Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:53:24.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diet selection and performance of cattle and horses grazing in heathlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2011

R. Celaya*
Affiliation:
Área de Sistemas de Producción Animal, Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), PO Box 13 – 33300, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
L. M. M. Ferreira
Affiliation:
CECAV – Departamento de Zootecnia, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801, Vila Real, Portugal
U. García
Affiliation:
Área de Sistemas de Producción Animal, Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), PO Box 13 – 33300, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
R. Rosa García
Affiliation:
Área de Sistemas de Producción Animal, Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), PO Box 13 – 33300, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
K. Osoro
Affiliation:
Área de Sistemas de Producción Animal, Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), PO Box 13 – 33300, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
*
E-mail: rcelaya@serida.org
Get access

Abstract

As the number of horses is steadily increasing in Cantabrian less-favoured areas, mostly occupied by nutritionally poor heathland communities, the objective of this research was to study and compare diet selection and performance of crossbred horses and beef cattle (Asturiana de los Valles breed) grazing these areas during the summer. A total of 20 cows (seven lactating their calves and thirteen dry) and 20 mares (eight lactating their foals and twelve dry) were managed during 3 years on a heathland area from June to September and October. The proportion of grass (mostly Pseudarrhenatherum longifolium) and heather (Erica umbellata, E. cinerea and Calluna vulgaris) in the diet selected by cows and mares was estimated in two occasions (July and September) each year using the alkane markers. All animals were weighed at the beginning, middle and end of the summer grazing season. Mares selected heath grasses and rejected heather species more than did the cows (P < 0.001), particularly in early summer (0.85 v. 0.65 herbage proportion in July; 0.63 v. 0.55 in September). Lactating state did not affect diet composition. Mares achieved more favourable (P < 0.001) body weight (BW) changes than cows, but there was also an interaction with season (P < 0.001). From June to August, cows lost BW, being the daily changes (in percentage of initial BW) −0.15%/day in lactating and −0.05%/day in dry cows, whereas both lactating and dry mares gained BW (0.16 and 0.12%/day, respectively). From August to October, lactating cows and mares lost more BW (P < 0.01) compared with their non-lactating counterparts (−0.19 v. −0.10%/day in cows, −0.14 v. −0.05%/day in mares). With regard to the offspring, BW gains between June and August were similar in calves and foals (0.83 and 0.90%/day, respectively), but thereafter calves achieved higher (P < 0.05) BW gains than foals (0.37 v. 0.16%/day). It is concluded that the low nutritive quality of these heathlands restricts, both cattle and horse performance, even during short summer grazing season, being more penalized lactating animals, especially the cows. Although calves were able to maintain acceptable growth rates, foals showed reduced ones during the second half of the grazing season. Other plant communities with better nutritive quality should be provided to assure replenishment of body reserves in dams, and enhance offspring gains to maintain sustainable grazing systems with productive herds of cattle and horses in these heathland areas.

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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.)

