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


     


Published online first on September 4, 2007
J. Anim Sci. 1990. doi:10.2527/jas.2005-569
© 2007 American Society of Animal Science

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jas.2005-569v1
86/1/180    most recent
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Golden, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Kolath, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Golden, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Kolath, W. H.
J. Anim Sci., doi: 10.2527/jas.2005-569
©Copyright, 2007, The American Society of Animal Science


ARTICLE

The relationship of feeding behavior to feed efficiency in crossbred Angus steers fed traditional and no roughage diets

J. W. Golden 1, M. S. Kerley 1*, W. H. Kolath 1

1 Division of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: kerleym{at}missouri.edu.


   Abstract

Two studies were conducted to determine the relationship of feeding behavior to the phenotypic expression of feed efficiency. In Exp. 1, a feedlot diet containing roughage was fed (traditional). In Exp. 2, a no-roughage diet was fed. Residual feed intake (RFI), a measure of feed efficiency, was calculated for both studies. In Exp. 1, 6 feed efficient (low RFI) steers and 6 feed inefficient steers (high RFI) were selected from a contemporary group of 80 steers, and feeding behaviors were analyzed. In Exp. 2, 9 feed efficient and 8 feed inefficient steers were selected from a contemporary group of 40 steers. There were no differences (P > 0.13) in initial or final BW or ADG between efficient and inefficient groups in either Exp. 1 or 2. In Exp. 1 DMI and average eating bouts daily differed (P < 0.001) with efficient steers consuming less feed and eating fewer times per day. In Exp. 2, efficient steers consumed less (P < 0.001) feed, and average eating bouts daily tended (P = 0.07) to be fewer in efficient animals. Limited differences were noted in feeding behavior between groups, with inefficient steers from both studies having a more variable eating pattern throughout the day. The average daily eating rate did not differ (P > 0.20) between groups in either experiment. The average number of days comprising a feeding pattern for both feed efficiency groups in Exp. 1 and 2 was found to be 2 to 3 d and multiples of 2 to 3 d. In Exp. 1 the feed intake pattern of efficient and inefficient steers changed once they reached a BW of approximately 391 kg and 381 kg, respectively. This occurred near d 47 for the efficient steers and near d 32 for inefficient steers. In Exp. 2 the feed intake pattern of both efficient and inefficient steers changed once they reached a BW of approximately 399 kg, which occurred on d 31 for the efficient steers and on d 33 for the inefficient steers. From the measured variables there were no differences in growth and limited differences noted in feeding behavior between feed efficient and feed inefficient groups. The results of the trials suggest increased variability of feed intake throughout the day for feed inefficient animals.

Key Words: beef cattle, feed efficiency, feeding behavior, residual feed intake




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
A. M. Meyer, M. S. Kerley, and R. L. Kallenbach
The effect of residual feed intake classification on forage intake by grazing beef cows
J Anim Sci, October 1, 2008; 86(10): 2670 - 2679.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2007 by the American Society of Animal Science.