The Nutritionist 2019 Live and Recorded Ruminant Nutrition Webinars - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The Nutritionist 2019

Live and Recorded Ruminant Nutrition Webinars More Information at https://agmodelsystems.com/webinars/ Email: webinars@agmodelsystems.com

14 November 2019 9:00 am EST 5:00 pm EST Dr Michael Dineen Teagasc-Agriculture and Food Development Authority

Optimizing Productivity From Pasture-based Systems

Cornell University

Optimizing productivity from pasture-based systems

• M. Dineen, B. McCarthy, and M.E. Van Amburgh

Cornell University

• Pasture-based systems
• How to maintain pasture quality
• Digesta flow experiment
• First limiting experiment

Introduction

Cornell University

• $0.04 lb/DM pasture (rent, fertilizer, reseeding, labor)
• For every 2.5% increase in grazed pasture in the cow’s diet,

cost of milk production reduced by 1 cent/litre

(Dillon et al., 2005)

• Key performance targets:

– Pasture yield of 15 t DM/ha/year – High grass utilization > 85% – Milk solids output of > 1,200 kg/ha/year – Concentrate supplementation of < 500 kg DM/cow

Competitive advantage

Cornell University

• Temperate maritime climate
• 46°F during winter time, and about 70 to 75 °F during

summer days (Met Eireann 2016)

• Eastern half of the country gets between 750 - 1000 mm

with the western side receiving between 1000 and 1400 mm

• f rainfall
• Over 90 % of the agricultural area consists of pasture, grass

silage or hay, and rough grazing (O’Mara, 2008)

Irish climate

Cornell University

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Jan Feb Mar Apr Jun July Aug Sept Nov Dec Jan Feb Month of year Feed (Kg Dm /Cow /Day) 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Milk Yield (kg/ha/wk)

Calving start

Grass 4.0 T. DM Silage 1.0 T.DM

Milk Profile 3.2% at peak week Concentrate 300-500 kg

Cornell University

• High forage diets – 90-100% inclusion levels
• High fiber (30-40% DM) - low starch
• Achieve large DMI

– 3.5% BW

• Produce BW in milk solids

– 500 kg MS; fat and protein

• Strong reproductive performance

– 90% calving in 6 weeks

Pasture-based system potential

Cornell University

Cornell University

• Immature plant - 1500 kg DM/ha
• Post grazing height ~ 4 cm
• Leaf/stem/dead ratio
• High digestibility but also high

productivity

Focus on plant maturity

50 kg DM/ha 1000 kg DM/ha 1500 kg DM/ha 2000 kg DM/ha

Cornell University

Pre-grazing yield and digestibility

Slide courtesy of Dr. Michael O’Donovan

Cornell University

Irish Pasture aNDFom Digestion Behavior 12, 30, 120, and 240 h

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144 156 168 180 192 204 216 228 240 uNDFom/aNDFom In vitro time (h) P1 P2 P3

P1 P2 P3 aNDFom, % DM 36 36 38 Fast pool, % (kd, %/h) 68 (13) 67 (14) 78 (13) Slow pool ,% (kd, %/h) 22 (3) 23 (2) 11 (2) uNDFom, % aNDFom 9.5 9.9 9.9 Integrated kd, %/h 7.1 6.6 8.3

Cornell University

NY Pasture aNDFom = 57 % DM Irish Pasture aNDFom = 33 % DM

NY vs. Irish pasture aNDFom digestion

Cornell University

How to maintain high sward quality?

Cornell University

You can’t manage what you don’t measure!

Cornell University

• Cut and weigh technique
• Quadrat = 0.5 m * 0.5 m
• DM/ha = X kg * DM%*40,000
• .100 * .18 * 40,000 = 720 kg DM/ha
• .200 * .18 * 40,000 = 1440 kg DM/ha
• .250 * .18 * 40,000 = 1800 kg DM/ha
• .300 * .18 * 40,000 = 2160 kg DM/ha

Pre grazing yield determination

Cornell University

Cornell University

Grass Wedge

• 3 cows/ha (stocking rate) x 17 kg/cow (demand) = 51 kg

demand/ha

• 5 cows/ha (stocking rate) x 12 kg/cow (demand) = 60 kg

demand/ha

• 1,550 kg DM/ha – 1,100 kg DM/ha = 450 ÷ 7 days (since

last cover) = 64 kg DM growth/day

Cornell University

Surplus pasture

Picture credit: Farmweek.com

Cornell University

y = 1385.9x + 1811.2 R² = 0.7302 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 K g D M / h a Number of grazings

Slide courtesy of Dr. Michael O’Donovan

Cornell University

Pasture inventory

• Understand feed supply
• Forward predict surplus or deficit and make proactive

decisions

• Maintain pasture quality

Cornell University

Utilization

Detrimental knock on effects

Graze this sward To 4cm Leaf grows from 4cm upwards Next rotation: Cows graze leaf down to 4cm again Graze this sward To 5cm Leaf grows from 5cm upwards Next rotation: Cows graze leaf down to 5cm, then stem down to 4cm

Slide courtesy of Dr. Michael O’Donovan

Cornell University

Cornell University

Cornell University

Growth curve

20 40 60 80 100 01-Feb 01-Mar 01-Apr 01-May 01-Jun 01-Jul 01-Aug 01-Sep 01-Oct 01-Nov 01-Dec kg DM/day

2017 2016 2015

Cornell University

Yield (kg DM/ha) Paddock #

Slide courtesy of Dr. Michael O’Donovan

Cornell University

20 40 60 80 100 01-Feb 01-Mar 01-Apr 01-May 01-Jun 01-Jul 01-Aug 01-Sep 01-Oct 01-Nov 01-Dec

kg DM/day

2018 2017 2016

Cornell University

Target Autumn/Spring Feed Budget

350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 31-Jul 14-Aug 28-Aug 11-Sep 25-Sep 09-Oct 23-Oct 06-Nov 20-Nov 04-Dec 18-Dec 01-Jan 15-Jan 29-Jan 12-Feb 26-Feb 12-Mar 26-Mar 09-Apr

Average Farm Cover (kg DM/ha) Week Start Date

Slide courtesy of Dr. Michael O’Donovan

Cornell University

Pasture nutrient composition

Cornell University

• Fresh sample, need to stop respiration immediately!
• Freeze drying:

– @ −55 °C for 72 h – Gold standard but very intensive

• Oven drying:

– 95oC for 15 h - DM only - thermo-chemical degradation – 40oC for 48 h – loss of nutrients by respiration

• 60oC for 48 h – seems to be a good comprimise

Drying protocols for wet chemical analysis

Cornell University

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 % DM Week

CP aNDFom ESC Fat_EE

How often to sample?

Cornell University

OMD

• Finalizing data on protein

fractionation

• Water Soluble CHO
• aNDFom fractionation
• First limiting?

– Metabolizable Energy (ME) – Metabolizable Protein (MP)

Nutrient supply

Cornell University

‘The effect of feeding barley grain on milk production, rumen metabolism and

• masal flow of nutrients in lactating dairy cattle fed fresh PRG indoors’

Main objectives: 1. Evaluate the effect of increased fermentable CHO on pasture fed cattle 2. Describe in vivo variables such as aNDFom digestion and N metabolism 3. Quantify protozoal dynamics to help refine the new microbial sub-model

Cornell University

• Hypothesis:

– ↑ CHO = ↑ ME + ↑ MP (↑ microbial protein)

• Two treatments

– G: Grass only – G+RB: Grass + Rolled Barley (3.5 kg DM, ~20% DMI)

• 10 lactating rumen cannulated cows ~500 kg BW
• Switchback design comprised of 3 experimental periods

– Day 1-20: Adaptation – Day 21-23: Milk production + composition (Infusion) – Day 24-27: Omasal sampling – Day 28-29: Rumen evacuations

Experimental design

Cornell University

• Pre cutting yield = 1580 kg DM/ha
• Single cut flail mower
• 20-30 cm extended length
• ~ 10 cm – CSH
• Post cutting height = 4 cm

Cornell University

Omasal sampling technique (Huhtanen et al., 1997)

Photo credit Dr. A. Foskolos

Cornell University

Diet nutrient composition

Diet Nutrient composition G G+RB RB CP, % of DM 16.3 15.4 11.6 Starch, % of DM 2.2 14.4 60.7 WSC, % of DM 23.9 19.3 1.9 NFC, % of DM 37.7 43.5 65.6 aNDFom, % of DM 36.3 32.7 19.2 12-h uNDFom, % of aNDFom 50.9

• 71.0

30-h uNDFom, % of aNDFom 20.9

• 72-h uNDFom, % of aNDFom
• 38.5

120-h uNDFom, % of aNDFom 11.8

• 33.0

240-h uNDFom, % of aNDFom 9.9

• Ether extract, % of DM

3.1 2.9 1.7 Ash, % of DM 6.6 5.6 2.6

Cornell University

Milk production and composition

G G+RB SEM P ECM, kg/d 24.6 24.1 0.8 0.70 Milk fat, % 4.52 4.28 0.16 <0.05 Milk true protein, % 3.23 3.32 0.07 <0.05 MUN, mg/dL 16.5 12.7 0.9 <0.01

5 10 15 20 25 30 ECM, kg/d kg/d G G+RB

3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Milk fat, % % G G+RB 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Milk true protein, % % G G+RB 5 10 15 20 MUN, mg/dL mg/dL G G+RB P < 0.05 P < 0.05 P < 0.01

Cornell University

aNDFom digestion

G G+RB SEM P DMI, kg/d 16.1 17.1 0.4 <0.01 aNDFom intake, kg/d 5.8 5.6 0.2 <0.05 Flow at omasal canal, kg/d 1.6 2.0 0.1 <0.01 Digested in the rumen, kg/d 4.2 3.6 0.1 <0.01 % of aNDFom intake 72.3 63.1 0.9 <0.01 % of pdNDFom intake 80.4 72.3 1.0 <0.01 Total-tract digestibility, % % of aNDFom intake 83.2 74.5 0.6 <0.01 % of pdNDFom intake 92.5 85.4 0.7 <0.01

Microfibrils

https://goo.gl/images/8sxdm5

Cornell University

CNCPS v.7 ruminal aNDFom digestion prediction

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 G G+RB g aNDFom digested Observed Predicted

+3.5 %

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 G_P2 G_P3 g aNDFom digested Observed Predicted

• 1.6 %
• 1.1 %

Cornell University

aNDFom digestion

G G+RB SEM P DMI, kg/d 16.1 17.1 0.4 <0.01 aNDFom intake, kg/d 5.8 5.6 0.2 <0.05 Flow at omasal canal, kg/d 1.6 2.0 0.1 <0.01 Digested in the rumen, kg/d 4.2 3.6 0.1 <0.01 % of aNDFom intake 72.3 63.1 0.9 <0.01 % of pdNDFom intake 80.4 72.3 1.0 <0.01 Total-tract digestibility, % % of aNDFom intake 83.2 74.5 0.6 <0.01 % of pdNDFom intake 92.5 85.4 0.7 <0.01

Cornell University

Water Soluble CHO digestion

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 WSC Intake, g/d WSC Intake, g/d G G+RB 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 G G+RB WSC ruminal disappearance/Total WSC

Cornell University

Nitrogen flows

100 200 300 400 500 Total N NH3-N NAN Microbial N NANMN N flow, g/d G G+RB 100 200 300 400 500 N intake, g/d N intake, g/d G G+RB P < 0.01 P < 0.01 P < 0.01 P < 0.01

G G+RB SEM P Microbial N, % NAN flow 87.1 88.8 0.8 0.17 NANMN, % NAN flow 11.6 11.0 0.9 0.65 Feed N True Ruminal Digestibility, % 88.4 89.0 0.87 0.64

Cornell University

• Immature pasture exhibits extremely digestible aNDFom
• aNDFom digestion is sensitive to starch supplementation
• CNCPS:

– High precision to predict aNDFom digestion with 3 pool fractionation scheme

• Pasture feed protein extensively degraded in the rumen
• Pasture-based cattle extremely dependent on microbial

protein as a MP source

Study conclusions

Cornell University

Effects of supplemental concentrate type on dry matter intake and milk solids production of mid-lactation dairy cattle grazing perennial ryegrass-based pasture

• M. Dineen*1, 2, B. McCarthy2, F. Coughlan2, P. Dillon2 and M. E. Van Amburgh1

1Department of Animal Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; 2Teagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre,

Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland

Cornell University

Daily Milk Solids yield 2014-2017

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45

Daily Milk Solids yield (kg/cow per day) Lactation week

Grass-only Grass-clover

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 Grass Grass-clover Grass Grass-clover Grass Grass-clover

Dry matter intake (kg/cow/day)

Clover DMI Grass DMI

Egan et al. 2018 McClearn et al. 2019

Early May Mid-July Mid-Sept

Hypothesis #1 CNCPS v7 – Meal pattern and fill/flux of DM

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 276 286 296

Rumen DM (g)

Simulation time (hr) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 276 286 296

Rumen DM (g)

Simulation time (hr)

Grass + sugar/soluble fiber Grass

Cornell University

Rumen Small I. Ammonia Absorbed 13% 87%

Metabolizable Protein Supply

Hypothesis #2

Cornell University

• Objective: Investigate the nutrient(s) first limiting milk solids production
• f grazing dairy cows
• 80 dairy cattle (98±25 DIM and 518 ± 64 kg of BW)
• 2 wk co-variate and 10 wk data collection

Paddock experiment

• Treatments:

– Perennial ryegrass (PRG) only (GO) – PRG + sugar/soluble fiber (5.4 kg Citrus + 0.08 kg Urea) – PRG + treated soybean meal (0.9 kg; TSBM) – PRG + Citrus + TSBM (3.5 kg; 3:1 Mix)

Cornell University

Grass only Citrus TSBM Mix Supplement fed (kg FW)

• 5.48

0.92 3.52 CP (% DM) 18.3 16.4 19.5 18.1 aNDFom (% DM) 35.0 31.9 33.7 32.4 pdNDFom (% aNDFom) 91 89 91 90 Soluble fiber (% DM) 21.2 24.5 21.1 22.9 Sugars (% DM) 13.8 17.3 13.7 15.6 ME supply v. 7* (Mcals day-1) 47 51 48 50 MP supply v. 7* (g day-1) 2026 2297 2333 2432

*CNCPS v.7.0 (Higgs, 2014)

Cornell University

20 40 60 80 100 01-Feb 01-Mar 01-Apr 01-May 01-Jun 01-Jul 01-Aug 01-Sep 01-Oct 01-Nov 01-Dec

kg DM/day

2018 2017 2016

• Exp. start

date

• Exp. end

date

Cornell University

5 10 15 20 25 30 Summer Pasture Wk 1 Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4 Wk 5 Wk 6 Wk 7 Wk 8 Wk 9 Wk 10 uNDF (% aNDFom) Exp Week

uNDF (% aNDFom)

GO Citrus TSBM Mix CP formulated (% DM) 18.3 16.4 19.5 18.1 CP observed (% DM) 14.3 13.5 16.1 14.7 NDF formulated (% DM) 35.0 31.9 33.7 32.4 NDF observed (% DM) 43.5 36.2 41.7 38.3

5 10 15 20 25 Summer pasture Wk 1 Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4 Wk 5 Wk 6 Wk 7 Wk 8 Wk 9 Wk 10 CP (% DM) Exp Week

CP (% DM)

Cornell University

GO Citrus TSBM Mix S.E. P-Value Grass intake (kg DM day-1) 15.6a 12.8b 15.3ac 13.8bc 0.47 <0.01 Supplement intake (kg DM day-1) 0a 4.8b 0.8c 3.1d 0.03 <0.01 Total intake (kg DM day-1) 15.6a 17.6b 16.1ab 16.9ab 0.48 0.02 Milk production (kg day-1) 18.5a 20.6b 20.3b 21.3b 0.34 <0.01 Milk Crude Protein content (g kg-1) 33.9ab 33.0a 34.7b 33.7ab 0.30 <0.01 Milk Fat content (g kg-1) 42.2 40.7 42.2 41.5 0.78 0.51 Milk solids production (kg day-1) 1.41a 1.49ab 1.55b 1.59b 0.03 <0.01 Energy Corrected Milk (kg day-1) 20.8a 22.1ab 22.6b 23.5b 0.57 <0.01

Cornell University

Lush ‘normal’ grass Peak drought

Cornell University

Total Tract Digestibility

Item GO Citrus TSBM Mix S.E. P-Value Fecal aNDFom (% DM) 49.2a 43.4b 47.4c 45.4d 0.48 <0.01 Fecal uNDFom (% aNDFom) 79.3a 69.9b 79.4a 73.8b 1.33 <0.01 Apparent TTDMD (g g-1) 0.72 0.70 0.72 0.72 0.01 0.13 Apparent TTOMD (g g-1) 0.74 0.74 0.75 0.75 0.01 0.47 Apparent TTaNDFomD (g g-1) 0.70a 0.67b 0.70a 0.68ab 0.01 <0.01 Apparent TTpdNDFomD (g g-1) 0.92a 0.87b 0.92a 0.89ab 0.01 <0.01

Cornell University

Forage versus non-forage fiber

Intake, kg/d GO Citrus TSBM Mix S.E. P-Value aNDFom 7.2 7.0 7.1 7.0 0.22 0.89 pdNDFom 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 0.17 0.96 uNDFom 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 0.05 0.38 Forage aNDFom 7.2a 5.9b 7.1ac 6.4bc 0.31 < 0.01 Forage pdNDFom 5.5a 4.5b 5.4ac 4.9bc 0.17 < 0.01 Forage uNDFom 1.7a 1.4b 1.7ac 1.5bc 0.05 < 0.01

Cornell University

• Providing a supplement rich in sugar/soluble fiber

increased DMI however, milk solids production was not significantly increased

• Under these experimental conditions, providing MP

increased milk solids production of grazing dairy cows

Study conclusions

Cornell University

• Research level: N-alkanes
• Method of Mayes et al., (1986), modified by Dillon and Stakelum (1989)

– Animal dosed with synthetic even-numbered alkane – Offered herbage which has been sampled and contains naturally

• ccurring odd-numbered alkane

– Herbage intake is calculated from the alkane dose, alkane content in the herbage and the ratio of the dosed and natural alkanes in the feces

• Herbage removed (pre – post grazing height) R2= 0.85 (McEvoy et al., 2007)
• Empirical regressions (Fox et al., 2004: NRC, 2001)

Estimating DMI

Cornell University

• Maintaining the correct pre-grazing yield is fundamental to

the success of pasture-based systems

• Management practices can be implemented to achieve this

with minimal cost and moderate effort

• aNDFom extremely digestible encouraging high DMI
• Although swards high in N, rumen escapable AA may be

beneficial

• CNCPS can help unlock further knowledge on how to

complement pasture-based systems

Summary

Cornell University

• Prof. Mike Van Amburgh
• Debbie Ross
• Sam Fessenden
• Andrew LaPierre
• Rodrigo Molano
• Andres Ortega
• Martina Cortese
• Undergraduate help

Acknowledgments

• Brian McCarthy
• Pat Dillon
• Michael O’Donovan
• Chloe Mattews
• Andy McGrath
• Eddie Magnier
• John Paul Murphy
• Fergal Coughlan
• Michelle Liddane
• Pat O’Connor
• Norann Galvin

Cornell University

Thank you!

md828@cornell.edu @MikeDineen2016

12 December2019 9:00 am EST 5:00 pm EST Dr James Drackley University of Illinois

Updated Recommendations For Feeding Calves

Webinar Co-Hosts

Gold Sponsor

Silver Sponsors Bronze Sponsors