Assessment of the Safety of Pine Tree Feed Additives

Full Length Research Article

Assessment of the Safety of Pine Tree Feed Additives

Roman Lapshin1*, Natalia Maksimova1, Victor Lipskiy1, Viktor Ryzhov2, Vasily Korotky2, Irina Mukhina3

Adv. life sci., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 406-411, September 2023
*Corresponding Author: Roman Lapshin (r.d.lapshin@mail.ru)
Authors' Affiliations

 1. Privolzhsky Research Medical University – Russian Federation
2. Science and Technology Center «Khiminvest» Ltd – Russian Federation
3. Privolzhsky Research Medical University; Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod – Russian Federation 
 
[Date Received: 15/02/2023; Date Revised: 19/05/2023; Date Published: 30/09/2023]


Abstractaa download_button
Introduction
Methods
Results

Discussion
References 


Abstract

Background: The research was focused on evaluating the safety of a pine tree energy feed additive, a product developed by Himinvest Scientific and Technical Center LLC, located in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia. The need for this study arose from the growing utilization of such feed additives in the agriculture sector and the necessity to ensure their safe usage for livestock health and welfare.

Methods: The experiments were carried out on white outbred mice and outbred rats of the Wistar line. The authors conducted a study of acute and chronic toxicity and the local irritant effect of the pine tree energy feed additive. In the experiments, the authors did not establish gender-related differences in the sensitivity of animals to the toxic effect of the preparation.

Results: As a result of the conducted studies on white outbred mice, it was found that with a single intragastric injection of the feed additive, it was a relatively harmless substance. Besides, with repeated intragastric administration of the pine tree energy feed additive to outbred rats in subtoxic doses, no significant defects of the functional state of the main organs and systems of the body were observed.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that the pine tree energy feed additive is relatively harmless, thus supporting its safe use. No significant toxicity or irritant effects were observed in the test subjects, making it a viable option for feeding purposes.

Keywords: Pine tree energy feed additive; General toxicity; Local irritant effect; Safety    

Introduction6th button-01


The Himinvest Scientific and Technical Center (STC) LLC has developed a unique technology for processing wood green shoots based on the extraction of biologically active substances with a new selective extractant. The extractant is non-toxic and allows for improving the properties of the products obtained, and also has antibacterial properties that ensure the preservation of consumer appeal of the products for a long period [1]. The pine tree energy feed additive is a highly effective product for farm animals and poultry [2]. The pine tree energy feed additive is based on biologically active substances of wood greens extracted with a composition of polyatomic alcohols widely used in the food industry, which differ favorably from many similar products in the absence of negative side effects [3]. The excellent taste qualities help to increase the appetite of farm animals and improve the eatability of their diet [4]. The pine tree energy additive is a homogeneous viscous liquid with a characteristic pine tree odor, olive green or dark green color, the water content of not more than 50%, a pH of 8.0-9.0, a density not less than 1.126, and mass fraction of carotene per 100 g of the extract not less than 3 mg% [5].

When conducting studies of the chemical composition of the pine tree energy supplement, the content of vitamins (B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9) and carotenoids was established. The energy value equals 250 kcal/100 g of the supplement. The feed additive is successfully used in animal husbandry [6-9].

Methods6th button-01


Study design

The experiments were carried out on white outbred mice and outbred rats of the Wistar line. Toxicological studies of the additive were carried out on animals following Standard Operating Procedures developed at the Center for Preclinical Research (CPR) of the Institute of Fundamental Medicine of the Privolzhsky Research Medical University (PIMU). The basic rules of maintenance and care corresponded to the standards given in the "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" (ILAR publication, 1996, National Academy Press) and the national standard of the Russian Federation, GOST 33044-2014 "Principles of good laboratory practice", and agreed with the Bioethical Commission of the Central Research Institute.

The study's objectives were to:

-        Assess the acute toxicity of the pine tree energy feed additive in mice by administering various dosages and observing for any signs of lethality or physiological changes.

-        Examine the chronic toxicity of the same feed additive in rats over 90 days, evaluating body weight gain, food intake, temperature, respiratory rate, behavior indicators, and the condition of various organs.

-        Determine the impact of the feed additive on organ mass coefficients in both acute and chronic settings.

-        Analyze any gender differences in the manifestation of the feed additive's toxic effects.

Acute toxicity

The experiments were carried out on white outbred mice (36 females and 36 males) weighing 19.5 ±0.7 g, divided into the following groups:

  1. Control: 1% starch solution was administrated intragastrically (6 females and 6 males);
  2. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 5 g/kg (6 females and 6 males);
  3. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 10 g/kg (6 females and 6 males);
  4. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 15 g/kg (6 females and 6 males);
  5. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 20 g/kg (6 females and 6 males);
  6. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 25 g/kg (6 females and 6 males).

The studied feed additive was administered once intragastrically using a non-traumatic olive-tipped metal probe. In the control series, 1% starch solution was intragastrically injected in an appropriate volume. The indicators of toxic effect in the acute experiment were lethality, time of death, symptoms of poisoning (within 14 days), general condition and behavior of animals (within 14 days), body weight assessment (once a week), macroscopic description of internal organs and external integuments (after euthanasia) and determination of mass coefficients of internal organs (after euthanasia).

Chronic toxicity

The experiments were carried out on 160 outbred Wistar rats (80 females and 80 males) weighing 221.06±0.84 g, divided into the following groups:

  1. Control: 1% starch solution was administrated intragastrically (20 females and 20 males);
  2. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 2.5 g/kg (20 females and 20 males);
  3. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 5 g/kg (20 females and 20 males);
  4. The pine tree energy additive (Himinvest STC LLC, Russia) was administrated in a dose of 7.5 g/kg (20 females and 20 males).

The studied feed additive was administered daily intragastrically to adult rats using a non-traumatic olive-tipped metal probe. In the control series, 1% starch solution was intragastrically injected in an appropriate volume of 1.5 ml. The calculation of doses was based on the body weight of animals, instructions for the use of the preparation, and the maximum possible single-dose volume for intragastric administration (5 ml) [10]. The doses in the study of chronic toxicity with intragastric administration to mature rats were the following: the therapeutic dose was 2.5 g/kg and 5 g/kg, and the subtoxic dose was 7.5 g/kg.

Study procedure

During the experiment (in the initial state, 30, 60, and 90 days after the administration, and 30 days after the withdrawal of the feed additive), changes in integral indicators were recorded. The general condition of the animals was assessed by indicators of body weight dynamics, feed and water consumption, rectal temperature, respiratory rate, and rat behavior in the open field test [11]. In addition, we evaluated the hematological parameters (the number of erythrocytes, leukocytes, platelets, hemoglobin level, leukocyte formula, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)), biochemical parameters, and activity of serum enzymes (total protein, albumin, creatinine, urea, glucose, triglycerides, cholesterol, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase activity, aspartate and alanine aminotransferases, calcium, potassium, sodium) and functional activity of rat kidneys by urine examination in the initial state and once a month after that [12-14]. After the administration of the preparations, a pathomorphological examination was performed, which included a necropsy, macroscopic examination, weighing, and histological examination of internal organs. The local irritant effect was evaluated in pathomorphological studies of the site of repeated administration of the preparation (macro and microscopic description of the stomach) [15, 16].

Methods of statistical data analysis

The obtained results were processed using Statistica 5.5 application software packages [17]. The data were checked for the normality of the distribution using the Shapiro-Wilk W-test [18]. The data set had a normal distribution, and therefore the group arithmetic mean (M) and the standard error of the mean (SEM) were calculated, which together with the value of the number of animals (n) are presented in the final tables.

To compare the samples (n=20) with a normal distribution of populations, the parametric Student's t-test was used for paired samples (for dependent samples) or unpaired samples (the independent ones). In the case of significant deviations of the distribution of the trait from the normal law, as well as with small sample sizes (n≤10), nonparametric criteria were used: for two dependent samples, the Wilcoxon criterion, for two independent samples, the Mann-Whitney criterion, in the case of comparing more than two groups, the Kraskel-Wallis criterion. The differences between the groups were considered statistically significant at a significance level of p<0.05 [19].

Results6th button-01


Acute toxicity

The studies of acute doses of feed additives in mice are shown in Table 1. There were no cases of lethality in any of the groups. After intragastric administration of maximum doses of the feed additive during the first 4 hours of observation, inhibition of motor activity, reflex functions, and responses to external stimuli was noted. By the end of the daily observation, there were no visible differences in the motor and eating behavior of animals, in the state of external integuments and visible mucous membranes, or reactions to external stimuli in comparison with the control group. During 14 days of observation, all the animals looked healthy. The amount and consistency of fecal masses, the frequency of urination, and the color of urine corresponded to the physiological norm.

During the entire observation period, three control weighing was performed (Table 2). The animals from the experimental groups gained weight during the entire observation period as well as in the control group. There was no difference in body weight gain between the groups. After the end of the experiment, all the animals were euthanized to determine the mass coefficients and macroscopic description of the organs. The data is presented in Table 3. There were no differences in the mass coefficients of organs between the group with a single intragastric administration of the pine tree energy feed additive in acute doses and the control group of animals.

There were no differences in the mass coefficients of organs between the group with a single intragastric administration in acute doses of the feed additive and a control group of animals. There were no gender differences in the manifestation of the toxic effect of the feed additive.

Chronic toxicity

The conducted studies of chronic toxicity on white outbred rats did not show the death of animals with intragastric administration of the pine tree energy feed additive for 90 days. During the entire follow-up period for 90 days in the groups receiving intragastric feed additive, there were no differences in body weight gain and food intake, rectal temperature, respiratory rate, and behavior indicators in the open field test compared with the control group of experimental animals (Table 4). There were also no abnormalities in the hematological and biochemical parameters of blood, the activity of serum enzymes, the functional activity of kidneys, and the mass coefficients of organs (Table 5).

Local irritating effect

The study of the injection site revealed no changes in the groups receiving the feed additive compared to the control group. The mucous membrane of the gelatinous part of the stomach was lined with a multi-layered squamous epithelium. The integumentary epithelium of the mucous membrane of the glandular part of the stomach was formed by mucous cylindrical cells, and there were no defects in the epithelial lining. The main and lining cells in the area of the body of the glands had not changed. There were no differences compared to the control group (Figure 1).

Figures & Tables

 

 

 

Discussion6th button-01


The obtained data on the properties of the coniferous energy feed additive are consistent with the opinions of the authors [20-23]. The additive contains distilled medical glycerin and a natural carrier – coniferous shoots complementing each other. Glycerol absorbed in the rumen of ruminants is used for glucose synthesis and energy production and is considered preferable to the more aggressive propylene glycol. Needles as plant components have a unique composition, rich in ash elements and water- and fat-soluble vitamins of organic origin with higher digestibility [24, 25]. As a result of the conducted studies on white outbred mice, it was found that with a single intragastric injection of the feed additive, it was a relatively harmless substance. Mortality in mice was not detected when the maximum possible single dose of 25 ml/kg was administered. The results of the study of chronic toxicity showed that pine tree energy feed additive with daily (for 90 days) intragastric administration to rats did not cause violations of the functional state of the main organs and systems of the body [26, 27]. There was no locally irritating effect of the feed additive with its repeated intragastric administration. The conducted studies confirm [28, 29] the safety of the additive both in production and in animal husbandry. It reduces the negative impact on the environment and positively affects the health of farm animals ultimately leading to an increase in their productivity and obtaining environmentally friendly livestock products [30]. The results of the study of general toxicity and local irritant action demonstrated the safety of the pine tree energy feed additive when used in both therapeutic and subtoxic doses, produced by the Himinvest Scientific and Technical Center LLC (Nizhny Novgorod, Russia).

The inclusion of the additive in the diet of cows at the beginning of lactation led to an increase of 11.9-12.2% in the average daily milk yield of natural fat milk while reducing the cost of feed per unit of product received.

Funding


Grant of the Scientific and Educational Center of the Nizhny Novgorod Region Technoplatform 2035 No. 075-10-2022-109.

Conflict of Interest


The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Author Contributions


All authors contributed equally to this study. 

6th button-01

References


  1. Shevchenko TV, Ustinova YV, Ermolaeva EO. Preparation and Light Stabilization of Natural Anthocyanin Dyes in the Presence of Fullerene for Food Products. Egyptian Journal of Chemistry, (2022); 65(11): 105–114.
  2. Sannikova N, Kovaleva O, Shulepova O, Bocharova A, Melnikov V. Reducing the carbon footprint when using non-metallic minerals as litter in poultry farms. Revista Ingeniería UC, (2022); 29(1): 43–50.
  3. Raketsky VA, Nametov AM, Sozinov VA, Baisakalov AA. Increasing the efficiency of the herd reproduction system by introducing innovative technologies into dairy farming in Northern Kazakhstan. Veterinary World, (2021); 14(11): 3028–3037.
  4. Ulrikh EV, Smolovskaya OV. Mycotoxins In Fodder And Its Importance On Safety Of Feed And The Health Of Farm Animals: A Review. Online Journal of Animal and Feed Research, (2021); 11(6): 219–223.
  5. Korotkiy VP, Ryzhov V, Turubanov AI, Roshkin VI, Bayunova EA, Prytkov YuN, Ryzhova ES. Coniferous energy additive. Patent RF 2543814. March 3, 2015; Bulletin No. 7. Federal Service for Intellectual Property of the Russian Federation.
  6. Korotkiy VP, Gibalkina NI, Mungin VV, Buryakov NP, Buryakova MA, Bazhenova DA, Korotkiy IV, Ryzhov VA. Method for application of coniferous energy supplement in growing calves. Patent RF 2771182. April 28, 2022; Bulletin No. 13. Federal Service for Intellectual Property of the Russian Federation.
  7. Korotkii VP, Ryzhov VA, Bogdanovich DM, Radchikov VF, Dzhumkova MV, Sonich NA, Sadykov EV. Effektivnost ispolzovaniya kormovoi fitodobavki v kormlenii telyat [The efficiency of using feed phytonutrients in feeding calves]. Zootekhnicheskaya nauka Belarusi, (2022); 57(1): 227-234.
  8. Zaitsev VV, Bogolyubova NV, Zaitseva LM, Emelyanova IS, Korotkiy VP, Ryzhov VA. Effect of dietary supplements farmatan TM and pine tree energy on the regulation of ruminal digestion and microbiocenosis of lactating black and white cows. Basrah Journal of Agricultural Sciences, (2022); 35(2): 99-109.
  9. Zaitsev VV, Mayorov IN, Zaitseva LM, Korotky VP, Ryzhov VA, Buryakov NP. The effect of a forest biomass supplement on morphophysiological parameters of calves. Basrah Journal of Agricultural Sciences, (2021); 34(2): 184-192.
  10. Mironov AN (ed). Rukovodstvo po provedeniyu doklinicheskikh issledovanii lekarstvennykh sredstv [Guidelines for conducting preclinical studies of medications]. In two parts. 2012. Grif i K, Moscow.
  11. Bures J, Buresova O, Huston JP. Materialy i osnovnye eksperimenty po izucheniyu mozga i povedeniya [Techniques and basic experiments for the study of brain and behavior]. 1991; 397. Vysshaya shkola, Moscow.
  12. Goldberg DI, Goldberg ED. Spravochnik po gematologii [Handbook of hematology]. 1968; 270. Izd-vo Tomskogo universiteta, Tomsk.
  13. Gorizontov PD, Belousova ON, Fedotova MI. Stress i sistema krovi [Stress and the blood system]. 1983; 240. Meditsina, Moscow.
  14. Menshikov ММ (ed). Klinicheskaya laboratornaya analitika [Clinical laboratory analytics]. 2003; 816. Agat-Med, Moscow.
  15. Sarkisov DS, Perova YuL (eds). Mikroskopicheskaya tekhnika [Microscopical technique]. 1996; 544. Meditsina, Moscow.
  16. Gayirbegov D, Engurazov G. Effect of the Cresacin Feed Additive on the Digestibility of Nutrients, Productivity and Egg Quality in Egg Laying Quails. American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, (2023); 18(1): 52-57.
  17. Szurpnicka A, Wrońska AK, Bus K, Kozińska A, Jabłczyńska R, Szterk A, Lubelska K. Phytochemical screening and effect of Viscum album L. on monoamine oxidase A and B activity and serotonin, dopamine and serotonin receptor 5-HTR1A levels in Galleria mellonealla (Lepidoptera). Journal of Ethnopharmacology, (2022); 298.
  18. Biehl J, Sandén H, Rewald B. Contrasting Effects of Two Hydrogels on Biomass Allocation, Needle Loss, and Root Growth of Picea Abies Seedlings Under Drought. SSRN Electronic Journal, (2023).
  19. Beili N. Statisticheskie metody v biologii [Statistic methods in biology]. 1963; 241. Mir, Moscow.
  20. Kolesnik YuN, Yurina NA, Danilova AA. Phytoenergy supplement in the diet of high-producing cow. Taurida herald of the agrarian sciences, (2018); 3(15): 55-64.
  21. Korotkiy VP, Ryzhov VA, Buryakov NP,  Yurina NA, Kolesnik YN. Use of natural phytonutrients in feeding of high-producing cows. Collection of scientific papers of the Krasnodar Scientific Center for Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, (2018); 7(1): 271-276.
  22. Lefler TF, Murzina TV, Kirienko NN, Turitsyna EG, Rabimov AI. The influence of coniferous and energy supplements on the cows’ milk productivity.Vestnik of the Krasnoyarsk State Agrarian University, (2020); 11(164): 114-121.
  23. Mishurov AV, Bogolyubova NV, Romanov VN, Korotkiy VP, Ryzhov VA. Complex of additional energetic feeding rations of cows. Agroindustrial Complex of Upper Volga Region Herald, (2017); 4(40): 35–38.
  24. Bayazitova ZE, Kurmanbayeva AS, Tleuova ZO, Temirbekova NG. Application of the Thermophilic Fermentation Method to Obtain Environmentally Friendly Organic Fertilizer. Journal of Ecological Engineering, (2023); 24(4): 202-216.
  25. Suraganova AM, Memeshov SK, Aitbayev TE, Kirchev H, Suraganov MN. Effect of Bio-Organic-Mineral Fertilizers on Quality, Yield and Safety Indicators of Potatoes under Conditions of Akmola Region. OnLine Journal of Biological Sciences, (2022); 22(1), 1-9.
  26. Al Dhanhani ASSJ, Mirza SB, Alhefeiti FRMO, Ridouane FL. Investigating the nutritional potential and vegetation blueprint mapping of Acacia tortilis and Acacia ehrenbergiana from the origin of Fujairah, UAE, for Arabian Tahr as native fodder plants. Adv. Life Sci., (2023); 10(1): 99-103.
  27. Ruin VA, Kistina AA, Prytkov YN. Use of the Bioprimum Sukhoy Feed Additive in Cow Feeding. J Biochem Technol. 2022;13(1):41-4. https://doi.org/10.51847/pAjB6Szo9z
  28. Khayyatnezhad M, Keynoos H. Incorporating Conditional Uncertainty into Decision-making for Forecasting Actual Evapotranspiration in Semiarid Area. Adv. Life Sci., (2022); 9(4): 498-503.
  29. Sherimova SK, Sarsembayeva NB, Abdigaliyeva TB, Lozowicka B. Vermikom feed additive effects on dairy cows' blood and milk parameters. Veterinary World, (2022); 15(5): 1228-1236.
  30. Kenebayev AT, Meiirman GT, Yerzhanova ST, Yesimbekova MA, Abayev SS. Manifestation of Valuable Selective Traits in Alfalfa Collection Samples. OnLine Journal of Biological Sciences, (2022); 22(2): 237-246.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License. To read the copy of this license please visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

6th button-01