Winners of the Alltech Young Scientist program to be awarded at ONE: The Alltech Ideas Conference (ONE18).

[LEXINGTON, Ky.] — In a few short weeks, agriscience students from colleges and universities around the world will compete at the highest level for the chance to be rewarded for their innovative research. The global regional finalists have been selected for the 2018 Alltech Young Scientist (AYS) program, the world’s largest agriscience competition for university students. Now in its 13^th year, the program’s pool of nominees represents 83 universities from 28 countries.

The regional finalists will attend AYS Discovery Week, held in conjunction with ONE: The Alltech Ideas Conference (ONE18), May 20–22 in Lexington, Kentucky, to present their research to a panel of international judges. They will also have leadership building, career mentorship and networking opportunities. The prizes include a fully funded Ph.D. position for the global undergraduate winner as well as $5,000 USD, and a fully funded postdoctoral position and $10,000 USD for the global graduate winner. 

The regional finalists for the graduate AYS award and their paper topics are:

• Zili Gao, University of Massachusetts Amherst, United States
  • “The heat shock cognate 70 protein is a novel target of nobiletin and its colonic metabolites in inhibiting colon carcinogenesis”
• Saheed Salami, University of Catania, Italy; currently attending University College Cork, Ireland  
  • “Cardoon meal as a novel feed: effect on lamb performance, rumen function and meat quality”
• Yanli Liu, Northwest A&F University, China
  • “Metabolomics and proteomics reveal impacts of folic acid on lipid metabolism in chicken primary hepatocytes (Folic acid regulates lipid metabolism mediated by IGF2)”
• Moisés Poli, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brazil
  • “Pacific white shrimp and Nile tilapia integration in biofloc system under different fish-stocking densities”

The regional finalists for the undergraduate AYS award and their paper topics are:

• Ronald Trotta, University of Kentucky, United States; currently attending North Dakota State University, United States
  • “Effects of source and level of dietary energy supplementation on fiber digestion and in vitro methane production from tall fescue-based diets”
• Evgeny Remizov, Saratov State Agrarian University, Russia
  • “Antimicrobial peptides as a base of development of new antimicrobial medication”
• Shenfei Long, China Agricultural University, China
  • “Dietary supplementation with DHA-enriched microalgae improves performance, serum composition, carcass trait, antioxidant status and fatty acid profile of broilers”
• Juan Bol, Universidad EARTH, Costa Rica 
  • “Evaluation of induced resistant products to improve root health and control of plant parasitic nematodes in commercial banana plantation”

“The Alltech Young Scientist program provides a once-in-a-lifetime experience for the best and brightest minds of the next generation of agriculture science leaders,” said Dr. Karl Dawson, vice president and chief scientific officer at Alltech. "The regional finalists will present their research to a global audience, and the undergraduate and graduate competition winners will have the opportunity to join our global team."the opportunity to join our global team.”

For more information about the Alltech Young Scientist program, visit AlltechYoungScientist.com and stay connected through the Alltech Education Facebook page.

Below is an edited transcript of Tom Martin’s interview with Aidan Connolly, chief innovation officer and vice president of corporate accounts at Alltech. Click below to hear the full audio:

Tom:                            You've written that technological innovations have the ability to transform every link in the food chain, “from seed to fork.” Give us your shortlist of emerging, potentially transformative agricultural technologies.

Aidan:                          I think anybody who lives on the planet is very aware of the transformation that is taking place in all aspects of every business. Agriculture is no different. I tried to summarize this once, because I think we’re flailing around trying to figure out what we can do with gene editing, with digital technologies, autonomous vehicles, and which ones are going to truly transform agriculture. I saw a paper written by PricewaterhouseCoopers in which they talked about eight digital technologies that will transform the world, and I applied that to agriculture.

                                      Effectively, the technologies split into two different types: hardware and software. From a hardware perspective, we are thinking about things like sensors, robots and 3D printing — things that collect data that we can analyze — the internet of things.

                                    From a software perspective, we're thinking of artificial intelligence: virtual reality, enhanced or augmented reality, the ability to analyze data and machine vision. In essence, we're talking about the collection of information and putting that information in a form that people can see, act on and make management decisions.

Tom:                            These technologies are quite revolutionary. How has the pace of the development of these technologies — digital, in particular — changed farming from what it used to be?

Aidan:                          I have to say it hasn't changed farming too much, so far. I would say robotics is probably the technology that has been most embraced so far. When you go to a dairy farm, you will see robots being commonly used. Robots are not yet used in swine farming or in poultry, though that’s going to be coming quite soon.

                                    I think that we've already seen the use of blockchain, which is an electronic ledger that allows you to trace food as it goes through the system. That has been embraced to some degree, in food, for example, with turkeys, grains and soybeans. I would say, frankly, agriculture is a little late to the game. Nonetheless, the opportunities, in terms of how this can transform the business, are probably greater in agriculture than they are in other industries.

Tom:                            What aspects of farming could undergo the greatest transformation from these technologies that you're talking about?

Aidan:                          If we think about what we do today on the farm, be it in the field or with animals, we see a huge gap between the genetic capacity of the animal and what we actually achieve. This is most easily seen if somebody decides to set up a research center. In that research center, they will see yields in corn or in soybeans — or, in terms of animal performance, in milk, meat or eggs — that perform 10 percent better than on the farm or in the field. So, that tells you there’s a lot of potential.

                                       We normally estimate that the genetic potential of an animal or of a plant is about 30 percent above what we actually get. Of course, a lot of this relates to weather, management, the use of pesticides, fertilizers — what we do in general to get the most out of those plants or animals. So, there is a very large gap that data could plug, particularly if we knew what was happening in real time.

                                    I think that, from that perspective, agriculture has lots of areas that could improve. Milk would be a classic example of that, but I think I could take any aspect of agriculture and expect it to be improved through the use of technologies.

Tom:                            If you were asked to compose a short list of the most important tech advances in agriculture of late, what would that look like?

Aidan:                          I think robotics is the one that has been embraced the fastest and where we’ve seen the greatest improvements in the shortest space of time.

                                    Sensors would be number two — in particular for dairy cows, but other species are starting to use sensors to detect, in real time, how much an animal is eating or drinking, how much weight gain is occurring and if it’s sick.

                                    We are seeing the use of drones to collect that same information with plants growing in the field. And, of course, we're seeing it in terms of what's being done with higher-value crops, where the sensors are directly in the soil or on the plant.

                                    The ones that excite me — blockchain has tremendous potential to be used in the near future. I think augmented reality — where you could walk into a field or into a barn wearing goggles that would provide you with information that would allow you to manage those animals or those crops — is very important. And although I don't think virtual reality is going to be something we see being used in agriculture in the near future, we already see it being used in the food industry. McDonald's is already using it to allow consumers to see where food is being produced on farms and to, in effect, “visit” those farms virtually to see what's happening.

Tom:                            To what extent are artificial intelligence and robotics playing roles in farming?

Aidan:                          Robotics is something that I believe has immediate relevance. We are finding it more and more difficult to get people to work on farms. That's especially relevant in the Western world — Western Europe and the United States, obviously, with lots of discussion about labor. But, surprisingly, robotics is increasingly an issue in places like Brazilian processing plants. People don’t necessarily want to work on pig farms anywhere in the world. I think even in China we will see the increasing use of robotics on the farm. Artificial intelligence can transform every aspect of the business of farming. So, even things like veterinarian interventions, nutritional advice or nutritional changes, anything where human intelligence is involved and where decisions are being made, I can see that artificial intelligence can allow us to replace some loss of that role by allowing real-time decisions to be made based on real-time information.

Tom:                            Disruptive innovation creates new markets and reshapes existing markets. What new markets are on the horizon, and how are existing markets being reshaped by these developments?

Aidan:                          A lot of the time, it seems with these digital technologies, what we’re doing is collecting information that allows us to do the current job better. I think that plays a very large part in what we're seeing at the moment: greater traceability, greater information to the consumer and greater information for management decisions.

                                    I wouldn't discard the ability of technology to open markets that haven't been there before. The most obvious one will be the ability to produce food at a lower cost on existing farms, which obviously would allow that food to be given to more of the 7 billion mouths that we have to feed. There is opportunity to create food in new ways. For example, hydroponics requires the use of sensors. The ability of cameras to make decisions in real time about how to irrigate could be very important. Also, because consumer transparency is very important, consumers can see the food being grown, what interventions are taking place and maybe a little bit more information on what's actually happening on either the farm in the countryside or the farm in the city.

