Loading…

Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs

The objective was to evaluate the effects of a winter-feeding system on (study 1) forage biomass and quality, DMI, beef cow performance, system costs, and (study 2) ruminal fermentation. In study 1, over 3 yr, 60 dry, pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (658.2 ± 15 kg) and randomly allocated t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied Animal Science 2020-10, Vol.36 (5), p.731-744
Main Authors: Jose, D., Larson, K., McKinnon, J.J., Penner, G.B., Damiran, D., Lardner, H.A.(Bart)
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03
container_end_page 744
container_issue 5
container_start_page 731
container_title Applied Animal Science
container_volume 36
creator Jose, D.
Larson, K.
McKinnon, J.J.
Penner, G.B.
Damiran, D.
Lardner, H.A.(Bart)
description The objective was to evaluate the effects of a winter-feeding system on (study 1) forage biomass and quality, DMI, beef cow performance, system costs, and (study 2) ruminal fermentation. In study 1, over 3 yr, 60 dry, pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (658.2 ± 15 kg) and randomly allocated to 1 of 3 replicated (n = 2) winter-feeding systems. Winter-feeding systems included (i) grazing standing whole-plant corn (STCOR; Zea mays L. ‘DKC 26-25’; 10.0% CP, 67.6% TDN); (ii) grazing swathed whole-plant barley (SWBAR; Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Ranger’; 11.5% CP, 60.5% TDN); and (iii) drylot feeding barley hay (DLHAY; Ranger; 10.3% CP, 54.2% TDN). In study 2 (yr 1 and yr 2), 9 ruminally cannulated beef heifers (529 ± 39 kg) cycled through the 3 winter systems in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design, with 21-d periods to evaluate the effects of system and day of forage allocation on ruminal fermentation. Forage utilization was greatest (P = 0.01) for the DLHAY (84.4 ± 5.9%), intermediate for SWBAR (63.9 ± 2.5%), and least for STCOR (51.1 ± 4.4%) system. Winter-feeding system did not differ (P = 0.21) for initial BW (665 ± 17 kg), final BW (679 ± 25 kg), initial (4.2±0.94 mm) and final rib fat thickness (4.9±0.86 mm), and BCS (P = 0.36; final BCS = 2.8 ± 0.10; BCS change = 0.07 ± 0.14; 5-point scale). Mean ruminal pH was greatest (P = 0.02) for DLHAY (6.59) compared with SWBAR and STCOR forages (6.42 and 6.44, respectively). The area (pH × min/d) and duration that pH was
doi_str_mv 10.15232/aas.2020-01983
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>elsevier_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_15232_aas_2020_01983</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2590286520301439</els_id><sourcerecordid>S2590286520301439</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWGrPXvMDum0y-2FylFI_oOBFzzGbTCTSTUoSLf33rq2CF08zh3mG930IueZswVuoYal1XgADVjEuRX1GJtBKVoHo2vM_-yWZ5fzOGAPBGgFyQl7XzqEpmUZH9z4UTJVDtD680XzIBQcaA-0RHTVxT3eYXEyDDgbnNH0MPugtdZgGDEUXH8Oc6mB_SRNzyVfkwultxtnPnJKXu_Xz6qHaPN0_rm43lQHJS9WYXmphoRO2Qw6NFFZ0ztYcWiHbruccOuDcAW_kDXLDNfbWNGY8sY0wrJ6S5emvSTHnhE7tkh90OijO1NGRGh2pb0fq6Ggk5InAMdanx6Sy8ThWsz6NSpSN_l_2C7Nzbiw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Jose, D. ; Larson, K. ; McKinnon, J.J. ; Penner, G.B. ; Damiran, D. ; Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</creator><creatorcontrib>Jose, D. ; Larson, K. ; McKinnon, J.J. ; Penner, G.B. ; Damiran, D. ; Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</creatorcontrib><description>The objective was to evaluate the effects of a winter-feeding system on (study 1) forage biomass and quality, DMI, beef cow performance, system costs, and (study 2) ruminal fermentation. In study 1, over 3 yr, 60 dry, pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (658.2 ± 15 kg) and randomly allocated to 1 of 3 replicated (n = 2) winter-feeding systems. Winter-feeding systems included (i) grazing standing whole-plant corn (STCOR; Zea mays L. ‘DKC 26-25’; 10.0% CP, 67.6% TDN); (ii) grazing swathed whole-plant barley (SWBAR; Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Ranger’; 11.5% CP, 60.5% TDN); and (iii) drylot feeding barley hay (DLHAY; Ranger; 10.3% CP, 54.2% TDN). In study 2 (yr 1 and yr 2), 9 ruminally cannulated beef heifers (529 ± 39 kg) cycled through the 3 winter systems in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design, with 21-d periods to evaluate the effects of system and day of forage allocation on ruminal fermentation. Forage utilization was greatest (P = 0.01) for the DLHAY (84.4 ± 5.9%), intermediate for SWBAR (63.9 ± 2.5%), and least for STCOR (51.1 ± 4.4%) system. Winter-feeding system did not differ (P = 0.21) for initial BW (665 ± 17 kg), final BW (679 ± 25 kg), initial (4.2±0.94 mm) and final rib fat thickness (4.9±0.86 mm), and BCS (P = 0.36; final BCS = 2.8 ± 0.10; BCS change = 0.07 ± 0.14; 5-point scale). Mean ruminal pH was greatest (P = 0.02) for DLHAY (6.59) compared with SWBAR and STCOR forages (6.42 and 6.44, respectively). The area (pH × min/d) and duration that pH was &lt;5.8 (min/d) was greater (P = 0.02) for SWBAR (50.8 and 231.6, respectively) compared with DLHAY (4.9 and 53.6, respectively) but similar to STCOR forage (52 and 129.3, respectively). Ruminal pH increased (P = 0.01) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation, and duration and area when pH was below 5.8 decreased (P = 0.03) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation. These results suggest that grazing either standing corn or swathed barley during winter can reduce (P = 0.01) costs by 25 and 36%, respectively, with no negative effects on cow performance and minimal effects on ruminal fermentation compared with feeding cows barley hay in drylot.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2590-2865</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2590-2865</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.15232/aas.2020-01983</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>corn grazing ; drylot feeding ; extensive winter system ; rumen metabolism ; swathed barley grazing</subject><ispartof>Applied Animal Science, 2020-10, Vol.36 (5), p.731-744</ispartof><rights>2020 American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6254-284X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590286520301439$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27924,27925,45780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jose, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larson, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinnon, J.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penner, G.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damiran, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs</title><title>Applied Animal Science</title><description>The objective was to evaluate the effects of a winter-feeding system on (study 1) forage biomass and quality, DMI, beef cow performance, system costs, and (study 2) ruminal fermentation. In study 1, over 3 yr, 60 dry, pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (658.2 ± 15 kg) and randomly allocated to 1 of 3 replicated (n = 2) winter-feeding systems. Winter-feeding systems included (i) grazing standing whole-plant corn (STCOR; Zea mays L. ‘DKC 26-25’; 10.0% CP, 67.6% TDN); (ii) grazing swathed whole-plant barley (SWBAR; Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Ranger’; 11.5% CP, 60.5% TDN); and (iii) drylot feeding barley hay (DLHAY; Ranger; 10.3% CP, 54.2% TDN). In study 2 (yr 1 and yr 2), 9 ruminally cannulated beef heifers (529 ± 39 kg) cycled through the 3 winter systems in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design, with 21-d periods to evaluate the effects of system and day of forage allocation on ruminal fermentation. Forage utilization was greatest (P = 0.01) for the DLHAY (84.4 ± 5.9%), intermediate for SWBAR (63.9 ± 2.5%), and least for STCOR (51.1 ± 4.4%) system. Winter-feeding system did not differ (P = 0.21) for initial BW (665 ± 17 kg), final BW (679 ± 25 kg), initial (4.2±0.94 mm) and final rib fat thickness (4.9±0.86 mm), and BCS (P = 0.36; final BCS = 2.8 ± 0.10; BCS change = 0.07 ± 0.14; 5-point scale). Mean ruminal pH was greatest (P = 0.02) for DLHAY (6.59) compared with SWBAR and STCOR forages (6.42 and 6.44, respectively). The area (pH × min/d) and duration that pH was &lt;5.8 (min/d) was greater (P = 0.02) for SWBAR (50.8 and 231.6, respectively) compared with DLHAY (4.9 and 53.6, respectively) but similar to STCOR forage (52 and 129.3, respectively). Ruminal pH increased (P = 0.01) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation, and duration and area when pH was below 5.8 decreased (P = 0.03) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation. These results suggest that grazing either standing corn or swathed barley during winter can reduce (P = 0.01) costs by 25 and 36%, respectively, with no negative effects on cow performance and minimal effects on ruminal fermentation compared with feeding cows barley hay in drylot.</description><subject>corn grazing</subject><subject>drylot feeding</subject><subject>extensive winter system</subject><subject>rumen metabolism</subject><subject>swathed barley grazing</subject><issn>2590-2865</issn><issn>2590-2865</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWGrPXvMDum0y-2FylFI_oOBFzzGbTCTSTUoSLf33rq2CF08zh3mG930IueZswVuoYal1XgADVjEuRX1GJtBKVoHo2vM_-yWZ5fzOGAPBGgFyQl7XzqEpmUZH9z4UTJVDtD680XzIBQcaA-0RHTVxT3eYXEyDDgbnNH0MPugtdZgGDEUXH8Oc6mB_SRNzyVfkwultxtnPnJKXu_Xz6qHaPN0_rm43lQHJS9WYXmphoRO2Qw6NFFZ0ztYcWiHbruccOuDcAW_kDXLDNfbWNGY8sY0wrJ6S5emvSTHnhE7tkh90OijO1NGRGh2pb0fq6Ggk5InAMdanx6Sy8ThWsz6NSpSN_l_2C7Nzbiw</recordid><startdate>202010</startdate><enddate>202010</enddate><creator>Jose, D.</creator><creator>Larson, K.</creator><creator>McKinnon, J.J.</creator><creator>Penner, G.B.</creator><creator>Damiran, D.</creator><creator>Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6254-284X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202010</creationdate><title>Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs</title><author>Jose, D. ; Larson, K. ; McKinnon, J.J. ; Penner, G.B. ; Damiran, D. ; Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>corn grazing</topic><topic>drylot feeding</topic><topic>extensive winter system</topic><topic>rumen metabolism</topic><topic>swathed barley grazing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jose, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larson, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinnon, J.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penner, G.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damiran, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Applied Animal Science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jose, D.</au><au>Larson, K.</au><au>McKinnon, J.J.</au><au>Penner, G.B.</au><au>Damiran, D.</au><au>Lardner, H.A.(Bart)</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs</atitle><jtitle>Applied Animal Science</jtitle><date>2020-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>731</spage><epage>744</epage><pages>731-744</pages><issn>2590-2865</issn><eissn>2590-2865</eissn><abstract>The objective was to evaluate the effects of a winter-feeding system on (study 1) forage biomass and quality, DMI, beef cow performance, system costs, and (study 2) ruminal fermentation. In study 1, over 3 yr, 60 dry, pregnant Angus cows were stratified by BW (658.2 ± 15 kg) and randomly allocated to 1 of 3 replicated (n = 2) winter-feeding systems. Winter-feeding systems included (i) grazing standing whole-plant corn (STCOR; Zea mays L. ‘DKC 26-25’; 10.0% CP, 67.6% TDN); (ii) grazing swathed whole-plant barley (SWBAR; Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Ranger’; 11.5% CP, 60.5% TDN); and (iii) drylot feeding barley hay (DLHAY; Ranger; 10.3% CP, 54.2% TDN). In study 2 (yr 1 and yr 2), 9 ruminally cannulated beef heifers (529 ± 39 kg) cycled through the 3 winter systems in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design, with 21-d periods to evaluate the effects of system and day of forage allocation on ruminal fermentation. Forage utilization was greatest (P = 0.01) for the DLHAY (84.4 ± 5.9%), intermediate for SWBAR (63.9 ± 2.5%), and least for STCOR (51.1 ± 4.4%) system. Winter-feeding system did not differ (P = 0.21) for initial BW (665 ± 17 kg), final BW (679 ± 25 kg), initial (4.2±0.94 mm) and final rib fat thickness (4.9±0.86 mm), and BCS (P = 0.36; final BCS = 2.8 ± 0.10; BCS change = 0.07 ± 0.14; 5-point scale). Mean ruminal pH was greatest (P = 0.02) for DLHAY (6.59) compared with SWBAR and STCOR forages (6.42 and 6.44, respectively). The area (pH × min/d) and duration that pH was &lt;5.8 (min/d) was greater (P = 0.02) for SWBAR (50.8 and 231.6, respectively) compared with DLHAY (4.9 and 53.6, respectively) but similar to STCOR forage (52 and 129.3, respectively). Ruminal pH increased (P = 0.01) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation, and duration and area when pH was below 5.8 decreased (P = 0.03) from d 1 to 3 of forage allocation. These results suggest that grazing either standing corn or swathed barley during winter can reduce (P = 0.01) costs by 25 and 36%, respectively, with no negative effects on cow performance and minimal effects on ruminal fermentation compared with feeding cows barley hay in drylot.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.15232/aas.2020-01983</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6254-284X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2590-2865
ispartof Applied Animal Science, 2020-10, Vol.36 (5), p.731-744
issn 2590-2865
2590-2865
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_15232_aas_2020_01983
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects corn grazing
drylot feeding
extensive winter system
rumen metabolism
swathed barley grazing
title Effects of winter-feeding system on beef cow performance, ruminal fermentation, and system costs
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T17%3A06%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-elsevier_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20winter-feeding%20system%20on%20beef%20cow%20performance,%20ruminal%20fermentation,%20and%20system%20costs&rft.jtitle=Applied%20Animal%20Science&rft.au=Jose,%20D.&rft.date=2020-10&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=731&rft.epage=744&rft.pages=731-744&rft.issn=2590-2865&rft.eissn=2590-2865&rft_id=info:doi/10.15232/aas.2020-01983&rft_dat=%3Celsevier_cross%3ES2590286520301439%3C/elsevier_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c291t-4cb9a8d268d6e12498d86fd31258956b1126211f21497e1c1aebdc4cfd3d48c03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true