Grazing diverse combinations of tanniferous and nontanniferous legumes: implications for foraging behavior, performance, and hair cortisol in beef cattle.
choice
condensed tannins
feeding pattern
forage diversity
one welfare
preference
Journal
Journal of animal science
ISSN: 1525-3163
Titre abrégé: J Anim Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003002
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Nov 2021
01 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
26
06
2021
accepted:
14
10
2021
pubmed:
18
10
2021
medline:
11
11
2021
entrez:
17
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A diversity of forages with different types and concentrations of nutrients and plant secondary compounds may lead to complementary relationships that enhance cattle performance and welfare. We determined whether grazing combinations of tanniferous legumes (Lotus corniculatus, birdsfoot trefoil [BFT], Onobrychis viciifolia, sainfoin [SF]), and alfalfa [ALF] (Medicago sativa) influence foraging behavior, performance, and hair cortisol concentration in beef cattle compared with grazing the same legumes as monocultures. Twenty-one pairs of heifers grazed three spatial replications of seven treatments: monocultures of BFT, SF, or ALF, and all possible two- and three-way choices among strips of these legumes: SF-BFT, ALF-BFT, ALF-SF, and ALF-SF-BFT in two periods of 25 d each (adaptation phase + experimental period) during two consecutive years. The lowest incidence of grazing events occurred in the BFT treatment (42.0% of the total scans recorded; P < 0.10), with the rest of the treatments ranging between 47.8% (SF-BFT) and 52.6% (ALF-SF) of the total scans recorded. Heifers selected a varied diet, preferring SF over BFT or ALF in a 46:27:27 ratio for the three-way choice, and in a 70:30 ratio for both two-way choices. Heifers preferred BFT over ALF (62:38 ratio) in a two-way choice. All treatments followed similar daily grazing patterns (P > 0.10), with two major grazing events (1 h after sunrise and 3 h before dark). No differences among treatments were observed for the number of steps taken by heifers on a daily basis, motion index, or the percentage of time heifers spent standing (1,599, 5,356, and 45.3%, respectively; P > 0.10), suggesting that heifers on choice treatments did not invest extra time in walking, searching, or patch switching activities relative to heifers grazing monocultures. Heifers grazing the three-way choice gained more body weight (1.27 kg/d) than the average gains observed for animals grazing in all legume monocultures (1.00 kg/d; P = 0.014) or two-way choices (0.97 kg/d; P = 0.007), suggesting a synergism among pasture species for the treatment with the highest diversity. No differences in hair cortisol concentration were observed among treatments, with values ranging between 1.4 (BFT) and 2.12 ng/g (three-way choice; P > 0.10). Thus, forage diversity has the potential to enhance animal performance without affecting grazing efficiency, likely explained by the spatial arrangement of the forage species presented in the study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34657159
pii: 6398707
doi: 10.1093/jas/skab291
pmc: PMC8575690
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Hydrocortisone
WI4X0X7BPJ
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : National Institute of Food and Agriculture
ID : 2016-67019-25086
Organisme : Utah Agricultural Experiment Station
ID : UTA1321
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Nov;98(11):7982-92
pubmed: 26364095
J Anim Sci. 2009 Nov;87(11):3817-24
pubmed: 19684258
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Dec 1;746:140788
pubmed: 32758982
J Anim Sci. 2015 Apr;93(4):1729-40
pubmed: 26020195
J Agric Food Chem. 2013 Mar 20;61(11):2669-78
pubmed: 23383722
Physiol Behav. 2012 Jan 18;105(2):181-7
pubmed: 21903122
Vet Rec. 2016 Oct 22;179(16):412-413
pubmed: 27770094
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 23;7:44953
pubmed: 28332567
Br J Nutr. 1997 Oct;78(4):545-61
pubmed: 9389883
Animal. 2015 Jun;9(6):1059-64
pubmed: 25997530
Behav Processes. 2016 Dec;133:56-61
pubmed: 27836737
J Anim Sci. 2009 Jan;87(1):340-50
pubmed: 18791142
J Anim Sci. 2019 Sep 3;97(9):3994-4009
pubmed: 31372657
J Anim Sci. 1996 Aug;74(8):2010-20
pubmed: 8856457
J Anim Sci. 2011 Aug;89(8):2571-81
pubmed: 21454862
Phytochemistry. 2010 Aug;71(11-12):1198-222
pubmed: 20570294
Proc Nutr Soc. 1997 Jul;56(2):547-63
pubmed: 9264107
Behaviour. 1974;49(3):227-67
pubmed: 4597405