Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:50:20.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The nutritive value of artificially dried grass and its effect on the quality of milk produced by cows of the main dairy breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

S. J. Watson  and
W. S. Ferguson
S. J. Watson
Affiliation:
(Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd., Agricultural Research Station, Jealott's Hill, Bracknell, Berks.)
W. S. Ferguson
Affiliation:
(Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd., Agricultural Research Station, Jealott's Hill, Bracknell, Berks.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

An experiment was carried out with two groups of ten cows each, made up of two Guernseys, two Ayrshires, two Friesians and four Shorthorns.

The experiment was of the change-over type, the experimental period of 20 weeks being subdivided into four periods of 5 weeks, each cow alternating between the two treatments.

In two of the periods a normal winter ration of roots, hay and concentrates was fed. In the other two periods artificially dried grass replaced a proportion of the concentrates, an average of 8 lb. being fed per head daily. The two types of ration provided equal amounts of starch equivalent and protein equivalent, but the carotene intake was greater in the “dried grass ration”.

A statistical analysis of the difference in milk yields due to the contrast “Dried grass” v. “Control” revealed no signs of any effect, and if any actual effect does exist, it is quite negligible for the 5-week periods of this experiment.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 1936 , pp. 189 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1936

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

(1)Woodman, H. E., Bee, J. W. and Griffith, G.J. agric. Sci. (1930), 20, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Watson, S. J.J. agric. Sci. (1931), 21, 414–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Watson, S. J.J. agric. Sci. (1931), 21, 425–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Hodgson, R. E. and Knott, J. C.J. agric. Res. (1932), 45, 557–63.Google Scholar
(5)Newlander, J. A. and Jones, C. H.Bull. Vt agric. Exp. Sta. (1932), No. 348.Google Scholar
(6)Watson, S. J. and Ferguson, W. S.J. agric. Sci. (1932), 22, 235–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Watson, S. J., Drummond, J. C., Heilbron, I. M. and Morton, R. A.Emp. J. exp. Agric. (1933), 1, 68–81.Google Scholar
(8)Watson, S. J. Unpublished data.Google Scholar
(9)Newlander, J. A.Bull. Vt agric. Exp. Sta. (1933), No. 350.Google Scholar
(10)Watson, S. J., Bishop, G., Drummond, J. C., Gillam, A. E. and Heilbron, I. M.Biochem. J. (1934), 28, 1076–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Report of Departmental Committee on Rationing of Dairy Cows (1925), p. 9.H.M. Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
(12)Halnan, E. T.J. Dairy Res. (1929), 1, 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Bartlett, M. S.J. agric. Sci. (1935), 25, 238–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar