Literature DB >> 29293792

Effect of forage species and supplement type on rumen kinetics and serum metabolites in growing beef heifers grazing winter forage.

Z D McFarlane, R P Barbero, R L G Nave, E B Maheiros, R A Reis, J T Mulliniks.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of stockpiled forage type and protein supplementation on VFA production, serum metabolites, and BW in yearling beef heifers. Over 2 yr, spring-born, Angus crossbred yearling beef heifers ( = 42; 305 ± 2.9 kg initial BW) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 forage pasture types: 1) endophyte-infected tall fescue [TF; (Schreb.) Dumort], 2) a big bluestem ( Vitman) and indiangrass ( L.) combination (BI), or 3) switchgrass (SG; L.). Each pasture was then randomly assigned to receive either 1 of 2 isonitrogenous CP treatments: 1) 0.68 kg·heifer·d of dried distiller's grains with solubles (DDGS; 28% CP and 88% TDN) or 2) 0.22 kg·heifer·d of blood meal and fish meal (BF; 72.5% CP and 69.5% TDN), resulting in a 3 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. Treatments were initiated in January and terminated in April in both years of the study. Body weights and blood samples were collected approximately every 28 d from initiation of grazing until the end of the trial. Heifer BW change from January to February and overall BW change were greater ( < 0.01) for TF heifers. However, BW change from March to April was not different ( = 0.84) among forage types. Supplement type did not influence ( ≥ 0.13) BW or BW change from January to February and from January to April; however, heifers fed DDGS had greater ( = 0.03) BW gain from March to April. Heifer BW change from February to March exhibited ( < 0.05) a forage type × supplement interaction, with BF-fed heifers gaining more BW on BI pastures than DDGS-fed heifers. Serum glucose concentrations, ruminal acetate, and the acetate:propionate ratio were greater ( ≤ 0.04) for SG heifers. However, circulating serum NEFA and urea N (SUN) concentrations were not different ( ≥ 0.85) among forage types. Serum glucose and NEFA concentrations were not influenced ( ≥ 0.61) by supplement type. Circulating SUN concentrations were greater ( < 0.01) in BF-supplemented heifers. Ruminal acetate tended to be greater ( = 0.09) and butyrate concentrations were greater ( < 0.01) for BF-supplemented heifers. The acetate:propionate ratio was not influenced ( = 0.15) by supplement type. These results suggest that a compensatory gain period prior to breeding would be needed for these native warm-season species to be a viable opportunity for growing and developing replacement heifers in the southeastern United States.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29293792      PMCID: PMC6292271          DOI: 10.2527/jas2017.1780

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


  22 in total

1.  Influence of protein type and level on nitrogen and forage use in cows consuming low-quality forage.

Authors:  J E Sawyer; J T Mulliniks; R C Waterman; M K Petersen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Quo vadis C(4)? An ecophysiological perspective on global change and the future of C(4) plants.

Authors:  Rowan F Sage; David S Kubien
Journal:  Photosynth Res       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Performance of beef heifers grazing stockpiled fescue as influenced by supplemental whole cottonseed.

Authors:  M H Poore; M E Scott; J T Green
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Reproductive performance of heifers offered ad libitum or restricted access to feed for a one hundred forty-day period after weaning.

Authors:  A J Roberts; T W Geary; E E Grings; R C Waterman; M D MacNeil
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2009-05-22       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Influence of supplementation method on forage use and grazing behavior by beef cattle grazing bluestem range.

Authors:  S D Brandyberry; R C Cochran; E S Vanzant; T DelCurto; L R Corah
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Protein supplementation of ruminants consuming low-quality cool- or warm-season forage: differences in intake and digestibility.

Authors:  D W Bohnert; T DelCurto; A A Clark; M L Merrill; S J Falck; D L Harmon
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Effects of supplementation on intake, digestion, and performance of beef cattle consuming fertilized, stockpiled bermudagrass forage.

Authors:  J S Wheeler; D L Lalman; G W Horn; L A Redmon; C A Lents
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Partitioning of energy in pregnant beef cows during nutritionally induced body weight fluctuation.

Authors:  H C Freetly; J A Nienaber; T Brown-Brandl
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2007-11-12       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  Comparison of target breeding weight and breeding date for replacement beef heifers and effects on subsequent reproduction and calf performance.

Authors:  R N Funston; G H Deutscher
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Performance of growing cattle grazing stockpiled Jesup tall fescue with varying endophyte status.

Authors:  M E Drewnoski; E J Oliphant; B T Marshall; M H Poore; J T Green; M E Hockett
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2008-11-21       Impact factor: 3.159

View more
  2 in total

1.  Winter grazing of stockpiled native forages during heifer development delays body weight gain without influencing final pregnancy rates.

Authors:  Zachary D McFarlane; Emily R Cope; Jeremy D Hobbs; Renata N Oakes; Ky G Pohler; J Travis Mulliniks
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Effects of Concentrate Supplementation on Growth Performance, Rumen Fermentation, and Bacterial Community Composition in Grazing Yaks during the Warm Season.

Authors:  Dongwen Dai; Kaiyue Pang; Shujie Liu; Xun Wang; Yingkui Yang; Shatuo Chai; Shuxiang Wang
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-29       Impact factor: 3.231

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.