Water intake and factors affecting water intake of growing beef cattle

Brew, Megan N.; Myer, R. O.; Hersom, Matt; Carter, J.N.; Elzo, Mauricio A.; Hansen, Gary R.; Riley, David G.

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2011.03.030

Cited by 63 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results of present study revealed that T max , DMI, BW, rainfall and sunshine hours were positively related (P<0.001) while, RH and TDS of water were negatively correlated (P<0.001) to DWI. These findings are in concordance with the findings of (Meyer et al, 2004;Meyer et al, 2006;Cardot et al, 2008;Ehrlenbruch et al, 2010;Arias and Madar, 2011;Brew et al, 2011;Mubareka et al, 2013). However, a negative correlation between DWI and BW was observed by Sexson et al, 2012in steers, whereas, Kume et al, 2010Khelil-Arfa et al, 2012 did not find any significant correlation in lactating cows.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…DMI of the animals is one of the major factors which affects DWI of animals (NRC, 2001;Kume et al, 2010) and was the first variable to enter the equation here. Relationship between water intake and DMI have been observed by several authors (Loneragan et al, 2001;Meyer et al, 2006;Arias and Madar, 2011;Brew et al, 2011;Kumar et al, 2015). The use of the variable DMI produced an initial r 2 of 0.52 and imposed an increased demand of 2.97 L of DWI for every kg of DMI.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantitative prediction of drinking water intake of Murrah buffalo calves under saline water

Sharma

Kundu

Tariq

et al. 2016

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present investigation was carried out with the aim of determining water requirement of Murrah buffalo calves under saline water. Twenty male buffalo calves were divided into five different treatment groups (n = 4 each) with average body weight of 219.94 kg. The animals in T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 groups were offered water having total dissolved solids (TDS) 0.55, 2.57, 4.46, 6.11 and 8.78 parts per thousand, respectively for 180 days. Data regarding environmental factors (maximum ambient temperature (Tmax), relative humidity (RH), rainfall and sunshine hour), dry matter intake (DMI) and drinking water intake (DWI) of individual animals were recorded daily. Results showed that Tmax, DMI, body weight (BW), rainfall and sunshine hours were positively related (P<0.001) while, relative humidity (RH) and total dissolved solids (TDS) of water were negatively correlated (P<0.001) to DWI. Applying a multiple linear regression analysis to all independent variables yielded DWI prediction equation as: (DWI) (L/day) = - 7.81- 0.45 × TDS (parts per thousand) + 0.41 × Tmax (°C) + 2.97 × DMI (kg/day) - 0.004 × BW (kg) with coefficient of multiple determination (R2 = 0.80), which can be useful to predict DWI of buffalo calves reared on saline water under tropical climatic conditions.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Quantitative prediction of drinking water intake of Murrah buffalo calves under saline water

Sharma

Kundu

Tariq

et al. 2016

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…in the same temperature range. Brew et al (2011) performed studies in thermoneutral conditions (5°C to 20°C) and found no effect of temperature on total water intake of 7-to 9-mo-old growing beef cattle housed in an opensided barn. We estimate that for an increase of mean ambient temperature from 5°C to 25°C in conditions of dry days with dry soils, total water intake increased by 49% if we assumed a constant dry matter intake of 7.3 kg/d and a dry matter content of 0.22 kg/kg.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drinking water intake of grazing steers: The role of environmental factors controlling canopy wetness1

Sun

Auerswald

Wenzel

et al. 2014

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cattle obtain water primarily from the moisture in their feed and from drinking water. On pasture, the moisture content of the diet is influenced by plant tissue water (internal water) and surface moisture (external water), which may include dew, guttation, and intercepted rain, that influence the drinking water requirement. This study investigated the relationship between daily drinking water intake (DWI, L/d) of steers on pasture (19 steers with mean initial BW of approximately 400 kg) and soil and weather factors that are known to affect plant water status (dry matter content) and surface moisture formation and persistence. Daily records of weather conditions and DWI were obtained during 2 grazing seasons with contrasting spring, summer, and autumn rainfall patterns. Plant available water in the soil (PAW, mm) was modeled from actual and potential evapotranspiration and the water-holding capacity of the soil. The DWI averaged over the herd varied among days from 0 to 29 L/d (grazing season mean 9.8 L/d). The DWI on both dry (<0.2 mm rainfall on the corresponding and previous days) and wet (>2 mm) days increased with increasing temperature (mean, maximum, and minimum), sunshine hours, and global radiation and decreasing relative humidity, and the slopes and coefficients of determination were generally greater for wet days. Wind reduced DWI on wet days but had no effect on dry days. The DWI was reduced by up to 4.4 L/d on wet days compared to dry days, but DWI did not correlate with rainfall amount. Increasing PAW decreased DWI by up to >10 L/d on both dry and wet days. These results are all consistent with environmental effects on the water status (dry matter content) of pasture vegetation and canopy surface moisture, the associated effects on grazing-related water intake, and the corresponding balancing changes of DWI. Using the observed relationships with environmental factors, we derived a new model predicting DWI for any soil moisture condition, for both wet and dry days, which included mean ambient temperature and relative humidity and explained virtually all variation of DWI that was not caused by the random scatter among individual animals.

show abstract

“…Despite the importance of water in AW, there are few studies on water intake in grazing beef cattle. This is primarily due to the fact that most work has been carried out in confinement systems and secondly, water, as a resource, has been considered readily available at a low cost for production systems (Brew et al, 2011). However, efficient water use is currently a subject of environmental concern, especially in areas where water is scarce.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of cattle kept in intensive silvopastoral systems: A case report

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of three different intensive silvopastoral systems (ISPS) on cattle animal welfare (AW) in Colombia. The three ISPS differed in area, plant composition, and grazing periods as follows: ISPS1 -low plant diversity in paddocks of 1200 m 2 , with grazing period of 24 h; ISPS2 -middle plant diversity in paddocks of 600 m 2 , with grazing period of 12 h; and ISPS3 -high plant diversity in paddocks of 600 m 2 , with grazing period of 24 h. Animal welfare was assessed using a wide range of criteria, which were integrated using L-spline functions and Choquet integrals to generate overall values. It was found that AW was good in all ISPS; the highest scoring criteria was for food and water, with 99, 97, and 100 points from a maximum of 100 for ISPSs 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Comfort showed values of 100 for all three systems, but good health was the most problematic criteria of the AW features with scores of 25, 40, and 36 for ISPSs 1, 2, and 3, respectively. All three ISPS showed excellent scores for appropriate behavior (82, 88, and 89). The welfare problems shown here were not specific to the individual ISPS, but were common to all livestock systems in the region. Despite the differences in diversity of plants, size of paddocks, and grazing period among the three ISPSs tested, all of them provide cattle with sufficient resources and a diverse environment, ensuring a good state of welfare to them.

show abstract

Water intake and factors affecting water intake of growing beef cattle

Cited by 63 publications

References 11 publications

Quantitative prediction of drinking water intake of Murrah buffalo calves under saline water

Quantitative prediction of drinking water intake of Murrah buffalo calves under saline water

Drinking water intake of grazing steers: The role of environmental factors controlling canopy wetness1

Welfare of cattle kept in intensive silvopastoral systems: A case report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About