Russian Federation
Modern animal husbandry faces the need to improve feeding efficiency to ensure high animal productivity and production profitability. One of the key tools for solving this problem is enzyme preparations, in particular feed proteases, which improve protein digestibility, reduce the impact of anti-nutritional factors, and optimize nutrient utilization. Despite significant advances in genetic engineering and fermentation technologies, problems remain regarding the stability of proteases in feed, their effectiveness under various physiological conditions of animals, and the economic feasibility of their use. This paper analyzes modern technologies for the production and use of feed proteases, examines their mechanisms of action, classification, and effect on animal digestion. Particular attention is paid to the role of proteases in the diets of young animals experiencing stress during the transition from milk to compound feed, as well as in conditions where alternative protein sources such as rapeseed meal, sunflower, and lupine are used. It is shown that proteases not only increase the availability of amino acids, but also contribute to a reduction in nitrogen excretion, improvement of the intestinal microbiome, and a decrease in environmental impact. Commercial preparations based on bacterial (Bacillus subtilis, B. licheniformis) and fungal (Aspergillus niger, Trichoderma longibrachiatum) strains, their thermostability, activity in various parts of the gastrointestinal tract, and economic efficiency are considered. Of particular interest are complex solutions that combine proteases with other enzymes (phytases, amylases) and probiotic components. The final part of the work is devoted to the prospects for the development of feed proteases, including the standardization of methods for assessing their activity, the development of multifunctional additives, and adaptation to regional feed conditions. The use of proteases not only increases animal productivity by 5–15%, but also reduces dependence on expensive protein components, making them an indispensable tool in modern animal husbandry.
feed proteases, enzyme preparations, protein digestibility, anti-nutritional factors, animal husbandry, pig farming, poultry farming, exogenous enzymes, thermal stability, alternative protein feeds, nitrogen excretion, subtilisin, Bacillus subtilis, phytases, mycotoxins, compound feeds
1. Bedford M.R., Schulze H. Exogenous enzymes for pigs and poultry. Nutrition Research Reviews. 1998. Vol. 11(1). P. 91–114.
2. Liu S.Y., Selle P.H., Cowieson A.J. Influence of exogenous xylanase supplementation on apparent metabolisable energy and amino acid digestibility in wheat for broiler chickens. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2013. Vol. 183(3–4). P. 226–237.
3. Bedford M.R. Exogenous enzymes in monogastric nutrition – their current value and future benefits. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2000. Vol. 86(1–2). P. 1–13.
4. Cowieson A.J. Factors that affect the nutritional value of maize for broilers. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2011. Vol. 163(2–4). P. 109–117.
5. Egorova A.A. Sovremennye fermentnye preparaty v kormlenii sel'skohozyaystvennyh zhivotnyh. – M. : Rosinformagroteh, 2018. 256 s.
6. Sidorenko O.D. Biotehnologicheskie aspekty proizvodstva kormovyh fermentov // Sel'skohozyaystvennaya biologiya. 2020. T. 55(3). S. 423–435.
7. Wang J.P., Lee J.H., Yoo J.S., Cho J.H., Kim H.J., Kim I.H. Effects of dietary protease supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and blood profiles in weaning pigs. Livestock Science. 2022. Vol. 255. 104800.
8. Adeola O., Cowieson A.J. Board-invited review: Opportunities and challenges in using exogenous enzymes to improve non-ruminant animal production. Journal of Animal Science. 2011. Vol. 89(10). P. 3189–3218.
9. Nelson D.L., Cox M.M. Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry. 8th ed. New York: W.H. Freeman, 2020. 1328 p.
10. Dersjant-Li Y., Awati A., Schulze H., Partridge G. Phytase in non-ruminant animal nutrition: a critical review on phytase activities in the gastrointestinal tract and influencing factors. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 2015. Vol. 95(5). P. 878–896.
11. Zuo J., Ling B., Long L., Li T., Lahaye L., Yang C., Feng D. Effect of dietary supplementation with protease on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, intestinal morphology, digestive enzymes and gene expression of weaned piglets. Animal Nutrition. 2015. Vol. 1(4). P. 276–282.
12. Kiarie E., Romero L.F., Nyachoti C.M. The role of added feed enzymes in promoting gut health in swine and poultry. Nutrition Research Reviews. 2013. Vol. 26(1). P. 71–88.
13. Woyengo T.A., Nyachoti C.M. Review: Anti-nutritional effects of phytic acid in diets for pigs and poultry – current knowledge and directions for future research. Canadian Journal of Animal Science. 2013. Vol. 93(1). P. 9–21.
14. Bedford M.R., Partridge G.G. Enzymes in farm animal nutrition. 2nd ed. Wallingford: CABI, 2010. 319 p.
15. Rawlings N.D., Barrett A.J., Bateman A. MEROPS: the database of proteolytic enzymes, their substrates and inhibitors. Nucleic Acids Research. 2018. Vol. 46(D1). P. D624–D632.
16. Ravindran V. Feed enzymes: The science, practice, and metabolic realities. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 2013. Vol. 22(3). P. 628–636.
17. Anson M.L. The estimation of pepsin, trypsin, papain, and cathepsin with hemoglobin. Journal of General Physiology. 1937. Vol. 20(4). P. 565–574.
18. Ward O.P. Proteases. Comprehensive Biotechnology. 2011. Vol. 3. P. 571–582.
19. Gupta R., Beg Q.K., Lorenz P. Bacterial alkaline proteases: molecular approaches and industrial applications. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2002. Vol. 59(1). P. 15–32.
20. Angel C.R., Saylor W., Vieira S.L., Ward N. Effects of a monocomponent protease on performance and protein utilization in 7- to 22-day-old broiler chickens. Poultry Science. 2011. Vol. 90(10). P. 2281–2286.
21. Cowieson A.J., Ravindran V. Effect of phytic acid and microbial phytase on the flow and amino acid composition of endogenous protein at the terminal ileum of broiler chickens. British Poultry Science. 2007. Vol. 48(6). P. 743–748.
22. Ghazi S., Rooke J.A., Galbraith H. Improvement of the nutritive value of soybean meal by protease and α-galactosidase treatment in broiler cockerels and broiler chicks. British Poultry Science. 2003. Vol. 44(3). P. 410–418.
23. Liener I.E. Implications of antinutritional components in soybean foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 1994. Vol. 34(1). P. 31–67.
24. Pluske J.R., Kim J.C., Hansen C.F., Mullan B.P., Payne H.G., Hampson D.J., Callesen J., Wilson R.H., Pluske J.M., Cottrell J.J., Pethick D.W. Piglet growth before and after weaning in relation to a qualitative estimate of solid (creep) feed intake during lactation: A pilot study. Archives of Animal Nutrition. 2018. Vol. 72(1). P. 55–66.
25. Noy Y., Sklan D. Digestion and absorption in the young chick. Poultry Science. 1995. Vol. 74(2). P. 366–373.
26. Uni Z., Noy Y., Sklan D. Posthatch development of small intestinal function in the poult. Poultry Science. 1999. Vol. 78(2). P. 215–222.
27. Krishnan H.B., Kim W.S., Jang S., Kerley M.S. All three subunits of soybean β-conglycinin are potential food allergens. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2009. Vol. 57(3). P. 938–943.
28. Tavano O.L. Protein hydrolysis using proteases: An important tool for food biotechnology. Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic. 2013. Vol. 90. P. 1–11.
29. Zhou J., Liu G., Zhao Y., Zhang R., Tang X., Li J., Wang J. An alkaline protease from Bacillus pumilus CAS 9: Characterization and application in antioxidant and meat tenderization. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2021. Vol. 176. P. 37–44.
30. Huwig A., Freimund S., Käppeli O., Dutler H. Mycotoxin detoxication of animal feed by different adsorbents. Toxicology Letters. 2001. Vol. 122(2). P. 179–188.
31. Vieille C., Zeikus G.J. Hyperthermophilic enzymes: sources, uses, and molecular mechanisms for thermostability. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 2001. Vol. 65(1). P. 1–43.
32. Hedstrom L. Serine protease mechanism and specificity. Chemical Reviews. 2002. Vol. 102(12). P. 4501–4524.
33. Laskowski M. Jr., Kato I. Protein inhibitors of proteinases. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 1980. Vol. 49. P. 593–626.
34. Selle P.H., Cowieson A.J., Ravindran V. Consequences of calcium interactions with phytate and phytase for poultry and pigs. Livestock Science. 2009. Vol. 124(1–3). P. 126–141.
