|
|
| Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Suínos e Aves. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpsa.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
Registro Completo |
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Suínos e Aves. |
Data corrente: |
28/06/2022 |
Data da última atualização: |
28/06/2022 |
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
Autoria: |
GÜTHS, M. F.; SIQUEIRA, H. A.; MONTES, J. H.; MOREIRA, F.; RIZZOTO, G.; PERIPOLLI, V.; TUTIDA, Y. H.; LUCIA JUNIOR, T.; IRGANG, R.; KICH, J. D.; BIANCHI, I. |
Afiliação: |
MARCELO FELIPE GÜTHS, IFC/Araquari; HELLOA ALAIDE SIQUEIRA, IFC/Araquari; JULIA HELENA MONTES, IFC/Araquari; FABIANA MOREIRA, IFC/Araquari; GUILHERME RIZZOTO, UNESP; VANESSA PERIPOLLI, IFC/Araquari; YUSO HENRIQUE TUTIDA, IFC/Araquari; THOMAZ LUCIA JUNIOR, UFPel; RENATO IRGANG, UFSC; JALUSA DEON KICH, CNPSA; IVAN BIANCHI, IFC/Araquari. |
Título: |
Removal or substitution of in feed antimicrobials in swine production. |
Ano de publicação: |
2022 |
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, n. 205, ed. 105696, 2022. |
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2022.105696 |
Idioma: |
Inglês |
Conteúdo: |
Abstract: Antimicrobial substitutes are being used in pig production systems, to maintain the health of the animals without compromising their performance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of either the removal of in feed antimicrobials or their substitution for feed additives, at the nursery and growing/finishing stages. At weaning, 1091 piglets were sexed, vaccinated, homogenized by weight and allocated to six treatments during the nursery stage (26?63 d): T1- feed with no antimicrobials nor additives; T2 - feed with antimicrobials; T3 - feed with prebiotic; T4 ? feed with probiotic; T5 ? feed with essential oils; T6 ? feed with organic acids. The same treatments were applied to 840 pigs during the growing/finishing stages (64?167 d). There was no effect of the treatments on feed conversion at the nursery (P = 0.222) and the growing/finishing (P = 0.809) stages. The average daily gain did not differ across treatments in the nursery (P = 0.342) and in growing/finishing (P = 0.050). The cost of the interventions with injectable drugs was not different between the treatments neither at the nursery (P = 0.990) nor at the growing/finishing (P = 0.310). However, the pneumonia and pleurisy index for all treatments was equal or above 1.0, which indicates a respiratory challenge. There was an increase in the cost with antimicrobials or additives per kg of feed produced, which impacts the cost per kg of pig produced. In conclusion, the removal of antimicrobials in pig diets is financially feasible and their substitution by additives did not impact growing performance. MenosAbstract: Antimicrobial substitutes are being used in pig production systems, to maintain the health of the animals without compromising their performance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of either the removal of in feed antimicrobials or their substitution for feed additives, at the nursery and growing/finishing stages. At weaning, 1091 piglets were sexed, vaccinated, homogenized by weight and allocated to six treatments during the nursery stage (26?63 d): T1- feed with no antimicrobials nor additives; T2 - feed with antimicrobials; T3 - feed with prebiotic; T4 ? feed with probiotic; T5 ? feed with essential oils; T6 ? feed with organic acids. The same treatments were applied to 840 pigs during the growing/finishing stages (64?167 d). There was no effect of the treatments on feed conversion at the nursery (P = 0.222) and the growing/finishing (P = 0.809) stages. The average daily gain did not differ across treatments in the nursery (P = 0.342) and in growing/finishing (P = 0.050). The cost of the interventions with injectable drugs was not different between the treatments neither at the nursery (P = 0.990) nor at the growing/finishing (P = 0.310). However, the pneumonia and pleurisy index for all treatments was equal or above 1.0, which indicates a respiratory challenge. There was an increase in the cost with antimicrobials or additives per kg of feed produced, which impacts the cost per kg of pig produced. In conclusion, the removal of antimicrobials in pig... Mostrar Tudo |
Palavras-Chave: |
Prebióticos; Probióticos. |
Thesagro: |
Ácido Orgânico; Controle Microbiano; Óleo Essencial; Produção Animal; Ração; Suíno. |
Thesaurus Nal: |
Essential oils; Organic acids and salts; Prebiotics; Probiotics. |
Categoria do assunto: |
-- |
Marc: |
