HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Clanton, D. C. Articles by Butcher, J. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Clanton, D. C. Articles by Butcher, J. E.

Effect of Nutrition on the Productivity of Range Sheep¹

Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Logan^,4

Abstract

Four hundred and fifty range ewes from each of two owners consisting of six age groups were maintained on desert-type winter range during the winter of 1954–55. Ten treatments including range forage only, and supplemental feeds of energy, protein and phosphorus during three seasons, November to April, January to April, and January to March were used.

Body condition changes are introduced as a measure of response. They help define body weight and they show that ewe gains in the spring are not necessarily due to increased flesh on the ewe.

Comparison of treated animals to nontreated animals did indicate definite improvement in maintenance of body weight and condition during the winter, in wool production and in lamb birth weights but not weaning weights. Differential feed treatments indicated no difference in lamb production among kinds of supplement and season. The midwinter fed groups produced more wool than those fed during other seasons. Kind of supplement had no effect on wool production. Protein feed and all-winter feeding maintained body weight and condition better than other combinations of feeding. Three-year-old ewes followed by 4-year-olds produced the most pounds of lamb. Yearlings, 2-year olds and 3-year-olds had nearly the same wool production. When combining lamb and wool production the 3- and 4-year-olds were the best producers. The yearling ewes maintained weight and condition better than the other age groups. Large ownership differences were observed. Owner 1's ewes lost more body weight and condition, produced more pounds of lamb and less wool than the ewes from Owner 2. These ownership differences, apparently due to previous genetic and environmental influences, emphasize another problem in the interpretation of nutrition experiments.

¹ The research presented in this report was supported in part by grants-in-aid from the Atomic Energy Commission (AT (11–1)– 297).

² Data used by Donald C. Clanton for Ph.D. thesis. Present address Animal Husbandry Department, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.

³ The authors wish to thank Dr. Lawrence A. Stoddart for aiding in planning the experiment and Dr. Wendell E. Brooksby and Max E. Robinson for helping with the collection of data.

⁴ Approved for publication as Journal Paper No. 61, 1958. Report on Project 423. Department of Animal Husbandry.