Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:33:17.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effect of stage of maturity and method of preservation of processed whole-crop wheat on the intake and milk production in dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

A.J. Bond*
Affiliation:
Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK.
R.J. Readman
Affiliation:
Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK.
J.A. Huntington
Affiliation:
Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK.
Get access

Extract

The use of a forage processor, which is fixed within the forage harvester and cracks the grains of whole-crop wheat (WCW) at harvest, has been shown to increase the digestibility of the starch component and improve the efficiency of forage utilisation in dairy cows (Jackson et al., 2002). This allows the wheat to be harvested over a much wider harvest window, although the optimum stage of maturity at which processed WCW should be cut is unclear. In addition, at the very high dry matter (DM) values that the forage processor allows WCW to now be harvested, the use of urea as a preservative may not be required. The objective of the current experiment was, therefore, to compare WCW harvested at different stages of maturity and investigate the effect of using a urea-based preservative on high DM processed WCW, on the performance of dairy cows.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Jackson, M.A., Sinclair, L.A., Readman, R and Huntington, J. 2002. The effect of forage grinding and cutting height of urea treated whole crop wheat on the milk production and diet digestibility in dairy cows. Proc. Winter Meeting BSAS, 13.Google Scholar