The Quantities of Herbage Eaten by Grazing Dairy Cows

MacLusky, D. S.

doi:10.1017/s036985210000155x

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The coefficient of variation using the twenty-eight-quadrat technique was 11·2% which is similar to or lower than those previously reported (MacLusky, 1955;Cox et al, 1956;Davison, 1959;Olubajo and Oyenuga, 1971), possibly because of the large number of samples taken. Strip grazing a range of uniform oat crops provided favourable swards for herbage sampling and relatively precise estimates of herbage intake.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Estimation of herbage consumption by grazing cattle using measurements of eating behaviour

Chacon

Stobbs

Sandland

1976

Grass and Forage Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

numbers of animals required to detect true differences in intake at various levels of precision are presented.It is concluded that herbage consumption by grazing ariimals can be obtained from measurements of eating behaviour. AbstractFeed consumption (/). of a group of eight nonlactating Jersey cows strip-grazing oats at three stages of growth was estimated from number of eating bites (AQ and bite size (5) measurements using the expression, I = NxS. N was measured with four non-fistulated animals while S was determined independently with four oesophageal fistulated animals. These estimates were compared with herhage consumption estimates using a cutting technique (fourteen samples of both herbage offered and refused).Eating behaviour estimates of intake based on N and S were 29% higher than cutting estimates due to fistulated animals having a high number of mastication bites with the head up during sampling and a large diurnal variation in bite size. After allowing for these sources of error eating behaviour estimates were only 2% higher than cutting estimates.Sampling variability was similar for both cutting and eating behaviour techniques; on an individual plot basis the percentage coeflBcients of variation were 11-2 and 101 for cutting and eating behaviour techniques, respectively. Methods of reducing ' sample variability are discussed and tables of

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Estimation of herbage consumption by grazing cattle using measurements of eating behaviour

Chacon

Stobbs

Sandland

1976

Grass and Forage Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although this contradicted the result for the whole feeding period, they concluded that there was a critical dry-matter content for grass, below which the dry-matter intake fell, and suggested that this lay between 24 and 28 %. MacLusky (1955) found no detectable effect of variations in water content of herbage on dry-matter intake, but only on the amount of water drunk. Ittner (1954) found that wilting of alfalfa of 20-27% dry-matter content up to 34-51 % dry-matter content did not increase the amount of dry matter eaten, nor affect the performance of the steers.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 66%

Effects of fertiliser nitrogen and herbage dry-matter content on herbage intake and digestibility in bullocks

Holmes

Lang

1963

Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY1. Two experiments were conducted, the first during May, July and August, 1958, and the second during August 1960. The first experiment measured the intake and digestive efficiency of cattle fed on fresh cut herbage from low-and high-nitrogen manuring treatments with and without irrigation. The second experiment tested the effect of water added to fresh cut herbage on the intake of cattle.2. Rainfall during the summer of the first experiment was high and irrigation had no effect on any of the criteria used.3. Although the dry-matter content of the fresh herbage from the high nitrogen treatment was consistently lower than that from the low nitrogen treatment (16·6% compared with 19·7% on average when free of surface moisture) the dry-matter intake was the same at 1·97 lb. dry matter per 100 lb. live-weight, on both herbages.4. The average digestibility of the high and low nitrogen treated herbage was 77·6% and 75·4%, the difference being significant. No scouring occurred. Digestibility was 78·9% in May, 76·1% in July and 74·5% in August (average of N levels).5. Rain water carried on the leaf surface was shown to have no effect on dry-matter intake.6. It is concluded that the dry-matter intake of cattle feeding on fresh herbage is unlikely to be restricted either by a high internal water content in the herbage or by rain water on the leaf surface.

show abstract

“…Several authors have concluded that there is no effect of DM content per se on the DM intake of herbage (MacLusky, 1955;Holmes and Lang, 1963) or other forages (Hillman et al, 1958;Moore et al, 1960;Campling and Balch, 1961;Thomas et al, 1961), but in these experiments the DM content of the forage was not reduced to very low levels. At herbage DM contents below about 180 g DM kg-' (Verite and Joumet, 1970) research has clearly demonstrated that DM intake is depressed (Duckworth and Shirlaw, 1958;Halley and Dougall, 1962;Rohr and Kaufmann, 1967).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

The effect of herbage surface water and the provision of supplementary forage on the intake and feeding behaviour of cattle

Butris

Phillips

1987

Grass and Forage Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High rainfall and the corresponding low herbage DM content has been shown to adversely affect cattle intakes and production. This could arise from physical restrictions on intake or digestion rate, or other behavioural limitations such as reduced palatability. A knowledge of the reason for the intake reduction would assist in determining the optimum supplement to feed. Eight steers were offered four diets in a changeover design. The diets were: A, cut herbage; B, cut herbage with added surface water; C, as B but with a low dry matter (DM) forage supplement (silage); and D, as B but with a high DM forage supplement (hay). The addition of surface water to herbage reduced DM intake and feeding time but had no effect on biting rate or rate of intake. Neither hay nor silage was eaten in sufficient quantities to restore DM intake, even though the silage was of similar nutrient composition to the herbage.

show abstract

The Quantities of Herbage Eaten by Grazing Dairy Cows

Cited by 18 publications

References 5 publications

Estimation of herbage consumption by grazing cattle using measurements of eating behaviour

Estimation of herbage consumption by grazing cattle using measurements of eating behaviour

Effects of fertiliser nitrogen and herbage dry-matter content on herbage intake and digestibility in bullocks

The effect of herbage surface water and the provision of supplementary forage on the intake and feeding behaviour of cattle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About