Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T03:20:06.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Winter feeding of the in-lamb ewe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. V. Large ,
F. E. Alder  and
C. R. W. Spedding
R. V. Large
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berks
F. E. Alder
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berks
C. R. W. Spedding
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berks
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Three winter feeding experiments (1954–57) were carried out using small flocks of Border Leicester x Cheviot ewes tupped by a Suffolk ram.

2. The feeds used were various combinations of (a) silage, (b) hay, (c) ‘winter grass’, and (d)concentrates. Their value in late pregnancy was compared in terms of performance of the ewe and the birth weight of the lambs.

3. In addition, in one year (1956–57) the effect of level of nutrition in early pregnancy and during the first 28 days of lactation was studied.

4. It was found that ‘winter grass’ could replace silage and hay where a concentrate ration was being fed.

5. Satisfactory results were obtained with a concentrate ration of ⅜ lb. per head per day rising to ¾ lb. per head per day by lambing time.

6. In the mild winter of 1956–57 a group of ewes produced normal healthy lambs when fed entirely on ‘winter grass’ during the latter half of pregnancy.

7. The intensity of grazing of the ewes in early pregnancy affected their live-weight gain, but this seemed to have little effect on lamb production.

8. A high plane of nutrition during early lactation resulted in a significantly greater live-weight gain of lambs over this period. The difference had been reduced to a non-significant level by mid-June.

9. None of the treatments imposed had any very marked effect on the nematode egg-output of the ewes.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , August 1959 , pp. 102 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1959

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

Barnicoat, C. R., Logan, A. G. & Grant, A. I. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 44, 237.Google Scholar
Coop, I. E. (1950). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, A. H. H., Godden, W., Snook, L. C. & Thomson, W. (1938). J. Agric. Sci. 94, 346.Google Scholar
Parry, H. B. (1953). The Suffolk Sheep Society Year Book, p. 26.Google Scholar
Tayler, J. C. (1954). Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod. 1954, p. 3.Google Scholar
Thomson, W. & Fraser, A. H. H. (1939). Scot. J. Agric. 22, 71.Google Scholar
Thomson, A. M. & Thomson, W. (1949). Brit. J. Nutr. 2, 290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, W. & Thomson, A. M. (1953). Brit. J. Nutr. 7, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, L. R. (1948). J. Agric. Sci. 38, 93, 243, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, H. E. (1954). Bull. Minist. Agric., Lond., 48, 82.Google Scholar