Effects of supplements that contain increasing amounts of metabolizable protein with or without Ca-propionate salt on postpartum interval and nutrient partitioning in young beef cows1

Waterman, R. C.; Sawyer, J. E.; Mathis, C.P.; Hawkins, D. E.; Donart, Gary B.; Petersen, M. K.

doi:10.2527/2006.842433x

Cited by 32 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to a concurrent drought at time this study was conducted cows and calves were sold after samples were collected and no reproductive assessments were conducted. Cows were individually milked with a portable milking machine at approximately d 90 postpartum following daily feeding of hay on a day after protein supplementation using a modified weigh-suckle-weigh technique [5]. Cows were injected with 1 mL of oxytocin (20 IU; Vedo, Inc., St. Joseph, MO) i.m.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delaying Postpartum Supplementation in Cows Consuming Low-Quality Forage Does Not Alter Cow and Calf Productivity

Mulliniks¹,

Sawyer²,

Waterman³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reducing the amount of supplemental feed postpartum without affecting productivity may enhance profitability of cow-calf operations. Therefore, sixteen 2-yr-old fall calving cows were used to evaluate effects of delaying postpartum supplementation on milk production, serum metabolites, and cow and calf BW change. Cows were stratified by calving date and randomly assigned to one of two treatments: 908 g/d of a 46% CP supplement beginning 5 d postpartum (Supp5, n = 7); or 908 g/d of the same supplement beginning 30 d postpartum (Supp30, n = 9). Supplements were formulated to provide 425 g/d of CP with 225 g coming from ruminally undegradable protein (RUP), and were fed twice weekly. Cows were daily fed 8.2 kg chopped sudangrass hay (5.5% CP, 74% NDF, OM basis) during lactation. Cows and calves were weighed before feeding on two consecutive days on d 0, d 30, and d 80 postpartum. Milk production and constituents were evaluated on d 90. Cow BW was not different at d 0 (P = 0.21) and 80 (P = 0.12) between treatment groups. Cows receiving supplement starting on d 5 postpartum were heavier (P = 0.04) than Supp30 cows on d 30. However, no differences (P ≥ 0.17) were found in BW change or ADG during the duration of the study. Milk production was similar (P = 0.99) for postpartum supplementation treatments. No differences (P ≥ 0.27) were observed in milk fat, lactose, protein, or solids-non-fat. However, there was a tendency (P = 0.09) for milk urea nitrogen to be greater for cows receiving supplement on d 5 than d 30 of lactation. Serum urea nitrogen was greater (P = 0.02) in cows receiving Supp5 than cows receiving Supp30. Serum non-esterified fatty acid (NEFA) and glucose concentrations were not different (P ≥ 0.40) between treatment groups. Calf BW and average daily gain (ADG) was not influenced (P ≥ 0.81) by timing of initial postpartum supplementation. These results indicate that withholding supplementation during the first 30 d postpartum 643may change pattern of cow BW loss without affecting net BW loss, milk production, or calf growth. Therefore, timing of postpartum supplementation can be manipulated to reduce amount of feed provided without sacrificing cow or calf productivity.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delaying Postpartum Supplementation in Cows Consuming Low-Quality Forage Does Not Alter Cow and Calf Productivity

Mulliniks¹,

Sawyer²,

Waterman³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar responses to DIP and MP were observed, as previously discussed, when MOEF was adjusted. In ad- dition, we evaluated results from Waterman et al (2006) for young lactating cows in a southwestern production system and observed poor agreement with actual vs. predicted 1996 Beef NRC ADG. The Beef NRC predicted the young lactating cows would lose 1.26 kg/d, whereas cows actually only lost 0.7 kg/d.…”

Section: Current Beef Nrc Predictions and The Existing Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both primary sources of dietary protein contribute to the MP supply delivered to the host animal, as will be discussed in subsequent paragraphs. Nutrient partitioning can be influenced by the type of protein supplied (Hunter and Magner, 1988;Miner and Petersen, 1989;Miner et al, 1990), the use of rumen-protected AA (Richardson and Hatfield, 1978;Waterman et al, 2007bWaterman et al, , 2012, or a supplement that supplies specific nutrients that target both an energy and protein deficiency in the host animal (Waterman et al, 2006;Mulliniks et al, 2011Mulliniks et al, , 2013.…”

Section: Need For Accurate Prediction Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

BEEF SPECIES SYMPOSIUM: An assessment of the 1996 Beef NRC: Metabolizable protein supply and demand and effectiveness of model performance prediction of beef females within extensive grazing systems1,2,3

Waterman

Caton

Löest

et al. 2014

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interannual variation of forage quantity and quality driven by precipitation events influence beef livestock production systems within the Southern and Northern Plains and Pacific West, which combined represent 60% (approximately 17.5 million) of the total beef cows in the United States. The beef cattle requirements published by the NRC are an important tool and excellent resource for both professionals and producers to use when implementing feeding practices and nutritional programs within the various production systems. The objectives of this paper include evaluation of the 1996 Beef NRC model in terms of effectiveness in predicting extensive range beef cow performance within arid and semiarid environments using available data sets, identifying model inefficiencies that could be refined to improve the precision of predicting protein supply and demand for range beef cows, and last, providing recommendations for future areas of research. An important addition to the current Beef NRC model would be to allow users to provide region-specific forage characteristics and the ability to describe supplement composition, amount, and delivery frequency. Beef NRC models would then need to be modified to account for the N recycling that occurs throughout a supplementation interval and the impact that this would have on microbial efficiency and microbial protein supply. The Beef NRC should also consider the role of ruminal and postruminal supply and demand of specific limiting AA. Additional considerations should include the partitioning effects of nitrogenous compounds under different physiological production stages (e.g., lactation, pregnancy, and periods of BW loss). The intent of information provided is to aid revision of the Beef NRC by providing supporting material for changes and identifying gaps in existing scientific literature where future research is needed to enhance the predictive precision and application of the Beef NRC models.

show abstract

“…Milk collection began~27 days (earliest date to acquire selection criteria previously mentioned) after parturition (average 16 April each year) and continued at 14-day intervals for 112 days using a technique previously described (Waterman et al, 2006). In brief, on the day of each milking, cows were gathered from pasture, calves were removed and cows were administered an i.m.…”

Section: Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Weight of milk from the second milking was recorded, and an aliquot (20 ml) was retained for analysis of milk protein, lactose, fat, solids non-fat and milk urea N by Rocky Mountain DHIA (Logan, UT, USA). Daily milk yield was estimated from the 4 h milk production yield (kg/day) and composition (g/day) was calculated by multiplying Waterman, Geary, Petersen and MacNeil constituent concentration by daily milk production (Appeddu et al, 1997;Waterman et al, 2006).…”

Section: Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of reduced in utero and post-weaning nutrition on milk yield and composition in primiparous beef cows

Waterman

Geary

Petersen

et al. 2017

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development and long-term retention of replacement beef females in a semi-arid environment are of a major concern for extensive livestock producers. Furthermore, the demand of not only producing a thriving, healthy calf, but having sufficient milk to support that first calf is essential. To address this issue, we conducted a 3-year study measuring milk production and milk constituent yields in primiparous beef heifers ( n = 48; 16/year reared under two different feeding regimens) raising steer calves. Cows received 1.8 or 1.2 kg/day winter supplementation for~80 day before parturition and their heifer calves were then randomly assigned to heifer development treatments that provided ad libitum (AL) or 80% (less than ad libitum (LAL)) of ad libitum feed post weaning. Heifers developed on the AL treatment also received 1.8 kg/day winter supplementation for life, whereas heifers developed on the LAL treatment received 1.2 kg/day winter supplementation for life. Milk production of primiparous cows was measured with a portable milking machine every other week from days 27 to 125 postpartum. Milk yield for the 125-day lactation period was calculated from area under the lactation curve approximated by trapezoidal summation. The ANOVA model included in utero winter nutrition, post-weaning heifer development treatment, year and their interaction. Heifers subjected to the AL treatment reached peak milk yield~12.3 day later ( P = 0.02) than heifers receiving LAL treatment. In addition, an in utero nutrition × post-weaning heifer treatment × year interaction existed ( P ⩽ 0.04) for milk peak yield, average daily milk yield (kg/day) and nutrient composition (protein, lactose, fat, solids non-fat, g/day). These interactions manifest as changes in magnitude and rank across the 3 years of the study. Livestock production in extensive environments is subject to variations in seasonal precipitation patterns and quality and quantity of grazeable forage and these fluctuations have a large impact on milk yield. In summary, the gestational nutritional environment of a heifer's mother may interact with the heifer's nutrient consumption during post-weaning growth and the current year to trigger variation in year-to-year milk production.Keywords: heifer development, milk and constituent yield, primiparous beef cow ImplicationsRaising livestock in an extensive rangeland environment relies heavily on the nutritive quality of grazeable forage. However, livestock producers in arid and semi-arid environments often encounter times of the year when grazeable forage quality is inadequate to meet animal requirements. Therefore, producers often resort to supplementing livestock with harvested feeds, which ultimately increases cost of production. A challenge for researchers is to provide producers with new and acceptable approaches to sustain optimal levels of production while ensuring economic feasibility. Present research suggests that obtaining an optimal level of additional feed inputs rather than maximizing intake has a similar impact on primip...

show abstract

Effects of supplements that contain increasing amounts of metabolizable protein with or without Ca-propionate salt on postpartum interval and nutrient partitioning in young beef cows1

Cited by 32 publications

References 35 publications

Delaying Postpartum Supplementation in Cows Consuming Low-Quality Forage Does Not Alter Cow and Calf Productivity

Delaying Postpartum Supplementation in Cows Consuming Low-Quality Forage Does Not Alter Cow and Calf Productivity

BEEF SPECIES SYMPOSIUM: An assessment of the 1996 Beef NRC: Metabolizable protein supply and demand and effectiveness of model performance prediction of beef females within extensive grazing systems1,2,3

Effects of reduced in utero and post-weaning nutrition on milk yield and composition in primiparous beef cows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About