124. Effect of Protein Supplementation Frequency on Forage Utilization by Cattle Consuming Cool-season or Warm-season Low-quality Forage

Abstract Cattle consuming low-quality forage (LQF; < 7% crude protein [CP]) require protein supplementation to improve forage utilization. However, daily supplementation is labor intensive, and it may be more practical for producers to adopt an infrequent supplementation strategy. When protein is supplemented, the type of basal forage (e.g., cool-season [C3] versus warm season [C4]) should be considered as the response to protein supplementation may depend on forage type. Previous research has quantified forage utilization response to less frequent protein supplementation, but the interaction between protein supplementation frequency and forage type has yet to be determined. The objective of this study was to assess utilization of wheat straw (C3: 5.3% CP, 81.2% neutral detergent fiber [NDF]) versus King Ranch Bluestem (C4: 4.3% CP, 76.3% NDF) by Angus steers receiving supplemental protein daily or every other day. Six ruminally cannulated steers (252 ± 23 BW) were used in a 6 × 6 Latin Square experiment with six 18-d periods. Each period included 8 d for treatment adaptation, 8 d to measure intake and digestion, and 2 d for assessment of rumen fermentation. Treatments were arranged as a 2 × 3 factorial where one factor was forage type (C3 versus C4) and the other was frequency of supplementation (none, daily [125 mg N/kg BW], or every other day [250 mg N/kg BW]). There were no interactions between forage type and supplementation frequency on measures of intake or digestion (P ≥ 0.14). Forage type affected forage organic matter intake (FOMI; P ≤ 0.01); FOMI was 1.39 kg/d for C3 and 3.69 kg/d for C4. Total digestible OM intake (TDOMI) was also affected by forage type (P ≤ 0.01) and averaged 0.90 kg/d for C3 and 2.23 kg/d for C4. Organic matter digestibility (OMD) was not affected by forage type (P = 0.86), averaging 56.2%. Supplementation frequency did not affect FOMI (P = 0.50) or OMD (P = 0.24), but there was a tendency for an effect on TDOMI (P = 0.06) where CON steers consumed 1.15 kg TDOMI/d, 1.74 kg/d for daily supplementation, and 1.81 kg/d for every other day supplementation. These data indicate that forage type affected forage utilization with C3 being less effective at meeting nutritional requirements than C4. Protein supplementation improved TDOMI but frequency of supplementation did not affect this response. Future research should further evaluate how forage type affects response to supplementation and quantify the microbial underpinnings of these responses.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Animal Science
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skag057.064
Primary Topic
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

124. Effect of Protein Supplementation Frequency on Forage Utilization by Cattle Consuming Cool-season or Warm-season Low-quality Forage

Tryon A Wickersham, Merritt L Drewery, Allison Serda, Brian L Bruner
Journal of Animal Science
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
article

124. Effect of Protein Supplementation Frequency on Forage Utilization by Cattle Consuming Cool-season or Warm-season Low-quality Forage

Tryon A Wickersham, Merritt L Drewery, Allison Serda, Brian L Bruner
article en

Abstract

Abstract Cattle consuming low-quality forage (LQF; < 7% crude protein [CP]) require protein supplementation to improve forage utilization. However, daily supplementation is labor intensive, and it may be more practical for producers to adopt an infrequent supplementation strategy. When protein is supplemented, the type of basal forage (e.g., cool-season [C3] versus warm season [C4]) should be considered as the response to protein supplementation may depend on forage type. Previous research has quantified forage utilization response to less frequent protein supplementation, but the interaction between protein supplementation frequency and forage type has yet to be determined. The objective of this study was to assess utilization of wheat straw (C3: 5.3% CP, 81.2% neutral detergent fiber [NDF]) versus King Ranch Bluestem (C4: 4.3% CP, 76.3% NDF) by Angus steers receiving supplemental protein daily or every other day. Six ruminally cannulated steers (252 ± 23 BW) were used in a 6 × 6 Latin Square experiment with six 18-d periods. Each period included 8 d for treatment adaptation, 8 d to measure intake and digestion, and 2 d for assessment of rumen fermentation. Treatments were arranged as a 2 × 3 factorial where one factor was forage type (C3 versus C4) and the other was frequency of supplementation (none, daily [125 mg N/kg BW], or every other day [250 mg N/kg BW]). There were no interactions between forage type and supplementation frequency on measures of intake or digestion (P ≥ 0.14). Forage type affected forage organic matter intake (FOMI; P ≤ 0.01); FOMI was 1.39 kg/d for C3 and 3.69 kg/d for C4. Total digestible OM intake (TDOMI) was also affected by forage type (P ≤ 0.01) and averaged 0.90 kg/d for C3 and 2.23 kg/d for C4. Organic matter digestibility (OMD) was not affected by forage type (P = 0.86), averaging 56.2%. Supplementation frequency did not affect FOMI (P = 0.50) or OMD (P = 0.24), but there was a tendency for an effect on TDOMI (P = 0.06) where CON steers consumed 1.15 kg TDOMI/d, 1.74 kg/d for daily supplementation, and 1.81 kg/d for every other day supplementation. These data indicate that forage type affected forage utilization with C3 being less effective at meeting nutritional requirements than C4. Protein supplementation improved TDOMI but frequency of supplementation did not affect this response. Future research should further evaluate how forage type affects response to supplementation and quantify the microbial underpinnings of these responses.

Journal of Animal ScienceVol. 104(Supplement_2)
Mitchell Institute (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.