Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T23:49:24.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maize silage as an energy supplement in organic dairy cow rations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2008

Margit Velik ,
Roswitha Baumung  and
Wilhelm F. Knaus
Margit Velik*
Affiliation:
Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Gregor Mendel Straβe 33, 1180 Wien, Austria.
Roswitha Baumung
Affiliation:
Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Gregor Mendel Straβe 33, 1180 Wien, Austria.
Wilhelm F. Knaus
Affiliation:
Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Livestock Sciences, BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Gregor Mendel Straβe 33, 1180 Wien, Austria.
*
*Corresponding author: margit.velik@boku.ac.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The literature implicates strongly that including energy supplements in dairy rations based on protein-rich forages increases performance and feed efficiency due to an improved and more balanced ruminal energy and protein supply. Therefore, both conventional and organic dairy farms primarily supplement roughages with concentrates, containing high proportions of cereal grains. However, considering the main principles of sustainable agricultural systems and nutrient cycles, the question of alternatives is raised. Therefore, the present study was conducted to compare grain and maize silage as energy sources in organic dairy cow rations. Two grass–clover silage-based diets, offered on an ad libitum basis, were supplemented either with 1 kg grain mixture plus 0.5 kg hay (treatment group G) or 2.1 kg maize silage (treatment group M) on a dry matter (DM) basis. The trial was carried out as a change-over design and lasted for 15 weeks. Intake of concentrates, DM and utilizable crude protein in the duodenum (uCP) were similar in both treatments. However, significant differences between treatments G and M were found for grass–clover silage dry matter intake (DMI) (13.4 versus 12.9 kg), forage DMI (14.6 versus 15.7 kg), crude protein (CP) intake (2885 versus 2801 g), ruminal nitrogen balance (RNB) (40 versus 29 g) and intake of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) (7630 versus 7900 g). Milk yield was not affected by treatment, but in treatment M, milk fat content was at 42.4 g kg−1, significantly higher, and milk urea concentration at 19.7 mg 100 ml−1, significantly lower, as compared with treatment G. Efficiency of N use (N in milk in % of N intake) tended to be improved in treatment M. Balances of energy and uCP (intake as a percentage of requirements) were unaffected by treatment.

Keywords

dairy coworganic farmingenergy supplementmaize silageproteinmilk composition
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , June 2008 , pp. 155 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

