Literature DB >> 9234432

Associations between off-label feed additives and farm size, veterinary consultant use, and animal age.

C E Dewey1, B D Cox, B E Straw, E J Bush, H S Hurd.   

Abstract

Data from the United States National Swine Survey collected by the National Animal Health Monitoring System were used to describe the use of feed additives in swine feeds. Data were collected from 710 farms. The concentration of feed additives expressed in grams per ton of complete feed was described by stage of production, and the use of feed additives above the labeled treatment levels (i.e. off-label) was identified. Of the 3328 feeds, about 79% contained feed additives used in the labeled manner. For all classes of pigs, the prevalence of labeled feed additive use was greater than 75%. Penicillin was used according to its label most often, followed by apramycin, bacitracin, tetracyclines, lincomycin, and tylosin. Carbadox had the highest prevalence of off-label use. Of the 699 feeds that included feed additives in an off-label manner, about 57% included additives at greater than the recommended concentrations or were fed to an incorrect class of pig. About 56% of the feeds had off-label combinations of additives. Small farms were more likely to use rations with no feed additives than intermediate or large farms (P < 0.001). Of those farms using feed additives, the odds of a small farm using all feed additives in the labeled manner was 7.7 times that of an intermediate or large farm (P < 0.0001). After controlling for herd size, producers who used a veterinary consultant were 2.1 times more likely to use feeds with feed additives (P < 0.0001).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9234432     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-5877(96)01077-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Vet Med        ISSN: 0167-5877            Impact factor:   2.670


  9 in total

1.  Epidemiological study of resistance to nalidixic acid and other antibiotics in clinical Yersinia enterocolitica O:3 isolates.

Authors:  S Capilla; P Goñi; M C Rubio; J Castillo; L Millán; P Cerdá; J Sahagún; C Pitart; A Beltrán; R Gómez-Lus
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  In vitro model of colonization resistance by the enteric microbiota: effects of antimicrobial agents used in food-producing animals.

Authors:  R Doug Wagner; Shemedia J Johnson; Carl E Cerniglia
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-01-28       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Association of antibiotic resistance in agricultural Escherichia coli isolates with attachment to quartz.

Authors:  Ping Liu; Michelle L Soupir; Martha Zwonitzer; Bridgette Huss; Laura R Jarboe
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Reported antibiotic use in 90 swine farms in Alberta.

Authors:  Andrijana Rajić; Richard Reid-Smith; Anne E Deckert; Catherine E Dewey; Scott A McEwen
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 1.008

5.  Antimicrobial drug use and related management practices among Ontario swine producers.

Authors:  R H Dunlop; S A McEwen; A H Meek; R A Friendship; R C Clarke; W D Black
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 1.008

6.  Agricultural use of antibiotics and the evolution and transfer of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Authors:  G G Khachatourians
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-11-03       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Growth performance of pigs fed diets with and without tylosin phosphate supplementation and reared in a biosecure all-in all-out housing system.

Authors:  T A Van Lunen
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.008

8.  Antimicrobial use through feed, water, and injection in 20 swine farms in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Authors:  Leigh B Rosengren; Cheryl L Waldner; Richard J Reid-Smith; John C S Harding; Sheryl P Gow; Wendy L Wilkins
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.310

Review 9.  Polyphenolic phytochemicals as natural feed additives to control bacterial pathogens in the chicken gut.

Authors:  Afnan Al-Mnaser; Mohammed Dakheel; Fatemah Alkandari; Martin Woodward
Journal:  Arch Microbiol       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 2.667

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.