Cargando…
Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions
Greenhouse gas emissions from the beef industry are largely attributed to the grazing sector, specifically from beef cattle enteric methane emissions. Therefore, the study objective was to examine how forage diversity impacts forage productivity, nutritive value, animal performance, and enteric meth...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8665682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34791305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab326 |
_version_ | 1784614059885199360 |
---|---|
author | Thompson, Logan R Maciel, Isabella C F Rodrigues, Patricia D R Cassida, Kim A Rowntree, Jason E |
author_facet | Thompson, Logan R Maciel, Isabella C F Rodrigues, Patricia D R Cassida, Kim A Rowntree, Jason E |
author_sort | Thompson, Logan R |
collection | PubMed |
description | Greenhouse gas emissions from the beef industry are largely attributed to the grazing sector, specifically from beef cattle enteric methane emissions. Therefore, the study objective was to examine how forage diversity impacts forage productivity, nutritive value, animal performance, and enteric methane emissions. This study occurred over three consecutive grazing seasons (2018 to 2020) and compared two common Midwest grazing mixtures: 1) a simple, 50:50 alfalfa:orchardgrass mixture (SIMP) and 2) a botanically diverse, cool-season species mixture (COMP). Fifty-six steers and heifers were adapted to an Automated Head Chamber System (AHCS) each year (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD) and stratified into treatment groups based on acclimation visitation. Each treatment consisted of four pastures, three 3.2-ha and one 1.6-ha, with eight and four animals each, respectively. Forage production was measured biweekly in pre- and postgrazed paddocks, and forage nutritive value was analyzed using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy. Shrunk body weights were taken monthly to determine animal performance. Forage availability did not differ between treatments (P = 0.69) but tended lower in 2018 (P = 0.06; 2.40 t dry matter ha(−1)) than 2019 (2.92 t dry matter ha(−1)) and 2020 (P = 0.10; 2.81 t dry matter ha(−1)). Crude protein was significantly lower for COMP in 2018 compared with SIMP. Forage acid detergent fiber content was significantly lower for the COMP mixture (P = 0.02). The COMP treatment resulted higher dry matter digestibility (IVDMD48) in 2018 and 2019 compared with the SIMP treatment (P < 0.01). Animal performance did not differ between treatments (P > 0.50). There was a tendency for the COMP treatment to have lower enteric CH(4) production on a g d(−1) basis (P = 0.06), but no difference was observed on an emission intensity basis (g CH(4) kg(−1) gain; P = 0.56). These results would indicate that adoption of the complex forage mixture would not result in improved forage productivity, animal performance, or reduced emission intensity compared with the simple forage mixture. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8665682 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86656822021-12-13 Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions Thompson, Logan R Maciel, Isabella C F Rodrigues, Patricia D R Cassida, Kim A Rowntree, Jason E J Anim Sci Forage Based Livestock Systems Greenhouse gas emissions from the beef industry are largely attributed to the grazing sector, specifically from beef cattle enteric methane emissions. Therefore, the study objective was to examine how forage diversity impacts forage productivity, nutritive value, animal performance, and enteric methane emissions. This study occurred over three consecutive grazing seasons (2018 to 2020) and compared two common Midwest grazing mixtures: 1) a simple, 50:50 alfalfa:orchardgrass mixture (SIMP) and 2) a botanically diverse, cool-season species mixture (COMP). Fifty-six steers and heifers were adapted to an Automated Head Chamber System (AHCS) each year (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD) and stratified into treatment groups based on acclimation visitation. Each treatment consisted of four pastures, three 3.2-ha and one 1.6-ha, with eight and four animals each, respectively. Forage production was measured biweekly in pre- and postgrazed paddocks, and forage nutritive value was analyzed using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy. Shrunk body weights were taken monthly to determine animal performance. Forage availability did not differ between treatments (P = 0.69) but tended lower in 2018 (P = 0.06; 2.40 t dry matter ha(−1)) than 2019 (2.92 t dry matter ha(−1)) and 2020 (P = 0.10; 2.81 t dry matter ha(−1)). Crude protein was significantly lower for COMP in 2018 compared with SIMP. Forage acid detergent fiber content was significantly lower for the COMP mixture (P = 0.02). The COMP treatment resulted higher dry matter digestibility (IVDMD48) in 2018 and 2019 compared with the SIMP treatment (P < 0.01). Animal performance did not differ between treatments (P > 0.50). There was a tendency for the COMP treatment to have lower enteric CH(4) production on a g d(−1) basis (P = 0.06), but no difference was observed on an emission intensity basis (g CH(4) kg(−1) gain; P = 0.56). These results would indicate that adoption of the complex forage mixture would not result in improved forage productivity, animal performance, or reduced emission intensity compared with the simple forage mixture. Oxford University Press 2021-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8665682/ /pubmed/34791305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab326 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Forage Based Livestock Systems Thompson, Logan R Maciel, Isabella C F Rodrigues, Patricia D R Cassida, Kim A Rowntree, Jason E Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title | Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title_full | Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title_fullStr | Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title_short | Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
title_sort | impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions |
topic | Forage Based Livestock Systems |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8665682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34791305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab326 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thompsonloganr impactofforagediversityonforageproductivitynutritivevaluebeefcattleperformanceandentericmethaneemissions AT macielisabellacf impactofforagediversityonforageproductivitynutritivevaluebeefcattleperformanceandentericmethaneemissions AT rodriguespatriciadr impactofforagediversityonforageproductivitynutritivevaluebeefcattleperformanceandentericmethaneemissions AT cassidakima impactofforagediversityonforageproductivitynutritivevaluebeefcattleperformanceandentericmethaneemissions AT rowntreejasone impactofforagediversityonforageproductivitynutritivevaluebeefcattleperformanceandentericmethaneemissions |