Was 2020 the last “business as usual” year for salmon feed manufacturers?

Recent data from the Norwegian salmon sector show that the industry used similar raw materials in aqua feed in 2020 as in 2016, but with a slight increase in the economic feed conversion rate (eFCR). According to an analysis published in aquaculture report, Norwegian salmon companies are formulating more new ingredients and reducing the amount of marine ingredients to be more sustainable.

While this dataset tells the story of continuity and environmental stewardship on the farm, the researchers say that in the future, global events and feeding considerations will play a greater role in aquatic feed formulations. Supply chain disruptions caused by the pandemic, rising inflation and the war in Ukraine are putting pressure on raw material prices and imports. Norway cannot easily produce its own feed ingredients, and alternatives to imported soy concentrate are not available in sufficient quantities. It can spur raw material adoption and force the industry to make difficult choices when creating aquaculture feeds.

Why do you care about feed?

The Norwegian salmon industry is set to expand to meet the growing demand for farmed fish, which will affect farm feed production and utilization. Feed is an important economic input and remains a prominent environmental burden for the salmon sector. The production, transport and deployment of feed has a significant carbon footprint. This was before the industry considered emissions from other farming activities and the fish themselves.

Salmon companies are taking steps to reduce the climate impact of their feed, but these strategic decisions rely on innovation in the nutritional segment and often involve trade-offs. has a high energy density. Made from high quality raw materials traded on the world market. Their sourcing, concentration and utilization influence the sustainability of salmon and the overall footprint of salmon production.

Aquafeed also presents a complex economic situation. Aquaculture nutritionists have revised their ingredient lists many times when faced with fluctuating prices, environmental regulations, or when new product options are added to their portfolio. It puts pressure on companies to choose products that are more sustainable and have a lower environmental impact.

Another major reason to focus on the formulation and sustainability of aquaculture feeds comes from changes in animal husbandry practices. To keep sea lice at bay, Norwegian salmon farmers have chosen to keep juveniles for long periods in land-based recirculation facilities (RAS), transferring larger smolts to saltwater pens and semi-enclosed holding units. I’m here. They also have smolt transitions to the saltwater stage for most of the year, taking breaks only during the coldest winters. is employed.

All of these factors play a role in the utilization of feed resources. Aquatic diets must be maintained in optimal condition for use in RAS, and several studies have shown that weather conditions and temperature can affect nutrient intake in fish. Genetics also play a big role in salmon growth and nutrient utilization. Overall sustainability of aqua feed involves more than the ingredient list.

How did the Norwegian salmon sector use feed ingredients?

The researchers examined data from four major Norwegian feed companies (Cargill, Mowi, Skretting and BioMar). These companies produce almost 100% of the aquatic feed used in the Norwegian salmon industry. The researchers also collected samples from slaughter-sized salmon for body and fillet analysis. Measure feed usage.

According to data, the salmon industry used 1,976,709 tons of feed ingredients to produce 1,467,655 tons of salmon in 2020. This utilization resulted in an economic feed conversion rate (eFCR) of 1.35 to 1.28, slightly higher than the 2016 figures (1.30 to 1.21). ).

Regarding the breakdown of ingredients, the researchers noted strong continuity from the 2016 data. The main substrate of the aquatic diet was the vegetable component (73.1%) and the marine component made up 22.4% of the diet. Approximately 4.1% of the diet was made up of trace ingredients such as vitamin and mineral premixes, astaxanthin and crystalline amino acids. The researcher was able to account for 99.8% of his constituents in the aquatic diets he sampled. All soy concentrates used in Norwegian feed are certified deforestation-free and marine ingredients are sourced from at least one environmentally certified fishery.

The ingredient profile was nearly identical to 2016, but the industry used even newer ingredients in 2020. That year, 8,126 tons of single-cell protein, insect meal, fermented products and microalgae were used in the salmon formula. This corresponds to approximately 0.4% of the component footprint. From the 2016 figures, the proportion of seafood ingredients in aquatic feeds has decreased. Researchers expect the percentage and number of novel ingredients in feed to increase as companies commit to a more circular economy and respond to consumer preferences.

