ARCHIVE FILE
This article was published in 1979
See the original document
Possible Response to Selenium in Cattle
K.G. Timmins, B.V.Sc., Veterinary Inspector, Cooma
Property Involved:
Mr, W. Herbert, 'Yandra', Nimmitable, situated 20 km. south east of Cooma. It is a highly improved property with mainly phalaris, ryegrass and cocksfoot pasture.
Soil - Basalt
Rainfall average 24' (600 mm)
People Involved:
Beef Livestock Officer Bega, Mr. Bruce Blackley, I.C.I. and V.I. Cooma.
Original Problem:
There was no real disease entity apparent in the cattle on this property to prompt the beginning of this trial, Mr, Herbert has quite healthy cattle and turns off good vealers every year, but every year during the spring break, he gets an outbreak of scouring in yearling cattle. Because of the scouring and the fact that when he used to run sheep he was one of the first properties in the area to experience losses in lambs due to White Muscle Disease, we decided to set up a trial over a 6 month period using 100 July/August '76 drop Angus heifer calves.
1977 Trial
They were run up the race and split into four groups of 25.
| Group 1 | Controls | 5 c.c. PK-Se marking Oct. 76 Weaned in March '77 when 8-9 months of age and given 18 c.c. Panacur (R) drench. |
| Group 2 | Selenium | |
| Group 3 | Panacur & Se | |
| Group 4 | Panacur |
They were weaned onto a paddock which had not had cattle on it for the previous 5 months.
Our trial began on 24th May, 1977, when we tagged the heifers, split them into 4 groups of 25 as they came up the race, treated and weighed.
Controls
weaned and given 18 c.c. Panacur in March.
Selenium
15 m.g. 24th May
20 m.g. 30th September
Se & Panacur
15 m.g. Se end 20 c.c. Panacur 24th May
20 m.g. Se 30th September.
Panacur
20 c.c. 24th May
20 c.c. 30th August.
The average weight for each group on 24th May was:—
| Controls | 259 kg |
| Selenium | 260 kg |
| Se & Panacur | 259 kg |
| Panacur | 258 kg |
PASTURE ANALYSIS
June, 1977. Molybdenum value which could not interfere with copper utilisation. Ma 0.26 ppm.
A copper value marginal for animal nutrition - (always depressed during Winter and increase in Spring) 7.15 ppm.
Selenium value in what was regarded as the 'safe' area - (less than 0.1 ppm.)
They were put back onto their weaning paddock and ran together over the winter. The weather during May was quite mild with a few frosts and some rainfalls. The rest of the winter period was cold and dry with some snowfalls and several very severe frosts. During July severe winter conditions were experienced From September, 1977 through to September 1978 both the Cooma and Bombala Boards were declared drought stricken.
30th August - Re-weighed (i.e. 3 months later).
ControlsJust maintained liveweight and in fact over all lost 5 kg.
Selenium Overall gained 205 kg. more than 8 kg. per head.
Sel & P. Overall gained 160 kg. more than 6 kg. per head.
Panacur Overall gained 90 kg. more than 3 kg. per head.
At this time the Panacur group only were given another 20 c.c. of Panacur. Due to an illness in the family I was not present at this weighing but when the results were discussed with Beef Livestock Officer Bega upon my return it appeared, without statistical analysis being carried out, that over the winter period at least, the Selenium drench had caused a weight gain response - in fact over 8 kg/head more than the controls. This view was supported by statistical analysis. (They were not weighed for 3 months, so whether it occurred gradually over the whole period or at one particular period we do not know. 0.075 g/day). Consequently on 30th September we gave the Selenium group and the Panacur and Selenium group 20 mg. of Selenium per heifer.
At the time there were a few interested onlookers, including Mr. Bill Herbert the owner, Mr.Jeff Cottrell another well known cattle owner and Mr. Peter Taylor, B.V. Sc., who owns a large holding. Beef Livestock Officer Mr. Bruce Blackley and myself — everyone agreed that the group which had received Selenium only 'looked 'cleaner and healthier than the other groups. The next best looking group was the Panacur/Selenium group. I think this point is important because we all know that a healthy clean appearance in the market place commands more money.
Unfortunately, instead of being placed back onto a spelled pasture they were put back on the same paddock which would have meant a reasonable amount of worm pick up, especially for the Control and Selenium groups which have been running on the same paddock since weaning in March and have had only the one drench.
30th October - Re-weighed and found that since 30th August (a two month period)
| Controls | Gain 600 - 24 kg. per head. |
| Selenium | Gained 655 - 26 kg. per head |
| Sel. & P. | Gain 675 - 27 kg. per head. |
| Panacur | Gained 830 - 33 kg. per head. |
With the onset of milder weather and better feed all groups have gained weight. It appears that the drench at the end of August was significantly beneficial to the Panacur group. This was backed up by statistical analysis.
The two Selenium groups are still ahead of the controls although the Control group was not left behind as much over September/October as it was during the winter.
Overall - Over the 5 month period from 24th May til 30th October the total weight gains per group were:
| Controls | 595 kg. (23.8 kg/head) |
| Selenium | 860 kg. (34.4 kg/head) |
| Sel. & P. | 835 kg. (33.4 kg/head) |
| Panacur | 920 kg. (36.8 kg/head) |
The Panacur group is in front and statistical analysis showed this weight gain to be significant. Remember, this was the only group to receive a drench at the end of August. The Selenium and Panacur group did not receive another drench at this time. By the way, faecal samples were taken from two heifers/ group on 30th October. All counts were fairly low but the Control group had more than the Selenium group and the Selenium group more than the Panacur/Selenium and Panacur groups.
The major species involved was Osteragia 81% with 10% Trichs, 6% Cooperia and 2% Haemonchus.
The two Selenium groups appear to be quite a way ahead of the Control group. On statistical analysis this weight gain advantage was shown to be significant over the winter period only.
Since the Selenium group did have a weight gain advantage over Controls, and as a group they had more 'bloom', healthier coats and less scouring than the Controls and consequently would have commanded a premium in the market place we decided to see if the work could be replicated during 1978.
We all know that drenching weaner cattle is advantageous so far as weight gain response is concerned and this was demonstrated by this trial. Consequently we concentrated solely on Selenium giving all a basic drenching programme. With the help of I.C.I., Selenium bullets were incorporated into this trial.
The bullets contain 10% by weight elemental Selenium, are about 2½ cm in length and 1½ cm in diameter. Each beast is given two bullets using a stomach tube type gun.
1978
In the 1978 trial we used 90 July/August, 1977 drop Angus heifers who had been drenched with Panacur(R) in February, 1978 and weaned onto pasture which had been grazed by adult cattle for the previous few months. At the time we envisaged giving them another drench at the end of July but the owner decided he would not given (sic) them another drench at this time.
On the 19th April the heifers were split into three groups by taking out lots of 30 as they run up the race - all were eartagged.
Group 1
Oral Selenium groups who received 50 mg Selenium on five occasions - 19.4.1978, 1.6.1978, 4.8.1978 and 22.9.1978, 27.10.1978.
In the 1977 trial we used a lower dosage of Selenium but it was increased at the suggestion of Mr. John Thomson, a Livestock Research Officer at Trangie.
Group 2.
Received two Selenium bullets.
Group 3.
Controls.
Blood samples were taken from ten of each group at each weighing, but unfortunately Glenfield has not the equipment available to date to analyse the samples.
Cost. The total cost of dosing the heifers with 50 mg Selenium five times would be a proximately 75¢.
The Selenium bullet would probably cost about 70-80¢ each I think, but this is only a very loose estimate.
Weather in 1978 - Although the Cooma/Bombala area was drought stricken September 1977 to September 1978, things were much better on Mr. Herbert's property 1978 than they were during 1977.
April - not a great deal of pasture available but in
May - good rain, cooler weather, good feed.
June & July - cold, wet.
September - Good rain, drought ceased and there was an excellent spring outlook.
The cattle were weighed on five occasions:—
| DATE | ORAL | BULLET | CONTROLS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19.4.1978 | 209.58 kg (+17.08) |
213.14 kg (+21.85) |
211.55 kg (+19.13) * |
| * Figures in brackets each time are the average weight gain per head between each weighing. | 1.6.78 | 260.00 (+24.48) |
235.00 (+25.74) |
230.68 (+20.68) |
| 4.8.78 | 251.25 (+16.66) |
260.74 (+16.85) |
251.55 (+15.34) |
| 22.9.78 | 267.91 (+19.16) |
277.59 (+18.8) |
266.72 (+16.37) |
| 27.10.78 | 287.08 |
296.48 |
283.10 |
* The gain that the oral and bullet groups made over the controls from 1/6/78 to 4/8/78 (i.e. 24.48 kg/head and 25.74 kg/head respectively) was statistically significant.
* The oral group started off 2 kg lighter per head than the control group and finished up 4 kg heavier/head.
* The bullet group started off 1.6 kg heavier than the control group/ head and finished up 13.4 kg heavier.
The Statistical Analysis of the results indicated that the Selenium treatments given at the beginning of winter achieved a statistically significant weight gain over the non-treated control group.
It also indicated that the heavier animals in all groups grew at a slower rate than the lighter animals.
COMMENTS
Mainly that the two groups which had received Selenium looked far better than the control croup. There was less scouring, they had better coats and they looked healthier. So much so that when an average price/head was put on the three groups by the local Ranger, the Beef Livestock Officer and the owner it worked out that:—
Controls would have commanded $125./head.
Oral Selenium groups would have commanded $135/head.
Bullet Se group would have commanded $150/head.
An animal which looks better commands a higher price whether it be from a restocker or a meat buyer point of view.
Recommendations
Nothing specific except to keep in mind that Selenium administration to weaner cattle may be worthwhile trying out in selected areas for reasons such as:—
1. where there has been a history of White Muscle Disease problems in sheep, or
2. where an owner has consistent scouring problems in yearling cattle during late winter/spring period, or
3. he wants to improve the general appearance of his young cattle to 18 months of age and possibly turn off heavier young stock for slaughter.
Note: This trial has not been duplicated so is only of minor significance at this stage.
FUTURE WORK
During 1979 Beef Livestock Officer Bruce Blackley and myself will be selecting about six herds in different areas and with different types of soil. We will administer two Selenium bullets to half of each group of weaner heifers and also weigh them. These heifers will be grazed together through the winter/spring period. We only intend to do two weighings on each group:- one at the end of winter and one at the end of spring. By the 1980 conference we will know if we can replicate the 1979 work.