Warm-season annual forages in forage-finishing beef systems: I. Forage yield and quality

Abstract The demand for a year-round supply of fresh, locally grown, forage-finished beef products has created a need for forage-finishing strategies during the summer months in the southeast. A 3-yr study was conducted to evaluate four warm-season annual forages in a southeastern forage-finishing b...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Translational animal science 2019-03, Vol.3 (2), p.911-926
Hauptverfasser: Harmon, Deidre D, Hancock, Dennis W, Stewart, Robert L, Lacey, Jenna L, Mckee, Robert W, Hale, John D, Thomas, Chevise L, Ford, Elyse, Segers, Jacob R, Teutsch, Chris D, Stelzleni, Alexander M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract The demand for a year-round supply of fresh, locally grown, forage-finished beef products has created a need for forage-finishing strategies during the summer months in the southeast. A 3-yr study was conducted to evaluate four warm-season annual forages in a southeastern forage-finishing beef production system. Treatments were four forage species and included brown-midrib sorghum × sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor var. bicolor*bicolor var. sudanense; BMR), sorghum × sudangrass (SS), pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.; PM], or pearl millet planted with crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.; PMCG]. Treatments were distributed in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Pastures (0.81 ha, experimental unit) were assigned to one of four forage treatments, subdivided, and rotationally stocked with a variable stocking density. British-cross beef steers (n = 32; 3-yr average: 429 ± 22 kg) grazed for 70, 63, and 56 d in 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. Put-and-take animals were used to maintain a forage allowance of 116 kg forage dry matter /100 kg body weight. Forage mass was measured by clipping a 4.3-m2 area in triplicate on d 0 and on 14-d intervals. Hand grab samples for forage nutritive value determination and quadrat clippings for species compositions were measured on d 0 and on 34-d intervals until termination of the trial. Forage mass was lowest (P < 0.01) for PMCG at the initiation of the grazing trial, whereas BMR was greater (P < 0.01) than SS at wk 6. Total digestible nutrients in 2014 were greater for SS compared to BMR and PM at the middle harvest (P < 0.01) and BMR, PM, and PMCG at the final harvest (P < 0.01). At the middle and final harvests in both 2015 and 2016, PM and PMCG contained greater (P < 0.01) concentrations of crude protein than SS. These results suggest that BMR, SS, PM, and PMCG may all be used in southeastern forage-finishing beef production systems, as long as the producer strategically accounts for the slight growth and nutritive value differences throughout the season.
ISSN:2573-2102
2573-2102
DOI:10.1093/tas/txz075