Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T19:03:51.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of flexible and rigid grazing management and of supplementary feed on output per hectare and per cow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. D. Leaver ,
R. C. Campling  and
W. Holmes
J. D. Leaver
Affiliation:
Wye College, (University of London), Ashford, Kent
R. C. Campling
Affiliation:
Wye College, (University of London), Ashford, Kent
W. Holmes
Affiliation:
Wye College, (University of London), Ashford, Kent
Get access

Summary

1. A comparison was made of the output per hectare and per cow of 3 systems of grazing management each based on a cycle of 5 days grazing followed by a 20-day rest period. The treatments were: C, strip grazing within a paddock, varying the area allotted so that a similar quantity of herbage was available each day, the pasture being frequently trimmed; treatment R, restricted grazing; the cows being allotted a fixed area of the paddock each day (67–5 m2 per cow per day) which was not trimmed or cut after grazing; and treatment RS, as treatment R but with each cow receiving cereal concentrates. Eight cows were on each treatment. Nitrogenous fertilizer was applied at the rate of 86 kg N per ha [1 kg per ha = 0.891b per acre] four weeks before the first grazing and at the same rate after each grazing; a total of 516 kg/ha was applied. The feed intake of each cow was measured on six occasions during the experiment.

2. The experiment continued for 150 days and the mean stocking rate on treatment C was 4–09 cows per ha [1 ha = 2·47 acre] and on the other two treatments 5·92 cows per ha. The number of cow grazing days per hectare were 610, 890 and 890 for treatments C, R and RS respectively and the outputs of milk were C 8450, R 12 420 and RS 13 380 kg/ha. Allowing for the concentrates given the milk outputs were C 7440, R 10 350 and RS 6660 kg/ha.

3. There were only slight differences between the treatments in output per animal.

4. The average intakes per kg W0·73 were similar in treatment C and R but the average intake of cows on treatment C was more uniform over the season. Cows on treatment RS ate consistently more digestible organic matter than those on treatment C and R but the differences became smaller as the season progressed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , May 1969 , pp. 161 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1969

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

REFERENCES

Anslow, R. 1967. Frequency of cutting and sward production. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 68: 377–384.Google Scholar
Curran, M. K., Leaver, J. D. and Weston, E. W. 1967. A note on the use of chromic oxide incorporated in a feed to estimate faecal output in ruminants. Anim. Prod. 9: 561–564.Google Scholar
Dent, J. W. and Aldrich, D. T. A. 1963. The inter-relationship between heading date, yield, chemical composition and digestibility in varieties of perennial ryegrass, timothy, cocksfoot and meadow fescue. J. natn. Inst. agric. Bot. 9: 261–281.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. and Runcie, K. V. 1962. The herbage intake and milk production of strip and zero grazed dairy cows. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 59: 95–103.Google Scholar
Hancock, J. 1958. The conversion of pasture to milk, the effect of stocking rate and concentrate feeding. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 50: 284–296.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. 1962. Grazing management for dairy cattle. J. Br. Grassld. Soc. 17: 30–40.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. 1968. The use of nitrogen in the management of pasture for cattle. Herb. Abstr. 38: 265–277.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. and Curran, M. K. 1967. Feed intake of grazing cattle. V. A further study of the influence of pasture restriction combined with supplementary feeding on production per animal and per acre. Anim. Prod. 9: 313–324.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. and Jones, J. G. W. 1965. The feed intake of milk cows. II. The effect of roughage quality during late pregnancy and lactation. Anim. Prod. 7: 39–51.Google Scholar
Holmes, W., Jones, J. G. W. and Adeline, C. 1966. Feed intake of grazing cattle. IV. A study with milk cows of the influence of pasture restriction combined with supplementary feeding on production per animal and per acre. Anim. Prod. 8: 47–57.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. and MacLusky, D. S. 1955. The intensive production of herbage for crop drying. VI. A study of the effect of intensive fertilizer treatment on species and strains of grass grown alone and with white clover. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 46: 267–286.Google Scholar
Jones, J. G. W., Holmes, W. and Drake-Brockman, R. M. 1965. The feed intake of grazing cattle. III. The influence of level of milk yield. Anim. Prod. 7: 141–151.Google Scholar
Leaver, J. D., Campling, R. C. and Holmes, W. 1968. The use of supplementary feeds for grazing dairy cows. Dairy Sci. Abstr. 30: 355–361.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food 1967. Costs and efficiency in milk production 1965/66. H.M.S.O. London.Google Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. 1958. The effect of stocking rate and concentrate feeding on the conversion of pasture to milk. Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 18: 34–42.Google Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. and Walshe, M. J. 1963. The inter-relationships of grazing method and stocking rate on the efficiency of pasture utilization by dairy cattle. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 61: 157–166.Google Scholar