1. Economical
Reasons
Essential

2. • Energy
Saver:
• Decrease
up
to
100
kcal/kg
of
ME:
Keep
same
FCR
and
ADG
• Improve
ADG
and
FCR
• AnDmicrobial
Effect:
• Effects
against
gram
posiDve
bacteria:
Clostridium
perfringens
(NE).
• Effects
against
protozoa:
Coccidiosis
• What
are
the
energy
effects
of
reducing
NE
or
coccidiosis?
Broilers

4. • Energy
Saver:
• Decrease
up
to
90
kcal/kg
of
ME:
Keep
same
producDon.
• Decrease
3
g/day
of
the
daily
intake.
• AnDoxidant
Effect:
beRer
persistency.
• AnDmicrobial
Effects:
• Effects
against
gram
posiDve
bacteria:
Clostridium
perfringens
(NE).
• Decreased
mortality.
• What
are
the
effects
on
energy
and
aminoacids
when
the
microbial
challenge
is
reduced?
Layers

6. • AnDmicrobial
Effect:
• Effects
against
gram
posiDve
bacteria:
Clostridium
perfringens
(NE).
• Effects
against
protozoa:
Coccidiosis
• AnDoxidant
Effect:
•
BeRer
persistency.
• BeRer
hatchability.
Broiler
Breeders

8. • Natural
• No
toxic
residues
in
animal
products
• No
negaDve
interacDons
• No
toxicity…
(maybe
this
is
client
convincing!)
Nice…
but
not
client
convincing

9. AnDmicrobial
• Protozoa
• Gram
PosiDve
DigesDon
Enhancer
• Energy
Saver
AnDoxidant
• BeRer
ReproducDon
• BeRer
Carcass,
Eggs
Essential

10. EssenDal
Castor
oil
Ricinoleic
Acid
Cashew
Nut
Shell
Liquid
(CNSL)
Cardol
Cardanol
Composition
of
Essential

11. Natural
Divalent
Ionophore
• AcDvity
against
gram
posiDve
bacteria
• AcDvity
against
protozoa
AnD-­‐inflammatory
• Downregulates
EP3
receptors
Ricinoleic
Acid

12. Natural
Monovalent
Ionophore
• AcDvity
against
gram
posiDve
bacteria
• AcDvity
against
protozoa
AnDoxidant
Cardol

13.
AnDoxidant
Cardanol

14. Essential
is
conventional
&
natural
1. Tested
levels
of
ricinoleic
acid,
cardol
and
cardanol.
2. Quality
control
of
the
Einal
product.
3. Analysis
of
active
compounds
in
the
feed.

15. Synergistic
Effect:
Castor
oil
+
CNSL
EssenDal
An#-­‐
inflammatory
An#oxidant
An#microbial

16. A^er
EssenDal
Healthy
Reddish
Integrity
Antimicrobial
Before
EssenDal
Hemorragic
Yellowish
Petechia

17. Effects
of
Essential
against
three
strains
of
Clostridium
perfringens
Treatment CP 8-1 CP 8-2 CP 3-1
Control + + +
Essential - - -
(+) Bacterial growth; ( - ) No bacterial growth

18. Effects
of
Essential
in
broilers
inoculated
with
E.
acervulina,
E.
maxima
and
E.
tenella
(Lara
et
al.,
2006)
Treatment Duodenum Ileum Cecum
Neg. Control
0.00 0.00 0.00
Neg. Control Inoculated
1.11a 1.17 1.78a
Salinomicin – Inoculated
0.72b 0.72 1.61a
Essential - Inoculated
0.67b 1.20 1.13b
abMeans in the same column with different superscripts differ P < 0.05

19. Intestinal
lesion
score
of
the
birds
7
d
after
a
coccidiosis
challenge
(21
d
of
age)
with
and
without
Essential
supplementation.
a
b
b
a
b
b
abMeans with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05).

20. Liveability
(%)
of
the
birds
at
21
and
42
days
of
age
with
and
without
Essential
supplementation.
3.40
2.24
SEM
96.25
97.33b
+
2
97.08
98.00b
-
2
93.33
97.33b
+
1.5
95.83
97.00b
-
1.5
96.25
87.33a
+
0
21 to 42 days
1 to 21 days
Liveability (%)
Challenge
Suplementation,
Essential, kg/ton
abMeans with a different superscript letter within a column are significantly
different (P < 0.05)

21. Energy
Saver
Nutrient
extracDon
Economic
Benefit
BeRer
DigesDon
BeRer
AbsorpDon
Miroflora
Improvement
IntesDnal
mucosa
protecDon
Enzyme
acDvity
sDmulaDon
Energy
extracDon
IntesDnal
Integrity

22. Feed conversion (g of feed/g of gain) for the birds
with and without Essential supplementation at 7 and
14 d of age (pre-challenge)
a
b
b
c
c
d
d
d
d
abTreatments differ (P = 0.0001)
cdTreatments differ (P < 0.02)

23. Treatment Weight @ 42 d, kg Intake, kg FCR FCR @ 2.5 kg
Control-0 3.093a 5.120a 1.682ab 1.512a
Essential-0 3.207b 5.206ab 1.648ab 1.446b
Control-100 3.046a 5.198a 1.734c 1.578c
Essential-100 3.182b 5.269bc 1.681ab 1.487ab
Control-200 2.968c 5.260bc 1.801d 1.667d
Essential-200 3.066a 5.322c 1.763ce 1.601ce
Essentialgf-100 3.160b 5.260bc 1.690b 1.502a
Essentialgf-200 3.018ac 5.301bc 1.785de 1.637de
Essentialf-100 3.054a 5.200a 1.731c 1.572c
Essentialf-200 2.971c 5.262bc 1.800d 1.666d
Effects of Essential on diets with
different levels of energy

24. y = 0.0074x + 0.1843
y = 0.0065x + 0.5185
y = 0.008x + 0.0307
y = 0.007x + 0.4353
2.85
2.90
2.95
3.00
3.05
3.10
3.15
3.20
3.25
3.30
355 360 365 370 375 380 385 390 395 400 405 410
WeightGain,kg
EM, kcal/d
Control 35-42 d 21-42 d Essential Linear (Control) Linear (35-42 d) Linear (21-42 d) Linear (Essential)
Effects
of
Essential
on
ME

25. Effect
of
Dietary
Supplementation
of
Essential®
and
Pharmaceuticals
on
Breast
Meat
Drip
Loss
P<0.10

26. Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Essential® and
Pharmaceuticals on TBARS values
*Means
differ
P
<
0.02

27. Essential
-­‐
Layers

28. Test
Protocol-­‐I
ProducDon
under
heat
stress
Strain:
Bovans
White
Ages:
23
weeks
Number
of
birds:
2.957
with
EssenDal
(1.5
kg/MT)
17.667
Control

29. Weekly
Production
under
heat
stress
Weekly
average
Week
Essen.al
Control
23
58,8
61,4
24
65,6
65,5
25
76,7
70,8
26
86,4
74,3
27
86,9
76,7
28
87,0
72,4
29
85,3
73,2
30
82,6
72,8
31
86,9
74,8
32
82,2
76,4
Average
79,84
71,83

30. Daily
Production
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
67
69
ESSENTIAL
PADRÃO

31. Weekly
Production
58.8
65.6
76.7
86.4
86.9
87
85.3
82.6
86.9
82.2
79.84
61.4
65.5
70.8
74.3
76.7
72.4
73.2
72.8
74.8
76.4
71.83
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
média
%
Produc#on
Weeks
EssenDal
Padrão

32. Conclusão
• The
group
supplemented
with
EssenDal
showed
beRer
producDon
than
the
control

33. Test
Protocol
-­‐
II
Strain:
Hy-­‐Line
Age:
56
weeks
Number
of
birds:
17.767
–
White
4.437
–
Red
Dosage:
1.5
kg/MT

34. Production
Data
Week
Produc#on
Standard
Produc#on
%
produc#on
Mortality
%
55
83
77,4
-­‐5,6
0,144
56
82
76,9
-­‐5,1
0,302
57
82
83,4
1,4
0,379
58
81
79,4
-­‐1,6
0,390
59
81
79,6
-­‐1,4
0,146
60
81
80,7
-­‐0,3
0,269
61
80
78,2
-­‐1,8
0,200

35. Production
&
Mortality
77.4
76.9
83.4
79.4
79.6
80.7
78.2
0.144
0.302
0.379
0.390
0.146
0.269
0.200
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
Produção
mortalidade
%
Beginning of
Essential Supplementation
End of Essential
Supplementation

36. Pictures
of
1st
necropsy
(09/09/2011)

37. 1st
necropsy

38. 1st
necropsy

39. Pictures
of
2nd
necropsy
(30/09/2011)

40. 2nd
necropsy

41. 2nd
necropsy

42. Piictures
of
3rd
necropsy
(12/10/2011)

43. 3rd
necropsy

44. 3rd
necropsy

45. Conclusion
• The
birds
were
already
post-­‐peak
and
below
the
standard
curve
when
the
treatment
began.
• During
the
treatment
there
was
an
improvement
in
the
laying
%.
• In
week
61,
a^er
ending
the
supplementaDon
of
EssenDal,
the
producDon
fell.
• Mortality
was
50%
lower
a^er
EssenDal
supplemenDon
compared
to
the
rest
of
the
farm.

46. Effects
of
Essential
supplementation
on
broiler
breeder
performance
(Brazil)

47. AnDmicrobial
• Protozoa
• Gram
PosiDve
DigesDon
Enhancer
• Energy
Saver
AnDoxidant
• BeRer
ReproducDon
• BeRer
Carcass,
Eggs
Essential