The Veterinary Record Link to Vetlife website
HOME CURRENT ISSUE TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SEARCH SUBSCRIPTIONS JOBS FEEDBACK HELP
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mateusen, B.
Right arrow Articles by Van Goubergen, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mateusen, B.
Right arrow Articles by Van Goubergen, M.

The Veterinary Record, Vol 151, Issue 5, 135-140
Copyright © 2002 by British Veterinary Association

Effectiveness of treatment with lincomycin hydrochloride and/or vaccination against Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae for controlling chronic respiratory disease in a herd of pigs

B. Mateusen DVM1, D. Maes DVM, MS, MSc, PhD1, M. Verdonck DVM1, A. de Kruif DVM, PhD1, and M. Van Goubergen DVM2

1 Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
2 Pharmacia Animal Health, Rijksweg 12, B-2870 Puurs, Belgium

A herd of pigs infected with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae was used in a double-blind randomised trial to assess the effectiveness of three control strategies against chronic respiratory disease in growing-finishing pigs. One group of 61 pigs received 220 ppm lincomycin hydrochloride in the feed from day 71 to day 91, a second group was vaccinated against M hyopneumoniae at four and 28 days of age, and a third group received both treatments; a fourth group was left untreated as a control. Throughout the nursery-finishing period (day 29 to slaughter) the average daily weight gain and feed conversion rate of all the treated groups were slightly better than in the controls, but there were no significant differences between them. There were no significant differences between the treated groups in terms of clinical signs, serology, pathology or mortality, which was very low throughout the trial.







HOME CURRENT ISSUE TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SEARCH SUBSCRIPTIONS JOBS FEEDBACK HELP
Copyright © 2002 British Veterinary Association