Economic Viability Analysis of an Oral Anthelmintic Treatment for Cattle in Feedlot

Matheus Takemi Muchon Nakatani, Mario Henrique Conde, Mariana Green de Freitas, Flávia Carolina Fávero, Lucas Chaves de Paula, Marcos Da Silva Cabrera, Marina de Nadai Bonin Gomes, Ricardo Carneiro Brumatti, Daniel de Castro Rodrigues and Fernando de Almeida Borges

Journal of Agricultural Studies, 2021, vol. 9, issue 2, 188-204

Abstract: The economic viability of a commercial oral anthelmintic suspension containing 10% fenbendazole was evaluated in Angus x Nelore cattle in a feedlot. Two groups of 37 animals (treated and non-treated) were formed. A random-block design was used based on initial weight, egg count per gram of feces (EPG) and carcass grade. EPG counts and the determination of weight were performed on Days 0, 42 and 122. Carcass grade and yield were determined on the day of slaughter. Economic viability was evaluated using cost-effectiveness, sensitivity and financial analyses, considering three economic scenarios- most likely (M), optimistic (O) and pessimistic (P). The anthelmintic achieved 99.89% efficacy regarding EPG reduction. The animals exhibited an increase of 20.7 kg in live weight, 20.2 kg in live weight gain and 0.166 kg in daily weight gain (p < 0.05). No effects were found on yield or carcass grade (p > 0.05). The genus Haemonchus predominated at the onset of the study, whereas only the genus Cooperia was found after treatment. A net return of 14.60 USD per animal was found in the treated group, which remained viable under O, M and P scenarios, with respective differences of 18.92%, 12.86% and 91.15% in gross profit. The treatment was financially superior under all scenarios (real, M, O and P), with reductions of 1.89, 1.04, 0.48 and 16.39 years for the recovery of the initial investment. These results demonstrate the importance of economic analysis methods in the evaluation and selection of anthelmintics.

Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/18032/14265 (application/pdf)
http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/18032 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mth:jas888:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:188-204

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Agricultural Studies is currently edited by Richard Williams

More articles in Journal of Agricultural Studies from Macrothink Institute
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Technical Support Office ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).