Industry indicators and ratios

Researchers calculated key metrics such as utilization efficiency, nutrient retention, eFCR, FIFO/FFDR, protein, lipid and energy efficiency ratios. They found that the economic feed conversion ratio (eFCR), or weight-to-weight ratio of feed used in the fish produced, increased between 1.35 and 1.28. This increase can be attributed to multiple factors such as feed intake, temperature, pest control procedures and disease outbreaks. I’m here. It should be viewed as part of a long-term trend before drawing any concrete conclusions.

In terms of nutrient retention (an estimate of how much energy is retained in the finished fish from the total amount of feed ingredients), the researchers noted that salmon retained more fat than in 2016. Phosphorus retention increased as well.

The industry used less seafood ingredients in 2020 than in 2016. The estimated FIFO for fishmeal in 2020 was 0.7, while his FIFO for fish oil was 1.8. The estimated FFDRs for fishmeal and fish oil were 0.5 and 1.5, respectively, while both the marine protein dependency and marine oil dependency rates were 0.5 in 2020. The researchers emphasized that FIFO and FFDR are not necessarily indicators of overall seafood feed sustainability. But as salmon farming expands, consumers are turning to these metrics.

New Feed Ingredients Now Online

Alternative and novel feed ingredients are trending topics in the industry, and 2020 saw more appear on the ingredient list. Entomophagy, single-cell proteins, fermented products and microalgae are widely seen as ways for the sector to meet its sustainability commitments. Insect meal has emerged as a potential soy alternative, and many fermented and single-celled products can be obtained from waste, and are key as the industry works towards its environmental goals.

However, even with the increasing content of alternative ingredients, there is still a long way to go in this segment. The main challenges for new feed ingredients are cost and yield. Consistency of supply is another factor, especially for ingredients produced from waste streams. These bottlenecks have prevented entomophagy, microalgae and single-cell proteins from replacing vegetable and seafood ingredients in aquatic diets.

Ingredients themselves have their own hurdles. Single-cell proteins have performed well in feed trials, allowing nutritionists to add “functional” ingredients that improve fish health. of cell wall material. Researchers have also noted that some are less palatable. These properties make it less attractive as a feed ingredient. Feed intake is an important factor for fish welfare and production goals. Fecal matter has a negative impact on water quality during production, especially as more and more salmon are reared in recirculation systems.

The problem is the lack of production of insect ingredients. Although entomophagy may replace soy protein concentrate in aquatic diets, a one-to-one replacement is not yet feasible. 1.47 million tons of larvae would be required to replace 413,611 tons of soy protein concentrate. This is roughly equivalent to the amount of salmon produced in Norway. Put another way, the industry can withhold soy protein concentrate in aquatic feed only if insects are farmed as large as salmon. Even this is a long way.

A changing global context

The past three years have not always been “business as usual”. The Covid-19 crisis, supply chain disruptions, inflation reaching 40-year highs and war between Russia and Ukraine are weighing on global food production. This series of events has led to a growing call for self-sufficiency, which has had a significant impact on the salmon industry.

Norway used its aquaculture resources to produce 273 kg of salmon per person in 2020, but had to import 91.7% of these feed ingredients. Complete self-sufficiency is not feasible as the country’s climate cannot support domestic production of feed ingredients. This makes aquafeed production vulnerable to supply chain and economic shocks. Brazil has been a major supplier of plant-based protein sources, but a significant portion of the ingredient list originated in Eastern Europe. Feed ingredients are likely to become increasingly scarce and more expensive through 2023.

Researchers theorize that this could spur changes in the salmon’s diet composition. Let the industry adopt SCP or blend it with other protein and lipid sources. , things can change.

On paper, the industry’s feed ingredients and formulations haven’t changed much since 2016, but it’s worth noting that the Norwegian industry has increased production since then. These figures mark the initial rise of the alternative ingredients sector. The publication of feed ingredient data in 2024 could reveal the segment’s rapid expansion and the industry’s reaction to soaring commodity prices.

Read the full review at aquaculture report.