Supplementary feeding of forage to grazing dairy cows, 3. The effect of three daytime stocking rates on the performance of cows offered grass silage overnight

Over a 24-week period, three groups of dairy cows were continuously stocked at 8, 10 or 12 cows ha^-1 between morning and afternoon milkings, and overnight were housed and offered grass silage ad libitum. Due to a prolonged drought, sward heights only averaged 4·1 cm.
The increase in daytime stocking rate led to a decline in herbage intake, and increases in silage intake. At the highest stocking rate (12 cows ha^-1), the silage intake failed to compensate for the reduced herbage intake. Consequently the total dry matter and estimated metabolizable energy intakes were lower than for the 8 and 10 cows ha^-1 treatments. Milk yields and milk composition were not significantly affected by treatment but the 12 cows ha^-1 stocking rate gave the lowest milk and milk solids yields.
The utilized metabolizable energy (UME) on the grazed swards was greatest for the 10 cows ha^-1 treatment. The sward cut to provide the silage had a UME level (GJ ha^-1) 32% greater on average than the grazed swards during the same growth period. The total areas utilized for grazing and silage production for 8, 10 and 12 cows ha^-1 were 0·240, 0·224 and 0·215 ha respectively. Fat and protein yields per unit area were greatest for the 10 cows ha^-1 group.     

Effect of three forages and two forage allowances offered to pregnant dry dairy cows in winter on periparturient performance and milk yield in early lactation

Sixty multiparous, Holstein–Friesian pregnant dry dairy cows were allocated to three forage treatments ( n  = 20; fodder beet, kale or grass silage) at two feeding allowances ( n  = 30; high and low) for 70 (s.e. of mean, 16) d before parturition. Cows offered the high feeding allowance were offered 9 kg of dry matter (DM) of kale or fodder beet grazed in situ plus 5 kg DM of baled grass silage daily or clamp grass silage ad libitum offered indoors. Cows offered the low feeding allowance were offered 6 kg DM of kale or fodder beet grazed in situ plus 3·5 kg DM baled grass silage daily, or 9·5 kg DM of clamp grass silage daily offered indoors. After calving, all cows received a daily allowance of 14 kg DM perennial ryegrass herbage at pasture plus 4 kg concentrate cow⁻¹ for the first 35 d of lactation. Cows offered grass silage had a greater increase in body condition score pre-partum compared to those offered kale or fodder beet. Cows offered fodder beet pre-partum had a greater milk solid and solids-corrected milk yield in the first 35 d of lactation than those offered kale and grass silage pre-partum. Offering fodder beet and kale pre-partum increased plasma non-esterified fatty acid concentrations pre-partum relative to offering grass silage. Offering kale pre-partum resulted in higher insulin-like growth factor-1 concentration post-partum but lower plasma copper concentration pre-partum and at calving than kale or grass silage. Offering the higher forage allowance pre-partum resulted in a higher plasma calcium concentration at calving and higher plasma non-esterified fatty acid concentration post-partum.     

FACTORS LIMITING ANIMAL PRODUCTION FROM GRAZED PASTURE*

Animal production from intensively managed pasture (240 units N/ac or 300 kg N/ha applied annually) should in theory reach 11,000 Ib/ac (12,500 kg/ha) of milk or 1550 lb/ac (1750 kg/ha) of liveweight gain per year. The figure for theoretical milk production is achieved in experiments, although rarely approached in commercial practice; the figure for liveweight gain is never approached, either experimentally or commercially. On commereial farms in Britain, the average stocking rate for grazed lowland pasture in 1971 was about 0·74 cow equivalents/ac (l±82/ha), compared with a theoretical target of 1·9/ac; in 1969 fertilizer N application was about 48 units/ae (60 kg/ha). The main purpose of this paper is to suggest reasons for the differences between practical, experimental and theoretical levels of production. Economic factors may deter farmers from intensifying their grassland management, but the deterrent to high stocking rates may be the fear of running out of grass. In practice, ungrazed herbage is used as a buffer, but other feeds might be used for this purpose. Concentrates, pelleted roughages and even long dried grass and silage are too attractive to grazing beef cattle to be offered to appetite; but silage might be used as a long-term buffer. Fouling of pasture reduces efficiency of harvesting, but attempts to overcome this effect, by conditioning of grazing animals, spreading excreta or by alternation of grazing and cutting, have largely been unsuccessful. High production per unit area cannot be achieved without high production per animal. Legumes have often been found to increase production per animal, and a technique has been developed for growing red-clover and grass in adjoining areas and grazing them together. The clover was grazed satisfactorily by dairy cows (and caused no bloat) but failed to increase milk yield per animal. Recent calorimetric studies of grass have shown that the net energy value of digestible organic matter is variable, and in particular is low for late-season herbage.     

Grazing cycle length and silage supplementation: effects on the performance of lactating ewes with twin lambs

Masham ewes, stocked at 20 ewes ha⁻¹, reared twins at pasture in 1979 and 1980 and were rotationally grazed around six paddocks. There were three lengths of grazing cycle (18, 30 or 42 d) and the ewes at pasture were either offered silage ad libitum (S) for 8 weeks of lactation or they were not supplemented with silage (N). By feeding silage, S ewes and lambs moved into greater herbage masses (3735 u. 3390 kg organic matter (OM) ha⁻¹), but there was little effect on net herbage accumulation (10.5 v. 10.0 t OM ha⁻¹) and herbage intakes per ewe were similar (2.31 v . 2.27 kg OM d⁻¹) over the 7-month grazing season. During the period of silage supplementation, total intake was 19% higher for S than N ewes, lamb growth rates were slightly higher (280 v . 273 g d⁻¹) and the ewes lost less weight (−78 v −96 g d⁻¹).
For 18-, 30- and 42-d grazing cycles respectively the herbage masses before grazing were 2825, 3620 and 4240 kg OM ha⁻¹; net herbage accumulations were 9.8, 10.4 and 10.6 t OM ha⁻¹; mean daily herbage intakes by each unit (ewe+lambs) were 2.22, 2.35 and 2.30 kg OM and lamb growth rates from birth to weaning at 20 weeks were 205, 204 and 204 g d⁻¹.
Frequent grazing of relatively light herbage masses or infrequent defoliation of heavier herbage masses made little difference to sward or animal performance. It is concluded that, at this stocking rate, different grazing cycles of 18, 30 or 42 d do not affect the performance of lactating ewes.     

Effect of early turnout to grass in spring on dairy cow performance

This experiment examined the effects of grazing severity and degree of silage restriction during early turnout of dairy cows to pasture in spring on animal performance. Forty late‐winter‐calving Holstein Friesian dairy cows were allocated to one of five treatments between 7 March and 17 April 1997. The treatments involved early turnout of cows to grass for 2 h per day at two residual sward heights and two silage allowances, plus a control treatment, in a randomized block design. Dairy cows on the control treatment remained indoors throughout the experiment and were offered grass silage ad libitum. Dairy cows on all treatments were also offered 6 kg d^–1 of a concentrate on a flat‐rate basis, split equally between the morning and afternoon milkings. Offering cows access to pasture in early spring for 2 h per day resulted in increases in both milk (P < 0·001) and protein yield (P < 0·01). On average, over all grazing treatments, cows produced an additional 2·6 kg milk per day compared with the control treatment (28·5 vs. 25·9 kg d^–1, s.e.m. 0·43). Furthermore, these increases in milk yield were obtained even when silage was restricted indoors (28·4 vs. 25·9 kg d^–1) and cows grazed down to a residual sward height of 40 mm (28·1 vs. 25·9 kg d^–1). Protein yield was higher (P < 0·01) with dairy cows grazing pasture compared with cows indoors (848 vs. 707 g d^–1, s.e.m. 28·9). Silage intake was significantly (P < 0·001) reduced when cows were turned out to pasture. In conclusion, early turnout of dairy cows to pasture in spring for 2 h per day reduced silage intake and increased milk yield and protein yield relative to those fully housed and offered grass silage with a low level of concentrates.     

Effect of annual stocking rates in grass and maize+rye system on production by dairy cows

The effects on the production from dairy cows of two annual stocking rates (2.5 and 3.0 cows ha^?1) and two systems (grass and maize+rye) were examined. The experiement included three treatments: Treatment A was a grass system with an annual stocking rate of 2.5 cows ha^?1 and Treatments B and C were maize+rye systems with a stocking rate of 2.5 and 3.0 cows ha^?1 respectively. There were twenty cows per treatment and the total area of the system was 22 ha. Treatment A had 4.05 ha of grass silage area, Treatment B had 0.8 ha of grass silage area and 3.2 ha designated to silage crops (maize+rye), whereas Treatment C had 0.4 ha of grass silage area and 2.7 ha of silage crops. Maize silage had a higher nutritive value that the rye or grass silage. The greter production from the maize+rye crops allowed the silage needs of the cows to be met in systems with a seasonal herbage production when stocking rates are higher than for grass-only systems. Rye plus maize system allowed higher stocking rates (2.7 cows per ha) than grass-only system (2.1 cows per ha) because of more efficident use of land resources. Lower stocking rates and grass-only systems increased milk production per cow but not per hectare in comparison with rye plus maize systems.     

Grass height as an indicator for supplementary feeding of continuously stocked dairy cows

Three groups of cows were continuously stocked on pasture and offered supplementary concentrates according to the herbage height measured weekly with a grass disc. Concentrates were offered when the mean herbage height fell below 9 cm for treatment A, 7 cm for treatment B and 5 cm for treatment C at a rate of 1 kg d^-1 for each 0·2-cm decline below these threshold levels. If the herbage height declined by more than 1·2 cm (8 kg concentrates d^-1) hay was offered in addition ad libitum. The stocking rates for all three treatments were 5·2, 3·2 and 3·2 cows ha^-1 for three successive 8-week periods. For treatments A, B and C the mean concentrate DM intakes were 3·2, 1·2 and 1·2 kg d^-1 (treatment A also received 0·2 kg hay DM d^-1), and the mean daily milk yields were 17·2, 16·2 and 15·2 kg respectively. The increasing level of supplementary feeding from treatment C to A also resulted in an increase in liveweight and body condition score change, and a reduction in milk fat.     

Effect of restriction of silage intake and the provision of an alternative forage on the performance of dairy cows

In three experiments the effects of restricting the silage ration of dairy cows and of offering alternative forages as buffer feeds were investigated.
In the first experiment of changeover design with 3-week periods, restricting the intake of low-quality silage to 0.62 of ad libitum had no significant effect on milk yield in spite of the large energy deficit. Offering high-quality hay as a buffer feed increased total DM intake and milk production of cows receiving either restricted or ad libitum silage.
In the second experiment of similar design, restricting the DM intake of high-quality silage to 0·58 of ad libitum significantly reduced milk yield and was associated with a large negative energy balance. Offering straw or ammonia-treated straw with the restricted silage diet did not restore milk production to the level achieved with ad libitum silage but these supplements slightly reduced the energy deficit of the cows. In the third experiment of continuous design lasting 7 weeks, restricting the silage ration to 0.85 of ad libitum had no significant effect on milk production. Offering a strawmix based on straw, barley, molasses and soya with the restricted silage ration restored total DM intake to the ad libitum silage level.
In all three experiments milk protein content was reduced by restricting the silage ration and partially restored by offering alternative forages. There were no significant effects on milk fat content and milk lactose content was only reduced by the severest restriction in Experiment 2. It is concluded that short-term minor restrictions of silage intake can be partly sustained by body fat mobilization but more severe restrictions will result in loss of milk yield. Good-quality hay and a strawmix were of benefit in restoring DM and metabolizable energy intakes, whereas straw and ammonia-treated straw were of little value.     

An evaluation of the effects of grazing management systems involving preferential treatment of high-yielding dairy cows on animal performance and sward utilization

Two systems of grazing management involving preferential treatment of high- yielding dairy cows were compared with a grazing system in which both high- and low-yielders received uniform treatment. Cows were rotationally grazed across I-day paddocks without concentrate supplementation from 23 April to 8 October 1985, with a mean stocking rate over the season of 5-4 cows ha^?1. Preferential treatment of high-yielding cows was achieved either by using a leader/follower approach (LF) with high-yielding cows in the leader group, or by preferential forage feeding (PFF) where high-yielding cows were allowed access to grass silage for 1 -5 h daily and grazed alongside low-yielders. Control (C) cows grazed together as a single group. The high grazing stocking rates used on all three treatments resulted in good grass utilization with residual sward heights, assessed by a rising-plate sward stick, of 45, 50 and 48 mm for the LF, PFF and C treatments respectively. Animal performance data for the LF, PFF and C treatments respectively were: milk yield (kg d^?1) 15middot;1, 15middot;6 and 14middot;7 (s.e. 0middot;78); milk fat yield (g d^?1) 598, 606 and 567 (s.e. 34); milk protein yield (g d^?1) 500, 519 and 480 (s.e. 31); and live weight gain (kg d^?1) 0middot;12, 0middot;23 and 0middot;25 (s.e. 0·05). These results indicate that leader/follower grazing had little overall effect on animal performance when high grazing severity was imposed, with the improvement in animal performance of high-yielding cows in the leader group being offset by the reduced performance of the follower group. Buffer-feeding of high-yielding, rotationally-grazed cows with high-quality grass silage had little effect on animal performance and resulted in a decrease in the efficiency of grassland utilization. Silage appeared to substitute for herbage, with a reduction in herbage DM intake of 0middot;55 kg per kg silage DM consumed.     

A short-term comparison of the performance of four grassland-based systems of milk production for autumn-calving dairy cows

Eighty winter‐calving dairy cows of mixed parity were managed in four grassland‐based systems of milk production (F‐F, F‐C, C‐F and C‐C) over a full lactation (year 1) and during the winter period of the subsequent lactation (year 2). During the winter periods cows on systems F‐F and F‐C were offered silages of high feeding value, supplemented with 6·0 kg d^?1 of concentrate [crude protein (CP), 307 g kg^?1 dry matter (DM)] through an out‐of‐parlour feeding system, while cows on systems C‐F and C‐C were offered silages of medium feeding value, supplemented with c. 12·8 kg d^?1 of concentrate (CP, 204 g kg^?1 DM), in the form of a complete diet. After 25 February in year 1, cows on systems F‐F and C‐F were given access to grazing for periods of increasing duration, achieving full turnout on 17 April. Thereafter, until 21 October, these cows were offered a high daily allowance of herbage within a flexible grazing system (23·0 kg DM per cow, measured above a height of 4·0 cm), supplemented with 0·5 kg d^?1 of a ‘high magnesium’ concentrate. Cows on systems F‐C and C‐C (year 1) commenced grazing on 1 April, achieving full turnout on 17 April. Thereafter, until 20 October, these cows were managed on a restricted allowance of herbage in a rotational paddock grazing system, with concentrates (average allocation, 3·9 kg d^?1) being offered according to yield. In year 2, cows on systems F‐F and C‐F were given access to grazing for periods of increasing duration, from 11 March to 8 April, at which point the study was terminated. With systems F‐F, F‐C, C‐F and C‐C, mean feed inputs and milk outputs (per animal) during year 1 of the study were as follows: total concentrate DM intakes [881, 1272, 1729 and 2171 kg (s.e.m. 96·1)]; total silage DM intakes [1722, 1713, 1047 and 1154 kg (s.e.m. 70·7)], total grass DM intakes (3245, 2479, 3057 and 2481 kg) and total milk outputs [7541, 7527, 7459 and 7825 kg (s.e.m. 305·8)] respectively. Stocking rates associated with each of the four systems were 2·2, 2·5, 2·6 and 2·9 cows per hectare respectively. Performance of dairy cows on the systems during the winter of year 2 was similar to that recorded during year 1. The results of this study indicate that similar levels of milk output, DM intakes, tissue changes and plasma metabolite profiles can be achieved from grassland‐based systems involving very different combinations of grass silage, grazed grass and concentrate feeds.     

Effect of stocking rate on the grazing behaviour and faecal output of lactating dairy cows

Information about the grazing behaviour and the return of dung to pasture by lactating dairy cows was collected from stocking rate experiments in northern Victoria. Grazing behaviour was observed for 24-h periods in mid-summer in two years. Grazing time increased as herbage allowance decreased to about 32 kg DM cow⁻¹ d⁻¹ but as herbage allowance decreased further grazing time also decreased. A herbage allowance of 32 kg DM cow⁻¹ d⁻¹ corresponded to a stocking rate of about 5.5 cows ha⁻¹. This effect of herbage allowance on grazing time may have been confounded by herbage mass, however. Rumination time of the cows increased by 003 h for each kg increase in herbage allowance while resting time was not affected by treatment.
The effects of stocking rate on some of the characteristics of faecal output were measured for a 3-d period in mid-summer. The number of pats deposited per cow daily declined by 0.66 for each unit increase in stocking rate. The fresh weight of dung also declined as stocking rate increased by 0.16 kg per unit of stocking rate. While the values for the amounts of dung deposited on the pasture by the cows at the lower stocking rates are similar to many of those reported in the literature, this study has quantified the way in which stocking rate may influence this in one instance. Furthermore, provided that some measure of herbage intake is made when measurements of dung excretion are performed, it is suggested that estimates of in vivo digestibility can be obtained.     

The effects of offering a range of forage and concentrate supplements on milk production and dry matter intake of grazing dairy cows

An experiment was undertaken to examine the effect of supplement type on herbage intake, total dry matter (DM) intake, animal performance and nitrogen utilization with grazing dairy cows. Twenty‐four spring‐calving dairy cows were allocated to one of six treatments in a partially balanced changeover design with five periods of four weeks. The six treatments were no supplement (NONE), or supplementation with either grass silage (GS), whole‐crop wheat silage (WS), maize silage (MS), rapidly degradable concentrate (RC) or slowly degradable concentrate (SC). Cows were rotationally grazed with a mean herbage allowance of 20·5 kg DM per cow per day, measured above 4 cm. Forage supplements were offered for approximately 2 h immediately after each morning milking, with cows on NONE, RC and SC treatments returning to the grazing paddock immediately after milking. Cows on treatment MS had a significantly higher supplement DM intake than the other treatments but a significantly lower grass DM intake than the other treatments, resulting in no significant difference in total DM intake when compared with cows on treatments WS, RC and SC. Concentrate type had no significant effect on herbage intake, milk yield, milk composition or yield of milk components. The yield of milk fat and milk protein was significantly higher on treatments MS, RC and SC compared with treatments NONE, GS and WS. The results indicate that despite a relatively high substitution rate, maize silage can be a useful supplement for the grazing dairy cow.     

A comparison of two grassland-based systems for autumn-calving dairy cows of high genetic merit

A full lactation study compared the performance of autumn‐calving dairy cows of high genetic merit under two contrasting systems of milk production: high forage (HF) and high concentrate (HC). During the winter, animals on system HF were offered a silage with a high feeding value characteristics, supplemented with 5·5 kg of concentrate [crude protein content of 280 g kg^?1 dry matter (DM)] through an out‐of‐parlour feeding system. From 14 March, these animals were given increasing access to grazing, achieving 24‐h turnout on 15 April. Thereafter, until day 305 of lactation, these animals were offered a large daily herbage allowance (23·0 kg grass DM cow^?1, measured above a height of 4·0 cm), supplemented with 0·5 kg d^?1 of a ‘high‐magnesium’ concentrate. During the winter, animals on system HC were offered a silage of medium feeding value, mixed with ≈14·0 kg of concentrate d^?1 (crude protein content of 202 g kg^?1 DM) in the form of a complete diet. These animals commenced grazing on 9 April, achieving 24‐h turnout on 18 April. From 18 April until 9 June, daily herbage allowances and concentrate feed levels were 17·0 kg DM and 5·0 kg respectively; thereafter, and until day 305 of lactation, these daily allowances were reduced to 15·0 kg of herbage DM and 4·0 kg of concentrate. Animal performance during the first 305 days of lactation for systems HF and HC, respectively, were as follows: total concentrate DM inputs, 842 and 2456 kg; total silage DM intakes, 2205 and 1527 kg; total grass DM intakes, 3019 and 2044 kg; total feed DM intake, 6061 and 6032 kg and total milk output, 7854 and 8640 kg. Total milk output per cow with system HF was 786 kg lower than for system HC, despite similar total DM intakes, suggesting a greater total nutrient requirement with the former to support a given milk production. However, the study confirms that relatively similar levels of animal performance can be achieved from systems based on very different sources of nutrient supply.     

Nitrogen flows and balances in four grassland‐based systems of dairy production on a clay‐loam soil in a moist temperate climate

This study examined productivity, nitrogen (N) flows and N balances in grassland‐based systems of dairy production in Ireland. There were four stocking densities of dairy cows on grass/white clover pastures and four inputs of N as fertilizers, concentrates and biological fixation over 2 years; 2001 and 2002. Annual stocking densities were 1·75, 2·10, 2·50 and 2·50 cows ha^?1. Associated N inputs were 205, 230, 300 and 400 kg ha^?1 respectively. There were eighteen cows per system. Cows calved within a 12‐week interval in spring with a mean calving date of 28 February and lactation extended until mid‐December in each year. There were no differences in annual milk yield (6337 kg cow^?1; s.e.m. 106·1), live weight or body condition score. Pre‐grazing N concentrations in herbage increased (P < 0·001) with increasing N input, whereas there were no differences in N concentrations in silage reflecting optimum N inputs for silage production. Grazed herbage accounted for 0·64, silage 0·26 and concentrates 0·10 of annual dry matter consumed by the cows. Annual intakes of N ranged from 144 to 158 kg cow^?1 and were mostly influenced by N concentration in grazed herbage. Annual output of N in milk and liveweight change was 38 kg cow^?1 and was not different between systems. Annual N surpluses increased with increasing N inputs from 137 to 307 kg ha^?1, whereas the proportion of N inputs recovered in products declined from 0·34 to 0·24. More efficient N use was associated with lower N inputs and in particular lower N concentrations in grazed herbage.     

Production and behavioural responses of high- and low-yielding dairy cows to different periods of access to grazing or to a maize silage and soyabean meal diet fed indoors

The study examined whether high‐yielding cows grazing pasture respond differently from low‐yielding cows in milk production and feeding behaviour, to increasing the time made available for eating a maize silage and soyabean meal (TAMS) diet indoors and reducing the time available for grazing (TAG). Two experiments, each lasting 42 d, were carried out in spring (Experiment 1) and autumn (Experiment 2) using Holstein‐Friesian cows at two different levels of milk yield (MYL). Milk production and feeding behaviour were examined for TAG + TAMS systems of 19 h, TAG plus 1 h TAMS (19 + 1), and 5 h TAG plus 15 h TAMS (5 + 15). There were two levels of concentrate (0 and 6 kg d^?1), and in the spring experiment two sward heights (4–6 and 8–10 cm) were also studied. Milk yield, persistency of milk yield, liveweight change and estimated total DM intake were significantly higher on the 5 + 15 than on the 19 + 1 grazing system in Experiment 1 but not in Experiment 2. There were no significant interactions of TAG + TAMS treatment with MYL for any production or behavioural measurements except for maize silage feeding time, where high MYL cows spent a significantly greater time eating maize silage than low MYL cows on the 5 + 15 treatment but not on the 19 + 1 treatment. It can be concluded that high‐ and low‐yielding cows respond similarly in milk production and feeding behaviour to different combinations of TAG and TAMS. In autumn, estimated daily intakes of herbage were lower on both grazing treatments relative to spring, resulting from lower rates of herbage intake with no compensatory increase in grazing time. In contrast, rates of intake of maize silage were higher in autumn especially on the 19 + 1 system. These results may imply a change of preference from herbage to maize silage between spring and autumn.     

Supplementary forage for grazing sheep. 2. Effects on weaned lambs

In two experiments weaned entire ram lambs were offered either pasture alone or pasture plus ad libitum conserved forage for 7–12 weeks during the finishing period. Herbage height was maintained at 3·2 cm on both treatments by manipulation of stocking rate in the twenty-four plots (twelve per treatment) used for the experiment. In experiment 1 silage, which was of lower metabolizable energy (ME) and crude protein (CP) content than the grazed herbage, was consumed at an average of 194 g DM head⁻¹ d⁻¹, providing approximately 40% of total DM intake requirements. In experiment 2 a strawmix, containing (g k g ⁻¹ freshweight) 450 g barley straw, 300 g concentrate and 250 g molasses and again with a lower ME and CP content than the grazed herbage, was consumed at an average of 57 g DM head⁻¹ d⁻¹, providing approximately 11% of total DM intake requirements. In both experiments stocking rate was increased by 20–25% by providing forage, but lamb growth rate was not affected.     

Mixing whole-crop pea–oat silage and grass–clover silage: positive effects on intake and milk production of dairy cows

Forty‐eight high‐yielding dairy cows of the Swedish Red breed were used to examine the effects of providing pea–oat silage (P), grass–clover silage (G) and a 0·50:0·50 mixture of the silages (M) ad libitum in diets with two concentrate levels (7 or 10 kg d^?1). A 9‐week experiment, including a 2‐week pre‐experimental period in which the cows were all fed the same diet, and an in vivo apparent digestibility study were conducted comparing the six dietary treatments (M7, M10, P7, P10, G7, G10). Intake and digestibility of the diets and milk production and live weight of the cows were measured. The G silage [11·3 MJ ME kg^?1 dry matter (DM)] was first‐cut grass herbage wilted for 24 h prior to addition of an additive, containing formic acid, propionic acid and ammonia, at 4 L t^?1 fresh matter (FM). The P forage was cut when the peas were at pod fill and ensiled directly with 6 L t^?1 FM of the same additive. The main hypothesis tested, that cows fed the M silage would produce more milk than the cows fed either the P or the G silages, was confirmed. The cows fed the M7 dietary treatment had similar milk yield and milk composition to cows offered the M10, G10 and P10 dietary treatments, and cows offered the G7 and P7 dietary treatments had lower milk and milk protein yields. This suggested that a mixed ration of pea–oat bi‐crop and grass–clover silage has a concentrate‐sparing effect, and that the use of pea–oat bi‐crop and grass–clover silage as a mixed ration for high‐yielding dairy cows can be recommended.     

Supplementary forage for grazing sheep. 1. Effects on lactating ewes and lambs

In two experiments, ewes in weeks 1–20 of lactation received either pasture only or pasture plus ad libitum conserved forage. Herbage height was maintained at 3·3–3·4 cm on both treatments by manipulation of stocking rate in the 24 plots (twelve per treatment) used for the experiment with additional ewes and lambs. In experiment 1, silage, which was of lower metabolizable energy (ME) and crude protein (CP) contents than the grazed herbage, was consumed at an average of 375 g dry matter (DM) ewe⁻¹ d⁻¹. In experiment 2 a strawmix, containing (g kg ⁻¹ freshweight) 480 g barley straw, 300 g concentrate and 220 g molasses, again with a lower ME and CP content than the grazed herbage, was consumed at an average of 165 g DM ewe ⁻¹ d ⁻¹. In both experiments ewes not receiving forage lost weight whereas those with forage gained weight and tended to have increased body condition scores. Offering silage or strawmix did not affect lamb liveweight gain or stocking rate.     

Milk-production potential of different sward types in a temperate southern Australian environment

The milk-production potential of different sward types was measured in each of the four seasons of the year in a replicated experiment in south-west Victoria, Australia. Dairy cows were offered ad libitum allowances of a 'short-term winter' sward, based on Italian ryegrass (treatment STW), a 'long-term winter' sward, based on a winter-active tall fescue (treatment LTW), a 'long-term summer' sward, based on a summer-active tall fescue (treatment LTS) and a Control sward (perennial ryegrass) in four seasons (days in milk in parentheses): spring (November dairy cows, 124), summer (February, 227), autumn (May, 234) and winter (August, sixty-four). A 'short-term summer' sward, based on chicory and white clover (treatment STS), was also included in summer. There was a significant season × treatment interaction caused by a more gradual decline in milk yield from peak for cows grazing treatment LTS compared to the Control treatment in the transition period from spring to summer. In summer, cows grazing treatment STS produced more milk (1·41 kg fat plus protein per cow d⁻¹) than cows grazing all other treatments (0·92 kg per cow d⁻¹) because of the superior nutritive value of herbage of pre-grazing pasture and higher apparent dry-matter intakes. Swards based on alternative species to perennial ryegrass are capable of supporting milk production that is at least comparable over an annual cycle.     

The effect of initial spring grazing date and subsequent stocking rate on the grazing management, grass dry matter intake and milk production of dairy cows in summer

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of an early (February; F) or delayed (April; A) primary spring grazing date and two stocking rates, high (H) and medium (M), on the grazing management, dry matter (DM) intake of grass herbage and milk production of spring‐calving dairy cows grazing a perennial ryegrass sward in the subsequent summer. Sixty‐four Holstein‐Friesian dairy cows (mean of 58 d in milk) were assigned to one of four grazing treatments (n = 16) which were imposed from 12 April to 3 July 2004. Cows on the early spring‐grazing treatment were grazed at 5·5 cows ha^?1 (treatment FH) and 4·5 cows ha^?1 (treatment FM) while cows on the late‐grazing treatment were grazed at 6·4 cows ha^?1 (treatment AH) and 5·5 cows ha^?1 (treatment AM). The organic matter digestibility and crude protein concentration of the grass herbage were higher on the early‐grazing treatment than on the late‐grazing treatment. The cows on the FM treatment had significantly (P < 0·001) higher milk (24·5 kg), solids‐corrected milk (22·5 kg), fat (P < 0·01, 918 g) and protein (831 g) yields than the other three treatments. Cows on the FM treatment had a higher (P < 0·001) DM intake of grass herbage by 2·3 kg DM per cow per day than cows on the AH treatment, which had a DM intake significantly lower than all other treatments (15·2 kg DM per cow per day). The results of the present study showed that grazing in early spring has a positive effect on herbage quality in subsequent grazing rotations. The study also concluded that early spring‐grazed swards stocked at a medium stocking rate (4·5 cows ha^?1; FM) resulted in the highest DM intake of grass herbage and milk production.