Abstract
Anbnal performance and nutrition under short duration grazing (SDG) and season-long grazing (SLG) were compared on qringgrazed crated whatgrass [Agropyron dh&orum (Flscb.)Scbult. and A. cr?&tuw (L.)Gaertn.] range to determine if SDG bas tbe potential to improve livestock production on such rangelands. Livertock performance was evaluated by measuring weigbt gains twice per grazing season. Diet quality was asses& by determining crude protein concentration and in vitro organic matter digatibih ity Of CxtNM samples COkCtd *OIlI erOpb@dy fiStUhtcd bdfers. Three variables of ingestive bebavior were measured: ingestion rate, biting rate, and graxing time. Daily forage iatake was calculated as tbe product of ingestion rate and graxing time. Animals in tbe SLG treatment gained signifhntly more tban those under SDG in 1983 (1.07 vs. 0.81 kg/bd/d), but no statistical differauzea were detected in 1984 (1.13 vs. 1.07 kg/ad/d for SDG and SLG, respectively). In 1985, animals under SDG gained tbe most (1.03 vs. 0.87 kg/ad/d for SDG vs. SLG, respectively). No differencea were detected in diet quality between SDG and SLG tbrougbout tbe study. No treatment differences were detected in ingestive behavior during 1984, but ingestion rate was grater and graxing time less under SDG tban SLG during 1985. Results indicate that forage intake was grater, while energy expenditures were lower under SDG tban SLG in 1985. Tbe bypotbesis that SDG extends tbe season of nutritiotw forage was not supported.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.