...
首页> 外文期刊>The Bovine Practitioner >Comparison of tulathromycin, tildipirosin, and tilmicosin for control of bovine respiratory disease in steers purchased from auction markets and fed in a Texas feedlot
【24h】

Comparison of tulathromycin, tildipirosin, and tilmicosin for control of bovine respiratory disease in steers purchased from auction markets and fed in a Texas feedlot

机译:在拍卖市场购买的带中牛呼吸道疾病中牛呼吸道疾病的比较,并在德克萨斯饲料中喂养的牛血素

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Crossbred steers (n=l,370) purchased from auction markets in Texas were received into a commercial feedlot near Hereford, Texas. Steers were recently weaned and considered at high risk of developing bovine respiratory disease (BRD). Upon arrival, steers were randomly assigned (within arrival blocks] to 1 of 3 treatment groups that received: 1] tilmicosin (TLM; 4.5 mg/lb (10.0 mg/kg)), 2) tildipirosin (TLD; 1.82 mg/lb (4.0 mg/kg)], or 3) tulathromycin (TUL; 1.14 mg/lb (2.5 mg/kg]]. Steers were pennedby treatment into 36 pens with 12 pens per treatment. Data were analyzed with linear mixed models for a randomized complete block design. Steers administered TUL had significantly lower BRD morbidity than both TLD and TLM (P < 0.01] treatments, and TLD had lower BRD morbidity than TLM (P < 0.05). Cattle receiving TUL also had a lower percentage of chronic illness than both TLD and TLM treatments (P < 0.05). Steers in the TUL treatment group had lower BRD and overall mortality at closeout than TLD (P < 0.05), but the TLM-treated steers did not differ from the other groups. Deads-in average daily gain was 0.55 lb (0.25 kg) greater in TUL-treated steers than steers administered TLM, and 0.56 lb (0.25 kg) greater than steers receiving TLD (P < 0.05). Cattle receiving TUL had 1.33 lb (0.6 kg) lower deads-in feed-to-gain ratio at closeout than those receiving TLM, and 1.51 lb (0.68 kg) lower than those receiving TLD (P < 0.05). During the first 30 days-on-feed, TUL-treated steers had greater daily dry-matter intake compared with TLD-treated steers (P < 0.01), but no other differences among treatment groups. By closeout, there were no differences in cumulative mean dry-matter intake between treatment groups. Overall, TUL treatment on arrival resulted in improved health and performance as compared to TLM and TLD treatments.
机译:从德克萨斯州拍卖市场购买的杂交阉牛(n = L,370)被收到到德克萨斯州附近的商业饲养场。最近被断奶并考虑了发展牛呼吸道疾病(BRD)的高风险。到达后,将带状者随机分配(在到达嵌段内]到接受的3个治疗组中的1个:1] TilmicoSin(TLM; 4.5mg / LB(10.0mg / kg)),2)TINDIROSIN(TLD; 1.82 mg / LB( 4.0 mg / kg)]或3)杜拉塞霉素(tul; 1.14 mg / lb(2.5 mg / kg]]。斯托尔被Pennedby治疗成36个钢笔,每次治疗12张。用线性混合模型进行分析数据以进行随机的组合进行分析封锁设计TLD和TLM治疗(P <0.05)。TUL治疗组的阉牛在比TLD的收缩中具有较低的BRD和总体死亡率(P <0.05),但TLM处理的操纵者与其他组没有不同。死亡平均Tul治疗的阉牛的每日增益比施用TLM的操纵器更大,而不是施用的TLM,0.56磅(0.25千克)大于转向S接受TLD(P <0.05)。牛接收TUL的牛肉(0.6千克)在比接受TLM的收缩的饲料到增益比下较低,1.51磅(0.68千克)低于接收到TLD(P <0.05)。在前30天的饲料中,与TLD处理的操纵器相比,Tul治疗的Steers具有更大的干物质摄入量(P <0.01),但治疗组之间没有其他差异。通过收缩,治疗组之间的累积平均干物质摄入没有差异。总体而言,与TLM和TLD治疗相比,托尔治疗抵达导致健康和性能提高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号