Cyanosis (purple head) is observed in breeder males, typically around 35–40 weeks of age, and is sometimes used as a management indicator (Figure 1). The condition is not limited to one breed or line and may be transient, with color changes throughout the day; cyanosis appears after feeding, then disappears during the day. Affected birds show no respiratory distress, and necropsy reveals few gross lesions except occasional flaccid hearts. Echocardiography has detected aortic insufficiency (AOI) in a significant proportion of affected males, and laboratory findings show elevated hematocrit and hemoglobin concentrations, suggesting increased blood viscosity and potential compensatory polycythemia, a condition where an overproduction of red blood cells compensates for a lack of oxygen. This information is intended to provide physiological context and support practical management decisions, rather than to imply differences between breeds or genetic lines. There is no evidence of a genetic basis for this condition; therefore, management should be the focus to reduce field incidence.

FIGURE 1: An example of affected (left) and unaffected (right) broiler breeder males.

AVIAGEN Brief: Cyanosis (Purple Head) in Broiler Breeder Males | © 2026 Aviagen

PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT OF MALE CYANOSIS

FEEDING AND PHYSICAL STRESS
Cyanosis typically occurs during periods of peak physical stress, such as feeding or mating, when oxygen demand spikes and the heart may struggle to keep pace. For this reason, feed distribution should be completed within three minutes to prevent uneven gorging and panic. Male exclusion grills must be intact to prevent males from stealing hen feed, which increases their body mass and oxygen demand while physically restricting their air sacs. In addition, verify water quality, drinker space, and water line flow rates to ensure they meet the requirements for broiler breeder males. Field observations have also suggested that behaviors such as litter consumption may contribute to transient episodes in some flocks, although the underlying mechanism remains unclear.

BODY WEIGHT AND CONDITION CONTROL
Rear males to a body weight profile that meets or slightly exceeds current breed standards, as these higher profiles help prevent conditions such as Valgus-Varus Deformity (VVD), also known as ‘X-legs’. Achieving and maintaining good body weight and uniformity in male populations is as critical as it is in females, because cyanosis occurs less frequently in well-managed, well-fed males. Over-fleshed males (with a Dimpled U-shaped breast; score 5) are at higher risk since muscle tissue is oxygen-expensive. Therefore, target a fleshing score of 2.5–3 (a Standard V or Standard U-shaped breast; score 2-3) to minimize risk (Figure 2).

FIGURE 2: Scoring system to assess bird body condition (fleshing).

VENTILATION
Oxygen demand peaks during feeding, regardless of temperature. Increase ventilation 10 minutes before and during feeding to maximize oxygen availability. Maintaining good air quality and effective air exchange is important, as suboptimal ventilation, elevated ammonia or carbon dioxide levels, and reduced oxygen availability may add to physiological stress and contribute to symptom expression, even in open-sided housing systems.

TRIAGE AND CULLING
If cyanosis is observed, monitor the bird’s recovery post-feeding. Persistent cyanosis indicates heart failure and warrants culling.

MORPHOMETRIC DOCUMENTATION OF CARDIAC ABNORMALITIES
STUDY OVERVIEW
Research by Floyd D. Wilson et al (2016) documented a high prevalence of left ventricular dilated cardiomyopathy in mature broiler breeder males, both cyanotic and clinically normal. To better contextualize these findings within commercial production, the study also incorporated comparisons to market-age broilers.

KEY FINDINGS
Both cyanotic and normal broiler breeder males showed extensive left ventricular chamber dilation, with no significant difference between groups. Older males (average 42 weeks of age) had significantly higher left and right ventricular weight-to-total heart weight ratios compared with market-age broilers (average 7 weeks of age).

Morphometric data indicated that the left ventricle chamber area-to-total ventricle area ratio increased from 3.2% in broilers to 10% in broiler breeder males; 33% of males had left ventricular volume ratios above 10%, with 13% above 20%. The right ventricle-to-total ventricle weight ratio (RV/TV) increased from 0.18 in broilers to 0.25 in males, and 36% of males exceeded the threshold for right ventricular hypertrophy, although ascites was not observed. Left ventricle wall area-to-body weight ratios were similar between age groups.

Histopathology revealed only minimal endocardiosis, with no substantial changes suggestive of dilated cardiomyopathy.

Collectively, these findings suggest that left ventricular enlargement in broiler breeder males is primarily due to dilation rather than hypertrophy, possibly linked to systemic hypertension and aortic insufficiency, and they highlight the need for further research into the relationship between cyanosis, cardiac dilation, and breeding performance.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The combined evidence from pathological and morphometric studies underscores the complexity of health challenges in broiler breeder males. Cyanosis and cardiac dilation are prevalent and multifactorial, impacting both flock management and productivity. Management strategies should prioritize rapid feed distribution, strict control of body weight and uniformity, sufficient drinker space and flow rates, and enhanced ventilation during feeding. Continued research and vigilant health monitoring are essential for optimizing breeder welfare and performance.

Yet despite the widespread use of organic trace minerals (OTMs), one important misconception continues to exist in the industry: that all organic trace minerals are the same.

Looking Beyond Inclusion Levels
When evaluating trace mineral programs, discussions often focus on inclusion rates, mineral concentration, and cost per ton of feed.

However, the true value of a trace mineral is not determined simply by how much is added to a formulation. Rather, it is determined by how much of that mineral is available for absorption and utilization by the bird. This distinction becomes increasingly important in modern poultry production.

Many producers experiencing challenges like, inconsistent performance, reduced meat quality, or variability in the flock focus on nutrient inclusion. Yet nutrients can only contribute to biological functions if they successfully reach the absorption sites where they are needed.

As poultry genetics continue to advance, nutritional efficiency has become just as important as nutritional adequacy. This shift is causing nutritionists to move beyond a simple question of: “How much mineral is in the feed?” to a more important question: “How much mineral is actually available to the bird?”

Understanding the Challenge: Mineral Antagonism
Trace minerals perform important functions throughout the bird’s body. Zinc, copper, and manganese act as cofactors for numerous enzymes involved in bone formation, connective tissue development, collagen synthesis, skin integrity, antioxidant defense, and immune function.

However, the digestive tract is a highly complex environment. As minerals move through digestion, they encounter changes in pH and interactions with dietary compounds such as phytate, fiber components, and even other minerals. These interactions can reduce mineral availability before absorption occurs.

This phenomenon, referred to as mineral antagonism, helps explain why increasing mineral inclusion does not always result in improved mineral utilization. Simply feeding more minerals does not necessarily mean the bird receives more minerals. In many situations, the challenge is not supply. The challenge is bioavailability.

Dietary antagonisms can reduce mineral availability before absorption occurs, limiting nutrient utilization despite adequate inclusion levels

Organic Trace Minerals: A Category, Not a Chemistry
To help improve mineral bio-availability, the industry increasingly adopted organic trace minerals. However, the term “organic trace mineral” can create confusion. Some assume that all OTMs provide similar benefits because they belong to the same category. In reality, organic trace minerals represent a broad group of products that may differ substantially in:
· Ligand type
· Ligand-to-mineral ratio
· Molecular structure
· Bonding characteristics
· Electrical charge of the molecule
· Stability in Upper Digestive Tract
These differences influence how minerals behave in the gastrointestinal tract and how effectively they remain available for absorption. In other words, two products may both be labelled as organic trace minerals while functioning very differently inside the bird.

Why Chelation Matters
Among organic trace minerals, one class stands out from the others: bis-chelates. The word chelate originates from the Greek word chela, meaning crab claw or pincer. Similar to two crabs holding a metal securely giving it the maximum protection a Chelate forms when a ligand connects to a metal atom at more than two points. A 2 five member rings connected to the metal with two points of contact is the most stable complex found in nature. This structure helps provide protection compared with less defined mineral associations. However, not all organic trace minerals are true chelates. True chelates require a neutral charge to protect the mineral and enhance stability. Not all organic trace minerals (OTMs) provide a neutral charge; therefore, not all OTMs are true chelates. Some products are better described as complexes, proteinates, or other association forms. While they are still classified as organic trace minerals, they can differ significantly in chemical stability and behavior during digestion. The degree of protection provided by the mineral structure ultimately determines how vulnerable the mineral may be to antagonistic interactions.
Differences exist among chelates, too. There are chelates where one ligand is bound to the metal and then there are bis-chelates where two ligands are bound, creating a neutral charge and making the molecule less susceptible to antagonism. (see image)

Why Molecular Structure Matters
Research continues to demonstrate that mineral structure influences stability and bio-availability. When minerals dissociate during digestion, they become charged ions that are more likely to interact with negatively charged compounds such as phytate, fiber complexes and other minerals. These interactions can reduce availability before absorption occurs.

For this reason, increasing attention is being given to mineral structures specifically designed to maintain stability throughout digestion. One such approach is bis-chelation technology.

Bis-chelated trace minerals are characterized by a defined molecular structure consisting of one mineral ion bound to two ligands, creating two stable chelate rings. This unique architecture helps maintain structural integrity while moving through the digestive tract.
An equally important feature is their neutral molecular charge. Because neutrally charged molecules are less likely to participate in unwanted interactions, the structure helps protect the mineral, reducing opportunities for antagonism and supporting mineral availability until absorption occurs.

Bis-chelated trace minerals feature a defined molecular structure designed to support stability and mineral availability during digestion.

The Future of Trace Mineral Nutrition
As poultry production evolves, mineral nutrition must evolve with it. The industry’s next opportunity may not come from increasing mineral inclusion rates but from improving how effectively minerals are utilized by the bird. This requires looking beyond product categories and focusing on the scientific characteristics that influence mineral availability. Organic trace minerals can provide significant advantages over traditional inorganic sources. However, not all organic trace minerals are created equal. Their molecular structure matters. Their stability matters. And ultimately, their ability to deliver minerals to the animal matters.

