Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-b2xwp Total loading time: 0.373 Render date: 2022-09-27T18:59:55.413Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Supplementing a yeast-derived product to enhance productive and health responses of beef steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 December 2017

L. G. T. Silva
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu 18168-000, Brazil
R. F. Cooke*
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA
K. M. Schubach
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA
A. P. Brandão
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA
R. S. Marques
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA
T. F. Schumaher
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu 18168-000, Brazil
P. Moriel
Affiliation:
Range Cattle Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Ona, FL 33865, USA
D. W. Bohnert
Affiliation:
Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Oregon State University, Burns, OR 97720, USA
Get access

Abstract

This experiment evaluated the impacts of supplementing a yeast-derived product (Celmanax; Church & Dwight Co., Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA) on productive and health responses of beef steers, and was divided into a preconditioning (days 4 to 30) and feedlot receiving phase (days 31 to 69). In all, 84 Angus × Hereford steers were weaned on day 0 (BW=245±2 kg; age=186±2 days), and maintained in a single group from days 0 to 3. On day 4, steers were allocated according to weaning BW and age to a 21-pen drylot (4 steers/pen). Pens were randomly assigned to (n=7 pens/treatment): (1) no Celmanax supplementation during the study, (2) Celmanax supplementation (14 g/steer daily; as-fed) from days 14 to 69 or (3) Celmanax supplementation (14 g/steer daily; as-fed) from days 31 to 69. Steers had free-choice access to grass-alfalfa hay, and were also offered a corn-based concentrate beginning on day 14. Celmanax was mixed daily with the concentrate. On day 30, steers were road-transported for 1500 km (24 h). On day 31, steers returned to their original pens for the 38-day feedlot receiving. Shrunk BW was recorded on days 4, 31 and 70. Feed intake was evaluated daily (days 14 to 69). Steers were observed daily (days 4 to 69) for bovine respiratory disease (BRD) signs. Blood samples were collected on days 14, 30, 31, 33, 35, 40, 45, 54 and 69, and analyzed for plasma cortisol, haptoglobin, IGF-I, and serum fatty acids. Preconditioning results were analyzed by comparing pens that received (CELM) or not (CONPC) Celmanax during the preconditioning phase. Feedlot receiving results were analyzed by comparing pens that received Celmanax from days 14 to 69 (CELPREC), days 31 to 69 (CELRECV) or no Celmanax supplementation (CON). During preconditioning, BRD incidence was less (P=0.03) in CELM v. CONPC. During feedlot receiving, average daily gain (ADG) (P=0.07) and feed efficiency (P=0.08) tended to be greater in CELPREC and CELRECV v. CON, whereas dry matter intake was similar (P⩾0.29) among treatments. No other treatment effects were detected (P⩾0.20). Collectively, Celmanax supplementation reduced BRD incidence during the 30-day preconditioning. Moreover, supplementing Celmanax tended to improve ADG and feed efficiency during the 38-day feedlot receiving, independently of whether supplementation began during preconditioning or after feedlot entry. These results suggest that Celmanax supplementation benefits preconditioning health and feedlot receiving performance in beef cattle.

Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 8 , August 2018 , pp. 1576 - 1583
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845, USA.

