1 / 49

Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Extension Beef Specialist South Dakota State University

Water Quality. Effects on Animal Performance and Health. Effects on Animal Performance and Health. Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Extension Beef Specialist South Dakota State University. Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Beef Specialist South Dakota State University. Water Quality.

danyl
Télécharger la présentation

Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Extension Beef Specialist South Dakota State University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Water Quality Effects on Animal Performance and Health Effects on Animal Performance and Health Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Extension Beef Specialist South Dakota State University Trey Patterson, Ph.D. Beef Specialist South Dakota State University

  2. Water Quality • Critical Issue in South Dakota and Region • Quantity • Quality • Samples from 498 operations (23 states) • 6% > 1000 ppm sulfate • 50% of those in SD, ND, NE, KS Gould et al., 2002

  3. Total Dissolved Solids • Indicator of total salt level • Sodium, chloride, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, iron, and others

  4. Nevada Research • Na2SO4 water to heifers reduced: • water consumption (35%) • feed consumption (30%) • increased weight loss • NaCl did not affect performance (Weeth and Hunter, 1971)

  5. Sulfates • Field Observations in western SD have shown sodium sulfate major salt in water • sulfates about 64% of TDS • Recent work has shown sulfur intake (from water and feed) is at potentially toxic levels in many South Dakota Ranches Gould et al., 2002

  6. Water Sulfur • Sulfur Requirement: 0.15% • Maximum Tolerable Level: 0.40% NRC, 1996

  7. Effect of Salts in Drinking Water • Reduced water/feed consumption • Reduced performance • Ingestion of toxic sulfur levels • Disease and reduced performance • Induced Copper deficiency • Reduced performance and health

  8. Water Intake • Size* • Physiological State* • Temperature* • Salt intake (and salts in water)* • Dry Matter Intake* • Activity • Water intake from feed • Rate of Gain

  9. Water Intake 800 lb Heifer NRC, 1996

  10. Finishing Steer Performance Sulfur from water sulfates Quadratic, P = 0.02 Loneragan et al., 2001

  11. Finishing Steer Performance Sulfur from water sulfates Linear, P < 0.10 Loneragan et al., 2001

  12. Sulfur Toxicity • Sulfur can be antagonistic to thiamin (Brent and Bartely, 1984) • Thiamin deficiency has been associated with Polioencephalomalacia (PEM) (McDowell, 1989)

  13. Sulfur Toxicity • PEM associated with hydrogen sulfide production, not blood thiamin (McAllister et al., 1997) • Hydrogen sulfide can be inhaled following eructation (Kandylis, 1984) • Hydrogen sulfide disrupts energy metabolism in brain cells • Necrotic lesions---PEM

  14. Previous Research Dietary sulfur levels of 0.9% have been associated with PEM Loneragan et al., 1998

  15. Finishing Steer Performance Sulfur in diet from ammonium sulfate Quadratic, P < 0.10 Zinn et al., 1997

  16. Copper and Sulfur SO22- S2- MoS2- sulfate sulfide thiomolybdate • Cu- MoS2- is not available • Sulfates > 300 ppm

  17. Water Intake: 2001 a b b (P = .07)

  18. Dry Matter Intake: 2001 a b b (P = .08)

  19. Average Daily Gain: 2001 a b b (P < .05)

  20. Health: 2001 Morbidity: P = .02 Mortality: P = .40 Polio: P = .08

  21. Sulfur Intake: 2001 Target Sulfates, ppm 400 3100 3900 % DM 0.27 0.74 0.93 grams/d 22 56 71

  22. Water Intake: 2002 (Linear, P < 0.01)

  23. Dry Matter Intake: 2002 (Quadratic, P < 0.05)

  24. Average Daily Gain: 2002 (quadratic: P < .05)

  25. Health: 2002 Morbidity: P < .01 Mortality: P < .01 Polio: P < .01

  26. Dietary Sulfur: 2002 Target Sulfates, ppm 400 1700 2900 4600 % DM 0.26 0.48 0.68 1.1 g/d 24 45 58 66

  27. DMI vs. Water Intake

  28. Average Daily Gain on Pasture 2001 (P < 0.10)

  29. Pasture Average Daily Gain: 2002 (P < .01)

  30. 96 cows • 3 pastures received rural water • Sulfates: 389 ppm • 3 pastures received water with sodium sulfate added: • Sulfates: 2600 ppm (1900-3000)

  31. Weight Change: 2003 + 10 lb -36 lb Weight Change: P = 0.09

  32. Body Condition Score: 2003 -.30 -.48 BCS Change: P = 0.22

  33. Calf Average Daily Gain: 2003 (P > .50)

  34. Sulfates Sulfates, ppm Comments < 500 Safe 500-1500 Safe, may have laxative effect 1500-3000 Marginal, reduce performance and health 3000-4000 Poor, likely to reduce performance and may cause polio >4000 Dangerous

  35. Poor Water? • Use earlier in summer • Use when temperatures not elevated • Reduce heat stress on cattle • Mix with better water • Water development

  36. Poor Water? • Use on dry cows or low producing livestock • Wean calves • Pay attention to sulfur in other feeds, especially alternative feeds

  37. Thiamin Trial: Average Daily Gain a b c (P < 0.06)

  38. Water Management • Know your water quality and develop a plan to best manage water • If you are forced to use poor water: • Be aware of potential impacts on performance • Have a PEM treatment plan • Have a strong mineral program

  39. Copper Supplementation • May be necessary year around if high sulfates, iron or molybdenum are present (10 to 40 ppm Cu from supplement) • Organic Cu Sources • Sulfates or Chlorides • Check forage and water: adequate mineral intake important

More Related