Comparing Blend of Essential Oils Plus 25-Hydroxy-Vit-D3 Versus Monensin Plus Virginiamycin Combination in Finishing Feedlot Cattle: Growth Performance, Dietary Energetics, and Carcass Traits

• Published in: Animals (Basel) Vol. 12; no. 13; p. 1715
• Main Authors: Estrada-Angulo, Alfredo, Mendoza-Cortez, Daniel A, Ramos-Méndez, Jorge L, Arteaga-Wences, Yesica J, Urías-Estrada, Jesús D, Castro-Pérez, Beatriz I, Ríos-Rincón, Francisco G, Rodríguez-Gaxiola, Miguel A, Barreras, Alberto, Zinn, Richard A, Plascencia, Alejandro
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 02-07-2022; MDPI
• Subjects: Additives; Antibiotics; Antiinfectives and antibacterials; Carcasses; Cattle; Coefficient of variation; Diet; Dry matter; Efficiency; Energy; Energy utilization; Essential oils; Feed additives; feedlot cattle; Feedlots; Feeds; Finishing; Food additives; Gram-positive bacteria; growth performance; Livestock; Livestock production; Monensin; Muscles; Oils & fats; Proteins; Virginiamycin; Vitamin D3; United States > US; Mexico; Switzerland; carcass; growth performance; virginiamycin; feedlot cattle; vitamin D3; monensin; essential oils
• ISSN: 2076-2615; 2076-2615
• DOI: 10.3390/ani12131715

Ninety crossbreed bulls (349.5 ± 8.25 kg initial weight) were used in an 87day trial to compare the effects of a blend of essential oils plus 25-hydroxy-Vit-D3 (EO + HyD) versus the combination of monensin with virginiamycin (MON + VM) on feedlot growth performance and carcass characteristics. Dietary treatments (nine replicates/treatment) were supplemented with 40 mg/kg diet dry matter of MON + VM (equal parts) or with 120.12 mg/kg diet dry matter of a combination of standardized mixture of essential oils (120 mg) plus 0.12 mg of 25-hydroxy-vitamin-D3 (EO + HyD). There were no treatment effects on dry matter intake (DMI, p = 0.63). However, the coefficient of variation in day-to-day DMI was greater for EO + HyD than for MON + VM (11.4% vs. 3.88%, p = 0.04). There were no treatment effects (p ≥ 0.17) on daily weight gain, gain-to-feed ratio, and estimated dietary net energy. Cattle supplemented with EO + HyD had greater Longissimus muscle area (7.9%, p < 0.01) and estimated retail yield (1.6%, p = 0.03), and tended to have heavier (1.7%, p = 0.10) carcass weight. Differences among treatments in dressing percentage, fat thickness, kidney−pelvic−heart fat, and marbling score were not appreciable (p > 0.10). It is concluded that growth performance response and dietary energetic are similar for finishing cattle supplemented with EO + HyD vs. MON + VM. However, compared with MON + VM, supplementation with EO + HyD during the finishing phase may improve carcass Longissimus area and carcass yield.