Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-11T22:19:18.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of forage type, concentrate feed level and soyabean supplementation on the periparturient rise in nematode egg output in ewes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

B. Good ,
T.W.J. Keady  and
J.P. Hanrahan
B. Good*
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Galway, Ireland
T.W.J. Keady
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Galway, Ireland
J.P. Hanrahan
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Galway, Ireland
*
Email:[email protected]
Get access

Extract

A recent study at this Centre has shown that maize silage, regardless of maturity at harvest has the same feed value as grass silage when offered to ewes in late pregnancy (Keady and Hanrahan 2008). The control of gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep is largely dependent on the use of anthelmintics. The increasing evidence for resistance to nematode parasites of sheep to the broad-spectrum anthelmintics (Good, 2005; Good et al., 2007) has led to the search for alternative sustainable solutions to parasite control. The temporary loss of acquired immunity to gastrointestinal nematodes that is indicated by an increased faecal egg output in late pregnancy and early lactation is a well established phenomenon and is important in the epidemiology of nematodes parasites of sheep. There is substantial evidence for nutritional effects on the expression of immunity to gastrointestinal nematodes. In particular, there is evidence that faecal egg output of parasitised periparturient ewes is reduced in response to increased dietary metabolizable protein (Coop & Kyriazakis 1999; Donaldson et al., 1998; Houdijk et al., 2000). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effect of diet during mid and late pregnancy as influenced by forage type and harvest system, concentrate feed level and soyabean supplementation on the peri-parturient rise in nematode egg output in ewes.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2008 , 2008 , pp. 98
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2008

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

Coop, R. L. and Kyriazakis, I.. 1999. Nutrition - parasite interaction. Veterinary Parasitology 84(3-4): 187–204.Google Scholar
Donaldson, J., van Houtert, M. F. J. and Sykes, A.R. 1998. The effect of nutrition on the periparturient parasite status of mature ewes. Animal Science 67: 523–533.Google Scholar
Good, B., 2005 Anthelmintics-what are you spending your money on? Irish Grassland Association Journal 39; 1–8.Google Scholar
Good, B., Patten, T., Hanrahan, J.P. Mulcahy, G., and de Waal, D.T. 2007 Anthelmintic resistance in Ireland: current status. Proceedings of the World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology, 392.Google Scholar
Houdijk, J.G.M., Kyriazakis, I., Jackson, F., Huntley, J. and Coop, R.L. 2000. Can an increased intake of metabolizable protein affect the periparturient relaxation in immunity against Teladorsagia circumcincta in sheep. Veterinary Parasitology, 91, 43–62.Google Scholar
Keady, T.W.J. and Hanrahan, J.P. (2008) The effects of grass silage harvest system, concentrate feed level and maize silage maturity and soyabean supplementation on ewe and subsequent lamb performance. BSAS Annual Proceedings, 125.Google Scholar