The influence of shade allocation or total shade plus overhead fan on growth performance, efficiency of dietary energy utilization, and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle under tropical ambient conditions.

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

The influence of shade allocation or total shade plus overhead fan on growth performance, efficiency of dietary energy utilization, and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle under tropical ambient conditions.

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

Comparing Blend of Essential Oils Plus 25-Hydroxy-Vit-D3 Versus Monensin Plus Virginiamycin Combination in Finishing Feedlot Cattle: Growth Performance, Dietary Energetics, and Carcass Traits.

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

The Effects of Single or Combined Supplementation of Probiotics and Prebiotics on Growth Performance, Dietary Energetics, Carcass Traits, and Visceral Mass in Lambs Finished under Subtropical Climate Conditions

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

Blend of Essential Oils Supplemented Alone or Combined with Exogenous Amylase Compared with Virginiamycin Supplementation on Finishing Lambs: Performance, Dietary Energetics, Carcass Traits, and Nutrient Digestion.

Two experiments were conducted to compare a supplemental blend of essential oils alone (EO) or combined with enzymes (EO + ENZ) versus virginiamycin (VM), on characteristics of growth performance (Exp. 1) and digestion (Exp. 2) in finishing lambs. Lambs were fed a high-energy finishing diet supplemented with: (1) no supplement (control); (2) 150 mg supplemental EO; (3) 150 mg supplemental EO plus 560 mg alpha-amylase (EO + ENZ); and 4) 25 mg VM. Compared with the control, growth performance response to EO and VM were similar, enhancing (5.7%, p < 0.05) feed efficiency and observed dietary net energy. Compared with control, supplementation with EO + ENZ tended (p = 0.09) to increase dry matter intake (6.8%), improving (p < 0.05) weight gain and feed efficiency (10.4 and 4.4%, respectively). Dietary energy utilization was greater (2.7%, p < 0.05) for EO and VM than EO + ENZ. Treatment effects on the carcass and visceral mass were small, but additive supplementation decreased (p ≤ 0.03) the relative weight of the intestines. There were no treatment effects on measures of digestion nor digestible energy of the diet. Supplemental EO may be an effective alternative to VM in high-energy finishing diets for feedlot lambs. Combination EO + ENZ may further enhance dry matter intake, promoting increased weight gain

Blend of Essential Oils Supplemented Alone or Combined with Exogenous Amylase Compared with Virginiamycin Supplementation on Finishing Lambs: Performance, Dietary Energetics, Carcass Traits, and Nutrient Digestion.

Two experiments were conducted to compare a supplemental blend of essential oils alone (EO) or combined with enzymes (EO + ENZ) versus virginiamycin (VM), on characteristics of growth performance (Exp. 1) and digestion (Exp. 2) in finishing lambs. Lambs were fed a high-energy finishing diet supplemented with: (1) no supplement (control); (2) 150 mg supplemental EO; (3) 150 mg supplemental EO plus 560 mg alpha-amylase (EO + ENZ); and 4) 25 mg VM. Compared with the control, growth performance response to EO and VM were similar, enhancing (5.7%, p < 0.05) feed efficiency and observed dietary net energy. Compared with control, supplementation with EO + ENZ tended (p = 0.09) to increase dry matter intake (6.8%), improving (p < 0.05) weight gain and feed efficiency (10.4 and 4.4%, respectively). Dietary energy utilization was greater (2.7%, p < 0.05) for EO and VM than EO + ENZ. Treatment effects on the carcass and visceral mass were small, but additive supplementation decreased (p ≤ 0.03) the relative weight of the intestines. There were no treatment effects on measures of digestion nor digestible energy of the diet. Supplemental EO may be an effective alternative to VM in high-energy finishing diets for feedlot lambs. Combination EO + ENZ may further enhance dry matter intake, promoting increased weight gain