Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:10:20.348Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of physical structure value in spring-harvested grass/clover silage and hay fed to heifers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2014

A. K. S. Schulze ,
P. Nørgaard ,
M. V. Byskov  and
M. R. Weisbjerg
A. K. S. Schulze
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
P. Nørgaard*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
M. V. Byskov
Affiliation:
Knowledge Centre for Agriculture – Cattle, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark
M. R. Weisbjerg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, AU-Foulum, Faculty of Science and Technology, Aarhus University, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
*
†E-mail: pen@sund.ku.dk
Get access

Abstract

The physical structure value of conserved grass/clover forages of spring harvest was evaluated by assessing effects of harvest time, conservation method, iNDF/NDF ratio and NDF intake (NDFI) per kg BW on chewing activity and fecal particle size in dairy heifers. A mixed sward consisting of ryegrass (Lolium perenne), red clover (Trifolium pratense) and white clover (Trifolium repens) was harvested in 2009 on May 9 (early) and 25 (late), and both cuts were conserved as silage and hay. The early silage, early hay, late silage and late hay contained dry matter (DM) of 454, 842, 250 and 828 g/kg, and NDF of 315, 436, 414 and 503 g/kg DM, respectively. Forages were fed as sole feed to four Jersey heifers of 435±30 kg BW in a 4×4 Latin square experiment. Feeding level was 90% of individual ad libitum intake, divided equally across two daily meals offered at 0800 and 1530 h. Chewing activity was estimated from recorded jaw movements (JM) oscillations continuously logged for 96 h and summarized per 24 h as mean effective rumination time and eating time. Eating behavior was further observed during four 20-min test meals. Weight proportion of large feces particles (>1.0 mm) and geometric mean fecal particle size (GPS) were calculated. Potentially indigestible NDF (iNDF) was estimated by incubation for 288 h in situ. The daily DM intake (DMI) decreased with progressing maturity at harvest (P<0.001) while daily NDFI was unaffected by harvest time (P>0.05). Earlier harvest led to less rumination per kg NDFI (P<0.01), similar eating time per kg NDFI (P>0.05) and similar proportion of large particles (P>0.01) compared with later harvest. Rumination time per kg NDFI decreased with higher NDFI per kg BW (P<0.001) and with lower iNDF/NDF ratio (P<0.01). Content and potential digestibility of NDF was greater in hay than in silage from the same harvest probably due to field loss and therefore confounded effects of conservation method. This study of high digestibility grass/clover silage and hay showed that NDF content and NDFI per kg BW affect fecal particle size and rumination time per kg NDF, and suggests implementation of NDFI per kg BW in systems evaluating physical structure in diets.