References

Allen, MS 1996. Physical constraints on voluntary dry matter intake of forages by ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 74, 30633075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2006. Official methods of analysis, 18th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Arthington, JD, Qiu, X, Cooke, RF, Vendramini, JMB, Araujo, DB, Chase, CC Jr and Coleman, SW 2008. Effects of pre-shipping management on measures of stress and performance of beef steers during a feedlot receiving period. Journal of Animal Science 86, 20162023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballou, CE 1970. A study of the immunochemistry of three yeast mannans. Journal of Biological Chemistry 245, 11971203.Google ScholarPubMed
Berry, BA, Confer, AW, Krehbiel, CR, Gill, DR, Smith, RA and Montelongo, M 2004. Effects of dietary energy and starch concentrations for newly received feedlot calves: II. Acute-phase protein response. Journal of Animal Science 82, 845850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bishop, MD, Simmen, RCM, Simmen, FA and Davis, ME 1989. The relationship of insulin-like growth factor-1 with post-weaning performance in Angus beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 67, 28722880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M and Nagaraja, TG 2009. Direct-fed microbials for growing and finishing cattle. In Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Publication No. AREC 09 2009 April 9; 10, pp. 42–60.Google Scholar
Cole, NA, Purdy, CW and Hutcheson, DP 1989. Influence of yeast culture on feeder calves and lambs. Journal of Animal Science 70, 16821690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, RF 2017. Nutritional and management considerations for beef cattle experiencing stress-induced inflammation. The Professional Animal Scientist 33, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, RF and Arthington, JD 2013. Concentrations of haptoglobin in bovine plasma determined by ELISA or a colorimetric method based on peroxidase activity: methods to determine haptoglobin in bovine plasma. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 97, 531536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooke, RF, Guarnieri Filho, TA, Cappellozza, BI and Bohnert, DW 2013. Rest stops during road transport: Impacts on performance and acute-phase protein responses of feeder cattle. Journal of Animal Science 91, 54485454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duff, GC and Galyean, ML 2007. Board-invited review: recent advances in management of highly stressed, newly received feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 85, 823840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellenberger, MA, Johnson, DE, Carstens, GE, Hossner, KL, Holland, MD, Nett, TM and Nockels, CF 1989. Endocrine and metabolic changes during altered growth rates in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 67, 14461454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elsasser, TH, Rumsey, TS and Hammond, AC 1989. Influence of diet on basal and growth hormone-stimulated plasma concentrations of IGF-1 in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 67, 128141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, ST, Newman, MC, Newman, KE and Meek, KI 2005. Immune parameters of dry cows fed mannan oligosaccharide and subsequent transfer of immunity to calves. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 766775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marques, RS, Cooke, RF, Francisco, CL and Bohnert, DW 2012. Effects of 24-h transport or 24-h feed and water deprivation on physiologic and performance responses of feeder cattle. Journal of Animal Science 90, 50405046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marques, RS, Cooke, RF, Rodrigues, MC, Cappellozza, BI, Larson, CK, Moriel, P and Bohnert, DW 2016. Effects of organic or inorganic Co, Cu, Mn, and Zn supplementation to late-gestating beef cows on productive and physiological responses of the offspring. Journal of Animal Science 94, 12151226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, RM and Bartley, EE 1972. Bloat in cattle. XVI. Development and application of techniques for selecting drugs to prevent feedlot bloat. Journal of Animal Science 34, 234240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller-Webster, T, Hoover, WH, Holt, M and Nocek, JE 2002. Influence of yeast culture on ruminal microbial metabolism in continuous culture. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 20092014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nde, FF, Verla, NS, Michael, C and Ahmed, MA 2014. Effect of Celmanax on feed intake, live weight gain and nematode control in growing sheep. African Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 695700.Google Scholar
Nocek, JE, Holt, MG and Oppy, J 2011. Effects of supplementation with yeast culture and enzymatically hydrolyzed yeast on performance of early lactation dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 40464056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council 2000. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7th edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Ponce, CH, Schutz, JS, Elrod, CC, Anele, UY and Galyean, ML 2012. Effects of dietary supplementation of a yeast product on performance and morbidity of newly received beef heifers. The Professional Animal Scientist 28, 618622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, RH and Mendez, JK 1990. Effects of preconditioning on pre- and post-shipment performance of feeder calves. Journal of Animal Science 68, 2834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Proudfoot, K, Nocek, J and von Keyserlingk, M 2009. The effect of enzymatically hydrolyzed yeast on feeding behavior and immune function in early lactation dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 87 (E-Suppl. 2), 280.Google Scholar
Salinas-Chavira, J, Arzola, C, González-Vizcarra, V, Manríquez-Núñez, OM, Montaño-Gómez, MF, Navarrete-Reyes, JD, Raymundo, C and Zinn, RA 2015. Influence of feeding enzymatically hydrolyzed yeast cell wall on growth performance and digestive function of feedlot cattle during periods of elevated ambient temperature. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal Science 28, 12881295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salinas-Chavira, J, Montano, MF, Torrentera, N and Zinn, RA 2017. Influence of feeding enzymatically hydrolysed yeast cell wall + yeast culture on growth performance of calf-fed Holstein steers. Journal of Applied Animal Research 43, 390395.Google Scholar
Schneider, MJ, Tait, RG Jr, Busby, WD and Reecy, JM 2009. An evaluation of bovine respiratory disease complex in feedlot cattle: Impact on performance and carcass traits using treatment records and lung scores. Journal of Animal Science 87, 18211827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snowder, GD, Van Vleck, LD, Cundiff, LV and Bennett, GL 2006. Bovine respiratory disease in feedlot cattle: environmental, genetic, and economic factors. Journal of Animal Science 84, 19992008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Step, DL, Krehbiel, CR, DePra, HA, Cranston, JK, Fulton, RW, Kirkpatrick, JG, Gill, DR, Payton, ME, Montelongo, MA and Confer, AW 2008. Effects of commingling beef calves from different sources and weaning protocols during a forty-two-day receiving period on performance and bovine respiratory disease. Journal of Animal Science 86, 31463158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, JD, Fulton, RW, Lehenbauer, TW, Step, DL and Confer, AW 2010. The epidemiology of bovine respiratory disease: What is the evidence for predisposing factors? The Canadian Veterinary Journal 51, 10951102.Google ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to nutrition animal. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 35833597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, DM, Jasper, J and Hötzel, MJ 2008. Understanding weaning distress. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110, 2441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Supplementing a yeast-derived product to enhance productive and health responses of beef steers
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Supplementing a yeast-derived product to enhance productive and health responses of beef steers
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Supplementing a yeast-derived product to enhance productive and health responses of beef steers
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *