Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:26:32.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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 live weight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. P. Ledger
Affiliation:
East African Agriculture and Forestry Research Organization, Muguga

Summary

An investigation was carried out to determine the daily energy intakes necessary to maintain, the live weights of ‘maintenance-stabilized’ steers (i.e. those held at constant live weight in pens for not less than 15 weeks) when walked at 5 km/h for distances of 5, 10 and 15 km/day.

The experiment utilized groups of Boran Zebu and Hereford × Boran Zebu steers at live weights of 275 and 450 kg.

Fed a standard diet of energy concentration 10·477 MJ metabolizable energy (ME)/kg D.M. it was found that the Hereford × Boran steers required significantly less food per day, at both live weights, than did the Borans to maintain live weight when walking distances of 15 km/day.

Based on the data relating to the total distance walked of 1120 km in 133 days it was calculated that the additional energy cost of maintaining live weight when walking was close to 4·184 kJ ME/kg/km walked. The efficiency of conversion of ME for walking was 50%.

For ‘maintenance-stabilized’ steers it was calculated that the 275 kg steers required 24, 49 and 73% more daily D.M. intake and the 450 kg steers 34, 69 and 97% more daily D.M. intake when walked 5, 10 and 15 km/day respectively than would have been the case if they had been kept inactive in pens.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

Blaxter, K. L. (1969). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants, chapter 7. London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Coop, I. E. (1962). The energy requirements of sheep for maintenance and gain. 1.Pen fed sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 58, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coop, I. E. & Hill, M. K. (1962). The energy requirements of sheep for maintenance and gain. 2. Grazing sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 58, 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Es, J. H. (1972). Maintenance. In Handbuch der Tiernahrung. Vol. 2. Leistungen und Ernahrung (ed. Lenkeit, W., Brierem, K. and Crasemann, E.). Hamburg und Berlin: Verlag Paul Parey.Google Scholar
Hutton, J. B. (1962). The maintenance requirements of New Zealand dairy cattle. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Lambourne, L. S. & Reabdon, T. F. (1963). Effect of environment on the maintenance requirements of Merino wethers. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 272–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlands, J. P., Corbett, S. L., McDonald, I. & Reid, G. W. (1963). Estimates of the energy required for maintenance by adult sheep. Animal Production 5, 11–6.Google Scholar
Ledger, H. P. & Sayers, A. R. (1977). The utilization of dietary energy by steers during periods of restricted food intake and subsequent realimentation. I. The effect of time on the maintenance requirements of steers held at constant live weights. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, J. T. (1958). Pasture Evaluation, Nutritional and Economic Aspects of Feed Utilisation by Dairy Cows (ed. Hoglund, C. R.), p. 135. Iowa State College Press.Google Scholar
Robertshaw, D. & Katangole, C. B. (1969). Adrenocortical activity and intermediary metabolism of Bos indicus and Bos taurus in the high altitude tropics (2000 m). International Journal of Biometeriology, p. 13.Google Scholar
Wallace, L. R. (1955). Intake of dairy cows at pasture in relation to their productive performance. Animal Research Division, New Zealand Department of Agriculture Report, 1955–6.Google Scholar