1
|
Douglas ML, Auldist MJ, Wright MM, Marett LC, Russo VM, Hannah MC, Garcia SC, Wales WJ. Using estimated nutrient intake from pasture to formulate supplementary concentrate mixes for grazing dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2021; 104:4350-4361. [PMID: 33516549 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2020-19383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2020] [Accepted: 11/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
In pasture-based dairy systems, feeding a complex concentrate mix in the parlor during milking that contains cereal grains and protein supplements has been shown to have milk production advantages over feeding straight cereal grain. This experiment had the aim of testing whether further milk production advantages could be elicited by adjusting the composition of the concentrate mix in an attempt to match the expected nutrient intake from pasture during late spring. The experiment used 96 lactating dairy cows, grazing perennial ryegrass pasture offered at a target allowance of 30 kg of dry matter/cow per day (to ground level) during late spring (mid October to November) in southeastern Australia. Cows were allocated into 3 replicates of 4 treatment groups, with 24 cows in each treatment. Each treatment group was offered 1 of 4 dietary treatments in the parlor at milking: control consisting of crushed wheat and barley grains; formulated grain mix (FGM) consisting of crushed wheat, barley, and corn grains and canola meal; designer grain mix 1 (DGM1) consisting of the same ingredients as the FGM grain mix but formulated using the CPM Dairy nutrition model to take into account the expected nutrient intake from pasture; and designer grain mix 2 (DGM2) consisting of the same ingredients as DGM1 but with canola meal replaced by urea and a fat supplement (Megalac, Volac Wilmar, Gresik, Indonesia). Concentrate mixes were offered at 8.0 kg of dry matter/cow per day, except for DGM2 cows, which were offered 7.5 kg of dry matter/cow per day. The experiment ran for a total of 28 d; after a 14-d adaptation period, nutrient intake, milk production, and body weight were measured over a 14-d measurement period. Milk yield (kg) of cows fed the FGM diet was greater than that of the control cows but was not different from that of the DGM1 and DGM2 cows. However, milk fat and protein yields (kg) were greater for cows fed the FGM diet than for all other diets. There was no difference in estimated daily pasture or total dry matter intakes between the 4 treatment groups, despite cows fed the DGM2 treatment consuming less of the concentrate mix (average 6.5 kg of dry matter/cow per day when offered 7.5 kg of dry matter/cow per day). This research has demonstrated the potential for using a nutrition model to take into account the expected nutrient intake from pasture to formulate a concentrate mix (DGM1) to achieve similar milk yields, but also highlighted the need for near real-time analyses of the pasture to be grazed so as to also capture benefits in terms of milk fat and protein yield.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M L Douglas
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia; Dairy Science Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia.
| | - M J Auldist
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia; Centre for Agricultural Innovation, School of Agriculture and Food, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| | - M M Wright
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia
| | - L C Marett
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia; Centre for Agricultural Innovation, School of Agriculture and Food, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| | - V M Russo
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia; Centre for Agricultural Innovation, School of Agriculture and Food, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| | - M C Hannah
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia
| | - S C Garcia
- Dairy Science Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia
| | - W J Wales
- Agriculture Victoria Research, Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions, Ellinbank, Victoria 3821, Australia; Centre for Agricultural Innovation, School of Agriculture and Food, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Barber DG, Auldist MJ, Anstis AR, Ho CKM. Defining the key attributes of resilience in mixed ration dairy systems. ANIMAL PRODUCTION SCIENCE 2020. [DOI: 10.1071/an18590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Dairy feeding systems in Australia and New Zealand have seen an increase in the use of mixed rations to manage variability in climate and market conditions and enable a certain degree of resilience in the operating environment. In this review, resilience was defined as the ability of the farm system to respond to challenges, optimise productivity and profitability for a given set of circumstances, and persist over time. Specific attributes of a dairy system that contribute to resilience were considered as flexibility, consistency, adaptation, sustainability and profitability. A flexible forage base that uses water efficient forage species provides a consistent supply of nutrients from home-grown forages across the year and is a key driver of resilience. Consistent milk production from purchased concentrates adds value to the forage base and will ensure that the system is profitable in the long term. Appropriate investment in infrastructure and careful management of debt has a positive impact on technical and financial efficiency and improves overall economic performance and resilience of the system. Nutrients, feed wastage, cow comfort and welfare were also identified as key areas to focus on for improved sustainability. Future research investigating the interaction between forages and concentrates, and the subsequent milk production response will be important for the future resilience of mixed ration systems. Adaptive management at a tactical and strategic level across several technical areas will further underpin the resilience of a mixed ration dairy system, and minimise the impact of climate and price variability. This will have flow on benefits to animal welfare and resource sustainability, which will have a positive impact of the public perception of these systems within the Australian and New Zealand dairy industries.
Collapse
|