Improving Brewery Sustainability: Upcycling the Discarded Byproducts Trub, Spent Hops, and Yeast as Livestock Feed Additives
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Collection, Analysis and Drying of Byproducts (THYM)
2.2. In Vitro Biological Activity Measurements
2.2.1. Measurement of Antimicrobial Activity with Bacillus subtilis
2.2.2. Measurement of Antioxidant Activity with ABTS
2.2.3. Rumen Fluid Fermentations, Short Chain Fatty Acid (SCFA), and Methane Measurements
2.3. In Vivo Biological Activity of THYM
2.3.1. Experimental Design of Feedlot Study with Weanling Black Angus Steers
2.3.2. Blood Collection and XN Blood Metabolite Analysis by LC-MS-MS
2.4. Statistical Analysis
2.4.1. In Vitro
2.4.2. In Vivo
3. Results
3.1. Collection and Analysis of THYM Preparations and Drying Experiments
3.2. Characterization of THYM Preparations
3.2.1. In Vitro Antimicrobial Activity

| Sample | Antimicrobial Activity 1,2 | Trolox Equivalent Antioxidant Capacity 3,4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC 5 (μg/mL) | SD | μmole-/g | SD | |
| THYM 3 | 137 c | 39 | 90 d | 13 |
| α-Acids | 8 b,d | 3 | 1140 a | 220 |
| β-Acids | 2 a,d | 1 | 263 c | 16 |
| Iso-α-acids | >250 | 1 e | 1 | |
| Monensin | 3 d | 3 | ND | |
| Vitamin C | ND | 494 b | 91 | |
3.2.2. In Vitro Antioxidant Activity
3.2.3. In Vitro Fermentations with Bovine Rumen Fluid
3.3. In Vivo Feeding Trial
Performance
3.4. Amount of XN and Related Phytoestrogens in Serum of THYM-Fed Animals
4. Discussion
4.1. Origin and Analysis of THYM
4.2. Antimicrobial Activity of Hop Acids and THYM
4.2.1. Antioxidant Activity of Hop Acids and THYM
4.2.2. Rumen Fluid Fermentations with THYM
4.3. In Vivo Feedlot Studies
4.3.1. Selection of the THYM Inclusion Rate
4.3.2. Animal Performance with THYM and Monensin Diet Inclusion
4.3.3. Estrogenic Evaluation of THYM
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| ADF | acid digestible fiber |
| ADG | average daily gain |
| AH | acid hydrolysis |
| A:P | acetate:protionate ratio |
| BTS | 2,2′-azinobis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) |
| DCHA | Dicyclohexylammonium |
| DDXN | O-desmethyl-α,β-dihydroxanthohumol |
| DMI | dry matter intake |
| DXN | α,β-dihydroxanthohumol |
| G:F | gain to feed ratio |
| HPLC | high-performance liquid chromatography |
| IACUC | Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee |
| MIC | minimum inhibitory concentration |
| MS | mass spectrometry |
| MRS | Mountain Research Station |
| NCSU | North Carolina State University |
| NDF | neutral detergent fiber |
| 6-PN | 6-phenylnaringenin |
| 8-PN | 8-phenylnaringenin |
| SCFA | short chain fatty acids |
| TEAC | Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity |
| THYM | trub hops yeast mix |
| TMRs | total mixed rations |
| XN | xanthohumol |
References
- Raihofer, L.; Zarnow, M.; Gastl, M.; Hutzler, M. A Short History of Beer Brewing: Alcoholic Fermentation and Yeast Technology over Time. EMBO Rep. 2022, 23, e56355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fernandes, P.C.B.; Silva, J. Brewing By-Products: Source, Nature, and Handling in the Dawn of a Circular Economy Age. Biomass 2025, 5, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korpelainen, H.; Pietiläinen, M. Hop (Humulus lupulus L.): Traditional and Present Use, and Future Potential. Econ. Bot. 2021, 75, 302–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amoriello, T.; Ciccoritti, R. Sustainability: Recovery and Reuse of Brewing-Derived By-Products. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pasquet, P.-L.; Villain-Gambier, M.; Trébouet, D. By-Product Valorization as a Means for the Brewing Industry to Move toward a Circular Bioeconomy. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyhan, L.; Sahin, A.W.; Schmitz, H.H.; Siegel, J.B.; Arendt, E.K. Brewers’ Spent Grain: An Unprecedented Opportunity to Develop Sustainable Plant-Based Nutrition Ingredients Addressing Global Malnutrition Challenges. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2023, 71, 10543–10564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ikram, S.; Huang, L.; Zhang, H.; Wang, J.; Yin, M. Composition and Nutrient Value Proposition of Brewers Spent Grain. J. Food Sci. 2017, 82, 2232–2242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westendorf, M.L.; Wohlt, J.E. Brewing By-Products: Their Use as Animal Feeds. Vet. Clin. Food Anim. Pract. 2002, 18, 233–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kerby, C.; Vriesekoop, F. An Overview of the Utilisation of Brewery By-Products as Generated by British Craft Breweries. Beverages 2017, 3, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brewers Association. Brewers Association Reports 2024 U.S. Craft Brewing Industry Figures; Brewers Association: Boulder, CO, USA, 2025. [Google Scholar]
- Rachwał, K.; Waśko, A.; Gustaw, K.; Polak-Berecka, M. Utilization of Brewery Wastes in Food Industry. PeerJ 2020, 8, e9427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haseleu, G.; Lagemann, A.; Stephan, A.; Intelmann, D.; Dunkel, A.; Hofmann, T. Quantitative Sensomics Profiling of Hop-Derived Bitter Compounds Throughout a Full-Scale Beer Manufacturing Process. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 7930–7939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bryant, R.W.; Cohen, S.D. Characterization of Hop Acids in Spent Brewer’s Yeast from Craft and Multinational Sources. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 2015, 73, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belardi, I.; De Francesco, G.; Alfeo, V.; Bravi, E.; Sileoni, V.; Marconi, O.; Marrocchi, A. Advances in the Valorization of Brewing By-Products. Food Chem. 2025, 465, 141882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halahlah, A.; Abdessamie, K.; Peltonen, S.; Thao, H.M. A Review of Innovative Approaches to Valorizing Brewing By-Products for Food Applications and Consumer Perceptions. Sustain. Food Technol. 2025, 4, 1316–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cermak, P.; Olsovska, J.; Mikyska, A.; Dusek, M.; Kadleckova, Z.; Vanicek, J.; Nyc, O.; Sigler, K.; Bostikova, V.; Bostik, P. Strong Antimicrobial Activity of Xanthohumol and Other Derivatives from Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) on Gut Anaerobic Bacteria. APMIS 2017, 125, 1033–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiofentzoglou, D.; Andronidou, E.M.; Kontou, P.I.; Bagos, P.G.; Braliou, G.G. Antimicrobial Activity of Chemical Hop (Humulus lupulus) Compounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 7806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontek, B.; Jedrejek, D.; Oleszek, W.; Olas, B. Antiradical and Antioxidant Activity In Vitro of Hops-Derived Extracts Rich in Bitter Acids and Xanthohumol. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 161, 113208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorjanović, S.; Pastor, F.T.; Vasić, R.; Novaković, M.; Simonović, M.; Milić, S.; Sužnjević, D. Electrochemical versus Spectrophotometric Assessment of Antioxidant Activity of Hop (Humulus lupulus L.) Products and Individual Compounds. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 9089–9096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flythe, M.D. The Antimicrobial Effects of Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) on Ruminal Hyper Ammonia-producing Bacteria. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2009, 48, 712–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flythe, M.D.; Kagan, I.A.; Wang, Y.; Narvaez, N. Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Bitter Acids: Modulation of Rumen Fermentation and Potential As an Alternative Growth Promoter. Front. Vet. Sci. 2017, 4, 131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pszczolkowski, V.L.; Bryant, R.W.; Harlow, B.E.; Aiken, G.E.; Martin, L.J.; Flythe, M.D. Effects of Spent Craft Brewers’ Yeast on Fermentation and Methane Production by Rumen Microorganisms. AiM 2016, 6, 716–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryant, R.W.; Burns, E.E.R.; Feidler-Cree, C.; Carlton, D.; Flythe, M.D.; Martin, L.J. Spent Craft Brewer’s Yeast Reduces Production of Methane and Ammonia by Bovine Rumen Microbes. Front. Anim. Sci. 2021, 2, 720646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flythe, M.D.; Aiken, G.E. Effects of Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Extract on Volatile Fatty Acid Production by Rumen Bacteria. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2010, 109, 1169–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Krishna, G.; Czerkawski, J.W.; Breckenridge, G. Fermentation of Various Preparations of Spent Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Using the Rumen Simulation Technique (Rusitec). Agric. Wastes 1986, 17, 99–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narvaez, N.; Wang, Y.; Xu, Z.; McAllister, T. Effects of Hops on in Vitro Ruminal Fermentation of Diets Varying in Forage Content. Livest. Sci. 2011, 138, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flythe, M.D.; Harlow, B.E. Effects of Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Beta-Acids on Short Chain Fatty Acid Production from Complex Carbohydrates by Rumen Microbiota. Adv. Microbiol. 2019, 9, 983–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Wang, Y.; Chaves, A.V.; Rigby, F.L.; He, M.L.; McAllister, T.A. Effects of Hops on Ruminal Fermentation, Growth, Carcass Traits and Shedding of Escherichia Coli of Feedlot Cattle. Livest. Sci. 2010, 129, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lavrencic, A.; Pirman, T.; Zgur, S. Use of Hop Cones in Growing Beef Cattle Nutrition. Ann. Wars. Univ. Life Sci.-SGGW. Anim. Sci. 2018, 57, 121–131. [Google Scholar]
- Focant, M.; Froidmont, E.; Archambeau, Q.; Van, Q.C.D.; Larondelle, Y. The Effect of Oak Tannin (Quercus robur) and Hops (Humulus lupulus) on Dietary Nitrogen Efficiency, Methane Emission, and Milk Fatty Acid Composition of Dairy Cows Fed a Low-Protein Diet Including Linseed. J. Dairy. Sci. 2019, 102, 1144–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cornelison, J.M.; Yan, F.; Watkins, S.E.; Rigby, L.; Segal, J.B.; Waldroup, P.W. Evaluation of Hops (Humulus iupulus) as an Antimicrobial in Broiler Diets. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2006, 5, 134–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tillman, G.E.; Haas, G.J.; Wise, M.G.; Oakley, B.; Smith, M.A.; Siragusa, G.R. Chicken Intestine Microbiota Following the Administration of Lupulone, a Hop-Based Antimicrobial. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2011, 77, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bortoluzzi, C.; Menten, J.F.M.; Romano, G.G.; Pereira, R.; Napty, G.S. Effect of Hops β-Acids (Humulus lupulus) on Performance and Intestinal Health of Broiler Chickens. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2014, 23, 437–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bortoluzzi, C.; Menten, J.F.M.; Pereira, R.; Fagundes, N.S.; Napty, G.S.; Pedroso, A.A.; Bigaton, A.D.; Andreote, F.D. Hops β-Acids and Zinc Bacitracin Affect the Performance and Intestinal Microbiota of Broilers Challenged with Eimeria acervulina and Eimeria tenella. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 2015, 207, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sbardella, M.; Perina, D.P.; Andrade, C.; Santos, C.B.; Cairo, P.L.G.; Marques, E.L.S.; Rezende, R.P.; Costa, L.B.; Miyada, V.S. Effects of Dietary Hop β-Acids or Colistin on the Performance, Nutrient Digestibility, and Intestinal Health of Weanling Pigs. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 2016, 217, 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bajagai, Y.S.; Alsemgeest, J.; Moore, R.J.; Van, T.T.H.; Stanley, D. Phytogenic Products, Used as Alternatives to Antibiotic Growth Promoters, Modify the Intestinal Microbiota Derived from a Range of Production Systems: An In Vitro Model. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 10631–10640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klotz, J.L.; MacAdam, J.W.; Flythe, M.D. Editorial: Natural Products in Animal Feed and Production Systems. Front. Anim. Sci. 2023, 4, 1204663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saraiva, B.R.; Anjo, F.A.; Vital, A.C.P.; da Silva, L.H.M.; Ogawa, C.Y.L.; Sato, F.; Coimbra, L.B.; Matumoto-Pintro, P.T. Waste from Brewing (Trub) as a Source of Protein for the Food Industry. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 54, 1247–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashburn, B.E.; Brennan, M.W.; Bryant, R.W. Animal Food Product and Method and Apparatus Therefor. US Patent Application No. 2024/0373877 A1, 1 November 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Hudzicki, J. Kirby-Bauer Disk Diffusion Susceptibility Test Protocol. Am. Soc. Microbiol. 2009, 15, 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Klančnik, A.; Piskernik, S.; Jeršek, B.; Možina, S.S. Evaluation of Diffusion and Dilution Methods to Determine the Antibacterial Activity of Plant Extracts. J. Microbiol. Methods 2010, 81, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Errington, J.; van der Aart, L.T. Microbe Profile: Bacillus Subtilis: Model Organism for Cellular Development, and Industrial Workhorse. Microbiology 2020, 166, 425–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gawad, R.; Fellner, V. Evaluation of Glycerol Encapsulated with Alginate and Alginate-Chitosan Polymers in Gut Environment and Its Resistance to Rumen Microbial Degradation. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 32, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sauer, F.D.; Fellner, V.; Kinsman, R.; Kramer, J.K.G.; Jackson, H.A.; Lee, A.J.; Chen, S. Methane Output and Lactation Response in Holstein Cattle with Monensin or Unsaturated Fat Added to the Diet. J. Anim. Sci. 1998, 76, 906–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Legette, L.; Karnpracha, C.; Reed, R.L.; Choi, J.; Bobe, G.; Christensen, J.M.; Rodriguez-Proteau, R.; Purnell, J.Q.; Stevens, J.F. Human Pharmacokinetics of Xanthohumol, an Antihyperglycemic Flavonoid from Hops. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2014, 58, 248–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Possemiers, S.; Bolca, S.; Grootaert, C.; Heyerick, A.; Decroos, K.; Dhooge, W.; De Keukeleire, D.; Rabot, S.; Verstraete, W.; Van de Wiele, T. The Prenylflavonoid Isoxanthohumol from Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Is Activated into the Potent Phytoestrogen 8-Prenylnaringenin In Vitro and in the Human Intestine. J. Nutr. 2006, 136, 1862–1867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Billah, M.T.; Hossain, M.A.; Zannat, N.E.; Roy, J.; Sarker, M.S.H. Integrated Design and Optimization of a Conceptual Double Drum Dryer for Drying of Wheat Flour Slurry: Experimental Validation and Computational Analysis. J. Food Process Eng. 2024, 47, e14701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almena, A.; Goode, K.R.; Bakalis, S.; Fryer, P.J.; Lopez-Quiroga, E. Optimising Food Dehydration Processes: Energy-Efficient Drum-Dryer Operation. Energy Procedia 2019, 161, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Natarajan, P.; Katta, S.; Andrei, I.; Ambati, V.B.R.; Leonida, M.; Haas, G.J. Positive Antibacterial Co-Action between Hop (Humulus lupulus) Constituents and Selected Antibiotics. Phytomedicine 2008, 15, 194–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fahle, A.; Bereswill, S.; Heimesaat, M.M. Antibacterial Effects of Biologically Active Ingredients in Hop Provide Promising Options to Fight Infections by Pathogens Including Multi-Drug Resistant Bacteria. Eur. J. Microbiol. Immunol. 2022, 12, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Łowicki, D.; Huczyński, A. Structure and Antimicrobial Properties of Monensin A and Its Derivatives: Summary of the Achievements. BioMed Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 742149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Dalabasmaz, S.; Gensberger-Reigl, S.; Heymich, M.-L.; Krofta, K.; Pischetsrieder, M. Identification of Colupulone and Lupulone as the Main Contributors to the Antibacterial Activity of Hop Extracts Using Activity-Guided Fractionation and Metabolome Analysis. Food Res. Int. 2023, 169, 112832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shen, C.; Sofos, J.N. Antilisterial Activity of Hops Beta Acids in Broth with or Without Other Antimicrobials. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, M438–M442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harlow, B.E.; Lawrence, L.M.; Kagan, I.A.; Flythe, M.D. Inhibition of Fructan-fermenting Equine Faecal Bacteria and Streptococcus Bovis by Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) Β-acid. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2014, 117, 329–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sleha, R.; Radochova, V.; Mikyska, A.; Houska, M.; Bolehovska, R.; Janovska, S.; Pejchal, J.; Muckova, L.; Cermak, P.; Bostik, P. Strong Antimicrobial Effects of Xanthohumol and Beta-Acids from Hops against Clostridioides Difficile Infection In Vivo. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Di Lodovico, S.; Menghini, L.; Ferrante, C.; Recchia, E.; Castro-Amorim, J.; Gameiro, P.; Cellini, L.; Bessa, L.J. Hop Extract: An Efficacious Antimicrobial and Anti-Biofilm Agent Against Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococci Strains and Cutibacterium acnes. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blatchford, P.A.; Parkar, S.G.; Hopkins, W.; Ingram, J.R.; Sutton, K.H. Dose-Dependent Alterations to In Vitro Human Microbiota Composition and Butyrate Inhibition by a Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Hops Extract. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khaliullina, A.; Kolesnikova, A.; Khairullina, L.; Morgatskaya, O.; Shakirova, D.; Patov, S.; Nekrasova, P.; Bogachev, M.; Kurkin, V.; Trizna, E.; et al. The Antimicrobial Potential of the Hop (Humulus lupulus L.) Extract against Staphylococcus Aureus and Oral Streptococci. Pharmaceuticals 2024, 17, 162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narvaez, N.; Wang, Y.; McAllister, T. Effects of Extracts of Humulus lupulus (Hops) and Yucca Schidigera Applied Alone or in Combination with Monensin on Rumen Fermentation and Microbial Populations In Vitro. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 2517–2522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putman, A.K.; Contreras, G.A.; Sordillo, L.M. Isoprostanes in Veterinary Medicine: Beyond a Biomarker. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dzienisik, M.; Marzec, M.; Nowak, I. Antioxidant Constituents of Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) as Functional Raw Materials for Cosmetic Applications. Materials 2026, 19, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blaxland, J.A.; Watkins, A.J.; Baillie, L.W.J. The Ability of Hop Extracts to Reduce the Methane Production of Methanobrevibacter Ruminantium. Archaea 2021, 2021, e5510063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scicutella, F.; Foggi, G.; Daghio, M.; Mannelli, F.; Viti, C.; Mele, M.; Buccioni, A. A Review of in Vitro Approaches as Tools for Studying Rumen Fermentation and Ecology: Effectiveness Compared to In Vivo Outcomes. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2025, 24, 589–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trotta, R.J.; Kreikemeier, K.K.; Foote, S.; McLeod, K.R.; Harmon, D.L. Influence of Anti-Coccidial Compounds and Phytogenic Saponin Extracts on In Vitro and In Vivo Ruminal Fermentation and Methane Production of Cattle. Animals 2023, 13, 2308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Intelmann, D.; Batram, C.; Kuhn, C.; Haseleu, G.; Meyerhof, W.; Hofmann, T. Three TAS2R Bitter Taste Receptors Mediate the Psychophysical Responses to Bitter Compounds of Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) and Beer. Chem. Percept. 2009, 2, 118–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, K.F.C.E.; Feltre, G.; Zandonadi, F.S.; Rabelo, R.S.; Sussulini, A.; Hubinger, M.D. Unlocking Hot Trub’s Potential: A Simple Method for Extracting Bitter Acids and Xanthohumol. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2024, 104, 5381–5390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baek, K.-R.; Ramakrishnan, S.R.; Kim, S.-J.; Seo, S.-O. Yeast Cell Wall Mannan Structural Features, Biological Activities, and Production Strategies. Heliyon 2024, 10, e27896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hanczakowska, E.; Świątkiewicz, M.; Grela, E.R. Effect of Dietary Supplement of Herbal Extract from Hop (Humulus lupulus) on Pig Performance and Meat Quality. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 62, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Overk, C.R.; Yao, P.; Chadwick, L.R.; Nikolic, D.; Sun, Y.; Cuendet, M.A.; Deng, Y.; Hedayat, A.S.; Pauli, G.F.; Farnsworth, N.R.; et al. Comparison of the In Vitro Estrogenic Activities of Compounds from Hops (Humulus lupulus) and Red Clover (Trifolium pratense). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 6246–6253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Hashem, N.M.; Soltan, Y.A. Impacts of Phytoestrogens on Livestock Production: A Review. Egypt. J. Nutr. Feed. 2016, 19, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wyse, J.; Latif, S.; Gurusinghe, S.; McCormick, J.; Weston, L.A.; Stephen, C.P. Phytoestrogens: A Review of Their Impacts on Reproductive Physiology and Other Effects upon Grazing Livestock. Animals 2022, 12, 2709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, H.-H.; Xia, T.-S.; Jiang, Y.-P.; Xu, W.-M.; Xu, P.-C.; Wang, N.-N.; Gou, X.-J.; Xin, H.-L. Absorption, Metabolism, and Pharmacokinetic Profile of Xanthohumol in Rats as Determined via UPLC-MS/MS. Biopharm. Drug Dispos. 2022, 43, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottner, M.; Christoffel, J.; Wuttke, W. Effects of Long-Term Treatment with 8-Prenylnaringenin and Oral Estradiol on the GH-IGF-1 Axis and Lipid Metabolism in Rats. J. Endocrinol. 2008, 198, 395–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Torrens-Mas, M.; Alorda-Clara, M.; Martínez-Vigara, M.; Roca, P.; Sastre-Serra, J.; Oliver, J.; Pons, D.G. Xanthohumol Reduces Inflammation and Cell Metabolism in HT29 Primary Colon Cancer Cells. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 73, 471–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, Y.; Bobe, G.; Revel, J.S.; Rodrigues, R.R.; Sharpton, T.J.; Fantacone, M.L.; Raslan, K.; Miranda, C.L.; Lowry, M.B.; Blakemore, P.R.; et al. Improvements in Metabolic Syndrome by Xanthohumol Derivatives Are Linked to Altered Gut Microbiota and Bile Acid Metabolism. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2020, 64, 1900789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Muhie, S.H. Novel Approaches and Practices to Sustainable Agriculture. J. Agric. Food Res. 2022, 10, 100446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clemensen, A.K.; Provenza, F.D.; Hendrickson, J.R.; Grusak, M.A. Ecological Implications of Plant Secondary Metabolites—Phytochemical Diversity Can Enhance Agricultural Sustainability. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2020, 4, 547826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flythe, M.D.; Harlow, B. 51 Use of Plant Secondary Metabolites and Impact on Beef Cattle Production. J. Anim. Sci. 2023, 101, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossi, L.; Dell’Anno, M. Novel Antioxidants for Animal Nutrition. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathias, T.R.d.S.; Alexandre, V.M.F.; Cammarota, M.C.; de Mello, P.P.M.; Sérvulo, E.F.C. Characterization and Determination of Brewer’s Solid Wastes Composition. J. Inst. Brew. 2015, 121, 400–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosa, R.S.; Lannes, S.C.d.S. Hop Extracts and Their Utilizations: Perspectives Based on the Last 10 Years of Research. Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 2024, 60, e23905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gormley, A.R.; Deng, Z.; Ashburn, B.; Bryant, R.W.; Kim, S.W. Effect of a Trub, Hops, and Yeast Mixture on Jejunal Mucosal Immune Status, Oxidative Stress Status, Structure, and Growth Performance of Nursery Pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 2025, 103, skaf425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Item | THYM, mg/mL | p Value | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 3.3 | SEM | Linear | Quadratic | |
| Hour 0 | ||||||||
| Total SCFA, mM | 66.1 | 67.3 | 66.2 | 66.9 | 63.2 | 1.86 | 0.94 | 0.87 |
| pH | 6.76 a | 6.72 a | 6.70 a | 6.55 b | 6.56 b | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.14 |
| Acetate, mol % | 64.7 | 65.3 | 65.5 | 65.3 | 65.3 | 0.33 | 0.13 | 0.35 |
| Propionate, mol % | 17.9 | 17.5 | 17.3 | 17.2 | 17.2 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.44 |
| Butyrate, mol % | 11.2 | 11.3 | 11.1 | 11.4 | 11.2 | 0.12 | 0.80 | 0.31 |
| Valerate, mol % | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 2.6 | 0.07 | 0.94 | 0.73 |
| A/P | 3.6 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.40 |
| Methane, nmol/mL | 24 | 22 | 20 | 25 | 32 | 3.00 | 0.97 | 0.14 |
| Hour 24 | ||||||||
| Total SCFA, mM | 166.6 | 169.4 | 178.9 | 172.7 | 165.8 | 6.6 | 0.51 | 0.16 |
| pH | 5.38 a | 5.45 b | 5.47 bc | 5.55 d | 5.51 cd | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.97 |
| Acetate, mol % | 43.6 | 43.9 | 44.3 | 44.2 | 42.7 | 0.52 | 0.78 | 0.23 |
| Propionate, mol % | 30.2 | 31 | 32.1 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 0.76 | 0.01 | 0.06 |
| Butyrate, mol % | 23.3 | 22.2 | 20.7 | 15.9 | 17.3 | 0.83 | 0.01 | 0.26 |
| Valerate, mol % | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.42 |
| A/P | 1.43 a | 1.40 a | 1.43 a | 1.20 b | 1.17 b | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Methane, nmol/mL | 430 a | 392 ab | 341 b | 345 b | 342 b | 21 | 0.01 | 0.16 |
| Item | Period 1 | Period 2 | Period 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| g/100 g DM 2 | SEM | |||
| Moisture a | 89.6 | 85.9 | 87.1 | 0.6 |
| CP | 33.8 | 35.7 | 35.2 | 0.7 |
| Calcium | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0. 9 | <0.1 |
| Phosphorus | 1.2 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.1 |
| Ash | 7.6 | 7.3 | 7.9 | 0.1 |
| NDF | 23.3 | 21.3 | 22.6 | 0.4 |
| ADF | 18.6 | 14.4 | 17.0 | 1.0 |
| mg/g | ||||
| iso-α-acids | 5.3 | 4.9 | 6.9 | 0.1 |
| α-acids | 29.9 | 21.9 | 24.3 | 1.0 |
| β-acids | 16.7 | 14.6 | 14.3 | 4.2 |
| XN | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 2.4 |
| Units | ||||
| pH b | 5.03 | 5.63 | 6.50 | 0.37 |
| Item | Treatment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Monensin | THYM | |
| Ingredient | g/100 g DM 1 | ||
| Corn silage | 66.97 | 66.90 | 66.34 |
| Mixed grass hay | 7.54 | 7.53 | 7.47 |
| Ground corn | 10.92 | 10.90 | 10.81 |
| Soybean meal | 12.48 | 12.47 | 12.36 |
| Mineral premix | 1.10 | 1.10 | 1.09 |
| Limestone | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 |
| THYM | - | - | 0.95 |
| Monensin | - | 0.003 | - |
| Formulated composition | |||
| DM | 32.13 | 33.10 | 32.41 |
| CP | 13.26 | 13.15 | 12.73 |
| Calcium | 0.83 | 0.84 | 0.80 |
| Phosphorus | 0.31 | 0.32 | 0.32 |
| Starch | 26.99 | 28.88 | 26.27 |
| Item | Treatment | Contrasts | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | MON | THYM | SEM | CON vs. MON and THYM | MON vs. THYM | |
| ADG 1, kg/d | -------- p < ------- | |||||
| Total | 1.54 | 1.65 | 1.72 | 0.09 | 0.22 | 0.6 |
| Period 1 | 1.34 | 1.43 | 1.53 | 0.12 | 0.34 | 0.6 |
| Period 2 | 1.62 | 1.85 | 1.90 | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.83 |
| Period 3 | 1.65 | 1.66 | 1.72 | 0.12 | 0.76 | 0.72 |
| DMI, kg/d | ||||||
| Total | 4.15 | 4.20 | 4.22 | 0.12 | 0.68 | 0.91 |
| Period 1 | 3.83 | 3.85 | 3.96 | 0.11 | 0.59 | 0.53 |
| Period 2 | 4.28 | 4.35 | 4.38 | 0.15 | 0.65 | 0.86 |
| Period 3 | 4.34 | 4.41 | 4.32 | 0.12 | 0.87 | 0.61 |
| G:F, kg/kg | ||||||
| Total | 0.36 | 0.38 | 0.40 | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.53 |
| Period 1 | 0.34 | 0.37 | 0.38 | 0.02 | 0.38 | 0.77 |
| Period 2 | 0.38 a | 0.43 b | 0.43 b | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.83 |
| Period 3 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.37 | 0.02 | 0.63 | 0.41 |
| Metabolite 3 | THYM | SD |
|---|---|---|
| Serum Concentration (nM) | ||
| XN 2 | 7.3 | 1.7 |
| DXN | 5.2 | 1.4 |
| IXN | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| 6PN | 6.9 | 1.4 |
| 8-PN | 4.0 | 0.8 |
| DDXN | 1.0 | 0.3 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Harmon, D.D.; Phipps, K.P.; Poore, M.H.; Henderson, E.; Martin, L.J.; Fields, I.D.; Stevens, J.F.; Wu, W.; Fellner, V.; Ashburn, B.; et al. Improving Brewery Sustainability: Upcycling the Discarded Byproducts Trub, Spent Hops, and Yeast as Livestock Feed Additives. Sustainability 2026, 18, 5449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18115449
Harmon DD, Phipps KP, Poore MH, Henderson E, Martin LJ, Fields ID, Stevens JF, Wu W, Fellner V, Ashburn B, et al. Improving Brewery Sustainability: Upcycling the Discarded Byproducts Trub, Spent Hops, and Yeast as Livestock Feed Additives. Sustainability. 2026; 18(11):5449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18115449
Chicago/Turabian StyleHarmon, Deidre D., Kendra P. Phipps, Matt H. Poore, Ethan Henderson, Langdon J. Martin, Isaac D. Fields, Jan F. Stevens, Wenbin Wu, Vivek Fellner, Broxton Ashburn, and et al. 2026. "Improving Brewery Sustainability: Upcycling the Discarded Byproducts Trub, Spent Hops, and Yeast as Livestock Feed Additives" Sustainability 18, no. 11: 5449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18115449
APA StyleHarmon, D. D., Phipps, K. P., Poore, M. H., Henderson, E., Martin, L. J., Fields, I. D., Stevens, J. F., Wu, W., Fellner, V., Ashburn, B., & Bryant, R. W. (2026). Improving Brewery Sustainability: Upcycling the Discarded Byproducts Trub, Spent Hops, and Yeast as Livestock Feed Additives. Sustainability, 18(11), 5449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18115449

