Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T17:22:08.533Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of protein supplementation of grass silage on the performance and carcass quality of beef cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. W. J. Steen
R. W. J. Steen
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down, BT26 6DR, UK Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland and The Queen 's University of Belfast
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two experiments (E1 and 2) were carried out in Northern Ireland in 1988/89 to examine the effects of a wide range of supplementary protein intakes given with grass silage-based diets on the performance and carcass composition of beef cattle, and to compare diets based on silage and dried forage. The five treatments used consisted of grass silage offered ad libitum and supplemented with 2·5 kg dry matter (DM) of barley-based concentrates containing (1) zero, (2) 0·2, (3) 0·4 and (4) 0·6 extracted soyabean meal and (5) artificially dried grass and hay supplemented with 3·3 kg concentrate DM. Experiments E3 and 4 were carried out in 1991/92 to examine the responses in ration digestibility, silage intake and animal performance to supplementary protein in relation to the requirements recommended by the United Kingdom Metabolizable Protein System. The two treatments consisted of grass silage offered ad libitum and supplemented with 3·2 kg DM of (1) barley and (2) 0·8 barley and 0·2 soyabean meal. The silages used were well preserved, containing on average 200 g DM/kg; 143 g crude protein (CP)/kg DM; 79 g ammonia-N/kg total N and 734 g digestible organic matter/kg DM. The cattle were castrated males of medium to late-maturing breed type and were initially 13 months old and 396 kg liveweight. Increasing protein intake did not affect ration digestibility, silage DM intake or animal performance in any of the four experiments, despite the fact that the effective rumen degradable protein (ERDP) intakes in the diets supplemented with barley alone were only 80–85% of ERDP requirements. However, increasing protein intake tended to increase carcass fatness in all experiments, the effect being significant (P < 0·05) for the lipid concentration in the M. longissimus dorsi muscle in E1 and 2. Offering the dried forage-based diet rather than an isonitrogenous silage-based diet did not affect carcass fatness. It is concluded that supplementing well preserved grass silages with mixtures of barley and soyabean meal, rather than with barley alone, did not affect ration digestibility, silage intake or animal performance but tended to increase carcass fatness, especially marbling fat, despite the fact that ERDP intakes for the diets with the lowest protein concentration were only 80–85% of requirements given by the United Kingdom Metabolizable Protein System.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 127 , Issue 3 , November 1996 , pp. 403 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 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

AFRC Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients (1992). Report No. 9. Nutritive Requirements of Ruminant Animals: Protein. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews (Series B) 62, 787–835.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council (1965). Recommended Procedures for Use in the Measurement of Beef Cattle and Carcasses. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Bligh, E. G.Dyer, W. J. (1959). A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology 37, 911–917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cottrill, B. R., Beever, D. E., Austin, A. R.Osbourn, D. F. (1982). The effect of protein- and non-protein-nitrogen supplements to maize silage on total amino acid supply in young cattle. British Journal of Nutrition 48, 527–541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuthbertson, A., Harrington, G.Smith, R. J. (1972). Tissue separation – to assess beef and lamb variation. In Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (Ed. Bichard, M.), pp. 113–122, Edinburgh: Longman.Google Scholar
Gill, M.Beever, D. E. (1982). The effect of protein supplementation on digestion and glucose metabolism in young cattle fed on silage. British Journal of Nutrition 48, 37–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L.Smith, R. J. (1980). The evaluation of a standardized commercial cutting technique for determining breed differences in carcass composition. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95, 431–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A.Harrington, G. (1982). Beef carcase grading and classification. In Carcase Evaluation in Livestock Breeding, Production and Marketing, pp. 163–201. London: Granada.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, C. R. (1976). The effect of season of harvest on the utilization by growing cattle of dried grass given alone or as a supplement to silage. PhD thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Neilson, D. R.Hunter, E. A. (1985). The effect of growth promoters on fattening cattle: growth, intake and carcass composition. Animal Production 40, 538 (Abstract 66).Google Scholar
McCarrick, R. B. (1966). Effect of method of grass conservation and herbage maturity on performance and body composition of beef cattle. In Proceedings of the 10th International Grassland Congress, Helsinki (Eds Hill, A. G. G., Mustonen, V. U., Pulli, S. & Latvala, M.), pp. 575–580. Helsinki: Valtioneuvoston Kirjapaino.Google Scholar
McDonald, P. & Edwards, R. A. (1976). The influence of conservation methods on digestion and utilization of forages by ruminants. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 35, 201–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry Of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1986). Feed Composition: UK Tables of Feed Composition and Nutritive Value for Ruminants. Marlow: Chalcombe.Google Scholar
Morris, J. G.Moir, K. W. (1964). Methods of determining the chemical composition of dead animals. In Carcase Composition and Appraisal of Meat Animals (Ed. Tribe, D. E.), pp. 2–1–2–22. East Melbourne, Australia: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Mehrez, A. Z. (1977). Estimation of extent of protein degradation from basal feeds in the rumen of sheep. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 36, 78A.Google ScholarPubMed
Steen, R. W. J. (1984). A comparison of two-cut and three-cut systems of silage making for beef cattle using two cultivars of perennial ryegrass. Animal Production 38, 171–179.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1988 a). Factors affecting the utilization of grass silage for beef production. In Efficient Beef Production from Grass (Ed. Frame, J.), pp. 129–139. Occasional Publication No. 22. Hurley: British Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1988 b). The effect of supplementing silagebased diets with soya bean and fish meals for finishing beef cattle. Animal Production 46, 43–51.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1988 c). The effect of implantation with hormonal growth promoters on the response in the performance of beef cattle to protein supplementation of a silage-based diet. Animal Production 47, 21–28.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1989 a). A comparison of soya-bean, sunflower and fish meals as protein supplements for yearling cattle offered grass silage-based diets. Animal Production 48, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1989 b). Recent research on protein supplementation of silage-based diets for growing and finishing beef cattle. 62nd Annual Report, Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, pp. 12–20.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. (1991). The effect of level of protein supplementation on the performance and carcass composition of young bulls given grass silage ad libitum. Animal Production 52, 465–475.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. & Moore, C. A. (1988). A comparison of silage-based and dried forage-based diets for finishing beef cattle. Animal Production 47, 29–37.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. & Moore, C. A. (1989). A comparison of silage-based and dried forage-based diets, and the effects of protein supplementation of a silage-based diet for finishing beef cattle. Animal Production 49, 233–240.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. & Robson, A. E. (1995). Effects of forage to concentrate ratio in the diet and protein intake on the performance and carcass composition of beef heifers. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 125, 125–135.Google Scholar
Tamminga, S. (1992). Nutrition management of dairy cows as a contribution to pollution control. Journal of Dairy Science 75, 345–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waghorn, G. C., Flux, D. S. & Ulyatt, M. J. (1987). Effects of dietary protein and energy intakes on growth hormone, insulin, glucose tolerance and fatty acid synthesis in young wether sheep. Animal Production 44, 143–152.Google Scholar