Tom:                            With the emergence and the arrival of all these new technologies, each demanding a lot of investment of time and money to acquire and to implement, do you have some advice for producers about how to manage all that?

Aidan:                          I think in the general history of agriculture, there’s been a conflict between the sales and marketing function and the purchaser that is the farmer. I'm sure that 8,000 years ago, when the first sales person arrived on the farm trying to convince a farmer to use his seeds, which he had harvested and held, the farmer was probably wondering what the price was going to be, what were the conditions, what do they need to barter in return. The reality is, with this new level of technology, we're typically talking about startups, and startups, by their nature, are small companies. Many of the startups don't have a history or background in agriculture. So, they don't often fully understand the benefits of the technology that they're promoting. Sometimes they promote too many benefits instead of focusing on the ones that are really relevant to farmers. I'd say to farmers and to companies — anybody engaging with startups in the agricultural space — try to be as friendly as you can and try to be understanding of the person on the other side of the desk or the other side of the tractor who's trying to explain to you why this technology might help you.

                                    Try to see if you can help that person actually be successful. Transformers of digital technologies are essential to the future of producing food efficiently, effectively and safely, and therefore to the future of the planet. Startups will be a part of bringing those technologies to us. If they are successful, we will be successful. So, our goal has to be to make it possible for them to succeed.

Tom:                            You mentioned blockchain technology, and I'm wondering about what seems to be a conflict: how a supply chain ledger system can be at once transparent and secure.

Aidan:                          Many listeners may not be familiar with the term “blockchain.” If they aren’t, I would suggest they read up on it. There are a lot of great videos on the internet. The way I've explained it to myself is that it’s similar to bitcoin. It's something that’s virtual — in this case, a virtual invoice — that passes from person to person, and yet that person cannot see who held that invoice at various stages of the process.

                                    Maybe there is a farmer producing eggs, and those eggs are cracked and we produce a liquid egg from it, and that liquid egg might be further fractionated and used in a variety of food products, with many people involved in the process. Sometimes, not everybody wants everyone in the chain to know where they purchased their raw material, and maybe even where their supplier bought their raw material. So, in that system, a virtual invoice is really exciting because it allows you to gain that traceability without giving up the secrecy. Like bitcoin, it can move from person to person and still retain its value; that's what blockchain allows us to do. That’s the excitement in agriculture and in the food chain in general – a technology that allows us to do this.

                                      Walmart has made a big noise about the fact that they've embraced this originally in China. They're now starting to use it here in the United States. We see discussions amongst many of the other major food companies about the same thing, about what they can do.

                                      I see blockchain as being capable of transforming every aspect of where food moves from one supplier to another.

Tom:                            Do you see blockchain technology combating fraud in food labeling?

Aidan:                          It certainly has the potential to do so. It is not possible for somebody to manipulate. So, yes, it checks that box. It allows us to gain transparency without losing secrecy. Secrecy, right or wrong, has been a big part of the way food has been produced in the past. People have not wanted everybody to know what they have done in their manufacturing process. I think it will be mandated, if not by governments, then I could see it being mandated by food companies. The constant concern is, “If I have a food recall, where did that problem come from, and how easily and quickly can I trace it back?”

Tom:                            Among the technologies that we've talked about, and maybe some that we have not touched on, do you see any that have the potential of mitigating world population growth?

Aidan:                          Well, if by mitigating world population growth you mean providing enough food for all the people who are going to be on the planet…

Tom:                            That’s what I mean.

Aidan:                          I definitely think that, if we look at that 30 percent gap, you could transform that into a 30 percent increase in food production. However, we know that there are areas where we could make even greater gains. Food waste is an obvious one. We say that we lose 30 percent of our food between the plate and our mouth in the West. They say that 30 percent of the food is wasted between the farm and the plate in the developing world. Clearly, there are tremendous gains that could be made to reduce the loss of food in the food chain as it exists at the moment, and I've already mentioned genetic potential. The ability to apply resources — in particular, scarce resources like water and land — more efficiently will also become a very large part of what we see in the future with digital technologies.

Tom:                            You’re watching these technologies emerge. What would you say is the most amazing thing that you've seen lately?

Aidan:                          Maybe I'm a little bit like a kid in a candy shop — I'm amazed by everything that's coming. I have seen many technologies that I truly believe are transformational. One that really excites me is that they've created an egg that you can put under lights and, from that light, you can tell whether the egg is male or female. In the layer industry, we hatch 18 billion eggs because we need 9 million females to grow up to be laying hens and to produce the eggs. That means that 9 million eggs are laid and hatched to become males that do not get used as laying hens. In the past, those were euthanized. However, that's increasingly unacceptable to consumers. In the case of the broiler industry, we know males grow differently than females. If we could shine a light to know which eggs are males and which were females, we could hatch them in different trays. We could put them into different houses. We could feed them differently, grow them for different periods of time, etcetera. So, that’s transformational in terms of what we could see from a world perspective.

Tom:                            Aidan Connolly is chief innovation officer and vice president of corporate accounts at Alltech. Thank you very much, Aidan.

Aidan:                          Thank you, Tom.

[DUNBOYNE, Ireland] – Alltech’s European Bioscience Centre, located in Dunboyne, County Meath, has been nominated for a US-Ireland Research Innovation Award. The centre has been nominated in the Multinational Corporation Category for research on how reduced diversity among intestinal gut microbes can affect animal health and can lead to the overgrowth of pathogens and the development of resistance. It also examines how increasing gut microbial diversity through nutrition and diet can aid in the control of these issues with the aim of reducing reliance on antibiotics.

Now in its fourth year, the awards are a joint initiative between the Royal Irish Academy and the American Chamber of Commerce Ireland and are aimed at recognising excellence in research innovation, creation and invention by an organisation as a result of U.S. foreign direct investment in Ireland. The winners will be announced on 18 May at the Chamber’s annual dinner, which will also welcome Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation Heather Humphreys.

Dr. Richard Murphy, research director at the Alltech European Bioscience Centre, said the nomination was a fantastic achievement for the research team.

“At Alltech, we strive for success,” said Murphy. “Our innovative solutions and cutting-edge technologies deliver real results for our customers and farmers, and so this award is a tremendous achievement for us as a research team. We are delighted to be nominated for a US-Ireland Research Innovation Award. This is a true testament to the hard work our team in Dunboyne put into researching innovative farming solutions.”

Alltech Ireland has long been a leader in both the Irish and European agriculture industry. Located in Dunboyne, County Meath, it became the first Alltech office to be established in mainland Europe in 1981 and today serves as Alltech’s European headquarters and bioscience centre.

Alltech’s European Bioscience Centre is Alltech’s pivotal research centre in Europe. The research work carried out at the centre specialises in cellular biotechnology, and the team of 20 scientists based in Dunboyne have developed unique insights into specific focus areas such as yeast cell wall architecture, trace element chelation, biomarker detection and microbial population dynamics. This work has resulted in the development of new solutions, services and analytical tools that improve producer profitability and efficiency.

“We have approximately 20 full-time scientists on-site in Dunboyne,” said Murphy. “We are very proud of our highly educated team and close links with Irish universities. The majority of the team have earned their Ph.D. or master’s degree with Alltech.

“Since redevelopment work on the facility was completed in 2013, the team at Alltech are very lucky to work in labs of exceptional quality and standard, thanks to Mrs. Deirdre Lyons, Alltech’s director of corporate image and design, who is responsible for designing our labs,” he continued. “This enables us to provide a state-of-the-art platform that enables young scientists to work with Alltech's expert team of biochemists, microbiologists and nutritionists.” 

Alltech’s European Bioscience Centre is one of the company’s three major bioscience centres around the world, with each centre having its own innovative focus. The centres are complemented by more than 20 research alliances with leading universities around the world. Alltech’s research team are also responsible for over 500 patents awarded to Alltech globally.

[LEXINGTON, Kentucky] – It is with great sadness that Alltech announces the passing of its founder and president, Dr. Pearse Lyons. Lyons died on Thursday, March 8, due to an acute lung condition that developed during his recovery from heart surgery. He was 73.

