Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:07:24.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the responses by lactating cows given grass silage to changes in the degradability or quantity of protein offered in the supplement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. C. Small  and
F. J. Gordon
J. C. Small
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR
F. J. Gordon
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR
Get access

Abstract

Twenty-four lactating British Friesian type cows were used in a four period, partially balanced, changeover design experiment to evaluate eight treatments consisting of four protein sources in the supplement (soya-bean meal, formaldehyde treated soya-bean meal, fish meal and a mixture supplying equal crude protein levels from fish and soya-bean meal (respective degradabilities of total supplement nitrogen (N) were 0·56, 0·37, 0·32 and 0·44), each offered in supplements formulated to contain 150 and 200 g crude protein per kg fresh weight in a 4 × 2 factorial design. All supplements were offered at 8·0 kg/day in addition to ad libitum access to a medium digestibility grass silage (digestible organic matter as proportion of dry matter (DM), 0·66); with a relatively poor quality fermentation (pH, 4·5; ammonia-N proportion of total N, 0·21).

There were no significant interactions between source and level of protein on any of the animal performance variables. Source of protein did not influence milk output or milk composition but increasing protein intake significantly increased milk yield (26·0 and 26·7 (s.e. 0·19) for the low and high protein supplements respectively). Blood urea levels were significantly influenced by both protein source and level.

Total diet digestibility and energy and N utilization studies were undertaken with six replicates per treatment and the full data are presented. Neither protein source nor level had any significant effect on DM or energy digestibility. N digestibility was significantly reduced following formaldehyde treatment of soya-bean meal (0·69 v. 0·72 (s.e. 0·01)) and most N utilization variables were influenced by the level of protein intake but not by protein source.

Keywords

milk productionnutritionproteinsilage
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , June 1990 , pp. 391 - 398
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Butler, T. M. 1973. Sources and levels of protein in cattle feeds. Irish Grassland Animal Production Association Journal 8: 24–31.Google Scholar
Butler, T. M., Gleeson, P. A. and Murphy, J. J. 1978. The effect of wilting and formic acid treatment on silage dry matter intakes and milk production by dairy cows. Proceedings 30th Annual Meeting European Association of Animal Production, Harrogate, No. 1.4.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E. and Watson, J. N. 1975. Silage and milk production: a comparison between barley and dried grass as supplements to silage of high digestibility. Journal of the British Grassland Society 30: 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E. and Watson, J. N. 1976. Silage and milk production: a comparison between barley and groundnut cake as supplements to silage of high digestibility. Journal of the British Grassland Society 31: 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E. and Watson, J. N. 1984. Silage and milk production: a comparison between concentrates containing different amounts of protected protein as supplements for silage of high digestibility. Grass and Forage Science 39: 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganev, G., Ørskov, E. R. and Smart, R. 1979. The effect of roughage or concentrate feeding and rumen retention time on total degradation of protein in the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93: 651–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1987. The influence of the system of silage harvesting and feeding and the use of protected protein on milk production. Grass and Forage Science 42: 9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. and McMurray, C. H. 1979. The optimum level of protein in the supplement for dairy cows with access to grass silage. Animal Production 29: 283–291.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. and Peoples, A. C. 1986. The utilization 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
Gordon, F. J., Unsworth, E. F. and Peoples, A. C. 1981. Protein supplementation of silage-based diets for milk production. 54th Annual Report, Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, pp. 13–23.Google Scholar
Judge, F. J. and Gleeson, P. A. 1977. Effects of crude protein and energy levels on milk production in early lactation. An Foras Taluntais Animal Production Research Report, p. 106.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
Miller, E. L., Galwey, N. W., Pike, I. H. and Newman, G. 1983. Effect of replacing soya-bean meal by fish meal on milk production by Friesian cows on commercial farms. Proceedings Nutrition Society 42: 62A (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Morgan, D. J. 1979. Effect of formaldehyde-protected soyabean meal upon the performance of lactating cows. An Foras Talúntais Animal Production Research Report, p. 56.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. J. 1985. The effect of formalin-treated soya bean meal upon the performance of lactating cows. Animal Production 41: 33–42.Google Scholar
Oldham, J. D., Phipps, R. H., Fulford, R. J., Napper, D. J., Thomas, J. and Weller, F. R. 1985. Response of dairy cows to rations varying in fish meal or soya bean meal content in early lactation. Animal Production 40: 519 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Reid, G. W. and McDonald, I. 1981. The effects of protein degradability and food intake on milk yield and composition of cows in early lactation. British Journal of Nutrition 45: 547–555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, H. D. and Lucas, H. L. 1962. Change-over designs. Technical Bulletin, North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, No. 147.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 utilization by lactating cattle. Animal Production 48: 305–317.Google Scholar
Small, J. C. 1986. An evaluation through dairy cattle of systems of harvesting grass for silage and the response in milk production to source of supplementary protein. Ph.D. Thesis, The Queen's University of Belfast.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. and Gordon, F. J. 1980. The effect of level and system of concentrate allocation to January/February calving cows on total lactation performance. Animal Production 30: 39–51.Google Scholar
Strickland, M. J., Poole, D. A. and Cottrill, B. R. 1985. An evaluation of protein levels and sources in concentrates for dairy cows. Animal Production 40: 519 (Abstr.).Google Scholar