Influence of undegraded intake protein on reproductive performance of primiparous beef heifers maintained on stockpiled fescue pasture.

Strauch, T. A.; Scholljegerdes, E. J.; Patterson, David J.; Smith, Michael F.; Lucy, M.C.; Lamberson, W. R.; Williams, J. E.

doi:10.2527/2001.793574x

Cited by 18 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, forage DMI was similar (P = 0.45) regardless of supplement type, comparable to findings in the current study. However, Strauch et al (2001) reported heifers offered stockpiled tall fescue forage (11.7% CP) had increased prepartum forage DMI when heifers were supplemented with an additional 84 g/d (106 vs. 190 g/d) RUP for 64 d prior to calving compared with control heifers.…”

Section: Individual Feeding Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Summers

Meyer

Funston

2015

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 3-yr study was conducted to determine the effect of supplemental protein source on ADG, feed intake, calf birth BW, and subsequent pregnancy rate in pregnant beef heifers. Crossbred, Angus-based, AI-pregnant heifers (yr 1, n = 38; yr 2, n = 40; and yr 3, n = 36) were stratified by BW (450 ± 10 kg) and placed in a Calan Broadbent individual feeding system at approximately d 142 of gestation. Following a 25-d adaptation period, an 84-d feeding trial was conducted. Heifers were offered ad libitum grass hay (8 to 11% CP, DM basis) and no supplement (CON), 0.83 kg/d distillers-based supplement (HI), or 0.83 kg/d dried corn gluten-based supplement (LO). Supplements were formulated to be isocaloric, isonitrogenous (28% CP, DM basis), and equal in lipid content but differed in RUP, with HI (59% RUP) having greater levels of RUP than LO (34% RUP). Dry matter intake was also calculated based on feed NE values to account for different energy levels of the supplement compared with the control diet. Control heifers tended (P = 0.09) to consume less total DM than either supplement treatment. However, forage-only DMI was greater (P < 0.01) for CON heifers (9.94 ± 0.12 kg) compared with HI or LO heifers (8.50 and 8.34 ± 0.12 kg, respectively). Net energy DMI was less (P < 0.01) for CON heifers (4.98 ± 0.23 kg) compared with HI or LO heifers (5.43 and 5.35 ± 0.23 kg, respectively). Control heifers gained less (P < 0.01; 0.59 ± 0.14 kg/d) than either HI (0.82 ± 0.14 kg/d) or LO heifers (0.78 ± 0.14 kg/d), resulting in lower (501 ± 9 kg) BW (P < 0.01) than HI (519 ± 9 kg) heifers at the end of the feeding period. Calf birth BW was similar (P = 0.99) among treatments. At prebreeding, CON heifers weighed less (P < 0.03) than LO heifers. Cow BW was similar (P = 0.48) among treatments at pregnancy diagnosis, and final pregnancy rate was also similar (87%; P = 0.22). Protein supplementation increased ADG in pregnant heifers; however, calf birth BW and subsequent pregnancy rates were similar.

show abstract

Section: Individual Feeding Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Summers

Meyer

Funston

2015

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence of the effect of supplementation on post-partum reproductive performance has been equivocal. Delcurto et al (1990) and Strauch et al (2001) both showed little evidence for a decreased calving interval associated with protein supplementation, but Beaty et al (1994) and Sasser et al (1988) showed that increasing the crude protein (CP) Unfortunately, these studies do not represent long-term supplementation programmes or characterize variable stocking rates common to production systems in Mediterranean climates. We hypothesized that supplementation based upon body condition will result in similar performance to that with supplementation based upon forage availability and quality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of supplementation and stocking rate on body condition and production parameters of multiparous beef cows

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2005). Effects of supplementation and stocking rate on body condition and production parameters of multiparous beef cows. AbstractFall-calving multiparous Angus × Hereford cows 3 to 10 years of age were stratified by age in a three by two factorial treatment arrangement to evaluate the efficacy of modifying stocking rate and supplementation strategy to manage cow body condition and production parameters over a 5-year study. Efficacy was evaluated quarterly in association with calving, breeding, weaning, and mid way between weaning and calving ( i.e. in August). Three protein supplementation strategies (none, standard, strategic) were imposed across both a moderate (0·3 cows per ha) and a high (0·4 cows per ha) stocking rate. In the strategically supplemented group, protein supplement was provided to cows with a body condition score < 5·5 at the quarterly evaluations. There was an effect of supplementation on pregnancy rate, which in combination with previously established culling practices resulted in different age profiles amongst supplementation strategies in years 2 to 5 ( P < 0·01). Two statistical analyses were therefore conducted to dissociate the confounding effects of supplementation strategy and age. One model included the effect of stocking rate, supplementation strategy, production year, and all interactions; the second included the addition of age and its interactive effects. Stocking rate and supplementation strategy affected pregnancy rate in each of the models ( P = 0·003 and P = 0·10, respectively). Standard, non-supplemented and strategically supplemented animals had estimated pregnancy rates of 0·83, 0·76, and 0·79, respectively ( P = 0·10). The effects of nutrition on both calving interval and birth weight were independent of the model employed. Animals that were not supplemented had extended calving intervals ( P = 0·06), but there was no effect of stocking rate ( P > 0·10). Birth weight was not affected by supplementation strategy or stocking rate ( P > 0·10). The lower 205-day weights of calves on a heavy compared with moderate stocking rate was independent of age ( P = 0·02). However, the increased 205-day weight of calves born to strategically supplemented cows compared with those born to unsupplemented cows was only evident when data were not corrected for differences in age among groups ( P = 0·03). Likewise, analyses of cow condition parameters using models without and with age resulted in different interpretations. These results suggest that strategic and standard supplementation result in similar animal performance and that the improvement in herd productivity associated with altering stocking rate and supplementation may partially be due to altered herd age dynamics.

show abstract

“…Although limited, research investigating the effects of UIP supplements on endocrine responses indicates UIP supplements may alter metabolic (Sletmoen-Olson et al, 2000b;Kane et al, 2004;Reed et al, 2007) and reproductive (Strauch et al, 2001;Kane et al, 2004) endocrine patterns. Interestingly, Sletmoen-Olson et al (2000a) reported that calf birth weights were greater for cows fed moderate levels of UIP compared with those fed low or high amounts of UIP.…”

Section: Degradable and Undegradable Intake Proteinmentioning

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

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

Influence of undegraded intake protein on reproductive performance of primiparous beef heifers maintained on stockpiled fescue pasture.

Cited by 18 publications

References 29 publications

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Effects of supplementation and stocking rate on body condition and production parameters of multiparous beef cows

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About