Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:26:16.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Challenges in the nutrition and management of herbivores in the temperate zone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2011

A. M. van Vuuren  and
P. Chilibroste
A. M. van Vuuren*
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
P. Chilibroste
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agronomy, Department of Animal and Pasture Production, University of the Republic, EEMAC, Ruta 3 km 363, CP 6000 Paysandú, Uruguay
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The expected higher global demand for animal proteins and the competition for starch and sugars between food, fuel and feed seem to favour herbivores that convert solar energy captured in fibrous plants into animal products. However, the required higher production level of herbivores questions the sustainability of this conversion. An increase in herbivore production can be achieved by increasing the number of animals associated with the increasing demand of plant biomass or by improving the efficiency with which plant biomass is converted into meat and milk. The potential to increase food production by cattle, the main food-producing herbivore in the temperate zones outside China, was considered in three production systems: grassland-based, mixed rain-fed and mixed irrigated systems. The potential to increase plant biomass production in grassland-based systems seems limited, unless fertiliser is imported in large quantities and crop production is increased, sacrificing valuable, high-quality grasslands, which often conflicts with sustainable production methods. Also, in mixed systems with high inputs of fertiliser or water, improvements in plant biomass production seem marginal and the main challenges for these systems are in breeding high-quality plant biomass at lower levels of fertiliser and the use of new co-products from food processing and bio-based economies. Consequently, the main challenge in herbivore nutrition management is to improve the efficiency of plant biomass utilisation. Stocking rate management along with seasonal variation in the grazing capacity of grasslands and moderate use of fertiliser may increase meat production in grassland-based systems by 400%. Improving plant biomass utilisation in the more industrialised mixed rain-fed systems seems possible by better feed storage technologies and for dairy cattle by improving animal health and lifetime production level. Managing the transition period seems crucial to achieve more sustainable mixed rain-fed and mixed irrigated dairy production systems. Whether sustainable production methods will be implemented also depends on macro-economic conditions and awareness of regional and global environmental concerns.

Keywords

nutritionherbivoresnutrient efficiencysustainability
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue s1: The 8th International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores (ISNH8) 6 – 9th September 2011, Aberystwyth (UK) , March 2013 , pp. 19 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Andersen, JB, Madsen, TG, Larsen, T, Ingvartsen, KL, Nielsen, MO 2005. The effects of dry period versus continuous lactation on metabolic status and performance in periparturient cows. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 3530–3541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basset-Mens, C, Ledgard, S, Boyes, M 2009. Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand. Ecological Economics 68, 1615–1625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baudracco, J, Lopez-Villalobos, N, Holmes, CW, Macdonald, KA 2010. Effects of stocking rate, supplementation, genotype and their interactions on grazing dairy systems: a review. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 109–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beauchemin, KA, Colombatto, D, Morgavi, DP 2004. A rationale for the development of feed enzyme products for ruminants. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, MJ, Wall, E, Russell, G, Roberts, DJ, Simm, G 2010. Risk factors for culling in Holstein–Friesian dairy cows. Veterinary Record 167, 238–240.Google Scholar
Bouwman, L, Klein Goldewijk, K, van der Hoek, KW, Beusen, AHW, van Vuuren, DP, Willems, J, Rufino, MC, Stehfest, E 2011. Exploring global changes in nitrogen and phosphorus cycles in agriculture induced by livestock production over the 1900–2050 period. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1012878108Google ScholarPubMed
Calsamiglia, S, Ferret, A, Reynolds, CK, Kristensen, NB, van Vuuren, AM 2010. Strategies for optimizing nitrogen use by ruminants. Animal 4, 1184–1196.Google Scholar
Castañeda-Gutiérrez, E, Overton, TR, Butler, WR, Bauman, DE 2005. Dietary supplements of two doses of calcium salts of conjugated linoleic acid during the transition period and early lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1078–1089.Google Scholar
