NZ785188A - Molasses supplement containing active agents - Google Patents

Abstract

molasses supplement for ruminants to thereby improve ruminant health and wellbeing. The molasses supplement, preferably in the form of a feed or lick block, contains an encapsulated active agent, preferably a vegetable-oil encapsulated active agent such as a rumen modifier.

Description

ES SUPPLEMENT CONTAINING ACTIVE AGENTS TECHNICAL FIELD This invention generally relates to a molasses supplement for ruminants. In particular, the invention concerns a molasses supplement containing an encapsulated active agent, preferably a vegetable oil-encapsulated active agent.

BACKGROUND ART Variable climate usually leads to ruminants changing their ng/feeding habits throughout the seasons. The nature of the ingested forage/feed will lly affect the ency of the feed ed by the animals. The nature of the ingested forage/feed will also dictate the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) produced by the animals. For example, a lowquality feed/forage diet (e.g. grass, leaves and straw) will lly lead to poor feed utilisation as well as more intense production of GHGE.

There is, of course, a desire to reduce the intensity of GHGE to decrease the impact that ruminant livestock have on the environment, and to increase the efficiency of feed utilised by ruminant livestock so that livestock production can become more profitable.

Additionally, the issue of improving welfare during aversive routine husbandry procedures has emerged as a leading welfare concern for all livestock ries in Australia and beyond. Growing consumer awareness of painful procedures and ces poses a significant threat to the red meat, dairy and wool industries. Providing adequate and long-lasting pain relief will deal with many of these concerns. Managing pain ated with husbandry interventions is increasingly commonplace in extensive sheep meat and beef production systems, although there remain lved issues preventing the promotion of ‘best practice pain management’ approaches. In particular, the timing of and route of administration, plus evidence of efficacy in provision of practical long-term pain relief on farms, deserves further attention.

Supplementation blocks are ly used to supplement diets of ruminants. They are not, however, routinely used to deliver active agents/ingredients, such as rumen modifiers and pain-relieving . Administration of active agent normally entails having to muster and handle the animals, and normally administering the active agent individually. Mustering, handling and administration of actives animals can be ous, inconvenient and expensive.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The ors have discovered that microencapsulating one or more active agents with an ulant and incorporating the resulting microcapsules into a molasses supplement is a novel and effective way of ring the active agents to ruminants, thereby improving ruminant health and wellbeing.

In some embodiments microencapsulating a rumen er (ie. the active agent) with an encapsulant (such as an oil) and incorporating the ing microcapsules into a molasses supplement produces the surprising result of increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant whilst reducing the intensity of GHGE, especially in the case of ruminants feeding on low-quality feed/forage.

In some embodiments microencapsulating a pain-relieving agent (ie. the active agent) with an encapsulant (such as an oil) and incorporating the resulting microcapsules into a molasses supplement can render the active agent more , available and/or palatable to the ruminant.

In some embodiments microencapsulating a generally unpalatable active agent (eg. bitterant) with an encapsulant (such as an oil) and incorporating the resulting microcapsules into a molasses supplement renders the active agent more palatable to the ruminant (ie. masking odour or taste), thereby providing a superior delivery system for ise unpalatable ingredients.

According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is ed use of an encapsulant for encapsulating an active agent.

According to a second aspect of the present ion, there is provided an encapsulated active agent.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is provided a molasses supplement for a ruminant comprising an encapsulated active agent.

According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method of cturing a molasses supplement for a ruminant, said method comprising the step of: combining an encapsulated active agent with one or more ingredients to e a molasses supplement; or combining an encapsulant, an active agent and one or more other ingredients to produce a es supplement, wherein said active agent is encapsulated with said encapsulant within the molasses supplement.

According to a fifth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a molasses supplement produced by the method of the fourth aspect.

According to a sixth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method sing the step of feeding the ruminant the encapsulated active agent of the second , the es supplement of the third aspect, or the molasses supplement of the fifth aspect, wherein the active agent comprises a rumen modifier.

According to a seventh aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant: the encapsulated active agent of the second aspect, the molasses supplement of the third aspect, or the molasses supplement of the fifth aspect; and low-quality feed/forage, n the active agent comprises a rumen modifier.

According to an eighth aspect of the present invention, there is ed a method of preventing or ating pain in a ruminant, said method sing the step of feeding the ruminant: the encapsulated active agent of the second aspect, the molasses supplement of the third aspect, or the es supplement of the fifth aspect.

According to a ninth aspect of the present invention, there is provided use of the encapsulated active agent of the second aspect, the molasses supplement of the third aspect, or the molasses supplement of the fifth aspect, in the ation of a medicament for preventing or alleviating pain in a ruminant.

It is to be appreciated that the term "an encapsulant" includes within its scope at least one type of encapsulant, including one or more encapsulant types.

It is to be appreciated that the term "an agent active" includes within its scope at least one type of active agent, including one or more active agent types.

It is to be appreciated that the term "an encapsulated active agent" es within its scope at least one type of encapsulated active agent, including one or more encapsulated active agent types.

Encapsulation (microencapsulation) involves building a functional barrier between the active agent and the external environment to avoid chemical and al reactions with that environment.

Any suitable type of encapsulant can be used. In some embodiments, more than one type of ulant can be used. In some ments, the ulant can comprise one or more edible polymers, including naturally-occurring and/or synthetic polymers. Examples of edible polymers include polysaccharides and hydrocolloids, polypeptides and proteins, oils, fats and lipids, and synthetic and composite edible rs.

Examples of edible olloids include, for example, starch alginate, carrageenan, carboxymethylcellulose, gum arabic, chitosan, pectin, and xanthan gum. An example of a ylated polymer is chitosan. Examples of polysaccharides include alginate, agarose, starch, dextran, sucrose, cellulose, carboxymethylcellulose, methylcellulose, and xanthan gum.

Examples of proteins, polypeptides and amino acid-based polymers include collagen, gelatin, albumin and poly-lysine. Examples of edible synthetic polymers include poly(ethylene glycol), polyvinyl alcohol, polyurethane, poly(ether-sulfone), polypropylene, sodium polystyrene sulfate, and polyacrylate poly(acrylonitrile-sodium methallylsulfonate).

Encapsulation can be ed in any suitable way. See, for example, Timilsena, Y., Haque, M. and Adhikari, B. (2020) Encapsulation in the Food Industry: A Brief Historical Overview to Recent Developments. Food and Nutrition Sciences, 11, 481-508. doi: 10.4236/fns.2020.116035 ; Gibbs BF, Kermasha S, Alli I, Mulligan CN. Encapsulation in the food industry: a . Int J Food Sci Nutr. 1999 May;50(3):213-24. doi: 0/096374899101256. PMID: 10627837; Viktor Nedovic, Ana Kalusevic, Verica Manojlovic, Steva Levic, Branko Bugarski, An overview of ulation technologies for food applications, Procedia Food Science, Volume 1, 2011, Pages 1806-1815, ISSN 2211-601X - the entire contents of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.

In some embodiments, encapsulation technology can be employed using oil emulsification in order to encapsulate the active agent in oil. The encapsulation can either be used directly in the liquid state or can be dried (spray- or freeze-drying) to form powders after emulsification. Typically, the apsules are in the micrometre to millimetre size range.

Typically, the encapsulant is pre-mixed with the active agent to form an encapsulated active agent, prior to adding the encapsulated active agent to other ingredients of the molasses supplement.

With respect to the encapsulant, any suitable source or sources of oil / lipid / fat can be used. In some embodiments the oil is a synthetic oil. In some ments the oil is a naturally-occurring oil. In some ments the oil is an oil from an animal. For example, animal oil can be ted from tissue fats such as from livestock, eg. pigs, cattle or chickens.

For example, animal oil can be ted from fish or milk fat. In some embodiments the oil is a vegetable oil. For example, vegetable oil can be ted from seeds or other plant parts. In some embodiments, the oil comprises one or more of the following: at least one type of synthetic oil; at least one type of naturally-occurring oil; at least one type of animal oil; and/or at least one type of vegetable oil.

Potentially suitable vegetable oils include one or more of the following: Clove oil, Coconut oil, Corn oil, Canola oil, Cottonseed oil, Garlic oil, Olive oil, Palm oil, Peanut oil, Rapeseed oil, Canola oil, Safflower oil, Sesame oil, Soybean oil, Sunflower oil, Hazelnut oil, Almond oil, Beech nut oil, Brazil nut oil, Cashew oil, Macadamia oil, Mongongo nut oil, Pecan oil, Pine nut oil, Pistachio oil, Walnut oil, Pumpkin seed oil, Grapefruit seed oil, Lemon oil, Orange oil, Bitter gourd oil, Bottle gourd oil, Buffalo gourd oil, Butternut squash seed oil, Egusi seed oil, Watermelon seed oil, Borage seed oil, Açaí oil, Black seed oil, Blackcurrant seed oil, Evening primrose oil, ed oil, Amaranth oil, Apricot oil, Apple seed oil, Argan oil, Avocado oil, Babassu oil, Ben oil, Borneo tallow nut oil, Cape chestnut oil, Carob pod oil, Cocoa butter, Cocklebur oil, Cohune oil, Coriander seed oil, Date seed oil, Dika oil, False flax oil, Grape seed oil, Hemp oil, Kapok seed oil, Kenaf seed oil, Lallemantia oil, Mafura oil, Marula oil, Meadowfoam seed oil, Mustard oil, Niger seed oil, Nutmeg butter, Okra seed oil, Papaya seed oil, Perilla seed oil, Persimmon seed oil, Pequi oil, Pili nut oil, Pomegranate seed oil, eed oil, Pracaxi oil, Prune kernel oil, Quinoa oil, Ramtil oil, Rice bran oil, Royle oil, Sacha inchi oil, Sapote oil, Seje oil, Shea butter, Taramira oil, Tea seed oil, e oil, Tigernut oil, Tomato seed oil, or Wheat germ oil.

In some embodiments the ulant, such as an oil, masks the bitter taste or odour of the encapsulated active agent, to render it palatable to the ruminant. In some embodiments the encapsulant, such as an oil, inhibits the growth of or kills methanogenic bacteria. In some embodiments, the oil is canola oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oil, olive oil or safflower oil, or any combination f. Preferably, the oil is canola oil, linseed oil and/or a combination of the two in any suitable s. Any suitable ty or quantities of oil can be used. For example, the oil content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

The molasses supplement can be of any suitable form such as a , olid or solid – e.g. solution, suspension, gelatinous, powder, e, feed block or lick block. In a preferred embodiment the molasses supplement is in the form of a block (feed block or lick block).

According to a preferred form of the present invention, there is provided a method of cturing a molasses block, said method comprising the steps of: combining ingredients, including an encapsulant such as oil, and an active agent, to form a block mixture; pouring the block mixture into a mould; and allowing the block mixture to set to form a molasses block sing encapsulated active agent, preferably substantially uniformly dispersed throughout the block.

Typically, the encapsulant is pre-mixed with the active agent to form an encapsulated active agent, prior to adding the encapsulated active agent to other ingredients of the molasses block.

According to another preferred form of the present invention, there is provided a molasses block supplement manufactured according to the method described above.

The molasses supplement’s ient t, size and shape can be tailored for the particular ruminant type for which it is provided, or even for the geographic location of the ruminant. For example, grain versus grass fed ruminants many require different ingredient contents, such as different mineral contents. The molasses supplement can also be tailored for the palate of the ruminant (e.g. molasses and salt content).

An "active agent" as defined herein is a compound, molecule, ingredient, extract, mixture or other type of agent or agent combination that provides a benefit to the nt.

The term "active agent" as defined herein can include one type of active agent, many active agents of the same type, two different types of active agents, many active agents of both types, more than two different types of active agents, and so forth. Any suitable type or types and quantity or quantities of active agents can be used.

The active agent can be, for ce, a pain relieving, analgesic, anaesthetic, ve, narcotic, antibiotic, anti-microbial, antifungal or anti-parasitic agent, antibody, vaccine, growth factor, steroid, hormone, rumen modifier, polysaccharide, polypeptide, vitamin, mineral, or antiseptic agent, for example.

In some embodiments, the active agent is a rumen modifier. Any le type or types and ty or quantities of rumen modifier can be used. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is a compound/substance that alters rumen fermentation patterns, to se feed efficiency and body weight gain. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier can inhibit or suppress the growth of or kill methanogenic bacteria. In some ments, the rumen modifier is a bactericidal agent. In some ments, the rumen modifier is an antibacterial agent. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is an antibiotic. In some embodiments, the rumen er is a polyether antibiotic . In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is an ionophore. In some ments, the rumen modifier is a divalent polyether ionophore antibiotic. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is a bromophore. In some ments, the rumen modifier is a red algae, such as the Asparagopsis species. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is 3- nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP). In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is monensin, lasalocid, laidlomycin nate or bambermycin. In some embodiments the rumen modifier is lasalocid or monensin. Lasalocid sodium is an cterial agent which is produced by strains of Streptomyces lasaliensis and is in the feed additive called Bovatec™. in is a polyether antibiotic isolated from Streptomyces cinnamonensis. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is a yeast capable of killing methanogenic bacteria. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is at least one bacterial strain capable of outcompeting methanogenic bacteria. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier comprises bentonite.

In some embodiments, the rumen modifier comprises citrus pulp (dry and/or wet), which may include the peel, internal tissues and/or seeds. Citrus pulp is the solid residue that remains after fresh fruits are squeezed into juice. Citrus pulp is believed to have antimethanogenic ties. Any suitable source or sources of citrus pulp can be used. Citrus pulp can be sourced form one or more of the following citrus species: orange, mandarin, tangerine, clementine, grapefruit, pomelo, lemon and lime. In some embodiments, the rumen modifier comprises citric acid-containing plant materials.

In some embodiments, the rumen modifier is at least one type of . In some embodiments the tannins can t the growth of or kill bacteria. In some embodiments the s are condensed tannins. Condensed tannins (or proanthocyanidins, PAs) are polymers of flavanol units. The tannins can be the same or similar to those occurring in nature. The tannins can be naturally occurring. The s can be ally modified. The s can be synthetically produced.

In some embodiments the tannins are sourced from plants. The tannins can be in the form of one or more plant extracts, and/or the tannins can be in the form of finely chopped plant forage, and/or in the form of a powder. In some embodiments the tannins are in the form of tea leaves.

In some embodiments the s are compounded tannins d from industry.

In some embodiments the tannins are obtained from legumes. In some embodiments the tannins are obtained from tropical shrubs. In some ments the tannins are obtained from the plant family Fabaceae. In some embodiments the tannins are obtained from the genus Leucaena or the genus Acacia, or the genus Melalecua. In some embodiments the tannins are obtained from Leucaena leucocephala. In some embodiments the tannins are obtained from Acacia aneura. That is, tannins can be produced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves).

The types of gases that are typically reduced by the molasses supplement are typically referred to as greenhouse gases and include methane and carbon dioxide (GHGE). The percentage of gas production will typically be reduced by about 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 84, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, , 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 or 3%. Preferably the percentage of gas production will typically be d between about 30% and 80%, more preferably between about 65% and 75%, or up to about 65% or 75%, provided the ruminant is consuming the molasses supplement.

"Increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by ruminants" as used herein preferably means that ingested feed/forage, especially low-quality feed/forage, is more efficiently utilised by the ruminant (for increased body weight gain) by about 80, 79, 78, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 84, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 or 3%.

In some embodiments, the active agent is a pain relieving agent. Any suitable type or types and quantity or quantities of a pain relieving agent can be used. In some embodiments, the pain ing agent can be used to prevent, minimise or obviate any suitable type of pain experienced by the animal. For example, pain may result from an injury or pain may be caused by a surgical procedure - such as a laceration, a surgical incision, an ulcer, a major abrasion or a major burn. For example, pain may be caused by an animal husbandry procedure such as mulesing, shearing, tion, tail docking, ear tagging, ear notching, de-horning, branding or marking.

In some embodiments, the pain relieving agent can be an analgesic agent or combination of different types of analgesic agents. For example, the pain relieving agent can be any suitable type of anti-inflammatory agent or combination of different types of antiinflammatory agents. In some embodiments the pain relieving agent can be at least one analgesic agent in combination with at least one anti-inflammatory agent.

Potentially suitable agents include one or more of the following: acetaminophen, n, salicylic acid, methyl salicylate, choline salicylate, glycol salicylate, 1-menthol, camphor, mefenamic acid, fluphenamic acid, thacin, enac, alclofenac, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, pranoprofen, fenoprofen, sulindac, fenbufen, clidanac, flurbiprofen, indoprofen, protizidic acid, fentiazac, tolmetin, tiaprofenic acid, bendazac, macpiroxicam, butazone, oxyphenbutazone, clofezone, pentazocine, mepirizole, hydrocortisone, cortisone, dexamethasone, nolone, triamcinolone, medrysone, prednisolone, flurandrenolide, prednisone, halcinonide, methylprednisolone, cortisone, corticosterone, thasone, thasone, naproxen, suprofen, piroxicam, diflunisal, meclofenamate sodium, carprofen, flunixin, tolfenamic acid and meloxicam.

In some embodiments, the pain relieving agent can be a non-steroidal anti- inflammatory drug (NSAID). The NSAID can be a salicylate (e.g. aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), diflunisal (dolobid), salicylic acid and other salicylates, salsalate (disalcid)), propionic acid derivative (e.g. ibuprofen, dexibuprofen, en, fenoprofen, ketoprofen, dexketoprofen, flurbiprofen, oxaprozin, loxoprofen), acetic acid derivative (e.g. indomethacin, tolmetin, sulindac, etodolac, ketorolac, diclofenac, aceclofenac, nabumetone), enolic acid (oxicam) derivative (e.g. piroxicam, meloxicam, cam, droxicam, lornoxicam, am, phenylbutazone), anthranilic acid derivative (fenamate) (e.g. mefenamic acid, meclofenamic acid, flufenamic acid, tolfenamic acid), selective COX-2 inhibitor (e.g. celecoxib, rofecoxib, valdecoxib, parecoxib, lumiracoxib, etoricoxib, firocoxib), anilide (e.g. lide), or other (e.g. clonixin, licofelone, H-harpagide in Figwort or Devil's Claw).

Any le type or types and quantity or quantities of active agent/s (eg. rumen modifier/s) can be used. For example, the active agent content can be about 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.03%, 0.04%, 0.05%, 0.06%, 0.07%, 0.08%, 0.09%, 0.1%, 0.15%, 0.2%, 0.25%, 0.3%, 0.35%, 0.4%, 0.45%, 0.5%, 0.55%, 0.6%, 0.65%, 0.7%, 0.75%, 0.8%, 0.85%, 0.9%, 0.95%, 1%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, 3%, 3.5%, 4%, 4.5%, 5%, 5.5%, 6%, 6.5%, 7%, 7.5%, 8%, 8.5%, 9%, 9.5%, 10%, .5%, 11%, 11.5%, 12%, 12.5%, 13%, 13.5%, 14%, 14.5%, 15%, 15.5%, 16%, 16.5%, 17%, 17.5%, 18%, 18.5%, 19%, 19.5% or 20% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 20% and any nge therein). Preferably, 0.5 kg to 20 kg (0.5% to 20%) of active agent/s is used per metric ton of block. The quantity coud be higher if the active agent also performs a ary (dual) function in the molasses supplement, such as an encapsulant or binding agent, for example.

Solidifying, binding, setting and/or gelling agents help solidify the block/make the block a coherent mass. Suitable es e calcium oxide, magnesium oxide, calcium hydroxide, di-ammonium phosphate, , bentonite and ed lime (quick lime).

Bentonite additionally has anti-methanogenic properties. Any suitable solidifying, binding, setting and/or gelling agent/s quantity can be used. For example, a setting agent can add heat to the block mix to help the block set. An example of a suitable setting agent is phosphoric acid. For example, the solidifying, binding, setting and/or gelling agent/s content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 or 40% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 40% and any subrange therein). pH adjusters help adjust the final pH of the block. Examples of suitable pH adjusters include organic acids such as citric, tartaric, boric and oric acid. Any suitable pH adjuster quantity can be used. For example, the pH adjuster content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 10% and any nge therein).

Fillers help bulk up the block, to get it to the correct volume. The filler can be digestible or not. Examples of suitable fillers include bran (digestible) and earth (not digestible).

Any suitable filler/s quantity can be used. For example, the filler/s t can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 or 40% weight/weight ding the range of 1% to 40% and any sub-range therein).

Any suitable source or s of energy can be used. The energy source can derive from a fat / oil, a protein, a carbohydrate and/or a non-protein nitrogen.

Any suitable source or sources of nitrogen can be used. The nitrogen can derive from a source of protein or not. In an example, the source of nitrogen is urea (non-protein source).

Any suitable quantity of nitrogen or nitrogen source can be used. For example, the en or nitrogen source content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

Any suitable source or sources of fat / oil can be used. Suitable sources include vegetable oils as described herein. Suitable sources of oils e d oil and canola oil. For example, the oil t can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight ding the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

Any suitable source or sources of protein can be used. Suitable sources of protein include bypass protein, canola meal, safflower meal, cottonseed meal, fish meal, soybean meal, oilseed meal, dried distillers grain, or tea leaves (eg. Camellia sp.). Any suitable quantity o f protein or protein source can be used. For example, the protein or protein source content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

Any suitable source or sources of ydrate can be used. Suitable sources of carbohydrate e molasses. Any suitable quantity of carbohydrate or carbohydrate source can be used. For example, the carbohydrate or carbohydrate source content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 or 60% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 60% and any sub-range therein).

The block can include any suitable type of mineral or minerals. es of suitable minerals e sodium, phosphorus, sulphur, calcium, sodium, iron, copper, manganese, zinc, iodine, selenium and cobalt. Any le mineral ty can be used. For e, the mineral content can be about 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 and 5% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 5% and any sub-range therein).

