Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-02T18:45:54.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the level and concentration of liquid milk substitutes fed to early weaned calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. W. A. Burt  and
E. O. Bell
A. W. A. Burt
Affiliation:
Unilever Research Laboratory, Colworth House, Sharnbrook, Bedford
E. O. Bell
Affiliation:
Unilever Research Laboratory, Colworth House, Sharnbrook, Bedford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The effects of feeding 6 or 9 oz. of milk substitute in 2 or 3 pints of water per feed were studied in Ayrshire calves weaned at 5 weeks, and of feeding 6 or 9 oz. in 3 pints with calves weaned at 3 weeks.

2. In both experiments higher milk substitute intakes significantly improved growth rate without detriment to the consumption of dry food.

3. Restriction of water to 2 pints per feed tended to reduce live-weight gain and concentrate consumption and increased free water intake, although not sufficiently to compensate for the restriction.

4. In calves weaned at 3 weeks the higher amount of milk substitute produced an effect which was still present at 88 days and this indicated that underfeeding in very early life may be permanently detrimental.

5. Regressions of live-weight gain upon concentrate and free water consumption and the progressive increase in live-weight gain and concentrate intake before weaning indicate the importance of this intake in providing energy for the calf before weaning and the beneficial effects of individual vigour.

6. The marked effects of the various systems of use of similar foods upon the distribution of liveweight gain during the first month and upon cost are described and discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , February 1962 , pp. 131 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

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

Castle, M. E. & Watson, J. N. (1959). Anim. Prod. 1, 31.Google Scholar
Hansson, A. (1956). Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod. p. 51.Google Scholar
Preston, T. R. (1957 a). N.A.A.S. Quart. Rev. No. 35, 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, T. R. (1957 b). Agriculture, Lond., 64, 429.Google Scholar
Sander, E. G., Warner, R. G., Harrison, H. N. & Loosli, J. K. (1959). J. Dairy Sci. 42, 1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, R. G., Flatt, W. P. & Loosli, J. K. (1956). J. Agric. Fd Chem. 4, 788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winchester, C. F. & Howe, P. E. (1955). Bull. U.S. Dept. Agric. Tech. 1108.Google Scholar
Winchester, C. F., Hiner, R. L. & Scarborough, V. C. (1957). J. Anim. Sci. 16, 426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar