Paper · 2011 · Journal of Dairy Science

Grazing management and supplementation effects on forage and dairy cow performance on cool-season pastures in the southeastern United States

B. Macoon; L.E. Sollenberger; C.R. Staples; et al.

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
19
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Cool-season annual forages provide high-quality herbage for up to 5 mo in the US Gulf Coast states, but their management in pasture-based dairy systems has received little attention. Objectives of this study were to evaluate pasture and animal responses when lactating Holstein cows (n=32, mean DIM=184±21) grazed either N-fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.)-annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) mixed pastures or rye-annual ryegrass-crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.)-red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) pastures at 2 stocking rates (5 vs. 2.5 cows/ha) and 2 rates of concentrate supplementation [0.29 or 0.40 kg of supplement (as is)/kg of daily milk production]. Two cows paired by parity (one multiparous and one primiparous) were assigned randomly to each pasture. The 2 × 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments was replicated twice in a completely randomized design. Forage mixture and supplementation rate did not affect milk production during three 28-d periods. Greater milk production occurred at the low (19.7 kg/d) than the high (14.7 kg/d) stocking rate during periods 2 and 3, but production was similar during period 1. Despite lower production per cow, milk production per hectare was generally greater at the high stocking rate (81.6 vs. 49.5 kg/ha). Generally, greater pregraze herbage mass on pastures at the lower stocking rate (1,400 vs. 1,150 kg/ha) accounted for greater herbage allowance. Both forage (8.0 vs. 5.9 kg/d) and total (14.1 vs. 11.6) organic matter intake were greater at the low stocking rate. Cows fed less supplement had greater forage organic matter intake (8.0 vs. 6.1 kg/d). Greater herbage mass was associated with the greater intake and subsequent greater milk production. Differences in forage nutritive value, blood metabolites and milk composition, although showing some response to treatments, may not be of sufficient magnitude to affect choice of pasture species or other management practices. Animal performance was not improved by adding clovers to mixed cool-season grass pastures like those in this study. Stocking rate had a major effect on pasture and animal performance. During the cool season, supplementation with concentrates should be planned based on estimated energy intake from forages to achieve optimum milk production and ensure maintenance of body condition.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pregraze herbage mass was greater at the lower stocking rate, 1,400 versus 1,150 kg/ha.

Treatment
lower stocking ratee0
Outcome
pregraze herbage masse0
Direction
greatere0
Value
1,400 vs. 1,150 kg/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Secale cereale
Secale cereale · TaxonLSDSL · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“greater pregraze herbage mass on pastures at the lower stocking rate (1,400 vs. 1,150 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1291–1383 · show in text ↑
t0

“N-fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–357 · show in text ↑
Mechanismobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Greater herbage mass accounted for greater herbage allowance.

Outcome
herbage allowancee0
Qualifier
greater pregraze herbage masse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Secale cereale
Secale cereale · TaxonLSDSL · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“greater pregraze herbage mass on pastures at the lower stocking rate (1,400 vs. 1,150 kg/ha) accounted for greater herbage allowance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1291–1423 · show in text ↑
t0

“N-fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–357 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding clovers did not improve animal performance in mixed cool-season grass pastures.

Treatment
adding cloverse0
Outcome
Animal performancee0
Direction
not improvede0
Comparator
mixed cool-season grass pasturese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Secale cereale
Secale cereale · TaxonLSDSL · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Animal performance was not improved by adding clovers to mixed cool-season grass pastures”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1956–2045 · show in text ↑
t0

“N-fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–357 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stocking rate had a major effect on pasture performance.

Outcome
pasturee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Secale cereale
Secale cereale · TaxonLSDSL · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Stocking rate had a major effect on pasture and animal performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2072–2138 · show in text ↑
t0

“N-fertilized rye (Secale cereale L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–357 · show in text ↑

grazing · yield · Secale cereale (rye)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.