Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T15:19:02.556Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies in grazing management II. The amount and chemical composition of herbage eaten by dairy cattle under close-folding and rotational methods of grazing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. Waite ,
W. Holmes ,
Jean I. Campbell  and
D. L. Fergusson
R. Waite
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
W. Holmes
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Jean I. Campbell
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
D. L. Fergusson
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. An attempt has been made to measure the amount of herbage eaten by groups of milking Ayr shire cows when grazing under two different systems, (a) close-folding and (b) rotational.

2. Under close-folding the daily consumption of dry matter varied from 18 to 27 lb. per cow. Long herbage reduced the amount eaten. Considerable increases in the weight of herbage offered resulted in only slightly increased consumption. On good leafy pasture the dry-matter intake was about 24 lb. per cow per day.

3. Under the rotational system the intake was more constant at about 28 lb. dry matter per cow per day. Some abnormally low results were obtained which were associated with the difficulty of obtaining a representative sample of herbage, particularly after grazing.

4. Frequent chemical analysis of the pasture before and after grazing on the close-folding system were made, and the intake of the major grass constituents calculated. A comparison of nutrient intake as calculated from these results with that theoretically required has been made.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , October 1950 , pp. 392 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1950

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

Axellson, J. (1949). Proc. 5th Int. Grassland Congress.Google Scholar
Booth, V. H. (1945). J. Soc. Chem. Ind., Land., 64, 162.Google Scholar
Cook, C. W., Harris, L. E. & Stoddart, L. A. (1948). J. Anim. Sci. 7, 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, G. H., Matrone, G. & Maynard, L. A. (1946). J. Anim. Sci. 5, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, C. H. & Subbarow, Y. (1925). J. Biol. Chem. 149, 465.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Braman, W. W. & Kriss, M. and associates (1928). J. Agric. Res. 37, 253.Google Scholar
Holmes, W., Waite, R., Fergusson, D. L. & Campbell, Jean I. (1951). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstons-Wallace, D. B. & Kennedy, K. (1944). J. Agric. Sci. 34, 190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linehan, P. A. & Lowe, J. (1946). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 1, 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linehan, P. A., Lowe, J. & Stewart, R. H. (1947). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 2, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, H. A. G. (1947). Analyst, 72, 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, E. C. (1948). Biochem. J. 43, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, W. F. (1948). Nature, Lond., 161, 937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Roth, (1939). Vorratspf. Lebensmittelforsch. 2, 22.Google Scholar
Waite, R. & Sastry, K. N. S. (1949 a). Emp. J. Exp. Agric. 17, 179.Google Scholar
Waite, R. & Sastry, K. N. S. (1949 b). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, K., Zarrow, A. & Shay, E. (1945). J. Ass. Off. Agric. Chem., Wash., 28, 1.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E. (1948 a). J. Minist. Agric., 54, 501.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E. (1948 b). Bull. Minist. Agric. no. 48.Google Scholar
Woodward, T. E. (1936). J. Dairy Sci. 19, 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar