Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wxk4p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T13:09:57.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Systems of concentrate allocation for dairy cattle 2. A comparison of two patterns of allocation for autumn-calving cows offered two qualities of grass silage ad libitum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

W. Taylor  and
J. D. Leaver
W. Taylor
Affiliation:
West of Scotland Agricultural College, Crichton Royal Farm, Dumfries DG1 4SZ
J. D. Leaver
Affiliation:
West of Scotland Agricultural College, Crichton Royal Farm, Dumfries DG1 4SZ
Get access

Abstract

In a 25-week experiment beginning at week 3 post partum, grass silages of 10·5 (H) and 8·9 (L) MJ metabolizable energy per kg dry matter (DM) were offered ad libitum to two groups of 24 autumn-calving dairy cows. Within each silage-quality group, two patterns of concentrate allocation were compared, a flat-rate (F) and a variable rate (V). All four treatment groups, HF, HV, LF and LV, received on average 1575 kg fresh weight per cow of a concentrate containing 170 g crude protein per kg during the 25 weeks. The cows on treatment F were all individually given 9 kg concentrate per day throughout. Individuals on the V treatments received different levels of concentrate, based initially on their 14-day milk yield and then reduced by 1 kg/day at 10, 15 and 20 weeks. For treatments HF, HV, LF and LV respectively, mean adjusted daily milk yields were, 24·4, 24·1, 21·6 and 22·1 kg; intakes of silage DM, 9·1, 8·7, 7·6 and 7·6 kg/day, and live-weight gains, 0·39, 0·31, 0·28 and 0·22 kg/day. The effects of silage quality were significant in each case, but the effects of pattern of concentrate allocation were not. Cows given the H silage produced milk with significantly greater lactose and solids-not-fat concentrations. During the residual period (2 weeks indoors and 14 weeks grazing) no significant differences in milk yield were observed. The 305-day yields of 6215, 6096, 5786 and 5824 kg for treatments HF, HV, LF and LV respectively, reflected the differences obtained during the indoor feeding period.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , December 1984 , pp. 325 - 333
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1984

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Baker, Anne-Marie C. 1980. A study of herbage production and its utilization by dairy cattle from continuously grazed swards. M.Sc. Thesis, Fac. Sci., Univ. Glasgow.Google Scholar
Broster, W. H. and Thomas, C. 1981. The influence of level and pattern of concentrate input on milk output. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition — 1981 (ed. Haresign, W.), pp. 49–69. Butterworth, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E. 1982. Feeding high-quality silage. In Silage for Milk Production (ed. Rook, J. A. F. and Thomas, P. C.), pp. 127–150. Tech. Bull. National Institute for Research in Dairying, Reading, Hannah Research Institute, Ayr, No. 2.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E., Retter, W. C. and Watson, J. N. 1980. Silage and milk production: A comparison between three grass silages of different digestibilities. Grass Forage Sci. 35: 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrall, A. J., Neal, Heather D. St C. and Wilkinson, J. M. 1982. Silage in milk production: a simulation model to study the economic impact of management decisions in the production and use of silage in a dairy enterprise. Tech. Rep., Grassld Res. Inst., No. 29.Google Scholar
Doyle, C. J. 1983. Evaluating feeding strategies for dairy cows: a modelling approach. Anim. Prod. 36: 47–57.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1981. Feed input — milk output relationships in the spring-calving cow. In Recent Developments in Ruminant Nutrition (ed. Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 295–311. Butterworth, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1982. The effect of pattern of concentrate allocation on milk production from autumn-calving heifers. Anim. Prod. 34: 55–61.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. L. 1977. The effect of the plane and pattern of concentrate feeding on milk yield and composition in dairy cows. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 88: 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C. L. 1983. Influence of feeding pattern on the biological efficiency of high-yielding dairy cows. J. agric. Sci, Camb. 100: 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1981a. Flat rate feeding of dairy cows. Tech. Bull. B2312. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1981b. Flat rate versus step feeding of compound for dairy cows fed silage to appetite. Research and Development Reports. Agriculture Service. Dairy Cattle, pp. 40–41. MAFF, Alnwick.Google Scholar
Moisey, F. R. and Leaver, J. D. 1984. A study of two cutting strategies for the production of grass silage for dairy cows. Research and Development in Agriculture. 1: 47–52.Google Scholar
Østergaard, V. 1979. Optimum feeding strategy during lactation. In Feeding Strategy for the High Yielding Dairy Cow (ed. Broster, W. H. and Swan, H.), pp. 171–194. Granada Publishing, St Albans.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, pp. 402–406. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. and Gordon, F. J. 1980a. The effect of level and system of concentrate allocation to January/February calving cows on total lactation performance. Anim. Prod. 30: 39–51.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. and Gordon, F. J. 1980b. The effect of type of silage and level of concentrate supplementation offered during early lactation on total lactation performance of January/February calving cows. Anim. Prod. 30: 341–354.Google Scholar
Taylor, K. 1979. Flat-rate feeding of concentrates to dairy cows. Rep. Milk Marketing Board, Farm Management Information Unit, No. 20.Google Scholar
Taylor, W. and Leaver, J. D. 1984. Systems of concentrate allocation for dairy cattle. 1. A comparison of three patterns of allocation for autumn-calving cows and heifers offered grass silage ad libitum. Anim. Prod. 39: 315–324.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 1980. Conserved forages. In Feeding Strategies for Dairy Cows (ed. Broster, W. H., Johnson, C. L. and Tayler, J. C.), pp. 8.1–8.14. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Thomas, C., Daley, S. R., Aston, K. and Hughes, P. M. 1981. Milk production from silage. 2. The influence of the digestibility of silage made from the primary growth of perennial ryegrass. Anim. Prod. 33: 7–13.Google Scholar
Wilson, P. N. and Wood, P. D. P. 1983. Some nutritional aspects of high yielding dairy herds. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition — 1983 (ed. Haresign, W.), pp. 179–197. Butterworth, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar