Wileman B W, Thomson D U, Reinhardt C D, Renter D G
College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.
J Anim Sci. 2009 Oct;87(10):3418-26. doi: 10.2527/jas.2009-1778. Epub 2009 Jul 17.
Conventional feeding systems use pharmaceutical products not allowed in natural or organic systems for finishing cattle. This review of data compares the performance effects (ADG, G:F, DMI) of technologies used in conventional feeding programs that are prohibited in organic programs, natural programs, or both. The technologies evaluated were steroid implants, monensin, tylosin, endectocides, and metaphylaxis with any antimicrobial. For inclusion in this analysis, studies were conducted in North America, reported randomization to treatment group, used beef cattle, contained an untreated control group, and were sourced from peer-reviewed journals. Forest plots were used to examine the data visually for trends toward a uniform effect of the technology on the outcomes of interest (ADG, DMI, G:F). Technologies that displayed a uniform response on the forest plot compared with negative controls were then analyzed using mixed models. Examination of forest plots for endectocides, steroid implants, monensin, and metaphylaxis technologies appeared to show performance advantages for treated cattle relative to cattle in negative control groups. An insufficient number of studies met the inclusion criteria to conduct meta-analyses comparing endectocides, monensin, or tylosin with negative controls. Average daily gain in feeder cattle given metaphylaxis on arrival was 0.11 kg/d (P < 0.01) greater relative to cattle that did not receive metaphylaxis on arrival. Implanting heifers increased ADG by 0.08 kg/d compared with nonimplanted controls (P = 0.09). Implants had no effect on G:F (P = 0.14) in heifers or on DMI (P = 0.44) relative to nonimplanted control heifers. Implanting steers was associated with greater ADG, by 0.25 kg/d (P < 0.01), and DMI, by 0.53 kg/d (P < 0.01), relative to nonimplanted control steers. Implants also improved G:F in steers relative to nonimplanted steers, by 0.02 (0.17 vs. 0.15; implanted vs. controls, P < 0.01; n = 21 studies). When average estimated differences in ADG and G:F for implanted and nonimplanted steers were incorporated into a breakeven model, implanted steers had a $77/animal lower cost of production than nonimplanted steers and a $349/animal lower cost of production than organically raised steers. These data illustrate the importance of capturing premiums when operating natural and organic production systems to maintain economic viability.
传统饲养系统在育肥牛时使用天然或有机系统中不允许使用的药品。本数据综述比较了传统饲养项目中使用但在有机项目、天然项目或两者中均被禁止的技术对生产性能的影响(平均日增重、料重比、干物质采食量)。评估的技术包括类固醇植入剂、莫能菌素、泰乐菌素、体内外寄生虫驱虫剂以及使用任何抗菌药物进行群体预防给药。为纳入本分析,研究在北美进行,报告了随机分组至治疗组的情况,使用肉牛,设有未处理的对照组,且数据来源为同行评审期刊。采用森林图直观检查数据,以了解该技术对感兴趣的生产性能指标(平均日增重、干物质采食量、料重比)产生一致影响的趋势。与阴性对照相比,在森林图上显示出一致反应的技术随后使用混合模型进行分析。对体内外寄生虫驱虫剂、类固醇植入剂、莫能菌素和群体预防给药技术的森林图检查显示,与阴性对照组的牛相比,接受处理的牛在生产性能方面具有优势。符合纳入标准的研究数量不足,无法进行将体内外寄生虫驱虫剂、莫能菌素或泰乐菌素与阴性对照进行比较 的荟萃分析。到达时接受群体预防给药的育肥牛的平均日增重比到达时未接受群体预防给药的牛高0.11千克/天(P < 0.01)。与未植入的对照组相比,给小母牛植入类固醇植入剂使平均日增重提高了0.08千克/天(P = 0.09)。相对于未植入的对照小母牛,植入剂对小母牛的料重比(P = 0.14)或干物质采食量(P = 0.44)没有影响。与未植入的对照阉牛相比,给阉牛植入类固醇植入剂使平均日增重提高了0.25千克/天(P < 0.01),干物质采食量提高了0.53千克/天(P < 0.01)。相对于未植入的阉牛,植入剂还提高了阉牛的料重比,提高了0.02(植入组为0.17,对照组为0.15;P < 0.01;n = 21项研究)。当将植入和未植入阉牛的平均日增重和料重比的估计差异纳入盈亏平衡模型时,植入阉牛的生产成本比未植入阉牛低77美元/头,比有机饲养的阉牛低349美元/头。这些数据说明了在运营天然和有机生产系统时获取溢价以维持经济可行性的重要性。