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

1 Nocek, J.E. and Russell, J.B. 1988. Protein and energy as an integrated system. Relationship of ruminal protein and carbohydrate availability to microbial synthesis and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 71:2070–2107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Givens, D.I. and Rulphin, H. 2004. Utilization by ruminants of nitrogen compounds in silage-based diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 114:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Eriksson, T., Murphy, M., Ciszuk, P., and Burstedt, E. 2004. Nitrogen balance, microbial protein production, and milk production in dairy cows fed fodder beets and potatoes, or barley. Journal of Dairy Science 87:1057–1070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4 Mogensen, L. and Kristensen, T. 2003. Concentrate mixture, grass pellets, fodder beets, or barley as supplements to silage ad libitum for high-yielding dairy cows on organic farms. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 53:186–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Phipps, R.H. 2002. Complementary forages in milk production. In Garnsworthy, P.C. and Wiseman, J. (eds). Recent Developments in Ruminant Nutrition. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK. p. 121–138.Google Scholar
6 Huhtanen, P., Jaakkola, S., and Saarisalo, E. 1995. The effects of concentrate energy source on the milk production of dairy cows given a grass silage-based diet. Animal Science 60:31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Moran, J.B. and Croke, D.E. 1993. Maize silage for the pasture-fed dairy cow. 5. A comparison with wheat while grazing low quality perennial pastures in the summer. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 33:541–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Sniffen, C.J., O'Connor, J.D., Soest, P.J., Fox, D.G., and Russell, J.B. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. 2. Carbohydrate and protein availability. Journal of Animal Science 70:3562–3577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 ALVA. 1983. Österreichisches Methodenbuch für die Untersuchung von Futtermitteln, Futterzusatzstoffen und Schadstoffen. ALVA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
10 VDLUFA. 1976. Methodenbuch Band III–Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. VDLUFA, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
11 GfE. 2001. Empfehlungen zur Energie- und Nährstoffversorgung der Milchkühe und Aufzuchtrinder. DLG, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
12 SAS. 1999. Software, Release 8.0. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
13 Kaps, M. and Lamberson, W. 2004. Biostatistics for Animal Science. CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire, UK, and Cambridge, MA. p. 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Mitani, T., Takahashi, M., Ueda, K., Nakatsuji, H., Kondo, S., and Okubo, M. 2005. Effects of supplementary corn silage on the feed intake and milk production of time-restricted grazing dairy cows. Animal Science Journal 76:331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 Holden, L.A., Muller, L.D., Lykos, T., and Cassidy, T.W. 1995. Effect of corn silage supplementation on intake and milk production in cows grazing grass pasture. Journal of Dairy Science 78:154–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16 Stockdale, C.R. 1994. Persian clover and maize silage. I. Silage as a supplement for lactating dairy cows offered herbage of different quality. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 45:1751–1765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17 Castillo, A.R., Kebreab, E., Beever, D.E., Barbi, J.H., Sutton, J.D., Kirby, H.C., and France, J. 2001. The effect of energy supplementation on nitrogen utilization in lactating dairy cows fed grass silage diets. Journal of Animal Science 79:240–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18 Visser, H.D.E. 1996. Characterisation of carbohydrates in concentrates for dairy cows. In Garnsworthy, P.C. and Cole, D.J.A. (eds) Recent Developments in Ruminant Nutrition. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK. p. 155–174.Google Scholar
19 Visser, H.D.E. and Hindle, V.A. 1990. Dried beet pulp, pressed beet pulp and maize silage as substitutes for concentrates in dairy cow rations. 1. Feeding value, feed intake, milk production and milk composition. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 38:77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Leaver, J.D. 2002. Supplementation of maize silage and wholecrop cereals. In Garnsworthy, P.C. and Wiseman, J. (eds) Recent Developments in Ruminant Nutrition. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK. p. 139–161.Google Scholar
21 Gruber, L., Stögmuller, G., Taferner, K., Haberl, L., Maierhofer, G., Steiner, B., Steinwidder, A., Schauer, A., and Knaus, W. 2005. Protein and carbohydrate fractions of the Cornell system as well as ruminal dry matter degradation in situ of energy and protein concentrates. Übersichten zur Tierernährung 33:129–143.Google Scholar
22 Taferner, K.C. 2006. Einfluss von Vegetationsstadium, Sorte, Konservierung und Standort von Silomais auf den Gehalt an Protein und Kohlenhydraten nach dem Cornell-System und auf den in-situ Abbau der Trockenmasse. Master's thesis, BOKU—University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
23 Bargo, F., Muller, L.D., Kolver, E.S., and Delahoy, J.E. 2003. Production and digestion of supplemented dairy cows on pasture. Journal of Dairy Science 86:1–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24 Faverdin, P., Dulphy, J.P., Coulon, J.B., Verite, R., Garel, J.P., Rouel, J., and Marquis, B. 1991. Substitution of roughage by concentrates for dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 27:137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25 Visser, H.D.E., Van der Togt, P.L., and Tamminga, S. 1990. Structural and non-structural carbohydrates in concentrate supplements of silage-based dairy cow rations. 1. Feed intake and milk production. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 38:487–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Steinwidder, A. and Wurm, K. 1998. Milchinhaltsstoffe zur Beurteilung der Fütterung nützen. Der Fortschrittliche Landwirt 76(20):25–35.Google Scholar
27 Hristov, A.N. and Ropp, J.K. 2003. Effect of dietary carbohydrate composition and availability on utilization of ruminant ammonia nitrogen for milk protein synthesis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 86:2416–2427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28 Huhtanen, P., Nousiainen, J., and Khalili, H. 2003. Efficiency of N utilization in milk production. In Niemeläinen, O. and Topi-Hulmi, M. (eds) Proceedings of the NJF's 22nd Congress: Nordic Agriculture in Global Perspective, Turku, Finland. p. 1–5.Google Scholar
29 Castillo, A.R., Kebreab, E., Beever, D.E., and France, J. 2000. A review of efficiency of nitrogen utilization in lactating dairy cows and its relationship with environmental pollution. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 9:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Cohen, D.C., Stockdale, C.R., and Doyle, P.T. 2006. Feeding an energy supplement with white clover silage improves rumen fermentation, metabolisable protein utilization, and milk production in dairy cows. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 57:367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31 Tamminga, S. 1996. A review on environmental impacts of nutritional strategies in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 74:3112–3124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed