. 2003. Yield, quality and cost effectiveness of using fertilizer and/or alfalfa to improve meadow bromegrass pastures. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 83: 291-298. A 4-yr study was conducted to determine the effects of forage type and fertilization on yield and quality of dryland pastures on the Canadian prairies. Pastures contained either meadow bromegrass (Bromus biebersteinii Roem & Schult.) (G) or alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.)-meadow bromegrass (A) and were either unfertilized (U) or fertilized (F) in order to increase the availability of essential plant nutrients to recommended levels. Average pasture yields (1995)(1996)(1997)(1998) of AF, AU, GF and GU treatments were 3.88, 3.12, 3.95 and 1.94 ± 0.19 t DM ha -1 and average carrying capacities were 200.4, 163.9, 208.7 and 127.6 ± 3.3 cow-days ha -1 , respectively. Alfalfa content declined (P < 0.05) over the 4 yr from 75.4 and 84.1% in 1995 to 32.5 and 40.3% in 1998 for AF and AU pastures, respectively. Simple incorporation of alfalfa into grass pastures (AU) improved carrying capacity by 28% and met the nutritional requirements of lactating beef cows at no additional cost. Fertilization of meadow bromegrass pastures (GF) improved the carrying capacity by 64% and met the nutrient requirements of lactating beef cows. Incorporating alfalfa with fertilization (AF) improved carrying capacity of pasture by 57% and met the nutrient requirements of lactating beef cows. Both the AF and GF treatments entailed significant financial risk as they were only cost-effective strategies when precipitation was not limiting. The AU treatment did not entail financial risk and was always a cost-effective treatment. (AU) améliore à elle seule la capacité de charge de 28 % et permet de répondre aux besoins nutritifs des vaches de boucherie en lactation, sans coût supplémentaire. L'amendement des pâturages de brome (GF) relève la capacité de charge de 64 % et permet lui aussi de satisfaire les besoins nutritifs des vaches de boucherie en lactation. Combinée à la fertilisation, l'addition de luzerne (AF) augmente la capacité de charge des pâturages de 57 %, ce qui satisfait les exigences nutritives des animaux. Les traitements AF et GF entraînent toutefois des risques financiers sensibles, ces stratégies n'étant rentables que lorsque les précipitations sont suffisantes. Le traitement AU n'engendre aucun risque financier et est toujours rentable.
. 2004. Management strategies to improve cow-calf productivity on meadow bromegrass pastures. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 529-535. A 4-yr experiment was conducted to determine the effects of fertilization, incorporation of a legume and use of the Rumensin ® -controlled release capsules (CRC) on productivity of cow-calf pairs grazing meadow bromegrass (Bromus biebersteinii Roem & Schult.). Four pasture treatments (T), alfalfa-grass fertilized (AF), alfalfa-grass unfertilized (AU), grass-only fertilized (GF) and grass-only unfertilized (GU), each replicated twice were compared. The eight 3.7-ha pastures were split into five equally sized paddocks and rotationally stocked with first-calf cows in 1995 and 1998, and with mature cows in 1996 and 1997. Half of the cows on each pasture received a Rumensin ® CRC 1 wk prior to the start of the pasture season. Cow DMI was not influenced by fertilization or incorporation of a legume. However, cows treated with monensin consumed less (2.3% BW) compared to the control cows (2.5% BW, P < 0.05). Incorporation of alfalfa and fertilization improved pasture quality and resulted in higher CP and lower NDF content in forage selected by the animals. Monensin improved (P < 0.05) cow average daily gain (ADG, kg d -1 ) when grazing unfertilized grass and alfalfa-grass pastures, but did not influence gains of cows on fertilized pastures. Fertilizer application, legume incorporation and monensin administration did not affect milk yield or milk composition. Despite differences in diet quality, calf ADG for AU, AF, and GF were similar. However, calf ADG was lower for GU pastures (P < 0.05), probably as a result of the high fibre and low protein content of this pasture treatment. Both incorporation of alfalfa and fertilization increased total calf gain (kg ha -1 ); the greatest improvement was associated with fertilization. There were, however, economic advantages to legume incorporation, as the cost of the additional gain for GF and AF pastures averaged $1.08 and $0.79 kg -1 ha -1 , and no extra costs were incurred for AU. ). Pour cela, ils ont comparé quatre traitements étudiés en double : la graminée et de la luzerne avec fertilisation (AF), la graminée et de la luzerne sans fertilisation (AU), la graminée avec fertilisation (GF) et la graminée sans fertilisation (GU). Les huit pâturages de 3,7 hectares ont été scindés en cinq enclos de superficie identique et on y a mis à l'herbe, en rotation, des vaches primipares (1995 et 1998) ou des vaches matures (1996 et 1997). La moitié des sujets de chaque enclos a reçu des capsules de Rumensin ® à libéra-tion lente une semaine avant que débute la paissance. La fertilisation et l'incorporation d'une légumineuse n'affectent pas l'ingestion de matière sèche par la vache. Toutefois, les animaux recevant du monensin mangent moins (2,3 % du poids corporel) que les vaches témoins (2,5 % du poids corporel, P < 0,05). L'incorporation de luzerne et la fertilisation améliorent la qualité du pâturage tout en augmentant la concentration de protéines brutes et en ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.