Does the mycotoxin ingestion by beef heifers on feedlot change the productive parameters?

Danielle de Oliveira Pião; Marco Roberto Bourg de Mello; Marina Mortati Dias Barbero; Alex Lopes da Silva; André Morais Moura; Rondineli Pavezzi Barbero

doi:10.14393/BJ-v39n0a2023-64329

Authors

Danielle de Oliveira Pião Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro
Marco Roberto Bourg de Mello Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9790-4764
Marina Mortati Dias Barbero Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7033-5995
Alex Lopes da Silva Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro
André Morais Moura Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3202-8767
Rondineli Pavezzi Barbero Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1577-395X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v39n0a2023-64329

Keywords:

Animal Nutrition, Beef Cattle, Bos indicus, Contaminated Feed, Zearalenone.

Abstract

In intensive beef cattle production systems, silage, corn, soy bean, and their coproducts are commonly used as feed. However, these ingredients are highly susceptible to contamination by fungi and mycotoxins, which may lead to immunological challenges and reduce animal production. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of mycotoxin contamination of diet on intake, digestibility, and performance of heifers. Twenty non-pregnant (Nellore) heifers (age, >18 months; initial body weight, 348±30 kg) were used and randomly distributed in two treatments: (1) control (non-contaminated diet) and (2) zearalenone-contaminated diet (300 ppb). The diet comprised 70% corn silage and 30% concentrate. Individual dry matter intake and digestibility were estimated using external and internal markers. Heifer body weight was evaluated every week without fasting to calculate performance. The experimental design was completely randomized. Each animal was considered one experimental unit. Assumptions were tested for variance analyses (error normality, independence of errors, and homogeneity of variances) (p<0.05). There were no differences in dry matter intake (p=0.96) and digestibility (p=0.62). Performance (kg/day) did not vary as a function of zearalenone ingestion (p=0.68). Therefore, contamination of diet with 300 ppb zearalenone did not affect the intake, digestibility, and performance of feedlot-finished heifers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis, in: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. Arlington, p. 672. 1990.

ARAÚJO, J.A.S., et al. Harvest period and baking industry residue inclusion on production efficiency and chemical composition of tropical grass silage. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020, 266, 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121953

ASLAM, N., et al. Higher levels of aflatoxin M1 contamination and poorer composition of milk supplied by informal milk marketing chains in Pakistan. Toxins (Basel). 2016, 8, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins8120347

BARBERO, R.P., et al. Supplementation level increasing dry matter intake of beef cattle grazing low herbage height. Journal of Applied Animal Research. 2020, 48, 28–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2020.1715985

CHANG, H., et al. The Occurrence of Zearalenone in South Korean Feedstuffs between 2009 and 2016. Toxins (Basel). 2017, 9, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins9070223

CUSTÓDIO, L., et al. Mycotoxin contamination of diets for beef cattle finishing in feedlot. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 2019, 48, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1590/RBZ4820190079

FINK-GREMMELS, J. Mycotoxins in cattle feeds and carry-over to dairy milk: A review. Food Addit. Contam. - Part A Chem. Anal. Control. Expo. Risk Assess. 2008, 25, 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652030701823142

HAGLER, J. and WINSTON, M. Zearalenona: micotoxina ou mioestrogênio. Fusarium, Simpósio do Meml. Paul E. Nelson, 2001, 321–331.

KIESSLING, K.H., et al. Metabolism of aflatoxin, ochratoxin, zearalenone, and three trichothecenes by intact rumen fluid, rumen protozoa, and rumen bacteria. Applied Environmental Microbiology. 1984, 47, 1070–1073. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.47.5.1070-1073.1984

McFARLANE, Z.D., et al. Effect of forage species and supplement type on rumen kinetics and serum metabolites in growing beef heifers grazing winter forage. Journal of Animal Science. 2017, 95, 5301-530. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas2017.1780

MERTENS, D.R., et al. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: Collaborative study. Journal of AOAC International. 2002, 85, 1217–1240.

NEME, K. and MOHAMMED, A. Mycotoxin occurrence in grains and the role of postharvest management as a mitigation strategies. A review. Food Control. 2017, 78, 412–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.03.012

RSTUDIO TEAM. 2019. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA URL http://www.rstudio.com/

TOLA, M. and KEBEDE, B. Occurrence, importance and control of mycotoxins: A review. Cogent Food Agriculture. 2016, 2, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2016.1191103

VALADARES FILHO, S.C., et al. Exigências Nutricionais de Zebuínos Puros e Cruzados. 2016, 3 ed., 314 p. https://doi.org/10.5935/978-85-8179-111-1.2016b001

ZAIN, M.E. Impact of mycotoxins on humans and animals. Journal of Saudi Chemical Society. 2010, 15, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscs.2010.06.006