Virginiamycin and sodium monensin supplementation for beef cattle on pasture

Association of virginiamycin and multiple supplement for cattle fed a high-quality tropical forage

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of adding virginiamycin to either mineral mixture or multiple supplement on intake, digestion, ruminal fermentation profile, rumen microbial production, blood metabolites, and liver metabolism of zebu heifers fed a high-quality tropical forage. Eight Brahman heifers were assigned to a replicated 4 × 4 Latin Square design. The treatments were: mineral mixture, mineral mixture with virginiamycin, multiple supplement, and multiple supplement with virginiamycin. The basal diet consisted of a high-quality Tifton 85 hay (Cynodom sp.) chopped at 10-cm particle size and fed twice daily. The mineral mixture was provided daily at 120 g/animal. The multiple supplement was formulated to provide 300 g of crude protein (CP)/kg as fed, contained mineral mixture, corn grain, and urea: ammonium sulfate, and was daily provided at 200 g/animal. The mineral mixture and multiple supplement provided the same daily amount of minerals. The amount of supplemental virginiamycin was based on a maximum theoretical response on animal performance (50 mg/100 kg body weight) and daily mixed to the supplements types. The treatments were compared according to a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement (mineral mixture and multiple supplement, with or without virginiamycin). The virginiamycin supplementation did not alter either voluntary intake or digestibility (P≥0.44). Using the multiple supplement decreased forage (P<0.05) and digested organic matter (DOM, P<0.10) intake, but increased dietary CP : DOM ratio (P<0.01). The multiple supplement increased the ruminal ammonia concentration (P<0.04) and the acetate-to-propionate ratio (P<0.06). Virginiamycin increased urinary nitrogen (N) when provided along with multiple supplement (P<0.05). Fecal N was decreased by multiple supplement (P<0.06). Despite these effects, no effect was verified on either body N accretion (P≥0.48) or microbial N production in the rumen (P≥0.27). Virginiamycin decreased the blood IGF-1 (P<0.07). The hepatic gene expression for propionyl-CoA carboxylase was increased by virginiamycin (P<0.01). Virginiamycin increased the hepatic gene expression of both citrate synthase and pyrivate carboxylase when mineral mixture was provided (P<0.01), but decreased it when animals were fed multiple supplement (P<0.04). Using a low-intake multiple supplement with a high CP content for cattle fed high-quality forage causes a substitutive effect on forage intake, but keeps nitrogen accretion unchanged. That pattern indicates an improvement in feed efficiency. On the other hand, virginiamycin supplementation seems to cause some post-prandial influences, which may vary according to the type of supplement. Those influences apparently improve animal efficiency.

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.

Intensification: A Key Strategy to Achieve Great Animal and Environmental Beef Cattle Production Sustainability in Brachiaria Grasslands

Intensification of tropical grassland can be a strategy to increase beef production, but methods for achieving this should maintain or reduce its environmental impact and should not compromise future food-producing capacity. The objective of this review was to discuss the aspects of grassland management, animal supplementation, the environment, and the socioeconomics of grassland intensification. Reducing environmental impact in the form of, for example, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is particularly important in Brazil, which is the second-largest beef producer in the world. Most Brazilian pastures, however, are degraded, representing a considerable opportunity for the mitigation and increase of beef-cattle production, and consequently increasing global protein supply. Moreover, in Brazil, forage production is necessary for seasonal feeding strategies that maintain animal performance during periods of forage scarcity. There are many options to achieve this objective that can be adopted alone or in association. These options include improving grassland management, pasture fertilization, and animal supplementation. Improving grazing management has the potential to mitigate GHG emissions through the reduction of the intensity of CO2 emissions, as well as the preservation of natural areas by reducing the need for expanding pastureland. Limitations to farmers adopting intensification strategies include cultural aspects and the lack of financial resources and technical assistance.