Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T11:00:52.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stocking intensity and pastoral production: II. Herbage intake of Merino sheep grazed at different stocking rates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. P. Langlands  and
I. L. Bennett
J. P. Langlands
Affiliation:
C.S.I.R.O., Pastoral Research LaboratoryArmidaleN.S.W., 2350, Australia
I. L. Bennett
Affiliation:
C.S.I.R.O., Pastoral Research LaboratoryArmidaleN.S.W., 2350, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Estimates were made at monthly intervals between January and December 1965 of the intake and nutritive value of the diet of unmated Merino ewes grazed continuously at stocking rates ranging from 2·5 to 37·1 sheep/ha. Oesophageally fistulated sheep were used to estimate intake and nutritive value.

Drought conditions existed during the experiment. Digestibility declined linearly with increasing stocking rate. The intercepts of the relationship between digestibility and stocking rate differed between months, being at a maximum in spring. Nitrogen content was also greatest in spring but did not change consistently with increasing stocking rate. Organic-matter intake declined linearly with stocking rate and increased asymptotically with total herbage available, the asymptotic relationship being the more precise. Neither relationship differed significantly between months. Organicmatter intake/ha increased continuously with increasing stocking rate and the maximum intake was predicted to occur at a stocking rate greater than that at which the sheep survived.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , October 1973 , pp. 205 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Arnold, G. W. & Dudzinski, M. L. (1967 a). Studies on the diet of the grazing animal. II. The effect of physiological status in ewes and pasture availability on herbage intake. Aust. J. agric. Res. 18, 349–59.Google Scholar
Arnold, G. W. & Dudzinski, M. L. (1967 b). Studies on the diet of the grazing animal. III. The effect of pasture species and pasture structure on the herbage intake of sheep. Aust. J. agric. Res. 18, 657–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1961). The utilization of the energy of food by ruminants. In 2nd Symposium on Energy Metabolism, Wageningen. Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 10, pp. 211–25.Google Scholar
Christian, K. R. & Coup, M. R. (1954). Measurement of feed intake by grazing cattle and sheep. VI. The determination of chromic oxide in faeces. N.Z. Jl Sci. Technol. A 36, 328–30.Google Scholar
Hogan, J. P., Weston, R. H. & Lindsay, J. R. (1970). The effects of ruminal digestion of forages on the quantities of amino acids supplied to the sheep. Proc. llth Int. Orassld Congr. Surfers' Paradise, Qld, pp. 706–709.Google Scholar
Lambourne, L. J. & Reardon, T. F. (1963). The use of chromium oxide to estimate the faecal output of Merinos. Aust. J. agric. Res. 14, 239–56.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. (1967). Studies on the nutritive value of the diet selected by grazing sheep. II. Some sources of error when sampling oesophageally fistulated sheep at pasture. Anim. Prod. 9, 167–75.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. & Bennett, I. L. (1973 a). Stocking intensity and pastoral production. I. Changes in the soil and vegetation of a sown pasture grazed by sheep at different stocking rates. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 81, 193–204.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. & Bennett, I. L. (1973 b). Stocking intensity and pastoral production. III. Wool production, fleece characteristics, and the utilization of nutrients for maintenance and wool growth by Merino sheep grazed at different stocking rates. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 81, 211–18.Google Scholar