饲喂10-G直接饲喂微生物对饲养场生产性能、胴体特性和饲用肉牛腹腔淋巴结沙门氏菌流行率的影响

IF 1.8 Q3 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Translational Animal Science Pub Date : 2025-04-14 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/tas/txaf050
Aubrey C Thompson, Tony C Bryant, Jenny S Jennings, Kevin Martens, Loni W Lucherk, Travis C Tennant, Ty E Lawrence
{"title":"饲喂10-G直接饲喂微生物对饲养场生产性能、胴体特性和饲用肉牛腹腔淋巴结沙门氏菌流行率的影响","authors":"Aubrey C Thompson, Tony C Bryant, Jenny S Jennings, Kevin Martens, Loni W Lucherk, Travis C Tennant, Ty E Lawrence","doi":"10.1093/tas/txaf050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Yearling crossbred beef steers [n = 6,400; initial body weight (BW) 358 kg] were used to investigate the efficacy of a direct-fed microbial upon animal growTh performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of <i>Salmonella</i> in subiliac lymph nodes after a feeding duration of 182 d. Steers were allocated to 1 of 32 pens [n = 200/pen] within 16 total blocks, and assigned to 1 of 2 dietary treatments; no probiotic (<b>CON</b>) or 2 g*steer<sup>-1</sup>*d<sup>-1</sup> of <i>Lactobacillus acidophilus</i>, <i>Enterococcus faecium</i>, <i>Pediococcus pentosaceus</i>, <i>Lactobacillus brevis</i> and <i>Lactobacillus plantarum</i> providing a total of 1 billion CFU (<b>10-G</b>). At harvest, subiliac lymph nodes were randomly obtained from 40 animals from each pen for blocks 1 through 10. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design, and pen served as the experimental unit. No differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.26) were observed between treatments for DMI, final BW, average daily gain, or feed efficiency. When evaluating carcass characteristics, there were no differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.15) for hot carcass weight or liver abscess prevalence. However, dressed carcass yield differed (<i>P</i> = 0.02) between treatments (CON = 64.74%, 10-G = 64.52%). No differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.12) were observed for marbling score, longissimus muscle area, 12<sup>th</sup> rib s.c. fat depth, or USDA quality grade outcomes. Lower frequency (<i>P</i> < 0.01; CON = 36.95%, 10-G = 23.60%) of <i>Salmonella</i> positive subiliac lymph nodes was observed for cattle supplemented dietary 10-G, whereas concentration of <i>Salmonella</i> quantifiable samples did not differ (<i>P</i> = 0.23) between treatments (CON = 0.84 Log<sub>10</sub>CFU/g, 10-G = 0.63 Log<sub>10</sub>CFU/g). In conclusion, the supplementation of 10-G direct fed microbial did not influence live or carcass performance within this trial; however, prevalence of <i>Salmonella</i> positive subiliac lymph nodes was reduced.</p>","PeriodicalId":23272,"journal":{"name":"Translational Animal Science","volume":"9 ","pages":"txaf050"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12311916/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of feeding 10-G direct-fed microbial on feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of <i>Salmonella</i> in subiliac lymph nodes of feedlot steers.\",\"authors\":\"Aubrey C Thompson, Tony C Bryant, Jenny S Jennings, Kevin Martens, Loni W Lucherk, Travis C Tennant, Ty E Lawrence\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tas/txaf050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Yearling crossbred beef steers [n = 6,400; initial body weight (BW) 358 kg] were used to investigate the efficacy of a direct-fed microbial upon animal growTh performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of <i>Salmonella</i> in subiliac lymph nodes after a feeding duration of 182 d. Steers were allocated to 1 of 32 pens [n = 200/pen] within 16 total blocks, and assigned to 1 of 2 dietary treatments; no probiotic (<b>CON</b>) or 2 g*steer<sup>-1</sup>*d<sup>-1</sup> of <i>Lactobacillus acidophilus</i>, <i>Enterococcus faecium</i>, <i>Pediococcus pentosaceus</i>, <i>Lactobacillus brevis</i> and <i>Lactobacillus plantarum</i> providing a total of 1 billion CFU (<b>10-G</b>). At harvest, subiliac lymph nodes were randomly obtained from 40 animals from each pen for blocks 1 through 10. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design, and pen served as the experimental unit. No differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.26) were observed between treatments for DMI, final BW, average daily gain, or feed efficiency. When evaluating carcass characteristics, there were no differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.15) for hot carcass weight or liver abscess prevalence. However, dressed carcass yield differed (<i>P</i> = 0.02) between treatments (CON = 64.74%, 10-G = 64.52%). No differences (<i>P</i> ≥ 0.12) were observed for marbling score, longissimus muscle area, 12<sup>th</sup> rib s.c. fat depth, or USDA quality grade outcomes. Lower frequency (<i>P</i> < 0.01; CON = 36.95%, 10-G = 23.60%) of <i>Salmonella</i> positive subiliac lymph nodes was observed for cattle supplemented dietary 10-G, whereas concentration of <i>Salmonella</i> quantifiable samples did not differ (<i>P</i> = 0.23) between treatments (CON = 0.84 Log<sub>10</sub>CFU/g, 10-G = 0.63 Log<sub>10</sub>CFU/g). In conclusion, the supplementation of 10-G direct fed microbial did not influence live or carcass performance within this trial; however, prevalence of <i>Salmonella</i> positive subiliac lymph nodes was reduced.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Animal Science\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"txaf050\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12311916/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Animal Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaf050\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Animal Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaf050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一岁杂交肉牛[n = 6400;试验采用初始体重(BW) 358 kg研究直接饲喂微生物对动物生长性能、胴体特性以及182 d后腹腔淋巴结沙门氏菌流行率的影响。在16个区32个栏中(n = 200个/栏)分配1个栏,并在2个饲粮处理中分配1个;嗜酸乳杆菌、屎肠球菌、戊糖Pediococcus、短乳杆菌和植物乳杆菌无益生菌(CON)或2 g*steer-1*d-1,共提供10亿CFU (10-G)。收获时,从第1至第10区每个栏中随机抽取40只动物的耻骨下淋巴结。数据分析采用随机完全区组设计,以笔为实验单位。DMI、末体重、平均日增重、饲料效率各处理间无差异(P≥0.26)。在评价胴体特征时,热胴体重和肝脓肿患病率无差异(P≥0.15)。不同处理间屠宰胴体产量差异显著(P = 0.02) (CON = 64.74%, 10-G = 64.52%)。在大理石纹评分、最长肌面积、第12肋脂肪深度或美国农业部质量分级结果方面没有观察到差异(P≥0.12)。饲粮中添加10-G的牛腹腔下淋巴结P沙门氏菌阳性发生率较低,但不同处理(CON = 0.84 Log10CFU/g, 10-G = 0.63 Log10CFU/g)的沙门氏菌定量样品浓度无显著差异(P = 0.23)。综上所述,在本试验中,添加10-G直接饲喂微生物对活产和胴体性能没有影响;然而,沙门氏菌阳性的髂下淋巴结患病率降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of feeding 10-G direct-fed microbial on feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of Salmonella in subiliac lymph nodes of feedlot steers.

Yearling crossbred beef steers [n = 6,400; initial body weight (BW) 358 kg] were used to investigate the efficacy of a direct-fed microbial upon animal growTh performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of Salmonella in subiliac lymph nodes after a feeding duration of 182 d. Steers were allocated to 1 of 32 pens [n = 200/pen] within 16 total blocks, and assigned to 1 of 2 dietary treatments; no probiotic (CON) or 2 g*steer-1*d-1 of Lactobacillus acidophilus, Enterococcus faecium, Pediococcus pentosaceus, Lactobacillus brevis and Lactobacillus plantarum providing a total of 1 billion CFU (10-G). At harvest, subiliac lymph nodes were randomly obtained from 40 animals from each pen for blocks 1 through 10. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design, and pen served as the experimental unit. No differences (P ≥ 0.26) were observed between treatments for DMI, final BW, average daily gain, or feed efficiency. When evaluating carcass characteristics, there were no differences (P ≥ 0.15) for hot carcass weight or liver abscess prevalence. However, dressed carcass yield differed (P = 0.02) between treatments (CON = 64.74%, 10-G = 64.52%). No differences (P ≥ 0.12) were observed for marbling score, longissimus muscle area, 12th rib s.c. fat depth, or USDA quality grade outcomes. Lower frequency (P < 0.01; CON = 36.95%, 10-G = 23.60%) of Salmonella positive subiliac lymph nodes was observed for cattle supplemented dietary 10-G, whereas concentration of Salmonella quantifiable samples did not differ (P = 0.23) between treatments (CON = 0.84 Log10CFU/g, 10-G = 0.63 Log10CFU/g). In conclusion, the supplementation of 10-G direct fed microbial did not influence live or carcass performance within this trial; however, prevalence of Salmonella positive subiliac lymph nodes was reduced.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Translational Animal Science
Translational Animal Science Veterinary-Veterinary (all)
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
149
审稿时长
8 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信