Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T20:19:09.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbage characteristics of perennial ryegrass, cocksfoot, tall fescue and timothy pastures and their relationship with animal performance under upland conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. A. Davies  and
T. E. H. Morgan
D. A. Davies
Affiliation:
Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Plas Oogerddan, Aberystwyth
T. E. H. Morgan
Affiliation:
Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Plas Oogerddan, Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Herbage characteristics of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) and timothy (Phleum pratense L.) pastures were obtained whilst rotationally grazed by ewes and their single lambs at a fixed stocking rate of 25/ha on an upland site (305 m O.D.) in mid-Wales. Drymatter production of cocksfoot averaged 32·1 kg/ha/day over the 3-year duration of the trial (1975·7) and was 13·3 kg/ha/day lower than that of the other three grass species. This resulted in a 8 kg/ha/day reduction in dry-matter intake on cocksfoot; this was significantly lower (P < 0·05) than that achieved on the other grasses, which were similar to one another around 36 kg/ha/day.

In vitro digestibility of the herbage ranked in the order perennial ryegrass > timothy = cocksfoot > tall fescue. Intake of digestible organic matter (DOMI) was lower on cocksfoot than on perennial ryegrass and timothy. Differences were also detected in crude protein, water-soluble carbohydrates and sodium composition between species.

Dry-matter intake was positively correlated with herbage growth rates (r = 0·95, P < 0·001) but not to digestibility of herbage on offer (r = 0·18). Both ewe and lamb live-weight gains were positively related to intake of dry matter and DOMI.

Reference is made to comparative yield data between the grasses obtained under cutting trials. In the 2nd and 3rd harvest years (1967–1967) growth rates in the grazing experiment were 76, 61, 81 and 80% of the 66·2, 66·7, 67·8 and 65·0 kg D.M./ha/day obtained under a cutting regime on perennial ryegrass, cocksfoot, tall fescue and timothy swards respectively. This illustrates the danger involved in assessing the potential of grasses based on such information.

The results are discussed in relation to the value of the species for use under grazing in the uplands.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 99 , Issue 1 , August 1982 , pp. 153 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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 (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2. Ruminants. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Arnold, G. W. & Dudzinski, M. L. (1967). Studies on the diet of the grazing animal. III. The effect of pasture species and pasture structure on the herbage intake of sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 18, 657–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A. G. (1966). Grazed pasture parameters. I. Pasture dry matter production and availability in a stocking rate and grazing management experiment with dairy cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 67, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, D. A. (1971). The yield and animal performance characteristics of S.59 red fescue (Festuca rubra L.) under hill conditions. M.Sc. thesis, University of Wales.Google Scholar
Davies, D. A. (1975). Produtivity of S.59 red fescue with and without S.I84 white clover under hill conditions. 2. Herbage measurements in relation to animal performance. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 84, 273–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, D. A. & Morgan, T. E. H. (1978). Evaluation of cocksfoot varieties. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1977, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar
Davies, D. A. & Morgan, T. E. H. (1982). Performance Yield, intake and quality of four grasses 161 of ewes and lambs on perennial ryegrass, cocksfoot, tall fescue and timothy pastures under upland conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 99, 145–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, D. A., Munro, J. M. M. & Morgan, T. E. H. (1979). Evaluation of perennial ryegrass varieties. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1978, pp. 67–68.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmond, D. B. (1964). Some effects of sheep treading on the growth of 10 pasture species. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, W. B. (1977). Meteorological data for 1976. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1976, pp. 210–211.Google Scholar
Evans, W. B., Munro, J. M. M. & Scurlock, R. V. (1980). Ryegrass and cocksfoot varieties under grazing. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1979, pp. 71–74.Google Scholar
Hodgson, J. (1977). Factors limiting intake by the grazing animal. Proceedings of International Meeting on Animal Production from Temperate Grassland. Dublin, 06, 1977, pp. 70–75. Dublin: An Foras Taluntais.Google Scholar
Jones, D. I. H. & Sinclair, K. B. (1968). Sodium nutrition of sheep grazing timothy pasture. Report of tlie Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1967, p. 126.Google Scholar
Little, T. M. & Hills, F. J. (1972). Statistical Methods in Agricultural Research. Agricultural Extension. University of California.Google Scholar
Miles, D. G., Walters, R. J. K. & Evans, E. M. (1969). Dry-matter intake and live-weight gain of cattle and sheep offered different grass varieties with and without clover. Animal Production 11, 19–28.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J., Raymond, W. F. & Harris, C. E. (1960). The digestibility of grass species and varieties. Proceedings of VIII International Grassland Congress. Reading, pp. 470–474.Google Scholar
Munro, J. M. M. (1979). Herbage variety evaluation under hill and upland conditions in Wales. In Hill Lands (ed. Luchok, J., Cawthon, J. D. and Breslin, M. J.), pp. 150–156. Morgantown: West Virginia University.Google Scholar
Munro, J. M. M. & Davies, D. A. (1968). Species potential. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1967, pp. 70–73.Google Scholar
National Institute Of Agricultural Botany (1980). Recommended varieties of grasses. Farmers Leaflet No. 16.Google Scholar
Patil, B. D. & Jones, D. I. H. (1970). The mineral status of some temperate herbage varieties in relation to animal performance. Proceedings XI International Grassland Congress. Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
Reid, R. L., Powell, K., Balasko, J. A. & McCormick, C. C. (1978). Performance of lambs on perennial ryegrass, smooth bromegrass, orchardgrass and tall fescue pasture. 1. Live-weight changes, digestibility and intake of herbage. Journal of Animal Science 46, 1493–1502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terry, R. A. & Tilley, J. M. A. (1964). The digestibility of the leaves and stems of perennial ryegrass, cocksfoot, timothy, tall fescue, lucerne and sainfoin, as measured by an in vitro procedure. Journal of the British Grassland Society 19, 363–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1967). Development of a comprehensive system of feed analysis and its application to forages. Journal of Animal Science 26, 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, R. J. K. & Evans, E. M. (1979). Evaluation of a sward sampling technique for estimating herbage intake of grazing sheep. Grass and Forage Science 34, 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, D. C. (1966). Nutrient minerals in grassland herbage. Commonwealth Bureaux of Pastures and Field Crops. Publication 1/1966, 86 pp.Google Scholar