Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T19:59:16.382Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replacement of grass and maize silages with lucerne silage: effects on performance, milk fatty acid profile and digestibility in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2015

L. A. Sinclair ,
R. Edwards ,
K. A. Errington ,
A. M. Holdcroft  and
M. Wright
L. A. Sinclair*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Welfare and Veterinary Sciences, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK
R. Edwards
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Welfare and Veterinary Sciences, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK
K. A. Errington
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Welfare and Veterinary Sciences, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK
A. M. Holdcroft
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Welfare and Veterinary Sciences, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK
M. Wright
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Production, Welfare and Veterinary Sciences, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK
*
†E-mail: lsinclair@harper-adams.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

In total, 20 multiparous Holstein-Friesian dairy cows received one of four diets in each of four periods of 28-day duration in a Latin square design to test the hypothesis that the inclusion of lucerne in the ration of high-yielding dairy cows would improve animal performance and milk fatty acid (FA) composition. All dietary treatments contained 0.55 : 0.45 forage to concentrates (dry matter (DM) basis), and within the forage component the proportion of lucerne (Medicago sativa), grass (Lolium perenne) and maize silage (Zea mays) was varied (DM basis): control (C)=0.4 : 0.6 grass : maize silage; L20=0.2 : 0.2 : 0.6 lucerne : grass : maize silage; L40=0.4 : 0.6 lucerne : maize silage; and L60=0.6 : 0.4 lucerne : maize silage. Diets were formulated to contain a similar CP and metabolisable protein content, with the reduction of soya bean meal and feed grade urea with increasing content of lucerne. Intake averaged 24.3 kg DM/day and was lowest in cows when fed L60 (P<0.01), but there was no effect of treatment on milk yield, milk fat or protein content, or live weight change, which averaged 40.9 kg/day, 41.0, 30.9 g/kg and 0.16 kg/day, respectively. Milk fat content of 18:2 c9 c12 and 18:3 c9 c12 c15 was increased (P<0.05) with increasing proportion of lucerne in the ration. Milk fat content of total polyunsaturated fatty acids was increased by 0.26 g/100 g in L60 compared with C. Plasma urea and β-hydroxybutyrate concentrations averaged 3.54 and 0.52 mmol/l, respectively, and were highest (P<0.001) in cows when fed L60 and lowest in C, but plasma glucose and total protein was not affected (P>0.05) by dietary treatment. Digestibility of DM, organic matter, CP and fibre decreased (P<0.01) with increasing content of lucerne in the diet, although fibre digestibility was similar in L40 and L60. It is concluded that first cut grass silage can be replaced with first cut lucerne silage without any detrimental effect on performance and an improvement in the milk FA profile, although intake and digestibility was lowest and plasma urea concentrations highest in cows when fed the highest level of inclusion of lucerne.

Keywords

dairy cowsgrasslucernemaizemilk fatty acid
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 12 , December 2015 , pp. 1970 - 1978
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

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

AOAC 2000. Official methods of analysis, 17th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Arndt, C, Powell, JM, Aguerre, MJ and Wattiaux, MA 2015. Performance, digestion, nitrogen balance, and emission of manure ammonia, enteric methane, and carbon dioxide in lactating cows fed diets with varying alfalfa silage-to-corn silage ratios. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 428–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bauman, DE, Harvatine, KJ and Lock, AL 2011. Nutrigenomics, rumen-derived bioactive fatty acids, and the regulation of milk fat synthesis. Annual Review of Nutrition 31, 299–319.Google Scholar
Brito, AF and Broderick, GA 2006. Effect of varying dietary ratios of alfalfa silage to corn silage on production and nitrogen utilization in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3924–3938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brito, AF, Broderick, GA and Reynal, SM 2006. Effect of varying dietary ratios of alfalfa silage to corn silage on omasal flow and microbial protein synthesis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3939–3953.Google Scholar
Broderick, GA, Brito, AF and Colmenero, JJO 2007. Effects of feeding formate-treated alfalfa silage or red clover silage on the production of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1378–1391.Google Scholar
Broderick, GA, Koegel, RG, Walgenbach, RP and Kraus, TJ 2002. Ryegrass or alfalfa silage as the dietary forage for lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1894–1901.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Delaby, L, Moloney, A, Boland, T and Lewis, E 2009. Nutritive value of forage legumes used for grazing and silage. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 48, 167–187.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Fisher, WJ, Tweed, JKS and Wilkins, RJ 2003a. Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 1. Production responses with different levels of concentrate. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2598–2611.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Evans, RT, Scollan, ND, Moorby, JM, Merry, RJ and Wilkins, RJ 2003b. Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 2. In vivo and in sacco evaluations of rumen function. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2598–2611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO 2013. Production: crops. FAOSTAT-Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved February 28, 2015, from http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/*/E.Google Scholar
Feng, S, Lock, AL and Garnsworthy, PC 2004. A rapid lipid separation method for determining fatty acid composition of milk. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3785–3788.Google Scholar
Hart, KJ, Huntington, JA, Wilkinson, RG, Bartram, CG and Sinclair, LA 2015. The influence of grass silage to maize silage ratio and concentrate composition on methane emissions, performance and milk composition of dairy cows. Animal 9, 983–991.Google Scholar
Hassanat, F, Gervais, R, Julien, C, Massé, DI, Lettat, A, Chouinard, PY, Petit, HV and Benchaar, C 2013. Replacing alfalfa silage with corn silage in dairy cow diets: effects on enteric methane production, ruminal fermentation, digestion, N balance and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 4553–4567.Google Scholar
Hoffman, PC, Combs, DK and Casler, MD 1998. Performance of lactating dairy cows fed alfalfa silage or perennial ryegrass silage. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 162–168.Google Scholar
Hussein, M, Harvatine, KH, Weerasinghe, WMPB, Sinclair, LA and Bauman, DE 2013. Conjugated linoleic acid-induced milk fat depression in lactating ewes is accompanied by reduced expression of mammary genes involved in lipid synthesis. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 3825–3834.Google Scholar
Jenkins, TC 2010. Technical note: common analytical errors yielding inaccurate results during analysis of fatty acids in feed and digesta samples. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 1170–1174.Google Scholar
Kliem, KE, Morgan, R, Humphries, DJ, Shingfield, KJ and Givens, DI 2008. Effect of replacing grass silage with maize silage in the diet on bovine milk fatty acid composition. Animal 2, 1850–1858.Google Scholar
Lee, MRF, Theobald, VJ, Gordon, N, Leyland, M, Tweed, JKS, Fychan, R and Scollan, ND 2014. The effect of high polyphenol oxidase grass silage on metabolism of polyunsaturated fatty acids and nitrogen across the rumen of beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 92, 5076–5087.Google Scholar
Lock, AL, Teles, BM, Perfield, JW, Bauman, DE and Sinclair, LA 2006. A conjugated linoleic acid supplement containing trans-10, cis-12 reduces milk fat synthesis in lactating sheep. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 1525–1532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowman, BG, Scott, NA and Somerville, SH 1976. Condition scoring of cattle. ESCA Bulletin No. 6. Edinburgh School of Agriculture, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
March, MD, Haskell, MJ, Chagunda, MGG, Langford, FM and Roberts, DJ 2014. Current trends in British dairy management regimens. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 7985–7994.Google Scholar
NRC 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Offer, NW, Cottrill, BR and Thomas, C 1996. The relationship between silage evaluation and animal response. Proceedings of the 11th International Silage Conference, Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Aberystwyth, UK, pp. 26–38.Google Scholar
Orozco-Hernández, JR, Brisson, GJ and Girard, V 1997. Timothy grass or alfalfa silage for cows in midlactation: effect of supplementary barley. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 2876–2884.Google Scholar
Sinclair, LA, Blake, CW, Griffin, P and Jones, GH 2012. The partial replacement of soyabean meal and rapeseed meal with feed grade urea or a slow-release urea and its effect on the performance, metabolism and digestibility in dairy cows. Animal 6, 920–927.Google Scholar
Steinshamn, H 2010. Effect of forage legumes on feed intake, milk production and milk quality – a review. Animal Science papers and Reports 28, 195–206.Google Scholar
Thomas, C 2004. Feed into milk. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Van Keulen, J and Young, BA 1977. Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. Journal of Animal Science 44, 282–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, WR, Murray, RD, White, AR and Rees, EM 1995. The use of blood biochemistry for determining the nutritional status of dairy cows. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. PC Garnsworthy and DJA Cole), pp. 29–51. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Wheeler, T and Reynolds, C 2013. Predicting the risks from climate change to forage and crop production for animal feed. Animal Frontiers 3, 36–41.Google Scholar
Yan, T and Agnew, RE 2004. Prediction of nutritive values in grass silages: 1. Nutrient digestibility and energy concentrations using nutrient compositions and fermentation characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1367–1379.Google Scholar