2019
DOI: 10.1017/s1751731118000666
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of equations, based on milk intake, to predict starter feed intake of preweaned dairy calves

Abstract: There is a lack of studies that provide models or equations capable of predicting starter feed intake (SFI) for milk-fed dairy calves. Therefore, a multi-study analysis was conducted to identify variables that influence SFI, and to develop equations to predict SFI in milk-fed dairy calves up to 64 days of age. The database was composed of individual data of 176 calves from eight experiments, totaling 6426 daily observations of intake. The information collected from the studies were: birth BW (kg), SFI (kg/day)… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
17
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, regardless of WM or MR feeding level, solid feed consumption is low during the first 3 wk of life (Quigley et al, 2018). After the initial weeks of life, preweaning starter intake and liquid feed intake are inversely correlated, which may negatively affect preweaning growth (Gelsinger et al, 2016;Silva et al, 2019). Specifically, for each 100 g of MR DMI, starter DMI decreased by 13 g/d at 30 d of age and by ~93 g/d at 60 d of age (Silva et al, 2019).…”
Section: Weaningmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, regardless of WM or MR feeding level, solid feed consumption is low during the first 3 wk of life (Quigley et al, 2018). After the initial weeks of life, preweaning starter intake and liquid feed intake are inversely correlated, which may negatively affect preweaning growth (Gelsinger et al, 2016;Silva et al, 2019). Specifically, for each 100 g of MR DMI, starter DMI decreased by 13 g/d at 30 d of age and by ~93 g/d at 60 d of age (Silva et al, 2019).…”
Section: Weaningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After the initial weeks of life, preweaning starter intake and liquid feed intake are inversely correlated, which may negatively affect preweaning growth (Gelsinger et al, 2016;Silva et al, 2019). Specifically, for each 100 g of MR DMI, starter DMI decreased by 13 g/d at 30 d of age and by ~93 g/d at 60 d of age (Silva et al, 2019). Thus, it is thought that feeding a high plane of WM or MR nutrition preweaning causes a decrease in growth rate postweaning, largely due to an inability to consume and digest sufficient quantities of starter for growth (Dennis et al, 2018;Quigley et al, 2018).…”
Section: Weaningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lower MR intake in the 10%-MR group lead to higher DMI of SF (hay, concentrate, and TMR) preweaning in wk 6 to 10, whereas postweaning DMI levels of SF were mostly higher in the 20%-MR group (Tümmler et al, 2020). Although the 10%-MR fed group revealed higher DMI of SF preweaning, which was similarly observed as a linear increase of forage intake with MR reduction (Broesder et al, 1990) or in a model for starter intake (Silva et al, 2019), this effect was not sufficient to compensate for the lower energy intake with MR in this group. Consideration must also be given to the fact that ME of SF might be overestimated because digestibility is lower in young calves and energy from starter is less metabolically available as predicted by NRC ( 2001) models (Quigley et al, 2019).…”
Section: Metabolizable Energy Intake and Growth Performancementioning
confidence: 73%
“…The lower precision of the BW~A and BW: H ~A models, when compared with the other equations, was likely due to the dispersion of these measures in older animals, as described above and reported by Cue et al (2012). For all equations, the majority of the MSEP was associated with random effects (>99%; Table 2); this, in association with their high accuracy, demonstrates the models' abilities to predict both actual and precise values (Tedeschi, 2006;Silva et al, 2019).…”
Section: Bwmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The first subset (training subset) was used to obtain the equation parameters, and the second subset (testing subset) was used to test the obtained parameters. After each simulation, the data set was reorganized, and the process was repeated 1,000 times to generate the average of the sensitivity statistics (Silva et al, 2019).…”
Section: Short Communicationmentioning
confidence: 99%