References

Aldezabal, A 2001. El sistema de pastoreo del Parque Nacional de Ordesa y Monte Perdido (Pirineo central, Aragón). Interacción entre la vegetación supraforestal y los grandes herbívoros. Consejo de Protección de la Naturaleza de Aragón, Zaragoza, Spain.Google Scholar
Arnold, GW 1981. Grazing behaviour. In World animal science, B1. Grazing animals (ed. FHW Morley), pp. 79104. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2006. Official methods of analysis, 18th edition (1st revision). AOAC, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.Google Scholar
Badiani, A, Nanni, N, Gatta, PP, Tolomelli, B, Manfredini, M 1997. Nutrient profile of horsemeat. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 10, 254269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, CB, Lawson, JE 1981. Estimated water and forage intakes in nursing range calves. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 61, 415421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barthram, GT 1986. Experimental techniques: the HFRO swardstick. In The hill farming research organisation biennial report 1984–1985 (ed. Sine nomine), pp. 2930. HFRO, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK.Google Scholar
Celaya, R, Benavides, R, García, U, Ferreira, LMM, Ferre, I, Martínez, A, Ortega-Mora, LM, Osoro, K 2008. Grazing behaviour and performance of lactating suckler cows, ewes and goats on partially improved heathlands. Animal 2, 18181831.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cymbaluk, NF 1990. Comparison of forage digestion by cattle and horses. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 70, 601610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deichsel, K, Aurich, J 2005. Lactation and lactational effects on metabolism and reproduction in the horse mare. Livestock Production Science 98, 2530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demment, MW, Van Soest, PJ 1985. A nutritional explanation for body size patterns of ruminant and nonruminant herbivores. The American Naturalist 125, 641672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doreau, M, Martin-Rosset, W, Boulot, S 1988. Energy requirements and the feeding of mares during lactation: a review. Livestock Production Science 20, 5368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dove, H, Mayes, RW 1991. The use of plant wax alkanes as marker substances in studies of the nutrition of herbivores: a review. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 42, 913957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulphy, JP, Jouany, JP, Martin-Rosset, W, Thériez, M 1994. Aptitudes comparées de différentes espèces d'herbivores domestiques à ingérer et digérer des fourrages distribués à l'auge. Annales de Zootechnie 43, 1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, P 1983. Determinants of the use of habitat by horses in a Mediterranean wetland. Journal of Animal Ecology 52, 93109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, P, Foose, TJ, Gordon, IJ, Gakahu, CG, Lloyd, M 1990. Comparative nutrient extraction from forages by grazing bovids and equids: a test of the nutritional model of equid/bovid competition and coexistence. Oecologia 84, 411418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, LMM, Garcia, U, Rodrigues, MAM, Celaya, R, Dias-da-Silva, A, Osoro, K 2007. The application of the n-alkane technique for estimating the composition of diets consumed by equines and cattle feeding on upland vegetation communities. Animal Feed Science and Technology 138, 4760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleurance, G, Duncan, P, Mallevaud, B 2001. Daily intake and the selection of feeding sites by horses in heterogeneous wet grasslands. Animal Research 50, 149156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleurance, G, Fritz, H, Duncan, P, Gordon, IJ, Edouard, N, Vial, C 2009. Instantaneous intake rate in horses of different body sizes: influence of sward biomass and fibrousness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 117, 8492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, MD, Theobald, VJ, Griffiths, JB, Morris, SM, Moorby, JM 2009. Comparative diet selection by cattle and sheep grazing two contrasting heathland communities. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 129, 182192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, HK, Van Soest, PJ 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agricultural handbook no. 379, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Gordon, IJ 1989. Vegetation community selection by ungulates on the isle of Rhum. II. Vegetation community selection. Journal of Applied Ecology 26, 5364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, IJ, Illius, AW 1988. Incisor arcade structure and diet selection in ruminants. Functional Ecology 2, 1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, SA, Torvell, L, Smith, HK, Suckling, DE, Forbes, TDA, Hodgson, J 1987. Comparative studies of diet selection by sheep and cattle: blanket bog and heather moor. Journal of Ecology 75, 947960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J, Forbes, TDA, Armstrong, RM, Beattie, MM, Hunter, EA 1991. Comparative studies of the ingestive behaviour and herbage intake of sheep and cattle grazing indigenous hill plant communities. Journal of Applied Ecology 28, 205227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, RE, Hansen, RM 1976. Diets of wild horses, cattle, and mule deer in the Piceance Basin, Colorado. Journal of Range Management 29, 389392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izquierdo, J 2008. Asturias, región agropolitana. KRK ediciones, Oviedo, Spain.Google Scholar
Krysl, LJ, Hubbert, ME, Sowell, BF, Plumb, GE, Jewett, TK, Smith, MA, Waggoner, JW 1984. Horses and cattle grazing in the Wyoming Red Desert. I. Food habits and dietary overlap. Journal of Range Management 37, 7276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamoot, I, Meert, C, Hoffmann, M 2005a. Habitat use of ponies and cattle foraging together in a coastal dune area. Biological Conservation 122, 523536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamoot, I, Vandenberghe, C, Bauwens, D, Hoffman, M 2005b. Grazing behaviour of free-ranging donkeys and Shetland ponies in different reproductive states. Journal of Ethology 23, 1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Du, YLP, Baker, RD 1979. Milk-fed calves: 5. The effect of a change in milk intake upon the herbage intake and performance of grazing calves. Journal of Agricultural Science 92, 443447.Google Scholar
Loucougaray, G, Bonis, A, Bouzilé, JB 2004. Effects of grazing by horses and/or cattle on the diversity of coastal grasslands in western France. Biological Conservation 116, 5971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandaluniz, N, Aldezabal, A, Oregui, LM 2009. Atlantic mountain grassland-heathlands: structure and feeding value. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 129136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, RW, Lamb, CS, Colgrove, PM 1986. The use of dosed and herbage n-alkanes as markers for the determination of herbage intake. Journal of Agricultural Science 107, 161170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menard, K, Duncan, P, Fleurance, G, Georges, JY, Lila, M 2002. Comparative foraging and nutrition of horses and cattle in European wetlands. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 120133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, JA, Osoro, K 1997. The role of livestock in habitat management. In Livestock systems in European rural development (ed. JP Laker and JA Milne), pp. 7580. Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen, UK.Google Scholar
National Research Council 2007. Nutrient requirements of horses, 6th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Naujeck, A, Hill, J, Gibb, MJ 2005. Influence of sward height on diet selection by horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 90, 4963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osoro, K 1989. Manejo de las reservas corporales y utilización del pasto en los sistemas de producción de carne con vacas madres establecidos en zonas húmedas. Investigación Agraria: Producción y Sanidad Animales 4, 207240.Google Scholar
Osoro, K, Fernández Prieto, E, Celaya, R, Noval, G, Alonso, L, Castro, P 1999. Respuesta productiva de dos razas de ganado vacuno manejadas en dos cubiertas vegetales de montaña. ITEA 95A, 188203.Google Scholar
Putman, RJ, Pratt, RM, Ekins, JR, Edwards, PJ 1987. Food and feeding behaviour of cattle and ponies in the New Forest, Hampshire. Journal of Applied Ecology 24, 369380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russel, AJF, Wright, IA 1983. Factors affecting maintenance requirements of beef cows and calves. Animal Production 37, 329334.Google Scholar
Salter, RE, Hudson, RJ 1980. Range relationships of feral horses with wild ungulates and cattle in Western Alberta. Journal of Range Management 33, 266271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) Institute Inc. 1999. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 35833597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed