Animal feed resources information system

Did you find the information you were looking for? Is it valuable to you? Feedipedia is encountering funding shortage. We need your help to keep providing reference-based feeding recommendations for your animals.
Would you consider donating? If yes, please click on the button Donate.

Any amount is the welcome. Even one cent is helpful to us!

Silva et al., 2007. Ciência Anim. Bras., 8 (4): 609-620

Document reference 
Silva, R. G. da; Neiva, J. N. M. ; Candido, M. J. D. ; Lobo, R. N. B., 2007. Behavior and productive performance of sheep maintained in Tanzania grass (Panicum maximum) pastures under intermittent stocking. Ciência Anim. Bras., 8 (4): 609-620
To evaluate the behaviour and productive performance of sheep grazing Tanzania grass (Panicum maximum) pastures during rest periods (RP) corresponding to the time necessary for the expansion of 1.5 (1.5L), 2.5 (2.5L) or 3.5 (3.5L) new leaves/tiller, this research was carried out. Aspects such as the time animals spent under shade and the time spent for grazing, ruminating and in idleness, beyond the number of times defaecating, urinating and ingesting water or salt per day as well as tax of bits (TXB) were evaluated. For evaluation of the productive performance, the average daily gain (ADG) and the stocking rate expressed in number of animals for hectare (NAH), beyond the production for hectare, express in kg of liveweight (PLW) were determined. The animals maintained in pastures under 3.5L RP spent 21% of the time between 5 and 18 hours under shade. The animals in the paddocks with 2.5L RP spent minor time percentage grazing, indicating that in this condition the animals got to ingest greater amount of forage in a lesser interval time. In relation to the TXB, there were no differences in the periods from 8 to 11 hours and from 17 to 18 hours. On the other hand in the 2.5L RP there were no differences among the evaluated intervals, but its TXB was higher than the 3.5L RP. In terms of the productive performance, it was observed that the animals maintained in the 1.5L PD showed the greater GMD, however its corresponding paddocks showed the lowest NAH and AUH, comparing to the 3.5L RP paddocks. On the other hand, the 1.5L and the 2.5L pastures presented similar PLW which, in turn, was superior to the 3.5L RP pastures. It is concluded that the pastures with Tanzania grass must be managed under an RP of 2.5 leaves/tiller, for at this stage satisfactory PLW can be achieved and it also allows the animals to consume more forage for a short period of time.
Citation key 
Silva et al., 2007