Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:17:59.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of wilting of grass prior to ensiling on the response to bacterial inoculation. 2. Intake and performance by dairy cattle over three harvests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. C. Patterson ,
T. Yan  and
F. J. Gordon
D. C. Patterson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 SDR
T. Yan
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 SDR
F. J. Gordon
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 SDR
Get access

Abstract

Four silages (unwilted with and without inoculant, and wilted with and without inoculant) were prepared from perennial ryegrass swards at each of three harvests over the growing season. The four silages from each of the first (primary growth), second (first regrowth) and third (second regrowth) harvests were offered ad libitum to 48 dairy cows during periods 2, 1 and 3 respectively, in a two (control and additive) × two (unwilted and wilted) × three (harvest (period)) change-over design experiment with 8-week experimental periods. The animals also received a concentrate supplement at 7·0, 6·1 and 5·2 kg dry matter (DM) per day in the first, second and third periods respectively. The supplement was based on barley, molasses and soya-bean meal.

There were significant interactions between inoculation and wilting across the three harvests on silage DM intake (F<0-01), milk yield (P<0·05), and outputs of fat (P<0·01) and protein (P<0·05). Inoculation had no significant effects on silage intake and milk production across the unwilted and wilted silages. However, within the unwilted silages, inoculation significantly increased silage DM intake by 0·46 kg/day (P < 0·05) and fat yield by 0·032 kg/day (P<0·05). In contrast, within the wilted silages inoculation significantly reduced fat yield by 0·030 kg/day (P < 0·05). Wilting of grass prior to ensiling significantly increased silage DM intake by 0·73 kg/day (P <0·001), milk yield by 0·42 kg/day (P<0·05), fat yield by 0·053 kg/day (P < 0·001) and protein yield by 0·047 kg/day (P < 0·001) across the inoculant-treated and untreated silages. The effects however were mainly derived from the untreated silages as within the inoculant-treated materials the differences in silage intake and milk yield were not significant between unwilted and wilted treatments. The results of the current experiment indicate that wilting with no additive significantly improved silage intake and milk production, but otherwise the improvement was reduced with wilting following inoculation. Inoculation significantly increased silage intake and fat yield when used with the unwilted grass, but it significantly reduced fat yield when used with the wilted grass.

Keywords

cowsinoculantmilk productionsilagewilting
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 3 , June 1996 , pp. 419 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1990. Technical committee on responses to nutrients. Report no. 5. Nutritive requirements of ruminant animals: energy. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B 60:729–804.Google Scholar
Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1992. Technical committee on responses to nutrients. Report no. 9. Nutritive requirements of ruminant animals: protein. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B 62:787–835.Google Scholar
Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1980. The effect of silage type on the performance of lactating cows and the response to high levels of protein in the supplement. Animal Production 30:29–37.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1981. The effect of wilting of herbage on silage composition and its feeding value for milk production. Animal Production 32:171–178.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1986. The effect of system of silage harvesting and feeding on milk production. Grass and Forage Science 41:209–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1989a. Effect of silage additive and wilting on animal performance. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp.159–173. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1989b. An evaluation through lactating cattle of a bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silage. Grass and Forage Science 44:169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1989c. A further study on the evaluation through lactating cattle of a bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silage. Grass and Forage Science 44:353–357.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J., Patterson, D. C., Porter, M. G. and Unsworth, E. F. 1995. The effect of degree of wilting of grass prior to ensiling on the performance and energy and nitrogen utilisation by dairy cattle. Grass and Forage Science In press.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. and Peoples, A. C. 1986. The utilisation of wilted and unwilted silages by lactating cows and the influence of changes in the protein and energy concentration of the supplement offered. Animal Production 43:355–366.Google Scholar
Henderson, N. 1993. Silage additives. Animal Feed Science and Technology 45:35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heron, S. J. E., Edwards, R. A. and McDonald, P. 1988. The effects of inoculation, addition of glucose and mincing on fermentation and proteolysis in ryegrass ensiled in laboratory silos. Animal Feed Science and Technology 19:85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinsson, K. 1991. A comparison between formic acid and an inoculant for the preservation of grass silage for dairy cows. Swedish journal of Agricultural Research 21:121–130.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. 1990. An evaluation of an inoculant of Lactobacillus plantarum as an additive for grass silage dairy cattle. Animal Production 51:1–13.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. 1993. The effect of formic acid, sulphuric acid and a bacterial inoculant on silage fermentation and the food intake and milk production of lactating dairy cows. Animal Production 56:29–42.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. and Gordon, F. J. 1984. The effect of type of concentrate and level of concentrate feeding on milk production. Animal Production 39:65–76.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. and Steen, R. W. J. 1993. A review of animal production responses to formic acid and inoculant treatment of grass silage in trials at the Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland. In Silage research 1993. Proceedings of the tenth international conference on research, Dublin, pp.178–179.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. C. 1993. The effects of grass and swath treatment factors on the rate of drying of silage grass. In Silage research 1993. Proceedings of the tenth international conference on silage research, Dublin, pp.52–53.Google Scholar
Peoples, A. C. and Gordon, F. J. 1989. The influence of wilting and season of silage harvest and the fat and protein concentration of the supplement on milk production and food utilisation by lactating cattle. Animal Production 48:305–317.Google Scholar
Rohr, K. and Thomas, C. 1984. Intake, digestibility and animal performance. In Efficiency of silage systems: a comparison between unwilted and wilted silages (ed. Zimmer, E. and Wilkins, R. J.), p.64–70. Landbauforschung Volkenrode, Sonderheft 69.Google Scholar
Rook, A. J., Sutton, J. D. and France, J. 1992. Prediction of the yields of milk constituents in dairy cows offered silage ad libitum and concentrates at a flat rate. Animal Production 54:313–332.Google Scholar
Sharp, R., Hooper, P. G. and Armstrong, D. G. 1994. The digestion of grass silages produced using inoculants of lactic acid bacteria. Grass and Forage Science 49:42–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sporndly, E. 1989. Effects of diet on milk composition and yield of dairy cows with special emphasis on milk protein content. Sivedish Journal ofAgricultural Research 19:99–106.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1991. Recent advances in the use of silage additives for dairy cattle. In Management issues for the grassland farmers in the 1990's (ed. Mayne, C. S.), Occasional symposium no. 25, British Grassland Society, pp.87–101.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1984. The effect of wilting and mechanical treatment of grass prior to ensiling on the performance of beef cattle and beef output per hectare. The fifty-seventh annual report of the Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, pp.21–32.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. and Gordon, F. J. 1980. The effect of type of silage and level of concentrate supplementation offered during early lactation on total lactation performance of January/February calving cows. Animal Production 30:341–354.Google Scholar
Sutton, J. D. 1989. Altering milk composition by feeding. Journal of Dairy Science 72:2801–2814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyrrell, H. F. and Reid, J. T. 1965. Prediction of the energy value of cow's milk. Journal of Dairy Science 48:1215–1223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yan, T., Patterson, D. C., Gordon, F. J. and Porter, M. G. 1996. The effects of wilting of grass prior to ensiling on the response to bacterial inoculation. 1. Silage fermentation and nutrient utilization over three harvests. Animal Science 62:405–417.Google Scholar
Zimmer, E. and Honig, H. 1984. Composition of the material and conservation losses. In Efficiency of silage systems: a comparison between unwilted and wilted silages (ed Zimmer, E. and Wilkins, R. J.), pp. 47–63. Landbauforschung Volkenrode, Sonderheft 69.Google Scholar