2Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Namık Kemal, Tekirdağ, Turkey
Keywords: Propolis; Neonatal calf; Growth; Body measurement; Diarrhea
Calves were allocated with their mothers and fed colostrums for the first three days after the birth [13]. After they housed in portable individual calf pen, and milk was given to calves one in a day from bucket with a nipple at 8.30-10.00 am. Calves were reared with limited milk for 5 weeks. Milk were increased until 3rd week then decreased from 3rd week to the final of the 5th week [14,15]. All calves were weaned at the end of the 5th week. Each calf had drunk 154 kg milk in five weeks. Besides, clover hay were given ad libitum to calves after the second weeks, water was given from the first week. Clover hay consumption was not recorded.
The raw propolis was Pinus spp. origin and supported from the beekeepers Izmir and nearby, stored at -18°C in deep freeze until using. Raw propolis was grinded in mini coffee machine and made as granule form. After grinding, 500 g propolis was weighted and dissolved in 1lt of ethyl alcohol (70%) in dark and tightly closed bottle. The bottle was shaked 4 times in a day regularly as manual and left in dark place at room temperature
|
Groups |
||
Gender |
Control |
Propolis |
Total |
Female calves |
5 |
5 |
10 |
Male calves |
5 |
5 |
10 |
Total |
10 |
10 |
20 |
Propolis tincture was given to calves 2 cc using syringe (5cc) with spiral pipette from the first day of birth until the end of the trial. Syringe was cleaned with alcohol before and after using. Calves in trial were weighted after birth, at the 1st week, at the 3rd week and the end of research (at the 5th week). Also body measurements (withers height, body length, sacrum height, shoulder length, chest length, sacrum length, chest depth, chest perimeter, front shin girth perimeter, leg perimeter, head length, forehead length and width, face length) were recorded at the 2nd day of birth and at the end of the research. Fecal score was visually monitored daily using the method described by Larson et al. [16], regarding the fluidity of feces. Feces were classified as normal (1) soft (2) loose (3), watery (4) or liquid consistency (5).
Data were analyzed with SPSS, [17] statistic program using following model. Treatment were introduced as independent variables, birth weight were used as co-variable. Means were compared with Scheffe test. Fecal score values were analyzed using chi-square test [18].
Yi= observation of traits
μ = general mean
ti = the effect of treatment
b = regression coefficient of birth weight for observed traits
ei = error
Female calves |
Male calves |
|||||||
Measurements |
Control |
Propolis |
Control |
Propolis |
||||
Initial |
Final |
Initial |
Final |
Initial |
Final |
Initial |
Final |
|
Live weight, (kg) |
39.50 ± 2.20 |
51.70 ± 0.72b |
42.00 ± 2.20 |
54.50 ± 0.72 a |
45.75 ± 1.28 |
63.37 ± 2.26 |
48.60 ± 1.15 |
63.80 ± 1.98 |
Withers height, (cm) |
69.00 ± 0.98 |
75.88 ± 1.37 |
70.50 ± 0.98 |
77.72 ± 1.37 |
73.00 ± 0.98 |
79.79 ± 0.66b |
75.80 ± 0.88 |
82.37 ± 0.58a |
Body length, (cm) |
67.80 ± 1.92 |
74.66 ± 0.86b |
71.20 ± 1.92 |
77.74 ± 0.86a |
72.13 ± 0.83 |
81.51 ± 1.28 |