LEADER 02703naa a2200397 a 4500 001 2144317 005 2022-06-28 008 2022 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d 024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2022.105696$2DOI 100 1 $aGÜTHS, M. F. 245 $aRemoval or substitution of in feed antimicrobials in swine production.$h[electronic resource] 260 $c2022 520 $aAbstract: Antimicrobial substitutes are being used in pig production systems, to maintain the health of the animals without compromising their performance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of either the removal of in feed antimicrobials or their substitution for feed additives, at the nursery and growing/finishing stages. At weaning, 1091 piglets were sexed, vaccinated, homogenized by weight and allocated to six treatments during the nursery stage (26?63 d): T1- feed with no antimicrobials nor additives; T2 - feed with antimicrobials; T3 - feed with prebiotic; T4 ? feed with probiotic; T5 ? feed with essential oils; T6 ? feed with organic acids. The same treatments were applied to 840 pigs during the growing/finishing stages (64?167 d). There was no effect of the treatments on feed conversion at the nursery (P = 0.222) and the growing/finishing (P = 0.809) stages. The average daily gain did not differ across treatments in the nursery (P = 0.342) and in growing/finishing (P = 0.050). The cost of the interventions with injectable drugs was not different between the treatments neither at the nursery (P = 0.990) nor at the growing/finishing (P = 0.310). However, the pneumonia and pleurisy index for all treatments was equal or above 1.0, which indicates a respiratory challenge. There was an increase in the cost with antimicrobials or additives per kg of feed produced, which impacts the cost per kg of pig produced. In conclusion, the removal of antimicrobials in pig diets is financially feasible and their substitution by additives did not impact growing performance. 650 $aEssential oils 650 $aOrganic acids and salts 650 $aPrebiotics 650 $aProbiotics 650 $aÁcido Orgânico 650 $aControle Microbiano 650 $aÓleo Essencial 650 $aProdução Animal 650 $aRação 650 $aSuíno 653 $aPrebióticos 653 $aProbióticos 700 1 $aSIQUEIRA, H. A. 700 1 $aMONTES, J. H. 700 1 $aMOREIRA, F. 700 1 $aRIZZOTO, G. 700 1 $aPERIPOLLI, V. 700 1 $aTUTIDA, Y. H. 700 1 $aLUCIA JUNIOR, T. 700 1 $aIRGANG, R. 700 1 $aKICH, J. D. 700 1 $aBIANCHI, I. 773 $tPreventive Veterinary Medicine$gn. 205, ed. 105696, 2022.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
Registro original: |
Embrapa Suínos e Aves (CNPSA) |
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
Registro Completo
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão. |
Data corrente: |
20/09/2010 |
Data da última atualização: |
21/09/2010 |
Autoria: |
CARVALHO, M. da C. S.; FERREIRA, A. C. de B. |
Afiliação: |
MARIA DA CONCEICAO SANTANA CARVALHO, CNPAF; ALEXANDRE CUNHA DE B FERREIRA, CNPA. |
Título: |
Adubação nitrogenada na sucessão braquiária-algodão em sistema plantio direto no Cerrado: safra 2008/2009. |
Ano de publicação: |
2010 |
Fonte/Imprenta: |
In: REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA DE FERTILIDADE DO SOLO E NUTRIÇÃO DE PLANTAS, 29.; REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA SOBRE MICORRIZAS, 13.; SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE MICROBIOLOGIA DO SOLO, 11.; REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA DE BIOLOGIA DO SOLO, 8., 2010, Guarapari. Fontes de nutrientes e produção agrícola: modelando o futuro: anais. Viçosa, MG: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, 2010. |
Descrição Física: |
1 CD-ROM. |
Idioma: |
Português |
Notas: |
FertBio 2010. |
Conteúdo: |
O objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar a eficiência da antecipação de parte ou do total da adubação nitrogenada de cobertura do algodoeiro para a braquiária na sucessão braquiária-algodão, em sistema de integração lavoura-pecuária, comparando-se uréia comum com uréia mais inibidor de urease ou uréia recoberta com polímero de liberação controlada. |
Palavras-Chave: |
Fertilizante de liberação controlada; Inibidor de nitrificação; Inibidor de urease. |
Thesagro: |
Algodão; Brachiaria ruziziensis; Cerrado; Fertilizante nitrogenado; Plantio direto. |
Categoria do assunto: |
F Plantas e Produtos de Origem Vegetal |
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/19162/1/1601.pdf
|
Marc: |
LEADER 01445nam a2200241 a 4500 001 1862568 005 2010-09-21 008 2010 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d 100 1 $aCARVALHO, M. da C. S. 245 $aAdubação nitrogenada na sucessão braquiária-algodão em sistema plantio direto no Cerrado$bsafra 2008/2009. 260 $aIn: REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA DE FERTILIDADE DO SOLO E NUTRIÇÃO DE PLANTAS, 29.; REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA SOBRE MICORRIZAS, 13.; SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE MICROBIOLOGIA DO SOLO, 11.; REUNIÃO BRASILEIRA DE BIOLOGIA DO SOLO, 8., 2010, Guarapari. Fontes de nutrientes e produção agrícola: modelando o futuro: anais. Viçosa, MG: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo$c2010 300 $c1 CD-ROM. 500 $aFertBio 2010. 520 $aO objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar a eficiência da antecipação de parte ou do total da adubação nitrogenada de cobertura do algodoeiro para a braquiária na sucessão braquiária-algodão, em sistema de integração lavoura-pecuária, comparando-se uréia comum com uréia mais inibidor de urease ou uréia recoberta com polímero de liberação controlada. 650 $aAlgodão 650 $aBrachiaria ruziziensis 650 $aCerrado 650 $aFertilizante nitrogenado 650 $aPlantio direto 653 $aFertilizante de liberação controlada 653 $aInibidor de nitrificação 653 $aInibidor de urease 700 1 $aFERREIRA, A. C. de B.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
Registro original: |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão (CNPAF) |
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
Expressão de busca inválida. Verifique!!! |
|
|