Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass

Kenaf [Hibiscus cannabinus L.] is primarily used as an industrial fiber. However, during the vegetative phase, nutrients from kenaf may be utilized as cattle feed. To determine animal performance, grazing trials were conducted for 2 consecutive yr. During the first year, 72 steers (214 ± 65 kg) were...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Professional animal scientist 2002-03, Vol.18 (1), p.74-78
Hauptverfasser: Rude, B.J., Baldwin, B.S., Hanson, K.C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 78
container_issue 1
container_start_page 74
container_title The Professional animal scientist
container_volume 18
creator Rude, B.J.
Baldwin, B.S.
Hanson, K.C.
description Kenaf [Hibiscus cannabinus L.] is primarily used as an industrial fiber. However, during the vegetative phase, nutrients from kenaf may be utilized as cattle feed. To determine animal performance, grazing trials were conducted for 2 consecutive yr. During the first year, 72 steers (214 ± 65 kg) were assigned to one of three forages: kenaf, pearl millet, or a bermudagrass/dallisgrass mix and allowed to graze for 56 d. Average daily gains for steers grazing pearl millet was greater (P < 0.01; 0.80 kg/d) than that for those grazing mixed grass or kenaf (0.65 and 0.67 kg/d, respectively). During the second year, 45 steers (244 ± 35 kg) were allotted to the same three forage groups and allowed to graze for 84 d. Total BW gain for steers differed (P < 0.01) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (0.71, 0.50, and 0.17 kg/d, respectively). To determine nutrient utilization, 12 steers were divided into three treatments consisting of greenchop kenaf, pearl millet, or mixed grass and fed while housed in individual metabolism crates. Apparent digestibility of NDF, ADF, and hemicellulose was less (P < 0.01) for kenaf than for mixed grass or pearl millet. More (P < 0.01) protein was retained in steers consuming pearl millet (320 g/d) than in those consuming mixed grass or kenaf (78 and 107 g/d, respectively). Apparent energy retained by steers was different (P < 0.03) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (5.2, 16.3, and 9.6 Mcal/d, respectively). Steers consuming pearl millet appeared to digest and utilize nutrients more efficiently than those consuming kenaf or mixed grass.
doi_str_mv 10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31487-X
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_reports_230350183</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S108074461531487X</els_id><sourcerecordid>113662163</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c315t-5d462cd89ff1edd1e91d9d557b03da4ac42856e21185610b5df88330b529256f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1rFTEUhoNYsN76FySCiwqdmpNM5mOnXLRKqxZq4e5C7uSkjWQm0ySj1l9veq9u3Lg6LyfPewIPIc-BnYLkgr--Ataxqq3r5hjkKwF111abR-SwvMpKQLd5XPJf5Al5mtI3xjjwvj0k6hKjDXHU04A0WKonQz8vOTqcMr3OzrtfOrsw0e09vcqIMdF1mNIyuumGnuOk7Qm9RB09_eS8x3xCQyzxJxp6FnVKR-TAap_w2Z-5Itfv331df6guvpx9XL-9qAYBMlfS1A0fTNdbC2gMYA-mN1K2WyaMrvVQ8042yAHKALaVxnadECXwnsvGihV5sb87x3C3YMoq4hxiTooLJiSDQq_I8T_M6NKA3usJw1JIxljdt8Ae0GaPDjGkFNGqObpRx3sFTO2sq5119aC0LNTOutqU4st98dbd3P5wEVUatffzshVq1gk6BaVTsDd7DIuT7w6jSkNRPqAplSErE9z_fvoN43-VaA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230350183</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Rude, B.J. ; Baldwin, B.S. ; Hanson, K.C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rude, B.J. ; Baldwin, B.S. ; Hanson, K.C.</creatorcontrib><description>Kenaf [Hibiscus cannabinus L.] is primarily used as an industrial fiber. However, during the vegetative phase, nutrients from kenaf may be utilized as cattle feed. To determine animal performance, grazing trials were conducted for 2 consecutive yr. During the first year, 72 steers (214 ± 65 kg) were assigned to one of three forages: kenaf, pearl millet, or a bermudagrass/dallisgrass mix and allowed to graze for 56 d. Average daily gains for steers grazing pearl millet was greater (P &lt; 0.01; 0.80 kg/d) than that for those grazing mixed grass or kenaf (0.65 and 0.67 kg/d, respectively). During the second year, 45 steers (244 ± 35 kg) were allotted to the same three forage groups and allowed to graze for 84 d. Total BW gain for steers differed (P &lt; 0.01) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (0.71, 0.50, and 0.17 kg/d, respectively). To determine nutrient utilization, 12 steers were divided into three treatments consisting of greenchop kenaf, pearl millet, or mixed grass and fed while housed in individual metabolism crates. Apparent digestibility of NDF, ADF, and hemicellulose was less (P &lt; 0.01) for kenaf than for mixed grass or pearl millet. More (P &lt; 0.01) protein was retained in steers consuming pearl millet (320 g/d) than in those consuming mixed grass or kenaf (78 and 107 g/d, respectively). Apparent energy retained by steers was different (P &lt; 0.03) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (5.2, 16.3, and 9.6 Mcal/d, respectively). Steers consuming pearl millet appeared to digest and utilize nutrients more efficiently than those consuming kenaf or mixed grass.