1 / 18

Calcium-butyrate SINTOBUTYL Product and specifications

Calcium-butyrate SINTOBUTYL Product and specifications. Calcium-butyrate : Product and specifications. Sintobutyl. - Chemically pure calciumbutyrate (slight surplus of Ca) – fine powder Doesn’t smell if not touched with humid surfaces (hands, ...).

serina-murphy
Télécharger la présentation

Calcium-butyrate SINTOBUTYL Product and specifications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Calcium-butyrateSINTOBUTYLProduct and specifications

  2. Calcium-butyrate : Product and specifications Sintobutyl • - Chemically pure calciumbutyrate (slight surplus of Ca) – fine powder • Doesn’t smell if not touched with humid surfaces (hands, ...). • May partly dissociate in contact with humidity and release unpleasant smell • Min. 76.6 % butyrate-ANION and approximately 17% Calcium

  3. Sintobutyl Coating: incapsulates the active compound (Ca-butyrate)  Fat components from vegetable origin ( Very good nutritional properties) • Fatty acids with high melting point • Hydrogenated fatty acids : C14 and lower (%) 1 % C16 palmitic acid (%) 45 % C18 stearic acid (%) 53 % C18’oleic acid (%) 0.5 % C20 and higher 0.4%

  4. Sintobutyl (calcium butyrate) and Antibiotic Growth Promoters How Sintobutyl ranks between other claimed alternatives ?

  5. Encapsulated Yeast ComponentsBotanical extracts Feature / Effect Calcium-butyrate(MOS, hydrolysed yeast) (herbs, roots,fruits) Probiotics,Prebiotics, enzymes acidifiers “coated”) GUT Morphology & Functioning (villi, epithelium, mucosa) IN-DIRECT EFFECT (some even stimulate butyric acid, -producing bacteria) DIRECT AGENT / NUTRIENT IN-DIRECT EFFECT + and - GUT Micro flora • Bacterial Load - Metabolism, - Pathogens (C-Cl-Salm) DIRECT INHIBITION Low MIC-value’s at intestinal pH = 6 In vivo flora studies IN-DIRECT EFFECT • Attachment • VFA –production (BA) • Substrate interaction DIRECT / INDIRECT EFFECT + and - Sintobutyl versus Other “Gut Modifiers” “Gut Flora Stabilisers” . Are they all the same ?

  6. More Feed Additives claim, support BUTYRATE effects Protection and regeneration of intestinal villi (mucosa integrity) Non Digestible Oligosaccharides Bacterial shift (LAB, Bifido) F.O.S. (inuline, profeed) M.O.S. (yeast cell walls) Fermentation to VFA and more Butyric (Megasphera LA -> BA) Selective bacterial inhibition at intestinal, ceacal level : Coli, Clostridium, Salmonella Butyrate (butyric acid) Immuno-stimulant Stimulation of enzyme synthesis Bacteria attachment (lectins) Some induce BA production () Herbal Extracts Stimulation of immunity Zootechical effects : FI, DWG, FCR, Egg Shell strength Part is converted at intestinal level to Butyric MCFA’s So, why not adding butyrate (Sintobutyl) directly !!??!!

  7. Mode of action of PROGUT(Vuorenmaa J & Vaahtovua J. (2006) PROGUT = Hydrolysed brewery yeast product; Prebiotic effects + Yeast Cell Wall effects are claimed • Stabilize gut flora • Support natural immunity • Prevent attachment of E.Coli, Salmonella to mucus Increases the MBI with piglets and poultry !!! Bifidobacteria + butyric acid producing bacteria MICROBIAL BALANCE INDEX = --------------------------------------------------------------- Enteric group bacteria + bacteroides Significant correlation with DWG and FCR Means more Butyrate in the gut, so just give straight Sintobutyl !!! MBI

  8. - / + + + +- - +/- - - + /- - - +/- - -+ +- - - - - - - - - - +/- - -+ +- - + +/- - - - - +/- + + + + + ++ + colon + ? ? ++ + + + +- -- - + colon + ? ? ? indirectdirect ++ indirect + colon direct + + ? ++ / - -+ +- - - - - - + ? - ? - ? - - / + + + ++++ - - ++ + - ? - ? • Gut integrity • Enzyme synthesis • Immunity • Microbial Shift (beneficial) • Metabolic activity flora • Inhibition - Coli • - Clostridium • - Salmonella Comparative mode of action and benefits of : ABGP ButyProl Coated MOS FOS MCFA Benzoic E.O. Butical Acids YCW’s Acid Herbs • Digestibility of nutrients • Absorption • FCR • Intestinal disorders • Pathogens • Litter quality + + + + + - - - - - ? + +? - + - - -/+ -/+ (c) - ? + - ? - - + + + + + + +? + - - - ? + ? + + + + + + ++ + + + ++ - - / + + + + ++ ++ +?- + + ++ -/+ + +- - - - -/+ - ? +/- -/+

  9. - / + + + ++/- - -+ +- - - -+ ++/- + + + + ++ + + + +- - indirectdirectindirect ++ / - -+ +-/+ - - / + + + +--/+ • Gut integrity • Enzyme synthesis • Immunity • Microbial Shift (beneficial) • Metabolic activity flora • Inhibition - Coli • - Clostridium • - Salmonella Comparative mode of action and benefits of : ABGP ButyProl Probiotics Butical • Digestibility of nutrients • Absorption • FCR • Intestinal disorders • Pathogens • Litter quality + + + + - - - + - - + + + + + + indirect + + + -- /+ - - / + + + --/+ -/+ + +- -

  10. Sintobutyl versus Aromabiotic (medium chain fatty acids) in rabbits

  11. Totally untrue !!!!!!!!!!! Pure Marketing !!!!! Sept 06 : so far limited use in 2-3 countries of EU-25 and on the way back (“fashion”)

