144 Energy requirement models for beef cattle

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 116
Author(s):  
Xianjiang Chen
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 991-998
Author(s):  
Mario Luiz Chizzotti ◽  
Sebastião de Campos Valadares Filho ◽  
Pedro Del Bianco Benedeti ◽  
Flávia Adriane de Sales Silva

Abstract The California net energy system (CNES) was the reference for the development of most energy requirement systems worldwide, such as Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle (NASEM, Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 8th Revised ed, 2016) and Brazilian Nutrient Requirements of Zebu and Crossbred Cattle (Valadares Filho, S. C., L. F. C. Silva, M. P. Gionbelli, P. P. Rotta, M. I. Marcondes, M. L. Chizzotti, and L. F. Prados, BR-CORTE: nutrient requirements of zebu and crossbred cattle, 3rd ed, 2016). This review aimed to compare methods used by NASEM and BR-CORTE to estimate the energy requirements for beef cattle. The net energy requirements for maintenance (NEm) of BR-CORTE is based on empty body weight (EBW), whereas NASEM uses shrunk body weight (SBW), but the Bos taurus indicus presents 10% to 8% lower NEm than Bos taurus taurus. We have compared animals with different EBW and SBW but with same equivalent empty body weight/standard reference weight ratio (0.75), as both systems have suggested different mature weights. Both systems predicted similar net energy requirements for gain (NEg) for animals with 1.8 kg of daily gain. However, estimated empty body gain was lower for NASEM estimations when the same metabolizable energy for gain is available. For pregnancy and lactation of beef cows, the NEm and net energy requirements for pregnancy (NEp) of a Zebu cow estimated by BR-CORTE were lower than the values estimated by NASEM. Furthermore, the magnitude of differences between these systems regarding NEp increased as pregnancy days increase. The NASEM and BR-CORTE systems have presented similar values for energy requirement for lactation (0.72 and 0.75 Mcal/kg milk, respectively).


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Jacquelyn Prestegaard

The objectives of these experiments were to determine the bypass value of rumen-protected lysine and performance responses of beef cattle fed encapsulated lysine. During experiment 1 singe-flow continuous culture fermenters were fed a Lys-deficient control (CON), a Lys-sufficient diet supplemented with rumen-protected soybean meal (RPSBM; AminoPlus, Ag Processing Inc., Omaha, NE), or a Lys-sufficient diet containing a commercially available rumen-protected Lys product (RPLYS; USA Lysine, Kemin Industries Inc., Des Moines, IA). Results from continuous culture showed greater degradation of RPLYS than RPSBM and CON. During Experiment 2, an in vitro dry matter digestibility study showed DM degradation was 23 percent greater for pure USA Lysine than another encapsulated lysine product (AjiPro 2G, Ajinomoto Heartland, Inc., Omaha, NE). The next objective was to test if AjiPro would increase plasma Lys levels in vivo (and therefore indicate its successful ruminal bypass and small intestinal absorption). Experiment 3 involved a 3 x 3 Latin Square study conducted on cannulated crossbred steers fed a combination of rumen-protected soybean meal and two increased levels of the rumen-protected product, where it was fed to meet 100 percent (AJ100) and 150 percent (AJ150) absorbable AA to effective energy (EE) ratio. Plasma Lys levels were greater when steers were fed diets containing AjiPro in comparison to when they were fed a negative control (NEGCON) which did not contain the product and was deficient in absorbable Lys. From both the in vitro dry matter degradation experiment and the 3 x 3 Latin Square study, we determined AjiPro to be an effective source of bypass Lys, and consequently used it to conduct a growing through finishing study. During Experiment 4, we evaluated steer performance when fed diets balanced for predicted Lys requirement to EE ratio through its supplementation in several dietary treatments. Control treatments included a negative control (NEGCON) that was deficient in absorbable Lys and contained no rumen-protected products; and a positive control (POSCON) where rumen-protected soybean meal was used to balance absorbable AA to EE ratio. Three additional dietary treatments included similar amounts of rumen-protected soybean meal and incremental amounts of AjiPro formulated to provide 50 percent (AJ50), 100 percent (AJ100), or 150 percent (AJ150) of the absorbable Lys provided by POSCON. Starting on d 151 of the growth study, steers were weighed on 2 consecutive days every 14 d and assigned a final BW when no longer profitable (defined as when cost of gain exceeded value of gain). Steers remained profitable for greater days for NEGCON, POSCON and AJ100 than AJ150. Steers consuming POSCON had lesser ADG (kg/d) than all other treatments during the early finishing phase (d 75 to 112). However, steer ADG (kg/d) during late finishing (d 112 to 179) was greater for steers fed diets optimized for Lys requirement (POSCON and AJ100) than all other treatments. Between d 112 to 179, POSCON had greater G:F than all other treatments but did not differ from AJ100. When encapsulated Lys was under or over-supplemented, finishing steers became less profitable sooner. Feed efficiency increased with use of rumen-protected products during late finishing (d 112 to 179) in diets formulated to meet Lys requirement, but this did not impact overall steer performance from growing through finishing. A more accurate understanding of steer AA requirement and subsequent AA metabolism will allow more precise and effective use of rumenprotected products.


Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1642
Author(s):  
Edward H. Cabezas-Garcia ◽  
Denise Lowe ◽  
Francis Lively

The present review compared features of the UK system for predicting energy requirements in beef cattle with a number of feeding systems developed from research institutes consortiums around the world. In addition, energy requirements for maintenance calculated from studies conducted at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) in Northern Ireland since the 1990s were compared with compiled data from recent peer-review papers published over the last decade (2009–2020). The mean metabolisable energy requirement for the maintenance (MEm) of growing cattle was 0.672 MJ/kg0.75 according to values obtained from calorimetry studies conducted at AFBI. This value is respectively 8.2 and 19.5% greater than the MEm values obtained by the Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC), and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) equations, but it is in close agreement with the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) approach, when assuming a Bos taurus bull (300 kg LW) and an efficiency for converting energy for maintenance (km) of 0.65. Most of the literature data on energy requirements for the maintenance for this animal category were obtained from studies conducted with Bos indicus animals and their crossbreds in Brazilian conditions with this confirming lower requirements of these animals when compared to pure Bos taurus cattle. A simulation of the total ME requirements calculated for an Angus × Friesian steer (LW = 416 kg) offered good quality grass silage, indicated that both AFRC and NASEM systems overestimate (38.5 and 20.5%, respectively) the observed efficiency of converting ME for growth (kg). When the total ME requirements (maintenance + growth) were assessed, both systems underpredicted total ME requirement in 15.8 and 22.1 MJ/d. The mean MEm requirements for suckler cows obtained from the literature (0.596 MJ/kg0.75) is on average 19.1% greater than predictions given by both AFRC and INRA (lactation) equations when considering a 550 kg cow and a km value of 0.72. Although no differences in net energy requirements for maintenance (NEm) were detected between dry and lactating suckler cows, as expected the later displayed greater variation as a result of differences in milk production. On this regard, the INRA model recognise increased NEm requirements for lactating animals compared to dry cows. The re-evaluation of the concept of diet metabolisability and the analysis of existing data on compensatory growth responses are recommended for future updates of the British system (AFRC) having in to account the particularities of grass-based systems in the UK.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Emeka Okafor ◽  
Anthony Chinweuba Onovo ◽  
Christopher Chukwutoo Ihueze

1997 ◽  
Vol 1997 ◽  
pp. 118-118
Author(s):  
R.W.J. Steen ◽  
L.E.R. Dawson ◽  
N. Lavery ◽  
D.E. Kirkpatrick ◽  
S.D. Johnston

The maintenance energy requirement of an animal can be defined as the daily metabolisable energy (ME) intake at which it is in zero energy balance. Maintenance energy requirements can be estimated either by measuring fasting metabolism or from a regression relationship between ME intake and energy retention for a number of animals given a range of ME intakes. However maintenance energy requirements may vary according to the composition of the diet, as higher intakes of high-fibre diets have promoted greater rates of gut metabolism than lower intakes of low-fibre diets. In the present study maintenance energy requirements of beef cattle and lambs have been estimated by regressions between ME intake and energy retention using data from a series of studies involving diets based on grass silage or fresh grass and concentrates.


2019 ◽  
Vol 331 (8) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
E. Nasanbaev ◽  
◽  
A.B. Akhmetalieva ◽  
A.E. Nugmanova ◽  
A.K. Zhumayeva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document