Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:19:55.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Energy expenditure of cattle walking on a flat terrain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. G. Méndez ,
O. N. di Marco  and
P. M. Corva
D. G. Méndez
Affiliation:
Unidad Integrada: Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), E.E.A. Balcarce — Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), CC 276 (7620) Balcarce (BA), Argentina
O. N. di Marco
Affiliation:
Unidad Integrada: Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), E.E.A. Balcarce — Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), CC 276 (7620) Balcarce (BA), Argentina
P. M. Corva
Affiliation:
Unidad Integrada: Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), E.E.A. Balcarce — Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), CC 276 (7620) Balcarce (BA), Argentina
Get access

Abstract

A study was carried out to evaluate the effect of horizontal walking upon CO2 production rate by the carbon dioxide dilution rate technique. This was used as an indicator of animal energy expenditure. Two groups of three 18-month-old Aberdeen-Angus steers were assigned to two experiments. Average weights were 290 (s.e. 7·6) kg and 285 (s.e. 1·0) kg for experiments 1 and 2 respectively. Animals were allocated to individual pens and given 5·0 and 4·5 kg dry matter of a mixed diet for experiments 1 and 2 respectively. After a 45-day training period they were assigned to three walking treatments: 0 (T0), 3 (T3) and 6 (T2) km at 3 km/hfor 3 days in a Latin square design (3 × 3). 14C labelled sodium bicarbonate (5·4 μCi/h), diluted in carbonate-bicarbonate buffer sterile solution 0·1 mol/l, was infused for 92 h intraperitoneally with portable peristaltic pumps carried by the animals. The CO2 production rate was calculated as the ratio between the rate of infusion (μCi/h) and the specific activity of CO2 (μCi/ml CO2) in saliva samples, which were taken, in experiment 1, as an average of the day (09.00 to 16.00 h) and the night (16.00 to 09.00 h of the following day). In experiment 2 the day was divided as follows: prior to activity (09.00 to 13.00 h), activity (14.00 and 15.00 h) and post activity (16.00 h). CO2 production rate (ml CO2 per h per kg M0·75) at resting was 817 (412 kj/kg M0·75), increasing during walking to 1·46 of the resting level (T1 and T2, experiment 2) with no differences between the 1st and 2nd h of activity. One hour post activity, the CO2 production rate returned in T2 to the level of T0 but in T2 remained at 1·28 times that of T0. The average CO2 production rate during a complete day or night (experiment 1) was not affected significantly by the activity. Assuming that CO2 production rate during walking is 1·46 of resting (experiment 2) and remains at that level even at lower speeds, it can be estimated that a daily 6 km walk would increase resting energy expenditure from 1·04 when walking takes 2 h, as in this experiment (3 km/h), to 1·11 when the animal spends 6h(1 km/h).

Keywords

cattleenergy expenditurewalking
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , August 1996 , pp. 39 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Aello, M. S. and Gómez, P. O. 1984. [Time and patterns of grazing of Hereford steers on Agropyron elongatum pasture.] Revista Argentina de Produccion Animal 4: 533–546.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. M. and Kothmann, M. M. 1977. Monitoring animal travel with digital pedometers. Journal of Range Management 30: 316–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, G. W. and Dudzinski, M. L. 1978. Ethology offree-ranging domestic animals. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. 1962. The energy metabolism of ruminants. Charles C. Thomas, Illinois.Google Scholar
Clapperton, J. L. 1964. The energy metabolism of sheep walking on the level and on gradients. British Journal of Nutrition 18: 47–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cocimano, M., Lange, A. and Menvielle, E. 1975. [Cattle requirements equivalences.[ Producción Animal 4: 161–190.Google Scholar
Di Marco, O. N., Mendez, D. G. and Corva, P. M. 1993. [Use of the 14C-carbon dioxide entry rate technique in studies of energy expenditure of unrestrained cattle.] Revista Argentina de Produccion Animal 13: 117–126.Google Scholar
Elia, M., Fuller, N. and Murgatroyd, P. 1988. The potential use of labelled bicarbonate method for estimating energy expenditure in man. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 47: 247–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, N. M. 1964. Energy costs of feeding activities and energy expenditure of grazing sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 15: 969–973.Google Scholar
Herbel, C. H. and Nelson, A. B. 1966. Activities of Hereford and Santa Gertrudis cattle on a Southern New Mexico range. Journal ofRange Management 19: 173–176.Google Scholar
Lamb, R. C., Barker, B. O., Anderson, M. J. and Walters, J. L. 1979. Effects of forced exercise on two-year-old Holstein heifers. Journal of Daily Science 62: 1791–1797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, P. R. and Stibbards, R. J. 1990. The energy costs of walking, carrying and pulling loads on flat surfaces by Brahman cattle and Swamp buffalo. Animal Production 50: 29–39.Google Scholar
Ledger, H. P. 1977. The utilization of dietary energy by steers during periods of restricted food intake and subsequent realimentation. 2. The comparative energy requirements of penned and exercised steers for long term maintenance at constant liveweight. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88: 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, M. G. 1991. Maximizing energy retention in grazing ruminants. Journal of Animal Ecology 60: 1029–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newsholme, E. A. 1985. Substrates, cycles and energy metabolism: their biochemical, biological, physiological and pathological importance. In Energy metabolism of farm animals. Proceedings of the tenth EAAP symposium (ed. Moe, P. W., Tyrrell, H. F. and Reynolds, P. J.), pp. 174–187. Totowa, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar
Nicholson, M. J. 1987. Effects of night enclosure and extensive walking on the productivity of zebu cattle. Journal ofAgricultural Science, Cambridge 109: 445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osuji, P. O. 1974. The physiology of eating and the energy expenditure of the ruminant at pasture. Journal of Range Management 27: 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, J. A. and Harvey, D. F. 1970. Trampling losses and travel by cattle on sandhills range. Journal of Range Management 23: 50–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribeiro, J. M. de C. R., Brockway, J. M. and Webster, A. J. F. 1977. A note on the energy cost of walking in cattle. Animal Production 25: 107–110.Google Scholar
Sahlu, T., Jung, H. G., Nienaber, J. A. and Morris, J. G. 1988. Development and validation of a prediction equation estimating heat production by carbon dioxide entry rate technique. Journal of Animal Science 66: 2036–2043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sánchez, M. D. and Morris, J. G. 1984. Energy expenditure of beef cattle grazing annual grassland. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 64 (suppl.): 332–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1988. SAS/Stat user's guide, release 6.03 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C.Google Scholar
Thomson, N. A. and Barnes, M. L. 1993. Extra walking: effect on dairy production. The Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production, vol. 53: 69–72.Google Scholar
Young, B. A. and Corbett, J. L. 1972. Maintenance energy requirement of grazing sheep in relation to herbage availability. I. Calorimetric estimates. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar