Monthly metabolisable energy feed requirements of crossbred ewes in accelerated and traditional lamb production systems
N. M. FogartyNSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia. Email: neal.fogarty@dpi.nsw.gov.au
Animal Production Science 55(5) 595-602 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN13456
Submitted: 1 November 2013 Accepted: 13 February 2014 Published: 28 March 2014
Abstract
The annual metabolisable energy (ME) feed requirements and patterns of monthly ME requirements for ewe maintenance, gestation, lactation and lamb growth to weaning were evaluated for 1175 crossbred ewes over 4 years at two sites (Cowra and Wagga Wagga). The study involved three lamb production systems: accelerated 8-monthly joinings, with two flocks joined 4 months apart (Ac8), spring joining with an autumn backup joining (SpB), and annual autumn joining (AuA). The Ac8 and SpB systems were evaluated at Cowra and the SpB and AuA systems were evaluated at Wagga Wagga. Two genotypes of ewes, Border Leicester × Merino (BLM) and Hyfer (Dorset × Merino composite), were used at both sites, with natural joinings to Dorset, Suffolk or Hyfer rams. The ewe liveweight, reproduction and lamb production data from individual ewes in the experiment were used to calculate monthly ME requirements using derived simplified equations for ewe maintenance, gestation, lactation and lamb growth to weaning. Annual ME, dry sheep equivalent (DSE = maintenance for a 50-kg, 3.5-year-old ewe = 3030 MJ) and weight of lamb weaned per DSE were analysed and the monthly pattern of ME components presented graphically. The ewes in the Ac8 system had 11% higher ME than those in the SpB system because of their considerably higher annual lambing performance, which resulted in 16–47% greater efficiency of the Ac8 compared with the SpB system when expressed as weight of lamb weaned per DSE. There was also a lower proportion of ME for ewe maintenance in the Ac8 (58%) than SpB or AuA (68%) systems. There was little difference in the annual feed requirements or DSE for ewes in the SpB and AuA production systems, although ewes in the AuA system weaned 9–28% more weight of lamb per DSE than the SpB ewes because of their higher lambing performance. The differences in ME and DSE between the BLM and Hyfer ewes were relatively small and mainly reflected the differences in lambing performance of the genotypes in the various production systems. The seasonal pattern of ME for the AuA and SpB systems showed a sharp increase from the last month of pregnancy to a high peak at weaning with a relatively low requirement for the rest of the year. Under the Ac8 system the ME requirements were more consistent throughout the year and at a lower level than the peak for the other systems. The results highlight the possible increased efficiency from an accelerated lambing system, provided the seasonal feed requirements throughout the year can be provided cost effectively.
References
Afolayan RA, Fogarty NM, Gilmour AR, Ingham VM, Gaunt GM, Cummins LJ (2008) Reproductive performance and genetic parameters in first cross ewes from different maternal genotypes. Journal of Animal Science 86, 804–814.| Reproductive performance and genetic parameters in first cross ewes from different maternal genotypes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18156352PubMed |
Atkins KD (1980) The comparative productivity of five ewe breeds 3. Adult ewe performance. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 20, 288–295.
| The comparative productivity of five ewe breeds 3. Adult ewe performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
deNicolo G, Morris ST, Kenyon PR, Morel PCH (2008) A comparison of two lamb production systems in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 51, 365–375.
| A comparison of two lamb production systems in New Zealand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dickerson GE (1978) Animal size and efficiency: basic concepts. Animal Production 27, 367–379.
| Animal size and efficiency: basic concepts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dzakuma JM, Harris DL (1989) Computer modelling of sheep reproduction: II Accelerated reproduction in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 67, 2212–2221.
Fisher JW (2001) An economic comparison of production systems for sheep. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 49, 327–336.
| An economic comparison of production systems for sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fogarty NM, Mulholland JG (2013) Annual lambing performance of crossbred ewes in out-of-season and accelerated lamb production systems. Animal Production Science 53, 1093–1100.
| Annual lambing performance of crossbred ewes in out-of-season and accelerated lamb production systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fogarty NM, Mulholland JG (2014) Seasonal reproductive performance of crossbred ewes in intensive lamb production systems. Animal Production Science 54,
| Seasonal reproductive performance of crossbred ewes in intensive lamb production systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | in press.
Fogarty NM, Brash LD, Gilmour AR (1994) Genetic parameters for reproduction and lamb production and their components and liveweight, fat depth and wool production in Hyfer sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 45, 443–457.
| Genetic parameters for reproduction and lamb production and their components and liveweight, fat depth and wool production in Hyfer sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fogarty NM, McLeod L, Morgan JE (2003) Variation among crossbred ewes in lamb productivity and profit on a feed unit basis. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 15, 314–317.
Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ, Cullis BR, Thompson R (2009) ‘ASReml user guide. Release 3.0.’ (VSN International Ltd: Hemel Hempstead, UK) Available at www.vsni.co.uk [Verified 15 February 2014]
Hunter GL (2010) Accelerated lambing. Part 2. Increasing the frequency of pregnancy in sheep. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 4, 009
| Accelerated lambing. Part 2. Increasing the frequency of pregnancy in sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morel PCH, Kenyon PR, Morris ST (2004) Economical analysis of year round lamb production. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 64, 179–182.
Salmon L, Donnelly JR, Moore AD, Freer A, Simpson RJ (2004) Evaluation of options for production of large lean lambs in south-eastern Australia. Animal Feed Science and Technology 112, 195–209.
| Evaluation of options for production of large lean lambs in south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Standing Committee on Agriculture (1990) ‘Feeding standards for Australian livestock – ruminants.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Speedy AW, FitzSimons J (1977) The reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn and Border Leicester × Scottish Blackface ewes mated three times in 2 years. Animal Production 24, 189–196.
| The reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn and Border Leicester × Scottish Blackface ewes mated three times in 2 years.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wang CT, Dickerson GE (1991) Simulated effects of reproductive performance on life-cycle efficiency of lamb and wool production at three lambing intervals. Journal of Animal Science 69, 4338–4347.
Young JM, Thompson AN, Kennedy AJ (2010) Bioeconomic modelling to identify the relative importance of a range of critical control points for prime lamb production systems in south-west Victoria. Animal Production Science 50, 748–756.
| Bioeconomic modelling to identify the relative importance of a range of critical control points for prime lamb production systems in south-west Victoria.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
