Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:46:39.057Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interaction of Compudose 200® and resistance to parasites on growth of steers of two cattle breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. E. Frisch  and
R. A. Hunter
J. E. Frisch
Affiliation:
CSIRO Division of Tropical Animal Production, Tropical Cattle Research Centre, Box 5545 Rockhampton Mail Centre, QLD 4702, Australia
R. A. Hunter
Affiliation:
CSIRO Division of Tropical Animal Production, Tropical Cattle Research Centre, Box 5545 Rockhampton Mail Centre, QLD 4702, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This study sought to determine whether increases in live weight (LW) of steers implanted with Compudose 200®, a growth promotant that contains 17β-oestradiol, arose in part from increases in resistance of those steers to cattle ticks and gastro-intestinal nematodes (worms) to which the steers were exposed while they were growing. Half of a group of interbred Hereford × Shorthorn (HS) and interbred Brahman × HS (BX) steers was implanted with Compudose 200 on two occasions 200 days apart. Half of each of the implanted and nonimplanted groups in each breed was treated every 3 weeks to control cattle ticks and worms. All animals grazed together and were regularly monitored for parasite burdens and LW changes. Both breeds responded positively to Compudose 200, to which BX responded most, and to treatment to control parasites. Resistance to either ticks or worms was unaffected by the presence of the implant so that, within each breed, increases in LW gain in response to the implant were similar regardless of parasite control. Thus the increases in LW gain resulting from the use of Compudose 200 arose directly from the action of the implant on metabolism, not indirectly through any effect on resistance to parasites.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 115 , Issue 2 , October 1990 , pp. 259 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Frisch, J. E. (1981). Factors affecting resistance to ecto- and endoparasites of cattle in tropical areas and the implications for selection. In Isotopes and Radiation in Parasitology IV, pp. 17–32, Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
Frisch, J. E. (1987). Physiological reasons for heterosis in growth of Bos indicus × Bos taurus. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 109, 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, J. E. & Vercoe, J. E. (1984). An analysis of growth of different cattle genotypes reared in different environments. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 137–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, J. E. & Hunter, R. A. (1990). Influence of the growth promotant Synovex-H® on growth, resistance to parasites and reproduction of cattle heifers of three breeds. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 114, 107–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, C. J. (1985). Interactions between gonadal steroids and the immune system. Science 111, 257–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, G. J. & Barker, D. J. (1988). Growth promotants in cattle in Australia. Australian Veterinary Journal 65, 101–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed