Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T14:38:21.469Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of work on food intake and ingestive behaviour of draught cattle and buffalo given barley straw

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. A. Person  and
D. G. Smith
R. A. Person
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
D. G. Smith
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
Get access

Abstract

In the first experiment the animals were worked for 5h/day and/or given 17 h access to food. In the second experiment they were worked for 4 h/day and/or given 20 h access to food. When animals were prevented from feeding on barley straw for 7 h/day their dry-matter intake (DMI) was significantly less than when they were given 24 h access to food. When feeding was prevented for only 4 h/day food intake was not significantly different from that with 24-h access.

A study of feeding behaviour (experiment 2) suggested that when most animals were deprived of food for 4 h they maintained similar intakes to those on ad libitum feeding by increasing their rate of eating, rather than by increasing the time they spent eating. Preventing food intake for 4 h/day was associated with little change in time spent ruminating during the day. On all treatments, the buffalo spent significantly less time eating and more time ruminating than the cattle.

Work, during the periods when food was withheld, had little effect on the DMI of either the buffalo or cattle compared with restricted feeding. No rumination occurred during the time that the animals were at work. However on working days, time spent ruminating was similar to that seen on restricted feeding days, but the animals spent more time ruminating later in the day than when they were able to ruminate during the middle of the day.

Keywords

buffaloescattlefeeding behaviourfood intakework
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , June 1994 , pp. 339 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Altman, J. 1974. Observational study of behaviour sampling methods. Behaviour 49: 227–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1990. Official methods of analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists. 15th ed.Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Virginia.Google Scholar
Bamualim, A. and Ffoulkes, D. 1988. Effect of work and level of feed intake on nutritional parameters and body weight change of swamp buffalo cows. DAP Bulletin 7: 2–8.Google Scholar
De Boever, J. L., Andries, J. I., De Brabander, D. L., Cottyn, B. G. and Buysse, F. X. 1990. Chewing activity of ruminants as a measure of physical structure — a review of factors affecting it. Animal Feed Science and Technology 27 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, J. M. 1988. Metabolic aspects of the regulation of voluntary food intake and appetite. In Nutrition Research Reviews I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
International Livestock Centre for Africa. 1990. Using dairy cows as draught animals. International Livestock Centre for Africa annual report and programme highlights, pp. 20–24. ILCA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. 1985. A review of nutrient requirements of draught oxen. In Draught animal power for production (ed. Copland, J. W.), ACIAR proceedings series no. 10, pp. 59–68. ACIAR, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. and Pearson, R. A. 1985. Factors affecting the measurement of the draught force, work output and power of oxen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105: 730–714.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. and Stibbards, R. J. 1990. The energy costs of walking, carrying and pulling loads on flat surfaces by Brahman cattle and swamp buffalo. Animal Production 50: 29–39.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. and Zerbini, E. 1993. Recent trends in research on draught animal nutrition. In Human and draught animal power in crop production (eds O'Neill, D. H., Hendriksen, G.). Proceedings of the Silsoe Research Institute/CEC/ FAO Workshop, 18-22 January 1993, Harare, pp. 40–49. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A. 1989. A comparison of draught cattle (Bos indicus) and buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) carting loads in hot conditons. Animal Production 49: 355–363.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A. 1990. A note on live weight and intake and digestibility of food by draught cattle after supplementation of rice straw with the fodder tree Ficus auriculata. Animal Production 51: 653–638.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A. and Lawrence, P. R. 1992. Intake, digestion, gastro-intestinal transit time and ntirogen balance in working oxen: studies in Costa Rica and Nepal. Animal Production 55: 361–370.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. A., Lawrence, P. R. and Ghimire, C. 1989. Factors influencing the work done by draught oxen: a study in the eastern hills of Nepal. Animal Production 49: 345–353.Google Scholar
Penning, P. D., Rook, A. J. and Orr, R. J. 1991. Patterns of ingestive behaviour of sheep continuously stocked on monocultures of rye grass or white clover. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31: 237–250.Google Scholar
Smith, H. K. and Hodgson, J. 1984. A note on the effect of recording frequency on the estimation of grazing time of cattle and sheep. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 229–236.Google Scholar
Wanapat, M and Wachirapakorn, C. 1987. Effect of walking on feed intake and digestibility of rice straw by water buffaloes. In Proceedings of the fourth Australasian Association for Animal Production, Animal Science Congress, pp. 332.Google Scholar