Chlorine dioxide may be an alternative to acidification and chlorination for drinking water chemical disinfection in dairy beef bulls.

Alternative water disinfectants to chlorination need to be identified because its effectiveness is limited by water pH and potentially carcinogen by-products resulted from chlorination and organic compound reaction. The first study aimed to evaluate the effect of different drinking water chemical disinfection treatments on water quality, its potential hazard effects on animal health, water and feed consumption, and apparent total tract digestibility in dairy beef bulls fed high-concentrate diets. For 224 days, 24 Holstein bulls (176 ± 16.3 kg BW, and 149 ± 5.8 days of age) were individually assigned to one of four treatments with different drinking water chemical disinfectants: without disinfection (CTR); acidification and chlorination (ACCHL; 0.65 mL/L HPO and 0.14 mL/L NaClO 15%); hydrogen peroxide (PER; 0.15 mL/L); and chlorine dioxide (DIO; 2.50 mL/L). Data were analysed with a mixed-effects model. Treatments affected the chemical characteristics of the water: in ACCHL, pH was 6.60 and free residual chlorine was 0.75 mg/L; in PER, HO was 10.6 mg/L; and in DIO, ClO was 0.52 mg/L. Water physicochemical quality parameters in all treatments were below maximal thresholds established for safe water consumption by the Water Safety Royal Decree (RD 140/2003). In addition, the total coliform count of treated waters was reduced (P = 0.01) compared with CTR; moreover, ACCHL and DIO treatments were more effective in reducing total coliform count than PER. Dry matter intake tended (P = 0.07) to increase in DIO compared with CTR. Treatments did not affect blood parameters nor apparent total tract digestibility. The second study aimed to evaluate the potential benefit on animal performance of two drinking water disinfectants under commercial conditions in dairy beef crossbred Holstein bulls fed high-concentrate diets. Ninety-six animals (307 ± 4.4 kg BW, and 224 ± 1.8 days of age) were allocated to six pens for 140 days and assigned to one of two treatments: ACCHL, most common water disinfectant, and DIO. Data were analysed with a mixed-effects model. Water total coliform count and water consumption were similar between treatments. Concentrate intake was greater (P = 0.02) in ACCHL for the last 14 study days. Growth performance and carcass quality were similar between treatments. In summary, acidification and chlorination, HO, and ClO as drinking water disinfectants in dairy beef bulls had good disinfecting activity without detrimental effects on health and nutrient digestibility, and performance.