Prediction of water intake to <i>Bos indicus</i> beef cattle raised under tropical conditions1

Zanetti, Diego; Prados, Laura Franco; Menezes, Ana Clara B; Silva, Breno C; Pacheco, M.V.C.; Silva, Flavia A S; Silva, Luiz Fernando Costa e; Detmann, Edênio; Engle, T. E.; Filho, S. C. Valadares

doi:10.1093/jas/skz003

Cited by 26 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 51 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The average daily consumption observed in Experiment 1 is similar to that observed by Zanetti et al (2019) that evaluated Nellore cattle consumption using the same electronic drinker model of this study in tropical climate conditions. Authors measured an average DWI of 16.7 L day -1 and estimated the water intake from equations developed from databases with predominantly Bos taurus cattle.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

Comparison of two water measurement systems for feedlot beef cattle

Palhares¹,

Morelli²,

Novelli³

et al. 2021

Rev. ambiente água

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to compare cattle drinking water consumption collected electronically with that of direct human observation using water metres and to analyse whether an automated system compensates due to its greater precision. The study was conducted in the feedlot of Embrapa Pecuaria Sudeste. The reference unit had four pens: two with electronic drinkers and two with water metres. Experiment 1 utilised 52 Nelore steers and Experiment 2 utilised 44 Canchim steers. Nelore fed a conventional diet, the automated system median daily water intake (DWI) was higher than for animals drinking from the water metre, 17.9 L day-1 and 15.6 L day-1. The reverse was observed for animals fed the co-product diet, the automated system median DWI was 18.9 L day-1 and in the water metre pen was 23.0 L day-1. When the Canchim drank from water metres, the median DWI was lower than with the automated system group, 25.9 L day-1 and 27.8 L day-1, respectively. In Experiment 1, there was a statistical difference between the two sets of equipment for both diets. In Experiment 2, the animals were the same breed, had similar weights and were fed the same diet. There was no statistical difference between the equipment in these conditions. The results indicate that the water meter can have the same performance as high technology at a much lower cost. If a more simplified system for measuring water consumption has the same performance as an automated system, this will justify its use with environmental and economic advantages.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

Comparison of two water measurement systems for feedlot beef cattle

Palhares¹,

Morelli²,

Novelli³

et al. 2021

Rev. ambiente água

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although several models have been developed since the original Beckett and Oltjen (1993) water assessment, Winchester and Morris (1956) remains one of the most reliable water models to predict beef cattle water intake on large scales ( Spencer et al, 2017 ; Ward et al, 2017 ; Zanetti et al, 2019 ). As such the Winchester and Morris (1956) model was used in the present model to predict total water intake by class of cattle ( Table 2 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How advances in animal efficiency and management have affected beef cattle’s water intensity in the United States: 1991 compared to 2019

Klopatek

Oltjen

2022

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Updating the static model by Beckett and Oltjen (1993), we determined that from 1991 to 2019, U.S. beef cattle blue water consumption per kg of beef decreased by 37.6%. Total water use for the U.S. cattle herd decreased by 29%. As with the 1993 model, blue water use included direct water intake by animals, water applied for irrigation of crops that were consumed by beef cattle, water applied to irrigated pasture, and water used to process animals at marketing. Numbers of cattle, crop production, and irrigation data were used from USDA census and survey data. On January 1, 2019, a total of 31.7 million beef cows and 5.8 million replacement heifers were in U.S. breeding herds, and 26 million animals were fed annually. In total, the U.S. beef cattle herd (feedlot and cull cows) produced 7.7 billion kg of boneless beef, an increase of 10% since 1991. Beef cattle directly consumed 599 billion L of water per year. Feedlot cattle were fed various grain and roughage sources corresponding to the regions in which they were fed. Feeds produced in a state were preferentially used by cattle in that state with that state's efficiency; any additional feedstuffs required used water at the national efficiency. Irrigation of crop feedstuffs for feedlot cattle required 5,920 billion L of water. Irrigated pasture for beef cattle production required an additional 4,121 billion L of water. Carcass processing required 91 billion L of water. The model estimated that in the U.S. 2,275 L of blue water was needed to produce one kilogram of boneless meat. As with the previous model, the current model was most sensitive to changes in dressing percentage and percentage of boneless yield in carcasses of feedlot cattle (62.8 and 65, respectively). In conclusion, with more beef, fewer cows, and lower rates of irrigation, beef cattle’s water intensity has decreased at an annual rate of 1.34% over a 28-year period.

show abstract

“…The water requirement can be met through three different sources: voluntary water intake; water intake from the feed; and water from the metabolism of nutrients in the body. Larger supplies of water via the feed translate into a lower water intake from the drinker (Zanetti et al ., 2019), which in turn reduces human-animal competition for water and the water footprint of animal production (Thomassen et al ., 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Replacement of grain maize with spineless cactus in the diet of dairy goats

Pereira

Neto

Gracindo

et al. 2021

Journal of Dairy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spineless cactus (Nopalea cochenillifera) is widely used in animal feed in semi-arid regions, due to the adaptive characteristics to such conditions and for having high levels of soluble carbohydrates. This research article describes the effect of replacing grain maize with spineless cactus in the diet of dairy goats on dry matter intake, water intake, milk yield, milk physicochemical characteristics and diet production costs. Eight multiparous Anglo Nubian goats were fed diets in which grain maize was replaced with spineless cactus at four levels (0, 33, 66, and 100%) in a double 4 × 4 Latin square design. Milk yield was measured and samples collected in the last three days of each period for physicochemical analysis and for determining nutrient intake. Diet production costs were also determined. Replacing maize with spineless cactus did not influence dry matter intake. Water intake via the drinker decreased linearly in response to the increasing levels of spineless cactus in the diet. The replacement of maize with spineless cactus did not change milk yield or physicochemical parameters. Total feed cost and the percentage of revenue losses from feed decreased with the replacement. Therefore, spineless cactus can fully replace grain maize in the diet of dairy goats, as it does not change dry matter intake or milk yield, but rather reduces feed costs and the drinking-water intake of goats.

show abstract

Prediction of water intake to Bos indicus beef cattle raised under tropical conditions1

Cited by 26 publications

References 51 publications

Comparison of two water measurement systems for feedlot beef cattle

Comparison of two water measurement systems for feedlot beef cattle

How advances in animal efficiency and management have affected beef cattle’s water intensity in the United States: 1991 compared to 2019

Replacement of grain maize with spineless cactus in the diet of dairy goats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About