RESUMO
Forty-eight Pelibuey × Katahdin male intact lambs (25.12 ± 3.79 kg LW) were used in a 70-d growing-finishing trial. Dietary treatments consisted of total mixed corn-based diet supplemented with: (1) no feed additives (Control); (2) 150 mg of essential oils blend plus 0.10 mg of 25-hydroxy-Vit-D3/kg diet offered throughout the 70-d experimental period (EOD3); (3) Control diet fed during the first 35 days and zilpaterol hydrochloride (ZH) supplementation at 6 mg/kg diet offered during the final 35 days of the experiment (32 days with ZH with a withdrawal 3-d before harvest), and (4) basal diet supplemented with EOD3 during first 35 days finishing, and EOD3 in combination with ZH (EOD3 + ZH) during the subsequent 32-days with ZH withdrawal 3 days before harvest. The temperature-humidity index during the experiment averaged 80.4 ± 3.2. There were no treatment interactions (p > 0.20) on growth performance and carcass measures. Supplemental EOD3 did not affect (p = 0.43) dry matter intake (DMI), but increased (p < 0.01) carcass adjusted average daily gain (ADG, 9.2%), gain efficiency (GF, 6.7%), and observed vs. expected dietary net energy for maintenance (NEm, 4.8%) and for gain (NEg, 6.4%). Supplemental ZH did not affect dry matter intake (DMI, p = 0.50) but increased (p < 0.01) carcass adjusted ADG (14.5%), GF (13%) and observed vs. expected dietary NEm (9%) and NEg (11.7%). Compared to control lambs, the combination of both additives increased ADG (24.9%), GF (21.2%), and observed vs. expected dietary NEm and NEg (14.2% and 18.9%, respectively). There were no treatment interactions on carcass characteristics, visceral organ mass, or on gene expression of IGF1, IGF2 and mTOR in longissimus muscle (LM). Supplemental EOD3 increased hot carcass weight (HCW; 4.0%, p < 0.01) but did not affect other carcass measures. Supplemental EOD3 decreased (3%, p = 0.03) intestine mass weight (g intestine/kg empty body weight). Supplemental ZH increased HCW (6%, p < 0.01), dressing percentage (1.7%, p = 0.04), and LM area (9.7%, p < 0.01), and decreased kidney-pelvic-fat percentage (16.2%, p < 0.01), fat thickness (14.7%, p = 0.03), and visceral fat. Compared to controls, the combination of EOD3 with ZH increased HCW (10.2%). It is concluded that growth performance responses to supplemental EOD3 and ZH are additive. Both supplements can be fed in combination without detrimental effects on expected benefits when fed separately. In addition, ZH supplementation improves carcass traits.
RESUMO
Objective: Several reports on the effects of zeolite (ZEO) inclusion in diets for feedlot lamb diets have indicated improvements in dietary energy efficiency and decreases in internal fat. Inclusion levels and the type of zeolite used have been the main focus of those reports. However, the possible effect of the zeolite particle size on the growth performance and carcass characteristics has not yet been investigated. Material and Methods: Forty-eight male intact Pelibuey × Katahdin lambs were fed for 67 days with a high-energy diet supplemented with ZEO as follows: 1) basal diet 0% ZEO (control); 2) basal diet 3% ZEO particle size 250 µM (sieve 60); 3) basal diet 3% ZEO particle size 149 µM (sieve 100); and 4) basal diet 3% ZEO particle size 74 µM (sieve 200). ZEO replaced corn grain and soybean meal in equal parts. At the end of feeding, lambs were slaughtered, and variables such as carcass characteristics and visceral mass were evaluated. Results: Particle size did not affect growth performance, carcass characteristics, or visceral mass. The inclusion of ZEO reduced 3.4% of dietary net energy in diets but did not affect dry matter intake or average daily gain, thus improving (p ≤ 0.05) dietary energy efficiency by 2.9%. Except for an 18.9% reduction (p = 0.02) in visceral mass fat, ZEO did not affect other carcass characteristics or visceral organ mass. Conclusion: The particle size studied in the present experiment has not affected any of the variables of growth performance or carcass characteristics. ZEO inclusion could be a strategy to reduce the visceral fat in finishing lambs.
