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


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Patterson, H. H.
Right arrow Articles by Musgrave, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Patterson, H. H.
Right arrow Articles by Musgrave, J. A.
J. Anim. Sci. 2003. 81:800-811
© 2003 American Society of Animal Science

Supplementation to meet metabolizable protein requirements of primiparous beef heifers: I. Performance, forage intake, and nutrient balance1

H. H. Patterson, T. J. Klopfenstein, D. C. Adams2 and J. A. Musgrave

Department of Animal Science, University of Nebraska, Lincoln 68583-0908

2 Correspondence:
Univ. of Nebraska West Central Research and Extension Center; Rte. 4, Box 46A, North Platte 69102.

Three experiments were conducted to evaluate the response of supplementing primiparous heifers based on the metabolizable protein (MP) system during pregnancy and lactation. In Exp. 1, 12 pregnant, March-calving heifers (432 ± 10 kg) grazing Sandhills range were randomly allotted to one of two treatments: supplementation based on either the MP system (MPR) or the CP system (CPR). Supplements were fed to individual heifers from October to February and no hay was offered. Grazed forage organic matter intake (FOMI) was measured in November, January, and February. In Exp. 2, 18 heifers (424 ± 8 kg) were randomly allotted to one of three treatments: 1) supplementation based on the MP system with hay fed in January and February (average 2.0 kg/d; MPR/hay), 2) supplementation based on the CP system, with hay fed in January and February (CPR/hay), or 3) supplementation based on the MP system, with no hay fed (MPR/no hay). Supplements were fed from October to February, and FOMI was measured in December and February. In Exp. 3, lactating 2-yr-old cows (394 ± 7 kg) maintained on meadow hay were supplemented to meet either 1) MP requirements (LMPR) or 2) degradable intake protein requirements (LDIPR). Body weight (BW) and body condition score change, hay intake, and milk production were measured. In Exp. 1, grazed FOMI decreased (P = 0.0001) from 1.9% of BW in November to 1.2% in February, but no differences among treatments were detected for FOMI or BW change. In Exp. 2, grazed FOMI declined (P = 0.0001) from 1.7% of BW in December to 1.1% in February, with no differences among treatments. Heifers on the MPR/hay and CPR/hay treatments had higher (P = 0.0018) total intake (grazed forage + hay intake) in February (1.7% BW) than the MPR/no hay heifers (1.1% BW). Heifers on the MPR/no hay treatment had a lower weight (P = 0.02) and tended (P = 0.11) to have a lower BCS than heifers on other treatments. In Exp. 3, the LMPR cows had higher (P = 0.02) ADG than LDIPR cows (0.41 and 0.14, respectively), but treatment did not affect milk production. Organic matter hay intake averaged 2.4% of BW. We conclude that supplementation to meet MP requirements had little benefit to heifer performance during gestation, but increased weight change during lactation. Because grazed forage intake decreased from 1.9 to 1.1% of BW with advancing gestation, supplemental energy is necessary to reduce weight and condition loss of gestating hefiers grazing dormant Sandhills range.

Key Words: Cows • Heifers • Intake • Lactation • Pregnancy • Protein






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Society of Animal Science.