Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Summers, Adam F.; Meyer, T. L.; Funston, R. N.

doi:10.2527/jas.2014-8296

Cited by 20 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies in cattle during late gestation [ 14 ] have provided evidence that feeding systems during the last third of gestation can alter the subsequent birth weight of the progeny, suggesting that the maternal dietary energy source may affect fetal growth [ 15 ]. Although the maternal intake of protein has also been shown to be an important factor for fetal growth, Summers et al [ 16 ] found no difference in calf birth BW according to the supplementation strategy applied to their mothers. Similarly, no difference was observed for calf birth BW in the present study, probably because throughout the experiment forage presented median quality (Table 2 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energetic-protein supplementation in the last 60 days of gestation improves performance of beef cows grazing tropical pastures

Silva

Paulino

Detmann

et al. 2017

J Animal Sci Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundNutrition is one of the most important factors that affect animal performance, and it therefore also impacts on financial results in beef systems. In this way, finding the best strategy for feeding supplements is of paramount importance. Aiming to evaluate the effect of supplement feeding strategies for beef cows in the last third of gestation, two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, 35 pregnant Nellore cows were assigned to a completely randomized design with four treatments: control, which received no supplement; supplementation for the last 30 d of gestation (30-d; 3.0 kg/d); supplementation for the last 60 d of gestation (60-d; 1.5 kg/d); or supplementation for the last 90 d of gestation (90-d; 1.0 kg/d). All supplemented treatments received the same total amount of supplement throughout the experiment: 90 kg (20% of crude protein). A second experiment (Experiment 2) was delineated to evaluate the effects of the amounts offered in Experiment 1 on intake and metabolism. Four multiparous pregnant Nellore cows were assigned to a 4 × 4 Latin square design, with periods of 15 d each.ResultsThere was a linear effect of the number of days of supplementation on calving body weight (BW; P < 0.05) and a quadratic effect on BW change from parturition to d 31 post-calving (P < 0.05), with cows on the 60-d strategy losing less BW post-calving. No difference was found in offspring birth BW (P > 0.10). A significant linear effect on interval from parturition to conception (P < 0.05) was observed, with the highest calving to conception interval being observed in the 90-d strategy. The level of supplementation did not affect forage intake or neutral detergent fiber digestibility (P > 0.10). Nitrogen excreted through urine tended to increase linearly with the level of supplementation (P < 0.10).ConclusionProviding 1.5 kg of supplement during the last 60 d of gestation improves cow performance after calving, reducing the magnitude of BW lost, and reduces the number of days from calving to re-conception in the following breeding season compared to the usually recommended period of supplementation of 90 d pre-partum.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energetic-protein supplementation in the last 60 days of gestation improves performance of beef cows grazing tropical pastures

Silva

Paulino

Detmann

et al. 2017

J Animal Sci Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Martin et al (2007) and Funston et al (2010) reported an increase in heifer adjusted 205-d weaning BW and actual weaning BW, respectively, for heifers born to cows supplemented with a DDGS-based supplement during late gestation. It is likely that the current study failed to report significant differences in calf weaning BW based on maternal treatment exceeding nutrient requirements in all diets, including the control (Summers et al, 2015).…”

Section: Preweaning and Weaning Calf Performancementioning

confidence: 78%

“…Primiparous heifer management has been reported in detail (Summers et al, 2015). In short, each October, pregnant heifers (yr 1, n = 38; yr 2, n = 40; and yr 3, n = 36) were placed in a Calan Broadbent individual feeding system (American Calan; Northwood, NH) and acclimated to the individual feeding bunks for approximately 25 d before the beginning of the feeding trial.…”

Section: Primiparous Heifer Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on II. Progeny performance and carcass characteristics

Summers¹,

Blair

Funston³

2015

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 3-yr study using primiparous crossbred beef heifers (n = 114) was conducted to determine the effects of protein supplement during late gestation on progeny performance and carcass characteristics. Pregnant heifers were stratified by heifer development system, initial BW, and AI service sire and placed in an individual feeding system. Heifers were offered meadow hay (8 to 11% CP) from early November to mid-February and provided no supplement (CON; n = 37), 0.83 kg/d (DM basis) of a dried distillers grains with solubles-based supplement (HI; n = 39), or 0.83 kg/d (DM basis) of a dried corn gluten feed-based supplement (LO; n = 38). Supplements were designed to be isonitrogenous (28% CP) and isocaloric but to differ in RUP with HI (59% RUP) having greater levels of RUP than LO (34% RUP). After the individual feeding period, heifers were placed in a drylot for calving. All heifers were bred using a fixed-timed AI protocol and pairs were moved to a commercial ranch in the Nebraska Sandhills for summer grazing. Calf weaning BW did not differ (P = 0.14) based on maternal diet. However, feedlot entry BW was greater (P = 0.03) for HI compared with CON calves. Average daily gain during the initial feedlot phase tended (P = 0.10) to be greatest for calves born to CON dams and lowest for calves born to LO dams. However, overall ADG was similar (P = 0.50) for the entire feedlot period. Residual feed intake during the reimplant and total feeding period was improved in calves born to supplemented dams in yr 2 and 3 compared with calves born to CON dams. There was no difference in final BW among treatments (P = 0.71). Hot carcass weight was similar (P = 0.72) among treatments; however, steers had greater (P < 0.01) HCW than heifers. Furthermore, percent empty body fat and 12th rib fat thickness were lowest (P = 0.05 and P = 0.04) for calves born to LO dams. Tenderness measured by Warner-Bratzler shear force was increased (P = 0.03) in longissimus samples from calves from CON dams compared to calves from LO dams. Similarly, crude fat levels tended to be greater (P = 0.07) for calves from CON dams compared with calves from LO dams. Based on these data, providing RUP supplements, similar to those used in this study, to primiparous heifers in late gestation consuming ad libitum grass hay resulted in increased initial feedlot BW for HI compared to CON calves, improved feed efficiency, and altered carcass characteristics in calves born to supplemented compared with CON dams.

show abstract

“…The birthweight of calves born to Angus cross-bred cows fed 60% of their requirements between 30 and 85 days or between 30 and 140 days of gestation was the same as offspring born to cows fed 100% of requirements but their liver was heavier (Prezotto et al, 2016). Moreover, nutritional supplementation of restricted beef heifers during pregnancy did not increase offspring birthweight nor subsequent performance (Summers et al, 2015) but increased feedlot efficiency and altered carcass characteristics with a tendency for high fat concentrations in the meat of animal born to restricted, non-supplemented heifers (Summers et al, 2015).…”

Section: Undernutritionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Does maternal size, nutrition and metabolic status affect offspring production traits in domestic species?

Robles¹,

Chavatte‐Palmer²

2017

Anim Reprod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Developmental Origins of health and Disease state that environmental conditions during pregnancy affect long term outcomes in offspring. In the present paper, effects of maternal size and breed as well as maternal nutrition on offspring size, growth and production traits are described. Although birthweight is mostly not affected, metabolic perturbations are often observed in adult offspring. In animal production, however, the relation between developmental conditions and long-term offspring outcome may remain unnoticed. Nevertheless, improving dams' health and nutrition before and during pregnancy may help improving production traits in domestic animals.

show abstract

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on I. Average daily gain, feed intake, calf birth body weight, and rebreeding in pregnant beef heifers

Cited by 20 publications

References 20 publications

Energetic-protein supplementation in the last 60 days of gestation improves performance of beef cows grazing tropical pastures

Energetic-protein supplementation in the last 60 days of gestation improves performance of beef cows grazing tropical pastures

Impact of supplemental protein source offered to primiparous heifers during gestation on II. Progeny performance and carcass characteristics

Does maternal size, nutrition and metabolic status affect offspring production traits in domestic species?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About