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


     


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 Similar articles in PubMed
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 McCann, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Hoveland, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McCann, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Hoveland, C. S.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 69, Issue 8 3112-3117, Copyright © 1991 by American Society of Animal Science


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Ruminal escape protein supplementation and zeranol implantation effects on performance of steers grazing winter annuals

M. A. McCann, R. S. Donaldson, H. E. Amos and C. S. Hoveland
Anim. and Dairy Sci. Dept., University of Georgia, Athens 30602.

Fifty-four crossbred steers (275 kg) were assigned randomly to one of three isoenergetic but not isonitrogenous ruminal escape protein (EP) supplements: high ruminal escape protein (HEP), low ruminal escape protein (LEP), or corn. The supplements contained corn, distillers' dried grains with solubles (DDGS), and fish meal. Supplements were fed at approximately 1.5 kg/d; the HEP and LEP supplements provided .25 and .12 kg more EP per day than corn, respectively. These supplements also supplied .20 and .10 kg more CP per day than corn. Fish meal and DDGS provided 66.7 and 33.3% of the supplemental EP, respectively. One-half of the steers in each supplement treatment were implanted once with 36 mg of zeranol. Steers grazed wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)-annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) pastures for 73 d (March 1 to May 12). Daily gains (kg/d) increased linearly (P less than .07) as EP increased (HEP, 1.61; LEP, 1.54; corn, 1.47); responses were apparent only during the later periods as forage quality declined. Zeranol implants increased (P less than .02) ADG (kg/d) by 9.7% (1.58 vs 1.44). After grazing, all cattle were fed a finishing ration for 76 d. Pre-feedlot EP level produced a negative linear (P less than .04) response on feedlot ADG (kg/d) (HEP, 1.44; LEP, 1.50; corn, 1.59). Zeranol implantation during the grazing phase did not affect (P greater than .2) performance during the feedlot phase or carcass characteristics other than increased ribeye area (P less than .08). Compensatory feedlot performance negated all weight gain advantages elicited by EP supplementation during the grazing period.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Society of Animal Science.