An evaluation of the effects of grazing management systems involving preferential treatment of high-yielding dairy cows on animal performance and sward utilization |
| |
| Authors: | C S MAYNE† A J CLEMENTS S C F WOODCOCK |
| |
| Institution: | AFRC Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, North Wyke, Devon, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | Two systems of grazing management involving preferential treatment of high- yielding dairy cows were compared with a grazing system in which both high- and low-yielders received uniform treatment. Cows were rotationally grazed across I-day paddocks without concentrate supplementation from 23 April to 8 October 1985, with a mean stocking rate over the season of 5-4 cows ha?1. Preferential treatment of high-yielding cows was achieved either by using a leader/follower approach (LF) with high-yielding cows in the leader group, or by preferential forage feeding (PFF) where high-yielding cows were allowed access to grass silage for 1 -5 h daily and grazed alongside low-yielders. Control (C) cows grazed together as a single group. The high grazing stocking rates used on all three treatments resulted in good grass utilization with residual sward heights, assessed by a rising-plate sward stick, of 45, 50 and 48 mm for the LF, PFF and C treatments respectively. Animal performance data for the LF, PFF and C treatments respectively were: milk yield (kg d?1) 15middot;1, 15middot;6 and 14middot;7 (s.e. 0middot;78); milk fat yield (g d?1) 598, 606 and 567 (s.e. 34); milk protein yield (g d?1) 500, 519 and 480 (s.e. 31); and live weight gain (kg d?1) 0middot;12, 0middot;23 and 0middot;25 (s.e. 0·05). These results indicate that leader/follower grazing had little overall effect on animal performance when high grazing severity was imposed, with the improvement in animal performance of high-yielding cows in the leader group being offset by the reduced performance of the follower group. Buffer-feeding of high-yielding, rotationally-grazed cows with high-quality grass silage had little effect on animal performance and resulted in a decrease in the efficiency of grassland utilization. Silage appeared to substitute for herbage, with a reduction in herbage DM intake of 0middot;55 kg per kg silage DM consumed. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