Centraal Veevoederbureau (CVB) 2010. Tabellenboek Veevoeding 2010, CVB-reeks 49. Productschap Diervoeder, The Hague, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Chilibroste, P, Gibb, MJ, Tamminga, S 2005. Pasture characteristics and animal performance. In Quantitative aspects of ruminant digestion and metabolism (ed. J Dijkstra, JM Forbes and J France), pp. 681–706. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Chilibroste, P, Soca, P, Mattiauda, DA, Bentancur, O, Robinson, PH 2007. Short term fasting as a tool to design effective grazing strategies for lactating dairy cattle: a review. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 47, 1075–1084.Google Scholar
Colditz, IG 2004. Some mechanisms regulating nutrient utilisation in livestock during immune activation: an overview. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 453–457.Google Scholar
Dairy NZ 2008. New Zealand Dairy Statistics 2007–2008. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from http://www.lic.co.nz/pdf/dairy_statistics_08-09.pdfGoogle Scholar
Drackley, JK, Dann, HM, Douglas, GN, Janovick Guretzky, NA, Litherland, NB, Underwood, JP, Loor, JJ 2005. Physiological and pathological adaptations in dairy cows that may increase susceptibility to periparturient disease and disorders. Italian Journal of Animal Science 4, 323–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Echeverria, R, Mackinnon, A, Rotulo, J, Chilibroste, P 2010. Milk production response to incremental levels of crude glycerol on diets of grazing dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93 (E-suppl. 1), 713.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT 2011. FAO Statistics Division. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from http://faostat.fao.org/Google Scholar
Fresco, LO, Dijk, D, de Ridder, W 2007. Biomass, food & sustainability: is there a dilemma? Rabobank, the Netherlands. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from http://www.rabobank.com/content/images/Biomass_food_and_sustainability_tcm43-38549.pdfGoogle Scholar
Gerber, P, Vellinga, T, Opio, C, Henderson, B, Steinfeld, H 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector: a life cycle assessment. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Animal Production and Health Division, Rome, Italy 94pp.Google Scholar
Gill, M, Smith, P, Wilkinson, JM 2010. Mitigating climate change: the role of domestic livestock. Animal 4, 323–333.Google Scholar
Hendy, RC, Kleih, U, Crawshaw, R, Phillips, M 1995. Interactions between Livestock Production Systems and the Environment: impact Domain: concentrate feed demand. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/lead/x6123e/x6123e00.htmGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J, Cameron, K, Clark, D, Condron, L, Fraser, T, Hedley, M, Holmes, C, Kemp, PD, Lucas, R, Moot, D, Morris, S, Nicholas, P, Shadbolt, N, Sheath, G, Valentine, I, Waghorn, G, Woodfield, D 2005. New Zealand's pastoral systems: efficient use of pastoral resources. In Grasslands: developments, opportunities, perspectives (ed. SG Reynolds and J Frame), pp. 181–205. FAO and Science Publishers, Inc., Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Holtshausen, L, Chung, Y-H, Gerardo-Cuervo, H, Oba, M, Beauchemin, KA 2011. Improved milk production efficiency in early lactation dairy cattle with dietary addition of a developmental fibrolytic enzyme additive. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 899–907.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kingston-Smith, AH, Thomas, HM 2003. Strategies for plant breeding for improved rumen function. Annals of Applied Biology 142, 13–24.Google Scholar
Laca, EA 2009. Precision livestock production: tools and concepts. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 38 (special suppl.), 23–132.Google Scholar
Lorenz, AJ, Coors, JG 2008. What can be learned from silage breeding programs? Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 148, 261–270.Google Scholar
Maher, P, Good, M, More, SJ 2008. Trends in cow numbers and culling rate in the Irish cattle population 2003 to 2006. Irish Veterinary Journal 61, 455–463.Google Scholar
McGechan, MB 1990. A review of losses arising during conservation of grass forage: part 2, storage losses. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 45, 1–30.Google Scholar
Miller, LA, Moorby, JM, Davies, DR, Humphreys, MO, Scollan, ND, MacRae, JC, Theodorou, MK 2001. Increased concentration of water-soluble carbohydrate in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.): milk production from late-lactation dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 56, 383–394.Google Scholar
Moorby, JM, Evans, RT, Scollan, ND, MacRae, JC, Theodorou, MK 2006. Increased concentration of water-soluble carbohydrate in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). Evaluation in dairy cows in early lactation. Grass and Forage Science 61, 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nabinger, C, Carvalho, PC 2009. Ecophysiology of pastoral systems: application for sustainability. Agrocienca XIII 3 (special issue), 18–27.Google Scholar
Nabinger, C, Maraschin, GE, de Moraes, A 1999. Pasture related problems in beef cattle production in Southern Brazil. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Grassland Ecophysiology and Grazing Ecology (ed. A Moraes, C Nabinger, PC Carvalho, SJ Alvez and SB Lustosa), pp. 23–48. Agosto, Curitiba, Brazil.Google Scholar
Nakutsuji, H. 2009. Livestock production (Chapter 5). In Agriculture in Hokkaido, Hokkaido University Open Course Ware. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from http://ocw.hokudai.ac.jp/Course/Faculty/Agriculture/AgricultureInHokkaido/2009/page/materials/AgricultureInHokkaido-2009-Text-05.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pallarés, OR, Berretta, RJ, Maraschin, GE 2005. The South American Campos Ecosystem. In Grassland of World, Plant Production and Protection Series (ed. M Suttie, SG Reynolds and C Batello), vol. 34, pp. 171–219. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Pinedo, PJ, De Vries, A, Webb, DW 2010. Dynamics of culling risk with disposal codes reported by Dairy Herd Improvement dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 2250–2261.Google Scholar
Provenza, FD 2009. Adaptability is sustainability. Agrocienca XIII 3 (special issue), 8–17.Google Scholar
Schils, RLM, de Haan, MHA, Hemmer, JGA, van den Pol-van Dasselaar, A, de Boer, JA, Evers, AG, Holshof, G, van Middelkoop, JC, Zom, RLG 2007. DairyWise, a whole-farm dairy model. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5334–5346.Google Scholar
Scollan, ND, Greenwood, PL, Newbold, CJ, Yáñes Ruiz, DR, Shingfield, KJ, Wallace, RJ, Hocquette, JF 2011. Future research priorities for animal production in a changing world. Animal Production Science 51, 1–5.Google Scholar
Sere, C, Steinfeld, H 1996. World livestock production systems: current status, issues and trends. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 127. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Soca, P, Claramunt, M, Do Carmo, M 2007. Sistemas de cría vacuna en ganadería pastoril sobre campo nativo sin subsidios: propuesta tecnológica para estabilizar la producción de terneros con intervenciones de bajo costo y de fácil implementación. Revista Ciencia Animal, Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas Universidad de Chile 3, 3–22.Google Scholar
Steinfeld, H, Mäki-Hokkonen, J 1995. A classification of livestock production systems. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from http://ocw.hokudai.ac.jp/Course/Faculty/Agriculture/AgricultureInHokkaido/2009/page/materials/AgricultureInHokkaido-2009-Text-05.pdfGoogle Scholar
Steinfeld, H, Wassenaar, T, Jutzi, S 2006. Livestock production systems in developing countries: status, drivers, trends. Revue Scientifique et Technique 25, 505–516.Google Scholar
Stockdale, CR 2006. Reducing or eliminating the dry period of dairy cows. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 957–963.Google Scholar
Strong, DR, Frank, KT 2010. Human involvement in food webs. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 35, 1–23.Google Scholar
Suttie, JM, Reynolds, SG, Batello, C 2005. Grassland of World, Plant Production and Protection Series, vol. 34. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Taweel, HZ, Tas, BM, Smit, HJ, Elgersma, A, Dijkstra, J, Tamminga, S 2005. Effects of feeding perennial ryegrass with an elevated concentration of water-soluble carbohydrates on intake, rumen function and performance of dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 121, 243–256.Google Scholar
Wageningen UR Livestock Research 2010. Handbook dairy farming. Roodbont Uitgeverij, Zutphen, the Netherlands, 507pp.Google Scholar
van Vuuren, AM, Huhtanen, P, Dulphy, JP 1995. Improving the feeding and health value of ensiled forages. In Proceedings of the IVth International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores: Recent Developments in the Nutrition of Herbivores (ed. M Journet, E Grenet, M-H Farce, M Theriez and C Demarquilly), pp. 279–307. INRA, Paris.Google Scholar
Wang, CQ, Liua, Q, Yanga, WZ, Huo, WJ, Donga, KH, Huanga, YX, Yang, XM, Hec, DC 2009. Effects of glycerol on lactation performance, energy balance and metabolites in early lactation Holstein dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 151, 12–20.Google Scholar
World Trade Organisation 1995. Agreement on Agriculture. Retrieved September 21, 2011, from http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/14-ag.pdfGoogle Scholar
Zom, RLG, van Baal, J, Goselink, RMA, Bakker, JA, de Veth, MJ, van Vuuren, AM 2011. Effect of rumen-protected choline on performance, blood metabolites and hepatic triacylglycerols of periparturient dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 4016–4027.Google Scholar