These forages, however, do not provide quality equal to that of alfalfa and must be supplemented with protein With dwindling water supplies, alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and (Anil et al., 1998;Chapko et al., 1991). Hall and Kephart corn (Zea mays L.) producers in the Southern High Plains (USA) seek alternative forages for the dairy industry. At New Mexico State (1991) said that yield and quality of triticale were max-University's Agricultural Science Center at Tucumcari, cereal forage imized slightly before heading in Idaho. Collins et al. monocultures and intercrops with legumes were subjected to two (1990), in Wisconsin, recommended harvesting oat at irrigation treatments during two growing seasons in a Canez fine boot to early head stage for livestock that required sandy loam (fine-loamy, mixed, thermic Ustollic Haplargid). Dry mathigher quality because oat quality would decline after ter (DM) yield of monocultures averaged 3.76, 3.90, 5.55, 5.59, and heading. 3.17 Mg ha Ϫ1 for rye (Secale cereale L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare Quality indicators of cereal forages tend to increase L.), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), triticale (ϫ Triticosecale rimpaui from the milk to dough stage due to dilution of indigest-Wittm.), and oat (Avena sativa L.), respectively. Cereal forages irriible fiber by the grain (Edmisten et al., 1998b). An gated once in a growing season yielded equally to those watered twice increase in digestible energy is also beneficial to fermenwith average precipitation (2000-2001, 408 mm), but not in a dry growing season (2001-2002, 245 mm) (6.15, 5.41, 1.90, and 3.21 Mg ha Ϫ1 tation and provides more energy for livestock. Thus, for cereal forages irrigated once or twice in

These forages, however, do not provide quality equal to that of alfalfa and must be supplemented with protein With dwindling water supplies, alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and (Anil et al., 1998;Chapko et al., 1991). Hall and Kephart corn (Zea mays L.) producers in the Southern High Plains (USA) seek alternative forages for the dairy industry. At New Mexico State (1991) said that yield and quality of triticale were max-University's Agricultural Science Center at Tucumcari, cereal forage imized slightly before heading in Idaho. Collins et al. monocultures and intercrops with legumes were subjected to two (1990), in Wisconsin, recommended harvesting oat at irrigation treatments during two growing seasons in a Canez fine boot to early head stage for livestock that required sandy loam (fine-loamy, mixed, thermic Ustollic Haplargid). Dry mathigher quality because oat quality would decline after ter (DM) yield of monocultures averaged 3.76, 3.90, 5.55, 5.59, and heading. 3.17 Mg ha Ϫ1 for rye (Secale cereale L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare Quality indicators of cereal forages tend to increase L.), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), triticale (ϫ Triticosecale rimpaui from the milk to dough stage due to dilution of indigest-Wittm.), and oat (Avena sativa L.), respectively. Cereal forages irriible fiber by the grain (Edmisten et al., 1998b). An gated once in a growing season yielded equally to those watered twice increase in digestible energy is also beneficial to fermenwith average precipitation (2000-2001, 408 mm), but not in a dry growing season (2001-2002, 245 mm) (6.15, 5.41, 1.90, and 3.21 Mg ha Ϫ1 tation and provides more energy for livestock. Thus, for cereal forages irrigated once or twice in

A winter grazing/feedlot performance experiment repeated over 2 yr (Exp. 1) and a metabolism experiment (Exp. 2) were conducted to evaluate effects of grazing dormant native range or irrigated winter wheat pasture on subsequent intake, feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, total-tract digestion of nutrients, and ruminal digesta kinetics in beef cattle. In Exp. 1, 30 (yr 1) or 67 (yr 2) English crossbred steers that had previously grazed native range (n = 38) or winter wheat (n = 59) for approximately 180 d were allotted randomly within previous treatment to feedlot pens (yr 1 native range = three pens [seven steers/pen], winter wheat = two pens [eight steers/pen]; yr 2 native range = three pens [eight steers/pen], winter wheat = four pens [10 or 11 steers/pen]). As expected, winter wheat steers had greater (P < 0.01) ADG while grazing than did native range steers. In contrast, feedlot ADG and gain efficiency were greater (P < 0.02) for native range steers than for winter wheat steers. Hot carcass weight, longissimus muscle area, and marbling score were greater (P < 0.01) for winter wheat steers than for native range steers. In contrast, 12th-rib fat depth (P < 0.64) and yield grade (P < 0.77) did not differ among treatments. In Exp. 2, eight ruminally cannulated steers that had previously grazed winter wheat (n = 4; initial BW = 407 +/- 12 kg) or native range (n = 4; initial BW = 293 +/- 23 kg) were used to determine intake, digesta kinetics, and total-tract digestion while being adapted to a 90% concentrate diet. The adaptation and diets used in Exp. 2 were consistent with those used in Exp. 1 and consisted of 70, 75, 80, and 85% concentrate diets, each fed for 5 d. As was similar for intact steers, restricted growth of cannulated native range steers during the winter grazing phase resulted in greater (P < 0.001) DMI (% of BW) and ADG (P < 0.04) compared with winter wheat steers. In addition, ruminal fill (P < 0.01) and total-tract OM digestibility (P < 0.02) were greater for native range than for winter wheat steers across the adaptation period. Greater digestibility by native range steers early in the finishing period might account for some of the compensatory gain response. Although greater performance was achieved by native range steers in the feedlot, grazing winter wheat before finishing resulted in fewer days on feed, increased hot carcass weight, and improved carcass merit.