Enhanced Intake and Production of Cows Offered Ensiled Alfalfa with Higher Neutral Detergent Fiber Digestibility

Dado, R.G.; Allen, Michael S.

doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(96)76381-6

Cited by 37 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The chemical and physical characteristics of NDF are both important in dairy diets to maintain normal milk production and normal chewing activities (Beauchemin et al 1994;Dado and Allen 1996). However, only the chemical requirement for NDF is presently considered by the NRC (1989).…”

Section: Okine Et Al -Forage Source and Chewing Activity In Cows 257mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, in spite of similar DMI, the NDF intake of cows fed the bromegrass diet was higher than that of cows fed the alfalfa diet reflecting the greater NDF concentration in bromegrass. Miller et al (1990) and Dado and Allen (1996) suggested that the rate of NDF digestion, amount of NDF and digestibility of NDF in diets can affect feed intake. In this study NDF digestion was not affected by dietary treatment (data not shown).…”

Section: Feed Intake and Milk Production And Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A functional rumen and the fermentation activity within the rumen are related to the secretion of saliva by the dairy cow (Okine et al 1994). Rate of saliva secretion and amount of saliva produced are determined by chewing activity, which in turn is influenced by the source of forage (Welch and Smith 1970), forage to concentrate ratio, forage intake (Bines and Davey 1970;Beauchemin and Buchanan-Smith 1989;Okine et al 1994;Dado and Allen 1996) and physiological status of the cow (Campling 1966). In terms of diet-related factors, intake limiting characteristics of diets such as bulk density, digestibility, rate of digestion, rumination time, total mastication time and passage of digesta from the RR are related to fibre content of the diet and forage:concentrate ratio (Beauchemin and Buchanan-Smith 1989;Bines and Davey 1970).…”

Section: Mots Clésmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of source of forage and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production response in late lactation cows

Okine¹,

Khorasani²,

Kennelly³

1997

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 1997. Effects of source of forage and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production response in late lactation cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 77: 253-258. Four cannulated Holstein cows in late lactation were used in a 4 × 4 Latin square design experiment to determine the effects of forage source with different NDF concentrations and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production. Diets were 65% first-cut alfalfa silage with 54% NDF and 35% concentrate, 50% alfalfa and 50% concentrate, 65% bromegrass silage with 65.5% NDF and 35% concentrate and 50% bromegrass silage and 50% concentrate. Diets were fed in 2 × 2 factorial design (silage sources, alfalfa vs. bromegrass and two levels of concentrate, 35 vs. 50%). Dry matter intake averaged 15.2 kg d -1 and was not affected by either forage source or level of concentrate. Intake of NDF was lower for the cows fed the alfalfa-based diet vs. bromegrass silage but the level of concentrate did not affect NDF intake. Time spent eating was not affected by either forage source or concentrate level of the diet. Time spent eating and ruminating kg -1 NDF intake was higher for cows fed alfalfa-based diets than for cows fed the bromegrass-based diets. Total chews g -1 NDF intake tended (P = 0.06) to decrease when cows were fed bromegrass-based diets but eating and ruminating chews g -1 NDF intake were not affected by source of forage or level of concentrate in the diet. Diets with either alfalfa or bromegrass had no effect on daily yields of milk, FCM, fat, protein and lactose. Diets with 50% concentrate increased milk and FCM yields by 11 and 14%, respectively. Fat and lactose yields were also increased by 17 and 11% in cows fed diets with the higher concentrate level. Results suggest that chewing activities during eating and ruminating phases of the eating cycle adjusted for DMI may decrease with increased concentrate level and are not affected by source of forage in the diet. However, chewing activities adjusted for NDF intake are influenced by source of forage but not by level of concentrate in the diet. The results also suggest that yields of both milk and milk components in late lactation cows are influenced by level of concentrate in the diet, while only milk components are affected by source of forage.Key words: Dairy cattle, chewing activity, forage, milk production Okine, E. K., Khorasani, G. R. et Kennelly, J. J. 1997. Effets de la nature du fourrage et de la proportion d'aliments concentrés dans le régime sur l'activité masticatoire et sur la production laitière de vaches en fin de lactation. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 77: 253-258. Quatre vaches Holstein fistulisées, en fin de lactation, ont été utilisées dans une expérience conduite en carré latin 4 × 4 pour déterminer les effets de fourrages de teneurs diverses en NDF et du niveau de concentrés de la ration sur l'activité masticatoire et sur la production de lait. Les régimes consistaient en : 65 % ensilage de luzerne de première pousse à 54 % de NDF et 35 % de concentrés, 50 % ensilage de luzerne ...

show abstract

Section: Okine Et Al -Forage Source and Chewing Activity In Cows 257mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Feed Intake and Milk Production And Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mots Clésmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of source of forage and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production response in late lactation cows

Okine¹,

Khorasani²,

Kennelly³

1997

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The positive effects of enhanced IVFD on productivity of lactating dairy cows have been reported for corn silage (Thomas et al 2001;Neylon and Kung, Jr. 2003;Ivan et al 2005), sorghum silage (Grant et al 1995;Aydin et al 1999;Oliver et al 2004), and alfalfa silage (Dado and Allen 1996). Whole-plant barley silage (WPBS) is the primary forage used by dairy producers in western Canada, but little is known about factors affecting IVFD and its effects on animal performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Communication: Effects of feeding Falcon or Tyto whole plant barley silage on milk production and feed efficiency

ObaM.

SwiftM.

2014

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oba, M. and Swift, M. L. 2014. SHORT COMMUNICATION: Effects of feeding Falcon or Tyto whole plant barley silage on milk production and feed efficiency. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 151Á153. Eight lactating dairy cows were fed diets containing either Falcon or Tyto whole-plant barley silage (Hordeum vulgare; WPBS) in a crossover design to study effects on milk production and feed efficiency. The in vitro fibre digestibility (IVFD) of Falcon and Tyto WPBS was 61.6 and 57.2%, respectively. Cows consuming the Falcon WPBS utilized feed more efficiently compared with those consuming the Tyto WPBS (1.44 vs. 1.32 kg milk kg(1 dry matter intake) although milk yield was not affected. This research demonstrates that IVFD may be an important quality indicator of WPBS when balancing diets for high producing lactating cows.

show abstract

“…When multiple models had similar likelihood values, the model associated with the least Bayesian information criteria was chosen as the best prediction model. All the meta-analyses were Castle and Watson, 1973;Castle and Thomas, 1975;Little et al, 1976;Holter et al, 1982;Murphy et al, 1983;Stockdale and King, 1983;Andersson et al, 1984;Woodford et al, 1984;Andersson, 1985;Janicki et al, 1985;Nocek and Braund, 1985;Richards, 1985;Anderson, 1987;Gorewit et al, 1989;Holter et al, 1990Shalit et al, 1991;Bahman et al, 1993;Dado and Allen, 1993, 1995, 1996Silanikove et al, 1997;Dahlborn et al, 1998;Dewhurst et al, 1998;Muller et al, 1994;Mooney and Allen, 1997;Burgos et al, 2001;Osborne et al, 2002aOsborne et al, , 2009Voelker and Allen, 2003;Cottee et al, 2004;Meyer et al, 2004;Taylor and Allen, 2005;Harvatine and Allen, 2006;Chaiyabutr et al, 2007Chaiyabutr et al, , 2008Thomas et al, 2007;Cardot et al, 2008;Kume et al, 2008Kume et al, , 2010Longuski et al, 2009;Kramer et al, 2009;…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of drinking water intake by dairy cows

Appuhamy

Judy

Kebreab

et al. 2016

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematical models that predict water intake by drinking, also known as free water intake (FWI), are useful in understanding water supply needed by animals on dairy farms. The majority of extant mathematical models for predicting FWI of dairy cows have been developed with data sets representing similar experimental conditions, not evaluated with modern cows, and often require dry matter intake (DMI) data, which may not be routinely available. The objectives of the study were to (1) develop a set of new empirical models for predicting FWI of lactating and dry cows with and without DMI using literature data, and (2) evaluate the new and the extant models using an independent set of FWI measurements made on modern cows. Random effect meta-regression analyses were conducted using 72 and 188 FWI treatment means with and without dietary electrolyte and daily mean ambient temperature (TMP) records, respectively, for lactating cows, and 19 FWI treatment means for dry cows. Milk yield, DMI, body weight, days in milk, dietary macro-nutrient contents, an aggregate milliequivalent concentration of dietary sodium and potassium (NaK), and TMP were used as potential covariates to the models. A model having positive relationships of DMI, dietary dry matter (DM%), and CP (CP%) contents, NaK, and TMP explained 76% of variability in FWI treatment means of lactating cows. When challenged on an independent data set (n = 261), the model more accurately predicted FWI [root mean square prediction error as a percentage of average observed value (RMSPE%) = 14.4%] compared with a model developed without NaK and TMP (RMSPE% = 17.3%), and all extant models (RMSPE% ≥ 15.7%). A model without DMI included positive relationships of milk yield, DM%, NaK, TMP, and days in milk, and explained 63% of variability in the FWI treatment means and performed well (RMSPE% = 17.9%), when challenged on the independent data. New models for dry cows included positive relationships of DM% and TMP along with DMI or body weight. The new models with and without DMI explained 75 and 54% of the variability in FWI treatment means of dry cows and had RMSPE% of 12.8 and 15.2%, respectively, when evaluated with the literature data. The study offers a set of empirical models that can assist in determining drinking water needs of dairy farms.

show abstract

Enhanced Intake and Production of Cows Offered Ensiled Alfalfa with Higher Neutral Detergent Fiber Digestibility

Cited by 37 publications

References 19 publications

Effects of source of forage and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production response in late lactation cows

Effects of source of forage and level of concentrate on chewing activity and milk production response in late lactation cows

Short Communication: Effects of feeding Falcon or Tyto whole plant barley silage on milk production and feed efficiency

Prediction of drinking water intake by dairy cows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About