2000 Animal Science Research Report
Pages 61-64
Efficacy of MultiminÔ in Improving Performance and Health in Receiving Cattle
B.A. Berry, W.T. Choat, D.R. Gill, C.R. Krehbiel and R.Ball

Story in Brief

Two loads of crossbred bull calves assembled from Oklahoma sale barns were assigned to either a negative control treatment or received 3 mL of MultiminÔ subcutaneously at processing.  Animals were weighed on d 0, 14, 28, and 42 of the trial and performance data were calculated.  In addition, animals were evaluated for clinical signs of sickness daily and treated accordingly.  MultiminÔ injected calves had higher overall daily gains and improved feed conversions.  In addition, calves injected with trace minerals tended to be treated for sickness less frequently.  The data from this experiment suggest that a study of a larger scale should be conducted to fully validate the efficacy of MultiminÔ.

Key Words: Beef Cattle, Trace Mineral, MultiminÔ

Introduction

Although actual mineral requirements of stressed calves do not seem to be greater than those of unstressed calves (Cole, 1993), calves may have difficulty meeting requirements during their first few days in the feedlot due to low feed intakes.  RXV Veterinary Products advertises MultiminÔ 6, an injectable trace mineral solution, as a method to avoid potential deficiencies due to low initial intake.  The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of injecting stressed calves with MultiminÔ in order to alleviate sickness, thus improving feedlot performance.

Product Description. MultiminÔ, an injectable trace mineral solution containing 20 mg/mL zinc, 20 mg/mL manganese, 5 mg/mL selenium, and 10 mg/mL copper, has been advertised as being more effective than dietary trace mineral supplementation due to avoidance of interactions with sulfur molybdenum.  Its label dosage for calves is 3 ml administered subcutaneously.  Ingredients include: manganese sulfate, zinc oxide, soda ash, copper carbonate, sodium selenite, disodium EDTA, and sodium hydroxide.

Materials and Methods

Two loads of crossbred bull calves (n = 60, BW = 317 ± 22 lb, and n = 81, BW = 371 ± 29.04 lb) assembled from Oklahoma sale barns were received at the Willard Sparks Beef Research Center in Stillwater, OK, on September 26, 1999, and January 9, 2000, respectively.  Upon arrival, calves were individually weighed, ear-tagged, and assigned randomly to receive MultiminÔ or assigned to a control treatment group.  Bull calves from each load received similar processing.  The day following arrival all calves were surgically castrated, vaccinated with BRSV-VacÒ 4Ô, given a CovexinÒ 8Ô clostridial preparation, medicated with MicotilÒ and treated for parasites with Ivomec PlusÒ.  All steers were revaccinated with BRSV-Vac-4 on d 14 of the trial.

Steers were housed in four uncovered pens per load (2 pens/treatment/load).  Animals in each treatment group were fed identical diets (Table 1) ad libitum.  Feed was delivered twice daily at 8:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. for the first load and once daily at 8:00 a.m. for the second load.  Calves were weighed on d 0,14, 28, and 42 with all steers being held off of feed and water overnight prior to 42-d weights.  Other weights, with the exception of the initial weight, received a 4% shrink prior to performance calculations. 

Prior to the morning feeding, calves were evaluated for clinical signs of sickness.  If the animal was determined to have clinical signs of sickness and it had a rectal temperature of 104° F or greater, then it was treated.  Medical treatments consisted of NuflorÔ for the first treatment and ExcenelÔ for each treatment thereafter.  Treatment, rectal temperature, weight, and severity of sickness data were recorded for each calf treated.

Statistical Analysis.  Data were analyzed using the GLM procedure of SAS (SAS, 1996) as a completely randomized design.  Pen served as the experimental unit for gain, dry matter intake, efficiency, and health data.  Treatments were evaluated contrasting calves injected with MultiminÔ vs negative control.  Interaction terms were insignificant and removed from the model.  All models were evaluated using treatment nested within load as the error term.

Results and Discussion

Performance data are presented in Table 2.  MultiminÔ increased feed intake from d 29 to 42, however, the injectable mineral had no other significant effects on performance of calves in this trial.  Nonetheless, MultiminÔ tended to increase (P<.06) overall daily gain as well feed conversion (P<.19) compared to their negative control contrasts.  Calves on the mineral treatment also tended to be treated for sickness less (P<.08) frequently (Table 3).  It is important to note that the experimenters made no attempt to evaluate the calves in this experiment as to their mineral status upon entering the trial.  Given the tendencies detected in this study, however, further research is warranted involving calves with predetermined deficiencies.  Also, this experiment involved limited numbers of experimental units.  In order to conclusively validate Multimin’s efficacy in affecting performance and health in receiving cattle, larger data sets should be generated.

Literature Cited

Cole, N.A. 1993. Proc. Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference. p 1-9.  University of Arizona, Tucson.

SAS. 1996.  The SAS System for Windows (Release 6.12).  SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to RXV Products for the injectable mineral used in this experiment.  In addition, special thanks to Jeff Carter, Turk Stovall, and the feedlot crew at the Sparks facility for their tireless assistance with this trial.

Table 1.  Ration fed to calves for 42 d.

Ingredient

%DM

Soybean hulls

33.0

Corn, whole-shelled

26.5

Wheat midds

16.9

Cottonseed hulls

10.0

Cottonseed meal

7.5

Soybean meal

4.3

Limestone

1.2

Pellet PartnerÔ

.68

BovatecÔ 68

.023

Vitamin A 30,000

.020

Selenium 600

.011

Vitamin E 50%

.003

 

 

Table 2.  Least squares means for feedlot performance.

Item

Control

MultiminÔ

SEMa

Prob > F

Steers

71

70

 

 

Pens, n

4

4

--

--

Weight, lb

Initial

345

343

2.59

.6397

Final

428

433

2.91

.4416

Daily gain, lb

d 0-14

.18

.25

.04

.4264

d 15-28

2.59

2.91

.10

.2703

d 29-42

3.06

3.20

.04

.2689

d 0-42

1.92

2.09

.01

.0574

Intake, lb DM/d

d 0-14

5.3

5.0

.25

.4941

d 15-28

9.0

8.9

.10

.6500

d 29-42

11.9b

12.3c

.02

.0305

d 0-42

8.7

8.7

.02

.3215

Gain:feed

d 0-14

.09

.14

.01

.1199

d 15-28

.29

.36

.01

.1577

d 29-42

.26

.26

.01

.0885

d 0-42

.23

.26

.01

.1836

aStandard error of the least squares means.

b,cMeans in same row with different superscript differ (P<.05).

 

Table 3.  Health data for receiving steers.

Item

Control

MultiminÔ

SEMa

Prob > F

Pullsb

1.02

.96

.06

.6067

Treatmentsc

.71

.63

.01

.0733

Number of pulls, % of  treatment

0

40.8

31.4

--

--

1

29.6

44.3

--

--

2

19.7

21.4

--

--

3

8.5

2.9

--

--

4

1.4

--

--

--

Number of treatmentsc, % of treatment

0

50.7

47.1

--

--

1

29.6

42.9

--

--

2

15.5

8.6

--

--

3

4.2

1.4

--

--

aStandard error of the least squares means.

bAnimal pulled due to clinical sign of sickness.

cAnimal treated for sickness.

2000 Research Report - Table of Contents