Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:27:15.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The utilization of Hyparrhenia veld for the nutrition of cattle in the dry season II. Veld hay compared with in situ grazing of the mature forage, and the effects of feeding supplementary nitrogen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. A. Smith
C. A. Smith
Affiliation:
Central Research Station, Mazabuka, Northern Rhodesia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Three methods of utilizing the natural Hyparrhenia grasslands for the dry-season nutrition of ranch cattle were tested in grazing trials. The feed regimes were:

(A) Late-cut veld hay plus aftermath grazing.

(B) The accumulated, seasonal growth of mature grass left as ‘standing hay’ for dry-season grazing.

(C) A combination of both practices in which half the area was cut for hay, and half left as ‘standing hay’. These treatments were compared with and without the feeding of supplementary protein.

Mature Hyparrhenia veld whether cut for hay or left as ‘standing hay’ was a stemmy, low-quality forage deficient in protein. The qualitative deficiency was such that all unsupplemented treatments were equally ineffective in preventing large cattle weight losses in the dry season.

The only significant treatment effect was that due to feeding a protein supplement. Otherwise, there were no differences between the three managements, i.e. there was no marked benefit from conserving forage as veld hay compared with in situ grazing of the standing grass.

The voluntary intake of veld hay was low; and with heifers, declined to negligible amounts. The feeding of supplementary nitrogen, either as protein or urea, increased the daily hay intake by 140%. As a result, a diet deficient in energy was altered into a productive ration, with consequent cattle weight gains.

Although the cattle preferentially sought-after, and grazed the aftermath from late-cut veld hay; its practical nutritional value was slight, and was not reflected in cattle weight gains.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , November 1961 , pp. 311 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

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

REFERENCES

Ainslie, K. S. (1958). Rhod. Agric. J. 55, 286.Google Scholar
Altona, R. E., Rose, C. J. & Tilley, T. J. (1960). S. Afr. J. Agric. Sci. 3, 69.Google Scholar
Beames, R. M. (1958). Qd J. Agric. Sci. 16, 223.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. & Wilson, R. S. (1961). Anim. Prod. 3, 51.Google Scholar
Cramtton, E. W. (1957). J. Anim. Sci. 16, 546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, R. C. (1960). Rhod. Agric. J. 57, 412.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. C. & Croft, A. G. (1958). Rhod. Agric. J. 55, 40.Google Scholar
Gallup, W. D. & Briggs, H. M. (1948). J. Anim. Sci. 7, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glover, J. & Dougall, H. W. (1960). J. Agric. Sci. 55, 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardison, W. A., Reid, J. T., Martin, C. M. & Woolfolk, P. G. (1954). J. Dairy Sci., 37, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, K. (1956). Rhod. Agric. J. 53, 241.Google Scholar
Kennan, T. C. D. (1956). Rhod. Agric. J. 53, 26.Google Scholar
Milford, R. (1960). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 11, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, F. B. (1956). Rhod. Agric. J. 53, 969.Google Scholar
Riggs, J. K. (1958). J. Anim. Sci. 17, 981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. A. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. A. (1961 a). J. Agric. Sci. 56, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. A. (1961 b). J. Agric. Sci. 57, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vorster, T. H. (1954). Rhod. Agric. J. 51, 428.Google Scholar
Williams, V. J., Nottle, M. C., Moir, R. J. & Underwood, E. J. (1953). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 6, 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar