11 Metal Amino Acid Chelates/complexes with Emphasis on Molecule Absorption and Efficacy Differences in Swine

Abstract

Abstract The objective of this presentation will be to discuss differences in the molecular structures between various organic trace minerals (OTM) and inorganic trace minerals (ITM) and discuss how these properties impact stability, absorption, bioavailability and retention. The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) lists several different categories of OTM including chelates, complexes and proteinates. Typical ligands include organic acids, amino acids, peptides and polysaccharides. It is widely known that bioavailability of ITM is low, primarily due to the presence of antagonisms such as phytate and/or fiber or excesses of other minerals. For this reason, inclusions of trace minerals (e.g. Zn, Cu, Mn, Fe) are often added in commercial livestock diets at 2–3-fold higher concentrations than recommended by NRC. Feeding highly bioavailable trace minerals is important. These minerals are required components of thousands of the proteins, enzymes and transcription factors that support a wide variety of biochemical processes in the cells and tissues of animals. These functions include gene regulation, cell growth and division, immune development and function, tissue development and integrity, reproduction and oxidative stress management. Low bioavailability of these trace minerals can reduce animal performance, immune function, reproductive performance and increase lameness. Numerous in vitro and in vivo methodologies have been used to compare bioavailability and demonstrate higher stability, tissue retention and digestibility of OTM vs ITM. Sow longevity is a key factor in commercial swine herd profitability. Reproductive problems and lameness are the most common reasons for premature sow culling from breeding herds. Compared to ITM, OTM reduced gilt and sow mortality 9–17% (P < 0.10), culling rate 20–35% (P < 0.01) and increased sow retention (through parity 3) 5–10%; (P < 0.01). Greater bioavailability translates to biological benefits to the producer, however, our findings demonstrate that not all OTM perform better than ITM.