Effects of dietary probiotics on beef cattle performance and stress
Effects of dietary probiotics on beef cattle performance and stress
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jveb.2018.05.010
复制
发表时间：
2018-09-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Colpoys, Jessica D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kelsey, Alexis J.;Colpoys, Jessica D.
膳食益生菌已被证明有利于牛的生产；然而，人们对它们如何影响肉牛的气质和压力知之甚少。因此，本研究的目的是评估膳食益生菌如何影响肉牛的生产性能和应激。本研究使用了两种处理方法：(1) 对照，接受不含益生菌的饲料；(2) 益生菌，接受每头每天含有 10 克益生菌的饲料（Probios 饲料颗粒，科汉森公司，密尔沃基，威斯康星州）。对三组牛进行了评估。第 1 组由 7 头 7-10 个月大的断奶小牛组成，采用交叉实验设计，每次处理小牛 3 周。第 2 组由 33 头 > 1 岁的母牛组成，采用随机完全区组设计进行为期 6 周的治疗（对照 n = 16，益生菌 n = 17）。第 3 组由分配给对照组和益生菌治疗 6 周的第 2 组奶牛喂养的小牛组成（每次治疗 n = 8 头）。测量了每周体重、平均日增重、饲料效率（仅第 2 组）、溜槽出口速度、新物体测试期间的行为（第 1 组和第 2 组）以及第 0 周和第 6 周（第 2 组）期间的血清皮质醇。接受益生菌的第 1 组牛的体重、平均日增重和增重：饲料的总体变化较大（P < 0.10）。对于第1组每周滑道出口速度没有观察到治疗效果；然而，与对照牛相比，接受益生菌治疗的第 2 组和第 3 组牛的每周溜槽退出速度总体较慢 (P = 0.72)。在新物体测试期间，与对照处理牛相比，接受益生菌的第 1 组牛离开竞技场的速度较慢，接受益生菌的第 2 组牛更频繁地越过区域线且发声频率较低（P
Dietary probiotics have been shown to benefit cattle production; however, little is known about how they affect beef cattle temperament and stress. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to evaluate how dietary probiotics impact beef cattle performance and stress. Two treatments were used for this study: (1) control, receiving feed without probiotics and (2) probiotics, receiving feed containing 10 g per head per day of probiotics (Probios feed granules, Chr. Hansen Inc., Milwaukee, WI). Three groups of cattle were evaluated. Group 1 consisted of 7 weaned calves that were 7-10 months old and used a crossover experimental design where the calves were given each treatment for 3 weeks. Group 2 consisted of 33 female cattle > 1 year of age and had treatments applied for 6 weeks using a randomized complete block design (control n = 16, probiotics n = 17). Group 3 consisted of calves that were nursing group 2 cows allocated to the control and probiotics treatment for 6 weeks (n = 8 per treatment). Weekly body weight, average daily gain, feed efficiency (group 2 only), chute exit velocity, behavior during a novel object test (group 1 and 2), and serum cortisol during weeks 0 and 6 (group 2) were measured. Group 1 cattle receiving probiotics had a greater overall change in body weight, average daily gain, and gain:feed (P 0.10). No treatment effect was observed for group 1 weekly chute exit velocity; however, group 2 and 3 cattle of the probiotics treatment had an overall slower weekly chute exit speed compared with control cattle (P = 0.72). During the novel object test, group 1 cattle receiving probiotics exited the arena slower and group 2 cattle receiving probiotics crossed zone lines more frequently and had less frequent vocalizations compared with control treatment cattle (P