|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Nutrient
Requirements
of Dairy Cattle
Seventh Revised Edition, 2001
Subcommittee on Dairy Cattle Nutrition
Committee on Animal Nutrition
Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R2
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS ~ 2101 Constitution Avenue, NVV ~ Washington, D.C. 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National
Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National
Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report
were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by the Agricultural Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture under
Agreement No. 59-32U4-5-6, the Center for Veterinary Medicine of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services under Agreement No. R-13-FD01495, and the American Feed Industry Association.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle / Subcommittee on Dairy Cattle
Nutrition, Committee on Animal Nutrition, Board on Agriculture, National
Research Council. 7th rev. ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p.
ISBN 0-309-06997-1
1. Dairy cattle Nutrition Requirements. 2. Dairy cattle Feeding
and feeds. I. National Research Council (U.S.). Subcommittee on Dairy
Cattle Nutrition.
SF203.N883 2001
636.2'13 dc21
00-012828
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area);
Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
OCR for page R3
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars
engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to
their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the
Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr.
Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy
of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the
selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal
government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national
needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William
A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services
of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of
the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional
charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care,
research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the
broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising
the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council
has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy
of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities.
The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and
Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
iii
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DAIRY CATTLE NUTRITION
JIMMY H. CLARK, Chair, University of Illinois
DAVID K. BEEDE, Michigan State University
RICHARD A. ERDMAN, University of Maryland
JESSE P. GOFF, USDA/ARS/NSDC, Ames, Iowa
RIC R. GRUMMER, University of Wisconsin
[AMES G. LINN, University of Minnesota
ALICE N. PELL, Cornell University
CHARLES G. SCHWAB, University of New Hampshire
TREVOR TOMKINS, Milk Specialties Company
GABRIELLA A. VARGA, Pennsylvania State University
WILLIAM P. WEISS, The Ohio State University
COMMITTEE ON ANIMAL NUTRITION
GARY L. CROMWELL, Chair, University of Kentucky
MARY E. ALLEN, National Zoological Park
MICHAEL L. GALYEAN, Texas Tech University
RONALD W. HARDY, University of Idaho
BRIAN W. McBRIDE, University of Guelph
KEITH E. RINEHART, Perdue Farms Inc.
L. LEE SOUTHERN, Louisiana State University
JERRY W. SPEARS, North Carolina State University
DONALD R. TOPLIFF, West Texas A&M University
WILLIAM P. WEISS, The Ohio State University
Stay
CHARLOTTE KIRK BAER, Program Director
NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Editor
STEPHANIE PADGHAM, Project Assistant
MELINDA SIMONS, Project Assistants
* through January 1999
v
OCR for page R6
BOARD ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
HARLEY W. MOON, Chair, Iowa State University
DAVID H. BAKER, University of Illinois
MAY R. BERENBAUM, University of Illinois
CORNELIA B. FLORA, Iowa State University
ROBERT T. FRALEY, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri
ROBERT B. FRIDLEY, University of California, Davis
W.R. (REG) COMES, University of California
PERRY R. HAGENSTEIN, Institute for Forest Analysis, Planning, and Policy, Wayland,
Massachusetts
GEORGE R. HALLBERG, The Cadmus Group, Inc., Waltham, Massachusetts
CALESTOUS PUMA, Harvard University
GILBERT A. LEVEILLE, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, Denville, New Jersey
WHITNEY MACMILLAN, Cargill, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota (retired)
WILLIAM L. OGREN, U.S. Department of Agriculture (retired)
NANCY I. RACHMAN, Novigen Sciences, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia
G. EDWARD SCHUH, University of Minnesota
JOHN W. SUTTIE, University of Wisconsin
THOMAS N. URBAN, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., Des Moines, Iowa (retired)
ROBERT P. WILSON, Mississippi State University
JAMES J. ZUICHES, Washington State University
Stay
WARREN MUIR, Executive Director
DAVID L. MEEKER, Director
CHARLOTTE KIRK BAER, Associate Director
SHIRLEY B. THATCHER, Administrative Assistant
vi
OCR for page R7
Preface
Dairy cattle production is an important component of
the food industry. Nutrition is a key factor in the perfor-
mance, health, and welfare of dairy cattle. Given the large
variation in dairy cattle types and the various environments
in which they are maintained, producers must increasingly
concern themselves with optimizing feeding programs.
To that end, the Subcommittee on Dairy Cattle Nutri-
tion, which was appointed in 1997 under the guidance
of the Committee on Animal Nutrition in the National
Research Council's Board on Agriculture and Natural
Resources, embarked on a monumental task in the devel-
opment of a new edition of Nutrient Requirements of Dairy
Cattle. As we conducted our work, it was our desire to
provide users of this volume an accurate, comprehensive,
and useful review of the scientific literature and practical
experiences that have shaped our knowledge of dairy cattle
nutrition over the past decade.
We chose to provide both a written description of the
biologic basis for predicting nutrient requirements and a
computer model on a compact disk to use for estimating
requirements of lactating, nonlactating, growing, and
young dairy animals. The subcommittee recognizes that
some users of this revision will prefer to apply tables of
requirements for an average situation, and we have
attempted to provide those tables. Although there is often
uncertainty using a modeling approach to estimate nutrient
requirements, we believed that we had a responsibility to
move the science forward, so we included a model that
was constructed on a substantial amount of data. We
believe that the model builds on the work of previous
Research Council committees and moves the science for-
ward without reaching so far that estimates cannot be vali-
dated. We found that an abundance of new science-based
knowledge had surfaced since the last edition, but we also
found that our knowledge of many aspects of dairy cattle
nutrition is incomplete; we chose not to venture too far
from what our knowledge base would allow.
In developing this report, the subcommittee considered
current issues in dairy cattle production inasmuch as they
affect nutrient requirements and animal feeding manage-
ment, including new emphasis on environmental consider-
ations in the feeding of dairy cattle. We have attempted
in this new edition to focus more than in the past on
considerations and criteria for establishing nutrient
requirements.
This study was conducted through the concerted efforts
of the members of the Subcommittee on Dairy Cattle
Nutrition. We began our 3-year task in 1997 and completed
this volume in 2000. We hope that it will be used with the
same passion and enthusiasm with which it was developed.
JIMMY H. CLARK, Chair
Subcommittee on Dairy Cattle Nutrition
vii
OCR for page R8
OCR for page R9
Acknowledgments
A volume of this magnitude represents the combined
efforts of many individuals. The subcommittee thanks all
those who shared their insights and knowledge to bring
this document to fruition. We would first like to thank
everyone who participated in our public sessions and the
special sessions that were organized for our benefit during
the American Dairy Science Association meetings over the
past several years.
During the course of its deliberations, the subcommittee
sought advice and special assistance from several people
who gave generously of their time to help us complete our
task. Very special thanks are due to Carl Davis, University
of Illinois; Jim Drackley, University of Illinois; Gale Bate-
man, University of Illinois; Danny Fox, Cornell University;
Brian Garthwaite, Food and Drug Administration; and
Normand St. Pierre, Ohio State University. We are
extremely indebted to them. In addition, we sought and
received guidance early on from R. Lee Baldwin, Univer-
sity of California, Davis; Mark Hanigan, Purina Mills, Inc.;
Rick Kohn, University of Maryland; and Dale Waldo,
U. S. Department of Agriculture (retired).
The expertise of Vajesh Durbal, Cornell University, is
gratefully acknowledged. He was instrumental in program-
ming the computer model, and we could not have accom-
plished what we did without his skill and patience.
The subcommittee is grateful to members of the
National Research Council staff who worked diligently to
maintain progress and quality in our work. Through her
dedication, guidance, and skill, Charlotte Kirk Baer trans-
formed our spirited verbal pondering and imperfect writ-
ten drafts into a comprehensive report. Stephanie Padgham
provided able assistance and much-needed momentum
during the final stages of our study. Melinda Simons sup-
ported all of us cheerfully and effectively during the early
phases of the study and Laura Boschini shared her skills
in preparing the report for publication.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individu-
als chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical
expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the
NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this
independent review is to provide candid and critical com-
ments that will assist the institution in making its published
report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report
meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and
responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments
and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the
integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the
following individuals for their review of this report: R. Lee
Baldwin, University of California, Davis; Paul Chandler,
Chandler Associates; Larry Chase, Cornell University; bud
Heinrichs, Pennsylvania State University; Roger HemLen,
University of Kentucky; Alois Kertz, Agri Brands Interna-
tional; David Mertens, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Dairy Forage Research Center; Jerry Olson, University of
Minnesota; Leo Timms, Iowa State University; Michael
Van Amburgh, Cornell University; Harold Van Horn, Uni-
versity of Florida; and Michael VandeHaar, Michigan State
University. Although the reviewers listed above have pro-
vided many constructive comments and suggestions, they
were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommenda-
tions nor did they see the final draft of the report before its
release. The review of this report was overseen by Michael
Galye an, Texas Tech University, appointed by the Commit-
tee on Animal Nutrition, and Robert Wilson, Mississippi
State University, appointed by the Board on Agriculture
and Natural Resources. These individuals were responsible
for making certain that an independent examination of
this report was carried out in accordance with institutional
procedures and that all review comments were carefully
considered. Responsibility for the final content of this
report rests entirely with the authoring subcommittee and
the institution.
ix
OCR for page R10
University of Kentucky; Alois Kertz, Agri Brands international; David Mertens, USDA Dairy
Forage Research Center; Jerry Olson, University of Minnesota; Leo Timms, Iowa State
University; Michael Van Amburgh, Cornell University; Harold Van Horn, University of Florida;
Michael VandeHaar, Michigan State University; Michael Galyean, Texas Tech University; and
Robert Wilson, Mississippi State University. Although the persons listed have provided many
constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests
solely with the authoring subcommittee and the National Research Council.
x
OCR for page R11
Contents
OVERVIEW
. . . . . . . . . . . .