The block can include any suitable type of vitamin or vitamins. Examples of suitable vitamins include vitamin A, B, C, D and E. Any suitable vitamin quantity can be used. For example, the vitamin content can be about 0.001, 0.01, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 and 5% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 5% and any sub-range therein).

Any suitable type or types of flavouring agent can be used. Any suitable quantity of flavouring agent/s can be used. Examples of flavouring agents include es and salt.

Any suitable type of salt or salts can be used. Suitable types of salt include sea salt and sodium chloride. Any suitable quantity of salt can be used. For e, the salt content can be about 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight (including the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

In the case of supplements in the form of blocks, suitable general excipients include antioxidants, colourants, emulsifiers, preservatives, solvents, solubilisers, viscosity increasing , diluents, carriers, binding, setting or gelling agents, and so forth. Any suitable quantity of water can be used. For example, the water content can be about 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 or 20% weight/weight ding the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

The molasses of the block provides the following: improves palatability (flavouring agent); provides minerals/trace elements such as sulphur; provides an energy source in the form of carbohydrates/fermentable sugars; and, functions as a binding agent. Molasses also makes the block easier to manufacture. Any suitable source and quantity of molasses can be used. For example, the molasses content can be about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 and 60% /weight (including the range of 1% to 60% and any nge therein). In other embodiments, molasses can be used to e the ient content to 100%. The molasses can be produced from sugarcane, for example.

Preferably the block has a -like consistency, able to withstand wet weather as well as temperatures ranging from about -20°C to 50°C.

Preferably the (oil-) encapsulated active agent is ntially uniformly dispersed throughout the block.

The molasses supplement can be fed to any suitable type of ruminant. Suitable ruminants include sheep, , buffalo and goats.

Preferably, the method comprises the ruminant edicating. That is, the ruminant es as much of the molasses supplement as it desires, as often as it desires.

Generally, speaking, the lower the quality feed/forage diet (e.g. grass, leaves or straw), the more molasses supplement the ruminant will consume to increase digestibility/uptake of the feed and reduce the volume of gas expelled from the ruminant. Generally, speaking, for a high-quality feed/forage diet (e.g. oats), the ruminant should consume less es supplement.

Any suitable ratio of molasses supplement to orage for ruminants can be used and may depend on whether it is a low-quality feed/forage diet (e.g. grass, leaves or straw) or high-quality feed/forage diet (e.g. oats). Preferably the molasses supplement is used with a lowquality orage diet (e.g. grass, leaves or straw). Examples of suitable molasses supplement: feed ratios include 1:50, 1:60, 1:70, 1:80. 1:90, 1:100, 1:150, 1:200, 1:250, 1:300, 1:350, 1:400, 1:450, or 1:500. es of suitable molasses supplement:low-quality feed/forage ratios preferably include from about 1:100 to 1:200.

If a molasses block, preferably ruminants consume approximately 50 g to 500 g of block per day. For example, goats and sheep can consume approximately 10 g to 100 g of block per day, and buffalo and cattle can consume approximately 100 g to 500 g of block per day – depending on the forage/feed quality.

Preferably, the molasses feed block comprising an active agent, such as a pain relieving agent provides a dose to the ruminant in the order of about 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95 and 100mg/ruminant/day (depending on the size of the animal).

Preferably, ruminants consume approximately 100 to 1000 g of block per day, including all 0.1 g increments in between. For example, rams may consume approximately 200 g per day. For example, ewes may consume approximately 300 g per day. For example, lambs may consume approximately 150 g per day. For example, cattle may consume imately 200 g per day. For example, calves may consume approximately 100 to 800 g per day, or about 170 to 760 g per day.

The molasses feed block can provide a dose to the ruminant in the order of about 0.05, 0.06, 0.07, 0.08, 0.09, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 5.0, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5 or 10 mg/kg ruminant body weight. In some embodiments, a ruminant can consume about 1.5 g to about 1.6 g of block per kg of body weight.

The molasses supplement can be fed to the ruminant for any ed period of time – days, weeks, months or years, for example.

If in the form of a molasses block, the block can be manufactured using a hot process (requiring heating of one or more ingredients) or cold process. Preferably, the block is manufactured using a hot process. More preferably, the block is ctured using a hot ng process. Typically, the ulant is pre-mixed with the active agent to form an encapsulated active agent, prior to adding the encapsulated active agent to other ingredients of the molasses block, being at a setting temperature of between about 46 to 55oC.

A body of the block can be of any suitable size and shape. The block body can comprise a top surface, a bottom surface and at least one side surface. Potential shapes for the block body include a rectangular, hexagonal or octagonal prism or cylinder/disc, for example.

The block body can be of any suitable weight but preferably has a weight of between about 5 and 1000 kg, and more preferably about 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950 and 1000 kg. ularly preferred ments of molasses supplements are described below.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises at least one type of flavouring agent and/or energy source. Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises at least about 45 to 60% /weight molasses, more preferably the molasses supplement comprises at least about 50 to 55% weight/weight molasses. Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 5 to 10% weight/weight salt.

Preferably, the molasses ment comprises at least one type of pH adjuster.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 3 to 5% weight/weight phosphoric acid.

Preferably, the molasses ment comprises at least one type of phosphate.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 5 to 10% weight/weight di-calcium phosphate.

Preferably, the molasses supplement ses at least one type of fying, binding, setting and/or gelling agent/s. Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 2.5 to 5% weight/weight bentonite. Preferably, the molasses supplement ses about 3 to 6% weight/weight magnesium, or more preferably magnesium oxide.

Preferably, the molasses supplement ses at least one type of mineral.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises the minerals phosphorous, calcium, magnesium, copper, cobalt and zinc. Potassium iodide, copper te, zinc oxide and colbalt sulphate can, for example, be used to e these minerals. Any suitable mineral quantity can be used. For example, the mineral content can be about 1-2% weight/weight.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises at least one type of n source/meal. Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 5 to 20% weight/weight canola meal.

Preferably, the es supplement comprises up to about 10% weight/weight water.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises at least one type of rumen modifier.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.03%, 0.04%, 0.05%, 0.06%, 0.07%, 0.08%, 0.09%, 0.1%, 0.15%, 0.2%, 0.25%, 0.3%, 0.35%, 0.4%, 0.45%, 0.5%, 0.55%, 0.6%, 0.65%, 0.7%, 0.75%, 0.8%, 0.85%, 0.9%, 0.95%, 10%, 10.5%, 11%, 11.5%, 12%, 12.5%, 13%, 13.5%, 14%, 14.5%, 15%, 15.5%, 16%, 16.5%, 17%, 17.5%, 18%, 18.5%, 19%, 19.5% or 20% weight/weight ding the range of 1% to 20% and any sub-range therein).

Preferably, 0.5 kg to 20 kg (0.5% to 20%) of rumen er is used per metric ton of block.

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 5-10% weight/weight finely chopped or powdered tannins. In some embodiments, the molasses block comprises about 3% lasalocid. In some embodiments, the molasses block comprises compounded tannins sourced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves).

Preferably, the molasses supplement comprises about 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.03%, 0.04%, 0.05%, 0.06%, 0.07%, 0.08%, 0.09%, 0.1%, 0.15%, 0.2%, 0.25%, 0.3%, 0.35%, 0.4%, 0.45%, 0.5%, 0.55%, 0.6%, 0.65%, 0.7%, 0.75%, 0.8%, 0.85%, 0.9%, 0.95%, 1%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, 3%, 3.5%, 4%, 4.5%, 5%, 5.5%, 6%, 6.5%, 7%, 7.5%, 8%, 8.5%, 9%, 9.5% or 10% weight/weight of canola oil. Preferably, the es ment ses about 5 to 10% weight/weight canola A particularly preferred hot-moulded molasses supplement ses the following ingredients (all weight/weight): approx. 50% molasses approx. 5% salt approx. 5% oric acid approx. 10% canola oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal approx. 0.01% potassium iodide approx. 0.01% copper sulphate approx. 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate approx. 0.001% Vitamin A approx. 10% tannins (tannins sourced from plants).

] Another particularly preferred hot-moulded molasses supplement comprises the following ingredients (all weight/weight): ] approx. 50% molasses ] approx. 5% salt approx. 5% phosphoric acid ] approx. 10% canola oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate approx. 5% linseed oil approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal approx. 0.01% potassium iodide approx. 0.01% copper sulphate approx. 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate . 0.001% Vitamin A ] approx. 10% tannins (tannins sourced from plants).

A particularly preferred cold-moulded molasses supplement comprises the following ingredients (all weight/weight): approx. 50% molasses ] approx. 5% salt approx. 10% canola oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 5% di-calcium ate approx. 5% linseed oil approx. 10% citrus pulp approx. 2.5% sodium sulphate approx. 5% s (tannins d from plants, eg. tea leaves) water, to balance.

Preferred embodiments of the invention are defined in the paragraphs below.

However, it is to be appreciated that the definitions may include other features of the ion bed elsewhere in this specification (context permitting). 1. Use of an encapsulant for encapsulating an active agent in a molasses supplement for a ruminant, wherein the encapsulant is ably an oil. ] 2. Encapsulated active agent in a molasses supplement for a ruminant, ably being an oil-encapsulated active agent. 3. A molasses supplement for a ruminant comprising encapsulated active agent, preferably oil-encapsulated active agent. 4. A method of manufacturing a molasses supplement for a ruminant, said method comprising the step of: combining encapsulated active agent, preferably an oil-encapsulated agent, with one or more ingredients to produce a es supplement; or combining an encapsulant, an active agent and one or more other ients to produce a molasses supplement, wherein said active agent is encapsulated with said encapsulant within the molasses supplement, and wherein said encapsulant is preferably an oil. 5. A molasses supplement produced by the method of paragraph 4. 6. A method of reducing gas emissions from a nt and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 2, the molasses supplement of paragraph 3, or the molasses supplement of paragraph 5, wherein said active agent is at least one type of rumen modifier. 7. A method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant: the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 2, the molasses ment of paragraph 3, or the molasses supplement of paragraph 5; and ality feed/forage, wherein said active agent is at least one type of rumen modifier. 8. A method of manufacturing a molasses supplement, said method comprising the steps of: combining ingredients, including an encapsulant and an active agent, to form a block mixture; pouring the block mixture into a mould; and allowing the block mixture to set to form a block comprising encapsulated active agent, preferably substantially uniformly sed throughout the block, wherein said encapsulant is ably an oil. 9. The use of aph 1, the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 2, the molasses supplement of aph 3, the method of paragraph 4, the molasses supplement of paragraph 5, the method of paragraph 6, the method of paragraph 7, or the method of paragraph 8, wherein said ulant is an oil, preferably a vegetable oil. 10. The use of paragraph 9, the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 9, the molasses supplement of paragraph 9, or the method of paragraph 9, wherein said vegetable oil is canola oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oil, olive oil, or safflower oil, or any combination f. ] 11. The use of paragraph 10, the encapsulated active agent of aph 10, the molasses supplement of paragraph 10, or the method of paragraph 10, wherein said vegetable oil is canola oil and/or linseed oil. 12. The use of any one of paragraphs 1, 10 and 11, the encapsulated active agent of any one of paragraphs 2, 10 and 11, the molasses supplement of any one of paragraphs 3, 5, 10 and 11, or the method of any one of paragraphs 4 and 6-11, wherein said at least one type of rumen modifier: (i) comprises a compound/substance that alters rumen fermentation patterns, to se feed efficiency and body weight gain; (ii) inhibits or suppresses the growth of or kills methanogenic bacteria; (iii) comprises a bactericidal agent; (iv) comprises an antibacterial agent; (v) comprises an antibiotic; (vi) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (vii) comprises an ionophore; (viii) ses a divalent polyether ionophore antibiotic; (ix) comprises a bromophore; (x) ses a red algae; ] (xi) comprises 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP); (xii) comprises monensin, lasalocid, mycin propionate and/or bambermycin; (xiii) comprises a polyether antibiotic; ] (xiv) ses a yeast e of killing methanogenic bacteria; (xv) comprises at least one bacterial strain capable of outcompeting methanogenic bacteria; (xvi) comprises bentonite; (xvii) comprises citrus pulp or citric acid thereof; ) comprises at least one type of tannin; or (xix) comprises any one or more of (i) to (xviii). 13. The use of paragraph 12, the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 12, the molasses supplement of paragraph 12, or the method of paragraph 12, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier comprises at least one type of tannin and/or citrus pulp. 14. The use of paragraph 13, the encapsulated active agent of paragraph 13, the molasses supplement of paragraph 13, or the method of paragraph 13, wherein the at least one type of tannin: (i) comprises condensed tannins; (ii) is sourced from plants; (iii) is in the form of one or more plant ts; (iv) is in the form of finely chopped plant forage; (v) is in the form of a powder; (vi) is in the form of tea leaves; (viii) is obtained from legumes; ] (ix) is obtained from tropical shrubs; (x) is obtained from the plant family Fabaceae; ] (xi) is obtained from the genus Leucaena, the genus Acacia, or the genus Melalecua; (xii) is produced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves); or (xiii) comprises any one or more of (i) to (xii). ] 15. A molasses supplement manufactured by the method of any one of paragraphs 8- 16. A molasses supplement block comprising the following ingredients (all weight/weight): ] molasses; at least one type of ulant; at least one type of rumen modifier; solidifying, binding, g and/or gelling agents so as to allow the block to set; and optionally, one or more additional ingredients. 17. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 16, wherein the at least one type of encapsulant comprises at least one type of vegetable oil. 18. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 17, wherein the at least one type of vegetable oil comprises one or more of canola oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oil, olive oil, and wer 19. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 18, wherein the at least one type of vegetable oil is canola oil and/or linseed oil. 20. The molasses supplement block of any one of paragraphs 16 to 19, wherein the at least one type of encapsulant is present in an amount of up to about 20%. 21. The molasses supplement block of any one of paragraphs 16 to 20, wherein the es is present in an amount of up to about 50%. 22. The molasses supplement block of any one of paragraphs 16 to 21, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier: (i) comprises a compound/substance that alters rumen fermentation patterns, to increase feed ency and body weight gain; (ii) inhibits or suppresses the growth of or kills methanogenic bacteria; (iii) comprises a bactericidal agent; ] (iv) comprises an antibacterial agent; (v) comprises an antibiotic; (vi) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (vii) comprises an ionophore; ] (viii) comprises a divalent polyether ionophore antibiotic; (ix) comprises a bromophore; ] (x) comprises a red algae; (xi) comprises 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP); (xii) comprises monensin, lasalocid, laidlomycin propionate and/or bambermycin; (xiii) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (xiv) comprises a yeast capable of g ogenic bacteria; (xv) comprises at least one bacterial strain capable of outcompeting methanogenic bacteria; (xvi) comprises bentonite; (xvii) comprises citrus pulp or citric acid thereof; ) comprises at least one type of tannin; or (xix) comprises any one or more of (i) to ). 23. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 22, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier ses at least one type of tannin and/or citrus pulp. 24. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 23, wherein the at least one type of (i) comprises condensed tannins; (ii) is sourced from plants; (iii) is in the form of one or more plant extracts; (iv) is in the form of finely chopped plant forage; (v) is in the form of a powder; (vi) is in the form of tea leaves; (viii) is obtained from legumes; (ix) is obtained from tropical shrubs; ] (x) is obtained from the plant family Fabaceae; ] (xi) is obtained from the genus na, the genus Acacia, or the genus Melalecua; (xii) is produced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves); or (xiii) comprises any one or more of (i) to (xii). 25. The molasses supplement block of paragraph 22, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier ses at least one type of ionophore, such as monensin and./or lasalocid. 26. The es supplement block of any one of paragraphs 16 to 25, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier is present in an amount of up to about 20%. 27. A molasses supplement comprising the ing ingredients (all weight/weight): Composition 1 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; . 10% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; . 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% n A; and approx. 10% tannins; Composition 2 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; ] approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate; ] approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 2.5% bentonite; ] approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; ] approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; and approx. 10% tannins; ] Composition 3 . 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 10% citrus pulp; approx. 2.5% sodium sulphate; ] approx. 5% tannins; and water, to balance; or ] Composition 4 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% cium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; ] approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; approx. 10% compounded plant tannins; and approx. 5-10% water; Composition 5 approx. 50% es; approx. 5% salt; . 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; . 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% ium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; . 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; approx. 10% compounded plant tannins; and . 5-10% water; Composition 6 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% linseed oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal; . 0.01% ium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; . 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; approx. 3% lasalocid; and approx. 5-10% water; Composition 7 approx. 50% es; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; ] approx. 10% cium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; ] approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; . 0.001% Vitamin A; ] approx. 3% lasalocid; and approx. 5-10% water. 28. A method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the nt the molasses supplement of any one of paragraphs 15 to 27. 29. A method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant: ] the molasses supplement of any one of paragraphs 15 to 27; and low-quality feed/forage.

Any of the es described herein can be combined in any combination with any one or more of the other features described herein within the scope of the invention.

The reference to any prior art in this specification is not, and should not be taken as an acknowledgement or any form of suggestion that the prior art forms part of the common general knowledge.

] Preferred es, embodiments and variations of the invention may be discerned from the following Preferred Embodiments section which provides sufficient information for those skilled in the art to perform the invention. The Preferred Embodiments section is not to be regarded as ng the scope of the preceding Detailed Description of the Invention in any way.

FIGURES Figure 1. Steer consuming molasses supplement lick blocks containing a vegetable Figure 2. Greenfeed Unit (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, South Dakota, US) utilized for ing CH4 and CO2 emissions from individual animals.

Figure 3. Effect of increasing the proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) containing d (top graph (a)) or canola oil (bottom graph (b)) on in vitro total gas production of a straw diet.

Figure 4. Effect of increasing the proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) containing linseed oil in a straw diet on in vitro CH4 (top graph (a)) and CO 2 (bottom graph (b)) concentration.

Figure 5. Effect of sing the proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) containing canola oil in a straw diet on in vitro CH4 (top graph (a)) and CO2 (bottom graph (b)) concentration.

PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Example 1 – Manufacture of a molasses supplement in the form of a block This Example describes the manufacture of a molasses supplement containing a rumen modifier (compounded plant tannins) and a vegetable oil (canola oil) as an encapsulant, manufactured using a hot moulding process. It is to be appreciated that the rumen modifier could be substituted for a different type of active agent such as, for example, a pain relieving, analgesic, anaesthetic, sedative, narcotic, antibiotic, anti-microbial, antifungal or anti-parasitic agent, antibody, vaccine, growth factor, steroid, hormone, polysaccharide, polypeptide, vitamin, mineral, or antiseptic agent. It is to be appreciated that the vegetable oil could be substituted for a ent type of vegetable oil or a combination of oils. For example, linseed oil could be used.

It is to be appreciated that the vegetable oil could be tuted for at least one different type of oil such as, for example, an animal or synthetic oil.

The nded plant s are powdered so that they can be emulsified and microencapsulated. Canola oil and powdered s at a 1:1 ratio were mixed in a high-speed mixer at a high shear speed forming the microcapsules. This was then immediately mixed into the below hot liquid base formula.

] Molasses, bentonite and magnesium oxide were mixed together in water using a highspeed mixer to create a hot liquid base formula. Other ingredients, including salt, phosphoric acid, di-calcium phosphate, canola meal, potassium iodide, copper te, zinc oxide and Vitamin A were added in turn to form a hot liquid molasses base formula. The hot liquid mixture was poured into a mould and allowed to set for about 48 hours. Canola oil-encapsulated tannins were dispersed evenly throughout the block during the mixing process allowing even consumption by all animals at a dose that was consistent with the y of the feed.

The molasses supplement ted of the following ingredients (all weight/weight): approx. 50% molasses approx. 5% salt ] approx. 5% phosphoric acid approx. 10% canola oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide . 10% di-calcium phosphate approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal approx. 0.01% potassium iodide . 0.01% copper sulphate approx. 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate approx. 0.001% n A approx. 10% compounded plant tannins approx. 5-10% water Alternatively, approx. 5% linseed oil could be used together with only approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate.

Some of the advantages of the molasses supplement as described in this e are stated below: 1. Bitterants that ruminants won’t normally eat owing to their acidic / bitter taste can be masked by way of encapsulation with canola oil. 2. Canola oil-encapsulated tannins can be dispersed evenly throughout the block. 3. The canola oil itself has ethanogenic properties. 4. The block is highly palatable, particularly to ruminants such as sheep and cattle. 5. The canola oil-encapsulated tannins produce a synergistic effect. 5. The block releases the canola oil-encapsulated tannins in a uniform and controlled manner. 6. The block enables controlled ption, thereby minimising the risk of overdosing. 7. s can self regulate consumption to gas emission and at the same time intake essential nutrients to increase productivity (body mass gain). ] 8. The block is weatherproof. 9. The block formulation allows ruminants to offset nt deficiencies.

Example 2 – In vivo feeding trials using the molasses ment block of e Summary An in vivo feeding trial was conducted to measure the effect of molasses supplement lick blocks (MLB) on growth rate and enteric gas production (CO2 and CH4) emissions in beef cattle. 40 steers and heifers were fed a basal diet of rice straw (low-quality orage) for 35 days. Animals were randomly assigned to one of two treatments: 1) Control, or 2) MLB containing canola oil-encapsulated rumen modifiers, prepared as described in Example 1. All animals were fed pellets in a GreenFeed unit to e greenhouse emissions from individual animals. Average MLB ption was 531 g/d and MLB increased growth rate by 233 g/d.

This would result in a ion in the intensity of GHG per unit of product or live weight produced. MLB based on canola oil have a positive effect on mance and intensity of GHG emissions of cattle fed rice straw (ie. low-quality feed/forage). This reduction in gas production may be due to a change in the fermentation pattern towards less methane and CO2 production, and more propionate. This mechanism should also increase the efficiency of feed utilization by the animal to e and reduce the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions.

Results of in vivo feeding trials Experimental details Forty Angus, Charolais and Crossbred weaned animals were used in the experiment (27 steers and 13 heifers, initial live weight = 441 ± 43.5 kg/hd; 18-20 months of age). The animals were blocked by liveweight and sex and then randomly assigned to one of two treatments: Control and Canola MLB (n=20 per group). All animals were tagged with electronic identification (EID).

The study was conducted for a total of 35 days with rice straw fed to allow for ad libitum consumption. Straw was delivered twice a week and placed into rake feeders for easy access. During the whole experiment animals from both groups were kept together in the experimental pen (25 m x 70 m) where hay was offered. Chemical composition of the offered forages and supplements is presented in Table 1. Water was always available. Animals in the Canola MLB treatment (n=20) were provided ad libitum access to molasses lick blocks containing canola oil in two electronic feeders to measure individual intake and feeding behaviour (Figure 1).

] One large animal Greenfeed Unit (GF; C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, South Dakota, US) was placed in the mental pen to measure greenhouse emissions from individual animals (Figure 2). The GF is a system designed to measure c gas fluxes from dual animals and it has been widely utilized and validated in research with beef and dairy cattle.

The GF unit utilizes small quantities of pellets, or based concentrates, as an attractant to encourage s to visit the unit multiple times per day. While the animal remains with the head inside the unit consuming the pellets, breathing and eructating, the air around the animal is aspirated automatically for real-time analysis to determine the concentration of CH4, H2, O2, and CO2. The flux rate of air is also measured and thus the total production of each gas emitted per unit of time is measured. For each animal, information generated by the GF includes animal identification, time and on of each visit and amount of each gas emitted during that time (converted to . More detailed information of the operation of the GF unit can be found in Hristov et al. (2015) and Velazco et al. (2016).

The GF was configured to feed animals in either the Control or Canola MLB group with the same amount of dried distillers grain pellets (DDG, Manildra Stockfeed, Table 1). The GF unit was programmed to deliver up to 5 cups (45 grams/cup) every 40 seconds comprising a visit, and a m of 5 visits or g periods per day at a minimum time between feeding periods of 4 hours. Chemical composition for all feeds were measured using NIRS. Before the commencement of the study, animals were gradually trained over two weeks to use the GF and electronic s.

Table 1: Chemical composition of rice straw and DDG pellets and Canola MLB fed during the study.

Live weight (LW) and faecal samples of individual animals were collected at the start and end of the trial. On those days, animals were walked to the holding yards in the morning and ed after collection ed. Faecal samples were analysed for faecal egg counts (FEC) and parasite identification, which was conducted by The University of Sydney’s Livestock Veterinary Services.

Results Data analysis Data from the GF was aded from the C-Lock Inc. website. Animals that presented less than 30 visits with good data to the GF were excluded for analyses, as per published literature suggest (Arthur et al., 2017). The final dataset for analysis contained 35 animals because of 4 animals never visited the GF and r animal with only 15 visits with good data.

Statistical es The GF data was averaged across the trial to obtain one value for each animal, as it was for initial and final LW, average daily live weight gain (ADG), and FEC for each sampling period. All data was analysed using SAS re (v9.4, SAS Inc., Cary, NC) using a linear regression model with the fixed effect of treatment, breed and sex.

Results The average consumption of rice straw hay was 5.74 kg DM/d or 1.30% of body weight measured at group level, and such low intakes are expected for these low-quality diets.

The average MLB intake was 410 g/d/hd across all 20 MLB animals measured manually by weighing the blocks. Results from the statistical analysis are presented for the effect of treatment only because breed and sex were not the objective of the trial.

Initial and final live weight was similar between treatments (P > 0.05) however animals fed the Canola MLB grew 232 g/d faster than Control animals (P = 0.02). Furthermore, animals in the Control treatment lost weight on average whereas those in the Canola MLB treatment gained weight. Faecal egg counts were not ed by treatments (P > 0.10), which was measured to assess the potential effect of rumen ers on tes and iosis. These results confirm that the improved performance of Canola MLB supplemented animals is not related to te Control but rather on the supply of energy and nutrients.

The daily intake of MLB of the Canola MLB group was 2 or 3-fold larger than expected and this may be explained by the low-quality diet as previously reported with similar blocks by Imaz et al. (2020). Calculation of energy requirements indicated a difference of approximately 5 MJ of ME/d between the Control and Canola MLB groups according to body weight and observed performance. Such an amount of ME would be provided by the MLB intake observed in the present study and therefore may explain the increased performance of the MLB animals. Animals in the Control group had a very small intake which was due to some animals in this ent occasionally gaining access to the MLB but being pushed but by the electronic feeders’ pneumatic gate. However, the intake of MLB by the Control animals is very small to cause any effects on performance or GHG emissions. The Canola MLB s ed their MLB intake visiting the feeder 1.8 times per day and spending approximately 12 min/d at the feeders.

Conclusion The molasses ment containing canola oil and rumen modifiers (encapsulated nded plant tannins) improved the performance of animals fed low quality forages.

Interestingly, cattle fed canola MLB put on weight and did not increase methane production compared to the control group. Therefore, the combination of these two factors would see a reduction in the intensity of methane emissions per unit of live weight produced, which may help with mitigating GHG emissions from nt production. Molasses seem a viable option for animal production with low quality diets typical of tropical and subtropical regions, and animals fed cereal straw. e 3 – Manufacture of a es supplement in the form of a block This Example bes the manufacture of a molasses supplement containing a rumen modifier (lasalocid) and a ble oil (linseed oil), manufactured using a hot ng process.

Molasses, ite and magnesium oxide were mixed er in water using a eed mixer to create a hot liquid base formula. Other ingredients, including linseed oil, lasalocid, salt, phosphoric acid, di-calcium phosphate, canola meal, potassium iodide, copper sulphate, zinc oxide and Vitamin A were added to form a hot liquid molasses base formula. The hot liquid mixture was poured into a mould and allowed to set for about 48 hours. Lasalocid was encapsulated by the d oil to some degree (semi-encapsulated) and the microcapsules were dispersed evenly throughout the block during the mixing process allowing even consumption by all animals at a dose that was consistent with the quality of the feed.

The molasses supplement consisted of the following ingredients (all weight/weight): approx. 50% molasses approx. 5% salt . 5% phosphoric acid approx. 10% linseed oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal . 0.01% potassium iodide approx. 0.01% copper sulphate ] . 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate approx. 0.001% Vitamin A approx. 3% lasalocid approx. 5-10% water Example 4 – Effect of molasses supplement lick block on in vitro fermentation profile of low-quality straw.

Summary Two in vitro fermentation trials were performed to measure total gas production and tation profile through the composition of the gas and liquid (volatile fatty acids, gas composition). The treatment diets contained 1 g of substrate with increasing proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) from 0, 25, 50 and 100% of MLB and the remainder being cereal straw. Each trial used MLB formulated either with linseed oil (Trial 1) or canola oil (Trial 2). The automated Ankom in vitro gas production system was used, and gas samples were taken at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours of incubation. In Trial 1, increasing the proportion of linseed oil MLB decreased OM available for fermentation, total gas production (TGP), total le fatty acid production (VFA), CH4 and CO2 production, and the proportion of acetate s MLB increased dry matter digestibility (DMD), the proportion of propionate and NH3-N (P < 0.001).

Linseed oil MLB reduced total gas, CH4 and CO2 production by up to 75% and more than doubled NH3-N. Canola oil also reduced linearly (P < 0.05) TGP, CH4, CO2 and total VFA but had negligible effects of fatty acid profile (acetate, butyrate and propionate) and did not affect the concentration of CH4 in the headspace. Canola oil MLB reduced TGP by 48%, CH4 by 65% and CO2 by 75%. The lower amount of TGP and lower concentration of CH4 suggest antimethanogenic properties of MLB containing linseed oil. In contrast, canola oil MLB reduced significantly TGP but the tration of CH4 in the headspace was not affected suggesting lower gas production without anti-methanogenic properties. Molasses lick blocks show a great potential to reduce greenhouse emissions from cattle while providing important nutrients to improve productivity.

Introduction The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effect of two MLB formulations on rumen fermentation e of cattle feed using in vitro gas production systems. In this study we evaluated the effect of MLB on fermentation ters, total gas production (TPG), Methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) production in vitro with low-quality straw diets, representative of Australasian beef cattle production systems.

Materials and s MLB formulated with linseed oil (Trial 1) has the following composition (all weight/weight): ] approx. 50% molasses approx. 5% salt approx. 5% phosphoric acid approx. 10% d oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate approx. 2.5% ite ] approx. 10% canola meal approx. 0.01% potassium iodide approx. 0.01% copper sulphate approx. 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate approx. 0.001% Vitamin A ] approx. 3% lasalocid approx. 5-10% water MLB formulated with canola oil (Trial 2) has the ing com position (all weight/weight): approx. 50% molasses approx. 5% salt approx. 5% phosphoric acid ] . 10% canola oil approx. 5% magnesium oxide approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate approx. 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal approx. 0.01% potassium iodide approx. 0.01% copper sulphate approx. 0.01% zinc oxide approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate approx. 0.001% Vitamin A approx. 3% lasalocid approx. 5-10% water Experimental Design The in vitro trials were conducted using the Ankom gas production . A basal forage diet composed of rice straw was mixed in different proportions with MLB containing linseed oil or canola oil (Table 2). The treatments were as follows in triplicate except for blanks which were in duplicate: (1) Blank: flask containing rumen fluid and buffer solution only. (2) 0% MLB: flask containing 1 gram of ground rice straw, rumen fluid as um + buffer solution. (3) 25% MLB: flask containing 0.75 g rice straw + 0.25 g MLB + rumen fluid as inoculum + buffer solution. (4) 50% MLB: flask containing 0.50 g rice straw + 0.50 g MLB + rumen fluid as inoculum + buffer solution. (5) 100% MLB: flask containing 1 g MLB + rumen fluid as inoculum + buffer solution.

For all diets, in vitro incubations were conducted to measure total gas production (TPG), methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations of the gases in the head space, volatile fatty acids (VFA) concentrations and proportions of the rumen liquid, a concentration and changes in fluid pH. The straw and MLB s were weighed into tared filter bags (F57, Ankom Technology, New York, USA) and then heat-sealed.

Table 2: Chemical ition of molasses lick blocks (MLB) containing linseed or canola oil, and cereal straw used for in vitro fermentations.

] Donor Animal and Preparation of Inoculum Rumen fluid (RF) inoculum was collected from a fistulated steer maintained at the University of Sydney, Camden Campus, according to current guidelines (NHMRC 2013). The steer was fed oaten hay (Avena sativa) ad libitum during the study to maintain a consistent microbial activity in the rumen over time. Rumen fluid was collected before the morning feeding, by sampling from the rumen and hand squeezing to filter through 5 layers of cheese cloth and completely fill a pre-warmed 1 L stainless steel thermo flask. The rumen fluid was immediately orted to the laboratory where it was kept at 39oC in a water bath and continuously purged with N2 to maintain anaerobic conditions. The same methodology was ted for each of the three experiments.

Inoculation and In Vitro Fermentation Two in vitro incubation trials were conducted with each MLB formulation to assess their effect on rumen fermentation profile using the ANKOM RF Gas Production System (Ankom logy, New York, USA). The in vitro incubations were conducted using 250 mL bottle fitted with ANKOM RF modules. These bottles measure the internal pressure and amount of gas produced by the fermentation fluid from the feed, which is then converted to mL of gas produced over time. On the day of the ment, bottles containing 80 mL of buffer solution of Goering and Van Soest (1970) and filter bags (feed and/or molasses lick block) samples were kept warmed at 39oC in a water bath. Twenty mL of rumen fluid were then added to each bottle, purged with N2 to maintain anaerobic conditions, capped with the Ankom RF module and randomly placed in an orbital shaker incubator maintained at 39oC and 90 Oscillation per minute for 72 hours while fermentation occurred (Thermofisher Scientific).

Fermentation and Gas Monitoring, and Post Fermentation Sample Analyses Total gas production The methods used in this study were similar to those described by Cone et al. (1996) and o et al. (2014). Total gas production (TGP) was measured continuously for 72 h. The ANKOM parameter settings were kept constant with maximum pressure in the fermentation bottle of 3 psi, which when reached would vent for 250 ms and the pressure change accounted in the cumulative re recording. Instantaneous and cumulative gas pressures were ed at 1-min intervals. The cumulative TGP expressed in mL/g of substrate DM was determined by application of the natural gas law to the accumulation of recorded gas pressure while accounting for individual bottle volume. TGP over time were plotted for each bottle and the TGP at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours of incubation were extracted (same times as gas sampling).

Methane and carbon dioxide tion In vitro methane and carbon dioxide concentration in the gas of the headspace was measured at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h post-incubation. Gas samples (12 mL) were ted from the head space via vent valve inserting a syringe and the gas was then transferred into a 10 mL evacuated exetainer (Labco Ltd, High Wycombe, UK) and preserved for analyses of methane and carbon dioxide tration by gas chromatography. Production of methane in mL/g substrate DM was estimated by application of e concentration in time series samples using the relative TGP while assuming constant homogeneity of bottle head space.

For chemical analysis of the gases, 2 mL vials (Agilent Technologies Pty Ltd, rne) were flushed with 7 mL of exetainer sample before over-pressurizing with a further 3 mL of gas. Quantification of the CH4 and CO2 mixing ratios were made from the 2 mL vials by injecting 250 µL of headspace gas, with a 1:1 injection spilt, onto a 100% divinylbenzene Rt-QBond ary gas chromatography (GC) column (30 m × 0.53 mm, 20 µm film thickness; LECO Australia Pty Ltd, Baulkham Hills), which was connected to a y splitter with makeup gas (Agilent). Restrictor s of deactivated fused silica (0.5 m x 0.18 mm; Agilent), connected to the outlets of the splitter, transferred the eluted products to a flame tion detector (FID; Model 7890A GC; Agilent) for measurement of CH4 or a thermal conductivity detector (TCD; Model 7890A GC; Agilent) for measurement of CO2. Ultra-high purity helium was used as carrier gas (flow rate through the Rt-Q-Bond column was 6.1 ml min–1 and 3.4 ml min-1 through each of the restrictor s). The GC oven and injection inlet were held isothermally at 30°C. The GC-FID/TCD system was calibrated using a high purity CH4 and CO2 mixture (20% CH4, 60% CO2 and 20% N2) that was d with ultra-high purity N2 (BOC). pH, volatile fatty acids and ammonia tion Upon completion of fermentations (72 h), the bottles were opened and the pH of the in vitro rumen fluid (IVF) was determined using a pH meter (model WP80M1-1300551, TSP, Brendale, QLD, Australia). Volatile fatty acids (VFA) and ammonia production were measured on a sub-sample of 1 mL of IVF transferred into 1 mL centrifuge tube, acidified with 25 µL of Sulfuric acid and stored at -20oC until al analysis. Samples were fuged for 20 min at 5000 × g and 1 µL of the clear supernatant was injected manually using 10 µL Hamilton e (Sigma-Aldrich, New Delhi, India) into NUCON-5700 gas chromatograph (Nucon Engineers, New Delhi, India) ed with flame ionization detector (FID) and glass column (30 m x 0.25 mm x 0.25 µm) packed with chromosorb 101 (Cottyn and Boucque, 1968). The column pressure for hydrogen and zero moisture air were 20 PSI and 10 PSI, respectively. Temperature of column oven, injector and detector were 170oC, 240oC and 250oC, respectively. The column was ramped from 170oC to 230oC at 6oC/min and held for 8.5 min. Measurement of ammonia nitrogen concentration consisted in similar sampling and sample sing of the IVF as for VFA and estimated as per the method of Chaney and Marbach (1962).

] Statistical analyses ] All data was analysed separately for each trial using SAS re (v9.4, SAS Inc., Cary, NC). Those variables measured only once for each bottle such as VFA proportions were analysed using ANOVA containing the fixed effect of treatment with means separated using the Tukey adjustment for multiple comparisons. Linear, quadratic and cubic effects of increasing MLB were calculated using linear model where MLB proportion was treated as a linear variable.

The P-values of treatments were obtained from a model which did not n the blank, so these represent differences between MLB treatments only. The average values for the blanks are presented in the table as descriptive information only. Total degradability was calculated as the percentage of feed disappearance from the Ankom bags between at the end of the incubation.

Total CH4 and CO2 production was calculated through 2 methods: 1) the area under the curve was calculated using the trapezoidal method, and 2) calculating the average gas concentration between 2 utive measures and then multiplying this by the amount of gas produced between these 2 measures. Data measured over time such as TGP and the concentration of methane and carbon dioxide were analysed using a linear mixed-effects model containing treatment, sampling time and their interaction as fixed effects, and bottle as random effect with repeated measure of time using a covariance structure SP(POW) to account for l spacing between repeated measurements. Gas production data over time was log transformed for statistical analysis. Significance was declared at P ≤ 0.05 and tendencies discussed at 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10. s and Discussion Gas production over time for each of the treatment diets in Trial 1 can be seen in Figure 3. There was a significant effect of diet, time and diet × time interaction on gas production kinetics (P < 0.001). For linseed MLB, total gas production was similar between treatment diets for the first 24 hours (P > 0.05) however Feed only diet showed greatest TGP at 48 and 72 hours, the 25% MLB diet was intermediate and both 50 and 100% MLB showed the lowest TGP with no ences between them (P < 0.05; Figure 3(a), top). Thus, 50 and 100% MLB diets produced nearly half (53%) of the gas produced by the same amount (1 g) of straw.

The kinetics of TGP was different for canola oil e 3(b), ) with differences n diets to be noted at 24 hours from the start of the incubation and a linear se in gas production to 72 hours as MLB proportion increased. The proportion of reduction in TGP by canola oil was similar to linseed, with the MLB only diet producing 51% of the gas produced by the feed only diet.

These results should only be interpreted together with OM ibility e the gas produced during in vitro fermentations come from the degradation of organic matter in feed by rumen microbes. Such fermentation produces waste gases including CO2, CH4 and H2 which represent a loss of energy, and volatile fatty acids (VFA) which are the main energy source of ruminant animals. Carbohydrates are hydrolysed to sugars (6 s) and these are finally fermented to butyric acid (4 C), propionic acid (3 C), acetic acid (2 C), methane (1 C) and carbon dioxide (1 C). VFA are measured in the liquid phase rather than in gaseous phase. Thus, TGP increases with feed degradation by rumen microbes indicating that more energy can be extracted from each gram of feed. Alternatively, more gas could be ed while feed degradability is maintained under fermentation pathways that increase carbon lost as gasses (e.g. CH4 + acetate) instead of propionate. Finally, it could also happen that both feed degradability and gas production are affected simultaneously. Therefore, the lower TGP with sing MLB proportion indicates that the extent and speed of feed degradation was reduced by MLB.

The in vitro fermentation indicated that the proportion of linseed oil MLB affected all variables (P ≤ 0.05) except pH at the start of the fermentations (P > 0.05; Table 3). Total VFA production per g of OM was greatest at 100% MLB but the concentration of VFA was greatest at 0% MLB compared to the rest of the treatments (Table 3). The tion of acetate and butyrate decreased linearly (P < 0.001) as the proportion of linseed MLB increased whereas nate increased sharply at 100% MLB. Total gas production, methane and carbon dioxide production also decreased with increasing MLB proportion (P < 0.001; Table 3). These are important and positive s which demonstrate that MLB changes the rumen fermentation profile perhaps promoting the growth of microorganisms that produce more nate from the degradation of sugars, and less acetate, methane and CO2. Similar effects have been observed for other products widely used in the livestock industries such as monensin which also increases propionate proportion, improves feed conversion efficiency and reduce e emissions.

Table 3. In vitro tation e of straw with increasing proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) containing linseed oil. 004 00.0 3.0 N00 60.0 3.0 56.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 mmd 50.0 50.0 50.0 055 No.0 00.0 um um fl fl a" fl fl fl H a" um fl u" um um a" 00.50 0.00 06.5 0nd N00 N00 00.2 0N0 0.000 50.50 00.0 06." 000. 064 0.5 00.5 0 N000 0 0 "5.0 600.0 560.0 N600 056.0 02.0 mmd 000.0 MON.0 00.520 53.0 005.0 0N0.0 005.0 000.0 0N0.0 005.0 00.0 03.0 000.0 .coanoa 0...). o8o.ov 80.0 500.0 000.0 80.0v 80.0V 20.0 08.0 80.0v 000.0 Sodv 80.0V 000.0 08.0 00N.0 N000 600.0 00N.0 80.0V 00N.0 08.0 00 A Hooov 000.0 Hooov Soov 000.0 mood 90o Hooov omoo Hooov Soov Hooov Hooov Soov 000.0 Soov Hooov 0oo.o "8.0V 52o Soov 053 253.0 Hooov 000.0 8o.ov Soov Hooov 8o.ov 060.0 80.ov 80.0v Hooov Soov 80.0v Hooov 8o.ov mmoo 800v Hooov mmoo Soov 03.0 Sod 2860:". 350 004 004 60.0 3.0 00.0 60.0 00.0 6.0 50.0 60.5 6H6 50.6 00.0 3.0 00.0 00.0 H00 00.0 004 00.0 00.0 :85. mu: a D 0 0 a o a a 0 0 a a o 0 o o o o 0 a o\eoom 00.60 00.00 00.00 0H0 00.0 054 ~00 2.00 6.0 ~00 0.05 0.6: 00.0 00.0 65.6 :6 50.0 656 50.60 N05 0H5 $29.0 mg o a 0 e o a o a p a a a n o o o o 0 0 on m .O e\e00 00.05 05.00 50.00 00.5 06.0 60.0 50.». NN6N 00.m 0N5 6.00 H.60H 00.0 6"." 00.0 00.6 N00 00.0 55.m0 60.5 00.5 J a v m a. a n a on on a 0 n o a u 0 n a a a n a n: $00 50.65 00.00 60.00 00.5 00.0 000 00.0 00.3 00.0 600 0.5: 0.02 00A 004 0m.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 0060 00.5 00.0 .006 mg a a a 9 a a a a a 0 o a u 0 a a a a 0 a 00.05 50.05 00.00 "0.0 mmo a." 00.0 0630.5. :0 006 0.060 6.02 00.0 65.N N05 50.0 00.3 N05 00.5 00.0 359.83 o\90 6066 coEEoU 038 A8 2m Song; x a a 28 .x. .x. .x. 0 48.53690 20 9 20 Q .5 .x. Q .x. .x. © © o 2.me 11> 4; .x. .2896 .2583 JEESH 68an mag durum a§§ $5 AS .x. 48 mus 5:388? © © .x. 3. msmfi> 38¢. 30 30 .630 .35 «mo .000 .80 .80 mm mg .a an 13°F .mmz 305 Eon. can 22m 25 47 47 Interestingly, NH3-N tration increased linearly with increasing MLB proportion (P < 0.001) and nearly doubled from 0 to 100% MLB (Table 3). NH 3-N is a byproduct from the fermentation and ruminal degradation of protein or urea nitrogen so these results may reflect the higher concentration of N in the MLB. Low concentrations of NH3-N in ality diets may indicate that ruminal degradation of feed is being limited by the availability of N for microbes to grow and degrade fibre.

] Feed DM digestibility increased from 0 to 50% MLB (P < 0.001) however no further improvement at 100% MLB were observed. These results could be due to an improvement in degradation of fibre or e MLB is more digestible than straw. However, it is important to note that the high ash content (low OM) of MLB may be due to high concentration of minerals which are dissolved in the rumen liquid increasing thereby the apparent DMD. Further research in vivo is required to assess the improvement in DMD when g MLB. An improvement of 10% units in DMD would equate to saving 1 kg of feed /hd/d for an animal consuming 10 kg of straw per day if translated to the same increase in total tract digestibility of feed (0.47 $/kg of feed). The greater proportion of propionate and lower methane production also supports this speculation of lesser energy losses and greater efficiency of feed utilisation with MLB. However, further in vivo trials measuring nutrient balance would be required to confirm these results. Unfortunately, trials to measure nutrient balances (for example N retention and elimination) are expensive and were not contemplated in this study.

] Ruminal fluid pH at the start of the incubations was not affected by MLB proportion (P < 0.05; Table 3). However, fluid pH at the end of the incubations increased with MLB proportion (P < 0.001) which could partly be related to the lower production of VFA with increasing MLB but also to potential buffering agents in MLB.

Results from in vitro fermentation of canola oil MLB are presented in Table 4. Feed DMD increased linearly by 24.6% as MLB increased from 0 to 100% of the diet. Total VFA production per g of OM increased linearly by 21.9% with MLB proportion (P < 0.001) s total VFA production decreased linearly by 10.6% (P = 0.01). Total mL of gas production, CH4 and CO2 decreased linearly by 48, 65 and 76% with MLB mentation (P < 0.001).

Therefore, the lower amount of OM ble for tation (26%) with increasing MLB proportion only explains part of the reduction of total VFA concentration and part is also explained by the se in total VFA per unit of OM due to lower fibre tration.

Furthermore, the lower amount of OM fermented with increasing MLB only explains part of the large reduction in total TGP, CH4 and CO2 reduction. Therefore, the effect of MLB on gas production is beyond of what is expected from the lower availability of OM for fermentation.

The detrimental effect of the ionophore lasalosid and oil on fibre degradation and methanogenic activity may be responsible for these observations.

The molar proportion of acetate showed a quadratic response to sing MLB being greatest for 0 and 100% MLB and lowest at 50% MLB (P = 0.001). However, butyrate and propionate tions were not affected by MLB tion. Valerate increased ly with MLB and isobutyrate showed a quadratic response being greatest with 25 and 50% MLB (P = 0.009; Table 4).

Table 4. In vitro fermentation profile of straw with increasing proportion of molasses lick block (MLB) containing canola oil.

Hmmd ammo Nmmd wood mvod woud :md Houd mwdm man E md vawd wand n24 nmod vvod Mafim - H H - - - - H H H H H H H H H H H H H H nn.nv 91% odd mod OWN no;v m0»; «66 odom omdm 2.0 wd Ed no." mmn wmn «mod nvod nwvd wmmd wwwd ond Hmad med mend nmod vwmd wmmd wmdd ommd and fimwd Sad owmd nowd dmmd vnfid wmgd Emd Hood onod wnod mood nmnd med owmd «mod wmod Hvod wwnd nood vad mNNd wmvd Sad wmvd NEd mood A 3odV mad SLd oomd mvod demo omnd ommd wood 8odV Hood Hoodv Hoodv mood wmfid floodv Hoodv Sod Hoodv floodv Hoodv .COEOQOLQ MEETA nood mood wood mgd mnod mvod wood wad ovod floodv Sodv floodv Hoodv VNod mnmd goodv sod odd mood Sod Hoodv 01—2 Sum «SYN emod :md wnvd anod mmod god mmnd wwod www.mm wman oomd mnNd cde wmvd mood ammo mwmd :6." mmod wmod 05:0 mg vod: den 2.8 mfiw mod mnA mm.m omAN mw.m n.nmm fiw 3 Tan do; wwA ZN me 3M SM. 24% Non mmn owe—.530 o\ooo~ cmmc: mg v6.0a nn.wn mwdm vwd mnd Nwé wmd mmdm nv.m ndmn m6: Nd: wag mvN mm.m mad mod 3% wwnv wmn nod mm=_m>.& o\oom 0.." mg .C 3 omdw dew de mod SA wmd nndm ov.m "3.0 vdfl o.mm~ mmd om.m ow.m 3n 3.x mmn 093. Nmn dad .Amod o\omm V ando wmww vméo 8d med on." "Nd wmdm mm.m $an ads H62 mod. mmd NQN mod «NdH wn.n om.mv mvn Vnd sm £08800 mg H8 2Q 6 o\o .5 "SO—E; .X. 20 20 .3 .X. o\o Nn Nn E .X. 959.: o Nn {PP 4g o\o o\o ..\a dougvoa doflgcokm © A8 mDS 45 we © © © o o\o o\o d o3wia> awe mam mam ,banmomhwmo mm mm .0 Eon. Eon "£8qu Graham 65.230 635393 duo—85$ 682905 653.? n.mEZ 30H EOE €30 .EAO €30 nNOD "NOD nNOD doom 33m 33m 50 50 Ammonia concentration increased linearly by 75% with MLB proportion (P < 0.001) which would also be because MLB contains high proportion of CP as both urea and true n from cottonseed. In contrast to results from d oil MLB, fluid pH at both the start and end of the incubation increased linearly with MLB. The tendency for lower concentration of total VFA may only explain part of these effects and the buffering effect of mineral used in MLB may be responsible for the remaining proportional effect.

Results on methane concentration of the headspace over time were similar to those obtained on gas production over time with increasing concentration of CH4 and CH2 over time (Diet × Time < 0.001; Figure 4 and 5). As the proportion of canola oil MLB sed, the concentration of CH4 in the headspace decreased with the differences between diets becoming more evident as the fermentation ssed (Figure 4). A similar observation was found on the concentration of CO2 over time with MLB decreasing the concentration of this gas (Figure ] r, the concentration of methane was not different amongst canola oil MLB treatments at any point in time (P > 0.05). In contrast, the concentration of CO 2 was reduced as the proportion of MLB sed (P < 0.05; Figure 5). Therefore, the reduced gas production is due to lower amount of gas produced with no changes in the concentration of CH4 and a reduction in CO2. No anti -methanogenic activity of canola oil MLB can be assumed from these results. In contrast, the reduction in the concentration of CH4 with MLB inclusion suggests that linseed oil has an anti-methanogenic effect in addition to the reduction in total gas produced.

Table 5 shows the proportion of change in the fermentation profile from 0 (straw only diet) to 100% MLB (MLB only diet), and from 0 to 25% MLB to better understand the differences n oils used in the block. The table shows that both blocks result in a similar increase in total VFA per g OM with 22 and 26% increase for canola and linseed oil, respectively.

Table 5. Proportional change from 0% to 25 and 100% es lick block (MLB) in the diet containing either linseed or canola oil in two in vitro trials of cereal straw.

However, the linseed oil results in a much larger reduction in butyrate and increase in propionate compared to the canola oil MLB. Linseed oil MLB also has a larger effect on NH3, which doubled (106%) at 100% MLB and ses by 32% at 25% MLB. Linseed oil also had a greater reduction of TGP per g OM and CH4 but lower reduction on CO2 production, and greater increase in DMD compared to canola oil (Table 5).

Conclusion Molasses lick block ning minerals, feed additives such as ionophores, energy and protein sources, and vegetable oil from canola and linseed show great potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from c fermentation. These blocks could also improve animal production further increasing the reduction on the intensity of greenhouse emissions (kg beef / kg CO2e). Lick blocks ning linseed oil seem to have anti-methanogenic ties reducing methane production at a larger extent than lick blocks containing canola oil. However, both blocks containing either canola or linseed oil have a similar ion in total gas production.

References Arthur, P. F., et al. "Optimizing test procedures for ting daily methane and carbon dioxide ons in cattle using short-term breath measures." l of Animal Science 95.2 (2017): 645-656.

Chaney A. L. and Marbach E. P. " Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia." Clin Chem. 1962 Apr;8:130-2. PMID: 13878063.

Cone, J.W., van Gelder, A.H., Visscher, G.J.W. and Oudshoorn, L. 1996. Influence of rumen fluid and substrate concentration on tation kinetics measured with a fully automated time related gas production apparatus. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61: 113- Cottyn B. G. and Boucque C. V. "Rapid method for the gas-chromatographic determination of volatile fatty acids in rumen fluid." Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 1968 16 (1), 105-107, DOI: 10.1021/jf60155a002.

Gibbs BF, Kermasha S, Alli I, Mulligan CN. Encapsulation in the food industry: a review. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 1999 May;50(3):213-24. doi: 10.1080/096374899101256. PMID: 10627837.

Goering, H.K., Van Soest, P.J. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, ures and some applications). In: United States Department of Agriculture (ed) Agricultural handbook, US Govemment Printing Office, Washington, vol. 379. 1970.

Hristov, Alexander N., et al. "The use of an automated system (GreenFeed) to monitor enteric methane and carbon dioxide emissions from ruminant animals." JoVE (Journal of Visualized Experiments) 103 (2015): e52904.

Imaz, José A., Sergio García, and Luciano A. ez. "Real-Time ring of Self-Fed ment Intake, Feeding Behaviour, and Growth Rate as ed by Forage Quantity and Quality of Rotationally Grazed Beef Cattle." Animals 9.12 : 1129.

Imaz, José A., Sergio García, and Luciano A. González. "Application of in-paddock technologies to monitor individual self-fed supplement intake and liveweight in beef cattle." Animals 10.1 (2020): 93.

Machado L, Magnusson M, Paul NA, de Nys R., Tomkins N. 2014. s of Marine and Freshwater Macroalgae on In Vitro Total Gas and Methane Production. PLoS ONE 9(1): e85289.

Nedovic V., Kalusevic A., Manojlovic V., Levic S., Bugarski B., An overview of encapsulation technologies for food applications, Procedia Food Science, Volume 1, 2011, Pages 1806-1815, ISSN 2211-601X.

Timilsena, Y., Haque, M. and ri, B. (2020) Encapsulation in the Food Industry: A Brief Historical Overview to Recent Developments. Food and Nutrition es, 11, 481-508. doi: 10.4236/fns.2020.116035.

] Velazco, J. I., et al. "Use of short-term breath measures to estimate daily methane tion by cattle." Animal 10.1 (2016): 25-33.

In the present specification and claims (if any), the word ‘comprising’ and its derivatives including ‘comprises’ and ‘comprise’ include each of the stated integers but does not exclude the inclusion of one or more further integers.

Reference throughout this specification to ‘one ment’ or ‘an embodiment’ means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is ed in at least one ment of the present invention. Thus, the appearance of the phrases ‘in one embodiment’ or ‘in an embodiment’ or ‘in some embodiments’ in various places throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment. Furthermore, the particular features, structures, or characteristics may be ed in any suitable manner in one or more combinations.

] In compliance with the statute, the invention has been described in language more or less specific to ural or methodical es. It is to be understood that the invention is not limited to specific features shown or described since the means herein described comprises preferred forms of putting the invention into effect. The invention is, therefore, claimed in any of its forms or modifications within the proper scope of the appended claims (if any) appropriately interpreted by those skilled in the art.

Claims (29)

1. Use of an encapsulant for encapsulating an active agent in a es supplement for a ruminant, wherein the encapsulant is preferably an oil.

2. Encapsulated active agent in a molasses supplement for a ruminant, preferably being an oilencapsulated active agent.

3. A es supplement for a ruminant comprising encapsulated active agent, preferably oilencapsulated active agent.

4. A method of manufacturing a molasses supplement for a ruminant, said method comprising the step of: ing encapsulated active agent, preferably an oil-encapsulated agent, with one or more ingredients to produce a molasses supplement; or combining an encapsulant, an active agent and one or more other ingredients to produce a molasses supplement, wherein said active agent is encapsulated with said encapsulant within the molasses ment, and wherein said encapsulant is preferably an oil.

5. A molasses supplement produced by the method of claim 4.

6. A method of reducing gas ons from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant the encapsulated active agent of claim 2, the molasses supplement of claim 3, or the molasses supplement of claim 5, wherein said active agent is at least one type of rumen modifier.

7. A method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or sing the efficiency of feed utilization by the nt, said method comprising the step of g the ruminant: the encapsulated active agent of claim 2, the molasses supplement of claim 3, or the molasses supplement of claim 5; and ality feed/forage, wherein said active agent is at least one type of rumen modifier.

8. A method of manufacturing a molasses supplement, said method comprising the steps of: combining ingredients, including an encapsulant and an active agent, to form a block mixture; pouring the block mixture into a mould; and ng the block mixture to set to form a block comprising encapsulated active agent, preferably substantially uniformly dispersed throughout the block, wherein said encapsulant is preferably an oil.

9. The use of claim 1, the encapsulated active agent of claim 2, the molasses supplement of claim 3, the method of claim 4, the molasses supplement of claim 5, the method of claim 6, the method of claim 7, or the method of claim 8, wherein said encapsulant is an oil, preferably a vegetable

10. The use of claim 9, the encapsulated active agent of claim 9, the molasses supplement of claim 9, or the method of claim 9, wherein said vegetable oil is canola oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oil, olive oil, or wer oil, or any combination thereof.

11. The use of claim 10, the encapsulated active agent of claim 10, the molasses ment of claim 10, or the method of claim 10, wherein said ble oil is canola oil and/or linseed oil.

12. The use of any one of claims 1, 10 and 11, the encapsulated active agent of any one of claims 2, 10 and 11, the molasses supplement of any one of claims 3, 5, 10 and 11, or the method of any one of claims 4 and 6-11, wherein said at least one type of rumen modifier: (i) ses a compound/substance that alters rumen fermentation patterns, to se feed efficiency and body weight gain; (ii) inhibits or suppresses the growth of or kills methanogenic bacteria; (iii) comprises a bactericidal agent; (iv) ses an antibacterial agent; (v) comprises an antibiotic; (vi) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (vii) comprises an ionophore; (viii) comprises a divalent polyether ionophore antibiotic; (ix) comprises a bromophore; (x) comprises a red algae; (xi) comprises 3-nitrooxypropanol ); (xii) comprises monensin, lasalocid, laidlomycin nate and/or bambermycin; (xiii) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (xiv) comprises a yeast e of killing methanogenic bacteria; (xv) comprises at least one bacterial strain capable of outcompeting methanogenic bacteria; (xvi) comprises bentonite; (xvii) comprises citrus pulp or citric acid thereof; (xviii) comprises at least one type of ; or (xix) ses any one or more of (i) to (xviii).

13. The use of claim 12, the encapsulated active agent of claim 12, the molasses supplement of claim 12, or the method of claim 12, n the at least one type of rumen modifier comprises at least one type of tannin and/or citrus pulp.

14. The use of claim 13, the encapsulated active agent of claim 13, the molasses supplement of claim 13, or the method of claim 13, wherein the at least one type of tannin: (i) comprises condensed tannins; (ii) is sourced from plants; (iii) is in the form of one or more plant extracts; (iv) is in the form of finely chopped plant forage; (v) is in the form of a powder; (vi) is in the form of tea leaves; (viii) is obtained from legumes; (ix) is obtained from tropical shrubs; (x) is obtained from the plant family Fabaceae; (xi) is obtained from the genus Leucaena, the genus Acacia, or the genus Melalecua; (xii) is produced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves); or (xiii) comprises any one or more of (i) to (xii).

15. A molasses supplement manufactured by the method of any one of claims 8-14.

16. A molasses supplement block comprising the following ingredients (all weight/weight): molasses; at least one type of encapsulant; at least one type of rumen modifier; solidifying, binding, setting and/or gelling agents so as to allow the block to set; and optionally, one or more onal ingredients.

17. The molasses supplement block of claim 16, wherein the at least one type of ulant comprises at least one type of vegetable oil.

18. The molasses ment block of claim 17, wherein the at least one type of vegetable oil comprises one or more of canola oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oil, olive oil, and safflower oil.

19. The molasses supplement block of claim 18, n the at least one type of vegetable oil is canola oil and/or linseed oil.

20. The molasses supplement block of any one of claims 16 to 19, n the at least one type of encapsulant is present in an amount of up to about 20%.

21. The molasses supplement block of any one of claims 16 to 20, wherein the molasses is present in an amount of up to about 50%.

22. The molasses supplement block of any one of claims 16 to 21, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier: (i) comprises a compound/substance that alters rumen fermentation patterns, to se feed efficiency and body weight gain; (ii) inhibits or suppresses the growth of or kills methanogenic bacteria; (iii) comprises a bactericidal agent; (iv) comprises an cterial agent; (v) comprises an antibiotic; (vi) comprises a polyether otic; (vii) comprises an ionophore; (viii) comprises a divalent polyether ionophore antibiotic; (ix) comprises a bromophore; (x) comprises a red algae; (xi) comprises 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP); (xii) comprises monensin, lasalocid, laidlomycin propionate and/or bambermycin; (xiii) comprises a polyether antibiotic; (xiv) comprises a yeast capable of g methanogenic bacteria; (xv) comprises at least one bacterial strain capable of peting methanogenic (xvi) comprises bentonite; (xvii) comprises citrus pulp or citric acid thereof; (xviii) comprises at least one type of tannin; or (xix) comprises any one or more of (i) to (xviii).

23. The molasses supplement block of claim 22, wherein the at least one type of rumen er ses at least one type of tannin and/or citrus pulp.

24. The molasses supplement block of claim 23, wherein the at least one type of tannin: (i) comprises condensed tannins; (ii) is sourced from plants; (iii) is in the form of one or more plant extracts; (iv) is in the form of finely chopped plant forage; (v) is in the form of a powder; (vi) is in the form of tea leaves; (viii) is obtained from legumes; (ix) is obtained from tropical shrubs; (x) is obtained from the plant family Fabaceae; (xi) is obtained from the genus Leucaena, the genus Acacia, or the genus Melalecua; (xii) is produced from plants such as acacia trees, wattle trees, mulga trees and/or tea plants (e.g. spent tea leaves); or (xiii) ses any one or more of (i) to (xii).

25. The molasses supplement block of claim 22, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier ses at least one type of ionophore, such as monensin and/or lasalocid.

26. The molasses supplement block of any one of claims 16 to 25, wherein the at least one type of rumen modifier is present in an amount of up to about 20%.

27. A molasses ment comprising the following ingredients (all weight/weight): Composition 1 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% di-calcium ate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; . 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; and . 10% tannins; Composition 2 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; . 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; and approx. 10% tannins; Composition 3 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; . 5% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 10% citrus pulp; approx. 2.5% sodium sulphate; approx. 5% s; and water, to balance; ition 4 approx. 50% es; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; . 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% n A; approx. 10% compounded plant tannins; and approx. 5-10% water; Composition 5 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 5% linseed oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 5% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium ; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% n A; approx. 10% compounded plant tannins; and approx. 5-10% water; Composition 6 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; . 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% linseed oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate; . 2.5% bentonite approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; . 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; . 3% lasalocid; and approx. 5-10% water; Composition 7 approx. 50% molasses; approx. 5% salt; approx. 5% phosphoric acid; approx. 10% canola oil; approx. 5% magnesium oxide; approx. 10% di-calcium phosphate; approx. 2.5% bentonite; approx. 10% canola meal; approx. 0.01% potassium iodide; approx. 0.01% copper sulphate; approx. 0.01% zinc oxide; approx. 0.01% cobalt sulphate; approx. 0.001% Vitamin A; approx. 3% lasalocid; and approx. 5-10% water.

28. A method of reducing gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the ruminant the molasses supplement of any one of claims 15 to 27.

29. A method of ng gas emissions from a ruminant and/or increasing the efficiency of feed utilization by the ruminant, said method comprising the step of feeding the nt: the molasses supplement of any one of claims 15 to 27; and low-quality feed/forage.