Voluntary food intake in relation to body weight among British breeds of cattle

Taylor, St C. S.; Moore, A. J.; Thiessen, R.

doi:10.1017/s0003356100017682

Cited by 30 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They found shorter grazing times in the larger animals and the exponent relating HOMI to W in the heifers and calves was 0-71, or 0-61 when the cows were included. The authors recognized the potential influence of sward characteristics on intake and the exponent of W, but under unrestricted grazing conditions it appears that the exponent is close to that found by Taylor et al (1986) to apply for growing cattle ranging from 0-17 to 0-70 of their mature size and given ad libitum access to pelleted feeds.…”

Section: Effects Of Sex and Degree Of Maturitymentioning

confidence: 62%

“…The most important determinant of voluntary food intake is body weight. In growing cattle, intake scales with about W 07 at any given age between 3 and 18 months (Taylor et al 1986). Under unrestricted grazing conditions, a similar exponent of W has been found (Hodgson & Wilkinson 1967).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…How then does the scaling of ad libitum intake with weight compare with that under more restricted grazing conditions? Taylor et al (1986) found that ad libitum intake of growing cattle c. 1 year old and above was related to u 042 A°7 3 . This can be compared with maintenance requirements of b«A°7 3 .…”

Section: Effects Of Sex and Degree Of Maturitymentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Allometry of food intake and grazing behaviour with body size in cattle

Illius

1989

J. Agric. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S U M M A R YIn 2 years two groups of 32 grazing cattle were used to examine the effects of previous grazing treatment and of body size on grazing behaviour and herbage organic matter intake (HOMI). Compensatory intake resulted from differences in grazing time only in the first year. There were no sex differences in intake when account was taken of differences in mature size raised to the power 0-73. Bite weight was related to the degree of maturity by the allometric coefficient of 0-46, and HOMI was similarly related by the coefficient of 0-36. This accords with the predicted effects of restricted grazing conditions on animals of different weight, and with allometric changes with weight in incisor breadth. Decreases in intake under grazing were similar in animals differing in maturity and weight. It is suggested that under constant grazing conditions the change in grazed herbage intake as animals mature reflects the allometric change in bite weight and a corresponding decline in bite numbers, resulting in consumption of a constant proportion of ad libitum intake.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Sex and Degree Of Maturitymentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Allometry of food intake and grazing behaviour with body size in cattle

Illius

1989

J. Agric. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may suggest that some other physiological factor associated with the J breed, other than LW, could be responsible for their higher Gross Ee values. Greater efficiencies exhibited by J cows may reflect: (i) a greater efficiency of utilisation of ME for milk and tissue production (0.58 versus 0.48) as a consequence of a lower heat increment (L'Huillier et al 1988); and (ii) a greater ability to consume more feed per unit liveweight than F cows (Taylor et al 1986), which may be a function of larger reticulo-rumen volumes. Nagel & Piatkowski (1988;cited by Brade 1992) found that J cows had 32 litres of reticulo-rumen volume per 100 kg of body weight compared with only 23 litres for F cows.…”

Section: Feed Conversion Efficiency Parametersfriesian Versus Jersey mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feed conversion efficiency, daily pasture intake, and milk production of primiparous Friesian and Jersey cows calved at two different liveweights

Mackle¹,

Parr²,

Stakelum

et al. 1996

New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pasture dry matter intake (DMI), milk yield and composition, and calculated feed conversion efficiencies (FCE), were monitored throughout lactation for primiparous Friesian (n = 16; F) and Jersey (n = 16; J) cows calved at either high (H) or low (L) calving liveweights (CLW). Half of the cows within each breed were differentially fed (H versus L) during the 8 weeks before expected calving date to produce CLWs of 404 (FH), 354 (FL), 334 (JH), and 277 (JL) ± 14 (SED) kg. Animals were fully fed on pasture as one group after calving throughout lactation. J cows were more efficient than F cows in converting DM into solids-corrected milk (SCM) (1.63 versus 1.49 ± 0.07 kg/kg DMI), milksolids (MS) (129 versus 115 ± 5 g/kg DMI), milk fat (79 versus 67 ± 3.8 g/ kg DMI), and metabolisable energy intake (MEI) into milk energy (43 versus 37 ± 1.8%). Average DMI measured during six periods across lactation and once after the completion of lactation, were higher for F than J cows (10.5 versus 8.6 ± 0.2 kg/ cow per day) but CLW had no effect on average DMI. CLW did however, affect DMI at 215 days A95076 Received 21 December 1995; accepted 12 July 1996 since calving (DSC) when LCLW cows consumed more DM (FH, 11.3; FL, 12.0; JH, 9.4; JL, 10.2 (0.4 kg DM/cow per day). Liveweight-corrected DMI were slightly greater for J cows (2.66 versus 2.55 ± 0.05 kg/cow per day per 100 kg LW). The HCLW cows lost LW while LCLW cows gained LW until 56 DSC (FH, FL, 33.4; JH, JL, 10.4 ( 8.5 kg LW/cow), with JH cows losing more than FH (P < 0.01). The LCLW cows produced less (P < 0.01) milk, SCM, protein, milk fat, and lactose over the first 30-56 DSC. Thereafter, differences between CLW groups were not significant. Average daily milk yield across the whole lactation was affected by CLW (12.2 versus 11.0 (0.6 kg/cow per day; HCLW versus LCLW). LCLW cows had higher concentrations of milk protein (38.5 versus 36.1 ± 0.8 g/1000 g) and milk fat (57.1 versus 54.1 ± 1.5 g/1000 g). It was concluded that J cows were more efficient converters of pasture DM into MS, primarily because of a greater efficiency in milk fat production. CLW reduced milk production during the early part of lactation but did not affect DMI until mid lactation.

show abstract

“…2003; 7, Jenkins & Ferrell 2002; 8, Afolayan et al. 2007; 9, Kuehn & Thallman 2010; 10, Taylor et al. 1986; 11, Jakubec et al.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritization based on neutral genetic diversity may fail to conserve important characteristics in cattle breeds

Hall

Lenstra

Deeming

2011

J Animal Breeding Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation of the intraspecific genetic diversity of livestock species requires protocols that assess between-breed genetic variability and also take into account differences among individuals within breeds. Here, we focus on variation between breeds. Conservation of neutral genetic variation has been seen as promoting, through linkage processes, the retention of useful and potentially useful variation. Using public information on beef cattle breeds, with a total of 165 data sets each relating to a breed comparison of a performance variable, we have tested this paradigm by calculating the correlations between pairwise breed differences in performance and pairwise genetic distances deduced from biochemical and immunological polymorphisms, microsatellites and single-nucleotide polymorphisms. As already observed in floral and faunal biodiversity, significant positive correlations (n=54) were found, but many correlations were non-significant (n=100) or significantly negative (n=11). This implies that maximizing conserved neutral genetic variation with current techniques may conserve breed-level genetic variation in some traits but not in others and supports the view that genetic distance measurements based on neutral genetic variation are not sufficient as a determinant of conservation priority among breeds.

show abstract

Voluntary food intake in relation to body weight among British breeds of cattle

Cited by 30 publications

References 8 publications

Allometry of food intake and grazing behaviour with body size in cattle

Allometry of food intake and grazing behaviour with body size in cattle

Feed conversion efficiency, daily pasture intake, and milk production of primiparous Friesian and Jersey cows calved at two different liveweights

Prioritization based on neutral genetic diversity may fail to conserve important characteristics in cattle breeds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About