Keywords

chewing activityNDFfecal particle sizeforage evaluationcow
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , February 2015 , pp. 275 - 284
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Ahvenjärvi, S, Skiba, B and Huhtanen, P 2001. Effect of heterogeneous digesta chemical composition on the accuracy of measurements of fiber flow in dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 79, 1611–1620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Åkerlind, M, Weisbjerg, MR, Eriksson, T, Tøgersen, R, Udén, P, Ólafsson, BL, Harstad, OM and Volden, H 2011. Feed analyses and digestion methods. In NorFor – The Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP publication No. 130 (ed. H Volden), pp. 41–54. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, NL.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2012. Official Methods of Analysis, 19th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.Google Scholar
Bae, DM, Welch, JG and Smith, AM 1981. Efficiency of mastication in relation to hay intake by cattle. Journal of Animal Science 52, 1371–1375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bayat, AR, Rinne, KK, Ahvenjärvi, S, Vanhatalo, A and Huhtanen, P 2010. Ruminal large and small particle kinetics in dairy cows fed red clover and grass silages harvested at two stages of growth. Animal Feed Science and Technology 155, 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayat, AR, Rinne, M, Kuoppala, K, Ahvenjärvi, S and Huhtanen, P 2011. Ruminal large and small particle kinetics in dairy cows fed primary growth and regrowth grass silages harvested at two stages of growth. Animal Feed Science and Technology 165, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beauchemin, KA and Iwaasa, AD 1993. Eating and ruminating activities of cattle fed alfalfa or orchard-grass harvested at two stages of maturity. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 73, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosch, MW, Lammers-Wienhoven, SCW, Bangma, GA, Boer, H and van Adrichem, PWM 1992. Influence of stage of maturity of grass silages on digestion processes in dairy cows. 2. Rumen contents, passage rates, distribution of rumen and faecal particles and mastication activity. Livestock Production Science 32, 265–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxton, DR and Redfearn, DD 1997. Plant limitations to fiber digestion and utilization. Journal of Nutrition 127, 814–818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Boever, JL, De Smet, A, De Brabander, DL and Boucque, CV 1993. Evaluation of physical structure. 1. Grass silage. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 140–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boever, JL, Andries, JI, De Brabander, DL, Cottyn, BG and Buysse, FX 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
European Community 1971. Methods of analysis of the components of feeding-stuffs. Official Journal of the European Communities First commission directive of 15 June 1971 establishing Community methods of analysis for the official control of feeding-stuffs (71/250/EEC), 480–505.Google Scholar
Garmo, TH, Randby, ÅT, Eknass, M, Prestløkken, E and Nørgaard, P 2008. Effect of grass silage chop length on chewing activity and digestibility. In Grassland science in Europe vol. 13 (ed. A Hopkins, T Gustafsson, J Bertilson, G Dalin, N Nilsdotter-Linde and E Spørndly), pp. 810–812. European Grassland Federation, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Kornfelt, LF, Nørgaard, P and Weisbjerg, MR 2013. Effect of harvest time of red and white clover silage on chewing activity and particle size distribution in boli, rumen content and faeces in cows. Animal 7, 909–919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kristensen, NB, Danfær, A, Tetens, V and Agergaard, N 1996. Portal recovery of intraruminally infused short-chain fatty acids in sheep. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 46, 26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luginbuhl, JM, Pond, KR, Burns, JC and Russ, JC 1989. Eating and ruminating behavior of steers fed coastal bermudagrass hay at four levels. Journal of Animal Science 67, 3410–3418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGechan, MB 1989. A review of losses arising during conservation of grass forage: Part 1, field losses. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 44, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mertens, DR 1993. Kinetics of cell wall digestion and passage in ruminants. In Forage cell wall structure and digestibility (ed. HG Jung, DR Buxton, RD Hatfield and J Ralph), pp. 535–570. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, USA.Google Scholar
Mertens, DR 1997. Creating a system for meeting the fiber requirements of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1463–1481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mertens, DR 2002. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: collaborative study. Journal of AOAC International 85, 1217–1240.Google ScholarPubMed
Morrison, IM 1979. Changes in the cell wall components of laboratory silages and the effect of various additives on these changes. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 93, 581–586.Google Scholar
Morrison, IM 1988. Influence of some chemical and biological additives on the fibre fraction of lucerne on ensilage in laboratory silos. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 111, 35–39.Google Scholar
Nørgaard, P 1986. Physical structure of feeds for dairy cows. (A new system for evaluation of the physical structure in feedstuffs and rations for dairy cows). In New developments and future perspectives in research of rumen function (ed. A Neimann-Sørensen), pp. 85–107. Directorate-General for Agriculture, Coordination of Agricultural Research, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Nørgaard, P and Sehic, A 2003. Particle size distribution in silage, boluses, rumen content and faeces from cows fed grass silage with different theoretical chopping length. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores (ed. J Herrera-Camacho and CA Sandoval-Castro), pp. 457–460. Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootechnia, Universidad Autonoma de Yucatan, Merida, Mexico.Google Scholar
Nørgaard, P and Hilden, K 2004. A new method for recording mastication during eating and ruminating in sheep. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 13, 171–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nørgaard, P, Nadeau, E and Randby, ÅT 2010. A new Nordic evaluation system for diets fed to dairy cows: a meta analysis. In Modelling nutrient digestion and utilisation in farm animals (ed. D Sauvant, J Van Miligen, P Faverdin and N Friggens), pp. 112–120. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, NL.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nørgaard, P, Nadeau, E, Randby, ÅT and Volden, H 2011. Chewing index system for predicting physical structure of the diet. In NorFor – The Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP publication No. 130 (ed. H Volden), pp. 127–132. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, NL.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, ER and McDonald, I 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubated measurements weighted according to passage rate. Journal of Agricultural Science 92, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppi, DP, Minson, DJ and Ternouth, JH 1981. Studies of cattle and sheep eating leaf and stem fractions of grasses. III: The retention time in the rumen of large feed particles. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 32, 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees, DVH 1982. A discussion of sources of dry matter loss during the process of haymaking. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 27, 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rinne, M, Huhtanen, P and Jaakkola, S 2002. Digestive processes of dairy cows fed silages harvested at four stages of grass maturity. Journal of Animal Science 80, 1986–1998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schleisner, C, Nørgaard, P and Hansen, HH 1999. Discriminant analysis of pattern of jaw movement during rumination and eating in a cow. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavia 49, 251–259.Google Scholar
Sudweeks, EM, Ely, LO, Mertens, DR and Sisk, LR 1981. Assessing minimum amounts and form of roughages in ruminant diets: roughage value index system. Journal of Animal Science 53, 1406–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teller, E, Vanbelle, M, Kamatali, P and Wavreille, J 1989. Intake of direct cut or wilted grass silage as related to chewing behavior, ruminal characteristics and site and extent of digestion by heifers. Journal of the British Grassland Society 67, 2802–2809.Google ScholarPubMed
Tilley, JMA and Terry, RA 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulyatt, MJ, Dellow, DW, John, A, Reid, CSW and Waghorn, GC 1986. Contribution of chewing during eating and rumination to the clearance of digesta from the ruminoreticulum. In Control of digestion and metabolism in ruminants (ed. LP Milligan, WL Glovum and A Dobson), pp. 498–515. Reston Publ. Co., Reston, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Van Bruchem, J, Bosch, MW, Lammers Wienhoven, SCW and Bangma, GA 1991. Intake, rumination, reticulo-rumen fluid and particle kinetics, and faecal particle size in heifers and cattle fed on grass hay and wilted grass silage. Livestock Production Science 27, 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waldo, DR, Smith, LW, Cox, EL, Weinland, BT and Lucas, HL Jr. 1971. Logarithmic normal distribution for description of sieved forage materials. Journal of Dairy Science 54, 1465–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar