Different fat sources in supplements for beef cattle at pasture.

We investigated the consequences of fat supplementation (free oil and rumen-protected oil) on the nutrient intake and digestion of beef cattle at pasture. Five rumen-cannulated Nelore bulls, with a median body weight (BW) of 467.8 ± 32.8 kg and an age of 26 months, were distributed in a Latin square design (5 × 5). The treatments were as follows: WF, no additional fat; PA, rumen-protected palm oil; PS, rumen-protected soybean oil; SO, soybean-free oil and CO, free corn oil. Nutrient intake and digestibility, ruminal pH and ammonia (NH3-N), serum urea and nitrogen balance were analysed. The supplements with different oil sources did not alter (P > 0.05) the intake and digestibility of dry matter (DM), forage DM intake (DM), organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fibre (NDF), neutral detergent fibre-corrected ash and protein (apNDF), nonfibre carbohydrates (NFC) or total digestible nutrients (TDN) compared to WF. An increase (P < 0.05) in the intake and digestibility of EE was observed with the inclusion of fat, independent of the source. No differences were observed between WF and other supplements with regard to ruminal parameters (pH and NH3-N) (P > 0.05) and serum urea (P > 0.05). The nitrogen balance was not affected by the fat source (P > 0.05). Supplementation of grazing beef cattle (2 g/kg BW) with free oil (130 g/kg DM supplement) or rumen-protected oil (160 g/kg DM supplement) did not interfere with nutrient intake and digestibility.

Effects of protein-energetic supplementation frequency on growth performance and nutritional characteristics of grazing beef cattle.

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate reduced supplementation frequencies for grazing beef cattle in rainy season. In experiment 1, evaluating the nutritional parameters, four rumen-cannulated Nellore bulls (BW = 410 kg) were used. In experiment 2, evaluating animal performance, 48 Nellore bulls (BW = 358 kg) were used. The treatments were as follows: mineral supplement (MS) alone and MS plus protein-energy supplement provided 3×, 5× and 7×/week. Supplementation frequency did not affect (P > 0.05) intake and digestibility. Average daily gain was greater (P < 0.001) to supplementation compared with MS. The supplementation 5×/week resulted in greater weight gain per hectare (9.24) and higher economic returns during the study period (1.64%) compared to other supplementations. Supplementation 5×/week increased animal performance and positively influenced economic returns.

Effect of calves' supplementation on performance, nutritional and behavioral characteristics of their dams.

The effects of supplementation of beef calves on weight gain, intake and digestibility of pasture, milk production and composition of their dams, and behavior of the pair cow-calf were assessed. Fifty-five beef cows with an initial average body weight of 449 ± 8 kg and their respective offspring, with an initial average body weight of 138 + 3 kg and aged between 90 and 150 days, were used. Animals were submitted to an experimental period of 112 days. The experimental treatments consisted of: control = mineral mixture only, plan 1 = high protein and high carbohydrate multiple supplement, plan 2 = high protein and low carbohydrate multiple supplement, plan 3 = low protein and high carbohydrate multiple supplement, and plan 4 = low protein and low carbohydrate multiple supplement. About 25 and 12.5 % of the protein requirements were supplied by the high and low protein supplements, respectively, and 15 and 7.5 % of total digestible nutrient requirements by the high and low carbohydrate supplements, respectively. Grazing behavior, performance, milk production, milk composition, intake, and digestibility of the cows were not affected (P > 0.05) by the supplementation of the calves. The supplemented calves had greater (P < 0.05) performance (as measured by final body weight, average daily gain, and final body condition score), intake and idle time, and lower (P < 0.05) grazing time, but supplementation did not affect (P > 0.05) suckling time and suckling frequency. It can be concluded that supplementation affects the behavior and feed intake of calves. However, it does not affect the suckling time and suckling frequency of calves. Additionally, performance, milk production, nutritional characteristics, and behavior of their dams are not affected.