The effects of concentrate energy source on the milk production of dairy cows given a grass silage-based diet

1995 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Huhtanen ◽  
S. Jaakkola ◽  
E. Saarisalo
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Organic Matter ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Apparent Digestibility ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Gross Energy ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Energy Supplements ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

AbstractSixteen Finnish Ayrshire cows were used in a four period cyclic change-over experiment to evaluate eight concentrate supplements in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial arrangement. Two concentrate energy sources (starchy and fibrous) were used, each given with two levels (0 and 180 g/kg on a dry-matter (DM) basis) ofrapeseed meal (RSM) and two levels (0 and 180g/kg on DM basis) of wet distillers' solubles (WDS). The starchy concentrate (S) comprised rolled barley and oats (1:1). For the cows given the fibrous concentrate (F), 600 g/kg of the grain mixture was replaced with a mixture of fibrous by-products. Grass silage was offered ad libitum and the supplements offered at a rate of 9 kg/day (fresh weight).The cows offered F supplements consumed more silage DM than those offered S supplements (P < 0·01) but the difference in the total DM intake was smaller. The cows given S supplements produced slightly more milk than those given F supplement (26·5 v. 25·9 kg/day) but no differences were observed in the yield of milk constituents between the energy supplements. Replacing starch with fibre in the concentrate had no effect on the apparent digestibility of organic matter but tended to increase that of neutral-detergent fibre.Including RSM in the supplement increased total DM intake (P<0·05) and led to increases in the yield of milk and milk constituents (P < 0·001 and P < 0·01). Diet apparent digestibility was not affected by RSM supplementation.There were no significant interactions between concentrate energy source and RSM supplementation. Including WDS in the diet had no effect on food intake. Production responses to WDS supplementation varied with the concentrate energy source. WDS increased (at least P< 0·05) milk yield (1·0 kg/day) and the yields of fat (76 g/day) and protein (48 g/day) when given with the starchy concentrate. With the fibrous concentrate WDS had no effect on milk and protein yield, and decreased fat yield by 52 g/day (P < 0·05). The positive responses in the yields of milk fat and protein to RSM and WDS supplementation were almost additive with the starchy concentrate. Inclusion of WDS in the diet increased the apparent digestibility of organic matter and gross energy.

The effects of energy source and level of digestible undegradable protein in concentrates on silage intake and performance of lactating dairy cows offered a range of grass silages

1999 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 763-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. W. J. Keady ◽  
C. S. Mayne ◽  
D. A. Fitzpatrick ◽  
M. Marsden
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Protein Concentration ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Apparent Digestibility ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Lactating Dairy Cows ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

AbstractThe effects of energy source and level of digestible undegraded protein (DUP) in concentrates on silage intake and performance of lactating dairy cows, offered one of a range of grass silages differing in digestibility and intake characteristics, were evaluated in a partially balanced change-over design experiment involving 48 cows. Four silages were prepared using differing management practices prior to and during ensiling. All silages were treated with an inoculant additive. For silages A, В, С and D, dry matter (DM) concentrations were 199, 320, 313 and 223 (s.e. 4.6) g/kg, pH values 3.82, 4.03, 4·03 and 5·27 (s.e. 0.056), ammonia nitrogen (N) concentrations 58, 122, 66 and 356 (s.e. 13.2) g/kg total N and in vivo DM apparent digestibilities 077, 0.75 , 0.60 and 0.60 (s.e. 0·013) respectively. When offered as the sole diet to 12 dairy cows in a partially balanced change-over design experiment, silage DM intakes were 14.7, 14.7, 12.7 and 10.5 (s.e. 0·36) kg/day respectively for silages А, В, С and D. Six concentrates containing three starch concentrations, each at two levels of DUP, were formulated to have similar concentrations of crude protein, metabolizable energy (ME) and fermentable ME. For the low and high starch concentrates and low and high levels of DUP, starch concentrations were 22·5 and 273 g/kg DM and DUP levels were 44 and 60 g/kg DM respectively. Silages were offered ad libitum supplemented with 10 kg fresh concentrate per head per day. For silages А, В, С and D, DM intakes were 10.8, 11.2, 10·7 and 9·1 (s.e. 0·26) kg/day and milk yields 29.0, 27.6, 27.1 and 25.7 (s.e. 0.69) kg/day respectively. With the exception of milk protein concentration there were no significant (P> 0.05) silage type by concentrate energy source and/or level of DUP interactions on silage intake, milk output or composition. Concentrate energy source had no effect (P> 0.05) on silage DM intake, the yields of milk, fat, protein or fat plus protein or milk fat concentration. However, increasing starch concentration increased milk protein concentration (P< 0·001), urinary allantoin concentration (P< 0·01) and diet apparent digestibility (P< 0·001). Altering concentrate DUP level had no effect (P> 0·05) on silage DM intake, yields of milk, protein, fat or fat plus protein, milk f at concentrations or diet apparent digestibility. Increasing the level of DUP decreased milk protein (P< 0·05) concentration. It is concluded that with silages of varying digestibility, fermentation and intake characteristics, there were no concentrate energy source and/or level of DUP by silage type interactions on silage intake, milk yield or composition, or diet apparent digestibility with the exception of a silage type by concentrate level of DUP interaction on milk protein concentration. With out-of-parlour feeding of concentrates the results of the present study suggest that there is no evidence to justify the formulation of concentrates differing in energy source or level of DUP to complement individual silage types.

The effects of concentrate energy source on silage intake and animal performance with lactating dairy cows offered a range of grass silages

1998 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. W. J. Keady ◽  
C. S. Mayne ◽  
M. Marsden
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Food Intake ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Design Experiment ◽  
Apparent Digestibility ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Lactating Dairy Cows ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

AbstractA partially balanced change-over design experiment was made to examine the effects of concentrate energy source on the voluntary food intake and animal performance of 50 lactating dairy cows offered a diverse range of grass silages. The silages were also offered as the sole diet to 10 dairy cows in a partially balanced change-over design experiment. A total of five silages were prepared. Silages A, B and D and silages C and E were harvested from primary regrowths and secondary regrowths respectively of predominantly perennial ryegrass swards. Herbage was ensiled either pre-wilted or unwilted and either untreated or treated with a bacterial inoculant or formic acid based additives. For silages A, B, C, D and E, dry matter (DM) concentrations were 473, 334, 170, 170 and 256 (s.e. 4·0) g/kg, pH values 4·42, 4·01, 4·88, 4·46 and 3·91 (s.e. 0·059), ammonia-nitrogen (N) concentrations 86, 88, 289, 182 and 135 (s.e. 10·6) glkg total N and in vitro DM apparent digestibilities 0·76, 0·76, 0·75, 0·73 and 0·75 (s.e. 0·009) respectively. When offered as the sole diet DM intakes were 14·1,14·7,10·5,10·1 and 11·5 (s.e. 0·50) kg/day. Five concentrates were formulated to contain similar concentrations of crude protein, effective rumen degradable protein (ERDP), metabolizable energy (ME) and fermentable ME (FME) but using different carbohydrate sources to achieve a wide range of starch concentrations. For the low and high starch concentrates, starch concentrations were 50 and 384 g/kg DM, and acid-detergent fibre concentrations were 128 and 75 g/kg DM respectively. The silages were offeredad libitumsupplemented with 10 kg concentrate per head per day. For silages A, B, C, D and E silage DM intakes were 10·6, 10·5, 8·5, 8·6 and 9·0 (s.e. 0·37) kg/day and milk yields 23·9, 28·1, 26·2, 26·1 and 25·0 (s.e. 0·76) kg/day respectively. Concentrate energy source did not influence (P > 0·05) silage DM intake, diet apparent digestibility or the yields of milk or fat plus protein. For concentrates containing 50, 131, 209, 310 and 384 g starch per kg DM, milk protein concentrations were 32·0, 32·2, 32·5, 33·0 and 33·6 (s.e. 0·13) glkg, milk fat concentrations were 44·5, 43·9, 43·8, 43·3 and 43·1 (s.e. 0·35) glkg and urinary allantoin concentrations 15·2,15·4, 17·0, 1.7·6 and 18·0 mmolll respectively. Increasing starch intake resulted in positive and negative linear relationships for milk protein (P< 0·01, R2 = 0·96) and fat (P< 0·01, R2 = 0·96) concentrations respectively. There were no significant concentrate energy source × silage type interactions on silage intake or yields of milk or fat plus protein (P > 0·05). However there was a concentrate energy source × silage type interaction on milk fat yield (P > 0·05). It is concluded that, with silages of varying fermentation and intake characteristics but similar apparent digestibility, there were no concentrate energy source × silage type interactions on food intake, milk composition or milk yield. Also concentrate energy source had no effect on silage DM intake or milk yield. However increasing starch intake linearly increased milk protein concentration, probably due to increased microbial protein synthesis and decreased milk fat concentration.

Fish-meal supplementation of grass silage given to young growing steers: effect on intake, apparent digestibility and live-weight gains

1992 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Sanderson ◽  
C. Thomas ◽  
A. B. McAllan
Keyword(s):  
Organic Matter ◽  
Dry Matter ◽  
Fish Meal ◽  
Live Weight ◽  
Apparent Digestibility ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Gross Energy ◽  
Ad Libitum ◽  
Voluntary Intake

AbstractSeventy-two, 4-month-old, British Friesian steers were used to investigate the effects of feeding a supplement of fish meal on the voluntary intake and live-weight gain by young growing cattle given a well preserved ryegrass silage. The silage was offered either alone or mixed with 50,100 or 150 g fish meal per kg silage dry matter (DM) and the diets were offered either ad libitum or intakes were restricted to 16, 19 or 22 g dietary DM per kg live weight (LW). Intakes were recorded daily, LW weekly and in vivo apparent digestibility over one 7-day period during the 132-day trial.For animals fed ad libitum, the absolute intake of dietary DM increased linearly with an increase in the level of fish-meal supplementation such that intake when the highest level of fish meal was given was significantly higher (P < 0·01) than when silage was given alone. However, DM intake per unit LW (approx. 24 g DM per kg LW) was not affected significantly (P > 0·05).Inclusion of fish meal in the diet did not affect the apparent digestibility of dietary DM, organic matter, acid-detergent or neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) although there was a trend for slightly higher (P > 0·05) gross energy apparent digestibility when fish meal was given. Increasing the level of feeding reduced NDF digestibility. The coefficients measured at the 22 g and ad libitum levels of intake were lower (P < 0·01 and P < 0·05 respectively) than that measured at the 16 g DM per kg LW level.Animals given silage alone to appetite achieved LW gains of 0·6 kg/day. LW gains increased linearly with increasing level of feeding (P < 0·001) and increasing level offish-meal supplementation (P < 0·001).

Milk production in early lactation dairy cows given grass silagead libitum: Influence of concentrate energy source, crude protein content and level of concentrate allowance

1988 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. K. Sloan ◽  
P. Rowlinson ◽  
D. G. Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Yield ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Crude Protein ◽  
Metabolizable Energy ◽  
Energy Concentration ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Neutral Detergent Fibre ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

ABSTRACTThere is increasing interest in how the raw material make-up of concentrates can influence the milk performance of dairy cows. Thus, over two consecutive winters, 54 dairy cows were used to investigate the effects on dry matter (DM) intake, milk yield and its composition of feeding concentrates of diverse energy source (LNDF — 131 g neutral-detergent fibre per kg DM, 492 g starch plus sugars per kg DM; HNDF — 244 g neutral-detergent fibre per kg DM, 293 g starch plus sugar per kg DM) at two formulated crude protein (CP) levels (157v.187 g/kg DM) and three levels of concentrate allowance (9, 11, 13 kg DM). The concentrates were formulated to be of equivalent metabolizable energy concentration (MJ/kg DM) and were offered with silagead libitumfor a 10-week period (weeks 4 to 13 of lactation).Silage intakes were variable but not significantly influenced by concentrate energy source or formulated CP level, except in the 1st year where animals consuming the high CP concentrate ate more silage. Silage DM intake decreased as concentrate allowance was increased with the substitution rate (kg silage DM per kg concentrate DM) increasing as concentrate allowance was increased.Increasing the concentrate allowance effected the expected increases in milk yield. Concentrate energy source did not influence milk yield but the higher CP levels effected a 2-kg increase in milk yield. Feeding of LNDF concentrates depressed milk fat concentration and its yield, the depression being accentuated with each increase in concentrate allowance. The depression in milk fat concentration was negatively correlated with the forage: concentrate ratio of the diet consumed. Furthermore, dietary NDF proportion was shown to account for greater than half of the variation in milk fat concentration. In contrast to the observations made for milk fat, feeding the LNDF concentrates effected an increase in milk protein concentration but only at the lower CP level of the concentrate.

An examination of possible interactions between silage type and concentrate composition on the intake characteristics of grass silage offered to growing cattle and dairy cows

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 ◽  
pp. 21-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.S. Mayne ◽  
Rosemary Agnew ◽  
D.C. Patterson ◽  
R.W.J. Steen ◽  
F.J. Gordon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Crude Protein ◽  
Protein Concentration ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Growing Cattle ◽  
Accuracy Of Prediction ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

Considerable progress has been made recently in improving the accuracy of prediction of silage intake, when offered as the sole food, to growing cattle (Steen et al, 1995). However, in order to incorporate this information into feed rationing programmes, it is essential to obtain information on how silages of differing characteristics interact when offered with a range of levels and types of supplementary feeds. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of concentrate energy source and crude protein concentration, when offered at a range of feed levels, on the voluntary food of a diverse range of grass silages with both growing beef cattle and dairy cows.

An examination of the effect of concentrate energy source on rumen fermentation characteristics of dairy cattle offered grass silages of differing intake characteristics

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 ◽  
pp. 217-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.W.J. Keady ◽  
C.S. Mayne ◽  
D A Fitzpatrick
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cattle ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Rumen Fermentation ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Production Studies ◽  
Metabolisable Energy ◽  
Lactating Dairy Cattle ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source ◽  
Degradable Protein

Recent dairy cow production studies (Keady et al, 1998a, b) have indicated that energy source (starch v fibre) in the concentrate did not alter silage intake or milk yield of lactating dairy cattle offered a range of grass silages. However in both studies increasing the level of starch in the concentrate increased milk protein concentration and tended to decrease milk fat concentration. The present study was undertaken to examine the effects of concentrate energy source on rumen fermentation characteristics of dairy cattle offered three grass silages.Three silages were produced from predominantly perennial ryegrass swards after 39 day regrowth intervals. Silages A and C were ensiled from primary regrowths treated with an inoculant while silage B was ensiled from a secondary regrowth untreated. Silage A was wilted for 24 hours prior to ensiling while silages B and C were ensiled direct. Two concentrates, 0s and 100s were formulated to contain different starch concentrations but similar concentrations of crude protein, metabolisable energy, digestible undegradable protein and effective rumen degradable protein.

An examination of the effect of concentrate energy source and changes in eRDP:DUP ratio on milk production of dairy cows offered grass silages differing in digestibility and intake characteristics

1997 ◽  
Vol 1997 ◽  
pp. 9-9
Author(s):  
T.W.J. Keady ◽  
C.S. Mayne ◽  
M. Marsden
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Important Variable ◽  
Animal Performance ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Lactating Dairy Cows ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source ◽  
Degradable Protein

Results from a previous study at this Institute indicated that concentrate energy source did not alter silage intake or animal performance of lactating dairy cows offered a range of grass silages of similar digestibility but differing in intake characteristics. Digestibility is probably the single most important variable affecting animal performance from grass silage. The present study was undertaken to examine the effects of concentrate energy source and effective rumen degradable protein (eRDP):digestible undegradable protein (DUP) ratio in the concentrate on the silage intake of, and animal performance from, lactating dairy cows offered a diverse range of grass silages differing in digestibility and intake characteristics.

A note on concentrate energy source for dairy cows in mid lactation

1987 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. K. Sloan ◽  
P. Rowlinson ◽  
D. G. Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Energy Source ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Yield ◽  
Dietary Protein ◽  
Protein Level ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Concentrate Energy ◽  
Feeding Level ◽  
Dietary Protein Level ◽  
Concentrate Energy Source

The forage: concentrate ratio in the diet is known to influence the fermentation characteristics in the rumen (Sudweeks, Ely, Mertens and Sisk, 1981). Increasing the proportion of concentrates in rations fed to dairy cows has been shown to narrow the acetate plus butyrate: propionate ratio in the rumen (Sutton, 1981) with an associated depression in milk fat concentration (Ørskov, Reid and McDonald, 1981). The magnitude of the effect, on milk yield and composition, of increasing the concentrate proportion in the ration has been shown to be dependent on feeding level (Sutton, 1981), and the number of meals of concentrate per day (Johnson, 1979) and also may be influenced by dietary protein level and source (Ørskov et al., 1981).

Replacing wheat with canola meal and maize grain in the diet of lactating dairy cows: Feed intake, milk production and cow condition responses

2017 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 240-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruairi P McDonnell ◽  
Martin vH Staines
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Daily Intake ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Holstein Friesian ◽  
Maize Grain ◽  
The Difference

This research paper describes the effect of partially replacing wheat with maize grain and canola meal on milk production and body condition changes in early lactation Holstein-Friesian dairy cows consuming a grass silage-based diet over an 83-d period. Two groups of 39 cows were stratified for age, parity, historical milk yield and days in milk (DIM), and offered one of two treatment diets. The first treatment (CON) reflected a typical diet used by Western Australian dairy producers in summer and comprised (kg DM/cow per d); 8 kg of annual ryegrass silage, 6 kg of crushed wheat (provided once daily in a mixed ration), 3·6 kg of crushed lupins (provided in the milking parlour in two daily portions) and ad libitum lucerne haylage. The second treatment diet (COMP) was identical except the 6 kg of crushed wheat was replaced by 6 kg of a more complex concentrate mix (27% crushed wheat, 34% maize grain and 37% canola meal). Lucerne haylage was provided independently in the paddock to all cows, and no pasture was available throughout the experiment. The COMP group had a greater mean overall daily intake (22·5vs20·4 kg DM/cow) and a higher energy corrected milk (ECM) yield (29·2vs27·1 kg/cow;P= 0·047) than the CON cows. The difference in overall intake was caused by a higher daily intake of lucerne haylage in COMP cows (4·5vs2·3 kg DM/cow). The CON group had a higher concentration of milk fat (42·1vs39·3 g/kg;P= 0·029) than COMP cows. Milk protein yield was greater in COMP cows (P< 0·021); however, milk fat yield was unaffected by treatment. It is concluded that partially replacing wheat with canola meal and maize grain in a grass silage-based diet increases voluntary DMI of conserved forage and consequently yields of ECM and milk protein.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document