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1080-7446</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-318X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31487-X</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Champaign: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>average daily gain ; Beef Cattle ; cattle feeds ; Cenchrus americanus ; crates ; Cynodon dactylon ; digestibility ; energy ; forage ; grasses ; Grazing ; grazing trials ; hemicellulose ; Hibiscus cannabinus ; Kenaf ; metabolism ; Nutrient Utilization ; nutrients ; steers</subject><ispartof>The Professional animal scientist, 2002-03, Vol.18 (1), p.74-78</ispartof><rights>2002 American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists</rights><rights>Copyright American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists Mar 2002</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c315t-5d462cd89ff1edd1e91d9d557b03da4ac42856e21185610b5df88330b529256f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c315t-5d462cd89ff1edd1e91d9d557b03da4ac42856e21185610b5df88330b529256f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rude, B.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baldwin, B.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanson, K.C.</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass</title><title>The Professional animal scientist</title><description>Kenaf [Hibiscus cannabinus L.] is primarily used as an industrial fiber. However, during the vegetative phase, nutrients from kenaf may be utilized as cattle feed. To determine animal performance, grazing trials were conducted for 2 consecutive yr. During the first year, 72 steers (214 ± 65 kg) were assigned to one of three forages: kenaf, pearl millet, or a bermudagrass/dallisgrass mix and allowed to graze for 56 d. Average daily gains for steers grazing pearl millet was greater (P &lt; 0.01; 0.80 kg/d) than that for those grazing mixed grass or kenaf (0.65 and 0.67 kg/d, respectively). During the second year, 45 steers (244 ± 35 kg) were allotted to the same three forage groups and allowed to graze for 84 d. Total BW gain for steers differed (P &lt; 0.01) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (0.71, 0.50, and 0.17 kg/d, respectively). To determine nutrient utilization, 12 steers were divided into three treatments consisting of greenchop kenaf, pearl millet, or mixed grass and fed while housed in individual metabolism crates. Apparent digestibility of NDF, ADF, and hemicellulose was less (P &lt; 0.01) for kenaf than for mixed grass or pearl millet. More (P &lt; 0.01) protein was retained in steers consuming pearl millet (320 g/d) than in those consuming mixed grass or kenaf (78 and 107 g/d, respectively). Apparent energy retained by steers was different (P &lt; 0.03) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (5.2, 16.3, and 9.6 Mcal/d, respectively). Steers consuming pearl millet appeared to digest and utilize nutrients more efficiently than those consuming kenaf or mixed grass.</description><subject>average daily gain</subject><subject>Beef Cattle</subject><subject>cattle feeds</subject><subject>Cenchrus americanus</subject><subject>crates</subject><subject>Cynodon dactylon</subject><subject>digestibility</subject><subject>energy</subject><subject>forage</subject><subject>grasses</subject><subject>Grazing</subject><subject>grazing trials</subject><subject>hemicellulose</subject><subject>Hibiscus cannabinus</subject><subject>Kenaf</subject><subject>metabolism</subject><subject>Nutrient Utilization</subject><subject>nutrients</subject><subject>steers</subject><issn>1080-7446</issn><issn>1525-318X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1rFTEUhoNYsN76FySCiwqdmpNM5mOnXLRKqxZq4e5C7uSkjWQm0ySj1l9veq9u3Lg6LyfPewIPIc-BnYLkgr--Ataxqq3r5hjkKwF111abR-SwvMpKQLd5XPJf5Al5mtI3xjjwvj0k6hKjDXHU04A0WKonQz8vOTqcMr3OzrtfOrsw0e09vcqIMdF1mNIyuumGnuOk7Qm9RB09_eS8x3xCQyzxJxp6FnVKR-TAap_w2Z-5Itfv331df6guvpx9XL-9qAYBMlfS1A0fTNdbC2gMYA-mN1K2WyaMrvVQ8042yAHKALaVxnadECXwnsvGihV5sb87x3C3YMoq4hxiTooLJiSDQq_I8T_M6NKA3usJw1JIxljdt8Ae0GaPDjGkFNGqObpRx3sFTO2sq5119aC0LNTOutqU4st98dbd3P5wEVUatffzshVq1gk6BaVTsDd7DIuT7w6jSkNRPqAplSErE9z_fvoN43-VaA</recordid><startdate>200203</startdate><enddate>200203</enddate><creator>Rude, B.J.