Cargando…

Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics (AB) are an important tool to tackle infectious disease in pig farms; however some research indicates that their frequent mis/over-use may contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance and the WHO has declared that this issue should be addressed. Little is known abou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Diana, Alessia, Boyle, Laura A., Leonard, Finola C., Carroll, Ciaran, Sheehan, Eugene, Murphy, Declan, Manzanilla, Edgar G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6390319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30808361
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1808-x
_version_ 1783398118480412672
author Diana, Alessia
Boyle, Laura A.
Leonard, Finola C.
Carroll, Ciaran
Sheehan, Eugene
Murphy, Declan
Manzanilla, Edgar G.
author_facet Diana, Alessia
Boyle, Laura A.
Leonard, Finola C.
Carroll, Ciaran
Sheehan, Eugene
Murphy, Declan
Manzanilla, Edgar G.
author_sort Diana, Alessia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Antibiotics (AB) are an important tool to tackle infectious disease in pig farms; however some research indicates that their frequent mis/over-use may contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance and the WHO has declared that this issue should be addressed. Little is known about the long term consequences of withdrawing prophylactic AB from pig feed; hence we aimed to assess its effects on performance and health of pigs from weaning to slaughter. Six batches of 140 pigs each were monitored on a commercial farm through the weaner and finisher stages to slaughter. In-feed antibiotics were not added to the feed for half of the pigs (NOI) and were added in the other half (ABI) within each batch for the whole weaner stage. Individual pigs in both treatments were treated with parenteral administrations if and when detected as ill or lame. Productive performance, parenteral treatments and mortality were recorded on farm and the presence of respiratory disease was recorded at slaughter. Pen was considered the experimental unit. RESULTS: ABI pigs showed higher growth (P = 0.018) and feed intake (P = 0.048) than NOI pigs in the first weaner stage but feed efficiency was not affected (NOI = 1.48 vs. ABI = 1.52). Despite an initial reduction in performance, NOI pigs had similar performance in finisher stage (ADG: NOI = 865.4 vs. ABI = 882.2) and minimal effects on health compared to ABI pigs. No difference between treatments was found at the abattoir for the percentage of pigs affected by pneumonia, pleurisy, pleuropneumonia and abscesses (P > 0.05). Mortality rate was not affected by treatment during the weaner stage (P = 0.806) although it tended to be slightly higher in NOI than ABI pigs during the finisher stage (P = 0.099). Parenteral treatments were more frequent in NOI pigs during the weaner stage (P <  0.001) while no difference was recorded during the finisher stage (P = 0.406). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the removal of prophylactic in-feed antibiotics is possible with only minor reductions in productive performance and health which can be addressed by improved husbandry and use of parenteral antibiotics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6390319
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63903192019-03-19 Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health? Diana, Alessia Boyle, Laura A. Leonard, Finola C. Carroll, Ciaran Sheehan, Eugene Murphy, Declan Manzanilla, Edgar G. BMC Vet Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Antibiotics (AB) are an important tool to tackle infectious disease in pig farms; however some research indicates that their frequent mis/over-use may contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance and the WHO has declared that this issue should be addressed. Little is known about the long term consequences of withdrawing prophylactic AB from pig feed; hence we aimed to assess its effects on performance and health of pigs from weaning to slaughter. Six batches of 140 pigs each were monitored on a commercial farm through the weaner and finisher stages to slaughter. In-feed antibiotics were not added to the feed for half of the pigs (NOI) and were added in the other half (ABI) within each batch for the whole weaner stage. Individual pigs in both treatments were treated with parenteral administrations if and when detected as ill or lame. Productive performance, parenteral treatments and mortality were recorded on farm and the presence of respiratory disease was recorded at slaughter. Pen was considered the experimental unit. RESULTS: ABI pigs showed higher growth (P = 0.018) and feed intake (P = 0.048) than NOI pigs in the first weaner stage but feed efficiency was not affected (NOI = 1.48 vs. ABI = 1.52). Despite an initial reduction in performance, NOI pigs had similar performance in finisher stage (ADG: NOI = 865.4 vs. ABI = 882.2) and minimal effects on health compared to ABI pigs. No difference between treatments was found at the abattoir for the percentage of pigs affected by pneumonia, pleurisy, pleuropneumonia and abscesses (P > 0.05). Mortality rate was not affected by treatment during the weaner stage (P = 0.806) although it tended to be slightly higher in NOI than ABI pigs during the finisher stage (P = 0.099). Parenteral treatments were more frequent in NOI pigs during the weaner stage (P <  0.001) while no difference was recorded during the finisher stage (P = 0.406). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the removal of prophylactic in-feed antibiotics is possible with only minor reductions in productive performance and health which can be addressed by improved husbandry and use of parenteral antibiotics. BioMed Central 2019-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6390319/ /pubmed/30808361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1808-x Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Diana, Alessia
Boyle, Laura A.
Leonard, Finola C.
Carroll, Ciaran
Sheehan, Eugene
Murphy, Declan
Manzanilla, Edgar G.
Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title_full Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title_fullStr Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title_full_unstemmed Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title_short Removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
title_sort removing prophylactic antibiotics from pig feed: how does it affect their performance and health?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6390319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30808361
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-1808-x
work_keys_str_mv AT dianaalessia removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT boylelauraa removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT leonardfinolac removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT carrollciaran removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT sheehaneugene removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT murphydeclan removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth
AT manzanillaedgarg removingprophylacticantibioticsfrompigfeedhowdoesitaffecttheirperformanceandhealth