RESUMO
Ninety crossbreed bulls (349.5 ± 8.25 kg initial weight) were used in an 87day trial to compare the effects of a blend of essential oils plus 25-hydroxy-Vit-D3 (EO + HyD) versus the combination of monensin with virginiamycin (MON + VM) on feedlot growth performance and carcass characteristics. Dietary treatments (nine replicates/treatment) were supplemented with 40 mg/kg diet dry matter of MON + VM (equal parts) or with 120.12 mg/kg diet dry matter of a combination of standardized mixture of essential oils (120 mg) plus 0.12 mg of 25-hydroxy-vitamin-D3 (EO + HyD). There were no treatment effects on dry matter intake (DMI, p = 0.63). However, the coefficient of variation in day-to-day DMI was greater for EO + HyD than for MON + VM (11.4% vs. 3.88%, p = 0.04). There were no treatment effects (p ≥ 0.17) on daily weight gain, gain-to-feed ratio, and estimated dietary net energy. Cattle supplemented with EO + HyD had greater Longissimus muscle area (7.9%, p < 0.01) and estimated retail yield (1.6%, p = 0.03), and tended to have heavier (1.7%, p = 0.10) carcass weight. Differences among treatments in dressing percentage, fat thickness, kidney−pelvic−heart fat, and marbling score were not appreciable (p > 0.10). It is concluded that growth performance response and dietary energetic are similar for finishing cattle supplemented with EO + HyD vs. MON + VM. However, compared with MON + VM, supplementation with EO + HyD during the finishing phase may improve carcass Longissimus area and carcass yield.
RESUMO
The aim of this trial was to test the effects of the use of eubiotics (pro- and prebiotics) alone or in combination in the diet of lambs finished under subtropical climate conditions. For this purpose, 40 Pelibuey × Katahdin lambs (29.5 ± 4.8 kg initial live weight) were used in a 93 day growth-performance experiment. Dietary treatments consisted of a cracked corn-based finishing diet supplemented with (1) no eubiotics (control), (2) 3 g of probiotics (live Saccharomyces cerevisiae, SC), (3) 3 g of prebiotics (mannan oligosaccharide plus b-glucans, MOS), and (4) a combination of 1.5 g of SC and 1.5 g of MOS (SC+MOS). Throughout the study, the average temperature humidity index (THI) was 78.60. Compared to controls, supplementation with SC or MOS, alone did not affect average daily gain (ADG), but enhanced feed efficiency by 5.6% and 6.9% (gain-to-feed ratio, G:F) and dietary net energy by 4.6% and 5.9%, respectively. Compared to controls, SC+MOS enhanced ADG (10%), G:F (9.5%), and dietary net energy (7.2%). Lambs fed SC+MOS had also greater ADG, G:F, and dietary net energy compared to lambs fed SC alone. When compared to MOS, the combination enhanced ADG (10.4%, p = 0.04). This effect could be attributed to the increased dry matter intake (7.6%, p = 0.06), as neither G:F nor dietary energy was significantly affected. Compared with controls and SC, supplementation with MOS alone and SC+MOS increased kidney-pelvic-heart fat, while SC supplementation tended (p = 0.08) to reduce 4.1% the relative intestinal mass (as a proportion of empty body weight) when compared to controls. Treatment effects on the other carcass measures were not significant. In the present study, supplemental probiotics and/or prebiotics improved dietary energetic efficiency in lambs finished under subtropical climatic conditions. The combination of probiotics with prebiotics reinforced this positive effect.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effect of shade allocation and shade plus fan on growth performance, dietary energy utilization and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle under tropical ambient conditions. METHODS: Two trials were conducted, involving a total of 1,560 young bulls (289±22 kg BW) assigned to 24 pens (65 bulls/pen and 6 pens/treatment). Pens were 585 m2 with 15 m fence line feed bunks. Shade treatments (m2 shade/animal) were: i) limited shade (LS) to 1.2 m2shade/animal (LS1.2); ii) limited shade to 2.4 m2 shade/animal (LS2.4); iii) total shade (TS) which correspond to 9 m2/animal, and iv) total shade equipped with fans (TS+F). Trials lasted 158 and 183 days. In both studies, the average weekly maximum temperature exceeded 34°C. RESULTS: Increasing shade allocation tended (p = 0.08) to linearly increases average daily gain (ADG), and dry matter intake (DMI, quadratic effect, p = 0.03). This effect was most apparent between LS1.2 and LS2.4. Shade allocation, per se, did not affect gain efficiency or estimated dietary net energy (NE). Compared with TS, TS+F increased (p<0.05) ADG, gain efficiency, and tended (p = 0.06) to increase dietary NE. There was a quadratic effect of shade on longissimus area and marbling score, with values being lower (p<0.01) for LS2.4 than for LS1.2 or TS. Likewise, marbling score was lower for TS+F than for TS. Percentage kidney, pelvic, and heart (KPH) linearly decreased with increasing shade. In contrast, KPH was greater for TS than for TS+F. CONCLUSION: Providing more than 2.4 m2 shade/animal will not further enhance feedlot performance. The use of fans in combination with shade increases ADG and gain efficiency beyond that of shade, alone. These enhancements were not associated with increased DMI, but rather, to an amelioration of ambient temperature humidity index on maintenance energy requirement.