Travis J Tilton, Kevin Martens, Loni W Lucherk, Alyssa B Word, Ben P Holland, Ty E Lawrence, Travis C Tennant
{"title":"The effect of a direct-fed microbial (10-G) on live animal performance, carcass characteristics, and <i>Salmonella</i> prevalence of fed beef heifers.","authors":"Travis J Tilton, Kevin Martens, Loni W Lucherk, Alyssa B Word, Ben P Holland, Ty E Lawrence, Travis C Tennant","doi":"10.1093/tas/txae086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of the direct-fed microbial 10-G upon cattle growth performance, liver and lung health, carcass quality, and yield outcomes, as well as prevalence and enumeration of <i>Salmonella</i> in feces and lymph nodes. Fed beef heifers (<i>N</i> = 1,400; initial shrunk body weight [<b>BW</b>] 343.3 ± 36.2 kg) were blocked by the day of arrival and randomly allocated to one of two treatments (0 [negative control, CON] or 2 g of a direct-fed microbial [10-G] that provided 1 billion CFUs per animal per day of <i>Lactobacillus acidophilus</i>, <i>Enterococcus faecium</i>, <i>Pediococcus pentosaceus</i>, <i>L. brevis</i>, and <i>L. plantarum</i>) with 10 pens per treatment. Recto-anal mucosal fecal samples (<b>RAMs</b>; <i>n</i> = 477) and subiliac lymph nodes (<b>SLNs</b>; <i>n</i> = 479) were collected longitudinally at harvest from 23 to 25 heifers per pen. Data were analyzed using mixed models; pen served as the experimental unit; block and harvest date were random effects. No differences were detected in dry matter intake (<i>P</i> = 0.78), final BW (<i>P</i> = 0.64), average daily gain (<i>P</i> = 0.51), gain to feed (<i>P</i> = 0.71), hot carcass weight (<i>P</i> = 0.54), dressed carcass yield (<i>P</i> = 0.52), 12th rib fat depth (<i>P</i> = 0.13), longissimus muscle area (<i>P</i> = 0.62), calculated empty body fat (<i>P</i> = 0.26), or marbling score (<i>P</i> = 0.82). Distributions of liver scores (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.34), quality grades (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.23), and yield grades (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.11) were also not different between treatments. A tendency was detected for more normal lungs (<i>P</i> = 0.08; 10-G = 65.96%, CON = 61.12%) and fewer inflated lungs at harvest for cattle fed 10-G (<i>P</i> = 0.10; 10-G = 0.29%, CON = 1.16%); other lung outcomes did not differ (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.54). <i>Salmonella</i> prevalence did not differ for RAM samples (<i>P</i> = 0.41; 10-G = 97.74%, CON = 96.82%) or SLN (<i>P</i> = 0.22; 10-G = 17.92%, CON = 13.66%). <i>Salmonella</i> concentration of RAM samples (<i>P</i> = 0.25; 10-G = 3.87 log CFU/g, CON = 3.32 log CFU/g) or SLN (<i>P</i> = 0.37; 10-G = 1.46 log CFU/g, CON = 1.14 log CFU/g) also did not differ between treatments at harvest. These results do not demonstrate any difference in live animal performance, carcass characteristics, or <i>Salmonella</i> carriage for heifers fed 10-G.</p>","PeriodicalId":23272,"journal":{"name":"Translational Animal Science","volume":"8 ","pages":"txae086"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11165639/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Animal Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txae086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of the direct-fed microbial 10-G upon cattle growth performance, liver and lung health, carcass quality, and yield outcomes, as well as prevalence and enumeration of Salmonella in feces and lymph nodes. Fed beef heifers (N = 1,400; initial shrunk body weight [BW] 343.3 ± 36.2 kg) were blocked by the day of arrival and randomly allocated to one of two treatments (0 [negative control, CON] or 2 g of a direct-fed microbial [10-G] that provided 1 billion CFUs per animal per day of Lactobacillus acidophilus, Enterococcus faecium, Pediococcus pentosaceus, L. brevis, and L. plantarum) with 10 pens per treatment. Recto-anal mucosal fecal samples (RAMs; n = 477) and subiliac lymph nodes (SLNs; n = 479) were collected longitudinally at harvest from 23 to 25 heifers per pen. Data were analyzed using mixed models; pen served as the experimental unit; block and harvest date were random effects. No differences were detected in dry matter intake (P = 0.78), final BW (P = 0.64), average daily gain (P = 0.51), gain to feed (P = 0.71), hot carcass weight (P = 0.54), dressed carcass yield (P = 0.52), 12th rib fat depth (P = 0.13), longissimus muscle area (P = 0.62), calculated empty body fat (P = 0.26), or marbling score (P = 0.82). Distributions of liver scores (P ≥ 0.34), quality grades (P ≥ 0.23), and yield grades (P ≥ 0.11) were also not different between treatments. A tendency was detected for more normal lungs (P = 0.08; 10-G = 65.96%, CON = 61.12%) and fewer inflated lungs at harvest for cattle fed 10-G (P = 0.10; 10-G = 0.29%, CON = 1.16%); other lung outcomes did not differ (P ≥ 0.54). Salmonella prevalence did not differ for RAM samples (P = 0.41; 10-G = 97.74%, CON = 96.82%) or SLN (P = 0.22; 10-G = 17.92%, CON = 13.66%). Salmonella concentration of RAM samples (P = 0.25; 10-G = 3.87 log CFU/g, CON = 3.32 log CFU/g) or SLN (P = 0.37; 10-G = 1.46 log CFU/g, CON = 1.14 log CFU/g) also did not differ between treatments at harvest. These results do not demonstrate any difference in live animal performance, carcass characteristics, or Salmonella carriage for heifers fed 10-G.
期刊介绍:
Translational Animal Science (TAS) is the first open access-open review animal science journal, encompassing a broad scope of research topics in animal science. TAS focuses on translating basic science to innovation, and validation of these innovations by various segments of the allied animal industry. Readers of TAS will typically represent education, industry, and government, including research, teaching, administration, extension, management, quality assurance, product development, and technical services. Those interested in TAS typically include animal breeders, economists, embryologists, engineers, food scientists, geneticists, microbiologists, nutritionists, veterinarians, physiologists, processors, public health professionals, and others with an interest in animal production and applied aspects of animal sciences.