Many farmers face the same situation: the feed formula remains unchanged, yet the results vary. In one production cycle, birds grow well with good feed conversion, while in another, feed intake drops, weight gain slows down, and overall performance declines. In such cases, the first assumptions usually point to genetics, health issues, or environmental conditions. However, in practice, the key factor is often much closer — the feed itself, or more precisely, the quality of raw materials.

In theory, everything seems simple: maize provides energy, soybean meal supplies protein, and sunflower meal serves as an alternative protein source. But under real conditions, especially in African markets, these ingredients are far from consistent. The same raw material can vary significantly from batch to batch, and this variability often explains the difference in performance.

Based on raw material analysis (NIR) from our operations, maize protein levels can range from 6.7% to 10.7%. While this may seem like a moderate variation, it directly affects energy value and nutrient availability. The situation is even more pronounced with soybean products, where protein levels range from 34.5% to 52.0% — a difference of more than 17 percentage points. In practical terms, these are not minor deviations, but entirely different quality levels of the same ingredient.

The most variable ingredient is sunflower meal. In our measurements, its protein content ranged from 17.8% to 36.5%. In other words, one batch can function as a полноцен source of protein, while another behaves more like a filler with limited nutritional value. When such an ingredient is included in a formula — for example at 10% inclusion — this variability directly affects the nutritional balance of the diet.

As a result, two feed batches produced using the same formula may deliver completely different nutritional value in practice. This quickly translates into real performance issues: reduced feed intake, slower growth, and inconsistent feed conversion. It is important to understand that in such cases, the problem is not the formulation itself, but the fact that it is based on “average values” that do not reflect the actual raw materials used.

Most feed problems are not caused by formulation — they are caused by ignoring raw material variability.

Another critical factor is the cumulative effect. When several variable ingredients are used simultaneously — such as maize, soybean meal, and sunflower meal —their deviations combine. This means that a diet that appears balanced on paper may, in reality, be deficient in protein or energy.

So, what does this mean in practice? First, raw material control is no longer optional — it is essential. Even basic analysis can help avoid critical mistakes. Second, feed formulations must be flexible. The same formula cannot perform consistently when raw material quality changes. And third, the most reliable indicator is not the formulation itself, but the performance on the farm — feed intake, growth rate, and feed conversion ratio.

There are also several practical approaches that can significantly reduce risks. For example, if performance suddenly declines, the first step should be to check recent raw material batches rather than immediately changing the entire formula. Changes in feed color, smell, or texture are often early indicators of differences in composition. It is also useful to compare high-performing and low-performing feed batches to identify which ingredients have the greatest impact.

An interesting fact: when sunflower meal has a high protein level (above 30–32%), it can partially replace soybean meal without compromising performance. However, at lower protein levels (below 20%), the same ingredient can significantly reduce results. This highlights a key point — the question is not which ingredient is used, but the quality of that ingredient in each specific batch.

For this reason, working with feed is not only about having the “right formula”, but about understanding what stands behind each ingredient in every delivery. In our approach, we do not rely on average values or standard tables alone. Each batch of raw materials is evaluated individually, and formulations are adjusted based on actual analytical data rather than theoretical assumptions.

We continuously monitor key parameters - protein, energy, fiber, and moisture — and adapt formulations according to raw material quality, availability, and market conditions. This allows us to minimize performance fluctuations and ensure more consistent production results.

Our principle is simple: there is no universal formula — there is only the right solution for a specific raw material at a specific moment in time. That is why we work not only with formulations, but with the entire system — from raw material control to on-farm performance.

If stability, predictable growth, and cost control are important for your operation, it is worth working with an approach that reflects reality — not just numbers on paper.