Literature DB >> 15484961

Effect of management strategies on reducing heat stress of feedlot cattle: feed and water intake.

T L Mader1, M S Davis.   

Abstract

Three experiments were conducted to evaluate management strategies designed to decrease heat stress of cattle finished during the summer. In Exp. 1, 144 Angus crossbred yearling steers were assigned to three treatments: 1) ad libitum access to feed at 0800 (ADLIB); 2) fed at 1600 with feed amount adjusted so that no feed was available at 0800 (BKMGT); and 3) fed at 1600 at 85% of predicted ad libitum levels (LIMFD). Treatments were imposed for 23 d of an 82-d study, after which all steers were fed ad libitum at 0800. Treatment did not affect (P > 0.10) overall DMI, although ADLIB cattle tended to consume less feed. Overall water intake was decreased (P < 0.05) by 6.8 L x animal(-1) x d(-1) for LIMFD vs. ADLIB steers. In Exp. 2, 96 Angus crossbred yearling steers were assigned to three treatments: 1) control, no water application; 2) water applied to the pen surfaces between 1000 and 1200 (AM); and 3) water applied to pen surfaces between 1400 and 1600 (PM). Water intake and DMI did not differ among treatments; however, feed efficiency of AM steers was superior (P = 0.06) to that of PM steers. Conversely, marbling scores of PM steers were higher (P = 0.06) than those of AM steers. In Exp. 3, 192 crossbred steers were used to determine the effects of feeding time (0800 [AMF] vs. 1400 [PMF]), with (WET) and without (DRY) sprinkling (20 min every 1.5 h between 1000 and 1750). Feed DMI did not differ among treatments; however, water intake and marbling scores were highest (P < 0.05) for AMF/DRY steers. During these experiments, bunk scores (0 = <10% of feed delivered remaining; 1 = 10 to 50% of feed remaining; 2 = >50% of feed remaining) were assigned to each pen at various times during the day. In Exp. 1, bunk scores of BKMGT pens remained similar (P > 0.20) under varying environmental conditions, whereas LIMFD steers had lower scores (P < 0.05) as days on feed increased, even under hot environmental conditions. In Exp. 3, bunk scores of PMF/WET steers tended to be lower (P < 0.10) at 1700 and 2000 compared with PMF/ DRY pens under mild heat stress but not under severe heat stress. Alternative feeding regimens and sprinkling can alter the feed intake pattern of steers. Heat stress management strategies imposed in these experiments had minimal effects on cattle performance. Such strategies would be most useful for decreasing the susceptibility of cattle to hyperthermia and reducing related feedlot cattle deaths without adversely affecting performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15484961     DOI: 10.2527/2004.82103077x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  16 in total

1.  Effect of sprinkling on feedlot microclimate and cattle behavior.

Authors:  T L Mader; M S Davis; J B Gaughan
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2007-03-16       Impact factor: 3.787

2.  Effect of hot temperatures on the hematological parameters, health and performance of calves.

Authors:  Jan Broucek; Peter Kisac; Michael Uhrincat
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 3.787

3.  Effects of different feeding time and frequency on metabolic conditions and milk production in heat-stressed dairy cows.

Authors:  L Calamari; F Petrera; L Stefanini; F Abeni
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 3.787

Review 4.  BEEF SPECIES-RUMINANT NUTRITION CACTUS BEEF SYMPOSIUM: A role for beef cattle in sustainable U.S. food production1.

Authors:  Claire B Gleason; Robin R White
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Productivity of Thai Brahman and Simmental-Brahman crossbred (Kabinburi) cattle in central Thailand.

Authors:  S Boonprong; A Choothesa; C Sribhen; N Parvizi; C Vajrabukka
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 3.787

6.  Environmental effects on water intake and water intake prediction in growing beef cattle.

Authors:  Cashley M Ahlberg; Kristi Allwardt; Ashley Broocks; Kelsey Bruno; Levi McPhillips; Alexandra Taylor; Clint R Krehbiel; Michelle S Calvo-Lorenzo; Chris J Richards; Sara E Place; Udaya DeSilva; Deborah L VanOverbeke; Raluca G Mateescu; Larry A Kuehn; Robert L Weaber; Jennifer M Bormann; Megan M Rolf
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Predicting impacts of climate change on Fasciola hepatica risk.

Authors:  Naomi J Fox; Piran C L White; Colin J McClean; Glenn Marion; Andy Evans; Michael R Hutchings
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Livestock Helminths in a Changing Climate: Approaches and Restrictions to Meaningful Predictions.

Authors:  Naomi J Fox; Glenn Marion; Ross S Davidson; Piran C L White; Michael R Hutchings
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 2.752

9.  The influence of feed energy density and a formulated additive on rumen and rectal temperature in hanwoo steers.

Authors:  Sangbuem Cho; David Tinotenda Mbiriri; Kwanseob Shim; A-Leum Lee; Seong-Jin Oh; Jinho Yang; Chaehwa Ryu; Young-Hoon Kim; Kang-Seok Seo; Jung-Il Chae; Young Kyoon Oh; Nag-Jin Choi
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.509

10.  Genetic, management, and nutritional factors affecting intramuscular fat deposition in beef cattle - A review.

Authors:  Seung Ju Park; Seok-Hyeon Beak; Da Jin Sol Jung; Sang Yeob Kim; In Hyuk Jeong; Min Yu Piao; Hyeok Joong Kang; Dilla Mareistia Fassah; Sang Weon Na; Seon Pil Yoo; Myunggi Baik
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 2.509

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.