Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:19:31.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of diet and frequency of watering on the performance of growing cattle given food at maintenance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

P. R. Hatendi ,
F. M. Mulenga ,
S. Sibanda  and
P. Ndlovu
P. R. Hatendi
Affiliation:
Grasslands Research Station, Post Bag 3701, Marondera, Zimbabwe
F. M. Mulenga
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science University of Zimbabwe, PO Box MP 167, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe
S. Sibanda
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science University of Zimbabwe, PO Box MP 167, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe
P. Ndlovu
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science University of Zimbabwe, PO Box MP 167, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe
Get access

Abstract

An 18-week experiment investigated the effects of type of diet and frequency of watering on the performance of growing cattle given food at maintenance (metabolizable energy (ME) allowance (MJ) = 8·3 + 0·091 M where M = live weight of the animal). Three diets with 20: 80 (low, L), 50:50 (medium, M) and 80: 20 (high, H) roughage to concentrate ratios (10·2, 7·8 and 5·4 MJME per kg dry matter) were used in combination with free access to water for 2·5 h once daily or once every 3rd day. A completely randomized-block design with a 3 (diets) × 2 (watering frequencies) factorial arrangement of treatments was used. Five animals were allocated per treatment (average weight 245 (s.d. 21·6) kg).

Dry-matter intake increased as the roughage content of the diet increased (P < 0·05) but was not affected by the watering regime (P > 0·05). Total water intake was found to be positively correlated with dry-matter intake and increased with dietary roughage level. Animals watered daily drank more (P < 0·05) water (12·6 v. 10·0 kg/day) than those watered every 3rd day. The apparent digestibility of the diets decreased as the amount of roughage increased (diet L 734g/kg, M471 g/kg and H 433 g/kg). Similar apparent digestibilities were observed under the two watering frequencies (546 g/kg and 547 g/kg).

Type of diet significantly (P < 0·05) affected the final weights of the steers. Animals given diet H were proportionately 0·07 heavier than those offered diet L corresponding to total weight changes of −0·8 and +18·4 kg respectively. Carcass weight, backfat thickness and eye muscle area were not affected by the treatments. The chemical composition of the 9 to 11th rib joint was only affected by diet H which gave less fat (P < 0·05). Water, fat, protein and ash content averaged 607,118,190 and 84 g/kg respectively.

Keywords

beef cattlecarcass compositionnutrient densitywater intake
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , August 1996 , pp. 33 - 38
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

Elliott, R. C., Mills, W. R. and Reed, W. D. C. 1966. Survival feeding of Africandar cows. Rhodesia, Zambia Malawi Journal ofAgricultural Research 4: 69–76.Google Scholar
Forbes, J. M. 1986. The voluntary food intake of farm animals. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
French, M. H. 1956. The effects of infrequent water intake on the consumption and digestibility of hay by zebu cattle. Empire Journal of Experimental Agriculture 24: 128–136.Google Scholar
Keulen, J. van and Young, B. A. 1977. Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. Journal ofAgricultural Science, Cambridge 44: 282–287Google Scholar
King, J. M. 1983. Livestock water needs in pastoral Africa. Research report no. 7, International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa.Google Scholar
Langhans, W., Rossi, R. and Scharrer, E. 1995. Relationships between feed and water intake in ruminants. In Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism, growth reproduction; proceedings of the eighth international on ruminant physiology (ed. Englehardt, W. V., Leonhard-Marek, S., Breves, G. and Giesecke, D.), pp. 199–216. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. E., Scott, N. A. and Summerville, S. H. 1976. Condition scoring of cattle. Bulletin no. 6, East of Scotland College of Agriculture, Animal Production Advisory Department.Google Scholar
Manyuchi, B., Smith, T. and Mikayiri, S. 1991. Effect of dry season feeding on the growth of Mashona steers of two ages kept on natural pasture during the subsequent wet season. Zimbabwe Journal of Agricultural Research 29: 1–10.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1984. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Reference 433. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Mulenga, F. M. 1994. The effect of type of diet and frequency of watering on the performance of growing cattle fed at maintenance. M.Sc. thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zimbabwe.Google Scholar
Nicholson, M. J. 1989. Depression of dry matter intake and water intake in Boran cattle owing to physiological, volumetric and temporal limitations. Animal Production 49: 29–34.Google Scholar
Shirley, R. L. 1985. Water requirements for grazing ruminants and water as a source of minerals. In Nutrition of grazing ruminants in warm climates (ed. McDowell, L. R.), pp 1–44. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Silanikove, N. 1992. Effects of water scarcity and hot environment on appetite and digestion in ruminants: a review. Livestock Production Science 30: 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silankove, N. 1989. Interrelationships between water, food and digestible energy intake in desert and temperate goats. Appetite 12: 163–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide: statistics. Version 5. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Topps, J. H. and Oliver, J. 1993. Animal foods of central Africa. Technical handbook no. 2. Zimbabwe Agricultural Journal.Google Scholar