...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Animal Science >Beef heifer growth and reproductive performance following two levels of pasture allowance during the fall grazing period.
【24h】

Beef heifer growth and reproductive performance following two levels of pasture allowance during the fall grazing period.

机译:秋季放牧期间,牛肉小母牛的生长和生殖性能遵循两种放牧水平。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The objective of this study was to compare heifer growth and reproductive performance following 2 levels of stockpiled fall forage allowance of orchardgrass (30.5%) and tall fescue (14.1%). Spring-born heifers ( n=203 and BW=24628.9 kg) of primarily Angus background were allocated to 2 grazing treatments during the fall period (November 12 to December 17 in yr 1, November 7 to January 4 in yr 2, and November 7 to January 14 in yr 3) each replicated 3 times per year for 3 yr. Treatments consisted of daily pasture DM allowance of 3.5% of BW (LO) or daily pasture DM allowance of 7.0% of BW (HI) under strip-grazing management. Throughout the winter feeding period, mixed grass-legume haylage and soybean hulls were fed. Heifers were grazed as 1 group under continuous stocking after the winter period. Heifers in the LO group gained less than heifers in the HI group during the fall grazing period (0.12 vs. 0.40 kg/d; P<0.0001). For each 1 10 g increase in NDF/kg fall pasture (DM basis), fall ADG decreased 0.14 kg ( P=0.01). During winter feeding, ADG was 0.30 and 0.39 kg/d for LO vs. HI heifers, respectively ( P=0.0008). During the spring grazing period (April 16 to May 24 in yr 1, April 22 to May 26 in yr 2, and April 5 to May 16 in yr 3), LO heifers had numerically greater ADG than HI heifers (1.38 vs. 1.30 kg/d; P=0.64). Hip height (122.7 vs. 121.4 cm; P=0.0055), BCS (5.8 vs. 5.6; P=0.0057), and BW (356 vs. 335 kg; P<0.0001) at the end of spring grazing was greater for HI than LO heifers. Heifers in the LO group compensated with greater summer ADG than heifers in the HI group (0.74 vs. 0.66 kg/d; P=0.03). Total ADG from treatment initiation (November) through pregnancy diagnosis (August) was greater for HI than LO heifers (0.61 vs. 0.55 kg/d; P<0.001) as was BW at pregnancy diagnosis (415 vs. 402 kg; P=0.0055). Percentage of heifers reaching puberty by the time of AI was 34% for both groups ( P=0.93). Percentage of heifers becoming pregnant to AI tended ( P=0.13) to be greater for HI (44%) than for LO heifers (32%). Fall ADG across treatment groups affected the probability of a heifer becoming pregnant by AI ( P=0.01). Percentage pregnant by natural service (61% for LO vs. 59% for HI; P=0.80) and final pregnancy rate (74% for LO vs. 77% for HI; P=0.61) was not different for the 2 groups. These results indicate that altering fall forage allowance may delay the majority of BW gain until late in heifer development without negatively affecting overall pregnancy rates.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较果园草(30.5%)和高羊茅草(14.1%)的2种堆积的秋季饲草津贴水平下的小母牛生长和生殖性能。在秋季(第1年的11月12日至12月17日,第2年的11月7日至1月4日,第2年和11月7日),以安格斯为主的春季小母牛(n = 203和BW = 24628.9 kg)被分配到两次放牧处理中至3月的1月14日),每年重复3次,共3年。处理包括在带草放牧管理下,每日牧场DM补贴为BW(LO)的3.5%或每日牧场DM补贴为BW(HI)的7.0%。在整个冬季饲喂期中,饲喂混合的豆科植物和大豆皮。冬季结束后,连续放养将小母牛分为一组。在秋季放牧期间,LO组的母牛比HI组的母牛少(0.12比0.40 kg / d; P <0.0001)。 NDF / kg秋季牧场每增加1 10 g(以DM为基准),秋季ADG减少0.14 kg(P = 0.01)。在冬季饲喂期间,LO和HI小母牛的ADG分别为0.30和0.39 kg / d(P = 0.0008)。在春季放牧期间(第1年的4月16日至5月24日,第2年的4月22日至5月26日,第3年的4月5日至5月16日),LO小母牛的ADG值要大于HI小母牛(1.38对1.30千克) /d;P=0.64)。春季放牧结束时,臀围高度(122.7 vs. 121.4 cm; P = 0.0055),BCS(5.8 vs. 5.6; P = 0.0057)和BW(356 vs. 335 kg; P <0.0001)大于HI LO小母牛。 LO组的小母牛比HI组的小母牛有更高的夏季日增重(0.74 vs. 0.66 kg / d; P = 0.03)。从治疗开始(11月)到妊娠诊断(8月)的总ADG高于LO小母牛(0.61 vs. 0.55 kg / d; P <0.001),妊娠诊断时的体重指数(415 vs. 402 kg; P = 0.0055) )。两组中到达AI的小母牛达到青春期的比例均为34%(P = 0.93)。 HI(44%)比LO母牛(32%)倾向于AI的小母牛百分比更高(P = 0.13)。各治疗组的秋季ADG影响小母牛被AI怀孕的可能性(P = 0.01)。两组的自然服务怀孕百分比(LO的孕妇为61%,HI的孕妇为59%; P = 0.80)和最终妊娠率(LO的孕妇为74%,HI的孕妇为77%; P = 0.61)无差异。这些结果表明,降低秋季饲草津贴可能会将大部分体重增加推迟到小母牛发育后期,而不会对总体妊娠率产生负面影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号