Zeolite: The mineral with a bag of chemical tricks
g o f c h e m i c a l t r i c k s
Zeolite : the mineral with a bag of chemical tricks
The use and preference for mineral materials over chemical in various agricultural application is not new.
In fact, the trend is fast growing owing to the people’s desire to reduce use of pollutants and minimize its entry into the food chain of human beings and farm animals.
During the last decade, notably the last four years an International Conference of Zeolite scientist is being held for them to exchange and share their observations on zeolite research with other scientists from other countries.
The Philippines was a participant in the last 4th International Conference on Zeolite help at Red Lion Hotel-Riverside in Boise, Idaho, U.S.A. The country was represented by Ignacio S. Sam, president and Gen. Manager of Chester Industries, Inc. and Engr. Aquilino S. Villa, animal nutrition consultant of the same company.
Zeolite technology in this country has made remarkable progress in the field of animal nutrition.
Besides odor control, water treatment, sludge removal and other industrial application where it is slowly replacing activated carbon, silica gel, pillared clays and other absorbent materials for its economic cost, natural zeolite is now widely used to achieve significant weight gain, greater intake and feed conversion efficiency in farms as well as domestic animals.
In a comparative study to determine the feeding value of Chester Industries, Inc. KRS Zeolite against another zeolite (Brand X) and Farm Diet (control), Dr. Lydia J. Querubin, Researcher and In-Charge, Analytical Service, Nutritional Div. at U.P Los Banos, Laguna and L. M. Pelaez, Farm Manager of DESMEG, in Latag, Lipa City, Batangas observed that weanling pigs’ body weight, feed intake and feed conversion efficiency was significantly improved when given five percent KRS Zeolite supplementation in their daily diets during 20 day period.
KRS Zeolite registered a daily weight gain of 0.735 ag. Against 0.623 g. for control and a lower 0.621 g. for Brand X zeolite; Average daily feed consumption was 1.44 kg. KRS Zeolite, 1.35 kg. for Control and 1.32 kg for Brand X Zeolite.
Final weight of Starter pigs fed five percent KRS Zeolite after the 20-day period was 49.25kgs, 46.13 kgs for control, and Brand X Zeolite, 45.44 kgs.
The common perception among some farm owners and animal nutritionist is that natural zeolite disrupt and interfere with biochemical transformations occurring within the digestive system of animals by binding amino acids, vitamins as well as antibiotics thereby eliminating its nutritional function is indeed without scientific basis.
Natural Zeolite’s main function, when used as absorbent is physical, owing to its inherent physical structural framework.
It’s microscopic pores that comprises its large cavities and entry channels have a molecular dimension of 4.0 Angstrom to 8.1 Angstrom.
An oxygen atom is about 1.3 A. If we could place oxygen atoms adjacent to one another, we could line up over 74 million of them in just 1 centimeter.
Amino acid, vitamins and antibiotics are generally regarded as macro-molecules, because they contain carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, and sometimes N atoms in large numbers, their molecular dimensions are definitely larger. (from 25 A to 65A) and would be too large to fit through the entry channels and excluded in the absorption process.
These molecules thereon pass around the outside of the zeolite particle, giving rise to the well known “molecular sieving” property of most crystalline zeolites.
Other foreign scientist like Frederick Mumpton and Fishman (1977) made similar findings, similar to those of Dr. Querubin and Pelaez. They observed increased weight gain, feed efficiency, and reduced incidence and severity of diarrhea with the addition of 1 to 5 percent clinoptilolite zeolite in the diet of pigs, sheep, rabbit and lambs.
Watkins and Southern (1992) observed that calcium utilization in-chicks fed natural zeolite is significantly increased. Rousel et al, (1992) also observed that zeolite supplementation in cow rations increases fat, protein and calcium content of cow’s milk.
One suggested mechanism advanced by F. Mumpton in the cation- exchange property of Natural Zeolite.
The increasing preference for natural zeolite as feed supplement stem primarily from its unique physical properties 1) enormous specific surface area, sometimes several hundred square meter/gram, 2) high water absorption capacity, 3) high porosity, the ability to allow liquids and gases to diffuse in and out of its grains with ease, and 4) high selectivity for ammonium ions, making it effective in counteracting ammonia toxicity in sheeps, ruminants, birds and pigs.
Natural zeolite takes up ammonium ions also in intestinal lumen. Varel et al, (1987) found that clinoptilolite increases urease activity in the large intestinal lumen of pigs possibly as a result of the binding of ammonium ions. Zeolites, generally are endowed with absorption power and cation-exchange abilities, because of its crystalline form and exchangeable cations loosely held in its tetrahedral framework.
However, not all zeolitic materials, especially those non-crystalline in form, hard and somewhat denser due to silica minerals filling pore spaces in the rock and acting as a mineral cement are good cation exchangers. Hard zeolite rocks are generally less porous and, of course contain less zeolite.
Chester Industries, Inc. president Ignacio S. Sam and Engr. Aquilino S. Villa had the opportunity to visit some very prominent zeolite deposits during their one-week stay in the United States, especially the one at Boise, Idaho and Succor Creek Pit TM at Oregon, U.S.
Our local zeolite is activable and possess like those in the United States some fine attributes of the zeolite of interest as prescribed in the previous International Conference on Zeolites.
The undergoing research for a more wider role for natural zeolite in the aquaculture industry i.e., the removal of toxic gases in brackish pond water has produced very encouraging results.
Brackish water generally contain strong ionic elements. Competition from other ions in this kind of effluent reduce the number of exchange sites available to contaminant species, i.e., ammonium, sulfide and nitrite ions. (Stephen Sp[otte, Fish and Invertebrate Culture).
Chien, in his Water Quality Management Review, underlined the failure of natural zeolite to remove ammonia in brackish water, although he found it to be effective in freshwater.
On occasion, the winemaker may decide to leave them in if the grapes themselves contain less tannin than desired. This is more acceptable if the stems have ‘ripened’ and started to turn brown. If increased skin extraction is desired, a winemaker might choose to crush the grapes after destemming.
Wine is one of the most civilized things in the world and one of the most natural things of the world that has been brought to the greatest perfection, and it offers a greater range for enjoyment and appreciation than, possibly, any other purely sensory thing.
Removal of stems first means no stem tannin can be extracted. In these cases the grapes pass between two rollers which squeeze the grapes enough to separate the skin and pulp, but not so much as to cause excessive shearing or tearing of the skin tissues. In some cases, notably with “delicate” red varietals such as Pinot noir or Syrah, all or part of the grapes might be left uncrushed (called “whole berry”) to encourage the retention of fruity aromas through partial carbonic maceration.
The Grapes
The quality of the grapes determines the quality of the wine more than any other factor. Grape quality is affected by variety as well as weather during the growing season, soil minerals and acidity, time of harvest, and pruning method. The combination of these effects is often referred to as the grape’s terroir.
Grapes are usually harvested from the vineyard from early September until early November in the northern hemisphere, and mid February until early March in the southern hemisphere.
In some cool areas in the southern hemisphere, for example Tasmania, harvesting extends into May. The most common species of wine grape is Vitis Vinifera, which includes nearly all varieties of European origin. The most common species of wine grape is Vitis Vinifera, which includes nearly all varieties of European origin.
Manual harvesting is the hand-picking of grape clusters from the grapevines. In the United States, some grapes are picked into one- or two-ton bins for transport back to the winery. Manual harvesting has the advantage of using knowledgeable labor to not only pick the ripe clusters but also to leave behind the clusters that are not ripe or contain bunch rot or other defects. This can be an effective first line of defense to prevent inferior quality fruit from contaminating a lot or tank of wine.
Destemming is the process of separating stems from the grapes. Depending on the winemaking procedure, this process may be undertaken before crushing with the purpose of lowering the development of tannins and vegetal flavors in the resulting wine. Single berry harvesting, as is done with some German Trockenbeerenauslese, avoids this step altogether with the grapes being individually selected.
Crushing is the process when gently squeezing the berries and breaking the skins to start to liberate the contents of the berries. Destemming is the process of removing the grapes from the rachis (the stem which holds the grapes).
In traditional and smaller-scale wine making, the harvested grapes are sometimes crushed by trampling them barefoot or by the use of inexpensive small scale crushers. These can also destem at the same time. However, in larger wineries, a mechanical crusher/destemmer is used. The decision about destemming is different for red and white wine making. Generally when making white wine the fruit is only crushed, the stems are then placed in the press with the berries. The presence of stems in the mix facilitates pressing by allowing juice to flow past flattened skins.
