Cattle Fattening Research Articles

Economic Sustainability Foraging Scenarios for Ruminant Meat Production—A Climate Change Adapting Alternative

Climate changes affect all agricultural production systems, directly or indirectly, including that of ruminant meat, through the limitation of forage resources sensitive to reduced water regimes and drought. The present paper assessed the economic sustainability of ruminant meat production in the context of climate change, with a particular focus on integrating bioeconomy principles through the use of drought-resistant crops such as sorghum and millet in livestock feed. This study included scenarios for two farm-level models, a sheep fattening farm and a cattle fattening farm, to determine the economic benefit and impact of integrating resilient crops in the total feed ration. The findings showed that the dry scenario system could offer economic and environmental advantages over traditional water-intensive crops like maize. The results demonstrated that replacing maize with sorghum or millet could result in a reduction in feed costs and enhanced economic benefit over the traditional feed system.

Assessment of the modification of the authorisation of the feed additive consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiaeCNCM I-1077 for lambs and its extension of use to all ruminants and camelids reared for milk production/suckling/reproduction, all minor (young) ruminant species and camelids for fattening and Equidae other than horses (Lallemand SAS).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a preparation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-1077 as a zootechnical feed additive for several animal species. The additive, existing in a not-coated and a coated form, is currently authorised for use in feed for calves, cattle for fattening, dairy cows, dairy goats and dairy sheep, lambs, all minor ruminant species for fattening and rearing, horses and camelids for fattening and rearing. This application regards the request for the extension of use in all ruminants and camelids reared for milk production/suckling/reproduction, all minor (young) ruminant species and camelids for fattening and Equidae other than horses, and the modification of the authorisation for lambs to reduce the minimum use level. The identity of the active agent as S. cerevisiae was confirmed. Based on the qualified presumption of safety approach and since no concerns are expected from other components, the additive is considered safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. The not-coated form of the additive is not irritant to skin or eyes. The additive in both formulations should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser and any exposure through skin and respiratory tract is considered a risk. No conclusion could be drawn on the eye irritation potential of the coated form of the additive due to the lack of data. The additive has the potential to be efficacious when used in feed for all ruminants and camelids reared for milk production/suckling/reproduction at the minimum proposed use level of 5 × 108 CFU (colony forming unit)/kg complete feed, all minor (young) ruminant species and camelids for fattening and lambs at 1 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed, and in all Equidae species other than horses at 3 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the flowering stems of Salvia sclarea L. (clary sage oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil from the fresh or dried flowering stems of Salvia sclarea L. (clary sage oil) when used as a sensory additive in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive under assessment is considered safe up to the maximum use level in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacers), cattle for fattening, sheep/goats, 10 mg/kg for horses, 20 mg/kg for dogs, salmonids and ornamental fish. For the other target species, the calculated safe concentrations were 5 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 8 mg/kg for laying hens, 7 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 9 mg/kg for piglets, 11 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 14 mg/kg for sows, 13 mg/kg for dairy cows, 8 mg/kg for rabbits and 4 mg/kg for cats. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is safe at 4 mg/kg complete feed. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use level in water of clary sage oil is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of clary sage oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the oil of the flowering stems of S. sclarea is recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Effect of different genetic backgrounds on rumen microbiota and serum metabolic phenotypes in beef cattle

Species with different genetic backgrounds exhibit distinct metabolic traits. Nine beef cattle were selected for the experiment to study changes in serum metabolic phenotypes, rumen microbiota diversity, and composition in beef cattle from different genetic backgrounds. Three groups were Chinese Simmental (S group), Simmental×Chinese Holstein (SH group), and Simmental × Mongolian (SM group) cattle. We used ELISA to detect serum biochemical indicators. The Short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) in the rumen were examined, and a significant difference was observed in the acetic acid content of the three experimental groups (p < 0.01). The propionic acid content in the rumen of the S group was significantly higher than that of the SH and SM groups (p < 0.05). The A/P ratios of both the S and SM groups were significantly higher than that of the SH group (p < 0.05). We analyzed rumen microbiota composition and diversity in each group of cattle using 16 S rRNA sequencing and found that their composition was generally similar in the three groups of crossbred fattening cattle; however, the f_Bacteroidales_RF16_group and g_norank_f_Bacteroidales_RF16_group were significantly enriched in the SH group, whereas Treponema and Spirochaetia were significantly enriched in the SM group. Spirochaetia was significantly enriched in the SM group. Differences in rumen bacterial enrichment indicated that starch, protein, and cellulolytic abilities differed among the S, SH, and SM groups. The results of Spearman correlation analysis confirmed the correlation between rumen genera and serum biochemical indices. Overall, differences in rumen microflora play an important role in influencing the serum metabolic phenotype.

Trends in the hormone and antibiotic use for cattle fattening in Bangladesh

The study was conducted to identify trends in the use of hormones and antibiotics, and traditional practices in cattle fattening in the southwest coastal region of Bangladesh. Data were collected from 150 farmers involved in beef cattle fattening through a survey questionnaire. The average numbers of cattle and beef cattle per household were 4.27 ± 1.94 and 3.54 ± 1.31, respectively. An average of 44.67 percent of the beef farmers selected indigenous (zebu) cattle and the rest of the farmers kept a variety of crossbred cattle for fattening. The average age of cattle at the start of fattening was 21.61 ± 8.07 months, the average duration of fattening was 9.71 ± 4.29 months, and farmers marketed cattle at an average weight of 285.50 ± 50.80 kg. The highest percentage (34.67%) of farmers ate beef once a week and 5.33 percent of farmers never ate beef. Among beef farmers, 53.33% and 62.67% applied hormones and antibiotics, respectively, to their beef cattle. The highest percentage of farmers used hormones (33.87%) and antibiotics (29.79%) once a week and the rest of the farmers used them at various intervals. The majority of farmers did not follow any withdrawal period before slaughtering beef cattle for application of hormones (85.48%) and antibiotics (83.58%), whereas the remaining farmers maintained different withdrawal periods. It can be concluded that more than half of the farmers applied hormones and about two-thirds of the farmers used antibiotics for beef fattening, and most of the farmers did not follow the recommended withdrawal periods before slaughter, which is of public health concern.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the flowering tops of Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (lavender oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil from the fresh flowering tops of Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (lavender oil) when used as a sensory additive in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive under assessment is considered safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 30 mg/kg for dogs and ornamental fish. For the other target species, the calculated safe concentrations were 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 23 mg/kg for sows, 39 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer) and salmonids, 35 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep/goats and horses, 22 mg/kg for dairy cows, 14 mg/kg for rabbits and 7 mg/kg for cats. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is safe at 7 mg/kg complete feed. The use of lavender oil in water for drinking was considered safe provided that the total daily intake does not exceed the daily amount considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of lavender oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the oil of the flowering tops of L. angustifolia is recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

367 Changing the conversation: Evaluating feedyard closeouts and the beef system on a carcass basis

Abstract Beef cattle genetics, management, technologies and nutritional strategies are ever evolving, and current US trends favor feeding cattle to heavier carcass endpoints and optimizing quality grade. The average number of days on feed (DOF) in the US has increased year after year, averaging 195 and 183 DOF for steers and heifers, respectively, as reported by Elanco Benchmark data in 2021. As DOF increase, cattle live performance, including average daily gain and feed efficiency decline; however, hot carcass weight (HCW) becomes significantly heavier. Although a reduction in live feed conversion occurs as cattle are fed for extended DOF, the kilograms of additional live gain that result as kilograms of gain on the carcass, termed carcass transfer, increase linearly. As DOF are extended, carcass transfer has been reported to increase up to 88 %. As a result of genetic advancements, technologies, and feeding longer, HCW has trended heavier over the last 60 yr, with 2024 USDA HCW reported for April as 11.3 and 9.5 kg heavier for steers and heifers, respectively, year after year. According to mandatory price reporting data, approximately 74 % of fat cattle marketed in the US are sold as dressed beef. As we continue to feed to heavier endpoints and longer DOF, the profitability of selling on a carcass-basis increases. With the increase in carcass transfer as DOF extend, this presentation will attempt to address that cattle live performance should be adjusted to a carcass-basis for feedyards to appropriately capture the inflection point at which cost of additional gain equals the price received for the additional gain.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Carum carvi L. (caraway oil) for all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Carum carvi L. (caraway oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel concluded that the use of caraway oil is of no concern up to the following concentrations in complete feed: 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 24 mg/kg for sows, 35 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 11 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, 10 mg/kg for dairy cows, sheep, goats, horses and rabbits, 25 mg/kg for salmonids and dogs. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For cats, ornamental fish and other species, no conclusion can be drawn. The use of caraway oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. The additive under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a respiratory and skin sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to perillaldehyde may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since C. carvi and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Apium graveolens L. (celery seed oil) for all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Apium graveolens L. (celery seed oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel concluded that the use of celery seed oil is of no concern up to the following concentrations in complete feed: 1.6 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 2.3 mg/kg for laying hens, 2.1 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 2.8 mg/kg for piglets, 3.3 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 4.1 mg/kg for sows, 6.5 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 6.2 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep, goats and horses, 4.0 mg/kg for dairy cows, 2.5 mg/kg for rabbits, 6.8 mg/kg for salmonids and 7.2 mg/kg for dogs. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For cats, ornamental fish and other species, no conclusion can be drawn. The use of celery seed oil in animals feed is not expected to pose concern for the consumers and for the environment. The additive under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a respiratory and skin sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to perillaldehyde and bergapten may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since A. graveolens and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Technical Efficiency and Allocative Efficiency of Beef Cattle Fattening in the Content of Digital Economy: An Empirical Study Based on Survey in China

This study applies data envelopment analysis (DEA) to gauge technical efficiency and allocative efficiency in China’s beef cattle-fattening industry using survey data. The Tobit model considers the salient determinants that drive these efficiencies. The results indicate that (1) large-scale farms exhibit robust TE and pure technical efficiencies (PTE), whereas scale efficiencies (SE) diverge significantly between large and medium-sized operations. The cost efficiency (CE) of smaller farms lags behind their larger counterparts, with the latter displaying greater revenue efficiencies (RE) and profit efficiency (PE). (2) The influence of identical factors on the efficiency of beef cattle fattening production can vary, sometimes antithetically, across different scales. Local policy interventions must be differentiated according to farm type and size. (3) The unique context of China’s national conditions and the status quo of livestock farming render the dual implementation of environmental regulations and technological subsidies less viable for Chinese beef cattle farms. These entities should prioritize production over technological innovation and advancement. Policymakers should adopt strategies such as targeted skill/technological training for farm managers at particular scales of operation. This could represent a critical trajectory to augment the efficiency of beef cattle production and increase beef yield in China.

Smallholder farmers’ decision-making style in the process of adopting beef cattle feed innovation in Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta

Abstract Decision-making style describes anecdotally the way each individual makes decisions. The aim of this research was to analyse the decision-making style of farmers in the process of adopting innovative feed for beef cattle fattening. This research is a case study of a group of beef cattle farmers in Kapanewon Bantul, Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta. The method for determining groups uses a purposive sampling method. Respondents in this study were all members of groups determined using the census method. Data collection was carried out by direct interviews with respondent farmers using prepared instruments. The data collected was analysed descriptively. Farmers’ decision-making styles based on rational (81.2%), intuitive (72.3%), and dependent (63.4%) dimensions are in the high category, while avoidant (54.4%) and spontaneous (64.4%) decision making styles are in the medium category. The conclusion in this research is that smallholder farmers are very careful in making decisions. Strong priorities emerge for the rational decision-making style. Fattening cattle farmers have considered the risks and benefits of the profits obtained when having to make decisions about using feed innovation because it is seen as a determinant in the livestock business.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil obtained from the wood of Juniperus deppeana Steud. (cedarwood Texas oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the wood of Juniperus deppeana Steud. (cedarwood Texas oil), when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, sheep, goats, horses, dogs, salmonids and ornamental fish. For the other species, the calculated safe concentrations in complete feed were 5 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 8 mg/kg for laying hens, 7 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 10 mg/kg for piglets, 12 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 14 mg/kg for sows and dairy cows, 8.5 mg/kg for rabbits and 4 mg/kg for cats. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive was considered safe at 4 mg/kg complete feed. The use of cedarwood Texas oil in water for drinking was considered safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumers and the environment were identified following the use of the additive up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Since the individual components of cedarwood Texas oil are recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the leaves of Cymbopogon nardus (L.) Rendle (citronella oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of citronella oil obtained from the leaves of Cymbopogon nardus (L.) Rendle, when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that citronella oil from C. nardus is of low concern for long-living and reproductive animals at the use levels in complete feed of 3.5 mg/kg for laying hens and rabbits, 6 mg/kg for sows and dairy cows, 9.5 mg/kg for sheep/goats and horses, 2.0 mg/kg for cats and 10 mg/kg for dogs. For short-living animals (species for fattening), the additive was considered of no concern at concentrations of 18 mg/kg in chickens for fattening, 24 mg/kg in turkeys for fattening, 20 mg/kg for piglets, pigs for fattening, veal calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, sheep/goats for meat production, horses for meat production and rabbits for meat production, and 30 mg/kg for salmonids. The conclusions were extrapolated to physiologically related minor species. For any other species, the additive is considered of low concern at 2.0 mg/kg complete feed. The use of citronella oil in animal feed is expected to be of no concern for the consumers and for the environment. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to methyleugenol may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since the leaves of C. nardus and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of a tincture derived from the leaves of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. (eucalyptus tincture) for all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture from the leaves of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. (eucalyptus tincture) when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The product is a ■■■■■ solution, with a dry matter content of ~ 1.86%, which contains on average 0.454% phenolic acids and flavonoids (of which 0.280% was gallic acid), 0.0030% 1,8-cineole and 0.00012% methyleugenol. In the absence of analytical data on the occurrence of mono- or diformylated adducts of acylphloroglucinols with terpenes in the tincture and in the absence of toxicity data, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not conclude on the use of eucalyptus tincture for long-living and reproductive animals. For short-living animals (species for fattening), the additive was considered of no concern at 4 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening, 5 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 6 mg/kg for piglets and rabbits for meat production, 7 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 16 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 14 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep/goats and horses for fattening, and 15 mg/kg for salmonids. These levels were extrapolated to physiologically related minor species. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of eucalyptus tincture up to the levels in feed considered of no concern. Eucalyptus tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. The use of eucalyptus tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the leaves of E. globulus and their preparations were recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Beef cattle fattening practices, marketing systems and challenges: The case of Bench Sheko and Sheka Zones of southwest Ethiopia

This study was conducted to assess beef cattle fattening practices, marketing systems, and challenges in the Bench Sheko and Sheka zones of South West Ethiopia. Multi-stage purposive and random sampling procedures were used. A total of 384 households were selected randomly and interviewed using a structured questionnaire. Secondary data were collected from zones and district offices. The collected data were managed and analyzed using SPSS version 20. Statistical differences were declared at P < 0.05. The mean difference was assessed by the Tukey test. The result of this study depicted that the major (87.5 %) cattle fattening system prevailing in the study areas was an extensive/traditional fattening system. The majority (68.5 %) of fatteners preferred local cattle for fattening in the study areas. Body condition was the major (52.3 %) criterion to buy and sell their beef cattle; but the mean ages selected for fattening were 4.51 ± 0.082 and 4.84 ± 0.089 years for male and female, respectively. The majority (58.9 %) of respondents fattened two times per year indicated that fattening was not their only activity in the study areas. The overall mean of cattle fattened per household per fattening period was 3.41 ± 0.077 in the study area. However, a significantly (P < 0.001) higher number of cattle was fattened in the Sheka (3.67 ± 0.126) than in the Bench Sheko (3.14 ± 0.089) per fattening period. About 81.5 % of respondents decided to finish the fattening period by considering live weight change but the rest decided by anticipated current and future price (13.5 %) and calculating feeding length (4.9 %). Village markets were the major (87.8 %) buying and selling place of cattle; whereas local butchers accounted for the highest share (62.2 %) in buying finished beef cattle in the study areas. Diseases and parasites were the severe challenges for beef cattle production while seasonal fluctuations of demand and price also challenged marketing systems. However, an increase in meat demand (41.7 %) and environmental suitability (28.1 %) were the most important opportunities for beef cattle production and marketing in the study areas. Therefore, improved beef cattle fattening practices and profit-oriented fattening systems should be adopted in areas through private and state holders in collaboration.

Financial Feasibility Analysis of the Beef Cattle Fattening Business

Financial analysis is an activity of assessing and determining rupiah units on aspects that are considered feasible from decisions made in the business analysis stage, and the results of the analysis are used as basic parameters in determining the feasibility of a business. The objective of this research was to determine the financial feasibility of the beef cattle fattening business in Balikpapan city. The study employed a survey method within the North Balikpapan subdistrict, in which 40 respondents were selected through purposive sampling. Criteria for respondents included ownership of at least two beef cattle with a rearing period exceeding one year. The financial feasibility analysis used several key indicators, including the break event point (BEP), net present value (NPV), benefit cost ratio (B/C ratio), internal rate of return (IRR), and payback period (PP). Based on the study calculations, the BEP was IDR 9.676.911; NPV (9.15%) was IDR 1.017.779.514; NPV (14.15%) was IDR 952.403.118; B/C ratio was 2.7; IRR was 87%; and PP was 0.37 years. According to these results, it could be concluded that the beef cattle business in the North Balikpapan subdistrict, Balikpapan city, was feasible.

Smart Agribusiness through Analysis of Balinese Cattle Fattening Using Alternative Feed in Palembang, Indonesia

The development of cattle fattening is one of the efforts to fulfill the increasing demand for meat, in line with the growth of the human population. In addition, cattle fattening also provides significant economic opportunities for farmers and business actors in the livestock sector. One important aspect in this regard is feed management, which can have a major effect on the growth and health of livestock. Therefore, this study aimed to (a) analyze the initial weight of cattle, length of fattening time, daily weight gain, and (b) assess the feed cost, selling price, as well as income before and after fattening. A descriptive qualitative method was used to explain the feasibility of cattle fattening business grouped based on four feeding patterns namely (a) grass, (b) grass and tofu pulp, (c) grass, tofu pulp, and sweet potato skin, as well as (d) grass, tofu pulp, sweet potato skin and molasses in Palembang, Indonesia. Furthermore, purposive sampling was used with 100 cattle as the population, divided into four different diet groups. Data analysis was conducted using mean differences to evaluate the impact of the four feed alternatives on the measured variables. The results showed that there were significant differences in income, with molasses generating the highest income per kilogram (kg) of beef. In the feasibility analysis, molasses showed good feasibility with an R/C Ratio of 1.56, implying that cattle fattening business by applying molasses feed alternative could be considered as a viable investment. The results provided practical insights for cattle fatteners, assisting in decision-makingregarding optimal feed patterns to increase income and business viability.

Efficacy of the feed additive consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiaeCNCM I-4407 (Actisaf® Sc47) for cattle for fattening (Lesaffre International).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-4407 (Actisaf® Sc47) as a zootechnical feed additive (functional group: gut flora stabiliser) in cattle for fattening. The additive is already authorised for use in feed for dairy cows, calves for rearing, lambs for fattening, dairy goats, dairy sheep and dairy buffaloes. In a previous opinion, the EFSA Scientific Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) concluded that Actisaf® Sc47 was safe for cattle for fattening, the consumers and the environment. Additionally, the Panel considered that Actisaf® Sc47 is not a skin irritant, and no conclusions could be drawn on the additive's eye irritancy and dermal sensitisation potential. Due to the lack of adequate data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive in cattle for fattening at the proposed conditions of use. In the current application, the applicant submitted three trials to support the efficacy in cattle for fattening. However, two of them were not considered for the assessment. The other trial showed an improved zootechnical performance of the animals at the proposed use level of 4 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed. Considering the additive is authorised in dairy cows and calves for rearing and the requirements of the current Guidance on the assessment of the efficacy of feed additives, no further demonstration of efficacy is necessary to extrapolate the conclusions previously reached to all ruminants. The significant positive effect shown in one trial in cattle for fattening supports the above extrapolation. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that Actisaf® Sc47 is efficacious as a zootechnical additive for cattle for fattening at the proposed conditions of use.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiaeMUCL 39885 (Biosprint®) for cattle for fattening for the renewal of its authorisation (Prosol SPA).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of the authorisation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae MUCL 39885 (Biosprint®) as a feed additive for cattle for fattening (category: zootechnical; functional group: gut flora stabiliser). The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) confirmed that the use of Biosprint® under the current authorised conditions of use remains safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. Taking into account the nature of the additive, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additive should be considered as a potential skin and respiratory sensitiser, and any exposure through skin and respiratory tract is considered a risk. The additive is not a skin/eye irritant. There is no need to assess the efficacy of Biosprint® in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from fresh leaves of Melaleuca cajuputi Maton & Sm. ex R. Powell and Melaleuca leucadendra (L.) L. (cajuput oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of cajuput oil obtained from fresh leaves of Melaleuca cajuputi Maton & Sm. ex R. Powell and Melaleuca leucadendra (L.) L., when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that cajuput oil is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 30 mg/kg for sows and dogs, 50 mg/kg for horses and ornamental fish, 40 mg/kg for salmon and 5 mg/kg for cats. For the other species, the calculated safe concentrations were 18 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 26 mg/kg for laying hens, 23 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 37 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 31 mg/kg for piglets, 78 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 69 mg/kg for cattle for fattening and sheep/goats, 45 mg/kg for dairy cows and 28 mg/kg for rabbits. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is safe at 5 mg/kg complete feed. The use of cajuput oil in water for drinking was considered safe provided that the total daily intake does not exceed the daily amount considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumers and the environment were identified following the use of the additive up to the highest safe use level in feed. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since cajuput oil was recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.