Characterization of water intake and water efficiency in beef cattle1,2

Abstract

In the future, water may not be as readily available due to increases in competition from a growing human population, wildlife, and other agricultural sectors, making selection for water efficiency of beef cattle increasingly important. Substantial selection emphasis has recently been placed on feed efficiency in an effort to reduce production costs, but no emphasis has been placed on making cattle more water efficient due to lack of data. Thus, the objective of this study was to calculate water efficiency metrics for cattle and evaluate their relationship to growth, feed intake (FI), and feed efficiency. Individual daily FI and water intake (WI) records were collected on 578 crossbred steers over a 70-d test period. Animals with low water intake ate less feed, had lower gains, and were more water efficient (as defined by water to gain ratio, W/G, and residual water intake, RWI). However, the amount of water consumed by animals had minimal phenotypic relationship with feed efficiency (residual feed intake [RFI], R2 = 0.1050 and feed to gain ratio (F/G) ratio R2 = 0.0726). Cattle that had low DMI consumed less water, had lower gains, had lower RFI, and had higher F/G. The level of feed consumed had minimal relationship with water efficiency. WI, W/G, RWI, and ADG had moderate heritability estimates of 0.39, 0.39, 0.37, and 0.37, respectively. High heritability estimates were observed for DMI and RFI (0.67 and 0.65, respectively). Feed to gain had a low heritability estimate of 0.16. WI had a strong positive genetic correlation with W/G (0.99) and RWI (0.88), thus selecting for decreased WI should also make cattle more water efficient. The genetic correlation between WI and ADG was 0.05; thus, selecting for low WI cattle should have little effect on growth. There is a low to moderate genetic correlation between WI and DMI (0.34). RWI has a positive genetic correlation with W/G ratio (0.89) and F/G ratio (0.42) and is negatively genetically correlated with RFI (−0.57). Water to gain and F/G had a strong positive genetic correlation (0.68). RFI has a positive genetic correlation with W/G ratio (0.37) and F/G (0.88). Minimal antagonisms seem to be present between WI and ADG, although it should be noted that standard errors were large and often not significantly different from zero due to the small sample size. However, care should be taken to ensure that unintended changes do not occur in DMI or other production traits and incorporation of WI into a selection index would likely prove to be the most effective method for selection.

Effects of Feeding and Drinking Behavior on Performance and Carcass Traits in Beef Cattle

“…Water intake (L/d) was measured daily and the residual water intake (RWI) was calculated as the residual of the linear regression equation of average WI on DMI and BW 0.75 (RWI DMI ), as described in Ahlberg et al [ 25 ]. The animals were classified as high-efficiency (RWI < 0) and low-efficiency (RWI > 0) animals.…”

A Smart Sensing System of Water Quality and Intake Monitoring for Livestock and Wild Animals

“…So far, little has been accomplished in quantifying individual animal variability and efficiency of water intake in rangeland environments. In recent years, a limited amount of studies have attempted to address the genetic influence on water consumption in beef cattle [ 9 , 10 , 12 ]. Nevertheless, the technologies utilized in these studies were limited to confinement situations.…”

Comparison of two water measurement systems for feedlot beef cattle

“…Baxter et al (2017) indicate that water-use quantification in beef meat production is important because it is a commodity often criticized for inefficient input conversion. Quantifying water use in ruminant production is a crucial step for identifying strategies for water use (Ahlberg et al 2019;West and Baxter, 2018;Legesse et al, 2017).…”