35. Le P.D., Aarnink A.J.A., Ogink N.W.M., Becker P.M., Verstegen M.W.A. Odour from animal production facilities: its relationship to diet. Nutrition Research Reviews. 2005. Vol. 18(1). P. 3–30.
36. Danisco Animal Nutrition. Axtra® PRO enzyme product brochure. 2021. 12 p.
37. Kemin Industries. KEMZYME® protease product specifications. 2022. 8 p.
38. DSM Nutritional Products. Ronozyme® ProAct technical manual. 2020. 15 p.
39. Novus International. CIBENZA® DP100 product datasheet. 2021. 6 p.
40. Jefo Nutrition Inc. EnzyNat® Grow technical sheet. 2022. 5 p.
41. Vland Biotech Group. Megapro® enzyme series product catalog. 2021. 20 p.
42. IFF Health & Biosciences. Synergen™ AVI 101 TRT product guide. 2022. 10 p.
43. Challenge Group. Proenzyme Mix product information. 2021. 7 p.
44. Guangdong VTR Bio-Tech. Idozyme X-3001 technical data. 2022. 5 p.
45. Mianyang Habio Bioengineering. Habio Protease 100 specifications. 2021. 4 p.
46. Agroferment. Agroprot: tehnicheskoe opisanie. 2022. 8 s.
47. NOVABIOTIC. Protomaks: instrukciya po primeneniyu. 2021. 6 s.
48. Sibbiofarm. Protosubtilin: tehnicheskie harakteristiki. 2022. 5 s.
49. Cowieson A.J., Roos F.F. Toward optimal value creation through the application of exogenous mono-component protease in the diets of non-ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2016. Vol. 221. P. 331–340.
50. O'Keefe S.F. Handbook of Regulators and Functional Foods for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2017. 568 p.
51. Barrett A.J., Rawlings N.D. Evolutionary lines of cysteine peptidases. Biological Chemistry. 2001. Vol. 382(5). P. 727–733.
52. Dersjant-Li Y., Peisker M., Awati A., van der Aar P. Effects of a mono-component protease on performance and protein utilization in 7- to 14-day-old broiler chickens. Poultry Science. 2021. Vol. 100(2). P. 1009–1018.
53. Angel C.R., Tamim N.M., Applegate T.J., Dhandu A.S., Ellestad L.E. Phytic acid chemistry: influence on phytin-phosphorus availability and phytase efficacy. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 2002. Vol. 11(4). P. 471–480.
54. Moughan P.J., Rutherfurd S.M. Gut luminal endogenous protein: implications for the determination of ileal amino acid digestibility in humans. British Journal of Nutrition. 2012. Vol. 108(S2). P. S258–S263.
55. Odetallah N.H., Wang J.J., Garlich J.D., Shih J.C.H. Versazyme supplementation of broiler diets improves market growth performance. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 2003. Vol. 12(2). P. 229–234.
56. Cowieson A.J., Singh D.N., Adeola O. Prediction of ingredient quality and the effect of a combination of xylanase, amylase, protease and phytase in the diets of broiler chicks. 1. Growth performance and digestible nutrient intake. British Poultry Science. 2006. Vol. 47(4). P. 477–489.
57. Zuidhof M.J., Schneider B.L., Carney V.L., Korver D.R., Robinson F.E. Growth, efficiency, and yield of commercial broilers from 1957, 1978, and 2005. Poultry Science. 2014. Vol. 93(12). P. 2970–2982.
58. Campbell J.M., Crenshaw J.D., Polo J. The biological stress of early weaned piglets. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology. 2013. Vol. 4(1). P. 19.
59. Cowieson A.J., Hruby M., Pierson E.E.M. Evolving enzyme technology: impact on commercial poultry nutrition. Nutrition Research Reviews. 2006. Vol. 19(1). P. 90–103.
60. Kocher A., Choct M., Porter M.D., Broz J. Effects of feed enzymes on nutritive value of soybean meal fed to broilers. British Poultry Science. 2002. Vol. 43(1). P. 54–63.
61. Olukosi O.A., Cowieson A.J., Adeola O. Energy and amino acid utilization in expeller-extracted canola meal fed to growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 2010. Vol. 88(4). P. 1433–1441.
62. Selle P.H., Ravindran V., Bryden W.L., Scott T. Influence of dietary phytate and exogenous phytase on amino acid digestibility in poultry: a review. Journal of Poultry Science. 2006. Vol. 43(2). P. 89–103.
