Effects of functional oils and monensin on cattle finishing programs

Effect feed additives on performance of beef cattle finished in feedlot

“…However, even though DMI explains 60 to 90% of the variations in animal performance (NRC, 2001), the changes observed on DMI in this performance trial did not result in significant differences on ADG. Nevertheless, according to reviewed literature in high concentrate diets the use of monensin has minimal influences on weight gain, acting mainly reducing feed intake and thus improving feed efficiency (Goodrich et al, 1984;Potter et al, 1985;Tedeschi et al, 2003;Purevjav et al, 2013), similarly to what was found in this experiment. Meschiatti et al (2019) reported greater ADG of bulls fed Crina ® plus α-amylase (BEO+AM) than bulls fed diet with monensin (MON).…”

“…Meschiatti et al (2019) reported greater ADG of bulls fed Crina ® plus α-amylase (BEO+AM) than bulls fed diet with monensin (MON). However, when compared with a control diet (no feed additives) no difference on ADG between animals fed diets with or without EO or BEO has been reported over the years (Benchaar et al, 2007;Yang et al, 2010;Purevjav et al, 2013;Silva et al, 2014;Cruz et al, 2016). In a recent meta-analysis from Khiaosa-Ard and Zebeli (2013) it was observed that supplementation of EO (pure bioactive compounds, individual essential oils or blend of essential oils) for dairy cows had no significant influence on milk production, fat content, nor feed efficiency.…”

“…These authors reported that monensin resulted in better feed conversion (lower DM kg/kg ADG) than all other treatments but was only higher in ADG from the treatment with higher inclusion of essential oil (dose of 0.5 g/kg DM). Purevjav et al (2013) testing the same blend of essential oils at level of 0.5 g/kg DM reported that animals receiving monensin had greater weight gain and greater feed utilization efficiency than those fed BEO. Meyer et al (2009) comparing the commercial blend Crina® associated with tylosin (EOM+T) and monensin associated with tylosin (MON+T) found that even though the animals treated with MON+T had lower DMI than those of the control and EOM+T treatments, they did not differ in G:F. However, the authors attribute the improvement on feed efficiency observed for EOM+T to the presence of tylosin.…”

“…Thus, there is a continous interest in studying different genetic groups finished in feedlots due to the high energy content in the diets and its implications in performance and quality. There are some studies that report that different feed additives can influence differently fat deposition and meat quality (Jedlicka et al, 2009) and carcass yield (Purevjav et. 2013).…”

“…Feed efficiency of animals fed MON was higher than of those fed BEO. In the reviewed papers wherein monensin and essential oils (EO or BEO) were compared and differed in G:F, they also differed in ADG or DMI (Jedlicka et al, 2009, Purevjav et al, 2013, Moura et al, 2017. Jedlicka et al (2009) compared two levels of inclusion of Essential ® (0.25 and 0.5 g/kg DM), the combination of the Essential ® with monensin (0.25 g/kg DM and 223 mg/animal.day), monensin straight (223 mg/animal.day) or no feed additives.…”