Supplemental monensin affects growth, physiology, and coccidiosis infestation of early-weaned beef calves consuming warm-season perennial or cool-season annual grasses

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-117
Author(s):  
R.A. Oliveira ◽  
P. Moriel ◽  
J.M.B. Vendramini ◽  
H.M. Silva ◽  
M. Vedovatto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Warm Season ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Beef Calves ◽  
Growth Physiology ◽  
Annual Grasses

scholarly journals Milk Production, Body Weight, Body Condition Score, Activity, and Rumination of Organic Dairy Cattle Grazing Two Different Pasture Systems Incorporating Cool- and Warm-Season Forages

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 264
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Ritz ◽  
Bradley J. Heins ◽  
Roger D. Moon ◽  
Craig C. Sheaffer ◽  
Sharon L. Weyers
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Body Condition Score ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Organic Dairy ◽  
Condition Score ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

Organic dairy cows were used to evaluate the effect of two organic pasture production systems (temperate grass species and warm-season annual grasses and cool-season annuals compared with temperate grasses only) across two grazing seasons (May to October of 2014 and 2015) on milk production, milk components (fat, protein, milk urea nitrogen (MUN), somatic cell score (SCS)), body weight, body condition score (BCS), and activity and rumination (min/day). Cows were assigned to two pasture systems across the grazing season at an organic research dairy in Morris, Minnesota. Pasture System 1 was cool-season perennials (CSP) and Pasture System 2 was a combination of System 1 and warm-season grasses and cool-season annuals. System 1 and System 2 cows had similar milk production (14.7 and 14.8 kg d−1), fat percentage (3.92% vs. 3.80%), protein percentage (3.21% vs. 3.17%), MUN (12.5 and 11.5 mg dL−1), and SCS (4.05 and 4.07), respectively. Cows in System 1 had greater daily rumination (530 min/day) compared to cows in System 2 (470 min/day). In summary, warm-season annual grasses may be incorporated into grazing systems for pastured dairy cattle.

Herbicides for Postemergence Control of Annual Grass Weeds in Seedling Forage Grasses

Weed Science ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Peters ◽  
Russell S. Moomaw ◽  
Alex R. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Warm Season ◽  
Big Bluestem ◽  
Forage Grasses ◽  
Annual Grass ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Intermediate Wheatgrass ◽  
Green Foxtail ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Large Crabgrass ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

The control of three summer annual grass weeds with herbicides during establishment of forage grasses was studied near Concord and Mead, NE, in 1984, 1985, and 1986. Three cool-season forage grasses, intermediate wheatgrass, tall fescue, and smooth bromegrass, and two warm-season grasses, big bluestem and switchgrass, were included. The control of three major summer annual grasses, green foxtail, barnyardgrass, and large crabgrass, was excellent with fenoxaprop at 0.22 kg ai/ha. Slight to moderate injury to cool-season forage grasses and severe injury to warm-season grasses were evident. Sethoxydim at 0.22 kg ai/ha and haloxyfop at 0.11 kg ai/ha controlled green foxtail and large crabgrass, but not barnyardgrass. Sulfometuron-treated big bluestem and switchgrass plots had the best forage stand frequencies and yields and, at the rate used, sulfometuron satisfactorily controlled green foxtail but only marginally controlled barnyardgrass and large crabgrass.

Growth, physiology, and coccidiosis infestation of suckling beef calves grazing warm-season grasses and offered creep-feeding supplementation with or without monensin

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhaiza A. Oliveira ◽  
Joao M. B. Vendramini ◽  
Marcelo Vedovatto ◽  
Elizabeth Palmer ◽  
Hiran M. da Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Warm Season ◽  
Creep Feeding ◽  
Beef Calves ◽  
Growth Physiology ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

scholarly journals Forage Yield and Nutritive Value of Cool-Season and Warm-Season Forages for Grazing Organic Dairy Cattle

Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1963
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Ritz ◽  
Bradley J. Heins ◽  
Roger Moon ◽  
Craig Sheaffer ◽  
Sharon L. Weyers
Keyword(s):  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Forage Yield ◽  
Perennial Grasses ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Organic Dairy ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