“The thoughts of our entire Alltech family around the world are with Dr. Lyons’ family, specifically his wife Deirdre, daughter Aoife, son Mark and Mark’s wife Holly,” said Alric Blake, CEO and treasurer of Alltech.

“Dr. Lyons was a visionary entrepreneur who transformed the agriculture industry beginning with his innovative application of yeast technology in animal nutrition. From farm to field, from market to family dinner table, our world is immeasurably better because he was a man who never saw problems, only a challenge that had not yet been solved.

“He inspired everyone he met with his energy, enthusiasm and passionate belief in possibilities. He instilled that positivity in his people, more than 5,000 Alltech team members around the world. I am confident I speak on behalf of all of them when I say that we are deeply honored to have known and worked for such a great man. We will resolve to honor his legacy by deepening our commitment to his customers and all the innovative ideas he believed in so strongly.”

To continue driving forward his vision for serving the agriculture industry through field-proven innovations, Dr. Lyons established a clear leadership structure, including:

• Dr. Mark Pearse Lyons, Chairman and President
• Alric A. Blake, Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer
• E. Michael Castle II, Vice President and Secretary

As the company’s director of corporate image and design, Mrs. Deirdre Lyons will continue to further Dr. Lyons’ vision for Alltech’s global presence and their shared commitment to philanthropy and community involvement.

 “We are all deeply saddened by my father’s passing,” said Dr. Mark Lyons, Pearse’s son and chairman and president of Alltech. “He always focused on developing people, and he built an extraordinary team over the years. I know he had full confidence in his team to continue growing the company he built.

“He saw farther into the horizon than anyone in the industry, and we, as his team, are committed to delivering on the future he envisioned. He planted seeds that will produce a bountiful harvest for the world in the years to come.”

Dr. Lyons’ family are deeply appreciative of the many prayers and well wishes they have received from friends around the world. At this time, they kindly ask that any expressions of sympathy, including memories and tributes, be shared at alltech.com/pearselyons.

In lieu of flowers, the family is encouraging donations to the Alltech ACE Foundation, a 501c3 nonprofit organization that funds a variety of philanthropic endeavours around the world from disaster relief to primary schools in Haiti. Donations may be made at alltech.com/pearselyons.

Funeral masses will be in Lexington, Kentucky, USA, on March 17 and in Dublin, Ireland, in April. A special celebration of life will be held on May 20 at the beginning of ONE: The Alltech Ideas Conference in Lexington.

Public visitation in Lexington will be on Friday, March 16. Arrangement details will be kept up to date on alltech.com/pearselyons.

“You are what you eat” might strike you with a bit of fear or guilt depending on what it is that you are munching at the moment. While the origins of this phrase are probably as old as mankind, fundamental research now supports the importance of eating the right things, at the right time, both in humans and animals. 

Our genes are the blueprint that defines who we are. How genes express themselves in the presence of nutrition, to produce proteins, is called “gene expression.” The science that defines how we understand this interplay between what we eat and how our genes function is called “nutrigenomics.”

A small chip, representing all the genes in the tissue of the individual being examined, allows scientists to predict precisely what effects to expect from dietary changes by showing which genes are activated and deactivated (in other words, turned “on” or “off”).

Just over ten years ago, Alltech opened a first-of-its-kind facility dedicated to the study of animal nutrition’s impact on gene expression. This study of nutrigenomics has allowed scientists to determine what outcomes to expect from feeding specific foods, feeds and dietary supplements to animals without waiting the months or even years that are typical in traditional farm trials. Additionally, nutrigenomics is minimally invasive research, requiring little from animals, such as minor bloodwork tests.

Over the 10 years since the Alltech Center for Animal Nutrigenomics and Applied Animal Nutrition opened, nutrigenomics has been used to:

• Understand how specific foods and diet structures change gene expression.
• Quickly screen and identify new nutrients with similar benefits to existing elements of the modern livestock diet.
• Predict responses to novel nutrients or foods.

10 Nutrigenomics Breakthroughs

1. Truly Amaize-ing

Although considered “amazing” by some farmers who use it, Amaize® from Alltech was a product with an elusive mode of action.

Cattle and other ruminants rely upon their first stomach (the rumen) to break down fiber. Enzymes such as Amaize should help with this digestion process. Using traditional techniques, researchers demonstrated that adding Amaize resulted in carcass weight gain for beef and greater milk production in dairy.

Examining tissue samples using gene expression, however, added much more to the story. The enzyme’s impact on the animal’s metabolic system showed that Amaize optimizes animal growth.

Several key changes were noted in particular. Genes relating to the expression of insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1), insulin receptors and the growth hormone were affected positively. These genes all have a direct correlation to increasing metabolic activity and therefore body growth.

Nutrigenomics allowed scientists to precisely understand the true function of Amaize, making it possible to issue specific recommendations to farmers of how and how much to incorporate into their cattle’s diets to maximize production and profitability (primary scientist: Dr. Ronan Power, Alltech). 

2. EconomasE: An economical alternative to vitamin E

In essence, EconomasE is an antioxidant supplement, demonstrating similar biological functions to vitamin E, but more economically.

Vitamin E is known throughout the world for its powerful antioxidant properties. Antioxidants inhibit the oxidation of other molecules, which can produce free radicals. Free radicals, unpaired loose electrons, cause damage to cells in the body. Generally, therefore, a person who consumes antioxidants will be healthier and in better shape to fight off illness, which is why doctors advise eating antioxidant-rich foods like leafy greens, nuts and certain berries.

Humans aren’t the only ones to benefit from antioxidants; all animals do, and this is why vitamin E is routinely included in the diets of all production animals. Vitamin E, however, is very expensive, and producers often seek ways to minimize its inclusion in their feed. The caveat is that reduction of vitamin E can increase the likelihood of requirement for antibiotics.

Using nutrigenomics, researchers were able to identify vitamin E’s mode of action and then set about identifying other compounds or combinations with similar effects. EconomasE proved capable of replicating the gene expression changes seen with vitamin E, and this was confirmed in 46 subsequent trials with poultry, swine and cattle. EconomasE maintained meat quality and the beneficial, protective antioxidative effects of vitamin E without the high price tag (primary scientist: Dr. Karl Dawson, Alltech).

3. Using zinc to facilitate development

Zinc is a trace mineral required by all animals to grow and develop properly. It supports immune function, allowing the animal to overcome immune challenges. In animals, through optimizing the immune response, it reduces risks associated with a severe infection known as necrotic enteritis (NE), which costs the poultry industry alone an estimated $5 to $6 billion globally and has mortality rates of up to 1 percent per day.

Necrotic enteritis is caused by the pathogenic bacteria family of Clostridium perfringens, resulting in lesions of the intestine that inhibit the absorption of nutrients, further weakening the sick animal and sometimes leading to death. In the last few years, scientists have been searching for ways to reduce the effects of necrotic enteritis in production animals such as poultry, pigs and cattle.

Nutrigenomics also confirmed that the form of zinc used is important. Forms such as zinc oxide and zinc sulphate that are typically used in animal diets, and in human supplements, are less effective than those connected to mixed peptides, which impact how the zinc is absorbed. Treating the animal in a holistic manner, supplying it with nutrients in the optimal form, enables that animal to be far better prepared to fight off potential infection, resulting in less antibiotic use and better efficiency of food digestion, both of which will save poultry producers (and consumers) billions of dollars annually (primary scientist: Dr. Daniel Graugnard, Alltech).

4. Mitigating myopathies in meat

As recently as five years ago, a condition known as “woody breast” wasn’t even on chicken producers’ list of concerns. Now, it is credited with losses conservatively estimated at $200 million dollars in the U.S. and affects chicken producers in Brazil, Spain and Italy, amongst others. An affliction of the chicken breast, it results in tough, chewy and otherwise inedible meat.

While genetics certainly play a factor, woody breast is generally considered to be directly correlated to how fast producers grow their chickens. Consider that in 1930, the average chicken was slaughtered at 2.5 pounds (1.1 kilograms) and took 50 days to gain each pound of weight. Less than 100 years later, we grow chicken to 6 to 8 pounds live weight, and they can put on a pound every eight days!

