We have located links that may give you full text access.
Performance and welfare of steers housed on concrete slatted floors at fixed and dynamic (allometric based) space allowances.
Journal of Animal Science 2018 April 4
The objectives of the study were to determine whether allometric equations are suitable for estimating the space requirements of finishing beef cattle housed on concrete slatted floors (CSF) and to examine the effect of fixed and dynamic space allowances on the performance and welfare of these cattle. Continental crossbred steers [n = 120: mean initial live weight, 590 (SD 29.8) kg] were blocked by breed, weight, and age and assigned to 1 of 5 space allowance treatments (3 fixed and 2 dynamic) on CSF: 1) 2.0 m2 per animal, 2) 2.5 m2 per animal, 3) 3.0 m2 per animal, 4) Equation 1 (E1); y = 0.033w0.667, where y = m2 per animal and w = body weight, and 5) Equation 2 (E2); y = 0.048w0.667. The length of the feed face was 3.0 m for all treatments. Steers were offered grass silage and concentrates ad libitum. DMI was recorded weekly on a pen basis. Steers were weighed and dirt scored every 14 d. Blood samples were collected every 28 d, and analyzed for complete cell counts. Behavior was recorded using closed-circuit infrared cameras. Steers' hooves were inspected for lesions at the beginning of the study and post-slaughter. Slaughter weight and ADG were lowest, and feed conversion ratio (FCR) was poorest, for steers accommodated at 2.0 m2, and slaughter weight and ADG were greatest, and FCR was the best, for steers accommodated at E2 (P < 0.05); steers accommodated at 2.5 m2 were intermediate (P > 0.05) to those accommodated at 2.0 m2 and both 3.0 m2 and E1, whereas steers accommodated at 3.0 m2 and E1 were intermediate (P > 0.05) to 2.5 m2 and E2. Carcass weight of steers housed at 2.0 m2 was lower (P < 0.05) than all other treatments. Steers housed at 2.5 m2 had lower carcass weights (P < 0.05) than those with accommodated at E1 and E2, whereas the carcass weight of steers accommodated at 3.0 m2 was intermediate. Carcass fat scores and hide weights were lower (P < 0.05) in steers accommodated at 2.0 m2 than those housed at E2 with other treatments being intermediate. The number of steers lying at any one time and the number of steers observed grooming themselves was lower (P < 0.05) at 2.0 m2 than any other treatment. Dirt scores, hoof lesion number, and hematological measurements were not affected by treatment. It was concluded that 2.0 m2 per animal was an insufficient space allowance for housing finishing beef steers and that the equation y = 0.033w0.667 is sufficient for estimating the space required by finishing beef cattle housed on CSF.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app