Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T09:50:29.970Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of seasonal intensity of stocking on the live-weight increase from a sward

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2016

D. E. Eyles ,
T. E. Williams  and
J. O. Green
D. E. Eyles
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berkshire
T. E. Williams
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berkshire
J. O. Green
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berkshire
Get access

Extract

The growth of grass varies considerably from month to month. Where stock numbers are constant, as in a dairy herd, it is difficult to use grassland efficiently by grazing alone. But where grassland is used for meat production, livestock numbers may be subject to a considerable fluctuation, and with skilful adjustment of classes of stock this fluctuation can be made to approximate to the seasonal pattern of growth in the pasture.

The adjustment of stock numbers to the quantity of grass present is an art which is part of successful grazing management. Understocking will lead to an accumulation of pasture which will then have to be grazed at a more mature stage, while overstocking will result in a lower plane of nutrition for the animals. The efficiency of equating stocking intensity to the pasture available in a given period will be reflected in the progress of the individual animal (in terms of daily milk yield or live-weight gain) and in the output per acre of pasture.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production , Volume 1956 , 1956 , pp. 91 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1956

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

Cowlishaw, S. J., 1951. The effect of sampling cages on the yields of herbage. J. Brit. Grassl. Soc., 6: 179.Google Scholar
Experiments in Progress 1949, Grassland Improvement Station, Stratford-on-Avon.Google Scholar
Klingman, D. L., Miles, S. R., & Mott, G. O., 1943. The cage method for determining consumption and yield of pasture herbage. J. Amer. Soc. Agron., 35: 739.Google Scholar
Smuts, D. B., & Marais, J. S. C., 1940. The dry matter consumption of sheep on natural grazing in the Transvaal. Onderstepoort J. vet. Sci., 14: 403.Google Scholar
Watson, S. J., & Horton, E. A., 1936. Composition, digestibility and nutritive value of samples of grassland products. J. agric. Sci., 26: 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, T. B., 1927. The production requirement of fattening sheep. J. Minist. Agric, 34: 295.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E., Evans, R. E., & Eden, A., 1937a. Sheep nutrition. I. Measurements of the appetites of sheep on typical winter rations, together with a critical study of the sheep-feeding standards. J. agric. Sci., 27: 191.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E., Evans, R. E., & Eden, A., 1937b. Sheep nutrition. II. Determinations of the amounts of grass consumed by sheep on pasturage of varying quality. J. agric. Sci., 27: 212.Google Scholar