Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bt4hw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T14:26:29.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of day length and temperature on food intake and growth rate of bulls given concentrate or grass silage ad libitum in two housing systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

I. Mossberg  and
H. Jönsson
I. Mossberg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Kungsängen Research Centre, S-753 23 Uppsala, Sweden
H. Jönsson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Engineering, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7033, S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

In order to study the effect of day length and temperature on performance, data from 495 growing, non-castrated bulls of the Swedish Red and White breed were analysed. Groups of 11 bulls were housed in either an insulated building in pens having slatted floors or in an uninsulated building with pens having both a deep straw bed and a concrete floor. The majority of the bulls (330) were given a concentrate diet ad libitum, while the remainder (165) were given grass silage ad libitum supplemented with concentrate. Energy intake, live-weight gain, housing temperature, day length and change in day length were calculated as 14-day period means for the two housing systems. Regression analyses showed that live-weight gain was associated with increasing day length in bulls on both feeding treatments. For bulls given concentrate ad libitum, metabolizable energy intake was associated with increasing day length. The intake of heavier animals was more influenced by day length than that of those which were lighter. The seasonal influence on daily energy intake in bulls given silage did not show the same pattern as for bulls given concentrate ad libitum. The intake was highest in June and lowest in December for the bulls given concentrate but for the bulls given silage it was highest in August, September and October and lowest in March and April. This was due to the varying quality of the grass silage over the year. No effect or very little effect of temperature or housing system on energy intake or on weight gain was found.

Keywords

cattleenergy intakegrowth ratephotoperiodseasonality

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 233 - 240
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Argo, C. McG. 1986. Photoperiodic control of nutritional and reproductive cyclicity in the Soay sheep. Ph.D. thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Baccari, F., Johnson, H. D. and Hahn, L. 1983. Environmental heat effects on growth, plasma T3 and postheat compensatory effects on Holstein calves. Proceedings of the Society of Experimental Biology and Medicine 173: 173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birkelo, C. P., Johnson, D. E. and Phetteplace, H. P. 1991. Maintenance requirements of beef cattle as affected by season on different planes of nutrition. Journal of Animal Science 69: 1214–1222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blaxter, K. L. and Boyne, A. W. 1982. Fasting and maintenance metabolism of sheep. journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 99: 611–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boren, F. W., Lipper, R., Smith, E. F. and Richardson, D.1965. The value of feed-lot lighting. Bulletin, Kansas Agricultural Experimental Station, no. 483, p. 38.Google Scholar
Bourne, R. A., Trump, P. R. and Kirk, J. A. 1984. The effect of extended photoperiod in winter on the growth and coat characteristics of heifer calves. Animal Production 38: 558 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Christison, G. L, Cymbaluk, N. F. and Nicholson, H. H. 1990. Feed intake of growing bulls during severe winters. Canadian journal of Animal Science 70: 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, M. and Bergström, P. L. 1989. Het effect van een grotere daglengde in de winter op de groei van vleesstieren. Rapport — Instituut voor Veeteeltkundig Onderzoek ‘Schoonord” no. B337.Google Scholar
Forbes, J. M. 1982. Effects of lighting pattern on growth, lactation and food intake of sheep, cattle and deer. Livestock Production Science 9: 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, P. J., Kamwanja, L. A. and Hauser, E. R. 1983. Photoperiod influences age at puberty of heifers. Journal of Animal Science 57: 985–992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holmes, C. W., King, C. T. and Sauwa, P. E. L. 1980. Effects of exposure to a hot environment on Friesian and Brahman × Friesian cattle, with some measurements of the effects of exposure to radiant heat. Animal Production 30: 1–11.Google Scholar
Ingvartsen, K. L., Andersen, H. R. and Foldager, J. 1992. Random variation in voluntary dry matter intake and the effect of day length on feed intake capacity in growing cattle. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 42: 121–126.Google Scholar
Kreft, H. W., Louw, G. N. and Bonsma, J. C. 1964. Physiological effects of the photoperiod upon the bovine. Proceedings of the South African Society of Animal Production 3: 207–215.Google Scholar
Leu, B. M., Hoffman, M. P. and Self, H. L. 1977. Comparison of confinement, shelter and no shelter for finishing yearling steers. Journal of Animal Science 44: 717–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehlhorn, G., Wilde, A., Bucholz, I., Methling, W., Dorn, W. and Koch, F. 1973. Untersuchung zum Einfluss des sichtbaren Lichtes auf das Kalb unter verschiedenen Lichtregimen und Produktionsbedingungen. Forschungsbericht. (Cited by: Mehlhorn, G. 1978. Die Bedeutung biologischer Rhytmen unde künstlicher Lichtregimes fur die industriemässige Tierproduktion. In: Umwelt und Leistung landivirtschaftliche Nutztiere(ed. Lyhs, L.), pp. 15–34. Gustav Fisher Verlag, Jena.)Google Scholar
Milligan, J. D. and Christison, G. J. 1974. Effects of severe winter conditions on performance of feedlot steers. Canadian journal of Animal Science 54: 605–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossberg, I. 1992. Environmental influences on growing bulls in two housing systems. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, report 217. Doctor's thesis.Google Scholar
Mossberg, I. and Danielsson, D.-A. 1993. Tjuren växer ej av mat allena — den biologiska klockan styr mer än vi tror. Fakta-Husdjur, nr 10. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Mossberg, I., Lindell, L., Johnsson, S., Tornquist, M. and Engstrand, U. 1992. Two housing systems for intensively reared bulls slaughtered in two weight ranges. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A, Animal Science 42: 167–176.Google Scholar
Mossberg, I., Lindell, L., Johnsson, S. and Tornquist, M. 1993. Two housing systems for growing bulls fed grass silage ad libitum. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 43: 107–115.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1981. Effect of environment on nutrient requirements of domestic animals. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Peters, R. R., Chapin, L. T., Emery, R. S. and Tucker, H. A. 1980. Growth and hormonal response of heifers to various photoperiods. Journal of Animal Science 51: 1148–1153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petitclerc, D., Chapin, L. T., Emery, R. S. and Tucker, H. A. 1983. Body growth, growth hormone, prolactin and puberty response to photoperiod and plane of nutrition in Holstein heifers. Journal of Animal Science 57: 892–898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petitclerc, D., Chapin, L. T. and Tucker, H. A. 1984. Carcass composition and mammary development responses to photoperiod and plane of nutrition in Holstein heifers. Journal of Animal Science 58: 913–919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pusillo, G. M., Hoffman, M. P. and Self, H. L. 1991. Effects of placing cattle on feed at two-months intervals and housing on feedlot performance and carcass grades. Journal of Animal Science 69: 443–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, V. and Roche, J. F. 1982. The effect of supplemental lighting on winter performance of heifers. Animal Production 34: 376–377 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Roche, J. F. and Boland, M. P. 1980. Effect of extended photoperiod in winter on growth rate of Friesian male cattle. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 19: 85–90.Google Scholar
Schanbacher, B. D. and Crouse, J. D. 1980. Growth and performance of growing-finishing lambs exposed to long or short photoperiods. Journal of Animal Science 51: 943–948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Serensen, M. T. 1984. Photoperiodic effect on growth and feed consumption of young bulls. Current topics in veterinary medicine and animal science 26: 298–300.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide: statistics, version 5. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Thompson, N., Barrie, I. A. and Ayles, M. 1981. The meteorological office rainfall and evaporation on calculation System: MORECS. Hydrological memorandum no. 45. Meteorological Office, Bracknell, Berkshire.Google Scholar
Webster, A. J. F., Smith, J. S. and Mollison, G. S. 1982. Energy requirements of growing cattle: effects of sire breed, plane of nutrition, sex and season on predicted basal metabolism. Proceedings of the ninth symposium on energy metabolism, Lillehammer, Norway. European Association for Animal Production, publication no. 29.Google Scholar
Zinn, S. A., Chapin, L. T. and Tucker, H. A. 1986a. Response of body weight and clearance and secretion rates of growth hormone to photoperiod in Holstein Heifers. Journal of Animal Science 62: 1273–1278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zinn, S. A., Purchas, R. W., Chapin, L. T., Petitclerc, D., Merkel, R. A., Bergen, W. G. and Tucker, H. A. 1986b. Effects of photoperiod on growth, carcass composition, prolactin, growth hormone and cortisol in prepubertal and postpubertal Holstein heifers. Journal of Animal Science 63: 1804.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed