1972The Journal of Agricultural ScienceRequires access

The effects of grazing intensity on herbage consumption and animal production: IV. An evaluation of two methods for avoiding the rejection of fouled herbage by dairy cows

George W. Reid, James Greenhalgh, J. N. Aitken

Open publisher page 15 citations

Abstract

SUMMARY For phase I of a rotational grazing experiment (three grazing cycles; May–July) a group of nine cows (group S) were ‘conditioned’ to eat fouled herbage by being allowed to graze only on slurry-treated pasture (area 1), and two further groups of nine (groups H and C) grazed on an adjacent area (2) of untreated pasture. One-third of area 2 was harrowed after each grazing. During phase II (the fourth grazing cycle; August) group H grazed on the harrowed part and groups S and C grazed on the remainder of area 2. The herbage allowance was 15 kg dry matter per cow per day in phase I and 12 kg in phase II. In phase I, group S cows ate significantly less than groups C and H combined (9·2 v. 10·5 kg organic matter per day), and lost weight (– 0·37 v. + 0–03 kg/day), but their milk yields were not significantly lower (16·1 v.16–6 kg/day). In phase II neither intake nor milk yield differed significantly between the three groups, but group S cows gained weight while the other two groups lost weight. It was concluded that neither conditioning the cows nor harrowing the pasture was an effective means of avoiding rejection of fouled pasture.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

SUMMARY For phase I of a rotational grazing experiment (three grazing cycles; May–July) a group of nine cows (group S) were ‘conditioned’ to eat fouled herbage by being allowed to graze only on slurry-treated pasture (area 1), and two further groups of nine (groups H and C) grazed on an adjacent area (2) of untreated pasture. One-third of area 2 was harrowed after each grazing. During phase II (the fourth grazing cycle; August) group H grazed on the harrowed part and groups S and C grazed on the remainder of area 2. The herbage allowance was 15 kg dry matter per cow per day in phase I and 12 kg in phase II. In phase I, group S cows ate significantly less than groups C and H combined (9·2 v. 10·5 kg organic matter per day), and lost weight (– 0·37 v. + 0–03 kg/day), but their milk yields were not significantly lower (16·1 v.16–6 kg/day). In phase II neither intake nor milk yield differed significantly between the three groups, but group S cows gained weight while the other two groups lost weight. It was concluded that neither conditioning the cows nor harrowing the pasture was an effective means of avoiding rejection of fouled pasture.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

SUMMARY For phase I of a rotational grazing experiment (three grazing cycles; May–July) a group of nine cows (group S) were ‘conditioned’ to eat fouled herbage by being allowed to graze only on slurry-treated pasture (area 1), and two further groups of nine (groups H and C) grazed on an adjacent area (2) of untreated pasture. One-third of area 2 was harrowed after each grazing. During phase II (the fourth grazing cycle; August) group H grazed on the harrowed part and groups S and C grazed on the remainder of area 2. The herbage allowance was 15 kg dry matter per cow per day in phase I and 12 kg in phase II. In phase I, group S cows ate significantly less than groups C and H combined (9·2 v. 10·5 kg organic matter per day), and lost weight (– 0·37 v. + 0–03 kg/day), but their milk yields were not significantly lower (16·1 v.16–6 kg/day). In phase II neither intake nor milk yield differed significantly between the three groups, but group S cows gained weight while the other two groups lost weight. It was concluded that neither conditioning the cows nor harrowing the pasture was an effective means of avoiding rejection of fouled pasture.

Key concepts: Grazing, Pasture, Dry matter, Animal science, Milk production, Biology, Agronomy, Chemistry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The effects of grazing intensity on herbage consumption and animal production: IV. An evaluation of two methods for avoiding the rejection of fouled herbage by dairy cows — Research Paper | ScholarLens