Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-kjzhn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-04T00:55:25.681Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feed intake and milk production in dairy cows fed different grass and legume species: a meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2017

M. Johansen ,
P. Lund  and
M. R. Weisbjerg
M. Johansen*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, Blichers Allé 20, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
P. Lund
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, Blichers Allé 20, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
M. R. Weisbjerg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, Blichers Allé 20, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
*
† E-mail: marianne.johansen@anis.au.dk
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare feed intake, milk production, milk composition and organic matter (OM) digestibility in dairy cows fed different grass and legume species. Data from the literature was collected and different data sets were made to compare families (grasses v. legumes, Data set 1), different legume species and grass family (Data set 2), and different grass and legume species (Data set 3+4). The first three data sets included diets where single species or family were fed as the sole forage, whereas the approach in the last data set differed by taking the proportion of single species in the forage part into account allowing diets consisting of both grasses and legumes to be included. The grass species included were perennial ryegrass, annual ryegrass, orchardgrass, timothy, meadow fescue, tall fescue and festulolium, and the legume species included were white clover, red clover, lucerne and birdsfoot trefoil. Overall, dry matter intake (DMI) and milk production were 1.3 and 1.6 kg/day higher, respectively, whereas milk protein and milk fat concentration were 0.5 and 1.4 g/kg lower, respectively, for legume-based diets compared with grass-based diets. When comparing individual legume species with grasses, only red clover resulted in a lower milk protein concentration than grasses. Cows fed white clover and birdsfoot trefoil yielded more milk than cows fed red clover and lucerne, probably caused by a higher OM digestibility of white clover and activity of condensed tannins in birdsfoot trefoil. None of the included grass species differed in DMI, milk production, milk composition or OM digestibility, indicating that different grass species have the same value for milk production, if OM digestibility is comparable. However, the comparison of different grass species relied on few observations, indicating that knowledge regarding feed intake and milk production potential of different grass species is scarce in the literature. In conclusion, different species within family similar in OM digestibility resulted in comparable DMI and milk production, but legumes increased both DMI and milk yield compared with grasses.

Keywords

forageruminantdigestibilityfeed efficiencyclover

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 66 - 75
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, MS 1996. Relationship between forage quality and dairy cattle production. Animal Feed Science and Technology 59, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Mabruk, RM, Beck, NFG and Dewhurst, RJ 2004. Effects of silage species and supplemental vitamin E on the oxidative stability of milk. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 406–412.Google Scholar
Bates, D, Maechler, M, Bolker, B and Walker, S 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1–48.Google Scholar
Bertilsson, J and Murphy, M 2003. Effects of feeding clover silages on feed intake, milk production and digestion in dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 58, 309–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, AD, Laidlaw, AS, Moot, DJ and O’Kiely, P 2009. Comparative growth and management of white and red clovers. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 48, 149–166.Google Scholar
Broderick, GA, Brito, AF and Olmos Colmenero, JJ 2007. Effects of feeding formate-treated alfalfa silage or red clover silage on the production of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1378–1391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broderick, GA, Walgenbach, RP and Maignan, S 2001. Production of lactating dairy cows fed alfalfa or red clover silage at equal dry matter or crude protein contents in the diet. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 1728–1737.Google Scholar
Broderick, GA, Walgenbach, RP and Sterrenburg, E 2000. Performance of lactating dairy cows fed alfalfa or red clover silage as the sole forage. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1543–1551.Google Scholar
Buxton, DR and Redfearn, DD 1997. Plant limitations to fiber digestion and utilization. Journal of Nutrition 127, S814–S818.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Evans, RT, Scollan, ND, Moorby, JM, Merry, RJ and Wilkins, RJ 2003. Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 2. In vivo and in sacco evaluations of rumen function. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2612–2621.Google Scholar
Eriksen, J, Askegaard, M and Søegaard, K 2014. Complementary effects of red clover inclusion in ryegrass-white clover swards for grazing and cutting. Grass and Forage Science 69, 241–250.Google Scholar
Halmemies-Beauchet-Filleau, A, Vanhatalo, A, Toivonen, V, Heikkilä, T, Lee, MRF and Shingfield, KJ 2014. Effect of replacing grass silage with red clover silage on nutrient digestion, nitrogen metabolism, and milk fat composition in lactating cows fed diets containing a 60:40 forage-to-concentrate ratio. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 3761–3776.Google Scholar
Hothorn, T, Bretz, F and Westfall, P 2008. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal 50, 346–363.Google Scholar
Huhtanen, P, Rinne, M and Nousiainen, J 2007. Evaluation of the factors affecting silage intake of dairy cows: a revision of the relative silage dry-matter intake index. Animal 1, 758–770.Google Scholar
Hymes-Fecht, UC, Broderick, GA, Muck, RE and Grabber, JH 2013. Replacing alfalfa or red clover silage with birdsfoot trefoil silage in total mixed rations increases production of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 460–469.Google Scholar
Lee, MRF 2014. Forage polyphenol oxidase and ruminant livestock nutrition. Frontiers in Plant Science 5, 694.Google Scholar
Lee, MRF, Theobald, VJ, Tweed, JKS, Winters, AL and Scollan, ND 2009. Effect of feeding fresh or conditioned red clover on milk fatty acids and nitrogen utilization in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1136–1147.Google Scholar
McDonagh, J, O’Donovan, M, McEvoy, M and Gilliland, TJ 2016. Genetic gain in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) varieties 1973 to 2013. Euphytica 212, 187–199.Google Scholar
Moorby, JM, Lee, MRF, Davies, DR, Kim, EJ, Nute, GR, Ellis, NM and Scollan, ND 2009. Assessment of dietary ratios of red clover and grass silages on milk production and milk quality in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1148–1160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team 2016. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Schmidely, P, Daudin, JJ and St-Pierre, NR 2008. Meta-analyses of experimental data in animal nutrition. Animal 2, 1203–1214.Google Scholar
Sjaunja, LO, Baevre, L, Junkkarinen, L, Pedersen, J and Setälä, J 1991. A Nordic proposal for an energy corrected milk (ECM) formula. In Performance Recording of Animals - State of the Art 1990. EAAP Publication 50 (ed. P Gaillon and Y Chabert), pp. 156–157. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation (PUDOC), Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Steinshamn, H 2010. Effect of forage legumes on feed intake, milk production and milk quality – a review. Animal Science Papers and Reports 28, 195–206.Google Scholar
St-Pierre, NR 2001. Invited review: integrating quantitative findings from multiple studies using mixed model methodology. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 741–755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Søegaard, K 2009. Nitrogen fertilization of grass/clover swards under cutting or grazing by dairy cows. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section B – Soil and Plant Science 59, 139–150.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, A, Kuoppala, K, Ahvenjärvi, S and Rinne, M 2009. Effects of feeding grass or red clover silage cut at two maturity stages in dairy cows. 1. Nitrogen metabolism and supply of amino acids. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5620–5633.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Mertens, DR and Deinum, B 1978. Preharvest factors influencing quality of conserved forage. Journal of Animal Science 47, 712–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisbjerg, MR, Kristensen, NB, Søegaard, K and Thøgersen, R 2010. Ensilering og foderværdi af nye græsmarksafgrøder. In Ensilering af majs og græs (ed. NB Kristensen), pp. 47–59. Faculty of Agricultural Science, Aarhus University, Denmark. (in Danish).Google Scholar
Wilkins, PW and Humphreys, MO 2003. Progress in breeding perennial forage grasses for temperate agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Science 140, 129–150.Google Scholar
Wilson, JR 1994. Cell wall characteristics in relation to forage digestion by ruminants. Journal of Agricultural Science 122, 173–182.Google Scholar
Woodward, SL, Laboyrie, PJ and Jansen, EBL 2000. Lotus corniculatus and condensed tannins – effects on milk production by dairy cows. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 13, 521–525.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Johansen supplementary material

Johansen supplementary material

Download Johansen supplementary material(File)
File 25.6 KB