Translator Disclaimer
5 August 2016 Swath-grazing oat or grazing stockpiled perennial grass compared with a traditional winter feeding method for beef cows in central Alberta
Vern S. Baron, Duane McCartney, A. Campbell Dick, Adele J. Ohama, John A. Basarab, Raquel R. Doce
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Swath-grazed oat (Avena sativa L.) and stockpiled meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rhem) were compared with (Control) a pen-fed straw-based total mixed ration (TMR) for dry, pregnant beef cows (670 ± 88 kg BW) using carrying capacity, nutritive value, cow performance, daily feeding, yardage, and total daily costs. Carrying capacity ranked (P < 0.05): oat (637 cow-d ha-1) > Control (454 cow-d ha-1) > stockpiled grass (189 cow-d ha-1). In vitro true digestibility (IVTD) ranked (P < 0.05): stockpiled forage (681 g kg-1) > oat (588 g kg-1) > Control (530 g kg-1). Average cow body condition score (BCS) off pasture was (P < 0.05): stockpiled grass (3.4) > oat (3.0), while the control was intermediate (3.3). The daily feed cost ranked: stockpiled grass ($0.38 cow-d-1) < swathed oat ($0.48 cow-d-1) < Control ($1.05 cow-d-1). Yardage (non-feed costs) ranked: oat ($0.41 cow-d-1) < stockpiled ($0.50 cow-d-1) < Control ($0.91 cow-d-1). Total daily cost was similar for oat ($1.07 cow-d-1) and stockpiled grass ($1.04 cow-d-1), both less (P < 0.05) than the control ($2.25 cow-d-1). The cost of both grazing treatments was comparable to other research, but the stockpiled treatment cost was limited by the low yield of forage regrowth.

© Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada 2016. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Vern S. Baron, Duane McCartney, A. Campbell Dick, Adele J. Ohama, John A. Basarab, and Raquel R. Doce "Swath-grazing oat or grazing stockpiled perennial grass compared with a traditional winter feeding method for beef cows in central Alberta," Canadian Journal of Plant Science 96(4), 689-700, (5 August 2016). https://doi.org/10.1139/cjps-2015-0330
Received: 3 November 2015; Accepted: 1 January 2016; Published: 5 August 2016
JOURNAL ARTICLE
12 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top