4.6 Article

Prevalence of gastrointestinal, liver and claw disorders in veal calves fed large amounts of solid feed through a cross-sectional study

Journal

RESEARCH IN VETERINARY SCIENCE
Volume 133, Issue -, Pages 318-325

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.10.022

Keywords

Veal calf; Solid feed; Rumen alteration; Abomasal lesion; Sole hemorrhage

Funding

  1. University of Padova, Italy, within the PRAT project [CPDA158107]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The impact of the current practice of feeding veal calves with large amounts of solid feed (SF) on the prevalence of specific disorders on rumen, abomasum, liver and claws was investigated through a post-mortem inspection at the abattoir. Forty-one batches (batch referred to a group of calves of the same breed, coming from the same farm and belonging to the same slaughter group) of crossbred male calves from dairy breed were randomly inspected at 213.6 days old. On average 16.0 rumens, 15.6 abomasa, 15.1 livers, and 30.5 hind claws were checked per batch. Rumens were evaluated for the presence of hyperkeratosis and plaques; abomasa for the presence of lesions in the pyloric area; livers for the presence of lipidosis, abscess or fibrous adherence; and claws for the presence of sole hemorrhages. More than 60% of rumens per batch had signs of hyperkeratosis and plaques, and 80 to 100% of abomasa per batch showed at least 1 lesion in the pyloric area. On average 24% of livers per batch were diseased and about 65% of claws per batch had sole hemorrhages. Affected abomasa were positively correlated to rumens with plaques. Claws with sole hemorrhages tended to be positively correlated to rumens with hyperkeratosis. Calves of inspected batches were fed 311 +/- 31 kg DM/cycle of milk-replacer and 158 +/- 44 kg DM/cycle of SF containing more than 85% of corn grain. Based on the recorded prevalence of alterations, this feeding strategy should be reconsidered in order to improve veal calves' welfare.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available