Journal of Animal Science, Vol 69, Issue 7 3027-3038, Copyright © 1991 by American Society of Animal Science

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Pregnancy and lactation in beef heifers grazing tallgrass prairie in the winter: influence on intake, forage utilization, and grazing behavior

E. S. Vanzant, R. C. Cochran and D. E. Johnson
Kansas State University, Manhattan 66506.

Six ruminally and eight bifistulated (ruminal and esophageal) Hereford x Angus heifers were used to determine effects of pregnancy and early lactation on forage intake and utilization under grazing conditions. Three ruminally and three bifistulated heifers were bred (pregnant/lactating; P/L; average calving date was February 11, 1989); remaining heifers served as controls (C). The experiment consisted of three periods (P1 = average of 55 d before parturition; P2 = average of 12 d before parturition; P3 = average of 26 d after parturition). All heifers grazed the same 24-ha Flint Hills range pasture. Dehydrated alfalfa pellets were supplemented at .5% BW/heifer daily prepartum and at .8% BW/heifer daily postpartum. Treatment x period interactions were noted (P less than .10) for forage OM intake, ruminal capacity, indigestible ADF (IADF) fill, and grazing time but not for OM digestibility or IADF passage rate (P greater than .10). In P1 and P3, P/L heifers had greater (P less than .10) forage OM intake than C heifers, whereas no differences were noted (P greater than .10) in P2. Pregnant/lactating heifers spent less time (P less than .10) grazing than did controls in P2 and more time (P less than .10) than controls in P3. Ruminal IADF fill and ruminal capacity, as measured by water fill, tended (P = .14 and .16, respectively) to differ between the two groups in P2. Digestibility of OM was unaffected (P greater than .10) by physiological status, whereas IADF passage rate was greater (P less than .10) in P/L heifers. Only minor differences were noted for the chemical composition of diets selected by the two groups. Ruminal fermentation patterns shifted only slightly; the largest effects were in P3, when P/L heifers had greater (P less than .10) propionate and less (P less than .10) acetate (mol/100 mol) than C heifers. In summary, during the period just before parturition, differences in forage OM intake between P/L and C heifers disappeared, and ruminal fill and capacity tended to be lower for P/L heifers. Intake was 16% greater for P/L than for C heifers during the early postpartum period. Organic matter digestibility was not influenced by physiological status, even though IADF passage rates were greater for P/L heifers.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. R. Johnson, D. L. Lalman, M. A. Brown, L. A. Appeddu, D. S. Buchanan, and R. P. Wettemann Influence of milk production potential on forage dry matter intake by multiparous and primiparous Brangus females J Anim Sci, July 1, 2003; 81(7): 1837 - 1846. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. H. Patterson, T. J. Klopfenstein, D. C. Adams, and J. A. Musgrave Supplementation to meet metabolizable protein requirements of primiparous beef heifers: I. Performance, forage intake, and nutrient balance J Anim Sci, March 1, 2003; 81(3): 800 - 811. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]