Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:36:06.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of infection with lungworms (Dictyocaulus viviparus) on energy and nitrogen metabolism in growing calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. E. G. M. Kroonen ,
M. W. A. Verstegen ,
J. H. Boon  and
W. Van Der Hel
J. E. G. M. Kroonen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal HusbandryAgricultural University of WageningenMarijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
M. W. A. Verstegen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition, Agricultural University of Wageningen, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. H. Boon
Affiliation:
Department of Animal HusbandryAgricultural University of WageningenMarijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
W. Van Der Hel
Affiliation:
Department of Animal HusbandryAgricultural University of WageningenMarijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Ten Friesian male calves of about 100 kg and 3 months old were reared similarly and were worm-free. From 13 weeks of age five calves received a dose of 640 infective larvae (L3) of lungworms (Dictyocuulus viviparus) twice weekly for 8 weeks to simulate continuous infection. Animals not infected were fed to the same level as the infected animals (about 1.2–1.3 kg concentrates and 14–1.5 kg good-quality hay/d).

2. Heat production was measured twice weekly during 48 h (days 2 and 3, and days 5 and 6) in each group of experimental animals.

3. Infection caused considerable damage to the lungs, increased respiration frequency and clearly produced antibody titres against D. viviparus.

4. Animals infected with lungworms had on average a lower rate of weight gain, reduced by 70 g/d per animal. Digestibility was not affected. Nitrogen retention was much lower in infected animals (12.0 v. 14.6 g/d per animal in controls).

5. Metabolizability of energy was slightly reduced in infected animals. Heat production as found in infected animals may be associated with an increased maintenance energy requirement of 30 kJ/kg live weight0.75 per d or reduced partial efficiency of feed conversion above maintenance in animals infected with lungworms (58.5 v. 64.1 % in the control animals).

6. It was concluded that the depression in rate of gain was related to reduced intake of feed and to decreased N retention.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , March 1986 , pp. 351 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1986

References

REFERENCES

Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants, p. 251. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Boon, J. H. (1979). An investigation into possible causes of coughing in calves at pasture. PhD Thesis, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Boon, J. H., Kloosterman, A. & Breukink, M. (1984). Veterinary Parasitology 16, 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boon, J. H., Kloosterman, A. & van den Brink, R. (1982). Veterinary Quarterly 4, 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coop, R. L. (1982). In Parasites: Their World and Ours, pp. 439–450 [Mettrick, D. F. and Desser, S. S., editors]. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Guyton, A. C. (1981). Textbook of Medical Physiology, pp. 478–480. London: Saunders.Google Scholar
Jarett, W. F. H., Jenning, F. W., McIntyre, W. I. M., Mulligan, W., Sharp, N. C. C. & Urquhart, G. M. (1960). Veterinary Record 72, 1066–1067.Google Scholar
Jarett, W. F. H., McIntyre, W. I. M. & Urquhart, G. M. (1957). Journal of Bacteriological Pathology 73, 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lekeux, P., (1984). Physiological studies of the preliminary function in unsedated Friesian cattle. PhD Thesis, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Lekeux, P., Haijer, R., Boon, J. H., Verstegen, M. W. A. & Breukink, H. J. (1985). Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine 49, 205–207.Google Scholar
Nie, N. H., Hull, G. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinberger, K. & Bent, D. M. (1975). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Poppi, D. P., MacRae, J. C. & Corrigall, W. (1981). Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 40, 116A.Google Scholar
Steel, J. W. (1974). Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 10, 139–147.Google Scholar
Sykes, A. R. & Coop, R. L. (1976). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 86, 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symons, L. E. A. (1976). In Pathophysiology of Parasitic Infection, pp. 11–21 [Soulsby, E. J. L., editor]. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Symons, L. E. A. (1982). In Parasites: Their World and Ours, pp. 233–241 [Mettrick, D. F. and Desser, S. S., editors]. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Van adrichem, P. W. M., Henken, A. H., Goedvind-overweg, B. A. & Vogt, J. E. (1981). In Metabolic Disorders in Farm Animals, pp. 34–37 [Giesecke, D., Dirksen, G. and Stangassinger, M., editors]. Munich: University of Munich.Google Scholar
Van es, A. J. & Nijkamp, H. J. (1967). In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals, pp. 203–207 [Blaxter, K. L., Kielanowski, J. and Thorbeck, G., editors]. Newcastle upon Tyne: Oriel Press.Google Scholar