The effect of neomycin inclusion in milk replacer on the health,growth, and performance of male Holstein calves during preweaning

The prophylactic use of oral antimicrobials, such as neomycin, in milk replacer (MR) or whole milk is a common practice in calf-rearing that is thought to aid in preventing disease. Heavy reliance on antimicrobials is of concern not only because of the development of antimicrobial resistance, but also because of the potentially negative effects on health. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of neomycin on calf health and growth performance. One hundred and sixty calves (approximately 3–10 d of age), distributed across 2 experimental periods, were stratified by body weight (BW) and serum total protein, and assigned to 1 of 3 treatments: control (CON; nonmedicated MR, n = 60), short-term antibiotic (ST; neomycin mixed in MR from d 1–14, n = 50), or long-term antibiotic (LT; neomycin in ?MR from d 1–28, n = 50). Arrival BW (47.69 ± 0.87 kg) and serum total protein (5.67 ± 0.09 g/dL) were not different between treatment groups. Neomycin in ST and LT was dosed in MR at a rate of 20 mg/kg of BW and was adjusted weekly according to BW. Calf BW was measured weekly for 49 d, and health indicators (fecal score, attitude score, respiratory score, and rectal temperature), MR intake, starter intake, and the use of additional electrolytes and antimicrobials were recorded daily. Calves in the CON group experienced a higher proportion of days with diarrhea (20.32 ± 0.02%) compared with ST (14.70 ± 0.02%) or LT (13.80 ± 0.02%) calves, as well as longer bouts of diarrhea (7.45 ± 0.38 d, 5.69 ± 0.46 d, and 5.62 ± 0.45 d for CON, ST, and LT calves, respectively). Calves in the CON group also experienced higher fecal scores (score of 0.64 ± 0.04) than ST (score of 0.53 ± 0.04) or LT (score of 0.49 ± 0.04) calves, especially at d 7. However, no differences were observed in other health-related measures. The time to reach first diarrhea and first respiratory illness was not different between treatments, nor was the time to recover from respiratory illness. The time to intervention with additional electrolytes or antimicrobials was not different between treatment groups. Furthermore, growth performance, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio were not different. No differences were found when comparing ST and LT, except in the defined daily dose of total antimicrobials received. Calves in the LT group received a higher overall dose than ST calves, and both ST and LT calves received a higher dose than CON calves, which received no prophylactic antimicrobials. Given that there were no differences in performance variables and no additional health benefits aside from reduced fecal scores in calves fed neomycin, current practices involving the use of antimicrobials on dairy and veal operations need to be considered more prudently.