J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J. Anim Sci. 1972. 35:1014-1019.
© 1972 American Society of Animal Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Malechek, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Leinweber, C. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Malechek, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Leinweber, C. L.

Chemical Composition and In Vitro Digestibility of Forage Consumed by Goats on Lightly and Heavily Stocked Ranges1

John C. Malechek2 and C. L. Leinweber3

Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843

Abstract

CHEMICAL composition and in vitro digestibility of forages consumed by Angora goats were compared on heavily-stocked, fair-condition range and lightly-stocked, good-condition range in the Edwards Plateau region of Texas. Chemical composition and in vitro digestibility varied greatly from season to season but general trends were similar for the two ranges for a particular nutritional attribute. When statistical differences did occur, forage on the lightly stocked range was higher in crude protein, cell wall constituents, cellulose and lignin but was lower in hemicellulose content and in vitro digestibility than that on the heavily stocked range. Observed differences in nutritional quality were not of sufficient magnitude or duration to explain a 5.1 kg difference in average weight gain and a 0.7 kg difference in mohair yield of intact animals grazing the two ranges. The production deficiency of animals on the heavily-stocked, fair-condition treatment was therefore attributed to a restricted forage intake, imposed largely by a shortage of palatable forage plants.

Footnotes

1 Research in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. Data reported herein were taken in part from a Ph.D. thesis submitted by the senior author to the Graduate School, Texas A&M University. The valuable assistance of Dr. L. B. Merrill, Dr. W. T. Hardy and Dr. M. M. Kothmann, Texas Agr. Sta. is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are also due to Dr. W. C. Ellis, Dept. Animal Sci., for his suggestions and review of the manuscript.

2 Department of Range Science, Utah State University, Logan.

3 Department of Range Science, Texas A&M University, College Station.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1972 by the American Society of Animal Science.