The objective of this study was to compare the forage nutritive value of cool-season perennial grasses and legumes with that of warm-season annual grasses grazed by organic dairy cows. Two pasture systems were analyzed across the grazing season at an organic dairy in Morris, Minnesota. Pasture system 1 included perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehmann), meadow fescue (Schedonorus pratensis (Huds.) P. Beauv), alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), white clover (Trifolium repens L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), and chicory (Cichorium intybus L.). Pasture system 2 was a combination of system 1 and monocultures of warm-season grasses (sorghum-sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor [L.] Moench subsp. drummondii [Steud.]) and teff (Eragrostis tef L.)). Across the grazing season, forage yield was 39% greater for system 2 than system 1 due to greater forage yield during the summer. Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) were similar for cool-season and warm-season grasses. Warm-season grasses had greater forage yield during the summer months compared with cool-season grasses and legumes. The total tract NDF digestibility (TTNDFD) varied by month and year across the study for both pasture systems. Overall, weather may affect the forage nutritive value for both cool-season perennial grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses.

scholarly journals Comparison of warm season and cool season forages for dairy grazing systems in continuous culture1

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn E Ruh ◽  
Bradley J Heins ◽  
Isaac J Salfer ◽  
Robert D Gardner ◽  
Marshall D Stern
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Nutrient Digestibility ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Total N ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Sorghum Sudangrass ◽  
Organic Dairy Production ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

AbstractThe objective of this study was to compare warm-season annual grasses to cool-season perennial (CSP) grasses for ruminal nutrient digestibility and N metabolism in a dual-flow continuous culture fermentation system. Dietary treatments were 1) fresh alfalfa, 2) CSP grasses and legumes, 3) brown-midrib sorghum-sudangrass (BMRSS), and 4) teff grass from an organic dairy production system. Eight dual-flow continuous culture fermenters were used during two consecutive 10-d periods consisting of 7 d for stabilization followed by 3 d of sampling. Fermenter samples were collected on days 8, 9, and 10 for analysis of pH, NH3-N, and VFA. Apparent DM, OM, NDF, and ADF digestibility were on average lesser (P < 0.05) in CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses compared with alfalfa. True DM and OM digestibility were lesser (P < 0.05) for CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses compared with fresh alfalfa. Total VFA were not affected (P > 0.05) by forage. The NH3-N concentrations were highest (P < 0.05) with alfalfa compared with the other CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses. CP digestibility was not affected (P > 0.05) by forage treatment. Flow of NH3-N was greatest (P < 0.05) for alfalfa, reflecting the greatest NH3-N concentration. Flow of total N was greatest (P < 0.05) for alfalfa, intermediate for teff, and lowest for CSP grasses and legumes and BMRSS. Flows of bacterial N, efficiency of bacterial N, non-NH3-N, and dietary N were not affected (P > 0.05) by forage source. Overall, fermentation of warm-season grasses was similar to the cool-season grasses and legumes which indicate dairy producers may use warm-season grasses without concerns about negative impact on rumen health.

Forage-Based Heifer Development Program for North Florida

EDIS ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose C.B. Dubeux ◽  
Nicolas DiLorenzo ◽  
Kalyn Waters ◽  
Jane C. Griffin
Keyword(s):  
Development Program ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Beef Cows ◽  
Good News ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Performance Targets ◽  
Grazing Systems ◽  
Heifer Development ◽  
Reducing Costs

Florida has 915,000 beef cows and 125,000 replacement heifers (USDA, 2016). Developing these heifers so that they can become productive females in the cow herd is a tremendous investment in a cow/calf operation, an investment that takes several years to make a return. The good news is that there are options to develop heifers on forage-based programs with the possibility of reducing costs while simultaneously meeting performance targets required by the beef industry. Mild winters in Florida allows utilization of cool-season forages that can significantly enhance the performance of grazing heifers. During the warm-season, integration of forage legumes into grazing systems will provide additional nutrients to meet the performance required to develop a replacement heifer to become pregnant and enter the mature cow herd. In this document, we will propose a model for replacement heifer development, based on forage research performed in trials at the NFREC Marianna.   

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document