Variation in Forage Preference in Dairy Cattle1

Coppock, C.E.; Everett, R.W.; Smith, Nathan R.; Slack, S. T.; Harner, Joseph P.

doi:10.2527/jas1974.3961170x

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems unlikely that cows would preferentially sort long particles from the TMR to ameliorate SARA, since SARA has been routinely documented in herds via rumenocentesis (Oetzel et al, 1999), and sorting is a common occurrence in dairy herds. Free choice hay may be beneficial to cows with SARA, but cows have exhibited varying preferences when offered different forages (Coppock et al, 1974). Thus, the ad libitum availability of TMR and hay could be deleterious to production in high-producing cows.…”

Section: Farm Variables Affecting Rumen Ph Ration Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional Approaches to Minimize Subacute Ruminal Acidosis and Laminitis in Dairy Cattle

Stone

2004

Journal of Dairy Science

227

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lameness and subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) both appear to be very prevalent throughout the US dairy industry. Reduced ruminal efficiency, liver and lung abscesses, and laminitis are all thought to be related to SARA. Both the nutritionist and dairy managers are responsible for the delivery and consumption of a ration that is likely to produce a ruminally healthy pH. Nutritionists should consider the expected amount of physically effective neutral detergent fiber provided by ration ingredients, along with their expected ruminal fermentabilities and resultant microbial acid production. Environmental conditions, such as heat stress, overcrowding, and uncomfortable stalls, which may alter feed intake patterns and animal behavior, should also be considered in ration formulation. Additional amounts of physically effective neutral detergent fiber, and/or a reduction in ruminal nonstructural carbohydrate availability, may be warranted during times of increased animal stress. Higher levels of intake may also predispose the rumen to SARA, since salivary buffer secretion may not adequately compensate for additional acid production. Forage dry matter should be determined twice weekly, or more frequently if results vary by more than 5 percent of the dry matter value. Ration variability can be further reduced by premixing individual forages, or at least attempting to make each loader bucket of feed a uniform mix obtained from the entire height or face of the bunker silo. Ingredient sequencing and mixing time should be standardized on a given dairy. Techniques to minimize sorting, including frequent feed pushups, the addition of water or a low dry matter by-product, and appropriate forage processing, should be adopted by managers.

show abstract

Section: Farm Variables Affecting Rumen Ph Ration Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional Approaches to Minimize Subacute Ruminal Acidosis and Laminitis in Dairy Cattle

Stone

2004

Journal of Dairy Science

227

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This hypothesis has not been unanimously accepted, primarily due to a lack of any experimental analysis, and thus the ability of herbivores to acquire preferences for feeds based on post-ingestive effects of nutrients has been questioned (e.g. Coppock et al 1974;Zahorik & Houpt, 1977). Indeed, the ability of herbivores to learn preferences based on nutrient feedback is thought to be of less significance than their ability to develop aversions to toxins (Cassini, 1994).…”

Section: Preference Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preference for wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch

Villalba

Provenza

1997

Br J Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We hypothesized that feed preference depends on the interplay between flavour and postingestive effects, and we tested two predictions based on this hypothesis: (1) lambs acquire preferences for poorly nutritious feeds paired with starch; and (2) preferences persist when starch is no longer administered. Twenty lambs were randomly allocated to two groups and conditioned as follows: on odd-numbered days, lambs in group 1 received onion-flavoured wheat straw and lambs in group 2 received oregano-flavoured wheat straw. On even-numbered days, the flavours were switched and starch (2-5-9.4% of the digestible energy received/d) was infused into the rumen of aU animals during straw consumption. Four periods of 8 d of conditioning were performed and on the 9th day of each period all animals were offered a choice between onion-and oregano-flavoured straw. After conditioning, starch administration was suspended and lambs were offered onion-and oreganoflavoured straw at weekly intervals for 8 weeks (extinction). Lambs strongly preferred the flavoured straw paired with starch, and this preference persisted during extinction. Thus, these results suggest that the postingestive effects of energy play an important role in the development of feed preferences of ruminants.Palatability: Starch Feed preference: Hedonic-shift: Flavour It is not completely understood why ruminants manifest preferences for feeds. On the one hand, preferences have been attributed to flavour, which provides hedonic sensations associated with eating (reviewed by G r o w , 1988). On the other hand, nutrients have been proposed as a reason for feed selection (Westoby, 1978), and toxins as a reason for feed avoidance (Freeland 8z Janzen, 1974). According to these hypotheses, flavour and the postingestive effects of nutrients and toxins are autonomous phenomena, and the former is usually considered to influence preference more than the latter. Nevertheless, the two phenomena may be related: postingestive feedback from nutrients and toxins may influence flavour preferences (Provenza, 1995a).The postingestive effects of energy cause non-ruminants to acquire preferences for non-nutritive flavours (Sclafani & Nissenbaum, 1988;Perez et al. 1995), and the preferences persist when energy is no longer administered. Thus, animals apparently acquire a liking for flavours previously associated with energy (Mehiel, 1991; Sclafani, 1991). The energy content of the feed may also be important in the development of preferences in ruminants because energy is vital for survival, growth, and productivity (Church, 1988). For example, sheep prefer non-nutritive flavours paired with glucose to non-nutritive flavours paired with saccharin or water (Burritt & Provenza, 1992;Ralphs et al. 1995). In these studies glucose provided 26-46 % of the total daily energy intake of the animals. Thus, it is not known if sheep form preferences for feeds containing little energy or if these preferences persist aRer conditioning.

show abstract

“…Different conclusions have been drawn regarding the importance of N in diet selection. Some authors contend large herbivores maximize rate of protein intake (for example Belovsky, 1984;Langvatn & Hanley, 1993), whereas other authors claim they maximize energy intake (for example Wilmshurst et al 1995), or simply that dietary choices are not influenced by the protein content of the food (for example Coppock et al 1974;Zahorik & Houpt, 1977). Other authors conclude that sheep can discriminate between forages differing in N and fibre content, but cannot modify their foraging behaviour in relation to the levels of supplementary protein received before grazing (Duncan et al 1994).…”

Section: Physiological Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preference for flavoured foods by lambs conditioned with intraruminal administration of nitrogen

Villalba

Provenza

1997

Br J Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

~ ~~We suggested that food preference depends on the interplay between flavour and post-ingestive effects, and we predicted that protein-restricted lambs would acquire preferences for foods paired with supplemental sources of N, including urea (Expts 1 and 2), casein (Expt 3), and gluten (Expt 4).In each experiment, twenty lambs, in two groups of ten, were conditioned as follows: on oddnumbered days, lambs in group 1 received wheat straw (Exptsl, 3, and 4) or ground barley (Expt 2) flavoured with a distinctive flavour, and lambs in group 2 received the same food but with a different

show abstract

Variation in Forage Preference in Dairy Cattle1

Cited by 18 publications

References 15 publications

Nutritional Approaches to Minimize Subacute Ruminal Acidosis and Laminitis in Dairy Cattle

Nutritional Approaches to Minimize Subacute Ruminal Acidosis and Laminitis in Dairy Cattle

Preference for wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch

Preference for flavoured foods by lambs conditioned with intraruminal administration of nitrogen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About