Repository logo
Log In(current)
  1. Home
  2. Colleges & Schools
  3. Graduate School
  4. Masters Theses
  5. COPING WITH DROUGHT IN BEEF CATTLE PRODUCTION: INNOVATION THROUGH OPTIMAL WARM-SEASON FORAGE SYSTEMS
Details

COPING WITH DROUGHT IN BEEF CATTLE PRODUCTION: INNOVATION THROUGH OPTIMAL WARM-SEASON FORAGE SYSTEMS

Date Issued
December 1, 2017
Author(s)
Zechiel, Katelynn Elizabeth  
Advisor(s)
Justin D. Rhinehart
Additional Advisor(s)
Jason K. Smith
Patrick D. Keyser
Gary E. Bates
Permanent URI
https://trace.tennessee.edu/handle/20.500.14382/41154
Abstract

Drought conditions have had detrimental effects on beef cattle production in the southeastern states where forages are the primary source of feed for livestock. Many southeastern states lie within the fescue-belt, where tall fescue is the predominant livestock forage. Tall fescue is a cool-season (CS) grass that thrives in the cooler temperatures of spring and fall, becoming semi-dormant during peak summer temperatures and again in winter. Conversely, warm-season (WS) forage species increase in production during the summer months and exhibit drought tolerant qualities, making them a viable summer forage option to complement tall fescue for beef cattle producers. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate various WS forage options and how they can help producers cope with drought. To accomplish this objective, a side-by-side comparison of five WS grasses were evaluated for production, nutrient density, and animal performance. The five WS grasses analyzed were: switchgrass (SW), eastern gamagrass (EG), big bluestem and Indiangrass mixture (BBI), bermudagrass (BG), and crabgrass (CG). This study was conducted over three years (2014, 2015, and 2016) at two locations: Ames Plantation Research and Education Center (APREC), and Highland Rim Research and Education Center (HRREC). To analyze animal performance, four heifers were placed on 1.2-ha paddocks with three replications per treatment. All test heifers were fed an equilibrium diet at the beginning and end of the grazing trial to help decrease variation in gut fill. The put-and-take method was used with additional heifers to help maintain targeted forage heights. Data was analyzed with SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.) using the mixed model analysis of variance. When comparing the 5 species of forage, average daily gains (kg/day) were 0.62, 0.41, 0.44, 0.42, and 0.51, BBI, BG, CG, EG, and SW; respectively. Grazing days (days/ha) were 412, 459, 455, 664, and 617, BBI, BG, CG, EG, and SW; respectively. Total gain per ha (kg/ha) were 259, 186, 200, 276, and 315, BBI, BG, CG, EG, and SW; respectively. Grazing WS grasses during the summer months can be a complementary tool to producers grazing cattle on CS grasses.

Subjects

Warm-Season Grasses

Drought

Beef Cattle

Grazing

Disciplines
Animal Sciences
Degree
Master of Science
Major
Animal Science
Embargo Date
January 1, 2011
File(s)
Thumbnail Image
Name

COPING_WITH_DROUGHT_IN_BEEF_CATTLE_PRODUCTION_Katelynn___JDR_Edits.docx

Size

14.89 MB

Format

Microsoft Word XML

Checksum (MD5)

8a9b447349539fd73bc524c443e0576f

Thumbnail Image
Name

Katelynn_Zechiel_Thesis_COPING_WITH_DROUGHT_IN_BEEF_CATTLE_PRODUCTION_.pdf

Size

743.71 KB

Format

Adobe PDF

Checksum (MD5)

ebc974057d8486ac8c84f6e89c62adcb


University Libraries

1015 Volunteer Boulevard
Knoxville, TN 37996
865-974-4351

Map & Directions
Donate to the Libraries
  • About
  • John C. Hodges Society
  • Speaking Volumes magazine
  • Outreach
  • Directory
  • Employment
  • Policies
  • Library Intranet
University of Tennessee power T logo

The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Knoxville, Tennessee 37996
865-974-1000

Events
A-Z
Apply
Privacy
Map
Directory
Give to UT
Accessibility

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science