Upload
william-barrett
View
220
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Implants and Additives
Galen Erickson
Implanting Defects
Partially missing implant
Improper Location
Crushed Implants
Implanting Defects
Abscess
Walled-off
Implants and Body Composition
• Implants increase protein deposition.
• Implants cause a upward shift in the growth curve.
• The shift in the growth curve influences body composition at a given weight.
Implants Change the Growth Curve
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
800 1100 1165 1230 1265
No Implant
1 Implant
2 Implants
28.6% EBFLow Choice
Relationship of empty body fat to Quality Grade(total of 1,355 animals)
21.1
26.2
28.629.9
31.031.8
32.5
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marbling score
% EBF
Weight @ 28% FatIncrease
• Non-implanted 1145• Rev-IS 1175a +30• Component-ES• Ralgro/Rev-S 1212b +67• Revalor-S 1 x• Syn-S/Rev-S 1223c +78• Rev-IS/Rev-IS• Rev-IS/Rev-S 1237d +92• Rev-S/Rev-S
Implant impact on BW 28% EBF - Steers
Guiroy et al., 2002
Implant impacts
Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database: http://idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm
none revalor-S Diff %change
N 1040 1040DOF 135 135
ADG 3.18 3.79 0.61 19.2
F:G 6.62 5.92 -0.7 -10.6
HCW 727.6 779.2 51.6 7.1
FW 1155 1237 82 7.1
% Choice 75.0 63.7 -11.3 -15.1
Implant impacts
Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database: http://idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm
none syn-S/rev-S Diff %change
N 379 443DOF 162 158
ADG 2.94 3.52 .58 19.7
F:G 6.40 5.61 -0.8 -12.3
HCW 687.8 759.1 71.3 10.4
FW 1092 1205 113 10.4
% Choice 70.4 52.7 -17.7 -25.1
Economics for implants
none implanting assumptionN 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200
Economics for implantsnone implanting assumption
N 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200
%choice 15 hd 800 lb carcass$2/cwt spread 240 -$6/cwt spread 720 -$15/cwt spread 1800 -$22/cwt spread 2640 -Implant & work 800 -
Economics for implantsnone implanting assumption
N 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200
%choice 15 hd 800 lb carcass$2/cwt spread 240 -$6/cwt spread 720 -$15/cwt spread 1800 -$22/cwt spread 2640 -Implant & work 800 -
$/made 1040-3440 5600-7200 $40.80/hdtoday: $61.60
Implant Decision MakingGender
Diet Energy
Marketing goals
Days from market!!!
0-120 one implant
120-140 weak initial or delayed
140-160 intermediate and terminal
160+ strong E, intermediate comb,
Always build on implant strength
Feed Additives
Ionophores- Rumensin, Bovatec, Cattlyst,
Gainpro, Vmax
Coccidiostats- Deccox, Amprolium,
Rumensin, Bovatec
Antibiotics- Tylan, CTC, OTC
Hormone- MGA, heifermaxx
Β-agonists- Optaflexx, Zilmax
Feed Additives
Premix-Type A
Supplements-Type B
Final diets-Type C
Compendium rules!
FDA regulated, no off-label use allowed
Law is 90% DM basis, g/ton and mg/hd
Rumensin
Large Impact on Nutritional Management
• ↓ Performance
• ↑ Intake Variation
• ↑ Acidosis
• ↑ Digestive Deads
• ↓ Coccidiosis Protection
Cooper slides, 2004
FermentableFeed
PropionateAcetate
Lactate
AcetatePropionate
Rumensin Mode of Action
Cooper slides, 2004
FermentableFeed
PropionateAcetate
Lactate
AcetatePropionate
Rumensin Mode of Action
Cooper slides, 2004
DM Intake Daily Gain Feed/Gain
Deads Out
Control 19.4 3.20 6.08
Rumensin 19.1 3.25 5.89
-1.5%* 1.6%* 3.1%*
Deads In
Control 19.4 3.13 6.21
Rumensin 19.1 3.21 5.97
-1.5%* 2.6% 3.9%*Source: Laudert, 1990
Four Trial Summary (2,904 Steers)
Rumensin Performance
Cooper slides, 2004
• Original research showed 10% improvement in feed conversion
• Recent research shows 3-4% improvement
• Difference likely due to ration energy level
• Summary– Direct effect on performance is lower in today’s rations– Greater improvement with Deads-In
Rumensin Performance
Cooper slides, 2004
• Dr. Baxter Black, 1980• Digestive deaths decreased by 2/3rds after inclusion of
Rumensin
Rumensin Digestive Deads
Cooper slides, 2004
Rumensin level, g/ton
Reference # 0 20 30 40
Laudert, 1990 2,904 1.01 0.62 0.57
Laudert, 1994 1,017 2.39 0.94
Vogel, 1996 1,172 2.62 1.62 0.25
Rumensin Digestive Deads
Cooper slides, 2004
Rumensin reduces acidosis and bloat
• Directly– ↓ lactate production
– ↑ lactate utilization
– ↓ rumen fluid viscosity
• Indirectly– ↓ day-to-day intake variation
– Improved feeding behavior
Rumensin Acidosis
Cooper slides, 2004
RumensinIntake Variation Within Pen
0
2
4
6
8
10
1-2 3-7 8-12 13-28 57-70 97-110
Days on Feed
Vari
an
ce,
lb2
ControlRumensin*
*
*
Source: Stock et al., 1995
Cooper slides, 2004
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1-2 3-7 8-12 13-28 57-70 97-110
Days on Feed
Vari
an
ce,
lb2
ControlRumensin
RumensinIntake Variation Across Days
*
* *
Source: Stock et al., 1995
Cooper slides, 2004
RumensinFeeding Behavior and Acidosis
Control RumensinDM Intake 28.4 27.9
Rate of intake 36.6 33.6
# of meals 8.8 9.3
Ave meal size 3.7 3.3
Total time 298 321
Ave ruminal pH* 5.59 5.74
Area below 5.6* 214 96Source: Cooper, 1997
Cooper slides, 2004
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82
Year
RumensinCoccidiosis
Cocci Death Loss per 100,000 hd
Source: Edwards, 1984
Cooper slides, 2004
RumensinCoccidiosis
Source: Watkins et al., 1986
Rumensin Level, g/ton
0 10 20 30
E. bovis 49.9 29.1 15.9 11.2
E. zuernii 18.5 7.0 2.3 2.2
Other oocysts 19.3 9.2 8.7 4.7
Mortality 16 0 0 0
Cooper slides, 2004
Acidosis and Bloat• Feed more roughage
– Level– Type
• Limit extensively processed grains– High moisture corn– Steam-flaked corn
• Optimize byproduct level– Digestible fiber replacing starch– Corn oil increases energy content– Provides small amount of lactate
Rumensin conclusions
Cooper slides, 2004
Ionophore Economics
Rumensin improves F:G by 4%
1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00
Therefore: $10.00 to $12.00 return from performanceCost: 2 cent/hd/d: approximately $3.00
RUMENSIN SAVE: range: $7.00 to $9.00
1996 Scientific Update, Elanco Animal Health; Laudert, 1990
Liver Abscesses
Elanco Animal Health
Tylan
Elanco Animal Health Technical Bulletin; Laudert and Vogel
none Tylan%change
Trials 40 40DOF 134 134Pens 40 40
ADG 2.84 2.90 2.1
F:G 6.72 6.90 -2.6
Liver abscesses 27.9 7.5Dressing % 61.65 61.80
Tylan Economics
none Tylan %change
F:G 6.72 6.90 -2.6
1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00
Therefore: $6.50 to $7.80 return from performanceCost: 1 cent/hd/d: approximately $1.50
TYLAN SAVE: range: $5.00 to $6.30
MGA
Interaction with heifer age (Mader and Lechtenberg, 2000; Anderson, 1991)
1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00
MGA generally: 4%+ improvement with yearling heifers
Therefore: $10.00 to $12.00 return from F:Gsell more weight 10 to 15 lb.
OH
NH
OH
OH
OH
NH
OH
OH
0 100 200
Initial weight -----------1206----------
Final weight 1292.4 1300.4 1307.2
ADG 3.04 3.33 3.57
F:G 6.74 6.12 5.67
HCW 825.4 830.7 837.7
marbling 504 504 501
% choice 47.6 48.5 45.6
YG 2.87 2.85 2.84
Recent commercial studies
Current Elanco recommendation: 200 mg/hd for 28 d.
Steers
OH
NH
OH
OH
100 200 300
Increase in live wt 10 17 21
Increase in carcass wt 6 14 18
Calculated return, $/hd
Price at $80/cwt live 6.30 6.60 4.50
Price at $70/cwt live 4.20 4.90 3.50
Steers only, fed 28 days and ~$7.00 for Optaflexx fed at 200 mg/hd
Expected Response
Current Elanco recommendation: 200 mg/hd for 28 d.
Steers
Optaflexx issues
Requirements
70-430 mg/hd/d 8.2 to 24.6 g/ton (90% DM basis)9.1 to 27.3 g/ton DM
At 24 lb DMI = 16.7 g/ton DM
Fed final 28-42 days prior to marketRecommendation
200 mg/hd/d for 28 days
Optaflexx issues
Benefits
Increased weight (profitable)Improved efficiency
late in feeding period
Little to no effect on carcass traitsApproved for use with Rum/Tylan
OH
NH
OH
OH
My thoughts
• Weight• N retention late• REA• Efficiency
• YG
No effect (<200 mg)
• Marbling• Tenderness
Increases Decreases
With trained panels, > 200 mg was not as positive on carcass qualityVery positive on most traits, and is safeConcern with sorting and the 28-42 d window, may create challengesFun to test over the next few years
Zilmax• Zilpaterol hydrochloride• 22.05 lb bag (10kg)• 4.8% product
– 4.8% of the bag is active Zilpaterol– 21.77 grams of active/lb (48 g/kg)– One bag contains 480 g of Zilmax
• Corn cob grit, Zilpaterol, surfactant and binder• Manufactured in France• Store at or below 77 degrees F
Permitted Claims and LimitationsCarcass Measurements Zilmax Effects
Dressing %
Hot Carcass Wt. lbs.
REA, sq.in.
YG
12th Rib Fat Thickness, in. NC
Marbling Score NCc
b Reduction indicates improvement
c Zilmax shown to decrease marbling score @ 40 days
b
Zilmax Inclusion Rate
• Cattle Fed in Confinement for Slaughter• All feeding rates on label expressed on a 90% DM basis• 6.8 g/ton on a 90% DM basis• 7.6 g/ton on a 100% DM basis
Zilmax Feeding Directions
• Feed continuously to cattle fed in confinement for slaughter as the sole ration for the last 20 to 40 days at 7.6 g/ton (100% DM) to provide 60-90 mg/hd/d.
• Approved to be fed in combination with Rumensin, Tylan and MGA
• Approved for use in Type B supplements dry (meal or pelleted) and liquid
Zilmax Withdrawal• Category II drug• 3 day withdrawal
Beta-agonist issues
ChallengesFeeding large enough rationsMixing (50 to 90% of capacity)
mix more than 1 feedingfeed 1X per day
Sorting and maintaining 28-42 d windowInteraction with implants
SummaryImplants: $62 45-90Rumensin: $8 7-9Tylan: $5.65 5-6.30MGA(heifers): $7 5-8Sick cattle: ?Lower energy: $10
TOTAL: $75.65
Technology Offers from Birth to Slaughter
• Added value - $132.37• Added costs
– Implants $8.00– Ionophore $3.80– Parasite $6.00– Optaflexx $7.00
• Total $24.80• Profit $107.57
Would require $11.16 cwt more to go without technology
Would increase retail cost for all meat $.35/lb
Ivan Rush, PHREC; UNL
Breakeven
Purchase price + feed cost + yardage + processing + interest + death (sick)
Sale weight
Factors to watch:lower finished weightsincreased feed cost (i.e., higher F:G)purchasing higher value calvessickness