</creator><creator>Baldwin, B.S.</creator><creator>Hanson, K.C.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200203</creationdate><title>Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass</title><author>Rude, B.J. ; Baldwin, B.S. ; Hanson, K.C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c315t-5d462cd89ff1edd1e91d9d557b03da4ac42856e21185610b5df88330b529256f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>average daily gain</topic><topic>Beef Cattle</topic><topic>cattle feeds</topic><topic>Cenchrus americanus</topic><topic>crates</topic><topic>Cynodon dactylon</topic><topic>digestibility</topic><topic>energy</topic><topic>forage</topic><topic>grasses</topic><topic>Grazing</topic><topic>grazing trials</topic><topic>hemicellulose</topic><topic>Hibiscus cannabinus</topic><topic>Kenaf</topic><topic>metabolism</topic><topic>Nutrient Utilization</topic><topic>nutrients</topic><topic>steers</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rude, B.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baldwin, B.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanson, K.C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Professional animal scientist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rude, B.J.</au><au>Baldwin, B.S.</au><au>Hanson, K.C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass</atitle><jtitle>The Professional animal scientist</jtitle><date>2002-03</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>74</spage><epage>78</epage><pages>74-78</pages><issn>1080-7446</issn><eissn>1525-318X</eissn><abstract>Kenaf [Hibiscus cannabinus L.] is primarily used as an industrial fiber. However, during the vegetative phase, nutrients from kenaf may be utilized as cattle feed. To determine animal performance, grazing trials were conducted for 2 consecutive yr. During the first year, 72 steers (214 ± 65 kg) were assigned to one of three forages: kenaf, pearl millet, or a bermudagrass/dallisgrass mix and allowed to graze for 56 d. Average daily gains for steers grazing pearl millet was greater (P &lt; 0.01; 0.80 kg/d) than that for those grazing mixed grass or kenaf (0.65 and 0.67 kg/d, respectively). During the second year, 45 steers (244 ± 35 kg) were allotted to the same three forage groups and allowed to graze for 84 d. Total BW gain for steers differed (P &lt; 0.01) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (0.71, 0.50, and 0.17 kg/d, respectively). To determine nutrient utilization, 12 steers were divided into three treatments consisting of greenchop kenaf, pearl millet, or mixed grass and fed while housed in individual metabolism crates. Apparent digestibility of NDF, ADF, and hemicellulose was less (P &lt; 0.01) for kenaf than for mixed grass or pearl millet. More (P &lt; 0.01) protein was retained in steers consuming pearl millet (320 g/d) than in those consuming mixed grass or kenaf (78 and 107 g/d, respectively). Apparent energy retained by steers was different (P &lt; 0.03) among kenaf, pearl millet, and mixed grass (5.2, 16.3, and 9.6 Mcal/d, respectively). Steers consuming pearl millet appeared to digest and utilize nutrients more efficiently than those consuming kenaf or mixed grass.</abstract><cop>Champaign</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31487-X</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1080-7446
ispartof The Professional animal scientist, 2002-03, Vol.18 (1), p.74-78
issn 1080-7446
1525-318X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_reports_230350183
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects average daily gain
Beef Cattle
cattle feeds
Cenchrus americanus
crates
Cynodon dactylon
digestibility
energy
forage
grasses
Grazing
grazing trials
hemicellulose
Hibiscus cannabinus
Kenaf
metabolism
Nutrient Utilization
nutrients
steers
title Performance of and Nutrient Utilization by Steers Consuming Kenaf, Pearl Millet, or Mixed Grass
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T21%3A05%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20and%20Nutrient%20Utilization%20by%20Steers%20Consuming%20Kenaf,%20Pearl%20Millet,%20or%20Mixed%20Grass&rft.jtitle=The%20Professional%20animal%20scientist&rft.au=Rude,%20B.J.&rft.date=2002-03&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=74&rft.epage=78&rft.pages=74-78&rft.issn=1080-7446&rft.eissn=1525-318X&rft_id=info:doi/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31487-X&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E113662163%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230350183&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S108074461531487X&rfr_iscdi=true