Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:14:41.646Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of ewe body condition at lambing on the performance of ewes and their lambs at pasture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. J. Gibb  and
T. T. Treache
M. J. Gibb
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berks. SL6 5LR
T. T. Treache
Affiliation:
The Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berks. SL6 5LR
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Ewes in body condition scores of 2·4 (thin) or 3·2 (fat) on a 5-point scale and suckling twin lambs were grazed at two stocking rates for the first 16 weeks of lactation. Paddocks were grazed for periods of 2 weeks at densities of 80 and 160 ewes/ha in weeks 1–8 and then 70 and 140 ewes/ha in weeks 9/16 of lactation.

Intakes of herbage by ewes were not significantly affected by body condition. Estimation of milk yield by weekly measurement of secretion rates over 4 h failed to demonstrate significant differences due to body condition except in weeks 9, 11 and 12, although there was a tendency throughout for fat ewes to produce more milk. However, the daily growth rates of the lambs during the first 8 weeks and the overall live-weight gains were significantly higher for lambs suckled by fat ewes than for those suckled by thin ewes. Intake of herbage by lambs was not affected by the body condition of the ewes.

Herbage intakes, milk yields and lamb growth rates were all significantly higher at the low stocking density than at the high stocking density.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 95 , Issue 3 , December 1980 , pp. 631 - 640
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Allden, W. G. & Scott Young, R. (1964). The summer nutrition of weaner sheep: herbage intake following periods of different nutrition. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 15, 989–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, G. W. & Birrell, H. A. (1977). Food intake and grazing behaviour of sheep varying in body condition. Animal Production 24, 343–353.Google Scholar
Doney, J. M., Peart, J. N., Smith, W. F. & Louda, F. (1979). A consideration of the techniques for estimation of milk yield by suckled sheep and a comparison of estimates obtained by two methods in relation to the effect of breed, level of production and stage of lactation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge, 92 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, J. R., Davidson, J. L. & Freer, M. (1974). Effect of body condition on the intake of food by mature sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 813–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibb, M. J. & Treacher, T. T. (1978). The effect of herbage allowance on herbage intake and performance of ewes and their twin lambs grazing perennial ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 90, 139–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadjipieris, G. & Holmes, W. (1966). Studies on feed intake and feed utilization by sheep. I. The voluntary feed intake of dry, pregnant and lactating ewes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 66 217–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffries, B. C. (1961). Body condition scoring and its use in management. Tasmanian Journal of Agriculture 32, 19–21.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. (1968). The feed intake of grazing sheep differing in age, breed, previous nutrition and live weight. Journal of Agricultural Sceince, Cambridge 71, 167–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCance, I. (1959). The determination of milk yield in the Merino ewe. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 10, 839–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission (1973). Feeding the ewe. Meat and Livestock Commission Sheep Improvement Technical Report No. 2, p. 12.Google Scholar
Morgan, P. J. K., Pienaar, J. P. & Clark, R. A. (1976). Animal-based methods of determining herbage intake and quality under grazing conditions. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of South Africa 11, 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peart, J. N. (1968). Some effects of live weight and body condition on the milk production of Blackface ewes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 70, 331–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peart, J. N. (1970). The influence of live weight and body condition on the subsequent milk production of Blackface ewes following a period of undernourishment in early lactation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 75, 459–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penning, P. D. & Gibb, M. J. (1977). The use of corticosteroid to synchronize parturition in sheep. Veterinary Record 100, 491–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penning, P. D. & Gibb, M. J. (1979). The effect of milk intake on the intake of cut and grazed herbage by lambs. Animal Production 29, 53–67.Google Scholar
Rowell, J. G. & Walters, D. E. (1976). Analysing data with repeated observations on each experimental unit. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 87, 423–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russel, A. F. J., Doney, J. M. & Gunn, R. G. (1968). Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72, 451–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilley, J. M. & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar