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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Professional animal scientist 2002-03, Vol.18 (1), p.74-78 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 < 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.</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 < 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.</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 & 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 < 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.</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 |