| Literature DB >> 35711795 |
Andréia Santana Bezerra1, Marcos Antônio Souza Dos Santos2, José de Brito Lourenço-Júnior1.
Abstract
This study identifies the number of publications that presented technologies used in the production systems of Santa Inês sheep in the last 5 years (2017-2021) carried out in Brazil. Therefore, the objective was to identify where we are in terms of knowledge about technologies in different fields (health, reproduction, animal breeding, behavior and welfare, nutrition and feeding, forage and pasture, carcass and meat quality, and economics and management of livestock systems). After rigorous selection, 114 studies were appointed and classified by knowledge field, and the main approaches within each theme were evaluated, pointing out research gaps. Most technologies have been in northeastern states. However, government agencies should develop public policies to disseminate techniques in rural areas because the production system in this region is still subsistence. This study highlighted the need for works that present management practices and tools that impact the improvement of animal welfare. Agro-industrial by-products have been widely used as an alternative for sheep feeding. However, economic feasibility analyses are recommended with these foodstuffs to substantiate their use as an option to reduce production costs. There is a lack of research allusive to the management of production systems, especially those related to estimates of economic feasibility indicators.Entities:
Keywords: Brazil; ewe; lamb; small ruminants; technological tools
Year: 2022 PMID: 35711795 PMCID: PMC9195131 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.896241
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Classification of studies according to the scopus.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Animal health | They evaluated some sanitary handling techniques or used technology on animals' health. The main work focus should be on health. |
| Animal reproduction | They were related to the use of technologies proposed to affect the reproductive efficiency of both males and females. |
| Animal breeding | They involved techniques that aimed to assist in the selection of superior animals. |
| Animal behavior and welfare | They demonstrated tools to contribute to the animals' well-being and the study of their behavior, taking into consideration the five freedoms (freedom from hunger and thirst; freedom from discomfort, pain, disease, and injury; freedom to express the natural behaviors of the species; and freedom from fear and stress). |
| Animal nutrition and feeding | They used some techniques for animal performance evaluation, such as weight, weight gain, consumption, digestibility, and/or feed efficiency. |
| Forage and pasture | They used some pasture management techniques or different grass or legume species. |
| Carcass and meat quality | They used technologies from different fields focused on the meat and/or carcass quality assessment. |
| Economics and management of livestock systems | They evaluated the production cost and profitability of the system and economic variables. |
Source: research data.
Figure 1PRISMA flow diagram (animal study). Summary of the literature search, screening, and selection of potential studies. The PRISMA flow diagram represents the literature search in three different electronic databases, which are Capes Periodicals, Scopus, Web of Science, and Scielo, followed by screening and inclusion of eligible studies for systematic review. Source: Research data.
Figure 2The proportion of articles retrieved from the databases from 2017 to 2021. Source: Research data.
Figure 3Geographical distribution of the studies. Source: Research data.
Studies' distribution according to the scopus.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Animal health | 10.6 | ( |
| Animal reproduction | 23.0 | ( |
| Animal breeding | 16.8 | ( |
| Animal behavior and welfare | 0.9 | ( |
| Animal nutrition and feeding | 13.3 | ( |
| Forage and pasture | 10.6 | ( |
| Carcass and meat quality | 23.9 | ( |
| Economics and management of livestock systems | 0.9 | ( |
Source: research data.
Technologies used with impacts on animal health of Santa Inês sheep, 2017–2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary strategy | Red propolis Extract (RPE) | Benefits to defense cells (3 g RPE/ ewe/ day) | ( |
| Probiotic ( | Does not cause intoxication (2.5 × 106 spores of BT/kg body weight-BW) | ( | |
| Chitosan and cotton husk | Does not affect the metabolic and ruminal health (136 mg/kg BW) | ( | |
| Cottonseed cake (CC) | No health effect 0, 140, 280, and 420 g of CC kg /BW; | ( | |
| Guava ( | Supports metabolism (inclusion of up to 30% in the diet) | ( | |
| Protein levels | Causes resistance to helminth (19% protein) | ( | |
| Controls helminth infestation (15 g of AM/animal day) | ( | ||
| Pharmaceuticals | Recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) | Reduces the risk of pregnancy toxemia (160 mg rbST) | ( |
| Antibiotic (gentamicin-GEN) | Does not prevent new mammary infections (250 mg of GEN) | ( | |
| Selective treatment tool | FAMACHA© system | Helps in the helminth infestation identification | ( |
| Biological control | Nematophagous fungi ( | Reduction of endoparasite larvae in pasture (0.2 mg of fungus per kg BW) | ( |
Source: research data.
Technologies used to increase reproductive efficiency of Santa Inês sheep, 2017–2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary strategy | Palm kernel cake (PKC) | Does not affect seminal quality (up to 45%) | ( |
| Concentrate supplementation | Maintains the reproductive performance of females (1.5% of BW) | ( | |
| Crude glycerin (GB) | Does not affect reproductive performance before and after the breeding season (10% of GB in dry matter-DM) | ( | |
| Improves energy balance in pre and post parturition (10% GB in DM) | ( | ||
| ADE Vitamins | Improves energy metabolism in females | ( | |
| Protected fat (PFAT) | Not recommended as it reduces the probability of gestation (5.5 and 13.5% PFAT per 60 days) | ( | |
| Semen additives | Dimethylacetamide (DMA) combined or not with glycerol (GLI) | Can be used for semen freezing without damage (max 5% DMA and max 6% GLI) | ( |
| Dimethylacetamide (DMA) combined with trehalose (TRE) | Can be used for semen freezing without causing major damage (3% DMA plus 100 mOsmol/L | ( | |
| Adenosine - ADA (a purinergic nucleoside) | Improves seminal parameters at 5°C (05 and 0.75% of ADA) | ( | |
| Sperm selection methods | Swim-up, Percoll, mini-Percoll, centrifugal sperm wash | Swim-up provides high values of sperm parameters and Percoll recovers more cells | ( |
| Intravaginal devices | Re-use of progesterone devices | Can be used, without negatively affecting reproductive efficiency | ( |
| Human intravaginal tampon embedded with natural progesterone | Can be used without adversely affecting pregnancy rate | ( | |
| Hormones | Equine chorionic gonadotropin (eGC) | Effective in long duration protocols (200 to 400 IU eCG) | ( |
| Human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) | Induces corpus luteum formation (250 IU eCG) | ( | |
| Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) | Efficient in synchronizing ovulation (10 to 25 μg of GnRH) | ( | |
| Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) | Effective in ovulatory response and embryo production (100 or 200 mg of pFSH (FSH from swine) combined with a dose of eCG) | ( | |
| Successive administration of FSH was not effective | ( | ||
| Oxytocin (OCI) | Effective in cervical dilatation without affecting the viability of the corpus luteum (100 IU of OCI) | ( | |
| Estradiol benzoate (BE), d-cloprostenol (CL) and oxytocin (OCI) | Can be used, care must be taken with the timing of administrativo (37.5 μg CL, 50 IU OCI 1 mg BE) | ( | |
| Dexamethasone | Effective for concentrating labor and facilitating handling (8 and 16 mg) | ( | |
| Management tools hours | Male effect combined with temporary weaning for 24 | Improves reproductive performance of ewes | ( |
| Promotes preovulatory LH peaks without compromising pregnancy rate | ( | ||
| Embryo transfer No difference | Embryo transfer or natural mating | Not significant difference | ( |
| Ultrasonography devices | Manual or automatic Doppler | Dopper is more accurate | ( |
| Color Doppler | Effective to be used in pregnancy identification at 17 days after mating | ( | |
| Infrared thermography | Detects temperature variations in the estrous cycle phases | ( |
Source: research data.
Technologies used to increase nutritional performance variables of Santa Inês sheep, 2017–2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary strategy | Cottonseed cake (CC) | Negative effect on nutritional performance variables (70, 140, and 210 g/kg of CC in DM) | ( |
| Coconut cake (COC) | Should be fed with caution (consumption of ether extract should not exceed 0.16% of body weight) | ( | |
| Detoxified castor bean meal (DCBM) | Increased efficiency of feeding and rumination (21% of DCBM in DM) | ( | |
| Licuri cake (LIC) | Improved production performance (174 g/kg of LIC in DM) | ( | |
| Sunflower meal (SUM) | No positive effect on performance (10, 20, and 30% SUM in DM) | ( | |
| Dehydrated distillers grains | Beneficial effect on performance variables (24% in DM) | ( | |
| Babassu palm by-product –BPBP ( | Provides superior nutritional quality when enriched with broken maize and cassava scraping additives (48.75% of BPBP | ( | |
| Guava ( | Maintains performance (16.4% in DM) | ( | |
| Buriti oil | Improved performance variables (12 g/kg) | ( | |
| Canola (CAO), sunflower (SUO) or castor oil (CO) | No productive increase (30 g of fatty acids-AG/kg DM of CAO, SUO or CO) | ( | |
| Urea associated with cassava root, corn or spineless cactus | Did not improve performance | ( | |
| Encapsulated nitrate | Can replace urea | ( | |
| Handling | Feeding frequency | Once daily feeding was recommended | ( |
| Volume and concentrate Ratio | The ratio 500:500 g/kg in hay-based diets was recommended for best performance | ( | |
| A ratio of 600:400 g/kg in silage-based diets was recommended for best performance | ( |
Source: research data.
Technologies used in the forage and pasture field for Santa Inês sheep, 2017–2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Grazing system | 1-grazing sheep only, 2- grazing sheep after cattle, and 3-cattle and sheep grazing together | Simultaneous grazing ( | ( |
| Tropical forage (pasture) |
| The cultivars Marandu and Piatã were recommended for best production results | ( |
| Cactus or alternative plant | Spineless cactus | Can replace Tifton 85 hay up to 50% | ( |
| with forage potential | Spineless cactus | Can replace sugarcane up to 49.5% | ( |
| Can replace up to 80% | Spineless cactus | Can replace wheat bran up to 80% | ( |
| wheat bran | Spineless cactus associated with sugarcane | Can replace corn silage | ( |
| Spineless cactus associated | Spineless cactus (SC) associated with maniçoba ( | Alternative of use: 400 g/kg of SC and 300 g/kg of maniçoba hay (MH) or silage (MS). | ( |
| Forage palm associated | Sisal ( | Performance similar to Tifton hay | ( |
| with maniocoba silage or hay Alternative of use: 400 g/kg of PF and 300 g/kg of maniocoba silage or hay |
| Can replace Buffel grass hay up to 20 g/100 g DM | ( |
| Leguminous | Can replace soybean meal | ( | |
|
| Potential use as a food source | ( | |
| Extruded forage | Can replace corn silage improving nutritional variables | ( |
Source: research data.
Technologies used in the carcass and meat quality evaluation for Santa Inês sheep, 2017–2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary strategy | Guava ( | Does not compromise the sensory characteristics of sheep meat (up to 30–40 % in DM) | ( |
| Sunflower cake | Improved levels of nutraceutical parameters (30% in DM) | ( | |
| Cottonseed (COS) combined with calcium lignosulfonate (CAL) | No effect on carcass characteristics (100 g/kg of COS and 100 g/kg of CAL) | ( | |
| Cottonseed (COS) associated with chitosan | Increases unsaturated fatty acids in the meat (150 g/kg of COS and 136 mg chitosan/kg of body weight) | ( | |
| Mazoferm | Can replace soybean meal without changing carcass characteristics (33, 67 and 100% in DM) | ( | |
| Cassava wastewater (CWW) | Changes meat composition, but does not harm the overall quality (25, 50, 75 and 100% in DM or 0.5; 1 and 1.5 liters of CWW) | ( | |
| Canola grain | Does not influence meat composition and sensory attributes (8 and 16% in DM) | ( | |
| Protein-energy supplementation | Favors carcass characteristics, but increases lipid oxidation (0.7% of BW) | ( | |
| Protein-mineral supplementation | Improves carcass characteristics (0.7% of BW) | ( | |
| Banana waste (BAW) | Does not interfere with meat characteristics and fatty acid profile (75% BAW) | ( | |
| Babassu cake -BAC ( | No effect on carcass characteristics and meat quality (up to 50% of BAC) | ( | |
| Cactus or alternative plant with forage potential | Spineless cactus (SC) | Improves lipid profile (30, 50, and 70% of SC or 17.6; 35.3; 53.2 and 71.1 % of SC) | ( |
| No compromise on meat quality (33% of SC) | ( | ||
| Beneficial effect on most carcass traits (<75.5% of SC) | ( | ||
| Beneficial effect on most of the carcass traits (44% of SC) | ( | ||
| Spineless cactus combined with Tifton 85 hay or sugar cane bagasse | Improves sensory meat quality (35% of SC) | ( | |
|
| Improves meat characteristics (250 g/kg) | ( | |
| Babassu leaves -BAL ( | Does not compromise carcass characteristics (33 g/100 g BAL and MOF) | ( | |
| Handling | Feed restriction (FRES) | Does not affect carcass yield (60% of FRES) | ( |
| Improves the lipid profile of the meat | ( | ||
| Improves fatty acid profile (30% of FRES) | ( | ||
| Castration | Promotes better lipid profile | ( | |
| Castration and vitamin E supplementation (VES) | No significant effect (350 mg/kg of VES) | ( | |
| Water salinity | No effect on carcass and meat characteristics (8,326 mgTDS/L) | ( |
Source: research data.