Lucta is a serious formulator with a long track record in this category, and Luctarom is a credible product range. We have no head-to-head trial data against it and will not imply otherwise. What this page does is show you how to interpret the claims on both sides — ours included — and how to settle the question in your own mill.
The retention claim is the standard currency in this category: some percentage of original intensity retained after some number of days. Lucta publishes a claim of this shape for the Luctarom range. It is a reasonable thing to publish. But a retention figure is only interpretable with three attachments, and they are usually missing:
| Question | Why it changes the answer |
|---|---|
| Held at what temperature and humidity? | Reaction rate roughly doubles per 10°C. A figure from a 20°C dry store does not describe a 32°C, 85% RH warehouse — and no correction factor makes it transfer honestly |
| Measured how? | Retained assay of a marker compound, sensory panel intensity, and actual feed intake are three different endpoints that can diverge. A product can keep most of its marker and still lose its feeding signal |
| Percent of what baseline? | Pre-pelleting or post-pelleting changes the meaning completely. If the baseline is taken after conditioning, the pelleting loss has already been excluded from the number |
This applies to our numbers too. When we say VS1437 holds 180 days under combined heat and humidity, you are entitled to ask the same three questions, and you should. The mechanisms behind all of this are written up here.
Lucta describes a porous silica carrier at range level for Luctarom — more disclosure than most of this category offers, and worth acknowledging. The engineering trade-off is real and cuts both ways:
| Carried on a porous substrate | Carrier-free or matrix-protected |
|---|---|
| High internal surface area genuinely slows volatilisation — the molecule has further to travel to escape | No inert mass to ship, clear customs on, or store |
| Easy to meter a gram-scale active at tonne scale | Dispersion depends entirely on particle size distribution |
| Many carriers are hygroscopic — in 85% RH they pick up moisture, cake, and can raise water activity in the feed | Different failure mode: fines and segregation if the granule is friable |
| Softer carriers abrade under mechanical stress; the active ends up somewhere other than the pellet | Nothing to abrade off, but the active is more exposed if the matrix is breached |
Neither form wins universally. What matters is whether the supplier has tested that specific form under your humidity and will show you the data.
| Field | Luctarom range (Lucta) | SILSEP VS1437 | SILSEP VS382 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Active percentage | Not published | Not published | Not published |
| Carrier | Porous silica described at range level | Not published | Not published |
| Flavour direction | Range covers sweet and aromatic profiles | Biomimetic marine attractant profile | Fresh-milk aroma, MCT/SCFA system |
| Stability claim | Retention-style claim published at range level | 180-day stability under combined heat and humidity | 540-day shelf life |
| Dosage | Luctarom Sweet SFS 100–1,000 g/T (as published) | To formulation | 500–1,000 g/T |
| Shelf life | At least 18 months for Luctarom Sweet SFS (as published) | Not published | 540 days |
| Trial data with conditions | Not published in accessible form | Not published | +13.65% intake, +10.58% ADG, +3.53% G:F at 600 g/T — 50-day-old weaned piglets, 30 days, n=40, Sichuan, China |
Lucta figures are as published by Lucta or by its distributors as at September 2026. “Not published” means we could not locate the figure in public sources — including for our own products, where it applies to us as much as to them. If any entry is out of date, tell us and we will correct it.
The row worth dwelling on is the last one. Not because our trial is large — n=40 over 30 days is a modest study and we describe it that way — but because the conditions are attached to the number. A percentage without a dose, an age, a duration and a sample size is not evidence; it is a claim wearing evidence's clothes. Judge ours on those terms, and ask the same of anyone else.
| The job | Grade | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Masking in fishmeal-replacement and alternative-protein formulas | VS1437 | Marine attractant profile; the task is covering an off-note as much as adding attraction |
| Getting a weaned piglet to start eating | VS382 | Milk aroma continuity from sow's milk to solid feed; this is where the trial data sits |
| Long distribution chain before consumption | Either, but check the dates | VS382 publishes 540 days; VS1437 publishes 180-day stability under heat and humidity |
Trial quantities start at a single carton with TDS, SDS and COA, so the comparison does not require a commercial order. If Luctarom performs better in your mill, that is a legitimate result and worth knowing on a carton rather than a container.
Less than it appears, unless three things come with it. Under what temperature and humidity was it held? Measured how — retained assay of a marker compound, or a sensory panel? And 70% of what baseline: pre-pelleting, or post-pelleting? A figure measured at 20°C in a dry store does not describe a warehouse at 32°C and 85% relative humidity, and no correction factor makes it transfer honestly. Ask for the conditions, not just the number.
It depends on which failure mode you are fighting. A porous carrier with high internal surface area genuinely slows volatilisation — the aroma molecule has further to travel to escape. The trade-off is that many carriers are hygroscopic: in an 85% RH warehouse they pick up moisture, which can cake the product and raise water activity in the feed, accelerating oxidation. Neither form is universally better. What matters is whether the supplier has tested the specific form under your conditions and will show you the result.
Lucta publishes a retention-style claim for the Luctarom range and a shelf life of at least 18 months for Luctarom Sweet SFS, with a silica-based carrier described at range level. SILSEP publishes 180-day stability under combined heat and humidity for VS1437, and for VS382 a 540-day shelf life plus trial results with the conditions attached — 600 g/T, 50-day-old weaned piglets, 30 days, n=40, Sichuan, China. Neither of us publishes active percentage. That symmetry is worth noticing: this whole category withholds the same field.
No. We have not run head-to-head trials against a competitor product, and we will not present modelled or inferred numbers as if we had. What we offer instead is a protocol you can run yourself, and trial quantities small enough that running it costs you very little.
VS1437 is the marine-profile palatant for fishmeal-replacement and alternative-protein formulas, where the job is masking as much as attraction. VS382 is the milk-flavour palatant for weaning and pre-starter diets, where the job is getting a piglet to start eating. They are not interchangeable, and a supplier who offers you one product for both jobs has not asked enough questions.
See VS1437 specifications Request a trial quantity
Last updated: 3 September 2026 · Luctarom and Lucta are trademarks of Lucta S.A. SILSEP is not affiliated with, endorsed by or connected to Lucta. Comparative statements are based on publicly available information as at the date above.