放牧奶牛采食量、能量消耗和甲烷排放对两种牧草的影响

C. Loza, J. Gere, M. S. Orcasberro, A. Casal, M. Carriquiry, P. Juliarena, E. Ramírez-Bribiesca, L. Astigarraga
{"title":"放牧奶牛采食量、能量消耗和甲烷排放对两种牧草的影响","authors":"C. Loza, J. Gere, M. S. Orcasberro, A. Casal, M. Carriquiry, P. Juliarena, E. Ramírez-Bribiesca, L. Astigarraga","doi":"10.4236/ojas.2021.113031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A grazing experiment was undertaken to assess the \neffects of two levels of herbage mass (HM) on herbage DM intake (DMI), fat and \nprotein corrected milk yield (FPCM), grazing behaviour, energy expenditure \n(HP), and methane emissions (CH4) of grazing dairy cows \nin spring. Treatments were a low HM (1447 kg DM/ha; LHM) or a high HM (1859 kg \nDM/ha; HHM). Pasture was composed mainly of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata) and lucerne (Medicago \nsativa), offered \nat a daily herbage allowance of 30 kg DM/cow, above 5 cm. Eight multiparous \nHolstein cows were used in a 2 × 2 Latin Square design in \ntwo 10-day periods. Despite the differences in pre-grazing HM between \ntreatments, OM digestibility was not different (P = 0.28). Herbage mass did not \naffect DMI or FPCM. Grazing time was not different between treatments, but cows \nhad a greater bite rate when grazing on LHM swards. However, HP did not differ \nbetween treatments. Daily methane emission (per cow), methane emission \nintensity (per kg FPCM) and methane yield (as percentage of gross energy \nintake) were not different. The lack of effect of the amount of pre-grazing HM \non energy intake, confirms that the difference between HM treatments was beyond the limits that impose \nextra energy expenditure during grazing.","PeriodicalId":62784,"journal":{"name":"动物科学期刊(英文)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intake, Energy Expenditure and Methane Emissions of Grazing Dairy Cows at Two Pre-Grazing Herbage Masses\",\"authors\":\"C. Loza, J. Gere, M. S. Orcasberro, A. Casal, M. Carriquiry, P. Juliarena, E. Ramírez-Bribiesca, L. Astigarraga\",\"doi\":\"10.4236/ojas.2021.113031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A grazing experiment was undertaken to assess the \\neffects of two levels of herbage mass (HM) on herbage DM intake (DMI), fat and \\nprotein corrected milk yield (FPCM), grazing behaviour, energy expenditure \\n(HP), and methane emissions (CH4) of grazing dairy cows \\nin spring. Treatments were a low HM (1447 kg DM/ha; LHM) or a high HM (1859 kg \\nDM/ha; HHM). Pasture was composed mainly of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata) and lucerne (Medicago \\nsativa), offered \\nat a daily herbage allowance of 30 kg DM/cow, above 5 cm. Eight multiparous \\nHolstein cows were used in a 2 × 2 Latin Square design in \\ntwo 10-day periods. Despite the differences in pre-grazing HM between \\ntreatments, OM digestibility was not different (P = 0.28). Herbage mass did not \\naffect DMI or FPCM. Grazing time was not different between treatments, but cows \\nhad a greater bite rate when grazing on LHM swards. However, HP did not differ \\nbetween treatments. Daily methane emission (per cow), methane emission \\nintensity (per kg FPCM) and methane yield (as percentage of gross energy \\nintake) were not different. The lack of effect of the amount of pre-grazing HM \\non energy intake, confirms that the difference between HM treatments was beyond the limits that impose \\nextra energy expenditure during grazing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":62784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"动物科学期刊(英文)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"动物科学期刊(英文)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1091\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojas.2021.113031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"动物科学期刊(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1091","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojas.2021.113031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

通过放牧试验,研究了两个水平的牧草质量(HM)对春季放牧奶牛牧草DM摄入量(DMI)、脂肪和蛋白质校正产奶量(FPCM)、放牧行为、能量消耗(HP)和甲烷排放(CH4)的影响。处理为低HM(1447 kg DM/公顷;LHM)或高HM(1859 kg DM/ha;HHM)。牧场主要由鸡爪(Dactylis glomerata)和苜蓿(Medicago sativa。尽管不同处理的放牧前HM存在差异,但OM的消化率没有差异(P=0.28)。牧草质量不影响DMI或FPCM。不同处理的放牧时间没有差异,但奶牛在LHM草地上放牧时有更高的咬合力。然而,HP在不同治疗之间没有差异。甲烷日排放量(每头牛)、甲烷排放强度(每公斤FPCM)和甲烷产量(占总能量摄入的百分比)没有差异。放牧前HM的量对能量摄入没有影响,这证实了HM处理之间的差异超出了放牧期间额外能量消耗的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Intake, Energy Expenditure and Methane Emissions of Grazing Dairy Cows at Two Pre-Grazing Herbage Masses
A grazing experiment was undertaken to assess the effects of two levels of herbage mass (HM) on herbage DM intake (DMI), fat and protein corrected milk yield (FPCM), grazing behaviour, energy expenditure (HP), and methane emissions (CH4) of grazing dairy cows in spring. Treatments were a low HM (1447 kg DM/ha; LHM) or a high HM (1859 kg DM/ha; HHM). Pasture was composed mainly of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata) and lucerne (Medicago sativa), offered at a daily herbage allowance of 30 kg DM/cow, above 5 cm. Eight multiparous Holstein cows were used in a 2 × 2 Latin Square design in two 10-day periods. Despite the differences in pre-grazing HM between treatments, OM digestibility was not different (P = 0.28). Herbage mass did not affect DMI or FPCM. Grazing time was not different between treatments, but cows had a greater bite rate when grazing on LHM swards. However, HP did not differ between treatments. Daily methane emission (per cow), methane emission intensity (per kg FPCM) and methane yield (as percentage of gross energy intake) were not different. The lack of effect of the amount of pre-grazing HM on energy intake, confirms that the difference between HM treatments was beyond the limits that impose extra energy expenditure during grazing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
372
期刊最新文献
Dairy Farming Conditions and Utilization Levels of Liquid Brewers’ Yeast in Kenya The Yellow Spot Pattern of Salamander (Salamandra infraimmaculata) in Various Habitats at the Southern Border of Its Distribution in Israel Study on Breeding Practices and Reproductive Performance of Black-Head Somali Sheep under Traditional Management System: The Case of Awbarre District, Eastern Ethiopia Water Quality and Growth Performance of Nile Tilapia Fries Fed on Insect-Based Feeds Short-Term Stress Response of Juvenile Rainbow Trout Subjected to Two Different Rearing Densities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1