Why Monteban™ is the ionophore of choice for maintaining FCR and Body Weight in finishing broilers

Ionophore anticoccidials provide a sustainable and economic tool in the fight against coccidiosis. Why is Monteban the superior ionophore for finishing birds?

Coccidiosis remains a significant threat to broiler production across the world, with estimates suggesting it costs the global industry £8.6bn every year1. Ionophore anticoccidials have proven their worth as a useful tool for fighting this costly disease, acting directly on the coccidia parasite in a bird’s intestines. However not all ionophores offer the same benefits. Although all ionophores have the same general mode of action to tackle coccidiosis, some of them can also have a negative effect on broilers. This tends to manifest as a decrease in feed intake, or a period of anorexia in the birds – both of which impact a producer’s bottom line.

Selecting an ionophore

There are a few main factors to consider when choosing an appropriate ionophore, the stability of coccidial population control provided, the mode of action and its impact on the bird as there is some variance in the efficacy, potency and consistency of different ionophores. However, data from Elanco’s Health Tracking System (HTSi) consistently shows the use of the narasin containing product  Monteban™, offers a superior level of stable coccidial population control as well as improved Intestinal Integrity, when compared to other ionophores. The negative impact on birds – a decrease in feed intake or a period of anorexia – of some ionophores, including salinomycin, has been identified by various studies2. Interestingly, studies have not identified the same anorexic effect with Monteban, which indicates it has little or no negative effect on performance. As a result, Monteban is a superior option to other ionophores in finishing birds, because as well as performing at least as well as others in terms of coccidial population control, it doesn’t have a negative impact on feed intake.

Benefits of Monteban

The production benefits of using Monteban for stable coccidial population have been trusted for over 20 years, but also reinforced in recent studies. A large-scale pen study in Europe was conducted to evaluate how Monteban and salinomycin compare with regards to coccidiosis control and various production parameters. A relatively low coccidiosis challenge was present from 40 times the recommended dose of the coccidia vaccine at day 14 and day 21, and over the 42-day period, one group was given narasin at a rate of 70mg/kg and the other received salinomycin at the same rate.”3
Results show both treatments offered adequate control of lesions, however the birds treated with narasin experienced a 3.3% increase in average daily feed intake, compared to those given salinomycin, and their final body weight was also 150g higher.

A field-scale evaluation of the study was also conducted on a European farm. Here a full Monteban treatment was compared to a full salinomycin treatment under commercial conditions. This commercial trial not only reflected the findings of the pen study, with differences of 2.7g average daily gain and 113g final body weight, but also a significant improvement in feed efficiency in the Monteban group3.

Financial benefits of Monteban

The cost of administering Monteban as an anticoccidial treatment is recouped through improvements in bird performance. Producers understandably focus on the input costs of production, which include the cost of an anticoccidial treatment. However, if outputs such as final body weight and feed conversion ratio (FCR) are also considered, it’s clear than an anticoccidial treatment that’s perceived to be more expensive can deliver better end results and therefore value for money. An improvement in FCR of one or two points is often all that is needed to cover the cost of a Monteban treatment programme – with recent studies involving the ionophore showing its use can achieve 3-5 points improved FCR. Therefore as the monetary value of one point of feed conversion is worth around 1.3p, this means that even in difficult economic times like the past two years, a superior economic benefit can be achieved from Monteban.

  1. White Paper on Intestinal Integrity conducted by SRUC
  2. Metzler et al. 1987, Weppelman et al. 1997, and Harms and Buresh 1987.
  3. Poland Study reference: PM-GLB-MAR-23-0022