70.90 ± 0.74 |
79.99 ± 1.13 |
Sacrum height, (cm) |
72.60 ± 1.01 |
77.04 ± 1.11 |
72.60 ± 1.01 |
77.96 ± 1.11 |
75.00 ± 0.83 |
81.19 ± 0.85 |
77.60 ± 0.74 |
83.24 ± 0.75 |
Shoulder length, (cm) |
26.00 ± 1.24 |
28.79 ± 0.44b |
25.40 ± 1.24 |
30.51 ± 0.44a |
27.75 ± 0.38 |
30.62 ± 0.39 |
27.40 ± 0.34 |
30.50 ± 0.34 |
Chest length, (cm) |
39.70 ± 1.17 |
43.40 ± 0.57 |
39.90 ± 1.17 |
44.79 ± 0.57 |
42.00 ± 0.88 |
45.92 ± 0.73 |
42.30 ± 0.79 |
46.96 ± 0.64 |
Sacrum length, (cm) |
24.90 ± 0.69 |
26.35 ± 0.40 |
24.20 ± 0.69 |
26.76 ± 0.40 |
26.50 ± 0.74 |
28.09 ± 0.47 |
25.90 ± 0.66 |
28.82 ± 0.41 |
Chest depth, (cm) |
27.80 ± 0.88 |
31.00 ± 0.70 |
27.10 ± 0.88 |
30.99 ± 0.70 |
28.38 ± 0.61 |
31.67 ± 0.76 |
29.70 ± 0.55 |
32.74 ± 0.66 |
Chest perimeter, (cm) |
79.80 ± 1.62 |
92.29 ± 1.19 |
79.60 ± 1.62 |
90.31 ± 1.19 |
82.25 ± 1.15 |
95.14 ± 1.25 |
82.20 ± 1.03 |
94.49 ± 1.09 |
Front shin girth perimeter,(cm) |
11.90 ± 0.22 |
11.89 ± 0.32 |
11.45 ± 0.22 |
12.11 ± 0.32 |
12.38 ± 0.18 |
12.83 ± 0.18 |
12.10 ± 0.16 |
12.24 ± 0.16 |
Leg perimeter, (cm) |
38.00 ± 0.99 |
43.42 ± 1.01 |
37.90 ± 0.99 |
43.08 ± 1.01 |
41.50 ± 0.42 |
44.17 ± 0.72 |
41.00 ± 0.38 |
44.37 ± 0.63 |
Head length, (cm) |
21.20 ± 0.50 |
22.16 ± 0.51 |
21.10 ± 0.50 |
22.84 ± 0.51 |
22.13 ± 0.38 |
23.13 ± 0.27 |
22.70 ± 0.34 |
23.50 ± 0.23 |
Forehead length, (cm) |
12.20 ± 0.25 |
12.75 ± 0.37 |
11.60 ± 0.25 |
12.86 ± 0.37 |
12.25 ± 0.42 |
13.25 ± 0.21 |
12.90 ± 0.38 |
13.40 ± 0.19 |
Forehead width (cm) |
12.80 ± 0.24 |
13.10 ± 0.34 |
13.00 ± 0.24 |
13.40 ± 0.34 |
12.50 ± 0.31 |
13.78 ± 0.25 |
13.40 ± 0.28 |
13.87 ± 0.22 |
Face length, (cm) |
9.00 ± 0.45 |
9.42 ± 0.31 |
9.50 ± 0.45 |
9.98 ± 0.31 |
9.88 ± 0.27 |
9.88 ± 0.35 |
9.80 ± 0.24 |
10.09 ± 0.31 |
1st week live weight, (kg) |
41.82 ± 0.37 |
42.94 ± 0.37 |
52.09 ± 0.77 |
50.83 ± 0.68 |
||||
3rd week live weight (kg) |
45.55 ± 0.52 |
46.45 ± 0.52 |
56.18 ± 1.37 |
57.25 ± 1.20 |
||||
Total live weight gain, (kg) |
10.95 ± 0.72b |
13.75 ± 0.72a |
16.04 ± 2.26 |
16.47 ± 1.48 |
||||
Daily weight gain, (g) |
312.88 ± 20.63b |
392.83 ± 20.63a |
458.31 ± 64.53 |
470.50 ± 56.67 |
||||
Fecal |
Female (%) |
Male (%) |
General (%) |
||||
Week |
Score |
Control |
Propolis |
Control |
Propolis |
Control |
Propolis |
1 |
1 |
30 |
50 |
44.4 |
44.4 |
36.8 |
47.4 |
2 |
|||||||
3 |
10 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
||||
4 |
10 |
5.3 |
|||||
P |
0.287 |
0.343 |
0.361 |
||||
2 |
1 |
30 |
11.1 |
44.4 |
5.3 |
36.8 |
|
2 |
20 |
11.1 |
11.1 |
31.6 |
15.8 |
||
3 |
50 |
22.2 |
10.5 |
||||
P |
0.04 |
0.155 |
0.02 |
||||
3 |
1 |
10 |
50 |
11.1 |
55.6 |
10.5 |
52.6 |
2 |
40 |
22.2 |
31.6 |
||||
4 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
|||||
P |
0.01 |
0.06 |
0.002 |
||||
4 |
1 |
50 |
50 |
22.2 |
55.6 |
36.8 |
52.6 |
2 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
|||||
4 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
|||||
P |
0.2 |
0.289 |
|||||
5 |
1 |
50 |
50 |
22.2 |
55.6 |
36.8 |
52.6 |
2 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
|||||
4 |
11.1 |
5.3 |
|||||
P |
0.2 |
0.289 |
- Webster J. Calf Husbandry, Health and Welfare. London: Reprinted by Collins Professional and Technical Books; 1986.
- Etgen WM, James RE, Reaves PM. Dairy cattle feeding and management 7/E. Inch, USA: John Wiley & Sons; 1987.
- Thickett B, Mitchell D, Hallows B. Calf Rearing. 2nd ed. UK: Farming Press. LTD; 1988.
- Stangaciu S. Apitherapy Internet Course Notes, AIC; 1999. p. 257.
- Gluhovski N, Spataru CL, Biruescu A. Using propolis in combination with some chemical therapeutic preparations for controlling endometrities in cattle, 2nd Int. Symposium on Apitherapy, Bucharest, September 2nd – 7nd. Romania; 1976. p. 217-220.
- Popeskovic D, Dimitrijevic M, Soldatovic B. The effect of propolis fractions on some biological systems. New apitherapy Research. 2nd Int. Symposium on apitherapy Bucharest, September 2nd-7nd. Romania; 1976. p. 220-222.
- Popravko SA. Chemical origin of propolis, New Apitherapy Research. 2nd Int. Symposium on Apitherapy Bucharest, September 2nd-7nd. Romania; 1976. p.183-184.
- Kaal J. Natural medicine from honey bees (Apitherapy). Amsterdam- Holland: Kaal's Printing House; 1991. p. 91
- Nowottnick, K., 1993. Leopold Verlag, Graz-Stuttgart, Germany, p.100.
- Donadieu, Y. Die propolis, KOCH Imkerei-Technik Verlag, Oppenau, Germany; 1994. p. 67.
- Gubicza A, Molnar p. Propolis in the rearing of calves. Magyar Mezogazdasag. 1987;42(17):14.
- Kwon, Myung-Sang, Kim Ji-Min, Kim Young-Jae, Kim JungYoon, Han, Zhong-Zhe and Lim Hwan. Use of propolis on neonatal diarrhea in calves. Apimondia'99 Congress XXXVI. Congress Vancouver 12-17 September, Canada, 1999; p. 248.
- Tümer,S. 1983. Siyah Alaca ve Esmer sığırlarda az sütle buzağı büyütme ve erken damızlıkta kullanma olanakları, E.Ü. Fen Bilimleri Ens., Doktora Tezi.
- Fowler NG. Beef and dairy mangement and production. Hutchinson, 1968.
- Foley RC, Bath DL, Dickinson FN, Tucker NA. Dairy cattle, principles, practices, problems, profits. Philadelphia, USA. Lea and Febiger; 1973.
- Larson LL, Owen FG, Albright JL, Appleman RD, Lamb RC, Muller LD. Guidelines toward more uniformity in measuring and reporting calf experimental data. J. Dairy Sci. 1977;60:989-991.
- SPSS. Statistic packet program version 8. USA; SPSS Inc., 1997.
- Bek Y, Efe E. Araştırma ve deneme metodları I. Ders kitabı. Çukurova Univ. Zir. Fak. Yay. No:71. Adana.
- Aytuğ CN. Çok faktörlü enfeksiyon hastalıkları (10. bölüm) Sığır hastalıkları (ikinci baskı) Aytuğ, C. N., Alaçam, E., Görgül, S., Gökçen, H., Tuncer, Ş.D., Yılmaz, K., TÜMVET Hayvancılık ve Veteriner Hizmetleri San. Tic. Ltd. Yayınları, No: 3. Teknografik Matbaacılık, İstanbul; 1991.
- Kaya A, Uzmay C, Alçiçek A, Kaya İ,. Buzağıların ekşitilmiş süt ile büyütülmesi üzerine bir araştırma. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 2000;24:413-421.
- Greceanu AI, Enciu V. Observation on the antibiotic effects of propolis pollen and honey. New Apitherapy Research 2nd International Symposium on Apitherapy Bucharest, September 2nd-7nd, Romania. 1976; p. 177-180.
- Hegazi AG, Abd El-Hady F. Influence of administration of propolis on chicken immune status. The Egyptian Journal of Immunology. 1996;3(1):111-116.
- Corlateanu, D. 1976. Treatment with bee products of neonatal calves, 2nd Int. Symposium on Apitherapy, Bucharest, September 2nd – 7nd, Romania, 295-297p.
- Sarker MSK, Yang CJ. Propolis and Illite as Feed Additives on Performance and Blood Profiles of Pre-Weaning Hanwoo Calves. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 2010; 9(19):2526-2531.



