Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T18:58:50.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of unwilted and wilted grass silage on the intake and performance of pregnant ewes at varying levels of concentrate feeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. C. Wilkinson  and
D. M. B. Chestnutt
S. C. Wilkinson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DP
D. M. B. Chestnutt
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DP
Get access

Abstract

In three separate experiments a total of 144 Greyface ewes was offered direct-cut or wilted silage from week 4 to 5 of pregnancy until lambing with varying levels of concentrate during the last 6 weeks of pregnancy. Wilting resulted in a proportional increase in the intake of silage dry matter of 0·08 on average but, because digestibility of the wilted silages was lower, digestible energy intake of both silages was similar. Average change in ewe live weight from housing until after lambing was not affected by silage type and there was a small, non-significant increase in lamb birth weight on direct-cut silage. There was no evidence of any reduction in silage intake as total concentrate intake over the last 6 weeks of pregnancy increased to about 18 kg, and limited evidence of a reduction at higher levels with some indication of a greater reduction on direct-cut than on wilted silage. Compared with no-concentrate feeding the highest level increased ewe live weight by 252 g/kg concentrate and there was a non-significant effect on lamb birth weight of 13 g/kg concentrate.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , February 1988 , pp. 63 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Apolant, S. M. 1982. A study of the value of grass silage based diets for sheep with particular reference to the breeding ewes. Ph.D. Thesis, The Queen's University, Belfast.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E. and Watson, J. N. 1984. Silage and milk production: a comparison between unwilted and wilted grass silages. Grass and Forage Science 39: 187–193.Google Scholar
Flynn, A. V. and Wilson, R. K. 1978. The relative importance of digestibility, ensiling, fermentation and dry matter content in limiting the utilization of silage by beef cattle. 7th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation, Ghent, pp. 6.2–6.15.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1981. The effect of wilting of herbage on silage composition and its feeding value for milk production. Animal Production 32: 171–178.Google Scholar
Grant, A. D. 1978. Quality of silage — a survey, 1975 and 1976. Research and Development Publication, West of Scotland Agricultural College, No. 2.Google Scholar
Jackson, N. and Forbes, T. J. 1970. The voluntary intake by cattle of four silages differing in dry matter content. Animal Production 12: 591–599.Google Scholar
McCarrick, R. B. 1966. Effect of method of grass conservation and herbage maturity on performance and body composition of beef cattle. Proceedings of the 10th International Grassland Conference, Helsinki, pp. 575–580.Google Scholar
Marsh, R. 1979. The effect of wilting on fermentation in the silo and on the nutritive value of silage. Grass and Forage Science 34: 1–9.Google Scholar
Murphy, J. J. and Gleeson, P. A. 1984. Effect of wilting and formic acid treatment on silage preservation and performance of autumn-calving cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 105–116.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. and Robinson, J. J. 1981. The application of modern concepts of ruminant protein nutrition to sheep-production systems. Livestock Production Science 8: 339–350.Google Scholar
Porter, M. G., Patterson, D. C., Steen, R. W. J. and Gordon, F. J. 1984. Determination of dry matter and gross energy of grass silage. Proceedings of the 7th Silage Conference, Belfast (ed. Gordon, F. J. and Unsworth, E. F.). pp. 89–90.Google Scholar
Russel, A. J. F., Doney, J. M. and Gunn, R. G. 1969. Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72: 451–454.Google Scholar
Sheehan, W. and Lawlok, M. J. 1972. Energy supplementation of silage for ewes in late pregnancy. Animal Production 15: 29–37.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1984. A comparison of unwilted and wilted grass silages offered to beef cattle without and with monensin sodium. Grass and Forage Science 39: 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trhacher, T. T. and Orr, R. J. 1985. Silage intakes and replacement rate by ewes offered ad libitum silage and rations of concentrates in late pregnancy. Animal Production 40: 522–523 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Wilkinson, S. C. 1986. The effect of silage dry matter and pattern of feeding during pregnancy on the performance of housed breeding ewes. Ph.D. Thesis, The Queen's University, Belfast.Google Scholar