1 DRY MATTER INTAKE
Equations for Predicting DMI, 3
Lactating Cows, 3
Growing Heifers, 6
.1
Nutrients and Feeding Management Related to DMI of Lactating Dairy Cows, 6
Moisture, 6
Neutral Detergent Fiber, 7
Forage to Concentration Ratio, 7
Fat, 7
Cow Behavior, Management, and Environmental Factors Affecting Feed Intake, 8
Eating Habits and Cow Behavior, 8
Weather, 9
Feeding Method Total Mixed Ration vs. Individual Ingredient, 9
Feeding Frequency, 9
Sequence of Feeding, 10
Access to Feed, 10
References, 10
2 ENERGY.....................................
Energy Requirements of Lactating and Pregnant Cows, 13
Energy Units, 13
Energy Values of Feeds, 13
Estimating TDN of Feeds at Maintenance, 14
Estimating DE of Feeds, 15
Estimating DE at Actual Intake, 16
Estimating ME at Actual Intake, 17
Estimating NET at Actual Intake, 17
Estimating Net Energy of Feeds for Maintenance and Gain, 17
Comparison of New NET Values with Values from 1989 Edition, 18
Precautions, 18
Energy Requirements, 18
Maintenance Requirements, 18
Lactation Requirements, 19
Activity Requirements, 20
xi
.13
OCR for page R14
x~v Contents
Water Quality, 180
Summary, 182
References, 182
9 UNIQUE ASPECTS OF DAIRY CATTLE NUTRITION . .
Transition Cows and Nonlactating Cows, 184
Nutritional and Physiologic Status of the Transition Cow, 184
Nutrient Requirements for Pregnancy, 185
Nutrient Intake, 185
Energy and Protein Density for Dry Cow Diets, 186
Etiology and Nutritional Prevention of Metabolic Disorders, 188
Fatty Liver and Ketosis, 188
Udder Edema, 189
Milk Fever, 191
Grass Tetany, 194
Retained Placenta and Metritis, 194
Displacement of the Abomasum, 196
Rumen Acidosis and Laminitis, 197
Milk Fat Depression, 199
Performance Modifiers, 201
Mineral Salts and Their Role as Buffers, 201
Ionophores, 201
Direct Fed Microbials, 203
Fungal Cultures, 203
Bovine Somatotropin, 204
References, 205
10 NUTRIENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE YOUNG CALF
Energy Requirements of Calves, 214
Young Replacement Calves Fed Milk or Milk Replacer Only, 215
Young Replacement Calves Fed Milk and Starter Feed or Milk Replacer and
Starter Feed, 219
Veal Calves, 220
Ruminant Calves (Large-Breed and Small-Breed Females) from
Weaning to Body Weight of 100 kilograms, 220
Effects of Environmental Temperature on Energy Requirements of Young
Calves, 220
Protein Requirements of Calves, 221
Mineral and Vitamin Requirements of Calves, 222
Minerals, 222
Vitamins, 224
Feed Composition Data with Application to Diet Formulations for Calves, 225
Other Aspects of Calf Nutrition, 226
Fetal Nutrition, 226
Colostrum, 227
Water and Electrolytes, 227
Milk Replacers, 228
Feed Additives, 228
Practical Feeding Considerations, 229
References, 230
.184
.214
OCR for page R15
Contents xv
11 GROWTH
Energy and Protein Requirements for Growing Dairy Heifers, 234
Terminology, 234
Growth Requirements and Composition of Gain, 234
Evaluation of Model Predictions of Energy and Protein Requirements for
Growth of Dairy Heifers, 236
Setting Target Growth Rates, 238
Evaluation of Target Weight Equations, 239
Maintenance Requirement Effects on Growth, 239
Basal Maintenance Requirement, 240
Adjustment for Previous Temperature, 240
Adjustment for Previous Plane of Nutrition, 240
Adjustment for the Direct Effects of Cold Stress, 241
Adjustment for the Direct Effects of Heat Stress, 241
Model Evaluation, 241
References, 242
.234
12 DAIRY CATTLE NUTRITION AND THE ENVIRONMENT 244
Nitrogen, 245
Phosphorus, 246
Summary, 247
References, 247
13 CARBOHYDRATE CHEMISTRY AND FEED PROCESSING 249
Nonstructural Carbohydrates, 249
Analytic Procedures, 249
Neutral Detergent Fiber, 249
Neutral Detergent Insoluble Nitrogen, 250
Acid Detergent Fiber, 250
Acid Detergent Insoluble Nitrogen 250
Lignin, 250
Total Nonstructural Carbohydrates, 251
Effects of Processing on Energy in Feed, 251
Sources of Starch, 251
Oilseeds, 254
References, 255
_ c~ _ __ 7
14 NUTRIENT REQUIREMENT TABLES
.258
15 NUTRIENT COMPOSITION OF FEEDS 281
16 MODEL EVALUATION AND PREDICTION EQUATIONS 315
GLOSSARY 334
USER'S GUIDE 341
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
INDEX
.361
OCR for page R16
Tables and Figures
TABLES
1-1 Validation statistics for prediction of dry matter intake by heifers, 6
1-2 Effect of bunk space per cow on feeding behavior and intake of early lactation cows, 9
2-1 Processing adjustment factors (PAF) for NFC, 14
2-2 True digestibility coefficients of CP used to estimate TONS values of animal-based
feedstuffs, 15
2-3 True digestibilities at maintenance (assumed 8 percent increase in digestibility com-
pared with 3X maintenance) of fatty acids from various fat sources, 15
Empty body (EB) chemical composition at different body condition scores (BCS),
relative Eb weight (EBW), and NED provided by live weight (LOO) loss and NED
needed for LW gain, 24
2-5 Energy provided by or needed to change body condition score (BCS) of cows of different
live weights and BCS, 25
Fatty acid composition and iodine values of fats and oils, 29
4-1
4-2
5-1
Nonstructural (NSC) and nonf~ber (NFC) analyses of selected feedstuffs, 34
Composition of the NFC fraction of selected feedstuffs, 35
Recommended minimum concentrations (% of DM) of total and forage NDF and
recommended maximum concentrations (% of DM) of NFC for diets of lactating
cows when the diet is fed as a total mixed ration, the forage has adequate particle
size, and ground corn is the predominant starch source, 37
Studies used to evaluate milk and milk protein yield responses to changes in the
concentration of dietary crude protein, 50
5-2 Descriptive statistics for data set used to evaluate animal responses to CP and RDP, 50
5-3 Studies used to evaluate milk yield responses to changes in the concentration of
dietary ruminally degraded protein, 51
5-4 Studies used to determine the relationship between NED intake and passage of
microbial protein to the small intestine of lactating dairy cows, 57
5-5 Studies reporting in situ determined estimates of N fractions and rates of protein
degradations that were used in preparing this edition, 60
xvi
OCR for page R17
Tables and Figures xvii
5-7
5-6 Recommended procedures and reporting details for a standardized in situ procedure
for measuring ruminal degradability of protein in dairy cattle, 62
Published studies that were summarized for the purpose of arriving at estimates of
intestinal digestibility of the RUP fraction of feedstuffs, 64
5-8 Studies used to validate the model equations for predicting flows of MCP, RUP plus
ECP, and NAN flows to the small intestine, 66
5-9 Mean percentage contributions of cysteine (and its oxidation product cystine) to total
sulfur amino acids (methionine + cysteine + cystine) and of tyrosine to tyrosine
+ phenylalanine in ruminal microbes and feedstuff, 70
5-10 A comparison of the EAA profiles of body tissue and milk with that of ruminal
bacteria and protozoa and common feeds, 72
Experiments used to develop equations for predicting amino acid passage to the
small intestine, 76
5-12 Feedstuffs and the extent of their use in the 199 diets in the data set used to
develop equations to predict the content of individual EAA in total EAA of duodenal
protein, 76
5-13 Descriptive statistics of the data used for developing equations for predicting content
of individual EAA in total EAA of duodenal protein and for predicting flows of total
EAA to the small intestine, 77
5-14
Comparison of the root mean square prediction errors (RMSPE) obtained from plots
of residuals (predicted-measured vs. measured) for equations that predicted directly
the flow of each EAA with those accepted for use in the model that predicts directly
the percentage of each EAA in total EAA of duodenal protein, 80
5-15 Studies used to determine the dose-response relationships for lysine and methionine
in metabolizable protein, 82
6-1 Comparison of estimated dietary copper requirements (mg/d) and dietary copper
concentrations (mg/kg of DM) for cattle in various physiologic states, 134
6-2 Calculated copper absorption coefficients across various dietary sulfur and molyEde-
num concentrations, 134
Comparison of estimated dietary manganese requirements (mg/d) and dietary manga-
nese concentrations (mg/kg of DM) for cattle in various physiologic states, 141
6-4
7-1
Comparison of estimated dietary zinc requirements (mg/d) and dietary zinc concen-
trations (mg/kg of DM) for cattle in various physiologic states, 145
Estimated absorption of selected B-vitamins from the small intestine compared with
estimated requirements for tissue and milk synthesis of a 650-kg cow producing 35
kg of 4 percent fat-corrected milk/day, 173
Guidelines for total soluble salts (TSS) in water for cattle, 180
8-2 Water hardness guidelines, 181
8 - 3 N itrate in wate r, 181
8-4 Generally considered safe concentrations of some potentially toxic nutrients and
contaminants in water for cattle, 182
10-1 Daily energy and protein requirements of young replacement calves fed only milk
or milk replacer, 215
OCR for page R18
xviii Tables and Figures
10-2 Daily energy and protein requirements of calves fed milk and starter or milk replacer
and starter, 216
10-3 Daily energy and protein requirements of veal calves fed only milk or milk
replacer, 217
10-4 Daily energy and protein requirements of weaned (ruminant) calves, 218
10-5 Effect of environment on energy requirement of young calves, 221
10-6 Mineral and vitamin concentrations recommended in diets of young calves, compared
with average for fresh whole milk (DM basis), 223
10-7 Energy, protein, calcium, and phosphorus concentrations in foodstuffs commonly
used in the formulation of milk replacers for young calves, 226
10-8 Energy, protein, fiber, and mineral composition of three milk replacers (MR), a
starter feed, and a grower feed for young calves, 227
11-1 Relationships between mature size and growth requirements, 237
11-2 Calculation of target weights and daily gain using the data set of Van Amburgh et
al. (1998a), 239
11-3 Application of equations to predict energy and protein requirements, using target
weights and daily gains from table 11-2, 240
11-4 Multipliers used to adjust the maintenance energy requirement to reflect various
environmental conditions, 241
11-5 Predicted effects of four environments on heifer performance, 242
14-1 Daily nutrient requirements of small breed cows (live weight -
lactation, 260
14-2 Daily nutrient requirements of small breed cows (live weight = 454 kg) in
midlactation, 261
14-3 Daily nutrient requirements of small breed cows (live weight = 454 kg) in
midlactation, 262
14-4 Daily nutrient requirements of large breed cows (live weight = 680 kg) in early
lactation, 263
14-5 Daily nutrient requirements of large breed cows (live weight = 680 kg) in
midlactation, 264
14-6 Daily nutrient requirements of large breed cows (live weight = 680 kg) in
midlactation, 265
14-7 Nutrient requirements of lactating dairy cows as determined using sample diets, 266
14-8 Nutrient requirements and required diet nutrient concentrations for fresh cows fed
an example fresh-cow ration, 268
14-9 Nutrient requirements and diet concentrations needed to meet requirements for
dry cows as determined using example diets, 270
14-10 Example diet incorporating dietary guidelines suggested in chapter 9 for transitioning
a heifer during the later dry period to acclimate her to the lactating ration and to
reduce metabolic disease, 272
14-11 Example diet incorporating dietary guidelines suggested in chapter 9 for transitioning
a cow during the last weeks of gestation to acclimate her to a lactating ration and
to reduce metabolic disease, 274
= 454 kg) in early
OCR for page R19
Tables and Figures xix
14-12 Daily nutrient requirements (DM basis) of small breed (mature weight = 450 kg)
non-bred heifers, 276
14-13 Daily nutrient requirements (DM basis) of large breed (mature weight = 650 kg)
non-bred heifers, 277
14-14 Daily nutrient requirements (DM basis) of small breed (mature weight = 450 kg)
bred heifers, 278
14-15 Daily nutrient requirements (DM basis) of large breed (mature weight = 650 kg)
bred heifers, 279
14-16 Nutrient requirements of growing Holstein heifers using model to predict target
average daily gain needed to attain a mature body weight of 680 kg, 280
Nutrient composition and variability of some foodstuffs commonly fed to dairy
cattle, 283
15-2a Nitrogen fractions, RUP digestibility, and amino acids of feedstuffs, 290
15-2b Nitrogen fractions and amino acid composition of less commonly used feedstuffs,
which are cited in the literature but were not included as commonly used foodstuffs
in Table 15-2a, 300
15-3 Mineral composition of some foodstuffs commonly fed to dairy cattle, 304
L Compositions of inorganic mineral sources and element absorption coefficients for
dairy cattle on a 100% dry matter basis, 311
Sources of data used in the model evaluation, 316
Ration densities of required minerals for three categories of feeds for calves, 331
Summary report for diet A, 355
Net energy and protein requirements of heifers with mature weights of BOO, 65O,
and 800 kg, 357
UG-3 Effect of body weight and rate of gain on daily gain, 357
UG-4 Target weights for dairy heifers, 358
UG-5 Target daily gains post transition to pre-conception for three mature sizes of dairy
heifers, 358
UG-6 Inputs for heifer growth exercises, 359
UG-7 Maintenance energy requirement multipliers for various environmental conditions, 359
FIGURES
1-1 Dry matter intake prediction of early lactation cows using equation 1-2 and Kertz
et al. (1991) equations, 4
1-2 Dry matter intake, four percent fat corrected milk production, and body weight
change of primiparous and multiparous cows during 48 weeks of lactation, 5
Observed versus predicted dry matter intake of growing dairy heifers using beef calf
equation from Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle (National Research Council,
1996), 7
The relationship between feeding level expressed as multiples of maintenance and
the unit decline in diet TDN per multiple of maintenance where TDN percentage
unit decline = 0.18 x -10.3, r2 = 0.85, 16
OCR for page R20
xx Tables and Figures
2-2 Body condition scoring chart adapted from Edmonson et al. (1989), 23
5-1
Analyses of crude protein fractions using borate-phosphate buffer and acid detergent
and neutral detergent solutions, 47
5-2 Response surface for data set described in "Animal Responses to CP, RDP, and
RUP" section, 51
Plot of observed (open circles) and residuals (squares) for measured microbial N
flow (g/day) versus estimated NET intake in lactating and dry dairy cows, 56
5-4 Relationship between measured efficiency of microbial protein synthesis (g microbial
N/kg rumen fermented OM) and apparent ruminal N balance, 57
Plot of adjusted (open circles) and residuals (squares) for measured microbial N (g/
day) versus measured total tract digestible OM (kg/d), 58
5-6 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circles) and residuals (predicted— measured;
open circles) vs. measured flows of microbial N to the small intestine of dairy cows, 66
5-7 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circles) and residuals (predicted—measured;
open circles) vs. measured flows of NANMN (rumen undegradable N plus endoge-
nous N) to the small intestine of dairy cows, 66
5-8 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circle) and residuals (predicted—measured;
open circles) vs. measured flows of NAN (microbial N + rumen undegradable N
+ endogenous N) to the small intestine of dairy cows, 67
5-9 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circles) and residuals (predicted-measured;
open circles) vs. measured (Lys, g/d) (from predicted Lys, percent of EAA and
predicted EAA, g/d), 79
5-10 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circles) and residual (predicted-measured; open
circles) vs. measured Met, g/d (from predicted Met, percent of EAA and predicted
EAA, g/d), 79
5-11 Plot of predicted vs. measured (filled circles) and residuals (predicted-measured;
open circles) vs. measured flow of total EAA, 79
5-12 Milk protein content responses as a function of digestible Lys and Met concentrations
in MP, 84
5-13 Milk protein yield responses as a function of digestible Lys and Met concentrations
in MP, 84
9-1 Dietary concentrations of crude protein needed in diets fed to transition cows to
meet requirements, 187
9-2 Dietary concentrations of NET needed in diets fed to transition cows to meet require-
ments, 188
10-1
Example of growth rate predicted by the model in this edition for a 40-kg calf fed
whole milk (open bars) or a milk replacer (dark bars) at TO, 14, or 18 percent of
body weight, 229
16-1 Model predicted vs. actual dry matter intake, 316
16-2 NET intake (estimated from observed dry matter intake and model estimated NET
~ , ~
concentration) versus NET use (estimated from model predicted maintenance and
lactation requirement plus NET needed to meet observed body weight change), 317
16-3 Actual milk production versus model predicted MP allowable milk production, 317
OCR for page R21
Tables and Figures xxi
16-4 Difference between MP allowable milk and actual milk versus model predicted lysine
concentration of MP, 317
Difference between MP allowable milk and actual milk versus model predicted
methionine concentration of MP, 317
UG-1 Settings for number properties, 344
UG-2 Settings for currency, 345
UG-3 Program menu bar, 346
Help box, 348
Program settings screen, 348
UG-6 Animal description screen, 349
UG-7 Production screen, 349
UG-8 Management/Environment screen, 350
UG-9 Feed screen, 350
UG-lORation screen, 352
UG-ll Reports screen, 352
OCR for page R22
OCR for page R23
Nutrient
Requirements
of Dairy Cattle
Seventh Revised Edition, 2001
OCR for page R24
