Effect of rumen degradable energy supplementation on forage utilization and performance of steers grazing stockpiled cool season perennial grass pastures

Añez-OsunaFederico,; PennerGregory, B; LarsonKathy,; JeffersonPaul, G; LardnerHerbert, A; McKinnonJohn, J

doi:10.4141/cjas-2014-148

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Legume-MBG or RWR in the current study, with greater IVOMD values than July HBG at SWIFT, indicated that MBG similar to RWR maintains its leaves and quality late in the season [17]. As forages mature, the nutritive value of both annual and perennial species declines [53] due to decreased protein and digestibility and increased fiber, which was evident in the current study.…”

Section: Forage Nutritive Valuesupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Allowing standing forage to accumulate for grazing at a later period, often for fall and winter grazing after dormancy is considered stockpiling. Stockpiling relies on mature forages that may not meet nutrient requirements of beef cattle [51][52][53]. According to NASEM [54], the CP and TDN requirements for mature cows and heifers either pregnant or lactating ranges from 62 to 129 g kg −1 and 449 to 645 g kg −1 , respectively.…”

Section: Forage Nutritive Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Harvest Date Effect on Forage Yield, Botanical Composition, and Nutritive Value of Novel Legume-Grass Mixtures

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential for novel forage mixtures to address reduced herbage for late season grazing was investigated. Forage legumes, sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) (SF) cvs. AC Mountainview, Shoshone, and Nova (MountainSF, ShoshoneSF, and NovaSF), cicer milkvetch (Astragalus cicer L.) cv. AC Veldt (CMV), Canadian milkvetch (Astragalus canadensis L.) cv. Great Plains (CaMV), and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) cv. AC Yellowhead (ALF) were evaluated in binary mixtures with meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehm.) cv. Admiral (MBG), hybrid bromegrass (B. riparius × B. inermis Leyss.) cv. AC Success (HBG) and Russian wildrye [Psathyrostachys junceus (Fisch.) Nevski.] cv. Tom (RWR) for yield, botanical composition, and nutritive value on July and September harvest dates at Saskatoon and Swift Current, Saskatchewan, Canada from 2016 to 2018. Hybrid bromegrass-legume mixture produced 16–38% greater forage compared to RWR-legume (7.5 vs. 5.6 Mg ha−1 in July and 6.1 vs. 5.1 Mg ha−1 in September at Saskatoon, and 3.2 vs. 2.0 Mg ha−1 in July at Swift Current). MountainSF and ALF had the greatest legume contribution to total yield at July harvest at Swift Current (67.7 ± 3.2%) and Saskatoon (62.1 ± 2.1%), respectively, while CaMV had lowest composition at Swift Current (20.2 ± 2.5%) and Saskatoon (12.6 ± 3.5%). The CMV and ALF-grass mixtures at Saskatoon and legume-RWR mixtures at both sites in July had greatest CP content. The July harvest had greatest yield, legume content and nutritive value compared to the September harvest at both sites. Study results suggest if yield is the objective, then either ALF or CMV with HBG may be considered. If nutritive value is the goal, any legume with RWR is an option. Finally, ALF or CMV in mixture with either HBG or RWR could be summer or fall stockpile forage in the Northern Great Plains of western Canada.

show abstract

Section: Forage Nutritive Valuesupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Forage Nutritive Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest Date Effect on Forage Yield, Botanical Composition, and Nutritive Value of Novel Legume-Grass Mixtures

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nutritive value, yield, and the overall success of stockpile grazing are dictated by forage species, length of the growing season, and soil nutrient management. As plants mature over the growing season, the nutritive value of both annual and perennial forage declines (Beck et al 2006;Biligetu et al 2014;Añez-Osuna et al 2015) as a result of a simultaneous decrease in CP and increase in neutral detergent fibre (NDF) concentrations and decrease in fibre digestibility. As a consequence of the decreased forage quality, stockpile grazing has traditionally been used primarily for beef cows in mid-gestation.…”

Section: Stockpile Grazing Of Standing Foragementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence of the decreased forage quality, stockpile grazing has traditionally been used primarily for beef cows in mid-gestation. Añez-Osuna et al (2015) observed a decrease in both CP content (from 9.9% to 6.9%) and digestible energy [2.6 to 2.2 Mcal kg −1 dry matter(DM)] in a wheatgrass-dominant [Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn.] sward over a 70-d growing period from August to mid-October.…”

Section: Stockpile Grazing Of Standing Foragementioning

confidence: 99%

Annual and Perennial Forages for Fall/Winter Grazing

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extending the grazing season by maintaining beef cattle on pasture in the fall/winter has been adopted by many producers on the Prairies as it reduces the need for mechanical harvesting and can lower labour and manure management costs relative to feeding cattle in confinement. Annual and perennial forages, alone or in combination, offer the potential for low-input grazing while maintaining animal productivity. Using a range of data sources, this paper will review the methods available for extending the grazing season of beef cattle using annual and perennial forages and discuss level of adoption and the practical implications and considerations for producers. These methods included stockpile grazing, bale grazing, swath grazing, and corn grazing, with the suitability of methods based on a range of factors including the nutritive requirements of the target class of cattle, environmental conditions, and costs of inputs. In an effort to maximise the efficiency of maintaining cattle on pasture in the fall/winter period, the ability to be flexible and adaptive to changing climatic and economic conditions within and between years is essential. Furthermore, a combination of the aforementioned methods may be employed in an integrated effort to enhance the productivity and sustainability of overwintering of beef cattle.

show abstract

“…Examples include oilseeds such as off-grade canola seed and flaxseed, which are high in monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) and PUFA, respectively. Research has shown that relative to conventional feed sources, inclusion of these by-products in the form of blended pelleted feeds has resulted in equal or superior performance of growing cattle (Zenobi et al, 2014;Añez-Osuna et al, 2015). Such high-fat by-product feeds may also be viable supplements for gestating beef cows to meet pregnancy requirements and could potentially improve the prenatal and postnatal growth of progeny through developmental programming mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level and source of fat in the diet of gestating beef cows: I. Effects on the prepartum performance of the dam and birth weight of the progeny1

Añez-Osuna

Penner

Campbell

et al. 2019

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2-yr study was conducted to evaluate the effects of level and source of fat in the diet of gestating beef cows on their prepartum performance and birth weight of progeny. Each year, 75 multiparous (≥3 calving) pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (663 ± 21.5 kg) and BCS (2.6 ± 0.12; 1 to 5 scale) and randomly assigned to 1 of 15 outdoor pens. Subsequently, each pen was randomly assigned to 1 of 3 (n = 5) treatments: a low-fat diet (LF; 1.4 ± 0.12% EE) consisting of grass-legume hay, barley straw, and barley grain, or 1 of 2 high-fat diets (HF; 3.3 ± 0.20% EE) that included either a canola seed (CAN) or a flaxseed (FLX) based pelleted feed. Diets were formulated to meet the requirements of pregnant beef cows during the last 2 trimesters of gestation (0.183 ± 4.8 d), adjusted for changes in environmental conditions, and offered such that each pen on average received similar daily amounts of DE (31.2 ± 2.8 Mcal/cow), CP (1.36 ± 0.13 kg/cow), and DM (12.9 ± 1.0 kg/cow). Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design with contrasts to separate the effects of level (LF vs. HF) and source (CAN vs. FLX) of fat. After 160 d on trial, conceptus corrected-BW (CC-BW) of LF cows (708 kg) and the proportion of overconditioned cows (13.2%) were greater (P ≤ 0.04) than those of HF, with no difference (P ≥ 0.84) between CAN and FLX for CC-BW (697 kg) and proportion of overconditioned cows (3.6% vs. 2.9%). Feeding FLX diet during gestation resulted in cows with a greater (P ≤ 0.01) concentration of conjugated linolenic acid (0.12% vs. 0.05%) and n-3 (0.58% vs. 0.37%) fatty acids, and a tendency (P = 0.09) for conjugated linoleic acid concentration (1.05% vs. 0.88%) to be greater in subcutaneous adipose tissue (SCAT) when compared with cows fed the CAN diet. By the end of gestation, serum NEFA concentration of LF cows (592 µEq/L) was lower (P < 0.01) than that of HF cows, and FLX cows had greater (P < 0.01) serum NEFA concentration than CAN cows (636 vs. 961 µEq/L). Cows receiving the LF diet during gestation gave birth to lighter (P < 0.01) calves compared with those receiving the HF diets (40.2 vs. 42.9 kg), with no difference (P = 0.24) between calves born to CAN (42.4 kg) and FLX (43.3 kg) cows. In conclusion, these results suggest a partitioning of the ME in pregnant beef cows that is dependent on the type of dietary energy, resulting in heavier calves at birth for cows fed high-fat diets. Also, the type of fatty acid in the diet of gestating beef cows affected the fatty acid profile in SCAT and serum NEFA concentration.

show abstract

Effect of rumen degradable energy supplementation on forage utilization and performance of steers grazing stockpiled cool season perennial grass pastures

Cited by 9 publications

References 45 publications

Harvest Date Effect on Forage Yield, Botanical Composition, and Nutritive Value of Novel Legume-Grass Mixtures

Harvest Date Effect on Forage Yield, Botanical Composition, and Nutritive Value of Novel Legume-Grass Mixtures

Annual and Perennial Forages for Fall/Winter Grazing

Level and source of fat in the diet of gestating beef cows: I. Effects on the prepartum performance of the dam and birth weight of the progeny1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About