CFS / BHE Newsletter December 2009 Inside This Issue A Look Back at 1 2009 Detrimental Effects 2 A Look Back at 2009 of IBD Clinton Monchuk Director’s Corner 4 As we near the end of 2009 one cannot help but predict what 2010 produc- Uses for Chicken 4 By Products tion allocations will bring to chicken farmers in Saskatchewan. Price 5 2009 was riddled with significant negative market forces. The year was pep- pered with words of recession, market failures, decreased consumer spend- Allocation 5 ing, and the Canadian chicken industry’s growing storage stocks. In an effort to control the chicken market significant reductions in allocation were re- Recipe 6 quired. These reductions lead to lower than expected allocations, up to and including A95. Ads 7 Looking forward into 2010 a different story is starting to shape. More gov- Contact Us 8 ernments and financial institutions have indicated that the worst is over for the recession. Markets are starting to climb again as consumers confidence grows. Storage stocks are remaining stable, while wholesale prices for Office Hours chicken are at the highest level, ever. With population growth expected at The board office will be just over 1% for 2010 and a steady to closed on: slight increase in consumption, Sas- December 24, 2009 katchewan chicken farmers can expect (Open 8am ‘til Noon) modest increases in their allocation for December 25, 2009 2010. December 28, 2009 From the entire staff at the Chicken January 1, 2010 Farmers of Saskatchewan have a safe and merry Christmas this holiday sea- For the Christmas Holidays son! Detrimental Effects of Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD) on Broiler Production Susantha Gomis1, Tara Zachar1, Tennille Knezacek2 and Bob Goodhope1 1 Dept. of Veterinary Pathology, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4 2 Dept. of Animal and Poultry Science, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5A8 INTRODUCTION Infectious bursal disease (IBD) is an acute, highly contagious disease of 3 to 6 week-old chickens caused by infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV). IBDV was first recognized near the town of Gumboro, Delaware, and thus IBD is also known as Gumboro disease. IBD is one of the most important avian-acquired immunosuppressive diseases and has lead to economic losses in the poultry industry worldwide. The most severe consequence of IBDV infection is the functional loss of the bursa of Fabricius (BF) which is required for effective immune response in birds. There are two IBDV serotypes, but only serotype 1 viruses have been associated with clinical problems while serotype 2 vi- ruses are considered non-pathogenic. Depending on their apparent virulence (pathotype), field IBDVs are often referred to as classic, variant and very virulent (vv). Infections with pathogenic IBDVs were successfully controlled with vaccines for many years. However, subtypes of serotype 1 IBDV emerged that could not be controlled by immunization with vaccines prepared from classic IBDV strains. These “variant” IBDVs escape the immunity elicited by classic vaccines due to a gene mutation. In broilers from hyper-immunized breeders, mortality associated with “classic” or “variant” virus challenge is rare. While vvIBDVs can cause high mortality in susceptible birds and are present in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America and the USA, they have not been detected in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Because the IBD virus is resistant to many disinfectants and environmental conditions, once a poultry house becomes contaminated, the disease is likely to recur in subsequent flocks. Vaccination with an attenuated virus is used worldwide to control IBD in broilers. One of the major problems with attenuated IBD vaccines is their sensitivity to maternally derived antibodies (MDA) which are always present at the time of vaccination. One way to approach this issue is the use of less attenuated, “intermediate” vaccines, but these vaccines can themselves cause a degree of vaccine-induced lesions in the BF. An effective IBD prevention and control program must involve an effec- tive broiler breeder parent vaccination program, an effective barn cleaning and disinfection program, and in many areas, a broiler vaccination program. Immunization of breeders is an important part of the IBD control program. Antibodies produced by the hen are passed through the egg to the broiler chick. These maternal antibodies, if present in adequate levels, protect young chicks against subclinical IBD. Effective control of IBD in commercial broilers requires that field virus exposure be re- duced by proper clean-up and disinfection between flocks and that traffic (people, equipment and vehicles) onto the farm be controlled. The development and enforcement of a comprehensive biosecurity program is the most important factor in limit- ing losses due to IBD. Control of IBD has been complicated by the recognition of “variant” strains of the IBD virus in some broiler barns in Canada. “Variant” viruses induce damage in the BF of chickens, even in chicks from well vaccinated hens. “Variant” strains do not cause obvious clinical disease, but induce severe immunosuppression. The degree of immunosuppression varies depending on the virulence of the virus strain and when the infection occurs. Immunosuppression is greater the closer the infection occurs to hatch and because the birds are a young age, the immunosuppression is permanent. The immunosuppression re- sulting from an IBDV infection is the underlying cause of mortality, culling losses, poor feed conversion, high processing con- demnations and vaccination failures. Hence, IBD is an economically important disease problem throughout the world. RESEARCH PROJECT A research project funded by the Saskatchewan Chicken Industry Development Fund (SCIDF) in 2006-2008 identified “variant” IBD strains in 110 of 201 broiler flocks in 28 of 67 premises in Saskatchewan. Furthermore, it has been reported that the majority of viruses circulating in Canada are “variant” IBDVs. IBDV vaccines used in Canada are based on the US IBDV strains and their effectiveness against Canadian IBDV field strains has not been investigated. Since the virulence of these “variant” IBD viruses in broilers in Canada is not known, it is essential to study the pathogenesis of “variant” IBD strains in order to identify proper control measures. Studying variant IBD pathogenesis is also important to the development of proper vaccination programs in broiler breeder parents and broilers against “variant” IBD strains of Canada. This goal could be reached, preferably through carefully designed challenge studies using “variant” IBD isolates from Canada while studying effects of vaccination programs of broilers breeders and broilers. This will allow us to study and implement proper control measures against the full spectrum of viruses circulating in the field. This research program is funded by the Saskatchewan Chicken Industry Development Fund (SCIDF) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). Page 2 Detrimental Effects of Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD) on Broiler Production Susantha Gomis1, Tara Zachar1, Tennille Knezacek2 and Bob Goodhope1 PRELIMINARY RESULTS The data from broiler production cycle A91 (May-June 2009 processing) are summarized. Preliminary data were collected from 29 poultry producers (premises or farms) and the remaining producer data will be collected and analyzed by December 2010. Several production parameters are summarized in the table below. PRODUCTION PARAMETER AVERAGE Range Square footage per premise (ft2) 42,000 12,640 - 96,000 Flock size (birds) 67,000 19,000 - 131,000 2 Stocking density (birds/ft ) 0.63 0.47 - 0.80 Market weight (kg) 2.00 1.60 - 2.58 Days to market 36 33 - 41 Daily gain (g/day) 55 45 - 64 Feed conversion ration (FCR) 1.80 1.59 - 2.04 Live market weight/floor area (kg/m2) 32.66 24.49 - 49.28 In addition to these data, 69% of premises had single story barns, 14% had two story barns, and the remaining 17% had a combination of single or double story barns. While the majority of farms (52%) had concrete floors, 31% had soil (clay) floors, and the remaining 17% were a combination of concrete/wood/soil floors. Vaccinations or medications administered at the hatchery included antibiotic injections (28%), Marek’s vaccination (10%), infectious bronchitis vaccination (41%), and infectious bursal disease vaccination (14%). The broiler chickens from 35% of farms were fed pelleted feed, while 20% of birds were mash-fed, and the remaining 45% of birds were provided pelleted feed mixed with whole wheat. Sixty-four percent of premises had more than 10 days “downtime” (range = 0 – 21 days), while 38% of premises had an IBD infection. The premises without IBD infection had a lower FCR (1.78) and more meat pro- duction (33.32 kg/m2) than the premises with IBD infection (FCR = 1.83, meat production = 31.57 kg/ m2). Livability or percentage of birds marketed at processing was higher in premises with no IBD infections (94.34%) as compared to premises with IBD infections (92.82%). In summary, FCR was lower on farms with no IBD infection, concrete floors, more than 9 days of downtime and pelleted feed. Livability was highest in farms with no IBD infections, and birds fed a mash diet. Broiler production (Kg/m2) was highest for farms with new barns, no IBD, and birds fed pelleted feed with added whole wheat. The preliminary data of this study confirms the detrimental effects of IBD infection on broiler production. We will update you with results from all Saskatchewan farms in spring 2010. Page 3 CFS Director’s Corner Tim Keet As one of the newest members of the CFS board I was asked to pre- sent myself. For those of you that don’t know me I’m devoted to the longevity of an industry that makes fiscal and moral sense towards a quality food-safe product. My position is that if it’s not good enough for me to eat then it’s not going to market. People need to know that we stand by our products without hesitation. Along with my wife Cathy we’ve raised 5 wonderful children. I’ve been a member of the Asquith Drama Club for the past 15 years, where I try not to take life so seriously. My goals on the board are to understand and improve the industry. I have enjoyed my time with the Board to this point as they challenge me to bring forth the needs of producers while maintaining the indus- tries direction. Non- Non-Food Uses for Chicken By Products Shelly Popowich We all know that feathers make comfortable quilts and pillows, but what other uses do they have day-to-day? Feathers, made up of keratins (fibrous structural proteins) have normally been discarded as waste at processing. But more research into the uses of feathers indicates there are economical uses for them