Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Responses to supplements by weaned lambs grazing mature pasture or eating hay in yards

M Freer, H Dove, A Axelsen, JR Donnelly and GT McKinney

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 25(2) 289 - 297
Published: 1985

Abstract

Weaned crossbred lambs grazing mature pasture in summer at stocking rates of 14, 28 or 42 lambs/ha were supplemented for 60 days with 0, 400, 600 or 800 g/day of either sunflower meal or a 1:1 mixture of sunflower meal and oats. Mean daily gains in fasted weight without and with supplement were - 51 and 62 g, respectively, with no significant difference between the three feeding levels. Greasy wool production increased from 4.7 g/day without supplement to 9.9 g/day at the 600 or 800 g level but the composition of the supplement had no effect. Stocking rate had no effect on animal performance. It was estimated that pasture intake increased slightly with the first 400 g of supplement but fell sharply as the level increased further, with a substitution rate of 1.3. In two experiments, yarded lambs were offered oaten or lucerne hay ad libitum and mixtures of sunflower meal and oats at levels from 400 g/day to ad libitum. Mean daily gain in fasted weight increased from about 140 to about 190 g/day over this range of supplementation and greasy wool production from about 9 to about 10 g/day. In one experiment weight gain and wool production were significantly lower with a 1:6 mixture of sunflower meal and oats than with a 1:2 mixture and the same trend was shown in the other experiment. Measurements of intake showed that the substitution rate for both types of hay was only about 0.5. Comparisons of the animals' estimated requirements and intake in all three experiments indicated that the relatively poor performance of grazing animals was due to the very high substitution rate for grazed pasture at levels of supplement intake above 400 g/day.

https://doi.org/10.1071/EA9850289

© CSIRO 1985

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Get Permission

View Dimensions