Affiliation:
1. Institute of Animal Nutrition, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Bischofsholer Damm 15, 30173 Hannover, Germany
Abstract
One of the possible roles of secondary plant metabolites, including toxins, is facilitating plant–animal communication. Lethal cases of pasture poisoning show that the message is not always successfully conveyed. As the focus of poisoning lies in the clinical aspects, the external circumstances of pasture poisoning are widely unknown. To document poisoning conditions in cattle, sheep, goats, and horses on pastures and to compile a checklist of plants involved in either poisoning or co-existence (zero poisoning), published case reports were evaluated as primary sources. The number of affected animal individuals was estimated within abundance classes from 0 to more than 100. The checklist of poisonous plants comprised 52 taxa. Of these, 13 taxa were deemed safe (no reference was found indicating poisoning), 11 taxa were associated with evidence-based zero poisoning (positive list), and 28 taxa were associated with poisoning (negative list). Nine plant taxa caused poisoning in more than 100 animal individuals. Zero poisoning accounted for 40% and poisoning accounted for 60% of a total of 85 cases. Poisoning was most often associated with a limited choice of feed (24.7%), followed by overgrazing (12.9%), seasonally scarce feed (10.6%), and co-ingestion of grass (4.7%). Hunger interferes with plant–animal co-existence, while zero poisoning improves it. In conclusion, poisonous plants in pastures may communicate their toxicity if the animals have enough alternative feed plants. An individual animal might utterly perceive the communication of toxicity by the plant species but be forced to ignore the message owing to a limited choice of feed options.
Funder
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Subject
General Veterinary,Animal Science and Zoology
Reference140 articles.
1. Ingebrigtsen, K. (2008). Bioactive Compounds in Plants—Benefits and Risks for Man and Animals, The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters.
2. Pain, S., and Revell, D.K. (2009). Fodder Quality Specifications: Identifying Predictors of Preference between Hays.
3. Effects of monoterpene odors on food selection by red deer calves (Cervus elaphus);Elliott;J. Chem. Ecol.,1987
4. Effects of volatile compounds on consumption of alfalfa pellets by sheep1;Estell;J. Anim. Sci.,1998
5. Food preferences in farm animals: Why don’t they always choose wisely?;Forbes;Proc. Nutr. Soc.,1995
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献