National feed inspection program: results for Program-15B (April 1, 1990 – March 31, 2018) - a monitoring program for mycotoxins in livestock feeds

This page is part of the Guidance Document Repository (GDR).

Looking for related documents?
Search for related documents in the Guidance Document Repository

Background

Program-15B is part of the National Feed Inspection Program at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), implemented for the purposes of monitoring for mycotoxins in all feeds and feed ingredients. Data are available from domestic and imported feed samples randomly collected by the CFIA from feed mills, farms, and retail establishments, over a period of 28 years from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018.

Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by a variety of moulds that grow on agricultural commodities specifically cereal crops. Thus, mycotoxins may occur in both food and animal feeds. There are nearly 400 characterized mycotoxins, some of which are known to cause serious health problems in humans and animals when ingested even at very low levels (parts per billion to parts per million). Their physiological effects on livestock are diverse and include feed refusal, vomiting, impaired reproductive function, reduced fertility, lung disease, cancer, and death. Mycotoxins present in feed could also be a food safety concern as some mycotoxins can be transferred to humans through foods of animal origin (meat, milk and eggs). For more information on the mycotoxins and action levels that were used in this report, consult the CFIA's Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed.

In this monitoring program, samples are analyzed for the presence of a panel of 12 different mycotoxins that are of concern. These include nivalenol (NIV), deoxynivalenol (DON), 3-acetyldeoxynivalenol (TAD, or 3-ADON), 15-acetyldeoxynivalenol (FAD, or 15-ADON), neosolaniol (NEOS), diacetoxyscirpenol (DAS), HT-2 toxin (HT-2), T-2 toxin (T-2), zearalenone (ZEA), fumonisins B1 & B2 (FUM), fusarenon-X (FUSA, or FUS-X), ochratoxin A (OTA). Analyses for aflatoxins are not included in this report since aflatoxins, above the feed regulatory level of 20ppb, have not been detected in samples taken under this inspection program.

Sample analyses to detect and quantify the mycotoxins for this program are conducted by the CFIA at the Ottawa Laboratory, Carling. The analyses of the results in this report are mainly focussed on seven mycotoxins (DON, HT-2, T-2, DAS, FUM, OTA and ZEA) that have assigned action levels (AL). The five other mycotoxins (NIV, FAD, TAD, FUSA and NEOS) that are part of the test panel do not have AL assigned to them at this time and were therefore excluded from the report.

Livestock species have varied sensitivities to the different mycotoxins present in the contaminated feed. Hence, each of the assigned AL is specific to certain livestock species regulated under the Feeds Act and Regulations, as indicated in the Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed. These AL provide guidelines regarding the safety of livestock feed. They are largely based on published toxicity studies on an individual toxin, and are subject to change if new studies emerge that indicate the need to revisit the values.

Tables 1 to 4, show sample results in relation to the "lowest AL" assigned for a particular mycotoxin. The data is presented as "percentage of samples below the lowest AL" to illustrate the proportion of samples that met the most stringent AL, thus presenting the worst case scenario for the prevalence of a particular mycotoxin in feeds.

Tables 5a to 5c, show results in relation to the AL for a specific livestock species and are reported as "percentage of samples below the AL". However, in case of multiple species, where feeds can be consumed by more than one livestock species, the "lowest AL" of the mycotoxin was used for analyses. The total numbers of samples tested are also presented in the tables.

Note that for HT-2 toxin the lowest AL used is 0.1 ppm even though a lower AL (0.025 ppm) is in place for dairy cattle, as indicated in the Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed. This was due to the fact that the limit of quantification of the CFIA laboratory method for HT-2 was 0.1 ppm until recently.

Feed samples in which mycotoxins are found to be "below an AL" are considered acceptable for use in livestock species. Detection of a mycotoxin in a feed sample "above the AL" of a livestock species triggers an investigation to mitigate the risk of the contaminated feed. This may include decision making to determine whether the reported level is below the "maximum AL" and the feed is safe for use in more tolerant livestock species or not. If the reported level is above the "maximum AL" the feed may not be used in livestock and requires a follow-up inspection at the facility.

Since the levels for the mycotoxins T-2, DAS, OTA and ZEA were "below the lowest AL" for over 99% of the samples tested, these four mycotoxins were excluded from any additional analyses in the report.

Sample results by mycotoxin and fiscal year (April 1 to March 31)

Table 1 presents a summary of the number of feed samples tested and the results as percentage of samples with mycotoxins levels below the "lowest AL", by mycotoxin and fiscal year. Table 1 does not take into consideration the intended livestock species for these feed samples. Results are presented for samples collected and tested from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018.

The average percentage (hereinafter referred to as percentage) of samples below the "lowest AL" was observed to be lowest for DON (81.3%), followed by HT-2 (96.5%) and FUM (96.9%). For the remaining mycotoxins (T-2, DAS, OTA and ZEA), over 99% of the samples were below the "lowest AL".

It is worth noting that while 17.7% of the samples for DON were above the lowest AL of 1ppm, only 1.7% of the samples exceeded the highest AL of 5 ppm (data not shown here).

Table 1: Percentage of feed samples below the lowest action levels of mycotoxins, by mycotoxin and fiscal year (April 1 to March 31) from 1990-91 to 2017-2018. Total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
Fiscal Years DON
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
HT-2
% Samples
< 0.1 ppm
(Total samples)
T-2
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
DAS
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
FUM
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
OTA
% Samples
< 0.2 ppm
(Total samples)
ZEA
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
1990-1991 84.52 (168) 97.01 (167) 99.40 (168) 99.40 (168) -- (0) 100.00 (4) 100.00 (167)
1991-1992 88.41 (233) 98.28 (233) 100.00 (233) 99.57 (233) -- (0) 100.00 (60) 99.57 (232)
1992-1993 93.23 (266) 98.50 (266) 98.50 (266) 98.87 (266) -- (0) 100.00 (265) 99.25 (266)
1993-1994 93.43 (213) 97.65 (213) 99.53 (211) 99.53 (213) 100.00 (65) 100.00 (212) 99.06 (213)
1994-1995 87.76 (245) 97.96 (245) 97.96 (245) 98.37 (245) 98.21 (112) 100.00 (243) 98.77 (244)
1995-1996 91.06 (235) 100.00 (232) 100.00 (232) 100.00 (232) 98.10 (105) 100.00 (231) 100.00 (233)
1996-1997 86.22 (196) 100.00 (195) 100.00 (195) 100.00 (195) 100.00 (76) 100.00 (195) 100.00 (195)
1997-1998 87.71 (236) 97.88 (236) 100.00 (236) 100.00 (236) 100.00 (80) 100.00 (236) 100.00 (236)
1998-1999 87.66 (235) 94.89 (235) 100.00 (235) 100.00 (235) 98.68 (76) 99.15 (234) 100.00 (234)
1999-2000 71.74 (184) 96.74 (184) 100.00 (184) 100.00 (181) 94.55 (55) 100.00 (184) 100.00 (183)
2000-2001 82.25 (169) 97.63 (169) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (80) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (169)
2001-2002 83.09 (136) 97.06 (136) 100.00 (136) 100.00 (136) 100.00 (44) 100.00 (136) 100.00 (136)
2002-2003 91.72 (169) 98.82 (169) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (169) 90.48 (63) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (169)
2003-2004 73.80 (187) 96.26 (187) 100.00 (187) 100.00 (187) 94.52 (73) 100.00 (187) 100.00 (187)
2004-2005 75.63 (197) 96.45 (197) 100.00 (197) 100.00 (197) 100.00 (83) 100.00 (196) 100.00 (196)
2005-2006 85.96 (114) 94.74 (114) 100.00 (114) 100.00 (114) 91.84 (49) 100.00 (114) 100.00 (114)
2006-2007 70.62 (194) 88.66 (194) 100.00 (194) 100.00 (194) 94.79 (96) 100.00 (193) 97.41 (193)
2007-2008 74.40 (168) 93.45 (168) 100.00 (168) 100.00 (168) 96.30 (81) 100.00 (170) 98.81 (168)
2008-2009 71.43 (224) 95.98 (224) 100.00 (224) 100.00 (224) 96.59 (88) 100.00 (223) 99.55 (224)
2009-2010 75.60 (209) 97.13 (209) 100.00 (209) 100.00 (209) 98.02 (101) 100.00 (210) 100.00 (209)
2010-2011 77.99 (209) 94.74 (209) 100.00 (211) 100.00 (211) 99.08 (109) 99.53 (212) 99.53 (211)
2011-2012 68.81 (202) 96.91 (194) 100.00 (209) 100.00 (209) 94.55 (110) 100.00 (208) 100.00 (208)
2012-2013 75.25 (198) 94.65 (187) 100.00 (198) 100.00 (198) 83.33 (78) 100.00 (197) 100.00 (198)
2013-2014 83.65 (159) 95.21 (146) 100.00 (159) 100.00 (159) 89.19 (74) 100.00 (158) 100.00 (159)
2014-2015 81.64 (207) 98.49 (199) 100.00 (199) 100.00 (207) 100.00 (108) 100.00 (199) 100.00 (199)
2015-2016 81.94 (144) 98.61 (144) 100.00 (144) 100.00 (144) 100.00 (85) 100.00 (143) 100.00 (144)
2016-2017 86.31 (168) 92.90 (169) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (168) 98.17 (164) 100.00 (169) 100.00 (169)
2017-2018 83.70 (184) 92.51 (187) 100.00 (187) 100.00 (184) 98.40 (187) 100.00 (187) 100.00 (187)
Total 82.22 (5449) 96.51 (5408) 99.80 (5448) 99.82 (5451) 96.92 (2242) 99.94 (5104) 99.69 (5443)

Sample results by mycotoxin and sampling area

Table 2 presents a summary of the number of feed samples tested and the mycotoxins results, organized by CFIA area from which the samples were collected (for CFIA Areas see Appendix I). It should be noted that the area where a feed was sampled is not necessarily the same as the area in which the feed was produced. The data were analysed using the "lowest AL" for each mycotoxin based on the mycotoxins levels outlined in the Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed. Results are presented for samples collected and tested from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018.

Overall, the percentage of samples below the "lowest AL" for most mycotoxins was observed to be lowest for the Ontario area. For DON, the percentage of samples found to meet the "lowest AL" of 1 ppm ranged from 76.4% for the Ontario area to 93.1% for the Western Area.

Table 2: Percentage of feed samples below the lowest action levels of mycotoxins, by mycotoxin and CFIA area from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. Total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
CFIA area DON
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
HT-2
% Samples
< 0.1 ppm
(Total samples)
T-2
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
DAS
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
FUM
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
OTA
% Samples
< 0.2 ppm
(Total samples)
ZEA
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
Atlantic 76.87 (402) 98.01 (403) 99.75 (402) 99.75 (402) 98.00 (100) 100.00 (378) 99.75 (403)
Quebec 81.45 (2205) 97.12 (2187) 99.77 (2205) 99.86 (2207) 96.83 (1134) 100.00 (2055) 99.82 (2203)
Ontario 76.41 (1619) 93.88 (1602) 99.75 (1617) 99.75 (1618) 96.54 (810) 99.93 (1518) 99.44 (1617)
Western 93.05 (1223) 98.36 (1216) 99.92 (1224) 99.84 (1224) 98.48 (198) 99.83 (1153) 99.75 (1220)
Total 82.22 (5449) 96.51 (5408) 99.80 (5448) 99.82 (5451) 96.92 (2242) 99.94 (5104) 99.69 (5443)

Sample results by mycotoxin and feed type

Samples for the mycotoxin monitoring program are taken from all types of feed and feed ingredients. The major categories of feeds and livestock species are identified in the Appendix I.

Table 3 presents a summary of the number of feed samples tested and the mycotoxins results organized by feed type. The data were analysed using the "lowest AL" for each mycotoxin based on the mycotoxins levels outlined in the Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed. Results are presented for samples collected and tested from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018.

Single ingredient feeds (SIF) were sampled most frequently followed by complete feeds, supplement and speciality feeds. Note that the different feed types had a varied frequency of testing as some feeds and feed ingredients, such as cereals, cereal by-products, are more prone to contamination with fungi and mycotoxins, so these feeds are sampled more frequently.

Single ingredient feeds were found to be the most frequently contaminated feed type for all the mycotoxins analysed. The percentage of samples below the "lowest AL" were lowest for DON (81.3%), followed by HT-2 (96.16%) and FUM (96.86%). Further analyses were performed for DON, HT-2 and FUM by various SIF subtypes to determine the type of ingredient in the SIF category that is most contaminated (see Table 4).

Table 3: Percentage of feed samples below the lowest action levels of mycotoxins, by feed type from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. Total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
Feed type DON
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
HT-2
% Samples
< 0.1 ppm
(Total samples)
T-2
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
DAS
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
FUM
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
OTA
% Samples
< 0.2 ppm
(Total samples)
ZEA
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
Complete 87.03 (694) 98.56 (695) 100.00 (695) 99.71 (693) 100.00 (18) 100.00 (624) 99.57 (693)
Single ingredient feed 81.30 (4621) 96.16 (4579) 99.76 (4618) 99.83 (4623) 96.89 (2216) 99.93 (4359) 99.70 (4617)
Speciality 85.71 (28) 100.00 (28) 100.00 (28) 100.00 (28) 100.00 (2) 100.00 (28) 100.00 (28)
Supplement 89.00 (100) 97.00 (100) 100.00 (101) 100.00 (101) 100.00 (5) 100.00 (87) 100.00 (99)
Macro-premix 100.00 (4) 100.00 (4) 100.00 (4) 100.00 (4) 100.00 (1) 100.00 (4) 100.00 (4)
Trace mineral salt 100.00 (2) 100.00 (2) 100.00 (2) 100.00 (2) -- (0) 100.00 (2) 100.00 (2)
Total 82.22 (5449) 96.51 (5408) 99.80 (5448) 99.82 (5451) 96.92 (2242) 99.94 (5104) 99.69 (5443)

Sample results by single ingredient feed subtype

Table 4 presents additional analyses on SIF sample results for DON, HT-2 and FUM. The main categories under SIF included cereals that were sub-categorized by grain type, cereal by-products, forages and roughages, plant protein products, animal by-products, and recycled food products. The data was analyzed by using the "lowest AL" of mycotoxins based on the mycotoxins levels outlined in the Regulatory Guidance, RG-8 Contaminants in Feed.

As shown in Table 4, corn, barley, wheat, and oats were the most frequently sampled grains in the SIF category. Some of the cereals were specified simply as "mixed grains" when more than one type of grains were present in the sample. A certain number of SIF samples were grouped as "not specified" as the information to classify these SIF were not available.

Cereal by-products had the lowest average percentage of samples below the "lowest AL" with a range of 50.4% to 89.4%. Among cereal crops, barley and wheat were found to be most frequently contaminated with DON, with 72.5% (Barley) and 75.3% (wheat) samples below the "lowest AL" of 1 ppm. For HT-2, the lowest average percentage of samples below the "lowest AL" of 0.1ppm was found to be 88.5% in oats.

Table 4: Percentage of feed samples below the lowest action levels of mycotoxins, by SIF subtype from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. Total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
IF subtype DON
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
HT-2
% Samples
< 0.1 ppm
(Total samples)
FUM
% Samples
< 1 ppm
(Total samples)
Cereals Table Note 1 - Barley 72.47 (523) 97.33 (524) 100.00 (31)
Cereals- Corn 82.44 (1435) 94.81 (1426) 97.14 (1433)
Cereals - Oats 92.36 (157) 88.54 (157) 100.00 (9)
Cereals - Wheat 75.27 (372) 99.19 (372) 100.00 (45)
Cereals - Mixed grains 86.47 (1530) 97.64 (1525) 99.10 (444)
Cereal by-products Table Note 2 50.35 (286) 89.45 (256) 88.84 (215)
Forages and roughages Table Note 3 85.29 (34) 91.43 (35) 100.00 (6)
Plant protein products Table Note 4 99.46 (184) 99.46 (184) 100.00 (21)
Animal by-products Table Note 5 100.00 (3) 100.00 (3) -- (0)
Recycled food products Table Note 6 92.06 (63) 100.00 (63) 100.00 (9)
Others Table Note 7 100.00 (8) 100.00 (8) -- (0)
Not specified Table Note 8 84.62 (26) 100.00 (26) 100.00 (3)
Total 81.30 (4621) 96.16 (4579) 96.89 (2216)

Table Notes

Table Note 1

Whole or cracked cereals (barley, corn, oats, rice, rye, wheat, mixed grains, etc.)

Return to table note 1  referrer

Table Note 2

Distillery and/or brewery by-products (brewers wet grains, wet and dried distillers grains, etc.) and bran, gluten meal, shorts, screenings, etc.

Return to table note 2  referrer

Table Note 3

Alfalfa, hay, hulls, mixed chop, silage, etc.

Return to table note 3  referrer

Table Note 4

Canola, canola meal, cotton seeds, lentil screenings, soybean meal, sunflower meal, etc.

Return to table note 4  referrer

Table Note 5

Fish meal, dairy by-products, feather meal, etc.

Return to table note 5  referrer

Table Note 6

Chocolate manufacturing by-product, bakery waste, chips, snack food waste, etc.

Return to table note 6  referrer

Table Note 7

Beet pulp, sugar, etc.

Return to table note 7  referrer

Table Note 8

Information to classify feed type not available.

Return to table note 8  referrer

Sample results by livestock species

Table 5a, 5b and 5c present a summary of DON, HT-2 and FUM results in relation to the action levels assigned to livestock species. Results are presented for samples collected and tested from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. For samples intended for multiple livestock species, the "lowest AL" for each mycotoxin was used for the analyses. The lowest AL for multiple species was chosen in consideration of the potential risk to the most sensitive livestock species.

For DON, the lowest percentage of samples below the action level was observed to be 81.3 % for multiple livestock species feed samples, followed by 85.2 % for dairy cattle feed, and 90.5 % for swine feed. For HT-2 and FUM, the lowest percentage of samples below the action level was found to be 88.9 %in turkey feed samples and 96.9% for multi- livestock species feed samples, respectively.

Table 5a: Results of feed samples tested for Deoxynivalenol (DON) by target livestock species of the feed sampled, from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. The results are presented as percentage of samples below the corresponding action level (AL) of the target livestock species. The total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
Livestock species DON Action level (ppm) Total samples Percentage of samples < AL
Multiple species Table Note 9 1 4615 81.32
Swine 1 264 90.53
Cattle (Lactating Dairy) 1 229 85.15
Cattle (Beef) 5 113 100.00
Poultry (Broiler) 5 58 100.00
Poultry (Layer) 5 113 98.23
Poultry (Turkey) 5 9 100.00

Table Note

Table Note 9

More than one livestock species regulated by the Feeds Acts and Regulations. Lowest action of DON was used to represent risk to most sensitive species.

Return to table note 9  referrer

Table 5b: Results of feed samples tested for HT-2 toxin by target livestock species of the feed sampled, from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. The results are presented as percentage of samples below the corresponding action level (AL) of the target livestock species. The total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
Livestock species HT-2 Action level (ppm) Total samples Percentage of samples < AL
Multiple species Table Note 10 0.1 4573 96.17
Cattle (Dairy) 0.1 229 98.25
Cattle (Beef) 0.1 114 97.37
Poultry (Broiler) 0.1 58 93.10
Poultry (Layer) 0.1 113 99.12
Poultry (Turkey) 0.1 9 88.89

Table Note

Table Note 10

More than one livestock species regulated by the Feeds Acts and Regulations.

Return to table note 10  referrer

Table 5c: Results of feed samples tested for Fumonisins (FUM) by target livestock species of the feed sampled, from April 1, 1990 to March 31, 2018. The results are presented as percentage of samples below the corresponding action level (AL) of the target livestock species. The total numbers of samples tested are given in parentheses.
Livestock species FUM Action level (ppm) Total samples Percentage of samples < AL
Multiple species Table Note 11 1 2192 96.90
Miscellaneous Table Note 12 1 2 100.00
Swine 10 21 100.00
Cattle (Dairy) 15 12 100.00
Cattle (Beef) 15 9 100.00
Poultry (Broiler) 50 1 100.00
Poultry (Layer) 15 5 100.00
Poultry (Turkey) 50 0 --

Table Note

Table Note 11

More than one livestock species regulated by the Feeds Acts and Regulations. Lowest action of FUM was used to represent risk to most sensitive species.

Return to table note 11  referrer

Table Note 12

Non-major (minor) livestock species regulated under the Feeds Act and Regulations such as duck, fox, geese, goat, horse, mink, rabbit and fish.

Return to table note 12  referrer

Appendix I Dictionary

CFIA Areas
CFIA has divided the 10 provinces and the three territories in 4 geographical areas: the Western (provinces - Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan; territories -Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon), the Ontario, the Quebec and the Atlantic (New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) Areas.
Complete feed (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a feed that, when used for the kind of livestock and for the purposes stated on the label, will provide all of the nutritional requirements necessary for the maintenance of life or for promoting production except
(a) water, in the case of monogastric animals other than horses, and
(b) water or roughage, in the case of ruminant animals and horses.
Macro-premix (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a feed that is used with another feed to improve the nutritive balance of the total and that is intended to be further diluted and mixed to produce a supplement or complete feed that conforms to the standards prescribed in the Feed Regulations
Micro-premix (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a feed that is a mixture of ingredients that supply only trace minerals, vitamins, medicating ingredients that are listed in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures, amino acids or other material that is used in minute quantities for feeding to livestock.
Mineral feed (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a mixed feed that contains minerals for the nutrition of livestock and may contain vitamins, facilitating agents, flavouring agents or medicating ingredients that are listed in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures.
Miscellaneous
a term designated for non-major (minor) livestock species regulated under the Feeds Act and Regulations such as duck, fox, geese, goat, horse, mink, rabbit and fish.
Multiple species
a term designated to refer to more than one livestock species regulated by the Feeds Acts and Regulations.
Single ingredient feed (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
any substance or mixture of substances that is assessed or evaluated as being acceptable for use in feeds and that is described in an item of Schedule IV or V.

Single ingredient feed subtype (NOTE: These categories are specific for this data set)

Animal by-products
fish meal, dairy by-products, feather meal, etc.
Cereals
whole or cracked cereal grains (barley, corn, oats, rice, rye, wheat, mixed grains, etc.)
Cereal by-products
distillery and/or brewery by-products (brewers wet grains, wet and dried distillers grains, distillers grains with solubles, distillers solubles condensed, etc.), bran, gluten meal, middlings, mill run, shorts, screenings, malt sprouts, etc.
Forages and roughages
Alfalfa, hay, hulls, mixed chop, silage, etc.
Plant protein products
canola, canola meal, cotton seeds, lentil screenings, linseed meal, peas, soybean, soybean meal, sunflower meal, etc.
Recycled food products
chocolate manufacturing by-product, bakery waste, chips, snack food waste, potato residues, sugar foods by-product, etc.
Others
beet pulp, sugar, etc.
Specialty feed
a feed type for which the label contains additional information to describe the usefulness of the feed such as specific guarantees claims, etc. The description of this feed type is not otherwise provided in Schedule I Table 3 of the Feeds Regulation.
Supplement (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a feed that is used with another feed to improve the nutritive balance of the total and that is intended to be
(a) fed undiluted as a supplement to other feeds,
(b) offered free choice with other parts of the ration separately available, or
(c) further diluted and mixed to produce a complete feed.
Trace mineral salt feed (Feeds Regulations, 1983)
a mineral feed that contains only ingredients incorporated to supply trace minerals and salt (NaCl) and may contain medicating ingredients that are listed in the Compendium of Medicating Ingredient Brochures or facilitating agents.
Date modified: