2006 Annual Report
Dickinson Research Extension Center
1089 State Avenue
Dickinson, ND 58601
for Printer Friendly version
Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science
Vol. 56, 2005
Utilization of Field Pea and Sunflower Meal as Dietary Supplements for Beef Cows
W.W. Poland1, L.J. Tisor1, C.
Smith2, T. Transtrom2 and A.S. Bartlett2 ¹ ² Department of Agriculture
and Technical Studies,
² Department of Agriculture
and Technical Studies,
ABSTRACT: The objectives
of this study were to determine if field pea and sunflower meal can be used
effectively as dietary supplements and whether energy or protein is a
first-limiting nutrient for beef cows grazing stockpiled native forage in the
late fall and early winter. Beef cows grazed a pasture of stockpiled
predominately native range in western
Words: Stockpiled Native Forage, Supplementation,
Narrow profit margins in the cow/calf sector of the beef industry require careful attention to production costs and associated levels of output. Extended grazing periods have been shown to decrease winter feed costs (a major component of overall cow/calf expenses; Adams et al., 1994). Management of precalving cow weight and condition change can enhance overall reproductive efficiency (Dunn and Moss, 1992). Nutritional supplementation regimes may be necessary to manage cow weight and condition during extended fall/winter grazing periods. Dietary protein has been suggested to be the first-limiting nutrient in cattle grazing winter range. There are alternative crops and processing co-products that are higher in crude protein than typical feed grains that might be used effectively in protein supplements formulated for cattle grazing stockpiled perennial forage. Stockpiling refers to the practice of allowing forage to accumulate in the absence of grazing for use at a later time.
Objectives on this study were to (1) determine whether field pea (Pisum sativum L)and sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) meal can be used effectively as dietary supplements for beef cows grazing stockpiled perennial forage in the late fall/early winter and (2) determine whether either energy or protein is the first-limiting nutrient for beef cows grazing stockpiled perennial forage in late fall/early winter.
Materials and Methods
pregnant beef cows grazed a pasture (116.6 ha) of stockpiled predominately
native range in southwestern
Cows were weighed (BW) and condition scored (BCS; Encinias and Lardy, 2000) at 14-day intervals throughout the course of the grazing period. Weight and BCS was also recorded either 28 or 42 days post-grazing in year 1 and 2, respectively.
Animal data were analyzed by year utilizing a completely random design with four treatments replicated across cows. Treatment represented a fixed effect and animal within treatment served as the experimental unit. Means were separated using a set of orthogonal contrasts. Specific contrasts included 1) CON vs supplemental treatments, 2) BAR vs PEA and SFM and 3) PEA vs SFM.
Results and Discussion
In general, cows were heavier and in better body condition in year 1 compared to year 2 (Table 1). The seasonal stocking rate (ha per animal unit month) was greater in year 2. This resulted from lighter cows and a longer grazing period in year 2. Initial forage available for grazing was not different between years (Poland et al., 2005).
Year 1. Dietary treatment (P > .3; Table 3) did not affect BW change on day 14. On this day, cows had lost an average of 64.5 kg. Supplementation reduced BW loss compared to CON on days 42 (P = .10) and 70 (P < .01). Overall, supplementation reduced BW loss during grazing by 28.6 kg. Loss of BCS (P < .10; Table 3) was reduced by supplementation on day 42. Supplemental treatments did not affect BW (P>.4) or BCS (P>.1) changes.
Under common management for 28 days post-grazing, overall BW and BCS change did not differ among dietary treatments (P > .2; Table 4). In general during late fall and early winter, BW increased 34.0 kg and BCS decreased .3 units with 70 days of grazing and 28 days of recovery.
Year 2. Dietary treatment (P>.7; Table 4) did not affect BW change on day 14 (average gain was 34.9 kg). Supplemental treatments improved BW change on days 42 (P<.05), 70 (P<.01) and 84 (<.01). Overall, supplementation increased BW gain during grazing by 27.2 kg. Supplementation improved BCS change (P<.05) on day 84. Supplemental treatments did not affect BW (P>.15) or BCS (P>.1) changes.
Under common management for 42 day post-grazing, overall BCS change (P>.1; Table 4) was not affected by dietary treatment. However, previous supplementation improved BW change (P<.01) 25.0 kg. There were no difference among supplemental treatments in overall BW (P>.5) and BCS (P>.1) change. In general, BW increased 70.4 kg and BCS increased .9 units with 85 days of grazing and 42 days of recovery.
cows starting from very different BW and BCS between the two years, BW change
in beef cows grazing stockpiled perennial forages in southwestern
Beef cows can be managed in the late fall and early winter on stockpiled perennial forages in southwestern North Dakota and weight change during grazing can be improved with supplementation. Supplemental energy appears to be the first limiting nutrient for beef cows grazing this type of forage. Field pea and sunflower meal appear to be suitable feed ingredients in the formulation of supplements for beef cows grazing stockpiled perennial forage.
Dunn, T.G. and G.E. Moss. 1992. Effects of nutrient deficiencies and excesses on reproductive efficiency of livestock. J. Anim. Sci. 70:1580-1593.
A.M. and G. Lardy. 2000. Body
condition scoring I: managing your cow herd through
body condition scoring. Ext. Publ.
Hickling, D. 1994. Canadian peas: feed industry guide. Canadian Special
Crops Assn. (
NRC. 1984. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle (6th Ed.).
NRC. 1985. Nutrient requirements of sheep (6th Ed.).
W.W. Poland, B.A. Porter and L.J.
Transtrom, T.J., C. Smith, W.W. Poland and L.J. Tisor. 2003. Diet composition of beef cows grazing stockpiled
native range in southwestern
[ Back to 2006 Annual Report Index ] [ Back to Beef Reports ]
[ DREC Home ] [ Contact DREC ] [ Top of Page ]