Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effect of muddy conditions in the field on the liveweight gain of cattle consuming Leucaena leucocephalaDigitaria eriantha pastures in north-west Australia

S. R. Petty A B and D. P. Poppi C D
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Department of Agriculture Western Australia, Kununurra, WA 6743, Australia.

B Present address: PO Box 1354, Howard Springs, NT 0835, Australia.

C Schools of Animal Studies and Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia.

D Corresponding author. Email: d.poppi@uq.edu.au

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(7) 818-820 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA07416
Submitted: 18 December 2007  Accepted: 13 March 2008   Published: 20 June 2008

Abstract

Cattle grazing leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala cv. Cunningham)–pangola grass (Digitaria eriantha cv. Steudel) pastures in the Ord River Irrigation Area in north-west Western Australia, sometimes exhibit higher liveweight gains in the dry season when temperature and humidity are lower. Two factors have been suggested as causing this seasonal difference: the combined effect of the temperature and humidity, and the effect of the muddy conditions in the field associated with rainfall in the wet summer season.

An experiment over 81 days, from August to October 1995, was conducted to evaluate the effect of muddy conditions on the liveweight gain of cattle grazing a leucaena–pangola grass pasture. Replicated paddocks were grazed in a normal irrigated system during this dry season whereas other paddocks were flood irrigated twice weekly to create muddy conditions. Cattle grazing the muddy paddocks had a liveweight gain of 0.29 kg/steer.day, which was lower (P < 0.001) than the animals in the dry paddocks (0.57 kg/steer.day). These cattle spent less time grazing (41.9 v. 67.6% of animals grazing at three observation times, 0600, 1100 and 1500 hours, on each day over the whole 81 days; P ≤ 0.001). It was suggested that the muddy condition of the paddock was the primary factor causing this difference in liveweight gain and grazing behaviour.

Additional keyword: cattle growth.


Acknowledgements

The skilled technical assistance of T. Triglone is gratefully acknowledged. This project was funded by the Department of Agriculture, WA.


References


Blunt CG (1978) Production from steers grazing nitrogen fertilized irrigated pangola grass in the Ord Valley. Tropical Grasslands 12, 90–96. open url image1

Blunt CG, Jones RJ (1977) Steer liveweight gains in relation to the proportion of time spent on Leucaena leucocephala pastures. Tropical Grasslands 11, 159–164. open url image1

Chacon E, Stobbs TH (1976) Influence of progressive defoliation of a grass sward on the eating behaviour of cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 27, 709–727.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Jones RJ (1990) Nitrogen rate and stocking rate effects on steer gains from grazed irrigated pangola grass in the Ord Valley, Western Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 30, 599–605.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Jones RJ , Tothill JC (1985) Botanal – a field and computer package for assessment of plant biomass and botanical composition. In ‘Ecology and management of the world’s savannas’. (Eds JC Tothill, JJ Mott) pp. 318–320. (Australian Academy of Sciences: Canberra)

Megarrity RG (1981) Rapid estimation of DHP in urine. Leucaena Research Reports 2, 16. open url image1

National Research Council (1986) ‘Predicting feed intake of food-producing animals.’ (National Academy of Sciences: Washington DC)

Petty SR, Poppi DP, Triglone TR (1998) Effect of maize supplementation, seasonal temperature and humidity on the liveweight gain of steers grazing irrigated Leucaena leucocephala/Digitaria eriantha pastures in north-west Australia. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 130, 95–105.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1