Display options
Share it on

Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 2013 Nov;26(11):1553-61. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13216.

Influence of Ionophore Supplementation on Growth Performance, Dietary Energetics and Carcass Characteristics in Finishing Cattle during Period of Heat Stress.

Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences

A Barreras, B I Castro-Pérez, M A López-Soto, N G Torrentera, M F Montaño, A Estrada-Angulo, F G Ríos, H Dávila-Ramos, A Plascencia, R A Zinn

Affiliations

  1. Research Institute of Veterinary Sciences, University Autonomous of Baja California, México.

PMID: 25049741 PMCID: PMC4093809 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13216

Abstract

Forty-eight crossbred heifers (378.1±18 kg) were used in a 56-d feeding trial (four pens per treatment in a randomised complete block design) to evaluate the influence of ionophore supplementation on growth performance, dietary energetics and carcass characteristics in finishing cattle during a period of heat stress. Heifers were fed a diet based on steam-flaked corn (2.22 Mcal NEm/kg) with and without an ionophore. Treatments were: i) control, no ionophore; ii) 30 mg/kg monensin sodium (RUM30); iii) 20 mg/kg lasalocid sodium (BOV20), and iv) 30 mg/kg lasalocid sodium (BOV30). Both dry matter intake (DMI) and climatic variables were measured daily and the temperature humidity index (THI) was estimated. The maximum THI during the study averaged 93, while the minimum was 70 (THI average = 79.2±2.3). Compared to controls, monensin supplementation did not influence average daily gain, the estimated NE value of the diet, or observed-to-expected DMI, but tended (p = 0.07) to increase (4.8%) gain to feed. Compared to controls, the group fed BOV30 increased (p≤0.03) daily gain (11.8%), gain to feed (8.3%), net energy of the diet (5%), and observed-to-expected DMI (5.2%). Daily weight gain was greater (7.6%, p = 0.05) for heifers fed BOV30 than for heifers fed MON30. Otherwise, differences between the two treatments in DMI, gain to feed, and dietary NE were not statistically significant (p>0.11). Plotting weekly intakes versus THI, observed intake of controls was greater (p<0.05) at THI values ≤77 than ionophore groups. When THI values were greater than 79, DMI of control and MON30 were not different (p = 0.42), although less than that of groups fed lasalocid (p = 0.04). Variation in energy intake was lower (p>0.05) in the ionophores group (CV = 1.7%) than in the control group (CV = 4.5%). Inclusion of ionophores in the diet resulted in relatively minor changes in carcass characteristics. It is concluded that ionophore supplementation did not exacerbate the decline of DM intake in heat-stressed cattle fed a high-energy finishing diet; on the contrary, it stabilised feed intake and favoured feed efficiency. Ionophore supplementation reduced estimated maintenance coefficients around 10% in finishing cattle during a period of heat stress. This effect was greatest for heifers supplemented with 30 mg lasalocid/kg of diet.

Keywords: Feedlot Cattle; Heat Stress; Lasalocid; Monensin; Performance

References

  1. J Anim Sci. 2012 Dec;90(12):4583-92 - PubMed
  2. J Anim Sci. 1984 Jun;58(6):1484-98 - PubMed
  3. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2007 Jul;23(2):299-307, vii-viii - PubMed
  4. J Anim Sci. 1999;77 Suppl 2:10-20 - PubMed
  5. J Anim Sci. 1988 Jan;66(1):136-50 - PubMed
  6. J Anim Sci. 1989 Sep;67(9):2393-9 - PubMed
  7. J Anim Sci. 1988 Jan;66(1):213-27 - PubMed
  8. Int J Biometeorol. 1992 May;36(2):77-87 - PubMed
  9. J Anim Sci. 1990 Oct;68(10):3441-55 - PubMed
  10. J Anim Sci. 1988 Jul;66(7):1807-17 - PubMed
  11. J Anim Sci. 1990 Oct;68(10):3382-91 - PubMed
  12. J Anim Sci. 2007 Mar;85(3):823-40 - PubMed
  13. J Therm Biol. 2013 Jan;38(1):1-9 - PubMed
  14. J Anim Sci. 1988 Feb;66(2):552-8 - PubMed
  15. J Anim Sci. 1995 Jan;73(1):39-44 - PubMed
  16. J Anim Sci. 2012 Aug;90(8):2861-72 - PubMed
  17. J Anim Sci. 1981 Dec;53(6):1440-5 - PubMed
  18. J Anim Sci. 1984 Jun;58(6):1518-27 - PubMed
  19. J Anim Sci. 1984 Jun;58(6):1465-83 - PubMed
  20. J Anim Sci. 2004 Nov;82(11):3314-20 - PubMed
  21. J Anim Sci. 2008 Sep;86(9):2270-6 - PubMed
  22. J Anim Sci. 1986 Dec;63(6):2005-12 - PubMed
  23. J Anim Sci. 1987 Jul;65(1):256-66 - PubMed
  24. J Anim Sci. 2000 Aug;78(8):2215-22 - PubMed
  25. J Anim Sci. 2010 Apr;88(13 Suppl):E123-32 - PubMed

Publication Types