Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:02:20.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective grazing by dairy cows in the presence of dung and the defoliation of tall grass dung patches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. Bao ,
P. S. Giller  and
G. Stakelum
J. Bao
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, 150030, People's Republic of China Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, University College, Cork, Ireland
P. S. Giller*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, University College, Cork, Ireland
G. Stakelum
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Husbandry, Teagasc, Moorepark Research Centre, Fermoy, Ireland
*
†Correspondig author.
Get access

Abstract

Two studies investigated the effect of contaminated pasture on selective grazing, overall grazing behaviour and the process of defoliation of dung patches through experiments targeted at four major questions: (a) how does relative utilization of tall and short grass change as the sward is grazed down? (b) what effect does herbage mass and sward height have on the relative utilization of short and tall grass? (c) how are tall grass patches actually utilized by cattle? and (d) how is overall grazing behaviour influenced by contamination of the sward?

Experiments were conducted in mid to late season using Friesian dairy cattle. In experiment 1, two -pasture types (topped sward (T) v. grazed-only sward (G)) were used. The distribution of bites on tall grass from both pasture types indicated that the grazing animals tended initially to graze short grass when they met a new sward, and then select tall grass as the swards were progressively grazed down. This switch happened earlier in the defoliation process in the topped sward. In experiment 2 observations were conducted on previously grazed and previously ungrazed swards. The distribution of bites on tall grass showed a similar trend to that found in experiment 1 and as the sward was gradually grazed, biting rate significantly declined. There was also a significantly higher total grazing time on the previously ungrazed sward (no contamination by dung). Comparing data based on a consistent biting rate (calculated as the time for 20 consistent bites) and natural biting rate (calculated as the total time for 20 bites) suggested that the grazing animals had increased difficulty in handling tall grass which may explain the declining biting rate as the swards were being grazed down and more bites were directed at tall grass. The defoliation of tall grass dung patches appeared to be concentrated around the edges of the patch. The average area of sward affected by a single dung pat was 1·04 m2 measured at the pre-grazing stage and was markedly reduced to 0·51 m2 at the post-grazing stage. In conclusion, selective grazing is likely to exist due to the presence of dung and conditioned by dung distribution and sward type and this in turn modifies biting rate during grazing down of a sward.

Keywords

dairy cowsdung patchesselective grazing
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , February 1998 , pp. 65 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Allden, W. G. 1962. Rate of herbage intake and grazing time in relation to herbage availability. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 4: 163–167.Google Scholar
Allden, W. G. and Whittaker, I. A. 1970. The determinants of herbage intake by grazing sheep: the interrelationship of factors influencing herbage intak e and availability. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 21: 755–766.Google Scholar
Arnold, G. W. 1962. Factors within plant associations affecting the behaviour and performance of grazing animals. In Grazing in terrestrial and marine environments (ed. Crisp, D. J.). Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
Arnold, G. W. 1966. The special senses in grazing animals. 2. Smell, taste, and touch and dietary habits in sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 17: 521–529.Google Scholar
Boswell, C. C. 1971. Fouling of pastures by grazing cattle. British Grassland Society's summer meeting. Journal of the British Grassland Society 26: 194.Google Scholar
Davson, H. and Eggleton, M. G. 1962. Principles of human physiology. Churchill, London.Google Scholar
Dillon, P. and Stakelum, G. 1988. Effect of pastur e topping and grass quality on milk production. Moorepark dairy farmers conference, TEAGASC, Dublin, pp. 21–22.Google Scholar
Fitzsimmons, E. 1995. Influence of sward structure on the grazing behaviour of dairy cows. MSc. thesis, University College, Cork.Google Scholar
Garner, F. H. 1963. The palatability of herbage plants. Journal of the British Grassland Society 8: 79–89.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. and Reid, G. W. 1969. The herbage consumption and milk production of cows grazing S24 ryegrass and S37 cocksfoot. Journal of the British Grassland Society 24: 98–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J. 1974. The effect of the grazing animal on herbage quality and utilisation. In Quality of herbage (ed. , Almquist and , Wiksell). Proceedings of the fifth general meeting of the European Grassland Federation, Uppsala, pp. 74–80.Google Scholar
Hodgson, J. 1981. Variations in the surface characteristics of the sward and short-term rate of herbage intake by calves and lambs. Grass and Forage Science 36: 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J. and Wilkinson, J. M. 1968. The influence of the quantity of herbage offered and its digestibility on the amount eaten by grazing cattle. Journal of the British Grassland Society 23: 75–80.Google Scholar
Leaver, J. D. 1987. The potential to increase production efficiency from animal-pasture systems. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 47: 7–12.Google Scholar
MacDiarmid, B. N. and Watkin, B. R. 1971. The cattle dung patch. 1. Effect of dung patches on yield and botanical composition of surrounding and underlying pasture. Journal of the British Grassland Society 26: 239–245.Google Scholar
Marsh, R. and Campling, R. C. 1970. Fouling of pastures by dung. Herbage Abstracts 40: 123–130.Google Scholar
Marten, G. C. and Donker, J. D. 1966. Animal excrement as a factor influencing acceptability of grazed forage. Proceedings of 10th international grassland congress, Helsinki, pp. 359–363.Google Scholar
Martin, P. 1986. Measuring behaviour. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Norman, M. J. T. and Green, J. O. 1958. The local influence of cattle dun g and urine upon the yield and botanical composition of permanent pastures. Journal of the British Grassland Society 13: 39–45.Google Scholar
Price, M. J. 1951. Sugar versus the intuitive choice of food by livestock. Agronomy Journal 43: 341–342.Google Scholar
Rattray, P. V. and Clark, D. A. 1984. Factors affecting the intake of pasture. New Zealand Agricultural Science 18: 141–146.Google Scholar
Richards, I. R. and Wolton, K. M. 1976. The spatial distribution of excreta under intensive cattle grazing. Journal of the British Grassland Society 31: 89–92.Google Scholar
Rook, A. J. and Huckle, C. A. 1995. Synchronization of ingestive behaviour by grazing dairy cows. Animal Science 60: 25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stakelum, G. and Dillon, P. 1990. Influence of sward structure and digestibility on intake and performance of lactating and growing cattle. In Grassland management priorities: management issues for the grassland farmer in the 1990s (ed. Mayne, C. S.), pp. 30–40. British Grassland Society, Hurley.Google Scholar
Stobbs, T. H. 1973. The effect of plan t structure on the intake of tropical pastures. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 24: 821–829.Google Scholar
Thorrold, B. S., O‘Connor, K. F. and White, J. G. H. 1985. Management influences on sheep behaviour, dung distribution and soil phosphate. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 46: 127–134.Google Scholar