Effects of Time of Supplementation on Beef Stocker Calves Grazing Ryegrass. II. Grazing Behavior and Dry Matter Intake

Scaglia, Guillermo; Boland, H.T.; Wyatt, W. E.

doi:10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30784-1

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the lower rates of N application in the present experiment, nutritive value of annual ryegrass was similar to those previously reported by Hafley (1996) but smaller than Scaglia et al (2009b). Notably, the latter work used three split applications of urea adding nearly twice the N compared to the present experiment.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Sampling procedures for forage mass, height, and estimated DMI followed Scaglia, Gillespie, Boland, and Wyatt (2009a); Scaglia, Boland, and Wyatt (2009b). Forage mass was determined at the beginning of the trial (d 0) and every 15 d thereafter using the double sampling technique as described by Sanderson, Rotz, Fultz, and Rayburn (2001), and Vendramini et al (2006).…”

Section: Supplement Pasture Management Sampling and Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stocking Rate and Energy Supplementation Effects on Replacement Beef Heifers Grazing Annual Ryegrass

Scaglia¹

2019

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of breeding heifers is a critical point in the beef cattle enterprise. The effect of stocking rate and supplementation strategy at high stocking rate were evaluated on Brahman influenced heifers (BW = 250±3.6 kg) continuously stocked on annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam. cv. ‘Nelson’) with the following treatments in a completely randomized design with 3 replicates: 1) LOW stocking rate (2.5 heifers/ha); 2) MED stocking rate (5.0 heifers/ha); 3) HIGH stocking rate (7.5 heifers/ha); 4) High stocking rate + 1% BW of ground corn (HIGH+C); and 5) High stocking rate + 1% BW of soybean hulls (HIGH+SBH). Dry matter intake was greater (P = 0.03) for heifers in LOW and MED, while those in HIGH, regardless receiving supplement or not, were the lowest. Heifers grazing LOW and MED did not differ (P = 0.06) in ADG. Supplemented heifers and those in MED produced the most beef per unit of land; however MED and HIGH were not significantly different. Grazing days was greater for LOW and supplemented heifers. There was a year effect for ADG, beef production, and grazing days which were smaller in year 1; however years 2 and 3 were not different (P > 0.05) between them except in production per hectare. Lower stocking rates allowed for appropriate BW gains. Level of supplementation affected DMI from ryegrass, replacing it and affecting animal performance. Weather conditions had an impact on forage production, hence affecting animal performance. Supplementation programs must consider level and type of energy supplement used.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Supplement Pasture Management Sampling and Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stocking Rate and Energy Supplementation Effects on Replacement Beef Heifers Grazing Annual Ryegrass

Scaglia¹

2019

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, methods to measure a trait such as palatability can be difficult to apply in large breeding populations because they require observations such as counting bites taken on a per plot basis (Scaglia et al, 2009). However, methods to measure a trait such as palatability can be difficult to apply in large breeding populations because they require observations such as counting bites taken on a per plot basis (Scaglia et al, 2009).…”

Section: Winter Forage Oat-breeding Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Grazing preference or palatability could also be a selection criterion that may add a positive value to animal production. However, methods to measure a trait such as palatability can be difficult to apply in large breeding populations because they require observations such as counting bites taken on a per plot basis (Scaglia et al, 2009). However, future research in the application of automated, precise grazing behavior (global positioning system and/ or telemetry technology) would make selection for animal palatability and preference a reality.…”

Section: Winter Forage Oat-breeding Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improvement of Oat as a Winter Forage Crop in the Southern United States

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oat (Avena sativa L.) is a cool season annual grass species produced for grain and forage in many countries. The majority of oat cultivars in the United States are spring types grown primarily for grain production. However, in the southern region of the United States, much of the oat production consists of winter types that are grown for grain or animal forage, and in some cases as a dual‐purpose crop. As with other small grain crops used for forage production, the improvement of grazing tolerance, forage yield, and forage quality have not been major goals in U.S. oat breeding programs even though oat forage is a rich source of protein, vitamin B1, phosphorus, iron, and other minerals. However, breeding and research efforts for oat have recently been revitalized because of increased awareness of the positive health benefits associated with oat consumed as a whole grain food. Strengthening the molecular approaches for forage oat breeding in the southern United States could have a large impact on cattle production systems and could increase the production area planted to oat. Although many of the molecular tools developed for the improvement of grain production could be applicable to winter forage oat breeding, the tools are currently an untapped resource within the forage breeding community. The objectives of this manuscript are to examine the production of forage oat, the current state of forage oat breeding, and how molecular tools could aid and strengthen the development of improved forage oat cultivars.

show abstract

“…The main factors that affect nutritional demands are forage availability and quality (AHARONI et al, 2004), stocking rate (BROSH et al, 2006), supplementation (SCAGLIA et al, 2009), paddock size (HUNT et al, 2007, slope (BROSH et al, 2010) and weather (BROSH et al, 2006). CSIRO (2007) reports that under extreme grazing conditions the energy requirement for maintenance may be increased by about 50%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<b>Requirement of energy and protein of beef cattle on tropical pasture</b> - doi: 10.4025/actascianimsci.v35i4.21143

Valente

Paulino

Detmann

et al. 2013

Acta Sci. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Protein and energy requirements of beef cattle, aged between 4 and 18 months old, on tropical pastures, were estimated. Forty-six Nellore calves (138.3 ± 3.4 kg BW and 90-150 days old), kept on pasture, were distributed in a maintenance group (restricted feeding) or in nutritional plans, receiving a supplements with different amounts of protein and carbohydrate or non-supplemented. The net energy requirement for weight gain (NE g ) was obtained by linear regression of logarithm of retained energy as a function of logarithm of empty body weight gain. The net energy requirement for maintenance (NE m ) was estimated by the exponential relation between heat production and metabolizable energy intake. Net protein requirement for weight gain (RP) was estimated by multiple linear regression of retained protein in the weight gain of empty body (EBWG) and retained energy. The efficiency of metabolizable energy (ME) used for maintenance and for weight gain was 0.55 and 0.26, respectively. The ME requirement for maintenance was 124 kcal EBW Exigências de proteína e energia de bovinos de corte em pastagem tropical RESUMO. Objetivou-se estimar as exigências de proteína e energia de bovinos de corte em pastagens tropicais dos 4 até 18 meses de idade. Foram utilizados 46 bezerros Nelore (138,3 ± 3,4 kg e 90-150 dias de idade) em pastagem, distribuídos em um grupo de mantença (alimentação restrita) ou em planos nutricionais, recebendo suplemento com diferentes quantidades de proteína e carboidrato, ou não suplementados. A exigência de energia líquida para ganho de peso (EL g ) foi obtida por regressão linear do logaritmo da energia retida em função do logaritmo do ganho de peso corporal vazio. A exigência de energia líquida para mantença (EL m ) foi estimada pela relação exponencial entre a produção de calor e consumo de energia metabolizável. A exigência líquida de proteína para ganho de peso (PR) foi estimada pela regressão linear múltipla da proteína retida no ganho de peso de corpo vazio (GPCVZ) e da energia retida. A eficiência de uso da energia metabolizável (EM) para mantença foi de 0,55 e para o ganho de peso foi de 0,26. A exigência de EM para mantença foi de 124 kcal PCVZ

show abstract

Effects of Time of Supplementation on Beef Stocker Calves Grazing Ryegrass. II. Grazing Behavior and Dry Matter Intake

Cited by 22 publications

References 36 publications

Stocking Rate and Energy Supplementation Effects on Replacement Beef Heifers Grazing Annual Ryegrass

Stocking Rate and Energy Supplementation Effects on Replacement Beef Heifers Grazing Annual Ryegrass

Improvement of Oat as a Winter Forage Crop in the Southern United States

<b>Requirement of energy and protein of beef cattle on tropical pasture</b> - doi: 10.4025/actascianimsci.v35i4.21143

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About