An evaluation of 10-G brand direct-fed microbial for yearling steers fed finishing diets containing wet distillers grains12

The effect of a direct-fed microbial (10-G) on live animal performance, carcass characteristics, and Salmonella prevalence of fed beef heifers

The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of the direct-fed microbial 10-G upon cattle growth performance, liver and lung health, carcass quality, and yield outcomes, as well as prevalence and enumeration of Salmonella in feces and lymph nodes. Fed beef heifers (N = 1,400; initial shrunk body weight [BW] 343.3 ± 36.2 kg) were blocked by the day of arrival and randomly allocated to one of two treatments (0 [negative control, CON] or 2 g of a direct-fed microbial [10-G] that provided 1 billion CFUs per animal per day of Lactobacillus acidophilus, Enterococcus faecium, Pediococcus pentosaceus, L. brevis, and L. plantarum) with 10 pens per treatment. Recto-anal mucosal fecal samples (RAMs; n = 477) and subiliac lymph nodes (SLNs; n = 479) were collected longitudinally at harvest from 23 to 25 heifers per pen. Data were analyzed using mixed models; pen served as the experimental unit; block and harvest date were random effects. No differences were detected in dry matter intake (P = 0.78), final BW (P = 0.64), average daily gain (P = 0.51), gain to feed (P = 0.71), hot carcass weight (P = 0.54), dressed carcass yield (P = 0.52), 12th rib fat depth (P = 0.13), longissimus muscle area (P = 0.62), calculated empty body fat (P = 0.26), or marbling score (P = 0.82). Distributions of liver scores (P ≥ 0.34), quality grades (P ≥ 0.23), and yield grades (P ≥ 0.11) were also not different between treatments. A tendency was detected for more normal lungs (P = 0.08; 10-G = 65.96%, CON = 61.12%) and fewer inflated lungs at harvest for cattle fed 10-G (P = 0.10; 10-G = 0.29%, CON = 1.16%); other lung outcomes did not differ (P ≥ 0.54). Salmonella prevalence did not differ for RAM samples (P = 0.41; 10-G = 97.74%, CON = 96.82%) or SLN (P = 0.22; 10-G = 17.92%, CON = 13.66%). Salmonella concentration of RAM samples (P = 0.25; 10-G = 3.87 log CFU/g, CON = 3.32 log CFU/g) or SLN (P = 0.37; 10-G = 1.46 log CFU/g, CON = 1.14 log CFU/g) also did not differ between treatments at harvest. These results do not demonstrate any difference in live animal performance, carcass characteristics, or Salmonella carriage for heifers fed 10-G.

Effect of a direct-fed microbial (10-G Armor) on feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and prevalence of Salmonella in fed-beef heifers

Crossbred beef heifers [N = 1,394; initial shrunk body weight (BW) 291 ± 9.9 kg] were used to investigate the efficacy of 10-G Armor (Life Products, Inc., Norfolk, NE; 10-G) upon feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and fecal and subiliac lymph nodes Salmonella prevalence. Heifers were blocked by day of arrival and allocated to 1 of 20 pens (N = 70 heifers/pen) and assigned one of two treatments (10 pens/treatment) : no direct fed microbial (CON) or 2g/heifer/d of L. acidophilus, E. faecium, P. pentosaceus, L. brevis and L. plantarum respectively (Life Products, Inc., Norfolk, NE; 10-G). Twenty four animals were randomly selected from each pen for Salmonella sampling. Recto-anal mucosal swab samples (RAMS) were obtained at initial processing and harvest; subiliac lymph nodes were collected at harvest. In addition, pen surface fecal pats were collected and composited by pen (10 pats per composite, 5 composites per pen) on day 0, 52, 120 and 192. Data were analyzed as a generalized complete block design and pen served as the experimental unit. No differences were observed in live growth performance metrics (P ≥ 0.55). Yield grade distributions did not differ between treatments (P ≥ 0.62), however cattle fed 10-G tended (P = 0.06; 14.6 vs 18.9%) to have fewer USDA Select carcasses and more (P = 0.09; 73.6 vs 78.0%) USDA Choice carcasses. Cattle fed 10-G tended (P = 0.10; 9.2% vs 12.3%) to have fewer liver abscesses and had fewer (P = 0.04; 5.3 vs 8.5%) severe liver abscesses. Salmonella prevalence of RAMS did not differ between treatments at initial processing (P = 0.97; CON = 11.6%, 10-G = 11.5%) or at harvest (P = 0.91; CON = 99.0%, 10-G = 98.6%), however RAMS differed (P < 0.01) in Salmonella prevalence between the two collection times. Cattle fed 10-G had a lower frequency of Salmonella positive lymph nodes (P = 0.01; CON = 15.8%, 10-G = 7.4%) than CON. However, Salmonella log (mpn/g) of lymph nodes did not differ between treatments at harvest (P = 0.34; CON = 0.73, 10-G = 0.34). These data indicate that cattle fed 10-G have decreased rates of severe liver abscesses without altering live animal performance or carcass characteristics. Supplementation of 10-G significantly reduced prevalence rate of Salmonella recovered from the subiliac lymph nodes. The factors responsible for the observed difference in the effects of 10-G on Salmonella warrants further investigation

Direct-fed microbials containing lactate-producing bacteria influence ruminal fermentation but not lactate utilization in steers fed a high-concentrate diet

Direct-fed microbials (DFM) have been shown to improve gain and growth efficiency and also modulate ruminal fermentation. In Exp. 1,72 beef steers were used to compare a lactate-producing bacterial (LAB) DFM consisting primarily of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Enterococcus faecium,and a lactate-producing and lactate-utilizing (LAB/LU) DFM consisting primarily of L. acidophilus and Propionibacterium both fed at 10(9) cfu/d. Steers were fed a corn-based finishing diet for 153 d and then slaughtered for collection of carcass characteristics. In Exp. 2, 12 ruminally cannulated steers were fed acorn-based finishing diet and treated with 10(9) cfu/d of LAB DFM. Rumen fluid was sampled on d 14 and 28 over a 12-h period. Steers were ruminally dosed with a 2-L solution of neutralized DL-lactate (0.56 M)and Cr-EDTA (13.22 M) 3 h postfeeding on d 15 and 29. Ruminal samples were collected at 10- and 20-minintervals for the first and second hour postdosing. No differences (P ≥ 0.14) between control (CON) and LAB for DMI, ADG, growth efficiency, or carcass characteristics were observed. Dry matter intake was greater (P = 0.04) for LAB/LU than LAB from d 0 to 28 but did not differ (P ≥ 0.29) thereafter. Average daily gain was greater (P = 0.04) and efficiency tended(P = 0.06) to be greater for LAB than LAB/LU over the entire 153 d. In Exp. 2, total VFA concentration and molar proportions of butyrate were unaffected(P ≥ 0.24). Molar proportions of acetate exhibited a DFM by hour interaction (P = 0.04); however, on average, molar proportion of acetate was 4.4% greater for DFM. Conversely, DFM did not affect the molar proportion of propionate (P = 0.39). On average,molar proportions of propionate tended to increase(P = 0.07), and acetate tended to decrease (P = 0.07)across days. Mean daily ruminal pH was similar for CON on d 14 and 28, whereas mean pH increased from d 14 to 28 for DFM (DFM × day; P = 0.08).Minimum pH remained unchanged for CON over time but increased from d 14 to 2 for DFM (DFM × day;P = 0.10). Maximum pH decreased from d 14 to 28 in CON but increased over time with DFM (DFM × day;P = 0.05). DL- and L-lactate utilization were unaffected by DFM (P ≥ 0.33) or day (P ≥ 0.50). Although the LAB DFM did not impact growth performance, itd id modulate ruminal fermentation, as evidenced by shifts in ruminal VFA profile and pH; however, DFM did not appear to influence ruminal lactate utilization.