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


     

J. Anim Sci. 1978. 47:276-282.
© 1978 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 Utley, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by McCormick, W. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Utley, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by McCormick, W. C.

Relationships among Laboratory Analyses of Pelleted Warm Season Grasses and Animal Performance

P. R. Utley1, G. L. Newton1, W. G. Monson2, R. E. Hellwig3 and W. C. McCormick1

University of Georgia, College of Agriculture Coastal Plain Station, Tifton 31794

Abstract

A 3-year study was conducted to determine the relationship between the laboratory evaluation of three warm season perennial grasses and that portion of animal performance accounted for by variety, maturity and year differences. Forage dry matter production, chemical analyses and animal performance for Coastal bermudagrass, Coastcross-1 bermudagrass and Pensacola bahiagrass are given. Multiple stepwise regression was used to construct prediction equations for average feed intake, average daily gain and feed/gain ratios. Regressions were fitted to the sum of squares remaining after removal of animal variation so that coefficients of determination are coefficients of multiple determination for the main plots (R2mp). Factors entering and remaining in the equations were: crude protein (CP), ether extract (EE), N-free extract (NFE), cell wall constituents (CWC), cellulose (C), acid-detergent lignin (ADL) and in vitro dry matter disappearance (IVDMD). The equation for feed intake was YAFI =33.34–. 109 (CWC)–.065 (IVDMD)–.097(C)–.144 (NFE)–.439 (ADL)–.620 (EE) and had an R2mp of .71. The best prediction equation for gain was YADG = .25 + .048 (CP)–.165 (ADL)–.121 (EE) + .023 (CWC)–.012 (NFE) with an R2mp of .78. Feed gain ratio was best predicted by the equation YFGR = 72.22 – . 163(IVDMD) – .768(CWC) – .556(CP) + 2.134 (ADL) which had an R2mp of .76. When applied the equations, generally, produced reasonably accurate predictions.

Footnotes

1 Department of Animal Science, University of Georgia, Tifton, 31794.

2 Plant Science, ARS, USDA, Tifton, GA 31794.

3 Agricultural Engineering, ARS, USDA, Tifton, GA 31794.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1978 by the American Society of Animal Science.