As nutritionists continue searching for ways to improve performance consistency, skeletal integrity, meat quality, and return on investment, bis-chelated trace minerals are an increasingly important technology because they combine defined structure, enhanced stability, and optimized bioavailability into a scientifically designed mineral solution.

Contact your local NOVUS representative to learn more about bis-chelated trace minerals from the company that brought the technology to the animal agriculture industry over 20 years ago.

Dr. Partha P. Biswas, Former Associate Professor & HoD,

Because more poultry meat and eggs are being produced worldwide, people are asking for better, more sustainable ways to farm. This means finding new and better ways to feed animals in the future. From 2000 to 2020, global egg production went up by more than 41%, increasing from 51 million to 87 million tonnes, with an average annual growth rate of 3%.In 2023, poultry meat production hit 145 million tonnes and is still rising. With 6.29 million tonnes produced in 2020, India is fast approaching the level of production in the USA (6.29 million tonnes) produced in 2020. With an average egg size slightly lower than that in the USA (average weight of a standard large chicken egg 56.7 grams (2 oz) in the USA as against 50 to 55 grams in India), the Indian egg sector estimated that they have already overtaken the USA in terms of the number of eggs produced. India produced 149.11 billion eggs in the 2024–25 period, while the United States produced approximately 105 billion eggs in 2025. This growth is making it more important to find sustainable ways to feed animals.Even though raising poultry is less harmful to the environment compared to other types of animal farming, it still has some negative effects, such as increasing global warming, making water too rich in nutrients (eutrophication), and making soil too acidic. Low-carbon poultry feed is now moving from just an idea to real, practical use. Feed is responsible for about 70% of the total carbon footprint in poultry farming, so it’s the biggest area where we can cut down on carbon emissions. To make poultry farming more sustainable, we need to change how we get, mix, and use feed. Soybean meal and fishmeal have been the main sources of protein for animals, used in everything from chicken farming to fish farming. But keeping on using them at the same levels is bad for the environment. The reason we’re looking for alternatives isn’t because these materials don’t work well for animals—they are very effective. It’s because they cause serious environmental and economic problems, especially for systems that try to be sustainable and manage fish resources properly.

CIRCULAR AND ALTERNATIVE INGREDIENTS
Producers are actively moving away from relying entirely on conventional corn and deforestation-linked soy. Feed formulations are increasingly incorporating agro-industrial by-products, former foodstuffs (circular feed), and alternative protein crops like rapeseed and peas.
Life Cycle Assessments show that feeds formulated with these by-products can have a carbon footprint nearly 40% lower than traditional raw material feeds.

THE “BIG THREE INGREDIENTS” OF POULTRY FEED
Poultry sector consumes ~60% of India’s maize (~20+ million tonnes annually).Soybean meal demand: ~6-7 million tonnes domestically. In commercial broiler and layer operations, dry fish meal is rarely used When added at strategic levels, typically 3-8% in starter feeds and 2-5% in grower phases, fish meal enhances palatability, encouraging birds to consume more feed during critical early stages. This increased intake, paired with high digestibility, results in superior weight gains and improved FCR. In the layer segment, specialized demand exists for producing enriched eggs. The long-chain n-3 fatty acids (like DHA) in marine lipids transfer efficiently into the yolk.

1. SOYBEAN MEAL (THE PROTEIN BASE) : Soybean meal is the main source of protein in chicken feed around the world, but it has a big impact on the environment. The protein in soybean meal is high in lysine, which is first limiting amino acid in most chicken diets. This makes it a great match for grains like corn and wheat. India does not allow growing or bringing in raw genetically modified (GM)soybeans or seeds. India’s soybean production fell a lot during the 2025-2026 growing season, reaching about 11 to 12.7 million tons, which is much lower than before, causing a serious shortage of supply. When there are not enough non-GM soybeans locally, they get them from certain African countries. Non-GM soybeans are more expensive than GM ones. Even though GM soybean meal has been allowed sometimes to meet the protein needs for animal feed, there are worries about the effects on the environment. These worries include carbon emissions from cutting down forests in important areas like the Amazon and Cerrado, more risks for climate change, loss of wildlife, and pollution from farm chemicals running into water.

2.CORN / MAIZE (THE ENERGY SOURCE) : Corn provides the bulk energy in most poultry diets. While corn generally has a lower carbon footprint per kilogram than soy, birds eat much more of it. The primary carbon issue with corn is its heavy reliance on synthetic nitrogen fertilizers. Manufacturing these fertilizers is extremely energy-intensive, and applying them to fields releases nitrous oxide (N₂O),a green house gas nearly 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Tractor fuel for plowing is another important issue.

3.FISH MEAL (THE SPECIALITY PROTEIN) : Though used in far smaller amounts (typically for young chicks or breeder birds), fish meal has a complex environmental footprint. The issue of TMA accumulation leading to a fishy flavor in brown-shelled eggs arises from a genetic defect in up to 10% of brown-feathered hens. Normally, TMA is oxidized in the liver into a harmless compound by the action of the enzyme trimethylamine oxidase. The synthesis of this enzyme depends on the expression of the FM03 gene, located on chromosome 8. In the case of anon-synonymous mutation in the FM03 gene (designated T3295),hens cannot oxidize TMA, which then accumulates in the yolk. Poultry diets restrict fish meal to 5-10% of total feed due to ecological inefficiencies. Fishmeal is sourced from small forage fish like anchovies and sardines, which are crucial to the marine food web. Overfishing these species endangers higher trophic levels, leading to decline predatory fish, marine mammals, and seabirds.Moreover, forage fish populations are vulnerable to climate change, causing unstable fishmeal supplies and significant price volatility.India is the third-largest producer and exporter of fishmeal. Fig.1:

Fig.1: Typical poultry feed mix

ECONOMIC HURDLES TO TRANSITION OF CIRCULAR PROTEINS
The transition to circular proteins, such as microbial biomass, insect meal, or fermented agro-industrial waste, is essential for stabilizing ecosystems and is crucial for a sustainable livestock industry. However, commercial feed mills face significant economic barriers due to scale, commodity pricing, and supply chain maturity, making it challenging to replace traditional soybean meal. Here are the primary economic hurdles commercial mills face today:

THE PRICE PARITY GAP
Decades of agricultural subsidies, optimized supply chains, and massive economies of scale keep their prices relatively low and stable (historically ranging from $600-$750 per ton for soy, and $1,500 to $2,000 for fishmeal). In contrast, alternative proteins like Black Soldier Fly Larvae (BSFL) or microalgae carry immense initial capital expenditures (CapEx) to build high-tech bio-manufacturing or fermentation facilities.
Although insects like Black Soldier Fly Larvae (BSFL) raised on organic waste represent the ultimate circular protein, converting low-value biomass into high-value feed with a minimal land and water footprint. BSFL defatted protein meal and de-oiled powder generally trade between ₹110 and ₹250 per kg in Indian market & wholesale price roughly between $1,320 and $3,000 USD per ton.

SCALE AND VOLUME CONSISTENCY
Commercial feed mills produce feed continuously, requiring tens of thousands of tons of standardized ingredients every single month. Currently, very few alternative protein manufacturers can guarantee that volume without interruption. If a mill alters its highly specific formulation to include 5% insect meal, and the supplier falls short on delivery, the mill has to halt production, re-calibrate its software, and reformulate the diet using different ingredients. This downtime is extraordinarily expensive.

HIDDEN COSTS OF NUTRITIONAL REBALANCING
Soybean meal and fishmeal are highly dependable. Nutritionists have a clear understanding of how these ingredients function within the digestive systems of fish and birds. When a mill uses insect meal or a plant-based alternative to fishmeal, the amino acid profile changes. As a result, the mill needs to purchase additional synthetic amino acids, such as L-methionine or L-lysine, along with specific feed enzymes to compensate for the missing nutrients. This helps maintain the animals’ growth rates. Even if the base alternative protein is priced competitively, these added ingredients increase the overall cost of the final feed formulation.

RETROFITTING MILL INFRASTRUCTURE
Feed mills are designed to handle, grind, and pellet traditional grains and meals. However, alternative ingredients often have very different physical properties. For instance, some insect meals contain significantly more fat than solvent-extracted soybean meal. High levels of lipids can cause blockages in extruders, reduce the quality of feed pellets (making them prone to breaking during transport), and damage machinery. To effectively use these new ingredients at high levels, mills usually need to invest heavily in upgrading their equipment, such as adding new vacuum liquid-coating systems for fats. Many mills are reluctant to make these costly investments due to financial concerns.

REGULATORY APPROVAL COSTS
The global feed industry has strict rules to stop harmful substances from getting into the food chain. To get approval for a new type of protein, like microbial biomass or insect protein, used in animal feed, companies must do many expensive and time-consuming tests. These tests check for safety, look for heavy metals, and measure how well the protein is digested. This process can take many years.The cost of these tests ends up being passed on to the feed producers, which raises the cost of the ingredients. Unless these alternative proteins can be made in large amounts and sold at prices that are as good as soy or wild-caught fish, they are probably only used in special, high-end, or environmentally friendly feed products, not in regular, mass-produced feeds..Fig.2:

Fig.2: A picture showing how to raise chickens in a way that is good for the environment, people, and the poultry industry. It shows how being efficient with resources, taking care of the chickens’ health and happiness, keeping the farm safe from disease, making sure the chickens are productive, and making the whole food system strong and able to handle challenges are all connected and important.

THE GLOBAL RACE TO DECARBONIZE LIVESTOCK DIET

CIRCULAR INGREDIENTS & CARBON REDUCTION
Upcycling Waste: Using agricultural and slaughterhouse by-products (like DDGS, fruit pomace, and rendered fats) reduces reliance on land-intensive virgin crops and prevents landfill methane. The sustainable use of fruit and vegetable residues (FVRs) in poultry feed formulations has gained considerable attention due to their potential in advancing animal health However, certain challenge such as anti-nutritional factors, palatability issues, and processing techniques are also associated while incorporating these residues into poultry diets. Fermentation technologies create new opportunities to recover nutrients from agricultural residues and improve their value in poultry diets.

Carbon-Optimized Formulation: Modern feed software integrates Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) data to dynamically select ingredients based on their carbon footprint, not just cost and nutrition. LCA is a measurement of the emissions generated during its cultivation, processing, and transport. The software can calculate the exact environmental cost of using raw protein crops (like soy) versus supplementing with synthetic amino acids. It optimizes the diet to prevent protein overfeeding, which simultaneously lowers the feed’s initial GWP (Global Warming Potential) and reduces the nitrogen output (and offensive odors) in the poultry droppings.

THE SHIFT TO DDGS (DISTILLERS DRIED GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES)

Cost Advantage: Maize-based DDGS (₹17-₹20/kg) is significantly cheaper than soymeal (~₹40/kg), driving rapid adoption in the poultry industry.
Substitution Limits: DDGS can replace 25-30% of maize demand. Insect protein and algae can replace small portions of soy (5-10%).
Ongoing Conventional Reliance: Despite these alternatives, conventional ingredients will still make up 60-70% of overall feed requirements.
PRECISION NUTRITION
Targeted Diets: Formulating feed to match exact amino acid and energy needs improves the Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR).
Lower Emissions: Preventing protein overfeeding reduces nitrogen in manure, which directly lowers harmful nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions downstream. Fig.3

Fig.3: Alternative protein sources for animal feed in a circular bioeconomy could include things like leftover materials from farming and food processing, meals made from insects and worms, leftovers from biorefineries, proteins made by microbes, and by-products from aquatic sources.

BETWEEN REALITY AND RHETORIC: LOW-CARBON POULTRY FEED
Moving from using a wide variety of ingredients in poultry feed to providing exactly what the birds need at each stage of growth is key to creating real low-carbon feed. While some talk about replacing soy with new ingredients, the actual science is about making tiny, precise changes. It’s about giving birds exactly the right nutrients they need, in the right amounts, so nothing is wasted. Real reductions in carbon emissions from poultry feed don’t come from using popular or fashionable ingredients. They come from making sure every part of the feed works as efficiently as possible. Ensuring every gram of feed is used well is the best way a farm can help the environment. Instead of providing too much crude protein, experts can use specific synthetic amino acids like L-Methionine, L-Lysine, and L-Threonine.This helps reduce the total amount of crude protein in the birds’ diets. By cutting crude protein by just 1.5%, farms can lower their carbon footprint by about 70 kg of CO₂ equivalent per ton.

CONCLUSION
Despite having significant potential, incorporating insects, algae, fermented products, and agricultural and industrial by-products into chicken feed continues to face multiple challenges. These challenges include scientific, technical, economic, and legal difficulties. For insects, key issues include variability in their nutritional content based on their diet, high chitin content that complicates protein digestion for chickens, higher production costs compared to traditional protein sources, and the absence of established international safety and quality standards. Consumer acceptance of chicken products derived from insect-based diets remains uncertain, which may hinder large-scale adoption. The effort to reduce the carbon footprint in chicken feed presents a mix of real benefits and exaggerated claims. While some measurable progress is achievable, the extent and impact of these improvements often fall short of what companies assert. Reducing the carbon footprint in chicken feed is neither a complete solution nor a total myth; it represents incremental steps within a broader system that is not sustainable. The true advantages come from the following areas:

– Integrating a circular bioeconomy into feed production
– Minimizing reliance on imported protein
– Utilizing waste materials effectively
– Developing better alternative ingredients

The industry must shift from making grand promises to achieving tangible improvements. This involves recognizing and celebrating small achievements, such as 5-10% reductions, while also being honest about limitations and working towards broader changes that extend beyond mere feed modifications. This conclusion reflects both the actual progress being made and the gap between marketing claims and real-world outcomes, offering a balanced assessment of the industry’s current position regarding sustainable feed promises. Hybrid feeding systems that combine commercial and alternative feed sources generally provide the most consistent results, although maintaining mineral balance is essential during the laying phase.

REFERENCES
1.Vincent Guyonnet (2025) : Chapter 2 World Egg Production and Marketing Trends, In book: Handbook of egg science and technology (pp.9-26) Publisher: CRC Press. DOI:10.1201/9781003254430-3.
2.Hairui Yu et al (2025): Sustainable poultry farming: mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in poultry farming through nutritional and environmental modulations. World’s Poultry Science JournalVolume 81, 2025 – Issue 4: Pages 1081-1141.
3.Dheeraj Kumar et al (2025): Alternative feed ingredients in poultry diets: A review of nutritional potential, processing technologies, and challenges. International Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry 2025; SP-10(9): 16-19.
4.Yadi Oktariansyah*& Mustafa Kamal (2026): Alternative Feed Use in Poultry Chickens: Impacts on Feed Efficiency and Physiological Parameters—A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Natural Sciences ISSN 2721-5571 (Online) Vol.7, No.1 March 2026: 41-53.

FERMNUTRAL: A POSTBIOTIC INNOVATION TO MAXIMIZE GUT HEALTH AND EFFICIENCY IN POULTRY PRODUCTION

Gut Health: The Key to Modern Poultry Production
The expression of the genetic potential of poultry largely depends on intestinal health. The gastrointestinal tract houses nearly 70% of the immune cells and constitutes the primary barrier against enteric pathogens. However, during the early stages of life, immune immaturity increases susceptibility to infections and microbiota imbalances, particularly under intensive production systems.

Traditionally, antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) have been used to improve productive performance and reduce health-related challenges. However, their continuous use has been associated with antimicrobial resistance, intestinal dysbiosis, and concerns regarding food safety and public health.

In this context, postbiotics have emerged as a sustainable alternative. They are defined as preparations of inanimate microorganisms and/or their bioactive components, including short-chain fatty acids, bacteriocins, exopolysaccharides, peptides, and cell

wall fragments. Unlike probiotics, postbiotics offer greater stability, safety, and consistency, making them an effective alternative to AGPs (Zhong et al., 2022).

Postbiotics vs. Probiotics: A Real Competitive Advantage
The probiotics most commonly used in poultry production, such as Lactobacillus spp. and spore-forming Bacillus spp., present certain limitations when compared with postbiotics.

Lactobacillus species are heat-sensitive microorganisms; therefore, their survival during feed pelleting and storage may be compromised. In addition, factors such as chlorination of drinking water can reduce their viability and, consequently, their biological efficacy.

In contrast, Bacillus spp. exhibit high resistance to elevated temperatures due to spore formation. However, their beneficial effects may depend on successful intestinal germination and on the physiological and microbiological conditions of the host. Furthermore, these bacteria do not permanently colonize the gastrointestinal tract, meaning that their biological impact may depend on continuous administration through feed or drinking water.

Postbiotics exhibit high stability during feed processing and storage, as well as in chlorinated drinking water, because they do not rely on cell viability. Moreover, their bioactive compounds can exert their effects immediately upon ingestion, without requiring germination or intestinal colonization. This allows for a faster, more reproducible, and more consistent response (De Marco et al., 2018).

FermNutral: Bioactive Profile of a Full-Spectrum Postbiotic
FermNutral is a postbiotic developed and manufactured by CPBIO through the controlled biological fermentation of the Clostridium butyricum CPBIO3000 strain using natural raw materials. (Figure1)

The product is supplied as granules with demonstrated stability at temperatures exceeding 80°C (simulating the feed pelleting process). The recommended inclusion rate for poultry is 300–500 g/t of feed. FermNutral is produced under FAMI-QS, FDA-cGMP, and ISO 9001/14001/18001 certifications, which have been maintained since 2001.

FermNutral contains a diverse range of bioactive compounds generated during the fermentation process, including teichoic acids, lipoteichoic acids, butyricin, antimicrobial peptides, and exopolysaccharides.

Within its short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) fraction, butyric acid represents approximately 40% of the total SCFAs. Other SCFAs are present at lower concentrations, including acetic acid (21.6 mg/kg) and propionic acid (81.6 mg/kg).
The vitamin fraction includes vitamin E (13.9 IU/kg), vitamin B1 (17.2 mg/kg), vitamin B2 (5.08 mg/kg), vitamin B5 (57.3 mg/kg), vitamin B6 (98.3 mg/kg), vitamin B12 (0.34 mg/kg), folic acid (30.9 mg/kg), and vitamin K3 (1.97 mg/kg). The mineral profile provides calcium (15.2%), total phosphorus (0.76%), iron (760 mg/kg), zinc (42 mg/kg), magnesium (3,600 mg/kg), and chromium (11.67 mg/kg). Additionally, FermNutral contains 17 amino acids, including glutamic acid (1.37%), alanine (0.59%), valine (0.46%), leucine (0.50%), and lysine (0.29%). Altogether all amino acids are between 10-12% in product.

This unique combination of bioactive metabolites, nutrients, vitamins, minerals, and amino acids supports intestinal integrity, microbial balance, immune function, and productive performance in poultry.

Figure 1: A postbiotic product derived from biological fermentation of Clostridium butyricum CPBIO3000 using natural raw materials

FermNutral: Bioactive Compounds
FermNutral contains a wide range of bioactive compounds generated during the fermentation process, with butyric acid being the predominant short-chain fatty acid (SCFA), representing approximately 40% of the product. Butyrate serves as a major energy source for enterocytes and promotes epithelial renewal, mucin synthesis, and the expression of tight junction proteins. These effects contribute to maintaining intestinal barrier integrity and reducing intestinal permeability.
In addition, butyrate exhibits immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties through its ability to regulate epigenetic processes, promote goblet cell differentiation, and stimulate the activation of regulatory T lymphocytes. It may also enhance intestinal serotonin release, which has been associated with the gut-brain axis and productive performance. Acetic and propionic acids complement these effects by regulating the intestinal environment and inhibiting undesirable microorganisms.

FermNutral also provides teichoic acids and lipoteichoic acids, which are recognized by Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR-2) on the intestinal mucosa. These components modulate both innate and adaptive immune responses, promoting a balance between immune defense and tolerance while helping to control intestinal inflammation (Pasquina et al., 2013; Muhammad et al., 2021).

Furthermore, FermNutral supplies butyricin (a bacteriocin), bioactive peptides, and antimicrobial peptides produced during fermentation, which contribute to the control of undesirable microorganisms and the modulation of intestinal microbiota. Exopolysaccharides are also present and have been reported to stimulate secretory IgA production and strengthen the mucosal barrier. In addition, the product’s vitamin and mineral profile acts synergistically to support immune function, antioxidant status, intestinal integrity, and productive performance.

FermNutral in poultry production
Several experiments conducted in China and Thailand have demonstrated the efficacy of FermNutral in poultry production. In a study at Guizhou University (China) comparing a control diet with additives such as FermNutral, Clostridium butyricum, protected sodium butyrate, and tributyrin in broiler chickens, the postbiotic (FermNutral) was confirmed to improve weight gain (+13%) and reduce feed conversion ratio (-11.68%) compared with the control and other experimental treatments.

In addition, another experiment carried out in a commercial broiler farm in China found that FermNutral reduced the feed conversion ratio (1.73 vs 1.77) and improved viability (+1.94) and the European Production Efficiency Factor (EPEF; 338.70 vs 315.30) in relation to the control diet.
Likewise, in a commercial broiler farm in Thailand, the use of FermNutral increased weight gain (+4.2%) and EPEF (+11.70%) and reduced feed conversion ratio (-7.69%). Furthermore, other trials conducted at Guizhou University (China) showed that FermNutral increased villus height in the duodenum (+9%), jejunum (+4%), and ileum (+8%), and improved the villus height to crypt depth ratio (V/C) in the duodenum (6.92 vs 6.27) and jejunum (5.71 vs 5.04).

Figure 3 : FermNutral effect on Immunoglobulins

Additional results from this experiment reported that FermNutral decreased the population of Escherichia coli in the duodenum (0.014 vs 0.234) and jejunum (0.0004 vs 0.013). Moreover, it promoted the growth of Lactobacillus in different intestinal segments, as determined by the relative abundance of microorganisms through 16S rDNA sequencing. (Figure 2) Finally, the inclusion of FermNutral in the diet improved the concentration of IgA (+13%), IgG (+19%), and IgM (+24%) compared with the control diet. (Figure 3)

Figure 2 : 16S rDNA sequencing to determine relative abundance of microorganisms in Poultry Intestine

Other trials conducted on a commercial farm in China with 48-week-old laying hens showed that FermNutral improved laying rate (+1.4) and shell thickness (+0.05 mm), while reducing feed conversion ratio (-0.06) and broken eggs (-2.6%), without affecting other productive performance parameters.

Likewise, in an experiment carried out at Henan Agricultural University, China, using 50-week-old laying hens, FermNutral increased egg weight (61.63 vs 59.77 vs g) and improved feed conversion ratio (2.08 vs 2.11 vs), while reducing dirty eggs (0.17 vs 0.45 %), broken eggs (0.32 vs 0.47 %), and unfit eggs (0.15 vs 0.28 %). These results demonstrate that FermNutral is an innovative and differentiated alternative within the new generation of postbiotics.

References
De Marco S, et al. (2018). Probiotic cell-free supernatants exhibit anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
Liu H, et al. (2023). Postbiotics modulate gut health and laying performance in laying hens. Animal Nutrition, 14, 244–256.
Muhammad I, et al. (2021). Lipoteichoic acid from Bacillus subtilis improves immune function of broiler chickens. Antioxidants, 10(9), 1414.
Pasquina LW, et al. (2013). Teichoic acid biosynthesis as an antibiotic target. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 16(5), 531–537.
Zhong R, et al. (2022). Gut microbiota and its interactions with postbiotics in animal production. Frontiers in Microbiology, 13, 831495.
About CPBIO – A Global Biotech Company, Based on the global practice of Charoen Pokphand Group in the agricultural, animal husbandry and food industry chain, CPBIO has extensively and deeply participated in the health cause of animals, the earth and human beings with the thinking of the whole industry chain. Organizations and individuals in large-scale validated products and solutions.

About CPBIO – A Global Biotech Company, Based on the global practice of Charoen Pokphand Group in the agricultural, animal husbandry and food industry chain, CPBIO has extensively and deeply participated in the health cause of animals, the earth and human beings with the thinking of the whole industry chain. Organizations and individuals in large-scale validated products and solutions.

Moisture Optimization and Mold Control:
An Integrated Approach to Improving Feed Quality,
Shelf Life, and Feed Mill Profitability in Tropical Climates

Dr. Maloshrie Bora, Senior Program Manager – Feed Safety, Trouw Nutrition South Asia

Across India and South Asia, feed manufacturers today face a common challenge: producing safe, stable, high-quality feed while navigating increasingly variable climate conditions, fluctuating raw material quality, rising production costs, and greater demands for feed efficiency.

Among the many factors that influence feed quality, moisture management remains one of the most underestimated. Yet moisture directly impacts pellet quality, nutrient preservation, feed hygiene, shelf life, production throughput, and overall profitability. Improper moisture management can result in shrinkage, spoilage, mold proliferation, nutrient losses, increased fines, and reduced mill efficiency. Conversely, optimized moisture control can generate significant economic returns while improving feed quality throughout the supply chain.

The Hidden Economics of Moisture Loss
During feed manufacturing, moisture is lost at several stages, including grinding, conditioning, pelleting, cooling, storage, and transportation. Industry observations indicate that feed mills can lose between 0.5% and 1.5% moisture during production, resulting in direct shrinkage and reduced profitability. A feed mill producing 500 tonnes per day can lose approximately 5 tonnes of saleable product for every 1% moisture reduction. In an industry where margins are constantly under pressure, minimizing process losses represents a substantial opportunity for value creation.

Why Adding Water Alone Does Not Solve the Problem
A common industry practice for compensating moisture losses is the addition of water during feed processing. While this may appear straightforward, water possesses high surface tension and does not distribute uniformly throughout the feed matrix. Instead, free moisture often remains on the surface of feed particles, increasing water activity and creating favourable conditions for microbial growth. The challenge for the modern feed industry is therefore not simply increasing moisture content, but ensuring moisture is effectively distributed and retained throughout the feed while maintaining microbial stability.

Mold Growth: A Feed Quality and Profitability Threat
Molds are among the most significant biological threats to feed quality. Beyond visible spoilage, molds consume valuable nutrients, reduce energy content, affect feed palatability, shorten storage life, and create conditions favourable for mycotoxin production. The economic implications can be significant. Raw materials often constitute up to 80% of total feed production costs. Any reduction in nutritional value, shelf life, or feed volume directly impacts both manufacturers and producers downstream.

Emerging Scientific Approaches to Mold Inhibition
Advances in feed preservation technology have moved beyond conventional organic acid applications. Modern solutions increasingly combine multiple modes of action to optimize efficacy under practical feed manufacturing conditions. These technologies typically integrate:
Organic acids
– Buffered acid systems
– Moisture management agents
– Surfactants and emulsifiers
– Synergistic bioactive compounds
Such approaches improve moisture distribution, enhance contact between active ingredients and microbial cells, and prolong preservation effectiveness throughout storage. This scientific evolution reflects the industry’s transition from simple preservation strategies toward integrated moisture and microbial management systems.

Commercial Validation: Integrating Moisture and Feed Hygiene
Research and commercial evaluations have demonstrated that moisture management and mold control must work together. In one reported study, the addition of plain water alone reduced feed shelf life by approximately 33%. However, when moisture was combined with an integrated mold inhibition program, shelf life improved compared to untreated feed while preserving feed quality and stability. Additional commercial applications have shown benefits including:
– Improved feed mill throughput
– Enhanced pellet durability
– Reduced reprocessed fines
– Better moisture retention
– Improved production efficiency
– Greater feed stability during storage
These findings highlight that effective moisture optimization depends on simultaneously managing microbial risks

A Modern Approach for South Asia
Recognizing the unique challenges faced by feed manufacturers in tropical climates, Trouw Nutrition has developed integrated solutions specifically designed to optimize moisture management and feed hygiene.

Among these solutions is the Fylax® portfolio, which combines organic acid technology, moisture management agents, surfactants, and the proprietary ActiProp® technology platform. The objective is to improve moisture distribution, enhance mold inhibition, preserve nutrient value, and support feed mill efficiency within a single integrated program. ActiProp® technology works by increasing mold cell wall permeability and improving access of active ingredients to microbial targets, resulting in enhanced preservation performance compared with conventional approaches. At the same time, moisture-management components facilitate more uniform distribution of moisture within the feed matrix, helping improve operational efficiency and shelf-life outcomes.

In today’s feed industry, moisture management can no longer be viewed simply as a processing parameter—it is a critical driver of feed quality, feed safety, and profitability. As feed manufacturers across India and South Asia face increasing challenges from humidity, raw material variability, and shelf-life pressures, an integrated approach that combines moisture optimization with effective mold control is becoming essential. By preserving nutrient value, reducing shrinkage, improving pellet quality, and enhancing microbial stability, modern feed hygiene solutions can help mills achieve greater operational efficiency while delivering safer, more consistent feed to livestock producers. Ultimately, successful feed preservation is not just about preventing spoilage—it is about maximizing value throughout the feed-to-food chain.

Introduction : Every year, invisible contaminants hidden within grains and feed ingredients silently reduce livestock productivity. Mycotoxins—naturally occurring toxic compounds produced by fungi—are responsible for millions of dollars in economic losses through poor growth, reduced immunity, reproductive disorders, lower feed efficiency, and increased mortality. Although impossible to see with the naked eye, their impact on poultry, swine, and dairy production is enormous.

What Are Mycotoxins?
Mycotoxins are toxic secondary metabolites produced by moulds such as Aspergillus, Fusarium, and Penicillium. Scientists have identified over 300 different mycotoxins, and studies indicate that nearly one-quarter of global feed supplies may be contaminated.
The most economically important toxins include:
-Aflatoxins
– Ochratoxins
– Fumonisins
– Deoxynivalenol (DON)
– T-2 Toxin
– Zearalenone
Each affects animals differently, but all reduce productivity and profitability.

Why Do Mycotoxins Develop?
Moulds flourish when four conditions come together:
– Warm temperatures
– High humidity
– Moisture in grains
– Oxygen
Once established, fungal growth continues during harvesting, storage, transportation, and feed manufacturing unless properly controlled.

India’s Mycotoxin Challenge
Recent testing presented in the report paints a worrying picture. 6,304 feed analysis, 99% contamination, and 83% above the performance-risk threshold.
Key Findings

– 6,304 feed analysis conducted
– 99% showed detectable contamination
– 83% exceeded performance-risk thresholds
Among ingredients, DORB, peanut meal, maize, soybean meal, DDGS, and corn gluten all showed significant contamination levels.

Multiple Mycotoxins: A Greater Threat
Animals are rarely exposed to a single toxin.
Instead, feeds commonly contain multiple mycotoxins that interact synergistically, making the combined damage significantly greater than the effect of individual toxins. This explains why even relatively low toxin concentrations can cause substantial production losses.

Economic Impact on Farms
The consequences are visible across every production system.

Poultry
– Lower feed intake
– Reduced weight gain
– Poor feed conversion
– Thin eggshells
– Lower hatchability
– Fatty liver
– Weak immunity

Swine
– Reproductive disorders
– Embryonic mortality
– Vomiting
– Reduced growth
– Feed refusal
– Tail necrosis
– Liver and kidney damage
Ultimately, these problems translate directly into economic losses through poorer animal performance.

The Hidden Cost: Immune Suppression
– One of the most damaging effects of mycotoxins is their ability to suppress the immune system.
– Animals become more vulnerable to bacterial and viral infections while showing reduced responses to vaccines and treatments.
– This means disease outbreaks become more severe and recovery becomes slower.

Can Nutrition Help?
Nutritional interventions can reduce the impact of toxins.

Recommended approaches include:
– Higher amino acid supplementation
– Vitamins E, C, and D3
– Selenium
– Choline chloride
– Liver-support products
– Mold inhibitors
– Broad-spectrum toxin binders
These measures improve resilience while reducing toxin damage.

Scientific Toxin Elimination Management (STEM-500)
An effective strategy combines four complementary actions:
1. Prevention
Prevent fungal growth before toxins develop.
2. Elimination
Bind multiple mycotoxins irreversibly.
3. Neutralization
Use enzymatic systems to neutralize toxins.
4. Gut Ecology Enhancement
Improve gut health while strengthening immunity and reducing pathogen pressure. This integrated approach offers broader protection than relying on toxin binders alone.

Featured Solution: STEM-500
The presentation introduces STEM-500, a multi-component toxin management product formulated with:
– Specially treated HSCAS
– Organic acids
– Oxine Copper
– MOS
– Bio-active phytocompounds
– Polyphenols
– Lactobacillus
– Lipotropic agents
According to the presentation, the product is designed to reduce mould growth, bind multiple mycotoxins, minimize endotoxin effects, improve liver function, support gut health, and enhance feed conversion, growth, and survival.

Conclusion
Mycotoxins remain one of the most significant hidden threats in modern animal production. Since contamination can occur throughout the grain supply chain, prevention alone is rarely sufficient. A comprehensive management strategy—combining mould control, toxin binding, detoxification, and gut health support—is essential for maintaining animal health and maximizing production efficiency.

Biosecurity as an Investment: Why Disease Prevention delivers the Best Return on Investment (ROI) in Poultry Production

Prof. (Dr.) P.K. Shukla and Dr. Amitav Bhattacharyya
Department of Poultry Science, College of Veterinary Science and
Animal Husbandry, Mathura- 281001 (U.P.)

Introduction
Over the last five decades, the poultry industry has undergone a remarkable transformation. Scientific advances in genetics, nutrition, housing, disease control, and management have enabled producers to achieve unprecedented levels of productivity. Poultry meat and eggs have become among the most affordable and nutritious sources of animal protein, making the industry indispensable for global food and nutritional security. In India, poultry production has developed into an important agribusiness sector, generating employment for millions of people while supporting allied industries such as hatcheries, feed manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, processing, transportation, and retail.

Despite these achievements, infectious diseases remain one of the greatest constraints to sustainable poultry production. Diseases such as avian influenza, Newcastle disease, infectious bronchitis, infectious bursal disease, Marek’s disease, coccidiosis, salmonellosis, and mycoplasmosis continue to cause substantial economic losses. These diseases not only reduce flock productivity but also affect food safety, consumer confidence, international trade, and public health.

Under modern intensive production systems, disease outbreaks spread rapidly because of high stocking densities, frequent movement of birds and equipment, and increasing interactions among farms. Once pathogens establish themselves within a flock, economic losses accumulate through mortality, reduced growth, poor feed conversion, lower egg production, treatment expenses, and market disruptions. Consequently, preventing disease introduction is far more economical than managing disease after it has occurred.

Biosecurity has therefore become the foundation of modern poultry health management. It is no longer viewed merely as a collection of hygiene practices but as a comprehensive risk management strategy designed to prevent disease while maximizing productivity and profitability.

Economic Impact of Poultry Diseases
The financial consequences of poultry diseases extend far beyond mortality alone. Disease outbreaks affect every component of the production chain, from breeder farms and hatcheries to processing plants, retailers, and consumers.

Direct economic losses include increased mortality, poor weight gain, reduced egg production, inferior feed conversion efficiency, decreased hatchability, veterinary expenses, medication costs, diagnostic testing, and emergency vaccination programmes. Even mild infections that do not cause obvious mortality often reduce flock performance sufficiently to eliminate expected profit margins.

Indirect losses are frequently even greater. Disease outbreaks can result in movement restrictions, export bans, lower consumer demand, reduced processing efficiency, insurance costs, and disruption of supply chains. Highly pathogenic avian influenza has repeatedly demonstrated how a single outbreak can result in massive financial losses through depopulation, compensation payments, and trade restrictions.
Equally damaging are the hidden costs associated with subclinical infections. Chronic disease reduces flock uniformity, suppresses immune responses, increases susceptibility to secondary infections, and diminishes reproductive performance without producing dramatic clinical signs. Such losses often remain unnoticed but continuously erode farm profitability.
These economic realities highlight an important principle: disease prevention should not be regarded solely as a veterinary responsibility but as an essential business strategy that protects investments in chicks, feed, labour, housing, equipment, and marketing.

Prevention Versus Treatment: The Economics of Biosecurity
The principle that “prevention is better than cure” has special relevance in commercial poultry production. Intensive poultry systems house thousands of genetically similar birds in close proximity, allowing infectious agents to spread extremely rapidly once introduced.

By the time clinical signs become evident, pathogens have often multiplied extensively within the flock and contaminated the surrounding environment. Even if treatment successfully controls mortality, birds rarely regain their original production potential. Reduced feed efficiency, slower growth, delayed marketing age, poor egg production, and increased susceptibility to secondary infections frequently persist throughout the production cycle.
Treatment also involves considerable expenditure on antibiotics, supportive medications, laboratory investigations, veterinary consultation, and labour. These costs are incurred after production losses have already begun, thereby reducing overall profitability.
Biosecurity interrupts pathogen transmission before infection becomes established. Investments in perimeter fencing, controlled farm access, sanitation, water treatment, pest management, employee training, and visitor control substantially reduce the probability of disease introduction. Unlike treatment costs, preventive investments continue generating economic returns throughout successive production cycles by maintaining flock health and preserving production efficiency.
Numerous studies have shown that the cost of implementing effective biosecurity programmes is significantly lower than the cumulative losses associated with disease outbreaks. Consequently, biosecurity functions as a form of biological insurance that safeguards every other investment made in poultry production.

Principles of Poultry Biosecurity
Biosecurity is a science-based management system aimed at preventing the introduction, establishment, and spread of infectious agents. Effective biosecurity requires an integrated approach involving infrastructure, operational procedures, personnel behaviour, environmental sanitation, and continuous monitoring.
Three fundamental principles form the basis of poultry biosecurity:

Bio-exclusion focuses on preventing pathogens from entering the farm through controlled access, procurement of healthy chicks, vehicle disinfection, quarantine, and visitor management.

Bio-containment prevents infectious agents from spreading outside infected premises by implementing movement restrictions, proper disposal of carcasses and litter, and thorough cleaning and disinfection.

Bio-management minimizes disease pressure within the farm through vaccination, optimal nutrition, environmental management, pest control, water sanitation, litter management, and animal welfare practices.

Farm design also plays an important role in disease prevention. Poultry farms should be located away from other commercial farms, live bird markets, and migratory bird habitats. Clearly defined clean and dirty zones, all-in/all-out production systems, and adequate downtime between flocks reduce pathogen survival and transmission.
Personnel hygiene is equally critical. Farm workers should use dedicated clothing and footwear, maintain hand hygiene, comply with visitor restrictions, and receive regular biosecurity training. Similarly, feed and water must be protected from contamination through proper storage, water chlorination, and routine quality monitoring.
Rodent and insect control programmes, together with scientifically approved mortality disposal methods, further strengthen disease prevention by eliminating important sources of pathogen transmission.

Biosecurity as a Strategic Business Investment
Historically, many poultry producers regarded expenditures on sanitation, fencing, disinfection equipment, employee training, and surveillance as unavoidable operating costs. Modern poultry enterprises increasingly recognize that these expenditures are investments that protect all other farm assets.

Feed represents nearly two-thirds of total production costs. Healthy birds utilize feed more efficiently, grow faster, produce more eggs, and require fewer medications than diseased birds. Even modest improvements in feed conversion ratio can substantially increase profitability.
Strong biosecurity systems also improve market confidence. Consumers increasingly demand poultry products that are safe, traceable, and produced under high standards of animal health and welfare. Farms maintaining effective biosecurity programmes are better positioned to comply with certification schemes, quality assurance standards, and export requirements.
From a business perspective, biosecurity reduces biological risk while improving enterprise resilience. Disease outbreaks can rapidly destroy years of investment in genetics, housing, labour, and marketing. Preventive biosecurity therefore serves as a protective framework that preserves productivity, enhances competitiveness, and ensures long-term sustainability.
Modern poultry producers should therefore ask not whether they can afford to invest in biosecurity, but whether they can afford the consequences of inadequate disease prevention.

Practical Biosecurity Measures that Enhance Profitability
The success of any biosecurity programme depends on its consistent implementation at the farm level. While sophisticated infrastructure and advanced technologies can strengthen disease prevention, many highly effective biosecurity interventions are simple, practical, and relatively inexpensive. Their value lies not in high capital investment but in disciplined and continuous application.

The first line of defence is strict farm access control. Entry to poultry houses should be restricted to essential personnel, and all visitors should comply with hygiene protocols including hand sanitization, use of dedicated clothing and boots, and passage through properly maintained footbaths. Maintaining visitor records and enforcing a minimum downtime for personnel who have recently visited other poultry farms significantly reduce the likelihood of introducing infectious pathogens.
Cleaning and disinfection remain the cornerstone of disease prevention. Poultry houses, equipment, feeders, drinkers, egg trays, transport crates, and vehicles should be thoroughly cleaned to remove organic matter before applying appropriate disinfectants. Adequate downtime between production cycles allows environmental pathogen loads to decline naturally and improves the effectiveness of sanitation programmes.
Feed and water hygiene are equally important because they represent continuous sources of pathogen exposure. Feed should be procured from reliable manufacturers and stored under dry, rodent-proof conditions to prevent fungal contamination and mycotoxin development.
Drinking water should be regularly tested for microbial quality, chlorinated when necessary, and supplied through cleaned pipelines to minimize biofilm formation.
Integrated pest management also plays a critical role. Rodents, flies, beetles, mosquitoes, and wild birds serve as mechanical carriers of numerous bacterial and viral pathogens. Effective pest control, combined with scientific carcass disposal methods such as composting, rendering, or incineration, minimizes environmental contamination and pathogen persistence.
Finally, employee education is perhaps the most cost-effective biosecurity investment. Every worker should understand disease transmission pathways, recognize early clinical signs, and consistently follow standard operating procedures (SOPs). A well-trained workforce transforms biosecurity from a written protocol into a daily management culture that protects flock health and farm profitability.

Digital Transformation of Poultry Biosecurity
Rapid advances in digital technologies are revolutionizing poultry health management by shifting disease control from a reactive to a predictive approach. Precision livestock farming integrates artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, sensor technologies, automation, and molecular diagnostics to improve disease surveillance and decision-making.

Artificial intelligence can analyse production data such as feed intake, water consumption, mortality, growth rate, and behavioural changes to detect early indicators of disease before clinical signs become apparent. Such predictive systems enable farmers to intervene promptly, thereby reducing mortality and economic losses.
The Internet of Things (IoT) has further strengthened biosecurity by enabling continuous monitoring of environmental variables including temperature, humidity, ammonia concentration, carbon dioxide, ventilation efficiency, and water quality. Automated alerts help managers respond immediately to deviations that may compromise bird health.
Computer vision systems are increasingly being used to monitor flock behaviour, feeding activity, movement patterns, and gait abnormalities. These technologies allow rapid identification of subtle behavioural changes associated with disease onset.
Molecular diagnostic tools such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), real-time PCR, and genomic sequencing permit rapid detection of viral, bacterial, and parasitic pathogens, facilitating timely intervention. Blockchain-based traceability systems and cloud-based farm management platforms further enhance transparency, certification, and supply chain confidence.
Although digital biosecurity requires initial investment, its long-term benefits include reduced disease incidence, improved productivity, lower veterinary costs, enhanced decision-making, and increased resilience against emerging diseases.

Biosecurity Challenges and Opportunities in India
India has become one of the world’s leading producers of poultry meat and eggs, yet the country’s diverse production systems create unique biosecurity challenges. Large integrated commercial operations coexist with smallholder and backyard poultry farms, creating epidemiological interfaces that facilitate pathogen transmission.

One of the major constraints is uneven awareness regarding the economic importance of biosecurity. Large poultry companies generally maintain comprehensive disease prevention programmes, whereas many small and medium-scale producers continue to regard biosecurity as an additional expense rather than a productive investment. Financial limitations often prevent investment in essential infrastructure such as perimeter fencing, vehicle disinfection facilities, controlled farm entry, and scientific carcass disposal systems.
High poultry density in several production clusters further increases disease risk. Frequent movement of day-old chicks, feed, eggs, live birds, and farm personnel across states facilitates pathogen dissemination. Backyard poultry, live bird markets, and mixed farming systems involving ducks and other livestock also increase the risk of zoonotic disease transmission.
Despite these challenges, India possesses significant opportunities to strengthen poultry biosecurity. The country has a strong network of veterinary universities, diagnostic laboratories, research institutes, extension agencies, and progressive poultry companies capable of promoting scientific disease prevention. Government initiatives supporting livestock health, antimicrobial stewardship, digital agriculture, and the One Health approach can further accelerate adoption of comprehensive biosecurity practices.
Public-private partnerships involving industry associations, academic institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and producer organizations will be instrumental in developing practical, affordable, and scalable biosecurity solutions for Indian poultry farmers.

Biosecurity within the One Health Framework
Modern biosecurity extends beyond farm profitability to encompass animal health, public health, and environmental sustainability. The One Health concept recognizes the close interdependence of humans, animals, and ecosystems.

Effective poultry biosecurity reduces the circulation of zoonotic pathogens such as avian influenza and Salmonella, thereby protecting consumers, farm workers, and surrounding communities. Healthy flocks also require fewer therapeutic antibiotics, contributing to global efforts to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
Good biosecurity practices improve waste management, reduce contamination of soil and water resources, and minimize environmental dissemination of infectious agents. Consequently, investments in poultry biosecurity generate societal benefits that extend far beyond individual farms by supporting food safety, environmental protection, and national food security.

Capacity Building and Policy Support
Infrastructure alone cannot guarantee successful biosecurity. Human behaviour remains one of the most critical determinants of disease prevention. Continuous training programmes should therefore be provided for farm owners, managers, veterinarians, technicians, and workers on disease recognition, personal hygiene, vaccination, cleaning and disinfection, pest control, mortality management, and emergency response.
Routine biosecurity audits, risk assessments, and comprehensive record-keeping systems enable producers to monitor flock performance and identify weaknesses requiring corrective action. Standard operating procedures should be regularly reviewed and updated in response to emerging disease threats and technological developments.
Government agencies also have an essential role in strengthening national biosecurity through veterinary services, laboratory networks, surveillance systems, science-based regulations, and financial incentives that encourage producers to invest in preventive infrastructure. Harmonization of national standards with international guidelines will further improve India’s competitiveness in global poultry trade.

Way Forward
Biosecurity has evolved from a routine veterinary recommendation into one of the most valuable strategic investments in modern poultry production. Scientific evidence consistently demonstrates that prevention delivers substantially greater economic returns than treatment. Every investment made in disease prevention safeguards valuable biological assets, preserves productivity, reduces veterinary expenditure, minimizes antimicrobial use, and enhances market confidence.
For India, where poultry production continues to expand rapidly, widespread adoption of comprehensive biosecurity systems will be fundamental to sustainable growth. Success will require coordinated efforts involving producers, veterinarians, researchers, policymakers, industry organizations, and technology providers working within a One Health framework.
The future of poultry farming will increasingly depend on predictive health management supported by digital technologies, precision farming, artificial intelligence, and robust surveillance systems. Producers who integrate biosecurity into their core business strategy will be better equipped to withstand emerging disease threats, satisfy evolving consumer expectations, and compete successfully in international markets.
Ultimately, the most profitable poultry enterprise is not the one that spends the least on disease prevention, but the one that invests wisely to ensure disease never compromises productivity. Biosecurity should therefore be regarded not as an operational expense but as a high-return investment that protects animal health, public health, environmental sustainability, and the long-term resilience of the poultry industry.

Selected References
1. Alexander, D. J. (2007). An overview of the epidemiology of avian influenza. Vaccine, 25, 5637–5644.
2. FAO. (2023). Good Practices for Biosecurity in the Poultry Sector. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
3. Gelaude, P., Schlepers, M., Verlinden, M., et al. (2014). Measuring on-farm poultry biosecurity using Biocheck.UGent. Poultry Science, 93, 2740–2750.
4. Glisson, J. R., Hofacre, C. L., & Christensen, J. P. (2019). Poultry Diseases. Elsevier.
5. WOAH. (2023). Terrestrial Animal Health Code.
6. Swayne, D. E. (Ed.). (2020). Diseases of Poultry (14th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
7. World Health Organization. (2022). One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022–2026).
8. World Bank. (2022). One Health Operational Framework for Strengthening Animal Health Systems.
9. FAO. (2022). Biosecurity Guide for Poultry Production and Value Chains.
10. USDA APHIS. (2023). Defend the Flock: Biosecurity for Poultry Owners.

Monsoon Broiler Management: Mitigating Humid-Heat Stress

Dr. Sikander1, Dr. Pooja Kundu2 and Dr. N K Mahajan3
1M.V.Sc student, Department of Veterinary Pathology, LUVAS Hisar,
2Veterinary Surgeon, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Govt. of Haryana,
3Retd. Professor and Dean, LUVAS Hisar.

Monsoon brings a unique and formidable set of challenges for commercial poultry farming. As monsoon advances, ambient temperatures remain high while relative humidity level also increases, flocks face dangerous dual threat of severe humid-heat stress and a higher prevalence of systemic viral infection with respiratory manifestations – such as Infectious Bronchitis Virus (IBV), Newcastle Disease Virus (NDV), or Low pathogenic Avian Influenza (LPAI) and Multi Drug Resistance Avian pathogenic E coli (MDR-APEC). Unlike mammals, birds lack sweat glands and rely on panting (evaporative cooling) and behavioral mechanisms like seeking shade, gular fluttering and standing in cool areas to regulate their body temperature. When relative humidity increases defense mechanism fails entirely, the consequences extend far beyond a drop in performance. Humid- heat stress triggers systemic physiological disruptions that compromise the intestinal barrier, suppress the immune system, and open the floodgates for opportunistic infections and catastrophic mortality.

Effectively managing a poultry farm requires a proactive approach balancing environmental humidity control, intensive litter management, strict water sanitization, and precise nutritional adjustments.

1. Environmental &Ventilation Control
Primary challenge is no longer just cooling the air, but moving moisture away from the birds and preventing the shed from becoming hot and humid.
· Stocking Density: Maintain strict reduction in stocking density by 10% to 15% compared to winter baselines. Allowing extra floor space per bird is critical during high-humidity periods to minimize micro-climate heat accumulation between individuals.

· Ventilation and Operational Air Velocity: Ensure that fans are running at peak efficiency. In environmentally controlled (EC) sheds, maintain an air velocity of at least 2.5 to 3.0 meters per second directly across the birds. Because evaporative cooling drops in efficiency when relative humidity exceeds 70%, farmers must rely on the wind-chill effect (convective cooling) to strip heat from the birds’ bodies. Regularly check house manometers. Maintain static pressure within the optimal 0.08 to 0.12 inches of water column depending on house width. High static pressure indicates restricted air inlets (clogged pads), causing fan motors to overheat and air speed to drop. Low static pressure indicates structural air leaks (loose curtains or unsealed doors), which causes short-circuiting of air currents and dead air spaces.

· Evaporative Cooling Pads: On high humidity days when relative humidity exceeds 70–75%, turn off the water pumps to the pads completely. Running water over the pads when air is already saturated will not lower temperature; it will only increase humidity, exacerbating respiratory distress. Run exhaust fans at maximum capacity to maximize pure wind velocity. Clean pads regularly with descalants to remove dust and monsoon-induced mold or algae blooms.

· Internal Fogger Restrictions: For open-sided poultry houses, discontinue use of internal low-pressure foggers entirely during rainy or high-humidity days. Fogger droplets will fail to evaporate in mid-air, falling directly onto the litter, causing wet floors, severe ammonia release, and coccidiosis outbreaks. High-pressure systems (400–600 PSI) should only be cycled briefly if dry, hot spells occur.

2. Water Security & Quality Management
Warm, humid monsoon conditions cause rapid bacterial proliferation and heavy biofilm formation in pipeline networks. Since water consumption remains high, biological water security is critical.

· Water Acidification and Sanitization: Efficacy of chlorine-based sanitizers is fundamentally tied to pH. In alkaline water (pH above 7.5), chlorine converts primarily into hypochlorite ions (OCl-), which are highly inefficient at killing bacteria. By utilizing organic acidifiers (Formic, Propionic, or Citric acid) to maintain an optimized, acidic water pH of 5.5 to 6.5, chlorine converts instead into hypochlorous acid (HOCl). This active form is up to 80 times more effective at destroying bacterial cell walls, preventing water lines from becoming breeding grounds for E. coli and Salmonella.

· Water Temperature Regulation: Particularly during hot spells birds will reject water if it is too warm (more than 22°C). Overhead water storage tanks must be fully shaded, or completely insulated with glass wool or local materials like gunny bags. Flush water lines regularly during the day to clear standing warm water and deliver cool, clean water to the nipples.

· Water Line Biofilm Removal: Between bird batches, or as a quick preventative step, water lines must be deeply cleaned to break down slimy bacterial buildup (biofilm). To do this, fill the pipe system with a 1–2% mix of hydrogen peroxide stabilized with silver nitrate. Leave this solution sitting still in the pipes for 4 to 6 hours so it can chemically dissolve the organic matrix completely. Immediately after; flush the lines thoroughly with high-pressure fresh water to wash away all the loosened dirt and leftover chemicals before the new chicks arrive.

3. Nutritional Adjustments & Electrolyte Therapy
In humid weather, broilers voluntarily reduce feed intake to minimize the metabolic heat generated by digestion. Feed consumed must be nutrient-dense but easy to metabolize.

4. Operational Practices
Minimizing physical and physiological stress and preserving litter quality are vital to avoiding sudden spikes in mortality.

· Feeding Schedule: Do not feed the birds during hottest, most humid hours of the day (typically 11:00 AM to 4:00 PM). Shift feed distribution to early morning/late evening when ambient conditions are more favorable. This prevents the peak of metabolic digestion from coinciding with the peak of environmental stress.

· Intensive Litter Management: Litter management is highly critical. Wet, caked litter undergoes rapid anaerobic fermentation, releasing toxic ammonia gas (NH3). Ammonia damages the protective cilia in the bird’s respiratory tract, leaving them highly vulnerable to viral infections (IBV/NDV). Rake the litter regularly during dry periods, add agricultural gypsum or alum to control ammonia release, and immediately replace wet patches with dry, pre-treated rice husk or sawdust.

· Zero Disturbances: Avoid shifting birds, vaccinations, flock grading, litter raking, and mortality collection, or weighing during peak heat hours. Any forced physical activity compels the birds to generate more internal metabolic heat load, which can quickly trigger acute heat stroke and fatal cardiovascular arrest.

Key Dietary Implementations

5. Critical Emergency Protocol:
· Assess Humidity and Disable Water Inputs: Immediate Check the relative humidity. If it is above 70%, ensure all cooling pad pumps and internal foggers are turned off immediately. Introducing more water vapor into saturated air will accelerate mortality.

· Maximize Wind Velocity: Within 2 minutes.
Override automated fan settings and force all exhaust fans to operate at 100% capacity. Achieve maximum operational air velocity (greater than 3.0 m/s) to maximize heat dissipation via the wind-chill effect.

· Charge Water Lines with Electrolytes: Within 10 minutes.
Ensure that cool water (under 22°C) infused with highly concentrated electrolytes—specifically Potassium Chloride and Sodium Bicarbonate—is fully charged into the drinking lines to combat respiratory alkalosis.

· Enforce Absolute Shed Calm: Continuous
Cease all human movement inside the shed. Do not collect mortality, adjust curtains, or walk along the lines during the crisis, as forcing a heat-stressed bird to stand up can induce instant heart failure.

Summary for Monsoon Management: Successful monsoon poultry management requires a complete shift from evaporative cooling to heavy wind-chill ventilation, aggressive litter moisture controls, and feed protection against molds. Managing the farm proactively before seasonal humidity peaks eliminates induced physiological stress, secures optimal feed conversion ratios (FCR), and safeguards overall farm profitability.

The poultry industry invests significant resources into genetics, hatching and breeding to ensure high-quality birds enter the supply chain. How do you preserve that value through catching, transport, lairage, and processing – without compromising welfare, quality, or operational efficiency? Live bird handling has become one of the most critical control points in modern poultry processing. It directly influences product quality, compliance, yield, and overall plant performance.

Efficient, low-stress live bird handling is essential for the performance and success of any poultry processing operation.

The Challenge Behind Live Bird Handling
In today’s poultry industry, processors operate under increasing pressure from multiple directions.
Higher processing speeds demand more from every part of the system. At the same time, labour challenges make manual handling more difficult to sustain. Stricter animal welfare regulations continue to raise expectations, while sustainability targets require reductions in energy use, emissions, and waste. On top of this, biosecurity risks must be tightly controlled to protect both product and plant integrity.

These external pressures translate into very real operational challenges:
– Avoiding dead-on-arrivals and bird injuries
– Ensuring high standards of animal welfare throughout catching, transport, lairage, and reception
– Maintaining consistent product quality
– Ensuring steady line feeding without disruption
– Reducing reliance on manual labour
– Managing variability in farm and transport conditions

Even small inefficiencies in live bird handling can cascade through the entire production process, affecting both cost and output.

Automation in the reception area ensures smooth, efficient handling while reducing reliance on manual labour.

Why It Matters More Than Ever
Live birds represent a high-value input that has already required significant investment before they reach the plant. Any loss in quality during handling translates directly into lost yield and reduced profitability.

Poor handling conditions during catching, transport, or reception can lead to stress, injury, and inconsistent product quality. These issues do not remain isolated – they impact downstream efficiency, outcome quality, and customer expectations.

In contrast, well-designed handling systems help maintain control over a process that has traditionally been variable and labour-intensive.

Transport equipment should be robust and allow for a safe journey from farm to plant.

The Role of Modern Live Bird Handling Systems
To address the above-mentioned challenges, the industry is increasingly moving toward integrated, automated, and welfare-focused handling systems.
Modern solutions are designed to manage the full journey from farm to shackling in a controlled and consistent way, reducing variability and improving outcomes across multiple dimensions.

Key capabilities include:
Gentle and Controlled Handling
Reducing stress and physical impact during catching, transport, and unloading helps preserve both welfare and product quality.

Automated Processes Where It Counts
Automation in key areas such as catching, unloading, stacking, or equipment washing reduces labour dependency while improving consistency and throughput.

Stable Line Feeding
Reception systems are designed to ensure a continuous and controlled flow of birds to the shackling area, even at high processing speeds.

Environmental Control
Proper airflow during transport and lairage helps prevent heat stress and supports animal welfare under varying climate conditions.

Hygiene and Biosecurity
Washable and disinfection-ready systems help reduce pathogen risks and maintain strict hygiene standards between flocks.

Scalability and Flexibility
Modular system designs allow processors to expand capacity or adapt layouts as production needs evolve, without major operational disruption.

Highly effective washing equipment eliminates the risk of inconsistencies associated with manual cleaning, ensuring reliable and repeatable hygiene standards.

Key Factors in System Design
Selecting the right live bird handling approach depends heavily on operational context. Farm layout, infrastructure, and access conditions all influence system design.
Large-scale operations require high-capacity systems capable of handling volume efficiently, while maintaining gentle handling principles. In contrast, labour availability may determine the level of automation required.

Climate conditions also play an important role. Systems must support adequate airflow and temperature control to prevent heat stress during transport and lairage.
Finally, biosecurity requirements and cleaning protocols are increasingly important, requiring equipment designed for effective washing and contamination control.

A well-designed live bird handling system takes conditions across the farm, transport, and reception areas into account to ensure best performance

A System-Level Approach to Performance
The most effective live bird handling strategies treat the entire process as one integrated system rather than isolated steps.
From farm loading to plant reception, every stage must work together to maintain flow, protect bird welfare, and support consistent processing.
When this is achieved, processors benefit from:
– Improved animal welfare outcomes
– Higher and more consistent product quality
– Reduced dead-on-arrivals and injuries
– Better operational efficiency and throughput stability
– Lower labour dependency
– Stronger compliance with regulatory standards
–   Greater long-term scalability

Choosing the Right Provider
To meet these diverse needs of a global market, BAADER offers crate handling and module/drawer solutions in a variety of modular layout options. These solutions are designed to adapt to specific operational requirements, ensuring flexibility and efficiency in handling processes.

Our live bird handling specialists provide processing audits to effectively analyse current and future challenges, helping processors design reception layouts that meet market demands. With over 80 years of proven expertise in handling live birds, we offer solutions supported by both global and local services to ensure equipment operates smoothly and efficiently.

Visit: https://poultry.baader.com/live-bird-handling to learn more about the BAADER live bird handling solutions

Every day, a broiler’s intestine processes several times its body weight in feed and water, encounters billions of microorganisms, responds to environmental stress, and continuously decides what enters the body and what remains outside.

In many ways, the gut functions as a customs checkpoint, security system, digestive factory, and immune headquarters—all at the same time.

In fact, nearly 70% of the bird’s immune cells are associated with the gastrointestinal tract, making it a key player in both health and performance. The remarkable aspect is that when the gut is functioning well, nobody notices it. When it begins to fail, everybody notices the consequences.

The Modern Poultry Bird: Built for Speed
Today’s broiler is a biological marvel. Through decades of genetic selection, modern birds reach market weight faster and more efficiently than ever before.
However, this achievement comes with a hidden challenge.

The digestive tract has become one of the most critical performance-limiting organs in poultry production. Every gram of feed must be digested, absorbed, and converted into muscle within an increasingly compressed production cycle.

Twenty years ago, a small reduction in nutrient absorption might have gone unnoticed. Today, even minor intestinal inefficiencies can translate into measurable losses in body weight gain, feed conversion ratio, and profitability. Modern birds can no longer afford a lazy gut.

The Gut Is Constantly Making Decisions
Traditionally, we think of the intestine as a nutrient absorption organ.
In reality, the gut is making thousands of biological decisions every second.

– Should nutrients support growth or immunity?
– Should a microorganism be tolerated or eliminated?
– Should energy be invested in production or defense?
– Should the intestinal barrier remain open for absorption or tighten to prevent invasion?

These microscopic decisions ultimately determine flock performance.
In many ways, poultry production is not simply about feeding birds—it is about influencing the decisions being made within the gut.

The Hidden Cost of Inflammation
One of the most important concepts emerging in poultry science is that inflammation carries a nutritional cost.
Whenever the intestine encounters stress from pathogens, mycotoxins, heat, poor litter quality, or microbial imbalance, the immune system becomes activated.
The immune response is essential for survival, but it is expensive.
Energy that could support growth is redirected toward immune activity.
Amino acids that could build muscle are utilized to produce immune proteins and inflammatory mediators.
Vitamins and minerals become involved in tissue repair and antioxidant defense.
The bird continues eating, yet a significant proportion of nutrients may no longer be contributing to production.
This phenomenon is often referred to as the “hidden feed cost” of inflammation.

The Silent Performance Thief
One of the greatest misconceptions in poultry production is that intestinal problems always produce visible symptoms.
– Not necessarily.
– Many flocks show normal feed intake, acceptable mortality, and no obvious disease outbreaks. Yet they consistently fail to achieve target performance.
– A slight reduction in nutrient absorption.
– A minor microbial imbalance.
– A low level of intestinal inflammation.
– A subtle increase in intestinal permeability.
Individually these changes may appear insignificant. Collectively they can result in substantial economic losses. This is why gut health is increasingly viewed not as a disease issue but as a performance issue.

The Microbial Workforce Inside Every Bird
Perhaps the most fascinating discovery in recent years is the realization that birds are never truly alone.
The digestive tract contains trillions of microorganisms collectively known as the gut microbiome.
These microbes help digest feed ingredients, produce beneficial metabolites, support intestinal development, influence immune responses, and compete with harmful bacteria.
Some scientists now describe the microbiome as an additional organ because of its profound influence on bird health.
This raises an interesting question:
Are we feeding the bird, or are we feeding its microbiome?
The answer is both.
The future of poultry nutrition may depend as much on managing microbial populations as on balancing nutrients.

Heat Stress: The Gut’s Greatest Enemy
In many poultry-producing regions, heat stress has become one of the most significant challenges affecting gut health.
High environmental temperatures reduce blood flow to the intestine, increase oxidative stress, and compromise intestinal barrier integrity.
As a result, harmful bacterial toxins can cross the intestinal wall and trigger inflammation.
Often the first casualty of heat stress is not growth—it is gut integrity.
This may explain why heat-stressed flocks frequently show poorer FCR, increased wet litter, reduced nutrient utilization, and greater disease susceptibility.
As global temperatures continue to rise, protecting gut health during periods of heat stress will become increasingly important.

The Gut in the Antibiotic-Free Era
The poultry industry is rapidly transitioning toward antibiotic-free and reduced-antibiotic production systems.
While this shift addresses consumer concerns and regulatory requirements, it has also increased attention on intestinal health.
Without routine antibiotic growth promoters, producers must rely on alternative strategies to maintain gut stability.
Probiotics, prebiotics, β-glucans, mannan oligosaccharides (MOS), organic acids, phytogenic compounds, and postbiotics are increasingly being used to support intestinal resilience and microbial balance.
The focus is shifting from killing pathogens to creating an intestinal environment where beneficial microbes and the host can thrive together.

More Birds or More Protein?
The global poultry industry is not being asked to produce more birds.
It is being asked to produce more protein.
As the world’s population grows and consumers increasingly seek affordable animal protein, poultry production continues to expand. Industry projections estimate the sector will grow at a CAGR of approximately 5–7% over the coming years.

But growth alone is not enough.
Producers are expected to deliver more meat with fewer resources, lower feed costs, and a smaller environmental footprint.
This means that every gram of feed matters more than ever before.
And that brings us back to the gut.
Because the difference between feed consumed and protein produced is ultimately determined by the efficiency of the digestive system.

The Future Begins in the Gut
For decades, poultry production focused on genetics, nutrition, and disease control.
The next frontier may be intestinal resilience.
Future improvements in productivity will likely come from better management of inflammation, enhanced barrier integrity, optimized microbiomes, and improved nutrient efficiency within the gastrointestinal tract.
The question may no longer be:

“How much feed did the bird consume?”

Instead, the more important question may be:
“How much of that feed actually became growth?”
The answer lies within the gut.
Not because it is merely another organ, but because it is the organ that determines how effectively all the others perform.
In an era of narrow margins, rising feed costs, heat stress, and antibiotic-free production, the healthiest gut may ultimately become the most valuable asset in the poultry house.