  12. CLAIM-ACTIVITY MCFA Calciumbutyrate MCFA soluble both in water and lipids, which would influence the speed of penetration of the product through the bacterial cell wall. Molecules have medium length C10-C14 and may be quite big to penetrate. Bacterial Inhibition E. Coli Clostridium Villi integrity Performance (dwg,fcr) Butyric acid is also solublein water and in fat, both lipofylic and hydrofylic. On top the molecule is smaller (C-4), which normally could be easier to penetrate. Ca-butyrate(Sintobutyl) versus MCFA’s 1.0-1.5 log reduction (10-15 days) at 0.2 % - MIC = 0.5% !! 1.0 -1.2 log reduction (25-50 mmol) – J . Decuyper 2003-U.G. MCFA would inhibit lipase production by bacteria, which seems needed for bacteria to attach to the gutwall. So attachment may be hindered and bacteria lessivate !? INDIRECT effect Calciumbutyrate has a DIRECT inhibition effect at pH=6 on all pathogenic clostridium strains (A.Decostere). Inhibtion of anaerobes by 0.5 log (J. Decuyper) MCFA would Increase villi length and vili/crypt ratio, but this is again INDIRECT (as more additives may do by fermentation or transformation to butyric acid) Butyrate is the FUEL (nutrient) of the gutwallcell (villi), having a DIRECT effect on the gutwall integrity and regeneration. Besides systemic effect, also the topical effect (local) Effects seems limited, nihil to negative (on feed intake). Few data ! Significant Positive Effect (higher feed intake -attractant). Full data base !

  13. Property, advantage MCFA’s Butyrate (butyric acid) Specific Characteristics Chain length caproic C6, Caprylic C-8, Capric C10 C4 (longest SCFA) pK-value 4.88 4.89 4.89 4.86 Solubility fat and water soluble fat and water soluble ME 26.6 kJ/gr 17.4 kJ/gr Human application as functional lipid (“slimming”) as anti-cancer (colon) Absorption enhancing (paracellular permeability) enhancing (idem +emulsifyer) Bacterial Inhibition mg/ml E. Coli > 5 2 5 < 5.0 (UG-AF) Salmonella > 5 3 > 5 < 5.0 (UG-VF) Clostridium > 5 1-2 1 4-16 (UG-VF) C-12 = 0.1-0.2 Butyrate – MCFA’s : similarities & differences !?

  14. Butyrate – MCFA’s : similarities & differences !? Property, advantage MCFA’s Butyrate (butyric acid) Specific Characteristics Ketosis effects (negative !!) Risk : C6-C8 in neonatals (piglets) not (only in ruminants) Association with C-4, VFA Antagonist (drop in C-4, VFA) Synergistic (= or >) =>Compatible with FOS,YCW, NOT YES Some Probiotics, .... Risk of lipolysis in feed Real NOT (lipase) Required antimicrobial 3-5 gr/l pure, stomach, gut concentration FI piglet 300 g/d =>10-17 kg per ton pure X 2 = 20-34 kg per ton of feed 0.5-3.0 kg/ton Accumulation in fat at high dosages (4 %) NOT

  15. MCFA’s = Butyrate antagonist !!!!! – Conflicting – Worrying ??? • J. Goris (2006), ILVO : C8 or caprylic acid changes fermentation profile in caecum of piglets : increase lactate, decrease butyrate and propionate (reversible) • F.Boyen & Pasmans (2006) – Effect on salmonella invasion of caprylic and caproic acid + butryic acid is antagonistic. Butyric alone decreases invasion ! • Leeson & Antongiovanni (2005) – Triglycerides of mcfa + butyric less effective in broilers than Triglycerides of butyric acid alone. • Van Oeckel (2005) - ILVO – Piglets trial : performance of combination of mcfa-product + butyrate less good than mcfa, butyrate, but also than negative control. • Maertens L (2006) – ILVO – Rabbits : mcfa-product decreased significantly VFA’s and Butyric concentration in caecum. Unbalancing cecal flora !!!

  16. Salmonella invasion through epithelial cells of broiler chickens after treatment with butyric acid or MCFA (caproic acid) IN VITRO !! “MCFA seem to decrease invasion at least to the same extent as butyric acid but at lower concentrations” F. Van Immerseel et All (2004) – Appl. Environ.Microbiol. 6/2004 : 3582-3587 • In Vitro data : what happens in intestine with additive ? How much caproic acid is liberated from coconut-oil ? • Related only to eventual accumulation in liver and spleen, not in caecum (see in vivo test)

  17. Salmonella in different organs of broiler chickens after treatment with butyric acid or MCFA (caproic acid) Log cfu/gr IN VIVO !! -1.66 log -2.2 log a b a’ a’ a” a” a b a’ b’ a” a” = 3 kg Butical 60 = 6-30 kg MCFA-product ?? Inoculation with 10exp3 Salmonella Enteritidis on day 5, counts on day 8 (Van Immerseel - University Ghent)

  18. Composition of a commercial MCFA product Method : saponification BF3/MeOH (hot) BF3/MEOH (cold) + BF3/MeOH (hot) Fatty Acid % rel g/100 gram % rel g/100 gram % rel g/100 gram Caproic C6:0 8.1 5 8.6 5 6.9 3 Caprylic C8:0 62.1 32 60.8 30 59.6 23 Capric C10:0 29.4 15 30.2 14 33.0 12 Undecanoic C11:0 0.2 0 0.2 0 0.3 0 Lauric C 12:0 0.2 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 53 49 38 Sample from Belgium – 2004 ; Independent industrial laboratory, analysis in 2005

More Related