J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J. Anim Sci. 1967. 26:106-109.
© 1967 American Society of Animal Science

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Perry, T. W.
Right arrow Articles by Nickel, C. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Perry, T. W.
Right arrow Articles by Nickel, C. H.

Injectable Iron for Beef Cattle1, 2,

T. W. Perry, W. H. Smith, W. M. Beeson, R. C. Peterson3, M. E. Heath4, Donald Webb5 and C. H. Nickel5

Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted with suckling calves and two experiments with fattening beef calves and yearlings to determine the effect of injectable iron. In one calf trial hemoglobin and packed cell volume values were compared.

An injection of 500 mg. of iron in calves less than 48 hr. of age was without benefit, as measured in terms of effect on gain to weaning.

Suckling calves averaging 4 months of age at time of injection of 1 gm. iron gained slightly more rapidly than controls which received no iron during a 91-day trial.

Two injections of 500 mg. of iron, one initially and the other 119 days later, were without significant effect on gain of fattening calves in a 208-day drylot trial.

Two injections of 1 gm. of iron, one initially and the other 14 days later, resulted in a significant (P<.05) depression in gain of fattening steer calves and of fattening yearling steers.

The effect of iron injections on feed consumption and efficiency of feed conversion could not be determined, because treatments were administered within feeding groups.


Footnotes

1 Department of Animal Sciences Journal Paper No. 2694, Purdue University Agricultural Experiment Station, Lafayette, Indiana.

2 The Armidexan was supplied by Armour and Company; Pigdex 100 was supplied by American Cyanamid Co. The research was supported in part by a grant-in-aid from the Armour Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Kankakee, 111.

3 Southern Indiana Forage Farm.

4 Department of Agronomy.

5 Lynnwood Farm, Carmel, Indiana.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1967 by the American Society of Animal Science.