Does supplementation of beef cattle impact the agronomy performance of tall fescue and bermudagrass pastures?

In forage-based beef cattle systems, bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.] and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) stand as widely used forage species. The strategic supplementation of animals may reduce forage intake, thereby potentially affecting the agronomic performance of these grasses. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of beef cattle supplemental feeding on forage accumulation, forage mass, and nutritive value in tall fescue and bermudagrass pastures. Two studies were conducted where pregnant beef cows were supplemental fed 1% of BW on DM basis of corn silage daily (SUP) or received no supplemental feeding (free-choice mineral; NON). Trial 1: conducted on bermudagrass pastures (BERM) grazed from late May to early October. Experimental design for BERM was completely randomized design with 4 pastures per treatment (n = 3 cows/pasture; average 5 years of age; 550 ± 72 kg initial BW). Trial 2: conducted on fescue pastures (FES) with an experimental design of a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement. The two factors evaluated were fescue type [TOXIC (507 ppm ± 0.82 SEM ergot alkaloids; 92.5% endophyte infection)] or non-toxin-producing (NT; 5 ppm ± 2.50 SEM ergot alkaloids; 38.6% endophyte infection) and two levels of supplemental feeding (NON or SUP). There were 3 or 4 replications per fescue x supplemental feeding treatment (n = 15 pastures), stocked with 3 cows/pasture (average age 4.75 years; 558 ± 73 kg initial BW) and grazed from early May through November. Forage accumulation (FA) was estimated every 28 d using the paired-cage method (4 exclosure cages/pasture). On each exclusion period, the forage mass (FM) was estimated both inside and outside the cages through destructive sampling method and samples analyzed for forage quality. Pasture was experimental unit and repeated measures were included in analysis. Bermudagrass FM tended to be increased by 31% with SUP (P = 0.09; 774 kg/ ha greater). Forage accumulation tended (P = 0.07) to be affected by feeding method x month. There was greater FA in June for SUP; however, there was greater FA for NON in July. SUP pastures had greater ADF (1% more; P = 0.01) and reduced TDN (1.5%; P < 0.01) than NON. Forage mass tended to be 10% greater for TOXIC pastures (P = 0.09; 409 kg/ha more forage mass). Supplemental feeding on fescue did not impact FM (P = 0.74). Forage accumulation was not impacted by fescue type, feeding method, nor the interaction (P > 0.30). Cows generally do not consume as much toxic fescue, thus more forage is available in pastures and supplemental feeding did not alter forage parameters. However, on a warm-season grass that is growing while supplemental feeding, forage availability was increased and maybe useful as method to increase stocking rates or as mitigation tool during drought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Animal Science is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)