Evaluation of Bacillus subtilis PB6 on feedlot phase growth performance, efficiency of dietary net energy utilization, and fecal and subiliac lymph node Salmonella prevalence in spring placement yearling beef steers fed in southeastern South Dakota1,2,3

Abstract

Yearling crossbred beef steers [N = 238; initial shrunk body weight (BW) = 402 ± 31.2 kg] were used to investigate the influence of a Bacillus subtilis probiotic on animal growth performance, efficiency of dietary net energy (NE) utilization, carcass characteristics, and fecal and subiliac lymph node Salmonella prevalence during a 140-d finishing period at the Southeast Research Farm in Beresford, SD. Steers were allotted to 1 of 24 pens (N = 9–10 steers/pen) and assigned to 1 of 2 dietary treatments (12 pens/treatment): no probiotic (CON) or 0.5 g/steer/d of a B. subtilis PB6 probiotic (CLOSTAT500, Kemin Industries, Des Moines, IA; CLO). Bunks were managed according to a slick bunk management approach. Fecal samples were collected on study days 1, 28, 56, 112, and 140 from a subsample of steers from each pen (N = 5 steers/pen) via rectal palpation and composited by pen for the determination of Salmonella prevalence using selective enrichment and culture media. Upon harvest, subiliac lymph nodes were obtained from an equal number of steers from each treatment (collected from every other steer) following evisceration and hide removal. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design and pen served as the experimental unit; an α of 0.05 determined significance. Live-basis final BW and average daily gain tended (P ≤ 0.06) to be reduced for CLO. No differences were detected (P ≥ 0.11) between treatments for dry matter intake or gain efficiency. Treatment neither altered the efficiency of dietary NE utilization nor calculated dietary NE content based upon observed performance (P ≥ 0.46). No differences were detected between treatments for any carcass traits (P ≥ 0.15). No Salmonella was recovered in any fecal samples collected on study days 1, 28, or 56. On day 112, steers from CLO had a numerically lower (P = 0.17; 25.0 vs. 8.3%) incidence of fecal Salmonella compared to CON. On study day 140, fecal Salmonella incidence did not differ between treatments (P = 0.34; 0.0 vs. 8.3%) for CON and CLO, respectively. Upon harvest, no Salmonella was recovered in any subiliac lymph nodes. These data indicate that B. subtilis PB6 did not influence feedlot phase growth performance or fecal Salmonella prevalence. Additionally, Salmonella was not observed in the subiliac lymph nodes of any steers upon harvest.

Effects of feeding CLOSTAT (Bacillus subtilis PB6) on the clinical health, performance, and carcass characteristics of feedlot steers1

“…Carcass characteristics, including HCW, dressing percentage, 12th-rib fat, longissimus muscle area, marbling score, USDA quality grade, and yield grade did not differ by treatment ( P ≥ 0.36). These results are consistent with other studies with B. subtilis PB6 supplementation to feedlot cattle ( Smock et al., 2019 ; Smith et al., 2021 ; Word et al., 2022 ). Likewise, Krehbiel et al.…”

“…(2019) did not observe an effect of B. subtilis PB6 supplementation on finishing performance. Similarly, feedlot performance was not affected by B. subtilis PB6 supplementation to yearling steers ( Smith et al., 2021 ). Yet, supplementing B. subtilis PB6 to feedlot steers in a commercial feedyard tended to improve live cattle performance on deads and removals included basis ( Word et al., 2022 ).…”

Evaluation of long-term supplementation of a Bacillus subtilis direct-fed microbial and enzymatically hydrolyzed yeast cell culture product used alone or in combination on Clostridia, Clostridium perfringens, Escherichia coli, and Salmonella prevalence in beef steers

“…However, it is important to note that the Salmonella prevalence in the Church and Dwight research database is biased due to repetitive sampling at Salmonella -challenged sites. The little Salmonella observed in the present study is consistent with other data in the Northern Plains ( Smith et al, 2021 ). The only time Salmonella was detected by Smith et al (2021) was when there was a heat event observed during fecal sampling.…”

“…As Salmonella , E. coli , and C. perfringens are common pathogens found in cattle feces and are capable of causing foodborne illness ( Flach et al, 2022 ), it is essential to find alternative preharvest interventions to reduce these pathogen loads and help improve food safety. Bacillus subtilis -based direct-fed microbial ( DFM ) feed additives have been shown to reduce harmful pathogenic bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract ( Smock et al, 2020 ; Smith et al, 2021 ). Yeast cell wall ( YCW ) components of Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been shown to reduce inflammation and modulate immune function while also helping reduce pathogen loads ( Baines and Erb, 2013 ; Stefenoni et al, 2020 ).…”

Metaphylactic antimicrobial effects on occurrences of antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella enterica, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. measured longitudinally from feedlot arrival to harvest in high-risk beef cattle

“…Numerous studies have reported relatively low prevalence of Salmonella isolated from lymph nodes in cattle (Arthur et al, 2008; Bailey et al, 2017; Smith et al, 2021; Webb et al, 2017). Results from the current study support these findings as the average Salmonella prevalence isolated from lymph nodes was 8.4% (0.0–14.0%).…”