livertoxic cytotoxic Ruminal Detoxification

17 Why is there an increased risk for mycotoxins in the field? Naturally ahead. Annual recontamination –No till –Less crop rotation Dramatic change of temperatures (at flowering) (cold nights, warm days)

18 You can`t change the weather, BUT: Effect of Cultivation system under unfavourable weather conditions on DON contamination? Naturally ahead ppb DON 315 ppb DON PloughingNo Till Average:

19 French study Barrier-Guillot et al. (2004) presented in Maryland, USA n =765 fields, > acres ~ 3% wheat surface in France Risk factors for DON –Weather at flowering (biggest impact) –Previous crop (corn!) Resistance against Fusarium –Cultivation system (ploughing, no till) Crop residues on the soil surface ! Naturally ahead.

20 Why is there an increased risk for mycotoxins in the rations? Natürlich im Futter. Highly concentrated rations

21 Why is there an increased risk for mycotoxins in the rations? Naturally ahead. Highly concentrated rations High mycotoxin risk (DON, ZON, T-2, Alfatoxins) in concentrates –Corn, wheat, cotton seed Mycotoxins in corn silage

22 Why is there an increased risk for mycotoxins in the rations? Naturally ahead. Highly concentrated rations High mycotoxin risk in concentrates –Corn (DON, ZON), wheat (DON; ZON), cotton seed (T-2) Mycotoxins in corn silage !

23 Mycotoxins in forages? Naturally ahead. mycotoxin suspicious samples tested

24 Naturally ahead. Mycotoxins in corn silage UW-Extension Team Forage – field study in fall 2000: Objective: Mycotoxin level of plants in standing corn Results: all samples positiv for Fusarium 63% of the samples were between 0,1 – 4,9 ppm DON (highest 41,6 ppm) Rankin M., Grau C. (2004)

25 Do Mycotoxins get eliminated in the feeds? They are not destroyed by: –Fermentation (corn silage) –Time (longer storing period) –Heat Naturally ahead Rankin M., Grau C. (2004)

26 What is happening in the field? Naturally ahead. n=100 dairies, USA Whitlow et al. (1986)

27 Conclusion of other field data There is a relationship between DON contamination and losses in production –Gotlieb 1997 –Seglar 1997 Naturally ahead.

28 Research and field trial difference? Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Ontario Naturally ahead. For example: Effects of DON in dairy cows ResearchField data 12 ppm DON: no reduced milk production (13-22 wk. of lactation) Depressed feed intake and lower milk production at 0,1 ppm DON

29 Research and field trial difference? Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Ontario Naturally ahead. ResearchField data pure mycotoxins synergistic effects of mycotoxins short trial period most symptoms occur after weeks mid to late lactation cows, 20 kg milk fresh cows with problems (DA, ketosis)

30 High risk especially in the transition period! Why? Naturally ahead.

31 Depressed immune function Naturally ahead. Goff & Horst (1997)

32 Periparturient energy balance Naturally ahead. nutrient intake/-requirement Energy deficit prior to calving! Surplus Far off dry parturition

33 Effect of mycotoxins on transition cows? More DA`s (displaced abomasum) Naturally ahead. Vet. Med. Univ. Munich, Germany Whitlow et al. (1986) Whitlow & Hagler (1998) Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Ontario

34 Effect of mycotoxins on transition cows? More DA`s (displaced abomasum) Ketosis, fatty liver syndrome Retained placenta, Metritis Mastitis Naturally ahead. Whitlow et al. (1986) Whitlow & Hagler (1998) Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Ontario

35 Effect of mycotoxins on transition cows? More DA`s (displaced abomasum) Ketosis, fatty liver syndrome Retained placenta, Metritis Mastitis Naturally ahead. Whitlow et al. (1986) Whitlow & Hagler (1998) Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Ontario

36 Naturally ahead. Mycotoxins intensify the risk for lameness in dairy cows Nocek (1993), adapted Hoffmann (2001)

37 DON - Deoxynivalenol ZON – Zearalenone AFB1 – Aflatoxin B1 T2-Toxin ZON Irregular heats Low conception rates Ovarian cysts Embryonic Loss T2-Toxin, DON, AFB 1 Gastroenteritis Intestinal hemorrhages Impaired rumen function Diarrhea Ketosis DON Laminitis T2-Toxin, DON Decreased feed intake Lower milk production Decreased feed efficiency AFB 1, T2-Toxin, DON Milk contamination Decreased milk production Mastitis Effects of Mycotoxins

38 Limits for Mycotoxins? Compromised immune system: –Transition (fresh) cows –sick cows –stressed cows Most susceptible to mycotoxins! Naturally ahead Linn & Chapman 2002

39 Limits for Mycotoxins? exact levels for dairy cattele unknown! Naturally ahead Biomin experience Mycotoxin levellowmediumhigh A-Trichothecenes (T-2, HAT-2, DAS) < > 800 B-Trichothecenes (DON, AcDON, NIV, Fus X) < > 2000 ZON < > 250 Ochratoxin A < > 500 Aflatoxin B 1 > (FDA)> 20

40 Controlling of the benchmarks in the milk produktion- small screws.. Feed conversion, -efficiancy Feed quality Supervision of the animals Optimising the TMR..demand is leading the rations Naturally ahead

41 Basics for economical value of life time performance Three lactations or kg / cow 15 kg of milk per day of life (27000 kg in 1800 days) Feed efficacy 1,5 kg milk / kg DM Naturally ahead

42 Auszug aus: DGfZ Schriftenreihe, Heft 42, 2005 T. Schomaker Less than 20% of dairy cows are finding in lactation No. 4 und 5!! 66 % of dairy cows do not reach the 3rd lactation ! Naturally ahead

