Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Canadian Veterinary Journal logoLink to The Canadian Veterinary Journal
. 1999 Mar;40(3):179–184.

A comparison of florfenicol and tilmicosin for the treatment of undifferentiated fever in feedlot calves in western Canada.

G K Jim 1, C W Booker 1, P T Guichon 1, O C Schunicht 1, B K Wildman 1, J C Johnson 1, P W Lockwood 1
PMCID: PMC1539678  PMID: 10086218

Abstract

A field trial was performed under commercial feedlot conditions in western Canada to compare the efficacy of florfenicol and tilmicosin for the treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in calves that received metaphylactic tilmicosin upon arrival at the feedlot. One thousand and eighty recently weaned, auction market derived, crossbred beef calves suffering from UF were allocated to one of 2 experimental groups as follows: florfenicol, which was intramuscular (i.m.) florfenicol administered at the rate of 20 mg/kg body weight (BW) at the time of allocation (Day 0) and again 48 h later, or tilmicosin, which was subcutaneous (s.c.) tilmicosin administered once at the rate of 10 mg/kg BW on day 0. Five hundred and forty-four animals were allocated to the florfenicol group and 536 animals were allocated to the tilmicosin group. The chronicity, wastage, overall mortality, and bovine respiratory disease (BRD) mortality rates were significantly (P < 0.05) lower in the florfenicol group than in the tilmicosin group. There were no significant (P > or = 0.05) differences in first UF relapse, second UF relapse, hemophilosis mortality, or miscellaneous mortality rates between the florfenicol and tilmicosin groups. Average daily gain (ADG) from arrival at the feedlot to the time of implanting and ADG from allocation to the time of implanting were significantly (P < 0.05) lower in the florfenicol group as compared with the tilmicosin group. There were no significant (P > or = 0.05) differences in arrival weight, allocation weight, implanting weight, or ADG from arrival to allocation between the experimental groups. In the economic analysis, there was an advantage of $18.83 CDN per animal in the florfenicol group. The results of this study indicate that florfenicol is superior to tilmicosin for the treatment of UF because of lower chronicity, wastage, overall mortality, and BRD mortality rates. However, interpretation of these observations must take into consideration the fact that these calves received meta-phylactic tilmicosin upon arrival at the feedlot, which is a standard, cost-effective, management procedure utilized by feedlots in western Canada.

Full text

PDF
179

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Adams P. E., Varma K. J., Powers T. E., Lamendola J. F. Tissue concentrations and pharmacokinetics of florfenicol in male veal calves given repeated doses. Am J Vet Res. 1987 Dec;48(12):1725–1732. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Booker C. W., Jim G. K., Guichon P. T. A field trial to determine the efficacy of long-acting oxytetracycline for reducing the treatment rate in aborted feedlot heifers. Can Vet J. 1992 Jun;33(6):397–399. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Booker C. W., Jim G. K., Guichon P. T., Schunicht O. C., Thorlakson B. E., Lockwood P. W. Evaluation of florfenicol for the treatment of undifferentiated fever in feedlot calves in western Canada. Can Vet J. 1997 Sep;38(9):555–560. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Church T. L., Radostits O. M. A retrospective survey of diseases of feedlot cattle in Alberta. Can Vet J. 1981 Feb;22(2):27–30. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gorham P. E., Carroll L. H., McAskill J. W., Watkins L. E., Ose E. E., Tonkinson L. V., Merrill J. K. Tilmicosin as a single injection treatment for respiratory disease of feedlot cattle. Can Vet J. 1990 Dec;31(12):826–829. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Guichon P. T., Booker C. W., Jim G. K. Comparison of two formulations of oxytetracycline given prophylactically to reduce the incidence of bovine respiratory disease in feedlot calves. Can Vet J. 1993 Dec;34(12):736–741. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Harland R. J., Jim G. K., Guichon P. T., Townsend H. G., Janzen E. D. Efficacy of parenteral antibiotics for disease prophylaxis in feedlot calves. Can Vet J. 1991 Mar;32(3):163–168. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hoar B. R., Jelinski M. D., Ribble C. S., Janzen E. D., Johnson J. C. A comparison of the clinical field efficacy and safety of florfenicol and tilmicosin for the treatment of undifferentiated bovine respiratory disease of cattle in western Canada. Can Vet J. 1998 Mar;39(3):161–166. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Jim G. K., Booker C. W., Guichon P. T. A comparison of trimethoprim-sulfadoxine and ceftiofur sodium for the treatment of respiratory disease in feedlot calves. Can Vet J. 1992 Apr;33(4):245–250. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kelly A. P., Janzen E. D. A review of morbidity and mortality rates and disease occurrence in north american feedlot cattle. Can Vet J. 1986 Dec;27(12):496–500. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Laven R., Andrews A. H. Long-acting antibiotic formulations in the treatment of calf pneumonia: a comparative study of tilmicosin and oxytetracycline. Vet Rec. 1991 Aug 10;129(6):109–111. doi: 10.1136/vr.129.6.109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Mechor G. D., Jim G. K., Janzen E. D. Comparison of penicillin, oxytetracycline, and trimethoprim-sulfadoxine in the treatment of acute undifferentiated bovine respiratory disease. Can Vet J. 1988 May;29(5):438–443. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Morck D. W., Merrill J. K., Thorlakson B. E., Olson M. E., Tonkinson L. V., Costerton J. W. Prophylactic efficacy of tilmicosin for bovine respiratory tract disease. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1993 Jan 15;202(2):273–277. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Canadian Veterinary Journal are provided here courtesy of Canadian Veterinary Medical Association

RESOURCES