Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T15:56:26.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A comparison of hay and silage for milk production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

J. C. Murdoch
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
J. A. F. Rook
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading

Summary

In a series of 3 trials there was little or no difference in milk yield when cows were fed the same quantity of dry matter in the form of well-preserved hay or silage from the same sward.

A higher milk yield was obtained from silage made from grass at an early stage of maturity than from silage or hay made from the same crop 5 weeks later.

In 2 trials when hay or silage was fed ad lib. the dry-matter intakes of the cows were higher with hay than with silage, and there was a consequent increase in milk yield and S.N.F. content in favour of hay.

Some of the results indicated that with certain silages a depression in the S.N.F. content of the milk, due to a decrease in the casein content, could occur, although this was not associated with an inadequate energy intake.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1963

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

Brown, S. M. (1960). Res. exp. Rec. Minist. Agric. N. Ire. 10, 9.Google Scholar
Brown, S. M. (1962). Agric. Ire. 37, 132.Google Scholar
Cooper, M. McG. (1954). J. Fmrs' CL., Lond., no. 3.Google Scholar
Harwood, R. E. & Wells, J. G. (1936). Guart. Bull. Mich, agric. Exp. Sta. 19, 100.Google Scholar
Huffman, C. F., Duncan, C. W., Dexter, S. T. & Chance, C. M. (1954). Guart. Bull. Mich, agric. Exp. Sta. 36, 391.Google Scholar
Larsen, J. B. (1960). Proc. 8th Int. Grassl. Congr. p. 697.Google Scholar
Moore, L. A., Thomas, J. W. & Sykes, J. F. (1960). Proc. 8th Int. Grassl. Congr. p. 701.Google Scholar
Murdoch, J. C. (1962). J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 17, 133.Google Scholar
Pratt, A. D. & Holdaway, C. W. (1943). Bull. Va. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 353.Google Scholar
Presthegge, K. (1959). Norg. Landbrukshogsk. Beretn. ForForsok. no. 93.Google Scholar
Shepherd, J. B., Gordon, C. H. & Campbell, L. F. (1953). U.S. Dep. Agric. B.D.I. Inf. no. 149.Google Scholar
Shepherd, J. B., Wiseman, H. G., Ely, R. E., Melin, C. G., Sweetman, W. J., Gordon, C. H., Schoenleber, K. G., Campbell, L. E., Roane, G. D. & Hosterman, W. H. (1954). Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. no. 1079.Google Scholar
Sheppebson, G. (1960). Proc. 8th Int. Grassl. Congr. p. 704.Google Scholar
Trimberger, G. W., Kennedy, W. K., Turk, K. L., Loosli, J. K., Reid, J. T. & Slack, S. T. (1955). Bull. Cornell Univ. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 910.Google Scholar
Turk, K. L., Morrison, S. H., Norton, C. L. & Blaser, R. E. (1951). Bull. Cornell Univ. agric. Exp. Sta. no. 874.Google Scholar
Watson, S. J. (1948). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 18, 1Google Scholar