Literature DB >> 34159296

Grazing behavior and production for lactating cows differing in residual feed intake while grazing spring and summer rangeland.

James E Sprinkle1,2, Melinda J Ellison1,2, John B Hall1,2, Joel V Yelich2, Carmen M Willmore3, Jameson R Brennan4.   

Abstract

The objectives were to determine if previously classified, efficient (LRFI, low-residual-feed intake, n = 12 × 2 yr) vs. inefficient (HRFI, high-residual-feed intake, n = 12 × 2 yr) lactating 2-yr-old Hereford × Angus cows differed in grazing behavior, body weight (BW), body condition score (BCS), and calf weaning weight while grazing rugged rangeland pastures. Cows were fitted with grazing halters containing both an accelerometer and a global positioning system (GPS) data logger during June 14 to July 4, 2016, August 2 to 25, 2016, May 23 to June 12, 2017, and August 5 to 28, 2017. GPS data were recorded at 7-min intervals in 2016 and 4-min intervals in 2017 and accelerometer data recorded at 25 times/s. Grazing time (GT), resting, walking, bite rate (BR), daily travel distance (DTD), elevation, and slope were analyzed with a mixed model that included fixed effects of RFI group, day, and RFI group × day and cow within treatment as the random effect. Cow BW, BCS, and calf weaning weight were analyzed by analysis of variance with treatment as the main effect. There were no differences (P &gt; 0.10) due to RFI detected for BW, BCS, or calf weaning weights. During periods of mild heat load (MHL), HRFI cows spent more (P < 0.05) time resting during the day at lower elevations (P < 0.05) than LRFI cows. During a 6-d period in spring with only 2 h MHL, HRFI cows grazed 1.7 h/d longer than LRFI cows (P < 0.05); commencing grazing earlier in the morning and extending the grazing bout later. During the summer with &gt; MHL, LRFI cows grazed more than HRFI cows 18% of the time (P < 0.10). The HRFI cows had greater GT than LRFI cows only 3% of the time (P < 0.10) during summer. There was no difference (P &gt; 0.10) in BR between HRFI and LRFI cattle. The DTD tended (P < 0.10) to be greater for LRFI cattle during summer 2017. Over all sample periods, HRFI had greater walking than LRFI 15% of the time and LRFI exceeded HRFI cattle for walking 3% of the time (P < 0.10). The greater walking for HRFI was assumed to be associated with more search grazing. Metabolic heat load on hot summer days for HRFI cattle is presumed to have contributed to differences observed in grazing behavior. These results suggest that lactating cows with low-RFI phenotypes appear to be better adapted to grazing rugged rangelands in late summer during periods of MHL.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.

Entities:  

Keywords:  accelerometer; beef cattle; global positioning system; grazing behavior; rangeland; residual feed intake

Year:  2021        PMID: 34159296      PMCID: PMC8212170          DOI: 10.1093/tas/txab063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Anim Sci        ISSN: 2573-2102


  16 in total

1.  Time of daily supplementation for steers grazing dormant intermediate wheatgrass pasture.

Authors:  R K Barton; L J Krysl; M B Judkins; D W Holcombe; J T Broesder; S A Gunter; S W Beam
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Heat stress in dairy cattle and other livestock under southern African conditions. I. Temperature-humidity index mean values during the four main seasons.

Authors:  J H Du Preez; W H Giesecke; P J Hattingh
Journal:  Onderstepoort J Vet Res       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 1.792

3.  Visceral organ weights, digestion and carcass characteristics of beef bulls differing in residual feed intake offered a high concentrate diet.

Authors:  C Fitzsimons; D A Kenny; M McGee
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Digesta kinetics, energy intake, grazing behavior, and body temperature of grazing beef cattle differing in adaptation to heat.

Authors:  J E Sprinkle; J W Holloway; B G Warrington; W C Ellist; J W Stuth; T D Forbes; L W Greene
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Beef Species Symposium: difficulties associated with predicting forage intake by grazing beef cows.

Authors:  S W Coleman; S A Gunter; J E Sprinkle; J P S Neel
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Short communication: grazing pattern of dairy cows that were selected for divergent residual feed intake as calves.

Authors:  P Gregorini; G C Waghorn; B Kuhn-Sherlock; A J Romera; K A Macdonald
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 7.  Joint Alpharma-Beef Species Symposium: interactions of feed efficiency with beef heifer reproductive development.

Authors:  R D Randel; T H Welsh
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Grazing behavior and production characteristics among cows differing in residual feed intake while grazing late season Idaho rangeland.

Authors:  James E Sprinkle; J Bret Taylor; Patrick E Clark; John B Hall; Nicole K Strong; Meghan C Roberts-Lew
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  ASAS-NANP Symposium: Mathematical Modeling in Animal Nutrition: Opportunities and challenges of confined and extensive precision livestock production.

Authors:  Hector M Menendez; Jameson R Brennan; Charlotte Gaillard; Krista Ehlert; Jaelyn Quintana; Suresh Neethirajan; Aline Remus; Marc Jacobs; Izabelle A M A Teixeira; Benjamin L Turner; Luis O Tedeschi
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.338

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.