At a scientific level, fast-growing chickens are being affected by hypoxia (low blood), increased oxidative stress, inflammation and an increase in fibrofatty tissue.  From a consumer perspective, this results in chewy chicken and a generally unpleasant eating experience. However, understanding gene expression changes through nutrigenomics has enabled the development of a feed program that decreases the oxidative effects within the bird, resulting in normal tasting breast fillets for consumers (primary scientist: Dr. Rebecca Delles, Alltech).

5. Actigen: A stronger next generation of a proven success

For many years, Bio-Mos® has been a star ingredient in animal feed. It supported animal performance naturally by reinforcing the function of the digestion system and enhancing feed efficiency.   

The challenge was that the nature of natural is variation: color, odor and particle size relating to the natural process of production. Producers wanted the benefits of Bio-Mos, but they wanted it to be more concentrated, make it more economical and make it traceable.  

Nutrigenomic research quickly confirmed Actigen®’s similarities to Bio-Mos but also showed it to be 2.5 to five times more powerful.

Subsequent animal feeding trials later proved Actigen’s ability to help animals achieve their genetic potential. However, nutrigenomics confirmed its biological value much earlier, in a matter of weeks rather than months or years (primary scientist: Dr. Colm Moran, Alltech).

6. You are what your mother ate: The science of epigenetics

Epigenetics, or how an environment impacts the expression of inherited genes, is the next science that we expect will revolutionize the way we think of nutrition. In this case, what the parents ate, and what the parents of their parents ate, affects gene expression. And, it goes beyond nutrition. Studies have shown that overeating, undereating, exercise and smoking all have potential benefits or deleterious effects on future generations.

Pregnant sows at the world’s largest pig farm were fed Actigen during the last trimester and demonstrated epigenetic benefits. Tissue samples from their offspring exhibited gene expression changes suggesting stronger immune systems and enhanced nutrient uptake. So, as epigenetics suggests, feeding the mothers Actigen resulted in pigs that were much better off than those whose mothers did not receive it.

Healthier piglets will grow better, be more efficient, have stronger immune systems and less likelihood of disease infections/need for antibiotics (primary scientist: Dr. Kristen Brennan, Alltech).

7. Programmed nutrition: Conditioning gene expression

Within the lifetime of a person or animal, genes can be conditioned. In other words, we can design specific feeding regimes that prime the genes so that when a second diet is introduced, those genes express in ways that are more beneficial for the animal. This can be especially of benefit in the cattle industry, where cattle are bred and born in one location and often exchange hands three or four times.

Programmed nutrition shows that when newborn animals are fed supplements at specific levels and specific times, their bodies can better learn to utilize and retain these nutrients. As the animal grows, they become more efficient and require fewer nutrients than animals receiving excess supplements.

One example is EPNIX®. Part of a feeding program designed for genetic conditioning, the timing of feeding EPNIX to cattle is critical. It is a two-part process: the first part conditions the animal’s body to utilize nutrients better and the second part involves feeding the optimal nutrients.

EPNIX is a natural feed program that can positively improve cattle performance, meat quality and even reduce the environmental impact of beef farming (primary scientist: Dr. Vaughn Holder, Alltech).

Check out this podcast by Alltech research scientist Dr. Vaughn Holder to learn more about EPNIX.

8. In ovo feeding: Feed the egg before the chicken

Typically, the time from when an egg is laid to when it hatches is 21 days, almost the same amount of time it takes the chicken to grow. So it’s not surprising that poultry producers are increasingly wondering what nutrition a chick receives inside the egg.

Using nutrigenomics, scientists can look at what happens when different nutrients are introduced into the eggs. When used correctly, in ovo (Latin for “inside the egg”) feeding methods can be a powerful way to improve the development and health of the animal.

Careful egg injections of tiny doses of water-soluble sugar called MR8, from a probiotic yeast, resulted in baby chicks with stronger immune systems at birth and more efficient digestive systems. Not only that, but their hatchability increased, with more chicks born and improved survivability in the first week. Additionally, nutrigenomics showed a more developed digestive system physiologically and structurally, giving the bird a strong head start when compared to chicks that didn’t get the sugar from the probiotic yeast.

Today, implementing in ovo feeding requires special machines for use in hatcheries incubating thousands of eggs. However, the technology is quickly emerging to make in ovo feeding a strong part of poultry nutrition’s future (primary scientist: Dr. Rijin Xiao, Alltech).

 9. Serving salmon sans sea lice

Fish have never been more popular with consumers. As such, fish farming, or aquaculture, has become very important. In fact, more fish now come from farms than are caught in the sea. Yet, aquaculture presents its own challenges, including managing diseases and parasites. Sea lice alone cost the aquaculture industry an estimated $1 billion dollars a year. The threat of sea lice to salmon is not new, and salmon have developed their own protection by the secretion of a mucous layer encompassing its scales. This works, but when the sea lice are big enough, they can harm the fish and sometimes even kill it.

Until now, no annotated gene chip for salmon existed. The only fish species available was zebrafish, which is more likely to be found in your child’s aquarium! Now, a new salmon gene chip allows researchers to test all kinds of nutritional changes from a nutrigenomics perspective, and already evidence has been generated showing how to reduce the threat of sea lice to salmon.

Scientists have learned how to harness the natural immune system of the fish. Dr. Keith Filer and the research team at Alltech have discovered how to help fish produce more of the mucous-producing cells, making them slimier and thus more difficult for the sea lice to attach. For more on sea lice and the salmon industry, check out “For salmon’s sake: Seeking solutions to sea lice” (primary scientist: Dr. Keith Filer, Alltech).

10. Retooling our approach to Alzheimer’s

From humankind’s perspective, the most important work at Alltech’s nutrigenomics facility is with a selenium compound called AT-001. Nutrigenomic studies have indicated this specific selenium has the ability to change biochemical pathways associated with many serious diseases such as Alzheimer’s or other neurodegenerative diseases.

In collaboration with the late Dr. William Markesbery, the former director at the University of Kentucky’s Sanders-Brown Center on Aging, Alltech began testing AT-001, using a well-established mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) to evaluate its effects on neurodegeneration.

AT-001 reduced the incidence of clumps of misfolded proteins, known as amyloid plaques, often associated with Alzheimer’s, by 45–50 percent in the brains of these AD mice. Furthermore, the overall destruction caused by oxidative damage in the brain tissue of these same animals was reduced. For example, oxidative damage to both DNA and RNA was reduced by 35 percent and 60 percent, respectively.

Now tested in other animal species and other tissues, AT-001 has been found to significantly increase mitochondrial activity. Mitochondria are the organelles responsible for producing energy in cells and are thus essential for life. It is well documented in scientific literature that even small decreases in mitochondrial activity are linked to the occurrence of at least 50 different illnesses.

These initial results have opened an entirely new field of research, evaluating the physiological impact of more than 100 individual sub-components of AT-001. Three small selenium compounds have displayed remarkable activity in cell culture and animal models with type 2 diabetes. In addition, the compound in AT-001 that is responsible for the reduction in amyloid plaques has been identified and characterized. AT-001 is currently in Phase II human clinical trials in a population of elderly subjects who are at risk of developing AD (primary scientist: Dr. ZJ Lan, Alltech).

The past 10 years have seen incredible scientific and technological advancements in our understanding of nutrigenomics. We believe these breakthroughs are only the beginning as technology and data analytics continue to advance. For humans, animals, and livestock and food producers, the future looks optimistic.

7^th annual survey features expanded data from 144 countries and more than 30,000 feed mills

China and the U.S. produce one-third of the global feed supply

[LEXINGTON, Ky.] – The 2018 Alltech Global Feed Survey, released today, estimates that international feed tonnage has exceeded 1 billion metric tons for the second consecutive year, with a total of 1.07 billion metric tons of feed produced in 2017. The growth seen in 2017 was strong at 2.57 percent over last year. The feed industry, valued at $430 billion, has seen 13 percent growth over the past five years, equating to an average of 2.49 percent per annum. This substantial growth is supported by the higher reported consumption of meat, milk and eggs.

The seventh edition of the annual survey is the most comprehensive ever, now covering 144 countries and more than 30,000 feed mills. The results show that China and the U.S. remain the top two countries, producing one-third of all animal feed, and that predominant growth came from the pig, broiler and dairy feed sectors as well as the European and Asia-Pacific regions.

“Now in its seventh year of analysis, the Alltech Global Feed Survey continues to serve as a valuable report on the state of the global feed industry,” said Aidan Connolly, chief innovation officer and vice president of corporate accounts at Alltech. “In addition to its insights into the feed industry, it serves as a barometer for agriculture as a whole and oftentimes demonstrates the economic strength of the countries included in the survey.”

The Alltech Global Feed Survey assesses compound feed production and prices through information collected by Alltech’s global sales team and in partnership with local feed associations in the last quarter of 2017. It is intended to serve as an information resource for policymakers, decision-makers and industry stakeholders.

The top seven feed-producing countries in 2017, in order of production output importance, were China, the U.S., Brazil, Russia, Mexico, India and Spain. These countries contain approximately 54 percent of the world’s feed mills and account for 53 percent of total production. These countries can be viewed as an indicator of the trends in agriculture.

Regional results from the 2018 Alltech Global Feed Survey

·       North America: The U.S. remains the second-largest feed-producing country globally, behind China. North America produces a third of the beef feed, five times that of the next-largest producer. The U.S. and Canada are two of the top horse feed producing countries. Feed prices in North America are lower than when compared to other regions.

·       Latin America: Brazil remained the leader in feed production for the region and third overall globally. Brazil, Mexico and Argentina account for almost 75 percent of regional feed production. Mexico leads the region in beef and layer feed production. Latin America as a region has had the third-highest growth rate over five years, seen primarily in aqua, horses and pets.

·       Europe: Tied with Asia-Pacific for the fastest-growing regions, Europe saw a 3 percent feed tonnage growth, resulting from increases in pig, boiler and aqua feed production. The region was led by Russia with 37.6 million tons produced in 2017, moving up in the country rankings from number seven to number four. Russia increased its estimated pig feed, including more private production. Russian broiler feed production also increased by 3 percent, while Ukraine, Romania, the U.K. and Belgium also reported higher numbers, supporting growth in the European region. Europe is the top pet food producing region.

·       Asia-Pacific: The Asia-Pacific region accounts for more than 35 percent of the world’s feed tonnage. China remained the top feed-producing country in the world with 186.86 million metric tons, a slight decline in overall feed production compared to last year. Asia-Pacific increased by 3 percent over the 2017 survey results, primarily due to increases in pig and pet food production. Increased production for Asia-Pacific also came from India with 7 percent and Thailand with 8 percent growth. Vietnam grew 4 percent over the past year and is the second-highest producer of pig and aqua feed in the Asia-Pacific region. Seventy percent of all aqua feed and 44 percent of all layer feed is produced in Asia-Pacific countries.

·       Africa: Africa remains the fastest growing region in the world for dairy and broiler feeds.  With a regional average growth rate of nearly 30 percent over the last five years, it did not show growth in 2017. Pig, dairy, layer and boiler feed production increased, while decreases occurred in beef and aquaculture. Also, on average, Africa is the most expensive region for feeding pigs, layers and broilers. Smaller countries such as Botswana and Mozambique led the growth for pig, dairy, layer and broiler feeds. Beef feed production decreases were reflected in countries such as Zambia and Morocco. While many African nations showed a small increase in aquaculture feed production, the region as a whole was down primarily because of lower reported feed production in Egypt, which has now been surpassed by Nigeria.

Notable species results from the 2018 Alltech Global Feed Survey

·       In the poultry industry, broiler feed production increased across all regions, with the largest growth found in Africa with 10 percent and Europe with 7 percent. Romania, Russia and Ukraine all reported steady growth, contributing to Europe’s overall production, while Africa’s growth came primarily from Egypt, Uganda and Mozambique.

·       Global leaders in pork production, China and Russia, led the way in pig feed production in 2017. Many smaller African countries, particularly Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Uganda and Namibia, also showed increases. 

·       Global dairy feed production saw growth across all regions. Europe, a global leader in dairy production, grew on average by approximately 2 percent. Africa as a region saw the largest dairy feed production increase by 10 percent, with countries such as South Africa, Morocco and Zimbabwe showing significant increases from their reported 2017 dairy feed production.

·       Beef feed production reported an overall global decline of approximately 1 percent, primarily in regions such as Latin America, Africa and Europe. This global downward trend has generally been felt by the industry for some time as more consumers turn to “white” meats such as chicken, pork and fish.

·       Overall aquaculture feeds showed a slight increase, particularly in the European region. China reported a decline of 5 percent this year and in 2016, which could be linked to government controls on feeding practices and food safety, such as the administration of antibiotics. Brazil, Chile and Peru led the increase in production in Latin America, as did in the Middle East. Carp leads the production of aquaculture feed, followed by shrimp/prawn and tilapia. Catfish, salmon and trout also ranked on the species feed indicator, though to lesser degrees.

·       The pet food sector had a strong year across all regions. Asia-Pacific’s pet food production increased by 13 percent, with China, Thailand and Taiwan as the primary contributors to the increase. Europe increased by 17 percent with Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania, Poland and Hungary producing over 580,000 metric tons of additional pet food. Uruguay, Ecuador, El Salvador, Chile and Argentina represent almost all of the pet food production growth in Latin America, combining for 725,000 more tons.

“The Alltech Global Feed Survey provides valuable data and insights on the health of the feed industry and agriculture as a whole,” said Connolly. “As such, we will continue to offer the findings of the feed survey freely in an effort to demonstrate the significance of the animal feed industry in feeding a growing global population, sustainably and affordably.”

The Alltech Global Feed Survey has illuminated some intriguing points that can play a role in analyzing the economies of agribusiness and indeed of the world. To discover more data from the 2018 Alltech Global Feed Survey, including the results booklet, an interactive global map and a presentation of the results, please fill out the form on this page for access.

Pearse and Deirdre Lyons could not have known when they met decades ago as teens at a Dublin rugby club dance that they would one day find themselves driving around the streets of a section of the Irish capital known as the Liberties in search of just the right place to house their legacy.

This quest was not about Alltech, the global animal health and nutrition company they had founded and nurtured to remarkable success. This was personal.

The story, one animated by shared imagination and powerful determination to overcome all manner of obstacles, is expressed in the location, history and reincarnation of a deconsecrated church that had known better days.

And who better to relate the story of Pearse Lyons Distillery at St. James than the Lyonses themselves?

Photo Credit: Conor McCabe Photography Ltd

Locating their legacy

Pearse recalled the day he and his wife Deirdre explored the Liberties district, one of Dublin’s most historic neighborhoods that had once hosted dozens of breweries and distilleries.

“I wanted something in Dublin, and I wanted something that would be close to Guinness for the simple reason that 1.6 million people visit Guinness every year,” he explained. “I’m a businessman, and I thought, ‘Okay, I need someplace close to the 1.6 million people.’ So I was looking in that vicinity.”

“It just so happened that we were driving down James’s Street,” said Deirdre. “This is the area where Pearse’s father and grandfather and his grandfather before him all grew up. Pearse's very first job was at Irish Distillers, which was, at that time Paddy, Powers and Jameson whiskey.”

They came upon St. James, a church that had been built before the signing of the Magna Carta. In the last century, it had been repurposed as a warehouse and a store, but it was sitting abandoned.

Pearse saw past its state of disrepair and envisioned the opportunity as real estate just steps away from Guinness.

He bought it.

Was there hope in this forsaken place?

“My first thought was, ‘Oh, no!’” said Deirdre. “When we walked in, I couldn’t believe it.”

It was bad. Very bad.

“The roof was leaking in many places,” she said. “We had all kinds of water damage, plaster damage and neglect. The beautiful stone columns that had come from Caen in Normandy were painted magenta. Where the beautiful ceiling is now, previous owners had hacked out the stone on each side and put in steel beams and a staircase for a mezzanine and above that, another mezzanine. All the windows were blocked up with cement blocks, both inside and outside.”

Additionally, they soon discovered that a buddleia, or butterfly bush, had started to grow from the top of the church. It was so powerful that the roots had come down and broken through a wall 9 feet thick.

At this point, many would likely begin having serious second thoughts. The Lyonses instead prepared themselves to move forward with the project.

A new classification creates complications

A major twist in the plot occurred when, only two weeks after the purchase, they were informed that the old church was to become a national monument.

This new designation began a multi-year, multi-million euro excursion through a sea of time-consuming, costly renovation and restoration work.

“We had to remove all of the plaster,” said Deirdre. “We had to then build it back with new plaster, but the new plaster had to be of the 18th century-style. So that meant it had to be a lime plaster with a rough finish.”

Since it can take up to six years for lime plaster to completely dry, a special and very rare silicate paint would be required — and there are only three on the planet.

“One of them happened to be in Ireland!” said Deirdre. “I wanted this warm, buttery yellow, like a glowing ‘wrap itself around you’ feel. The Irish firm had five or six shades of white. So we said no. The next one was in Slovenia. They sent samples that were very yellow. Unfortunately, 48 hours after their paint was tested, it changed color. So we did more research and found a German company called Keim. They do a lot of restoration of historical buildings, particularly with the paints that were used in medieval times, which were very muted colors. That worked perfectly.”

But no sooner had the paint issue been solved then another challenge arose. The old church had long ago lost its spire. So Deirdre turned her attention to its replacement.

“There had been no spire on the church since 1954,” she explained. “It had been struck by lightning, and it became dangerous, so it was taken down.”

Deirdre presented ideas for a new slate, copper or stone spire, but every idea was rejected by city officials.

But, said Pearse, “Deirdre doesn’t compromise. She was going to do something spectacular. She knew what she was doing, and she would not take any shortcuts. It took them a while to realize that this was a woman for whom it wasn’t money; this was a passion.”

Deirdre has a fondness for glass and came up with a concept for a glass spire that could be lighted at night. That idea was rejected.

“I was so frustrated at this point with everything that was rejected that I sought out a meeting with the city officials,” she said. “We shared our drawings, and they found them to be unique and exciting. Since we didn’t hear anything negative, we went ahead and created the spire.”

Deirdre’s vision for the interior called for custom-made stained glass windows decorated with depictions of the brewing, distilling and coopering that had been so characteristic of the Liberties.

“We presented the renders for the stained glass windows, but they were rejected on the premise that it had been a Protestant church, which would not have had stained glass,” she said.

To move forward with the stained glass windows, the Lyonses were invited to prove that they couldn’t be read from the outside of the church. Deirdre took this as a go-ahead to produce one of the windows and install it, since it would be the only way to test it.

“We created the south window first, which explains the brewing process,” said Deirdre. “It took a long time to sketch it and go to the glass company, a little two-person company way up in the north, pick out all the glass and lay the glass the way we wanted — because we wanted to use all of the colors that would be associated with the industry, like gold, amber, copper, some black and some warm browns and yet put them in a way that was very easy to read.”

Photo Credit: Donal Murphy

Once they installed the window, they invited the planners and zoners to come see it.

After opportunity for review, Deirdre decided to proceed to the next window. However, when the concrete blocks were removed, a couple small lattice pieces were discovered. Because the lattice pieces were original, the window could no longer be removed.

“We had to create our window and put it on what I call a ‘goal post frame’ and float it off the window,” said Deirdre.

Photo Credit: Donal Murphy

Classic copper pot stills, custom-made for the distillery by the Vendome Copper & Brass Works in Louisville, Kentucky, were transferred from their County Carlow location to the site. With the attempted move, an entirely new round of frustration gripped the project.

“We were a quarter of an inch shy of getting them through the biggest door,” said Deirdre. “We could take the door off, but we couldn’t remove the arch because we were afraid that the stone would not be able to support itself.”

But, where there’s a will, there’s a way. Workers were in the process of reinforcing and replacing the building’s roof.

“We got everything structurally right and then we left one section of the roof open,” said Deirdre. “We had a crane lift them in.”

Photo Credit: Donal Murphy

A legacy project becomes an ancestral tribute

Excavation to make room for the building’s new mechanical systems yielded yet another surprise. This one, at least, brought with it a most amazing serendipity.

“We soon unearthed bodies that we hadn’t expected at all,” said Deirdre. “In those days, graves were dug very deeply, and bodies were placed on top of bodies.”

An on-site archeologist oversaw a careful process each time a body was discovered. Each one was carefully taken to the National Museum of Ireland – Archaeology, where it was examined, dated and photographed. The bones would then be returned to rest at St. James.

“To accommodate all those bones, we actually had to create crypts under the floor of the church,” said Deirdre. “There were two crypts already in the church, but we had to put in five more.”

Then, there was a startling discovery.

Among those buried in the centuries-old church graveyard was none other than John Hubert Lyons, grandfather of Pearse.

The revelation unlocked something long hidden in the recesses of his memory.

“At age 4, my earliest recollection is of going to a funeral, an Irish wake,” he explained. “I saw this person, and I remember them saying it was my grandfather.”

The year was 1948.

“His parents were on holiday in France and had distributed all of the little ones to various aunts and uncles in the area,” related Deirdre. “So, Pearse and his older brother were taken in a horse-drawn carriage with the hearse. But he never knew that it was a funeral until he grew up. He was too young. It was hushed up. It all flooded back when we realized this. That then made it very important to Pearse.”

This personal commitment would prove critical as myriad obstacles continued to mount. For example, the Lyonses would present 17 renderings of a proposed visitors center before a plan would finally be approved.

Breathing life into the Liberties

Pearse hopes the beautifully restored distillery’s presence and energy breathes new life into the neighborhood.

“When you put a beautiful place up, people tend to step up,” said Pearse. “There are going to be a lot of refurbishments. I hope we’re alive to see it.”

“I have to say that, even though it was probably the most challenging job I’ve ever done, it’s also been the most rewarding,” said Deirdre as she reflected.

“The builders said that they loved working with Deirdre because she never changed her mind. Never,” said Pearse. “She has the vision of what she wants to do. I think this is what makes us a formidable team. It’s telling our story. It’s history.”

Former Iowa Governor and U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack recently led a discussion amongst four other past U.S. Secretaries of Ag — Dan Glickman, Ann Veneman, Mike Johanns and Ed Schafer — at the 2017 Iowa Hunger Summit. Their primary objective was to address a less commonly realized but ever-prevalent issue affecting U.S. citizens: food insecurity.

Some may be asking themselves what exactly the term “food insecurity” means. It is defined as being without consistent access to an adequate supply of reasonably priced, healthy food. And, while it may seem almost inconceivable for such a highly developed country to be dealing with an issue like hunger, according to the United States Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service, it’s an unfortunate reality for some 41.2 million Americans living in food-insecure households.

Fortunately, the U.S. has one of the most comprehensive feeding programs in the world, offering the Woman, Infants and Children (WIC) program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and National School Lunch Program (NSLP).

Yet, programs like SNAP have no restrictions. People may buy whatever unhealthy options they wish to, and often do. So, the question arises: Should we limit participant options? And, while we’ve come a long way from the days of food stamps and the associated stigmas, many feel that restricting offerings would only serve to further reinforce shame felt by program participants.

Domino effect

According to estimates from the 2015 U.S. Census Bureau, the official poverty rate is roughly 13.5 percent, meaning over 43 million Americans are living on an insufficient income. The nation also sits at a record high obesity rate; according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 36.5 percent of U.S. adults are considered grossly overweight. It would seem these two issues go hand in hand with the issue of food insecurity.

People are not only undereducated on nutrition but are often unsure how to prepare food. To put it simply, many people don’t know how to cook anymore. Without this knowledge, most seek quick, convenient and often calorie-dense options.

And we are paying a high price for these correlations:

• Globally, more people are dying of non-communicable diseases (e.g., heart disease and diabetes) than communicable diseases. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), unhealthy diets and lack of physical activity are some of the top reasons for premature death.
• Obesity is one of the biggest drivers of healthcare costs. In fact, the fastest growing part of the U.S. budget is healthcare. The United States spends an estimated $147 to $210 billion annually on costs associated with preventable chronic diseases.

Focus on nutrition, not just hunger

The panel did seem to collectively agree that nutrition education should continue to be a top priority. The Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) was established nearly 50 years ago to help with nutrition and exercise-related behaviors for low-income families, particularly those with small children. SNAP to Health is another example of an effective program aimed at reducing food insecurity and promoting better nutrition for Americans. Additionally, many grocery store chains are now employing dietitians to help consumers make better choices, often at little to no cost.

How agriculture can help

We must continue to be proactive in our efforts to end hunger in this country. Not surprisingly, agriculture will continue to play a critical role. We are making headway with efforts such as the expansion of farmers markets and local food options, more widely available crop insurance and risk management tools, and the establishment of farm-to-school program grants for sourcing local foods. But the hard work can’t stop there. As our population continues to grow and weather patterns shift, we will need to continue to examine new resources, fresh ideas and innovative technologies, all aimed at making food insecurity a thing of the past.

How do you think the future of farming will impact issues like food insecurity? A panel of agribusiness experts recently discussed “Farming the Future” and what it may hold for not only agriculture, but the entire food supply chain.

Watch Farming the Future

The following is an edited transcript of Tom Martin’s interview with Dr. Karl Dawson, vice president and chief scientific officer at Alltech.

Tom:                            Dr. Karl Dawson is the vice president and chief scientific officer at Alltech and directs activities at the company’s bioscience centers around the world, including Alltech’s Center for Animal Nutrigenomics and Applied Animal Nutrition, where he is the co-director. We thank you for joining us.

Karl:                             Thank you.

Tom:                            The gene editing technology CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) allows researchers to quickly change the DNA of nearly any organism, including humans. Would it be fair to say that the implications are pretty enormous?

Karl:                             Yes. CRISPR is going to change the way we think about breeding processes, the way we think about changing the genetics of livestock, plants. Even microorganisms will be changed using this type of technology. In terms of the way it will move forward, it has ramifications for just about anything we think about in terms of the overall breeding process and the way we think about using genetics and the genetic material that’s in an animal, plant or other organism.

Tom:                            How does this differ from gene modification?

Karl:                             CRISPR could be considered a form of gene modification. It is different in that it is a very precise tool where we can go in and pick out very specific sites on this long DNA molecule and we can put things in or take things out of it. It is a form of editing or changing a gene structure. And it can be used to not only delete specific genes or pieces of DNA, it can also be used to add in pieces of DNA. So, we can make genetic modifications that way. The difference is that we don’t necessarily have to use a transgenic approach, which means we’re not taking material from other organisms and putting it into a new organism. We’re not changing or bringing two types of DNA together, if you’d like.

Tom:                            So, what are the implications for agriculture, for food?

Karl:                             For food, it is a very fast way of changing and, very specifically, changing specific genetic pieces or genetic information. If you take, for example, some of the things that are being done, one of the examples we look at is the polled cattle. Calves are very oftentimes dehorned when they’re young. Dairy cattle are dehorned. That is a process that is rather uncomfortable for the animal, and it’s something that is very difficult to do, but it is very important because it changes the safety of handling that livestock. There has been a CRISPR approach used to change that in livestock. With traditional breeding, you can cross a hornless animal — a polled animal — with a dairy cow and produce a hornless animal. But when you do that, the productivity of that dairy animal changes considerably because lots of other things change when you do that genetic cross.

                                    The idea of CRISPR is that we could actually go in and take the very specific gene that’s associated with that horn formation and eliminate that gene, or poll that gene. And when we do that, we are doing it almost immediately. The difference is, if I bred that animal or did that through traditional crossbreeding, it would probably take 25 years to produce a high-producing dairy cow with that polled characteristic. In this case, we can do it within calves immediately. No time changed. The next generation of animals will have that specific gene.

Tom:                            Wow. Pretty exciting, isn’t it?

Karl:                             That’s powerful stuff.

Tom:                            How does this technology impact the whole GMO debate?

Karl:                             It’s going to change the GMO debate a little bit. There’s still a lot of controversy in this area. Typically, if you look at CRISPR technology, there are a number of other of these. There’s one called TALEN (transcription activator-like effector nucleases) that’s out there and zinc-finger modifications or nucleases that do the same thing. But when you do this, you can go very specifically to a site in the DNA and make your changes. You’re not introducing any new DNA, so it is no longer a combination of DNA from two animals or transgenic. It is, in fact, just maintaining one type of DNA. As a result, it’s not necessarily a traceable activity. So, theoretically, you could actually do a CRISPR transformation of a particular gene and you would not know that it was any different than a natural mutation process. The only thing is that you directed that very specifically to a very specific gene and a very specific chromosome in that animal.

Tom:                            Getting genetically modified crops approved for use is complex and expensive, and most of the crops that have been modified are large commodity crops: corn, soybeans. Could the ease and low cost make genome editing a viable option for smaller specialty crops as well as animals?

Karl:                             I think it could. There’s going to still be an economic barrier there, I’m sure, whether you could do it economically, but it is a very rapid way. This type of technology is not that complex. In one presentation I heard the other day about this, they were talking about this being something some people could do in their basements one day. So, it’s not that complex to take over. So, yes, it may in the long run be a technique that is used to do that very rapidly in smaller crops, different organisms, even fungi and things like that that we use for food manufacturing.

Tom:                            The implications of the science are pretty profound. Even possibly a little scary. What about worries that the field’s breakneck pace is leaving little time to talk about ethical and safety concerns?

Karl:                             Just about every time you talk about CRISPR, that type of information comes up or that kind of discussion comes up. I guess it is a little bit scary if you think about some of the potentials of these things. One of the areas that we’ll talk a little bit about tomorrow in our gene editing presentation relative to mosquito control is that we have gene editing capability right now that will develop what’s called a “gene drive.” A gene drive will actually make it so a specific gene is always transmitted to the offspring. So, if you think about the possibilities there of transmitting a lethal gene to a mosquito, it’s possible to actually cause the extinction of that species. That is not a long time off, either. You could actually do that very easily and change the ecology of the system completely. It’s nice that we want to get rid of mosquitos and we don’t have to swat them anymore, but the activity here says, yes, you could do that, but what happens to the rest of the ecology if that happens?

Tom:                            Let’s take this opportunity to turn to your work on the Zika virus, if we could. If you can bring us up to date where you are.

Karl:                             This is more of an insect-control concept that we’re working on right now. Quite frankly, the Zika virus in our case is used as an example of what might be done in insect control. Our goal is really to look more at some of the other insects — for example, fly problems in the livestock industry. They face flies, and horn flies, and things like that. But the Zika virus gives us an opportunity to see what can happen with the mosquito population. It is probably more developed in terms of population control than any other insect population. Zika has allowed us to put a lot of emphasis on that today. So, there are a number of techniques that are being used to control mosquitos using both molecular tools such as gene editing as well as particular bacterial control systems that will help eliminate the carrier or vectors for these diseases.

Tom:                            And does that steer us away from chemicals?

Karl:                             Absolutely. One of our big limitations is the development of resistance to pesticides. There are mosquitos today that are extremely resistant. It takes five, 10, 15 times more insecticide to kill the same mosquito that was killed 20 to 30 years ago. So, it is changing very dramatically. The idea here would be to move away to more natural control mechanisms or more sophisticated and more efficient control mechanisms.

Tom:                            What ag-tech trends are you watching these days? Which ones really excite you?

Karl:                             One of the areas we talked about today was programmed nutrition and the idea of programming animals to get very specific responses, whether it’s an immune response or growth efficiency or better reproduction. One of the tools we have today is the use of appropriate nutrients at very specific times of an animal’s life. “Programming” young animals to be resistant to disease or “programming” animals to use a lot less minerals in their diets. Those are things that are very exciting because they’re changing the paradigm of what we used to think was common nutrition.

                                    We no longer just think about the diet composition or the nutrient composition of a diet. We start thinking about, “Well, how do we strategically use that nutrient component to change what the animal is doing throughout its life?” Those same concepts are being used to improve meat quality and product quality from livestock or even plant quality. We can use that nutritional approach to do those types of things. So, I think that’s one of the most exciting things that we’ve worked on recently.

                                    Technology is moving so fast in the agricultural field today. I’ve been at a loss to say I know what are going to be the best trends, but those things that have to do with nutrition are going to be very important to us in the future. I think gene editing, in some form or another, is going to be a very important area for us to think about in the future. It’s not going to be in the traditional ways we think about it. But if you think about the barriers, for example, right now, there is no genetically modified livestock that are being used in food production today; part of that is the fear of what recombinant DNA really looks like, but some of it is the lack of understanding of what some of those molecular changes are. There are cattle that have been developed in China recently. They’re totally resistant to tuberculosis. That was the result of a gene editing. The PRRS (Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome) virus in pigs, we have genetically modified animals or used a CRISPR-type gene editing technology to make pigs resistant to the PRRS virus. So, those things are happening. Whether those will be accepted or not, that’s outside of my area of expertise, but the technology is there, and it’s going to change. So, we have to get ready for that type of technology.

Tom:                            I have to believe you must spend a lot of your time being fascinated.

Karl:                             Yes. There’s lots to do. Yes.

Tom:                            What’s the most interesting part of your work?

Karl:                             I’ve been doing this for quite a few years now, and I think the neatest thing that I have to do is — not the science space — but it’s the ability of the younger people we’re producing in science today to come up with innovative ideas. I was involved with the Alltech Young Scientist program here. The brilliance of these young minds, it just always blows me away, and it’s something I like to be involved with. Maybe it’s not a real basic science, but it’s that educational process that leads to innovation that I get excited about.

Tom:                            Dr. Karl Dawson, vice president and chief scientific officer at Alltech. We thank you so much.

Karl:                             Thank you.

Dr. Karl Dawson spoke at ONE: The Alltech Ideas Conference (ONE17). To hear more talks from the conference, sign up for the Alltech Idea Lab.

Silage samples from across the U.S., Canada and Europe have shown high levels of mycotoxins, according to the Alltech 2017 Harvest Analysis. The high reading comes on the heels of similar findings in 2016.

As the name implies, mycotoxins are toxic. They can negatively affect the health of animals if contaminated feedstuffs are ingested. The symptoms can be many and varied, but the outcome in all cases will be reduced performance and lost profits.

Produced by certain molds, more than 500 mycotoxins have been discovered to date. Each affects the animal or human in a certain way. Some mycotoxins are carcinogenic, neurotoxic and immunosuppressive.

Climate change and feed storage practices are starting to influence the range of molds occurring in farm feedstocks. And with traditional tilling and crop rotation practices diminishing in many developed countries, mold contamination is persisting year-on-year, making the multiple mycotoxin threat very real.

U.S. sampling shows high mycotoxin count

Samples from American farms submitted to the Alltech 37+^® mycotoxin analytical services laboratory in Kentucky between Sept. 1 and Nov. 1, 2017, show that grains contained mixtures of mycotoxins, including deoxynivalenol (DON), fusaric acid and fumonisin.

Fumonisin is commonly found in corn at levels of 2 parts per million (ppm) or less, but this year, testing has confirmed levels well above 30 ppm, and some above 100 ppm.

Forages such as corn silage, barlage and haylage samples also contained multiple mycotoxins in 2017, including DON, fusaric acid, type A trichothecenes (T-2) and fumonisin.

“It’s particularly high right now,” said Dr. Max Hawkins, nutritionist with the Alltech^® Mycotoxin Management team. “In the Wisconsin-Minnesota area, we’re about seven-tenths of a mycotoxin-per-sample higher than a year ago. More of the samples we’re seeing have the mycotoxins in them, and the major toxins that are present are four to five times higher than they were a year ago.”

The Canadian findings are much the same

Samples submitted for the Alltech 2017 Canadian Harvest Analysis indicated high levels of DON and zearalenone (ZEA) in grain and forage.

Submitted between Sept. 1 and Oct. 15, 2017, the samples show that grains contained mixtures of mycotoxins, including DON and ZEA. Forages such as corn silage, barlage and haylage samples also contained multiple mycotoxins in 2017, particularly from mycotoxins produced by Fusarium species of molds, such as DON, ZEA and T-2/HT-2 toxins.

Mycotoxin risk levels high in Europe, as well

The Alltech 37+ lab in Dunboyne, Ireland, analyzed samples of wheat, barley, corn, corn silage and grass silage submitted from across Europe. The grain crops are showing risk levels of trichothecenes from DON and T-2 to swine. Silages are showing risk levels of not only DON and T-2, but also high levels of Penicillium and, to a lesser degree, aflatoxin, according to Alltech’s 2017 European Summer Harvest Analysis.

What’s causing this?

Weather conditions can be a major influence.

“Some areas have seen record levels of rain, some areas are experiencing record drought conditions,” Dr. Alexandra Weaver, Alltech Mycotoxin Management technical specialist, said of the European findings. “That’s going to play a big role in the level of mycotoxins you see as well as what types of mycotoxins.”

Weather factors are also suspected in the United States.

“A lot of areas have gone through a cool, wet summer, and cool, wet weather is the preferred environment for Fusarium mold,” said Hawkins. “Fusarium is the mold that produces DON, T-2, ZEA and fusaric acid. Those are the mycotoxins that can become very problematic, and they already appear to be very problematic this year in the corn silage crop.”

Higher levels of mycotoxins appear to be a lingering legacy of the havoc Hurricane Harvey delivered to the Texas Gulf Coast in mid-August.

“In Texas, we have really dramatically high levels of fumonisin,” said Hawkins. “You can track it northward from where that rainfall came up from the Gulf and across the Texas panhandle into Kansas and Nebraska. The levels of fumonisin will begin to decrease, but they’re still much higher than we would typically see in those areas.”

Weather’s important, but there are other factors

While weather is linked to the higher mycotoxin rates of recent years, Weaver suggested that other important factors are contributing to the scope of the findings, including better detection methods as well as increased awareness among farmers.

“We have better ability to test for these toxins now; different agronomic practices play a role — the idea of ‘no-till’ versus ‘till’ has an influence; the use of fungicides may have an influence,” she said. “So there are things that play into this whole topic rather than just the weather, but certainly weather events with excess moisture are going to have a big impact.”

Watching for co-occurrence of mycotoxins

The Alltech 37+ analysis examines over 40 individual mycotoxins in minute levels: parts per billion. The laboratories are especially vigilant for samples containing more than one type of mycotoxin.

“We have a fairly thorough understanding of the additive effects of mycotoxins,” said Hawkins. “But many mycotoxins can have synergistic effects for DON and for fusaric acid. When you have those two together in the same feed or the same ingredient, one plus one does not necessarily equal two. One plus one may equal three, four or five in terms of magnified or synergistic effects.”

Mycotoxins present researchers with challenging paradoxes. Feeding multiple mycotoxins at low levels can be as detrimental or worse than feeding one mycotoxin at a high level, explained Hawkins. One mold species may produce many different mycotoxins, and several species may produce the same mycotoxin.

Hawkins wants people to be aware of multiple mycotoxins and the risk that they present.

“As you make more complex feeds with more ingredients, you’re bringing more and different combinations of mycotoxins into one place, where the animal will have the opportunity to consume it, so the opportunity for risk goes up,” he said.

Helping farmers gain the advantage

The Alltech^® RAPIREAD^TM  tool delivers an integrated system of tools and technologies to the farm to enable quick on-site analysis.

“It’s a handheld lateral-flow device,” explained Hawkins. “We can take samples on-farm for feed ingredients — corn, grain, distillers grains, corn silage — and we don’t check for a broad array of toxins, we’re looking for one, two or three toxins that could be on a very problematic level.

“So, for example, if we’re in Texas, we might be checking corn grain for high fumonisin levels; if we’re in Wisconsin, we might be checking corn silage for high DON or high T-2 levels,” he continued. “And we can give them that answer on the spot within 10 to 20 minutes.”

Based on the information produced by RAPIREAD, the Alltech team can put together a basic management program to help the farmer mitigate the risk of animals going through a period of stress or suffering.

“When the analysis comes back showing extremely high levels of mycotoxins in corn silage — to the point that they didn’t think that they would be able to feed that corn silage — the Alltech team can show them how they can continue to feed the silage they’ve invested in,” said Hawkins. “Alltech puts together a program, monitoring and tweaking as they go along. We can show them that, if they manage it properly in the right program setting, they can still use a feed that has mycotoxins present.”

Alltech^® MIKO, a program based on HACCP principles (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points), identifies the mycotoxin risks within a farm or feed mill and creates a plan to minimize the risks to the animal and protect the profitability of operations.

Alltech’s Mycosorb A+^® reduces the threat of mycotoxins in animal feed. The technology reduces mycotoxin absorption within the animal, negating the damaging effects of mycotoxins on its health.

“Farmers should carefully consider if and how feed with mycotoxins is used,” cautioned Weaver. “Even minimal changes in feed quality can have a big impact on an animal’s production over time.”

Effective mycotoxin management is about seeing the whole challenge, from the farm to feed mill and from risk assessment to feed management.

The Alltech Mycotoxin Management team has produced a number of species-specific fact sheets, which explain the impact of mycotoxins.

For more information about mycotoxins and to view a collection of case studies, visit knowmycotoxins.com.