کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
2448427 1554017 2008 14 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Intake, performance and carcass characteristics of beef cattle offered diets based on whole-crop wheat or forage maize relative to grass silage or ad libitum concentrates
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم زیستی و بیوفناوری علوم کشاورزی و بیولوژیک علوم دامی و جانورشناسی
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
Intake, performance and carcass characteristics of beef cattle offered diets based on whole-crop wheat or forage maize relative to grass silage or ad libitum concentrates
چکیده انگلیسی

Seventy beef steers, mean initial live-weight 424 (S.D. 33.0) kg, were blocked by live-weight and breed and allocated to one of 5 dietary treatments in a randomised complete block design. Treatments, including supplementation with 3 kg concentrates/head/day, were grass silage (GS), maize silage (MS), fermented whole-crop wheat (FWCW), urea-treated, processed whole-crop wheat (UPWCW), and ad libitum concentrates supplemented with 5 kg grass silage/head/day (ALC). The grain in urea-treated, processed whole-crop wheat (WCW) was cracked and the crop ensiled with a urea plus urease-based additive. The mean dry matter (DM) of the grass silage, maize silage, fermented WCW and urea-treated, processed WCW was 174, 315, 404 and 716 g/kg, respectively. Total DM intake and carcass growth were lowest for GS (P < 0.001). Relative to ALC, feed conversion efficiency (FCE) (P < 0.05), live-weight gain (P < 0.05), carcass-weight gain (P < 0.01) and kill-out rate (P < 0.05) were lower for GS, FWCW and UPWCW. The MS had a better FCE than the UPWCW (P < 0.001) or the FWCW (P < 0.05). Plasma urea concentration was lowest for MS and highest for UPWCW (P < 0.001). Animals offered the GS treatment had the most yellow fat (higher (P < 0.05) ‘b’ value) and those offered UPWCW had the whitest fat (lower (P < 0.01) ‘b’ value). It is concluded that MS, FWCW and UPWCW supported superior levels of growth by cattle compared to GS (in vitro DM digestibility 674 g/kg). There was no animal productivity advantage with UPWCW compared to FWCW.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Livestock Science - Volume 116, Issues 1–3, July 2008, Pages 223–236
نویسندگان
, , , ,