Effects on animal performance and sward composition of mixed and sequential grazing of permanent pasture by cattle and sheep

Fraser, Malcolm; Davies, D. A. L.; Vale, J. E.; Hirst, W.M.; Wright, I. A.

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2006.11.006

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Disturbances by the grazer can shift the competition conditions among plants, as varying defoliation frequencies lead to different optima in adaptation to grazing. Generally, intensive grazing will induce the formation of a dense, well-tillered sward (Frame 1992;Matthew et al 2000;Nelson 2000). As a result, the vegetation composition usually differs between tall and short sward areas (e.g.…”

Section: Selective Grazingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytodiversity of temperate permanent grasslands: ecosystem services for agriculture and livestock management for diversity conservation

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant diversity has been reported to increase productivity. Farming practices aiming at conserving or increasing plant diversity are, however, usually less profitable than conventional ones. In this review, we aim to find reasons for this discrepancy, discuss ecosystem services of grassland phytodiversity that are useful for farmers, and ways of livestock management most beneficial for diversity. Under agricultural conditions, a clear effect of species richness on a site's primary or secondary production has not yet been demonstrated. Reasons could be that species numbers in permanent grassland are above the threshold of five species found effective in experimental plots or that the conditions are more in equilibrium with management than in weeded experimental plots. Other diversity effects on production stability, nutrient and water retention or product quality might convince farmers to increase diversity. However, these should be tested in agricultural situations, as most research has again been carried out in experimental plots. To enhance phytodiversity, grazing has been found superior over mowing, as selective grazing, treading and excreta deposition increase the heterogeneity of a sward and thus the niches available. Especially rotational grazing with intermediate intensity may be advantageous for phytodiversity. However, complex interactions between environmental conditions, sward composition, management and livestock behaviour make it difficult to forecast grazing effects. Thus, ecological and agricultural researchers should cooperate more, e.g. either in interdisciplinary projects or by hiring researchers from the respective other profession and thus diversifying research groups, in order to integrate agricultural management into biodiversity research and biodiversity measurements into agricultural research to 123Biodivers Conserv (2011) 20:3317-3339 DOI 10.1007 advance our understanding of how to make conservation and enhancement of grassland phytodiversity both feasible and sustainable.

show abstract

Section: Selective Grazingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytodiversity of temperate permanent grasslands: ecosystem services for agriculture and livestock management for diversity conservation

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fraser et al (2007) reported a gain in lamb performance of 30% more than the control for 3 consecutive years as a result of mixed grazing with cattle. Hamilton and Bath (1970) and Nolan and Connolly (1989) observed a gain of 10% of BW compared with the control for mixed grazing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…For example, the CP content was the same regardless of the management of the plots (mixed or control). These results may best be explained by a better use of the grass as a result of mixed grazing and improved complementary feeding between the two species (Goetsch et al, 2010), resulting in a decreased residual biomass.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, few studies have investigated mixed systems involving goats even though over 90% of goats are used for meat in developing countries, which is affected mainly by gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN), a major pathology in the tropics (Over et al, 1992;Hoste and TorresAcosta, 2011). Mixed grazing could be an efficient strategy for goat production in the pasture, as their vulnerability to GIN and selective behaviour is superior to those of sheep (Goetsch et al, 2010;Rutter, 2010). Complementarity in the feeding behaviour of associated species is expected to lead to a better quality of available biomass and thus promote animal production (Abaye et al, 1994;Sehested et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mixed grazing systems of goats with cattle in tropical conditions: an alternative to improving animal production in the pastureq

d'Alexis¹,

Périacarpin²,

Jackson

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed grazing systems combining sheep and cattle have shown better growth performance for one or both species. This observation has been attributed to their complementary feeding behaviour and the reduced host infection by gastrointestinal nematodes. Less attention has been paid to mixed grazing systems combining goats and cattle. Here, continuously grazing goats mixed with cattle (M) were compared with control goats reared alone (C) under tropical conditions. The comparison was conducted with gastrointestinal nematode-infected (I) and non-infected (nI) goats. Thus, the four treatments were cattle with gastrointestinal nematode-infected goats (MI), gastrointestinal nematode-infected goats alone (CI), cattle with non-infected goats (MnI) and non-infected goats (CnI). Average daily gain (ADG, g/day) and grass production were measured for the four groups of animals (six goats and two heifers treated with MI or MnI) grazing for 3 months on 4 subplots. Monthly measurements were performed over 5-day periods. This pattern was replicated in space for a second set of four subplots and in time for six successive cohorts of animals (bands 1 to 6). The ADG of goats in mixed grazing conditions was higher than controls irrespective of the infection status (32.6 v. 18.4 g/day for MI v. CI; 44.2 v. 33.5 g/day for MnI v. CnI). Concomitantly, the average biomass was lower for mixed grazing animals compared with controls (174 v. 170 for MI and MnI; 235 v. 208 for CI and CnI, respectively), suggesting better use of the sward. For daily BW gain (g/kg DM), mixed grazing also yielded better results than the control (1.88 v. 0.52 g BW/kg DM per day for MI v. CI; 2.08 v. 1.47 g BW/kg DM per day for MnI and CnI). Mixed grazing of goats and heifers offers a promising alternative for increasing goat and overall animal production as well as improving the management of pastures.Keywords: mixed grazing, BW, goat, agro-ecological management, tropical ImplicationsThis study conducted over 2 years showed a higher average daily gain of grazing goats pastured together with cattle compared with goats reared alone, considering either the individual gain or gain per hectare. This increased gain occurred irrespective of the infection status of the goats. Moreover, the biomass was lower in mixed grazing conditions, likely due to improved use of the pasture by goats that were mixed with cattle. These results suggest that integrated grazing could be employed as an alternative agroecological strategy to increase performance per hectare and control residual biomass. In addition, this strategy represents an important alternative to reduce the use of anthelmintics.

show abstract

“…In addition, different schools of thought describe mixed grazing as grazing simultaneously, while sequential grazing is grazing in succession (Fraser et al 2007). However, both methods apply the mixed exploitation of different livestock species (beef cattle, sheep, camels, etc.…”

Section: Co-grazing Camels With Cattlementioning

confidence: 99%

The biochemical and microbiological characteristics of rumen fluid from cattle co-grazed with and without camels as compared to that from the foregut of camels

Suyub¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-grazing is a common practice under many range conditions. The main advantage of co-grazing is to fully utilize the vegetation sources by taking advantage of the different preferences among animals towards plant species and parts. Hence, this study aimed to establish if co-grazing camels with cattle would lead to changes in the biochemical characteristics in the rumen contents of cattle, and result in different fermentation end products. Rumen contents were collected from two groups of animals at two different locations, the Runnymede Cattle Station at Richmond in northern Queensland, and the Meramist abattoir at Caboolture in Queensland. For the Richmond site, two groups of animals were sampled via stomach tube; cattle co-grazed with camels (n=6) and cattle grazed alone (n=6). For the Caboolture site, foregut contents from three groups of animals were sampled post mortem; camels co-grazed with cattle (n=6), cattle cograzed with camels (n=6), and camels grazed alone (n=6). The ratios of camel to cattle for the Richmond and the Caboolture sites were 1:49 and 1:14 respectively. These ratios were considered adequate for microbial transfer to occur.Foregut fluid samples from all animals were used to inoculate a pre-reduced medium containing Mitchell grass (Astrebla lappacea), Flinders grass (Iseilema spp.), or Lucerne hay (Medicago sativa). Measurements of gas production, volatile fatty acids, and dry matter digestibility were carried out following 48 or 96 h of in vitro incubation at 39 °C.Inocula from cattle co-grazed with camels from Richmond resulted in greater (P< 0.05) dry matter digestibility for Mitchell grass than cattle grazed alone and produced greater (P< 0.05) amounts of n-butyrate. On the other hand, inocula of camels co-grazed with cattle from Caboolture had higher in vitro dry matter digestibility for Mitchell grass and shared the potential for higher dry matter digestibility with cattle co-grazed with camels for lucerne hay. Camels co-grazed with cattle also produced more (P<0.05) n-Butyric acid in the Mitchell grass treatment compared to groups of camels grazed alone and cattle co-grazed with camels. The results from the biochemical analysis suggested that co-grazing may change the ecosystem of the foregut in a number of beneficial ways.A microbiological analysis was carried out to investigate the structure of the bacterial community in each group of animals with high throughput sequencing of 16s rRNA gene using 454 pyrosequencing technology. Using an open source software computational program provided by Quantitative Insights into Microbial Ecology (QIIME), not only was it possible to identify all microbial species within the foregut fluid samples but also it was possible for all data to be analysed and compared systematically.Further analyses to identify the different operational taxonomic units (OTUs) with a similarity threshold of 97% allowed the assessment of observed species (OTUs); species richness (Chao1); and phylogenetic diversity (PD) whole tree metric for each foregut fluid sa...

show abstract

Effects on animal performance and sward composition of mixed and sequential grazing of permanent pasture by cattle and sheep

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

Phytodiversity of temperate permanent grasslands: ecosystem services for agriculture and livestock management for diversity conservation

Phytodiversity of temperate permanent grasslands: ecosystem services for agriculture and livestock management for diversity conservation

Mixed grazing systems of goats with cattle in tropical conditions: an alternative to improving animal production in the pastureq

The biochemical and microbiological characteristics of rumen fluid from cattle co-grazed with and without camels as compared to that from the foregut of camels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About