Schunicht Oliver C, Booker Calvin W, Guichon P Timothy, Jim G Kee, Wildman Brian K, Pittman Tom J, Perrett Tye
Feedlot Health Management Services, PO Box 140, Bay 7-87 Elizabeth Street, Okotoks, Alberta T1S 2A2.
Can Vet J. 2007 Jun;48(6):600-6.
A field trial was performed under commercial feedlot conditions in central Nebraska to assess the relative efficacy of tulathromycin (TULA) to florfenicol (FLOR) for the treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in feedlot calves that did not receive a metaphylactic antimicrobial or vaccines/bacterins containing Mannheimia haemolytica or Histophilus somni at feedlot arrival by comparing animal health, feedlot performance, and carcass characteristic variables. Two hundred recently weaned, auction market derived, crossbred beef calves that met the study-specific case definition of UF were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to 1 of 2 experimental groups as follows: TULA, which received tulathromycin administered subcutaneously at the rate of 2.5 mg/kg body weight (BW) once at the time of allocation; or FLOR, which received florfenicol administered subcutaneously at the rate of 40 mg/kg BW once at the time of allocation. In terms of animal health, the first UF relapse (RR = 0.65), overall mortality (RR = 0.33), and BRD mortality (RR = 0.29) rates in the TULA group were significantly (P < 0.05) lower than in the FLOR group. There were no significant (P > or = 0.05) differences between the TULA and FLOR groups for the other animal health variables measured. There was no significant (P > or = 0.05) difference in average daily gain between the TULA and FLOR groups. There were no significant (P > or = 0.05) differences in the overall distributions of quality grade and yield grade between the experimental groups; however, a significantly (P < 0.05) higher proportion of carcasses in the TULA group graded yield grade USDA-4 as compared with the FLOR group. In the economic analysis, the benefits observed resulted in an economic advantage of $52.50 USD/animal in the TULA group due to lower first UF relapse and overall mortality rates, even though the occurrence of yield grade USDA-4 carcasses increased and the initial UF treatment cost was higher.
在内布拉斯加州中部的商业饲养场条件下进行了一项田间试验,通过比较动物健康状况、饲养场性能和胴体特征变量,评估土拉霉素(TULA)与氟苯尼考(FLOR)对未接受预防性抗菌药物或在饲养场到达时未接种含有溶血曼氏杆菌或睡眠嗜组织菌的疫苗/菌苗的饲养场犊牛未分化发热(UF)的相对疗效。200头最近断奶、来自拍卖市场的杂交肉牛犊符合UF的研究特定病例定义,按1:1比例随机分配到以下2个实验组中的1组:TULA组,在分配时按2.5mg/kg体重(BW)的剂量皮下注射一次土拉霉素;或FLOR组,在分配时按40mg/kg BW的剂量皮下注射一次氟苯尼考。在动物健康方面,TULA组的首次UF复发率(RR = 0.65)、总死亡率(RR = 0.33)和BRD死亡率(RR = 0.29)显著低于FLOR组(P < 0.05)。所测量的其他动物健康变量在TULA组和FLOR组之间没有显著差异(P≥0.05)。TULA组和FLOR组的平均日增重没有显著差异(P≥0.05)。实验组之间在质量等级和产量等级的总体分布上没有显著差异(P≥0.05);然而,与FLOR组相比,TULA组中胴体等级为美国农业部4级产量等级的比例显著更高(P < 0.05)。在经济分析中,尽管美国农业部4级产量等级胴体的发生率增加且最初的UF治疗成本较高,但由于首次UF复发率和总死亡率较低,TULA组观察到的效益导致每头动物有52.50美元的经济优势。