These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effects of lasalocid, narasin, or virginiamycin supplementation on rumen parameters and performance of beef cattle fed forage-based diet.
    Author: Miszura AA, Marques RS, Polizel DM, Cappellozza BI, Cruz VA, Ogg MA, Barroso JPR, Oliveira GB, Martins AS, Limede AC, Ferreira EM, Gouvêa VN, Pires AV.
    Journal: J Anim Sci; 2023 Jan 03; 101():. PubMed ID: 37042805.
    Abstract:
    Two experiments were designed to evaluate the impacts of supplementing lasalocid (LAS), narasin (NAR), or virginiamycin (VRM) on rumen fermentation parameters, apparent nutrient digestibility, and blood parameters (Exp. 1), as well as feed intake and performance (Exp. 2) of Nellore cattle consuming a forage-based diet. In Exp. 1, 32 rumen-fistulated Nellore steers (initial shrunk body weight [BW] = 355 ± 4.4 kg) were assigned to a randomized complete block design. Within block, animals were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 1) forage-based diet without feed additives (CON), 2) CON diet plus 13 mg/kg of dry matter (DM) of NAR, 3) CON diet plus 20 mg/kg of DM of sodium LAS, or 4) CON diet plus 20 mg/kg of DM of VRM. No treatment effects were detected (P ≥ 0.32) for intake and apparent digestibility of nutrients. Steers fed NAR had the lowest (P ≤ 0.01) molar proportion of acetate on day 28, 56, and 112 vs. CON, LAS, and VRM steers, whereas acetate did not differ (P ≥ 0.25) between LAS, VRM, and CON steers from day 28 to 84. On day 112, steers fed LAS had a lower (P < 0.02) molar proportion of acetate vs. VRM and CON, whereas it did not differ between CON and VRM (P > 0.33). Steers receiving NAR had a greater (P ≤ 0.04) ruminal propionate vs. CON, LAS, and VRM, whereas LAS steers had greater (P < 0.04) propionate vs. CON and VRM steers on day 28 and 112, and it did not differ (P > 0.22) between CON and VRM. In Exp. 2, 160 Nellore bulls were blocked by initial shrunk BW (212 ± 3.1 kg) in a 140-d feedlot trial. Diets contained the same treatments used in Exp. 1. Bulls fed NAR had greater (P < 0.02) average daily gain (ADG) vs. CON and VRM, and similar (P = 0.17) ADG between NAR and LAS, whereas ADG did not differ (P > 0.28) between LAS, VRM, and CON bulls. A treatment effect was detected (P = 0.03) for dry matter intake, being greater in NAR vs. CON, LAS, and VRM bulls, and similar (P > 0.48) between CON, LAS, and VRM bulls. A tendency was detected (P = 0.09) for feed efficiency, which was greater (P < 0.02) in NAR bulls vs. CON and VRM, and similar (P = 0.36) between NAR and LAS bulls. From day 112 to 140, bulls receiving NAR were heavier (P < 0.03) vs. CON, LAS, and VRM bulls, but no differences were observed (P > 0.51) between CON, LAS, and VRM bulls. Collectively, ruminal fermentation profile and intake were impacted by NAR supplementation, which partially contributed to the enhanced performance of Nellore bulls receiving a forage-based diet. Feed additives are nutritional tools that benefit dietary digestibility and nutrient utilization, alter ruminal fermentation routes, and improve cattle growth and efficiency, thus increasing productivity and profitability in beef cattle systems. Nonetheless, most of the current research focuses on supplementing feed additives in high-concentrate diets. Leaving a significant gap in understanding the influence of feed additives in cattle consuming forage-based diets, especially molecules capable of altering the fermentation process and, consequently, beef cattle performance. Therefore, this experiment aimed to evaluate the impacts of supplementing narasin (NAR), lasalocid (LAS), or virginiamycin (VRM) on rumen fermentation parameters, apparent nutrient digestibility, feed intake, and performance of Bos indicus Nellore cattle consuming a forage-based diet. Including commercially available feed additives into forage-based diets did not impact nutrient intake and digestibility of nutrients. The inclusion of NAR affected ruminal fermentation parameters toward propionate production, positively contributing to animal performance. Ruminal fermentation characteristics and animal growth were not impacted by dietary LAS and VRM, which could be attributed to the dose used in the current experiment, despite the manufacturer’s recommendation. This research provides insights into NAR as an important feed additive for forage-based beef cattle diets.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]