Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T11:19:13.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feed Additives: Do They Add to Animal Welfare? An Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

C J Kan ,
L P Jager  and
F J Grommers
C J Kan*
Affiliation:
Institute for Animal Science and Health (ID-DLO), Postbus 65, 8200 AR Lelystad, The Netherlands
L P Jager
Affiliation:
Institute for Animal Science and Health (ID-DLO), Postbus 65, 8200 AR Lelystad, The Netherlands
F J Grommers
Affiliation:
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Utrecht, Interdepartmental Section of Veterinary Medicine and Society, Postbus 80.151, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The welfare of farm animals is strongly influenced by the man-made environment. Welfare problems also arise from reduced homeostatic capacities in animals. Feed additives, used to promote growth or to prevent diseases can alter the animals' self-regulating capacities thus affecting their welfare. The EU regulates the use of these additives within specified groups of Directive 70/524/EEC. Although these feed additives can be regarded as prescription-free veterinary drugs, critical remarks on their desired and adverse effects have received little attention.

A survey of the available literature shows that about one-third of licensed feed additives alter adrenal function in vitro. Reports of the adverse effects of anticoccidial additives in vivo suggest they can be classified under three headings: (i) substances with a very narrow safety margin (the difference between the permitted dose and the dose with adverse effects) and often irreversible effects on growth and feed conversion; (ii) substances with a narrow safety margin and largely reversible effects; (iii) substances with an adequate safety margin. The growth promoters (including antibiotic growth promoters) can - on the basis of their adverse effects - be classified into two groups: (i) substances with a very narrow safety margin; and (ii) substances with an adequate safety margin.

On the one hand, animal welfare considerations require use of disease-preventing additives, but on the other hand, they also demand discontinuation of current practices. Judicious use of additives can add to animal welfare. However, their unlimited use to obscure defects in husbandry is detrimental to animal welfare. A major obstacle to the judicious use of feed additives, is the lack of published, unbiased information on their efficacy and safety for farm animals.

Keywords

animal welfareantimicrobialscattlecoccidiostatsgrowth promoterspigspoultry
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , November 1998 , pp. 397 - 414
Copyright
© 1998 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, P and Garry, A S 1973 The effect of amprolium and payzone on the functional state of the thyroid in growing chickens. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavia 14: 225–228Google Scholar
Anonymous 1979 Arpocox Technical Manual. Merck Sharpe & Dohme: Rahway, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 1983 Voederproeven met salinomycine [Feeding experiments with salinomycin] pp 163-164. Jaarverslag Merelbeke 1983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 1984 Spiramycin (5337 R.P.): Medicinal Feed Additive. Rhone Poulenc Animal Feed Department: Commenty, FranceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 1987 European Union Guideline 87/1531 on the assessment of additives in animal nutritionGoogle Scholar
Baars, A J, Molen, E J van der, Spierenburg, T J, Graaf, G J de, Nabuurs, M J A and Jager, L P 1988 Comparative toxicity of three quinoxaline-di-N-dioxide feed additives in young pigs. Archives of Toxicology 12S: 405–409Google Scholar
Badiola, J J, Luco, D F, Pérez, V, Vargas, M A, Luján, L and Garcia Marin, J F 1994 Maduramicin and tiamulin compatibility in broiler chickens. Avian Pathology 23: 3–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartov, I 1992a Effects of energy concentration and duration of feeding on the response of broiler chicks to growth promoters. British Poultry Science 33: 1057–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartov, I 1992b Lack of effect of dietary energy-to-protein ratio and energy concentration on the response of broiler chickens to virginiamycin. British Poultry Science 33: 381–391CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beers, K W, Raup, T J, Bottje, W G and Odom, T W 1989 Physiological responses of heat-stressed broilers fed nicarbazin. Poultry Science 68: 428–434CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belay, T and Teeter, R G 1996 Virginiamycin and caloric density on live performance, blood serum metabolite concentration, and carcass composition of broilers reared in thermoneutral and cycling ambient temperatures. Poultry Science 75: 1383–1392CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Best, P 1996 Production without antibiotics: The Swedish experience. Feed International April 1996: 8–12Google Scholar
Björnerot L, Franklin A and Tysén 1996 Usage of antibacterial and antiparasitic drugs in animals in Sweden between 1988 and 1993. Veterinary Record 139: 282–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bombeke, A, Okerman, F, de Groote, G and Moermans, R J 1986 De invloed van de antibiotica flavomycine en spiramycine op de groei, de voederomzetting en de leefbaarheid bij slachtkonijnen [The influence of the antibiotics flavomycin and spiramycin on the growth, feed conversion efficiency and mortality of meat-rabbits]. Landbouwtijdschrift 29: 1481–1499Google Scholar
Broom, D M 1991 Animal Welfare: concepts and measurements. Journal of Animal Science 69: 4167–4175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broz, J and Frigg, M 1987 Incompatibility between lasalocid and chloramphenicol in broiler chicks after a long-term simultaneous administration. Veterinary Research Communications 11: 159–172CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casey, N H, Crosley, R I and Smith, G A 1992 Influence of continuous dietary halofuginone on broiler skin tensile strength and growth performance. Journal of the South African Veterinary Association 63: 16–19Google ScholarPubMed
Caston, L J and Leeson, S 1992 The response of broiler turkeys to flavomycin. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 445–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, H D 1994 A review of the biological activity of the anticoccidial drug nicarbazin and its application for the control of coccidiosis in poultry. Poultry Science Reviews 5: 231–243Google Scholar
Combs, G F and Bossard, E H 1963 Comparison of growth response of chicks to virginiamycin and other antibiotics. Poultry Science 42: 681–685Google Scholar
Condren, H B, Davies, R E, Deyoe, C W, Zavbala, M A, Creger, C R and Cough, J R 1963 Studies on the effect of l,2-dimethyl-5-nitroimidazole on growth and reproduction in turkeys and its residual concentration in tissue. Poultry Science 42: 585–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corpet, D E 1996 Microbiological risks for the consumer of antimicrobial growth promoter use in meat production. In: Proceedings of the Scientific Conference on Growth Promotion in Meat Production, 29 November -12 December 1995, Brussels pp 401–429Google Scholar
Council Directive 70/524/EEC Concerning additives in feedstuffs. Official Journal L 270: 1Google Scholar
Council of Europe 1976 Explanatory Report on the European Convention on the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes. Council of Europe: StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
Czarnecki, C M 1990 Effect of including lasalocid or monensin singly or in combination with furazolidone on the growth and feed consumption of turkey poults. Research in Veterinary Science 49: 256–260Google ScholarPubMed
Daghighian, P and Waibel, P E 1982 The efficacy of bacitracin methylene disalycylate and zinc bacitracin in turkey nutrition. Poultry Science 61: 962–976Google Scholar
Decuypere, E, Isterdael, J van, Hermans, A and Michels, H 1989 Influence d'une supplementation en antibiotiques sur les performances de poulets en croissance en Zaïre: comparaison avec l'effet dans les pays a climat tempère. Tropicultura 7: 87–89Google Scholar
de Graaf, G J, Jager, L P, Baars, A J and Spierenburg Th, J 1988 Some pharmacokinetic observations of carbadox medication in pigs. Veterinary Quarterly 10: 34–41CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Jonge, G, Someren, G van, and Snuverink, M 1994 Robenidine is op het Spelderholt overbodig. NOK Blad 12(4): 10–16Google Scholar
Dost, G 1985 Die Wirkung von Flavomycin über 20 Jahre (Anfang 1962 - Ende 1981) bei Broilern (The effect of flavomycin over 20 years [start 1992 - end 1981] on broilers). Archiv für Geflügelkunde 49: 73–80Google Scholar
Ekkel, E D 1996 Impact of Farrow-to-finish Production on Health and Welfare of Pigs. PhD thesis, Utrecht University, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Elwinger, K, Engstroem, B, Fossum, O, Hassan, S and Tegloef, B 1994 Effect of coccidiostats on necrotic enteritis and performance in broiler chickens. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 24: 39–44Google Scholar
Franti, C E, Julian, L M and Adler, H E 1973 Antibiotic growth promotion: effects of zinc bacitracin and oxytetracycline on live weight and weight of selected muscles of New Hampshire cockerels. Poultry Science 52: 1757–1765Google Scholar
Granot, I, Bartov, I, Plavnik, I, Wax, S, Hurwitz, S and Pines, M 1991 Increased skin tearing in broilers and reduced collagen synthesis in skin in vivo and in vitro in response to the coccidiostat halofuginone. Poultry Science 70: 1559–1563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granot, I, Haley, O, Hurwitz, S and Pines, M 1993 Halofuginone: an inhibitor of collagen type I synthesis. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1156: 107–112Google ScholarPubMed
Hanrahan, L A, Corrier, D E and Naqi, SA 1981 Monensin toxicosis in broiler chickens. Veterinary Pathology 18: 665–671CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harms, R H and Buresh, R E 1987a Research note: performance of turkey poults when fed two levels of methionine with and without ipronidazole. Poultry Science 66: 1887–1888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harms, R H and Buresh, R E 1987b Influence of salinomycin on the performance of broiler chicks. Poultry Science 66: 51–54Google ScholarPubMed
Harms, R H and Miles, R D 1983 The response of turkey poults to virginiamycin in diets containing various levels of supplemental methionine. Poultry Science 62: 1896–1898CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helder, J F and Versteegh, HAJ 1976 Invloed van Avatec en Enkele Andere Coccidiostatica op de Groei en Voederconversie van Slachtkuiken. Rapport 104.75 V. Spederholt Institute for Poultry Research: Beekbergen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Hoshino, S, Shimada, K, Kobayashi, Y and Wakita, M 1992 Serum amino acid concentrations in cockerels administered salinomycin. Japanese Poultry Science 29: 262–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, J, Hanson, J, Onderka, D and Harris, W N 1980 Monensin toxicity in chickens. Avian Diseases 24: 1050–1053CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jager, L P, Graaf, G J de and Widjaja-Greefkes, H C A 1996 Screening for drug-induced alterations in the production and release of steroid hormones by porcine adrenocortical cells in vitro. Toxicology In Vitro 10: 595–608CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jager, L P, Graaf, G J de, Widjaja-Greefkes, H C A, Accord-Burleson, C C F, Dungen, H M van den and Baars, A J 1994 Effects of feed additives and veterinary drugs on aldosterone production and release by porcine adrenal cells in vitro. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 17: 175–185CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jager, L P and Vroomen, L H M 1990 Toxicologische overwegingen bij de beoordeling van diergenees-middelen. (Toxicological considerations in the evaluation of veterinary drugs.) Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 115: 727–735Google Scholar
Jamroz, D, Skorupinska, J, Orda, J, Wiliczkiewicz, A and Kirchgessner, M 1995 Zum Einsatz von Avilamycin (Maxus) und Roxazyme in Broilerfuetterung)About the use of avilamycin and roxazyme in broiler nutrition). Archiv für Geflügelkunde 59: 228–233Google Scholar
Jongenburger, H 1983 Het verstrekken van het anti-blackheadmiddel dimetridazol aan kalkoenen via het drinkwater. Bedrijfsontwikkeling 14: 956–958Google Scholar
Jukes, T H 1977 The history of the ‘antibiotic growth effect’. Federation Proceedings 37: 2514–2518Google Scholar
Keshavarz, K and McDougald, LR 1981 Influence of anticoccidial drugs on losses of broiler chickens from heat stress and coccidiosis. Poultry Science 60: 2423–2428CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keshavarz, K and McDougald, L R 1982 Anticoccidial drugs: growth and performance depressing effects in young chickens. Poultry Science 61: 699–705CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kingston, D J 1977 The influence of monensin sodium upon feather development of male chickens. Australian Veterinary Journal 53: 251–252CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laczay, P, Simon, F and Lehel, J 1989 Study of the maduramicin tolerance in broilers. Magyar Allatorvosok Lapja 44: 529–532Google Scholar
Lee, S-J, Kim, S-S, Suh, O-S, Na, J-C, Lee, S-H and Chung, S-B 1993 Effect of dietary antibiotics and probiotics on the performance of broiler. RDA Journal of Agricultural Science 35: 539–548Google Scholar
Leeson, S 1991 The need for growth promoting compounds in poultry meat production. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 4: 89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litjens, J B, Hendriekx, J J M and Gommans, J H 1965 Vergiftigingsverschijnselen bij slachtkuikens tengevolge van de combinatie 3,5 dinitro-ortho-toluamide (d.o.t.) en furazolidonum. (Intoxication in broilers caused by a combination of d.o.t. and furazolidone). Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 90: 862–869Google Scholar
Lodge, NJA, Comben, N, Roberts, N L and Fairley, C 1988 Safety of lasalocid in turkeys and its compatibility with tiamulin. Veterinary Record 122: 576–578CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDougald, L R 1980 Compensatory growth in broiler chickens as related to the use of ionophorous antibiotic anticoccidial drugs. Proceedings of the Georgia Nutrition Conference, 1980: 11–16Google Scholar
Miles, R D, Janky, D M and Harms, RH 1984 Virginiamycin and broiler performance. Poultry Science 63: 1218–1221CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, M A and Sandercock, D A 1994 Mechanism of monensin myotoxicity in the broiler chicken - an in vitro model. British Poultry Science 35: 824Google Scholar
Morrison, W D, Ferguson, A E and Leeson, S 1979 Efficacy of salinomycin and stenorol against various species of Eimeria and effect on chick performance. Poultry Science 58: 1160–1166CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moss, R 1980 The Laying Hen and its Environment. Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science 8. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Nabuurs, M J A, Molen, E J van der, Graaf, G J de and Jager, L P 1990 Clinical signs and performance of pigs treated with different doses of carbadox, cyadox and olaquindox. Journal of Veterinary Medicine A37: 68–76Google Scholar
New Animal Drug Application (NADA) 044-759 Bambermycins for cattle (Freedom of information summaiy). Freedom of information (FOI) office, CVM-FDA: Rockville, USAGoogle Scholar
NADA 128-686 Freedom of information Summary. FOI-office, CVM-FDA: Rockville, USAGoogle Scholar
NADA 139-075 Freedom of information Summary. FOI-office, CVM-FDA: Rockville, USAGoogle Scholar
NADA 140-998 Freedom of information Summary. FOI-office, CVM-FDA: Rockville, USAGoogle Scholar
NADA P-130-736 Monensin for Coccidiosis in Turkeys (Freedom of information summary). FOI-office, CVM-FDA: Rockville, USAGoogle Scholar
Newberne, P M and Buck, W B 1957 Studies on drug toxicity 3: the influence of various levels of nicarbazin on growth and development of chicks. Poultry Science 36: 304–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okerman, F and Moermans, R J 1980 De invloed van het coccidiostaticum salinomycine als additief in samengesteld voeder, op de produktieresultaten van slachtkonijnen (The influence of the coccidiostat Salinomycin, as feed additive on the production results of meat rabbits). Landbouwtijdschrift 33: 1295–1306Google Scholar
Olson, G, Ott, W H and van Iderstine, A 1970 The effect of dietary ronidazole on the growth of young chicks and turkeys. Poultry Science 49: 1291–1294Google Scholar
Page, S W 1990 Advances in the chemotherapy of coccidiosis in broiler chickens. Australian Poultry Science Symposium (1990): 39–46Google Scholar
Perelman, B, Abarbanel, J M, Gur-Lavie, A, Meller, Y and Elad, T 1986 Clinical and pathological changes caused by the interaction of lasalocid and chloramphenicol in broiler chickens. Avian Pathology 15: 279–288Google ScholarPubMed
Potter, L M, Shelton, J R and Melton, L G 1974 Zinc bacitracin and added fat in diets of growing turkeys. Poultry Science 53: 2072–2081Google Scholar
Pressman, B C and Fahim, M 1982 Pharmacology and toxicology of the monovalent carboxylic ionophores. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology 22:465-490Google Scholar
Produktschap voor Veevoeder 1996 Inventarisatie Gebruik A, D & K Toevoegingsmiddelenin de Diervoedersector, December 1996. Dutch Feed Board: The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Richter, A, Löscher, W and Witte, W 1996 Leistungsförderer mit antibakterieller Wirkung: Probleme aus pharmakologisch-toxikologischer und mikrobiologischer Sicht. Der praktische Tierartz 77: 603–624Google Scholar
Richter, G and Ranft, U 1991 Prufung verschiedener Leistungsfoerderer in der Putenmast. In: Flachowsky, G, Schone, F and Hennig, A (eds) Vitamine und weitere Zusatzstoffe bei Mensch und Tier, 3 Symposium pp 315–319. Friedrich-Schiller Universitaet Jena, Biologische Fakultaet und Universitaet Leipzig, Agrawissenschaftliche Fakultaet: GermanyGoogle Scholar
Riley, W W, Esteve-Garcia, E and Austic, R E 1986 Intestinal absorption of glucose and amino acids in chickens administered monensin. Poultry Science 65: 2292–2298CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, E F, Brown, R D, Brown, J E, Kazazis, D M, Leanza, W J, Nichols, J R, Ostlind, D A and Rodino, T M 1983 Nicarbazin complex yields dinitrocarbanilidine as ultrafine crystals with improved anticoccidial activity. Science 222: 630–632CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, J A, Cupo, M A and Davidson, J N 1993 Effect of ardacin and virginiamycin on growth and performance of broilers. Poultry Science 72S: 38Google Scholar
Rutgers, L J E, Grommers, F J and Colenbrander, B 1996 Ethical aspects of invasive reproduction techniques in farm animals. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 31: 651–655Google Scholar
Sandercock, D A and Mitchell, M A 1996 Dose dependent myopathy in monensin supplemented broiler chickens: effects of acute heat stress. British Poultry Science 37: S92-S95Google Scholar
SCAN 1988 Report of the scientific committee for animal nutrition on the use of avilamycin in feeding stuffs for pigs. European Union 6429/VI/87Google Scholar
SCAN 1996 Report of the scientific committee for animal nutrition on the possible risk for humans on the use of avoparcin as feed additive. European Union V1/6474/96Google Scholar
Scholtyssek, S 1983 Einsatz von Monensin und Schwarzkopfmitteln bei Puten. Kraftfutter 66: 162–164Google Scholar
Smith, M O and Teeter, R G 1987a Monensin and lasalocid in the diets of heat stressed broilers. Poultry Science 66: 178Google Scholar
Smith, M O and Teeter, R G 1987b Response of broiler chickens to lasalocid and bacitracin in the diet. Oklahoma Agricultural Experimental Station Report MP-119: 188–190Google Scholar
Spencer, G K and Waldroup, P W 1985 The influence of amprolium and butynorate on growth rate and feed utilization by large white turkeys. Poultry Science 64: 610–615CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stavrou, D 1966 Beitrag zur Dinitro-Ortho-Toluamid (D.O.T.) Toxizitaet beim Huenchen. Berliner und Münchener Tierärtzliche Wochenschrift 14: 281–283Google Scholar
Stephenson, K A, Lean, I J and O'Meara, T J 1996 The effect of monensin on the chemotactic function of bovine neutrophils. Australian Veterinary Journal 1 A: 315–317Google Scholar
Stephenson, E L, Meinecke, C F, Bond, P L and Miller, M A 1985 Effect of various coccidiostats on chick growth and in controlling coccidiosis. Poultry Science 64: 43Google Scholar
Stuart, J C 1978 An outbreak of monensin poisoning in adult turkeys. Veterinary Record 102: 303–304Google ScholarPubMed
Stutz, M W, Johson, S L and Judith, F R 1983 Effects of diet, bacitracin, and body weight restrictions on the intestine of broiler chicks. Poultry Science 62: 1626–1632CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szancer, J 1989 The toxicity of ionophore-polyether antibiotics. Dansk Veterinaertidsskrift 72: 744–751Google Scholar
Vahl, H A 1983 Coccidiostatica in Pluimveevoeder. Report from the Centrale Lanbouw Organisaties (CLO) Institute: De Schothorst, Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
van de Kerk, P 1985 Geneesmiddel intoxicaties bij biggen na langdurig gebruik van gemedicineerd voeder. (Medicine intoxications in piglets after long term administration of medicated feed.) Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 110: 181–184Google Scholar
van der Molen, E J, de Graaf, G J and Baars, A J 1989 Persistence of carbadox-induced adrenal lesions in pigs following drug withdrawal and recovery of aldosterone plasma concentrations. Journal of Comparative Pathology 100: 295–304Google ScholarPubMed
van der Molen, E J, de Graaf, G J, Spierenburg Th, J, Nabuurs, M J A, Baars, A J and Jager, L P 1986 Hypoaldosteronism in piglets induced by carbadox. Experientia 42: 1247–1249Google ScholarPubMed
van der Molen, E J, Nabuurs, M J A and Jager, L P 1985 Pathological and clinical changes related to toxicity of carbadox in weaned pigs. Zentralblatt fur Veterinär Medizin A32: 540–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Stroom-Kruyswijk, J H 1992 Economic health care and coccidiosis: field observations. In: Mulder, R W A W (ed) Proceedings of the XIX World Poultry Congress, Volume 1 pp 826–833. World Poultry Science Association (Dutch Branch): Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Varewyck, H, Peeters, J E, Halen, P, Lampo, P and Bouquet, Y 1984 Influence of the anticoccidials clopidol/methylbenzoquate and robenidine on fertility and progeny of female rabbits. British Veterinary Journal 140: 202–206CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vijfhuizen J, Roeden W van and Zijderveld F G van 1988 Bepaling van de minimaa! inhiberende concentratie-waarden van Nederlands isolaten van T. hyodysenteriae. In: Bepaling van MJ.C.-waarden van T. hyodysenteriae Tegen Veel Gebruikte Antibiotica en Chemotherapeutica; de Ontwikkeling van een ELISA en de Bereiding van Monoclonale Antilichamen t.b.v. de Diagnostiek pp 3–8. Central Veterinary Institute (CDI) Report No 5 (February 1988). CDI: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Vinardell, M P and Gonzalez, G 1992 Anticoccidial effects 3-oxy-methyl-D-glucose transport by chicken intestine. Medical Science Research 20: 451–452Google Scholar
Vogt, H 1980 Sind Coccidiostatica Wachstumfoerderer beim Broiler. Deutsche Geflügelwirtschaft und Schweineproduktion 32: 1184Google Scholar
Wagner, D D, Furrow, R D and Bradley, B D 1983 Subchronic toxicity of monensin in broiler chickens. Veterinary Pathology 20: 353–359CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waibel, P E, Halvorsen, J C, Noll, S L, Hoffbeck, S L and Daniels, H 1991 Influences of virginiamycin on growth and efficiency of large white turkeys. Poultry Science 70: 837–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldmann, K H, Kikovic, D and Stockhofe, N 1989 Klinische und hämatologische Veränderungen nach Olaquindoxvergiftung bei Mastschweinen. (Clinical and haematological changes following intoxication with olaquindox in pigs). Journal of Veterinary Medicine A36: 676–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltner-Toews, D and McEwen, S A 1994 Residues of antibacterial and antiparasitic drugs in foods of animal origin: arisk assessment. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 20: 219–234Google Scholar
Watkins, K L, Schlegel, B F and Bafundo, K W 1991 Effect of anticoccidial program on broiler performance. Poultry Science 70S: 186Google Scholar
Wiepkema, P R and Koolhaas, J M 1993 Stress and animal welfare. Animal Welfare 2: 195–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar