Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T18:14:12.331Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of feeding dried sugar-beet pulp on the intake and production of dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

M. E. Castle ,
A. D. Drysdale  and
J. N. Watson
M. E. Castle
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
A. D. Drysdale
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
J. N. Watson
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Three rations were compared in a 15-week winter feeding experiment using 12 Ayrshire cows. All the cows received silage 3 times a day and concentrates; ration A contained no sugar-beet pulp whilst ration B contained 6 lb of pulp and ration C 12 lb.

The total weights of dry matter consumed were 29·7, 32·3 and 33·4 lb/day, respectively, on treatments A, B and C. For every 1 lb of extra sugar-beet pulp dry matter eaten the decline in the dry weight of the other feeds consumed was 0·50 lb on treatment B and 0·55 lb on treatment C. The main decrease was in the silage part of the ration. The weights of starch equivalent (S.E.) consumed daily were 18·0, 19·8 and 20·7 lb on rations A, B and C, respectively, with mean daily milk yields of 38·2, 39·3 and 39·7 lb, giving a response of 0·55 lb milk/lb extra S.E. between rations A and C. The corresponding fat percentages of the milks did not differ significantly from each other but the solids-not-fat (SNF) percentages increased significantly from 8·76% on ration A to 8·88% on ration C. The average response per lb extra S.E. was 0·044% SNF and the increase was in the protein fraction of the milk. The cows were significantly heavier on rations B and C than on ration A. The inclusion of beet pulp in rations B and C had no adverse effect on the taste of the milk.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , June 1966 , pp. 123 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1966

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

Bath, I. H. & Rook, J. A. F. (1965). J. agric. Sci., Camb., 64, 67.Google Scholar
Blackburn, P. S., Laing, C. & Malcolm, J. F. (1955). J. Dairy Res. 22, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broster, W. H. (1960). Br. Sug. Beet. Rev. 29, 21, 71.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E., Drysdale, A. D. & Waite, R. (1961). J. Dairy Res. 28, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E., Drysdale, A. D., Waite, R. & Watson, J. N. (1963). J. Dairy Res. 30, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E., MacLusky, D. S., Waite, R. & Watson, J. N. (1958). J. Dairy Res. 25, 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, W. G., Autrey, K. M. & Cannon, C. Y. (1941). J. Dairy Sci. 24, 937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. E. (1960). Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish. Fd, Lond., no. 48.Google Scholar
Lucas, H. L. (1943). J. Dairy Sci. 26, 1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waite, R. (1961). J. Dairy Res. 28, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waite, R., Abbot, J. & Blackburn, P. S. (1963). J. Dairy Res. 30, 209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waite, R., White, J. C. D. & Robertson, A. (1956). J. Dairy Res. 23, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, S. J. (1949). Feeding of Livestock, p. 165. London and New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Watson, S. J. & Nash, M. J. (1960). The Conservation of Grass and Forage Crops, p. 691. Edinburgh and London: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar