“…There is evidence from the literature and the present report that copper in feed at concentration above requirements (5–15 to 175 mg/kg feed) shares the same mode of action as conventional growth‐promoting antibiotics (e.g. Kellog et al., ; Vervaeke et al., ; Dierick et al., ; Jensen, , ): in general, a reduction of lactobacilli/lactic acid bacteria in the foregut, which are known to compete with the host for nutrients (glucose, amino acids) and a reduction of clostridia and coliforms/ Escherichia coli , in the foregut, which are more related to gut pathogenesis or less wanted microbial enzyme activities (e.g. β‐glucosidase, β‐glucuronidase).…”
Section: Assessmentsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…In the context of the current opinion, EFSA awarded two procurements on an Update of the Systematic Literature Review (SLR): ‘Influence of Copper on antibiotic resistance of gut microbiota on pigs (including piglets)’ and on an ‘Extensive Literature Search on the Effects of Copper intake levels in the gut microbiota profile of target animals, in particular piglets’, for which the reports of Van Noten et al. () and Jensen (), respectively, were provided. Information from these reports has been used in this opinion.…”
Section: Data and Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Little information about the growth stimulation mechanisms is available. One of the possible mechanisms has been attributed to the bactericidal and/or bacteriostatic effects of copper on the gastrointestinal tract microbiota (Jensen, ; see also Section 3.6.1). The bactericidal action of copper is dependent on the concentration of free ionic copper in solution, while the free ionic copper concentration is affected by pH and solubility (Pang and Applegate, ).…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One plausible explanation is that the effect is attributed to an antimicrobial effect (less microbial load and less microbial (potential toxic) metabolites in the gut) leaving more nutrients and energy available to the pig itself (e.g. Fuller et al., ; Henderickx et al., ; Radecki et al., ; Jensen, ; Corpet, ; Jensen, ; see also Section 3.6.1). This is further supported by the results of Shurson et al.…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The terms of reference provided comprised the review of the matter with particular consideration to piglets; besides pigs/piglets, two other species were initially considered (chickens and cows). The full ELS report (Jensen, ) was published. The results are briefly summarised below.…”
The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) reviewed (i) the copper requirements of food-producing and pet animals, (ii) the copper concentration in feed materials and complete feed, (iii) the copper bioavailability, and (iv) the calculated background copper concentration of complete feed. Also considered were (i) the influence of dietary copper on gut microbiota profile and on the bacterial antibiotic resistance in target animals and (ii) the environmental occurrence of bacterial heavy metal tolerance (copper resistance) and resistance to certain antibiotics. The data collected supported the possibility of a reduction in some of the currently authorised maximum contents (CAMC) for total copper in feed. The EFSA Panel developed an algorithm to derive newly proposed maximum contents (NPMC) from the requirement and the native dietary copper content. The NPMC (mg Cu/kg complete feed) comprised of maintained (m), decreased (d) and increased (i) values: 15 for bovine before the start of rumination (m), 30 for other bovine (d), 35 for caprine (i), 15 for ovine (m), 50 for crustacean (m) and 25 for other animal species ((d) for piglets up to 12 weeks, (m) for all other species). The NMPC support health, welfare and economic productivity of target animals, except piglets; performance of weaned piglets would be impacted. The NPMC values would not likely have any consequences on the consumers' intake of copper and are of no concern for the safety of the consumer. The reduction from 170 mg to 25 mg Cu/kg feed piglets would have the capacity to save 1,200 tonnes copper/year being spread in the field and thus, to reduce total copper emissions from farm animal production by about 20%. Thus, the reduction of the CAMC to the NPMC would have a significant impact on the concentrations of copper in the environment of piggeries.
“…There is evidence from the literature and the present report that copper in feed at concentration above requirements (5–15 to 175 mg/kg feed) shares the same mode of action as conventional growth‐promoting antibiotics (e.g. Kellog et al., ; Vervaeke et al., ; Dierick et al., ; Jensen, , ): in general, a reduction of lactobacilli/lactic acid bacteria in the foregut, which are known to compete with the host for nutrients (glucose, amino acids) and a reduction of clostridia and coliforms/ Escherichia coli , in the foregut, which are more related to gut pathogenesis or less wanted microbial enzyme activities (e.g. β‐glucosidase, β‐glucuronidase).…”
Section: Assessmentsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…In the context of the current opinion, EFSA awarded two procurements on an Update of the Systematic Literature Review (SLR): ‘Influence of Copper on antibiotic resistance of gut microbiota on pigs (including piglets)’ and on an ‘Extensive Literature Search on the Effects of Copper intake levels in the gut microbiota profile of target animals, in particular piglets’, for which the reports of Van Noten et al. () and Jensen (), respectively, were provided. Information from these reports has been used in this opinion.…”
Section: Data and Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Little information about the growth stimulation mechanisms is available. One of the possible mechanisms has been attributed to the bactericidal and/or bacteriostatic effects of copper on the gastrointestinal tract microbiota (Jensen, ; see also Section 3.6.1). The bactericidal action of copper is dependent on the concentration of free ionic copper in solution, while the free ionic copper concentration is affected by pH and solubility (Pang and Applegate, ).…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One plausible explanation is that the effect is attributed to an antimicrobial effect (less microbial load and less microbial (potential toxic) metabolites in the gut) leaving more nutrients and energy available to the pig itself (e.g. Fuller et al., ; Henderickx et al., ; Radecki et al., ; Jensen, ; Corpet, ; Jensen, ; see also Section 3.6.1). This is further supported by the results of Shurson et al.…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The terms of reference provided comprised the review of the matter with particular consideration to piglets; besides pigs/piglets, two other species were initially considered (chickens and cows). The full ELS report (Jensen, ) was published. The results are briefly summarised below.…”
The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) reviewed (i) the copper requirements of food-producing and pet animals, (ii) the copper concentration in feed materials and complete feed, (iii) the copper bioavailability, and (iv) the calculated background copper concentration of complete feed. Also considered were (i) the influence of dietary copper on gut microbiota profile and on the bacterial antibiotic resistance in target animals and (ii) the environmental occurrence of bacterial heavy metal tolerance (copper resistance) and resistance to certain antibiotics. The data collected supported the possibility of a reduction in some of the currently authorised maximum contents (CAMC) for total copper in feed. The EFSA Panel developed an algorithm to derive newly proposed maximum contents (NPMC) from the requirement and the native dietary copper content. The NPMC (mg Cu/kg complete feed) comprised of maintained (m), decreased (d) and increased (i) values: 15 for bovine before the start of rumination (m), 30 for other bovine (d), 35 for caprine (i), 15 for ovine (m), 50 for crustacean (m) and 25 for other animal species ((d) for piglets up to 12 weeks, (m) for all other species). The NMPC support health, welfare and economic productivity of target animals, except piglets; performance of weaned piglets would be impacted. The NPMC values would not likely have any consequences on the consumers' intake of copper and are of no concern for the safety of the consumer. The reduction from 170 mg to 25 mg Cu/kg feed piglets would have the capacity to save 1,200 tonnes copper/year being spread in the field and thus, to reduce total copper emissions from farm animal production by about 20%. Thus, the reduction of the CAMC to the NPMC would have a significant impact on the concentrations of copper in the environment of piggeries.
AbstractThe aim of this study was to determine whether newly weaned piglets had a preference for diets containing hydroxychloride trace minerals (HTM). To test this, two preference tests were set up. In Exp. 1, the piglets could choose between HTM or inorganic, originating from sulfate trace minerals (STM) in the form of sulfates. Two treatments were applied with high Cu levels (160 ppm Cu added) or low Cu levels (15 ppm Cu added). All diets contained 110 ppm added Zn from the same source as Cu in the respective diet. The pigs could choose between a diet with hydroxychloride Cu and Zn or with Cu and Zn originating from sulfates at the same mineral levels. The piglets were included in the study from weaning until 34 d after weaning. In Exp. 2, the piglets could also choose between HTM and STM. However, automated feeding stations were used to collect individual feed intake data. Similarly two treatments were applied, one with high Cu levels (160 ppm added Cu) and one with slightly lower Cu levels (140 ppm added Cu until 28 d after weaning, thereafter 15 ppm added Cu). All diets contained 110 ppm added Zn from the same source as Cu in the respective diet. The piglets were followed until 35 d after weaning. The current studies showed that when piglets were given a choice, they preferred diets with HTM. This effect resulted only in a significant (P < 0.05) preference for HTM at high dietary Cu levels (160 ppm) ranging from 76% to 81% in the first and second week of Exp. 1 to between 53.4% and 57.8% in the overall experiment period of Exp. 2. This preference was less pronounced at levels of 140 ppm added or less. Individual feed intake and gain measurements did not show any link between the preference and the performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.