43 PREVENTION (good agricultural practices, plant breeding, Bt corn)... during feed production FEED ADDITIVES Deactivation ADSORPTION BIOTRANSFORMATION BIOPROTECTION... during feed digestion DECONTAMINATION physical/chemical treatments (cleaning, mechanical sorting, irradiation, solvent extraction; ammonia, sodium hydroxide, oxidizing- and reducing agents...)... during feed processing uncertain results, often connected with high feed losses expensive time consuming change in palatability and nutritive value decreased feed quality toxic by-products possible Strategies to minimize mycotoxin impact

44 PREVENTION (good agricultural practices, plant breeding, Bt corn)... during feed production FEED ADDITIVES Deactivation ADSORPTION BIOTRANSFORMATION BIOPROTECTION... during feed digestion DECONTAMINATION physical/chemical treatments (cleaning, mechanical sorting, irradiation, solvent extraction; ammonia, sodium hydroxide, oxidizing- and reducing agents...)... during feed processing uncertain results, often connected with high feed losses expensive time consuming change in palatability and nutritive value decreased feed quality toxic by-products possible Strategies to minimize mycotoxin impact

45 Strategies counteracting Mycotoxins

46 3 Strategies Unique and exclusive.... Biotransformation Adsorption Elimination of toxic effects Trichothecenes e.g. DON, T-2,... Zearalenone All mycotoxins Aflatoxin, Fumonisin No binding of vitamins, antiobiotics

47 Experience with Mycofix ® Plus in Dairy Cows Experience

48 Naturally ahead 1200 cows 12 week trial on-off-on

49 Naturally ahead

50 Experience Acetic Acid : Propionic Acid 2,8 : 1

51 Naturally ahead. Even in low producing, robust Simmental cows – There is a difference

52 Results : Stronger immune defense Lowering SCC (long trial period!) Experience

53 Take home message: Mycofix ® Plus increases milk yield. Mycotoxines impair rumen function. Mycofix ® Plus lowered Somatic Cell Count by 60%. Experience

54 Mycofix ® Plus 3.E since 28. January 2006 Progress of days between calving and new pregnancy Farm: BEAG Agrar GmbH, Behringen, Germany Naturally ahead Long term field trial in a dairy farm 340 cows

55 Long term effects of Biomin MycofixPlus FarmsCowsageLakt.Diff.MillkyieldDiff.LivetimeDiff.Culling Nr.in daysNr. Past yearLivetime Past yearefficiancy Past year cows DIM F ü rstenwalde ,30, ,72,0343 Griesheim ,50, ,50,6204 Ranzig ,90, ,11,2260 Behringen ,50, ,42,0354 K ö rner ,90, ,21,7207 Farms without Mycofix Plus Milsana ,7-0, ,1-0,1213 Dermbach ,7-0, ,1-0,2237 Field trials

56 Auszug aus: DGfZ Schriftenreihe, Heft 42, 2005 T. Schomaker Less than 20% of dairy cows are finding in lactation No. 4 und 5!! 66 % der Kühe erreichen nicht die 3. Laktation ! FCM control dataFCM genetic possible Outlook: In using the capability of the dairy cows by stabilizing the performance with Mycofix Plus, the better ones reach the higher lactation number 4,5 and 6 and more

57 References Barrier-Guillot B., Delambre M., Morel A., Maumene C., Gouet H., Grosjean F., Leuillet M. (2004): Identification of agronomic factors that influence the level of deoxynivalenol (DON) in wheat grown in france. XI IUPAC Symposium on mycotoxins and phytotoxins, May , Bethesda, Maryland, USA Goff J.P., Horst R.L. (1997): Physiological changes at parturition and their relationship to metabolic disorders. J. Dariy Sci. 80, Gotlieb, A. (1997): Causes of mycotoxins in silages. Pp In: Silage: Field to Feedbunk, NRAES- 99, Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, Ithaca, NY Hagler Jr., W.M., Tyezkowska, K., Hamilton, P.B. (1984): Simultaneous occurence of deoxynivalenol, zearalenon and aflatoxin in 1982 scabby wheat from the midwestern United States. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 47: Hofman, P. (2004): Feed Molds & Mycotoxins. www. wisc. edu/dysci/uwex/nutritn/presentn/mold.pdf Hoffmann M. (2001): Gut zu Fuß, wenn es im Trog stimmt. DLZ 12, Linn J., Chapman B. (2002): Drought feed concerns and feeding strategies. Timly Topics. Ministry of Agriculture and Food (2004): Molds and Mycotoxins – Effects of Moldy Feed and Mycotoxins on Cattle. Nocek, J.E. (1993): Hoof Care for Dairy Cattle. W.D. Hoard & Sons Company, Fort Atkinson, WI Rankin M., Grau C. (2004) Agronomic Considerations for Molds and Mycotoxins in corn silage. Crops and Soils Agent, Fond du Lac County. Extension Plant Pathologist, UW-Madison Seglar, B. (1997): Case studies that implicate silage mycotoxins as the cause of dairy herd problems. Pp In: Silage: Field to Feedbunk. NRAES-99, Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, Ithaca, NY Whitlow et al. (1986), J. Dairy Sci., 69 (Suppl. 1): 223 Whitlow L.W., Hagler W.M. (1998): The Potential for an Association for Mycotoxins with Problem of Production, Helath, and Reproduction in Dairy Cattle. Proceedings MN Dairy Health Conference, May 19-21, College of Vet Med., UM, St. Paul, MN Naturally ahead.


Download ppt "Can the rumen protect the dairy from mycotoxins? Naturally ahead Hilmar Gerhardt, MSc Ruminant Application Champion, Biomin."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google