Literature DB >> 7982821

Dietary energy source and density: effects of roughage source, roughage equivalent, tallow level, and steer type on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics.

S J Bartle1, R L Preston, M F Miller.   

Abstract

The effects of roughage level (10, 20, or 30% roughage equivalent [RE]), roughage source (alfalfa vs cottonseed hulls), roughage regimen (constant RE vs 2% RE during the mid-finishing period), tallow level (1.2 vs 4.6%), and steer type (British crossbred [BRITX] vs Bos indicus crosses [BRX]) were evaluated in three experiments with a common allotment and several overlapping treatments. Steers (n = 432; initial weight = 326 +/- 26 kg) were divided into three BW blocks and allotted randomly to 72 pens and 24 treatments. Steers were fed steam-flaked, sorghum grain-based finishing diets for 124 to 166 d. Diets with 20% RE decreased gain efficiency and 30% RE diets decreased both gain (linear, P < .07) and efficiency (linear, P < .001) compared with 10% RE diets. Reducing roughage level during the mid-finishing period improved overall gain efficiency 2, 7, and 24% (P > .2, < .05, and < .001, respectively) for the 10, 20, and 30% RE diets, respectively. Steers fed cottonseed hulls consumed more feed (9.6 vs 8.8 kg/d, P < .001) but tended to gain less (1.53 vs 1.58 kg/d, P = .11) than steers fed alfalfa, were leaner, and had fewer carcasses grading Choice (62 vs 77%, P < .05). Feeding 4.6% tallow decreased DMI (P < .05) and improved gain efficiency (P < .05) compared with 1.2% tallow. The BRITX steers consumed more feed (6%, P < .001) but were somewhat less efficient (3.5%, P < .05) than BRX steers. Carcasses from BRITX steers tended to be fatter than carcasses from BRX steers and more of them graded Choice (62 vs 37%, P < .01). Commercial BRX steers did not perform as well as BRITX steers on higher-energy-density diets (4.6% tallow or variable roughage regimen). Knowledge of the genetic background of feeder cattle can be important in the selection of dietary energy density and marketing expectations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7982821     DOI: 10.2527/1994.7281943x

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


  6 in total

1.  Effect of increasing the level of alfalfa hay in finishing beef heifer diets on intake, sorting, and feeding behavior.

Authors:  A Madruga; L A González; E Mainau; J L Ruíz de la Torre; M Rodríguez-Prado; X Manteca; A Ferret
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaria L.) substitution for orange pulp on intake, digestibility, and performance of hairsheep lambs.

Authors:  Ulises Macías-Cruz; Juan A Quintero-Elisea; Leonel Avendaño-Reyes; Abelardo Correa-Calderón; Francisco D Alvarez-Valenzuela; S A Soto-Navarro; F A Lucero-Magaña; Arnoldo González-Reyna
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2009-08-09       Impact factor: 1.559

3.  Using 19% of alfalfa hay in beef feedlot finishing diets did not modify meat quality but increased feed intake and ADG1.

Authors:  Ana Madruga; Ricardo S Abril; Luciano A González; Xavier Manteca; Núria Panella-Riera; Marta Gil; Alfred Ferret
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Interaction of replacing corn silage with soyhulls as a roughage source with or without 3% added wheat straw in the diet: impacts on intake, digestibility, and ruminal fermentation in steers fed high-concentrate diets.

Authors:  Bryan W Neville; Wayde J Pickinpaugh; Lea J Mittleider; Rebecca L Moore; Kendall C Swanson; Joel S Caton
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2022-05-17

5.  Economic assessments from experimental research trials of feedlot cattle health and performance: a scoping review.

Authors:  Andrea L Dixon; Christy J Hanthorn; Dustin L Pendell; Natalia Cernicchiaro; David G Renter
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2022-06-06

6.  Alfalfa hay improves nursing performance of Awassi ewes and performance of growing lambs when used as a source of forage compared with wheat straw.

Authors:  B S Obeidat; H S Subih; J B Taylor; M D Obeidat
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 1.559

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.