Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T02:39:10.568Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beef production from silage 3. The effect of supplements of hay and dried grass on the performance of beef cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Thomas ,
R. M. Tetlow ,
B. G. Gibbs  and
Margaret Gill
C. Thomas
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 SLR
R. M. Tetlow
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 SLR
B. G. Gibbs
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 SLR
Margaret Gill
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 SLR
Get access

Abstract

1. The primary growth of perennial ryegrass was cut between 7 and 9 June and ensiled with formic acid at 2·5 1/t. The regrowth was cut on 24 July; part was dried at high temperature (dried grass), the remainder was left to dry in the field (hay). The dried grass (DG) and part of the hay were ground and pelleted, the hay being pelleted alone (PH) or with the addition of formaldehyde at 20 g/kg crude protein (PHF). The remainder of the hay was offered in the chopped form (CH). The four supplements (CH, PH, PHF, DG) were offered at two levels, 6·5 (L) and 130 (H) g dry matter per kg live weight to 54 British Friesian steers (initial live weight, 110 kg) receiving the silage ad libitum.

2. The silage had a high pH and a high proportion of the total nitrogen was in the form of ammonia, indicating poor fermentation. The solubility of nitrogen in the supplements was highest (262 g/kg total nitrogen) in CH, progressively less in PH and PHF and lowest (122 g/kg total nitrogen) in DG.

3. Total dry-matter intake was highest with DG at the higher level of inclusion. Dry-matter intake was significantly higher for PH and PHF than for CH (P < 0·001). However, intake of digestible energy did not differ between hays. Live-weight gain was increased from a low level of 0·24 kg/day (silage alone) by all supplements, but this effect was greater with DG than with the hays (P < 0·001). Level of supplementation increased live-weight gain from 0·54 to 0·74 kg/day.

4. Supplements of dried grass gave higher live-weight gains than did hay made from the same sward. However, the results indicate that supplementation of badly preserved silage with grass hay of good quality can produce acceptable levels of performance of up to 0·70 kg/day in 4-month-old steers. Processing of the hay had little effect on animal performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , October 1983 , pp. 195 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1983

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council. London.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Barton, N. J. and Mclaughlin, J. W. 1976. Effects of formaldehyde treatment of high quality pasture hay on its utilization by weaner sheep. Aust. J. exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 16: 661–667.Google Scholar
Beever, D. E.. Thomson, D. J. and Cammell, S. B. 1976. The digestion of frozen and dried grass by sheep. J. agric. Sci.. Camb. 86: 443–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coelho da sllva, J. F., Seeley, R. C., Beever, D. E., Prescott, J. H. D. and Armstrong, D. G. 1972. The effect in sheep of physical form and stage of growth on the sites of digestion of a dried grass. 2. Sites of nitrogen digestion. Br. J. Nutr. 28: 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demarquilly, C. and Journet, M. 1967. [Nutritive value of pelleted hay.] Annls Zootech. 16: 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garstang, J. R., Thomas, C. and Gill, MARGARET 1979. The effect of supplementation of grass silage with fish meal on intake and performance by British Friesian calves. Anim. Prod. 28: 423 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Jarrige, R., Demarouilly, C., Journet, M. and Beranger, C. 1973. The nutritive value of processed dehydrated forages with special reference to the influence of physical form and particle size. In Proc. 1st Int. Green Crop Drying Congr. (ed. Skidmore, C. L.), pp. 99–118. Br. Assoc. Green Crop Driers, Tunbridge Wells.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, C. R. 1976. The effect of season of harvest on the utilization by young cattle of dried grass given alone or as a supplement to grass silage. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Reading.Google Scholar
Mcdonald, P. and Whittenbury, R. 1967. Losses during ensilage. In Fodder Conservation, Occ. Symp.Br. Grassld Soc. No. 3 (ed. Wilkins, R. J.), pp. 76–84.Google Scholar
Mcdougall, E. I. 1948. Studies on ruminant saliva. I. The composition and output of sheep's saliva. Biochem. J. 43: 99–109.Google Scholar
Siddons, R. C., Evans, R. T. and Beever, D. E. 1979. The effect of formaldehyde treatment before ensiling on the digestion of wilted grass silage by sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 42: 535–545.Google Scholar
Tayler, J. C. 1970. Dried forages and beef production. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 25: 180–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terry, R. A. and Osbourn, D. F. 1980. Determination and prediction of the digestible energy in silages. In Forage Conservation in the 80's, Occ. Symp. Br. Grassld Soc. No. 11 (ed. Thomas, C.), pp. 315–318.Google Scholar
Tetlow, R. M. 1974. A method for determining particle size distribution in packages of dried forage. J. agric. Engng Res. 19: 347–352.Google Scholar
Theil, H. 1966. Applied Economic Forecasting, pp. 15–36. North-Holland Publishing Company. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Thomas, C., Aston, K., Gibbs, B. G. and Tayler, J. C. 1981a. Beef production from silage. 1. The voluntary intake and live-weight gain of beef cattle given red clover silage. Anim. Prod. 32: 143–148.Google Scholar
Thomas, C., Gibbs, B. G. and Tayler, J. C. 1981b. Beef production from silage. 2. The performance of beef cattle given silages of either perennial ryegrass or red clover. Anim. Prod. 32: 149–153.Google Scholar
Van soest, P. J. and Wine, R. H. 1967. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. IV. Determination of plant cell-wall constituents. J. Ass. Off. Analvt. Chem. 50: 50–55.Google Scholar
Wernli, C. G. and Wilkins, R. J. 1980. Nutritional studies with sheep fed conserved ryegrass. 2. Silage supplemented with dried grass or barley. J. agric. Sci. Camb. 94: 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. 1970. The ad libitum intake and digestibility of dried grass pellets and silage by sheep. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 25: 125–130.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. 1974. Scientific and technical progress in forage crop dehydration. In Proc. 12th int. Grassld Congr. Moscow, Volume 1, pp. 195–209.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J., Lonsdale, C. R., Tetlow, R. M. and Forrest, T. J. 1972. The voluntary intake and digestibility by cattle and sheep of dried grass wafers containing particles of different size. Anim. Prod. 14: 177–188.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, J. M., Wilson, R. F. and Barry, T. N. 1976. Factors affecting the nutritive value of silage. Outl. Agric. 9: 3–8.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. F. and Wilkins, R. J. 1973. Formic acid as a silage additive for wet crops of cocksfoot and lucerne. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 80: 225–231.Google Scholar