after all. The properties of feathers are similar to those of polyethylene and polypropylene – common types of plastic. The advantages of feathers are they have greater strength than conventional plastic while being biodegradable and weigh less. With the increase in chicken production, there is an increase in waste (~6% of a bird is feather) with an estimated 5 billion pounds of feathers that would otherwise go to waste. Chicken feather fibre is high in microcrystallines and is very durable meaning it is resistant to mechanical and heat stress. It adds surface area to filters, insulation and can decrease the density of otherwise heavy particle board. Before the feather fibres can be used, they are cleaned and separated into chopped fibres and quill pieces. The chopped fibres are then used in plastics, paper pulp and textiles. A polymer film can be made from the feather fibres, which is rolled into thin sheets for use as biodegradable candy wrappers or 6 pack can holders. The fibres can be even used as pet food bowls, car dashboards, filters, paper, insulation, door panels etc. But even with all of these uses, there is still one more by product – quills. For every pound of feather fibres produced, there is 1 pound of quills that remain. Fortunately, quills are high in protein and can have some inter- esting uses themselves such as protein for shampoos, conditioners, lotions, make-up, lipstick and even dietary supplements (Journal of Applied Poultry Research). Aside from using feather fibre as paper or plastic, scientists are becoming more and more creative with uses for chicken feathers. Normally, air filters in homes are made from wood pulp, screening particles with sizes between 10 and 20 microns. Filters made from chicken feather fibres can screen particle sizes of around 5 microns, de- creasing more amounts of airborne spores, dust and dander. Lastly, the significance of chicken feather fibre uses may change the ways of the future, becoming a possible solu- tion to fossil fuel pollution in the environment. When feather fibres are carefully heated at a specific temperature for a specific amount of time, hollow tubes will form between them. These hollow tubes strengthen the fibres structure and make it more porous – this increases its surface area and increases its capability to store gas. The carbon rich fibres attract high quantities of hydrogen. Hydrogen, being a clean and abundant source of energy can one day replace fossil fuel use in vehicles. However, hydrogen is difficult and expensive to store and handle (Science Daily). Maybe the chicken feather fibres will change the future of automobiles – able to store large quan- tities of hydrogen and emitting water into the atmosphere rather than detrimental pollutants. Page 4 Allocation & Price Saskatchewan Cycle: A95 December 6, 2009 to January 30, 2010 Allocation Item Price Quota A: 95 % Hatching Egg: $ 0.4660 Auction Quota B: 95 % Day Old Chick: $ 0.64 Follow-up Quota B: 70.5 % Live Chicken: $1.4510 Working For You Board Members Positions —2009 Office Staff Positions Diane Pastoor CFS Chair Clinton Monchuk Chief Executive Officer Market Committee 306-242-3270 Terry Knippel CFS Vice-Chair Colleen Kohlruss Executive Assistant Market Committee 306-775-1583 Promotions Canadian Western Agribition Mike Pickard CFC Director Gale Kellington Admin and Accounting Production Committee 306-242-3240 SCIIF/SCIDF Shelly Popowich Poultry Analyst Rudy Martinka CFC Alternate Director 306-242-3273 OFFSAP/CHEQ Production Committee Canadian Broiler Commit- tee Aaron Neufeld Auditor 306-546-2207 OFFSAP/CHEQ Tim Keet CFS Director Janice Sopatyk Auditor Poultry Council 306-376-4422 OFFSAP/CHEQ Market Committee Production Committee Lorraine Forster Auditor 306-682-4905 OFFSAP/CHEQ Page 5 Chicken Tartlets with Cranberry Salsa Serves: 24 tartlets Ingredients: Cranberry Salsa: 1 lb 450 g fresh or frozen cranberries 125 mL ground chicken ¼ cup sugar 50 mL ¼ cup 50 mL minced onion 2 2 green onions, sliced 1 tsp 5 mL thyme ¼ cup fresh cilantro 50 mL ½ tsp 2.5 mL (coriander) salt 1 1 2 tsp fresh gingerroot, 10 mL egg, beaten chopped 1 /3 cup 75 mL light sour cream 1 1 lime, zest and juice frozen unsweet- Jalapeño pepper, 24 24 1 1 ened mini tart seeded and sliced shells Preparation: Preparation: 1. In a skillet combine 1. Combine all ingredients in a ground chicken, onion, food processor and pulse thyme and s a l t . Stir-fry on/off until the mixture is until the g r o u n d chopped (not pureed). chicken is no longer p i n k . Remove from the heat 2. Cover and chill for at least and cool slightly. two hours to allow the fla- vours to blend. Cranberry 2. Mix egg and sour cream. Salsa will keep in the fridge Stir into meat mixture. for about a week. 3. Fill tart shells and bake at 400°F (200°C) for 12-15 minutes until crust is golden brown. Serve w a r m topped with Cranberry Salsa. For more recipes visit: www.chicken.ca Page 6 Come Visit Us! 15-2220 Northridge Drive Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7L 6X8 Phone: 306-242-3611 Toll Free: 1-888-33CLUCK Fax: 306-242-3286 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org www.saskatchewanchicken.ca If you have any comments or questions regarding the CFS/BHE newsletter, would like to receive the newsletter via email or would like to advertise in upcoming issues, please contact Shelly at the CFS/BHE board office 306-242-3273 or email Shelly@SaskatchewanChicken.ca.