Energy and protein requirements of crossbred (Holstein × Gyr) growing bulls

Energy requirement for primiparous Holstein × Gyr crossbred dairy cows

Our objective was to estimate the requirements of metabolizable energy (ME) and NEM of lactating and dry cows, the efficiency of ME utilization for milk production (kl) and tissue gain (kg), and the use of body energy mobilization for milk production (kt) throughout the lactation of primiparous crossbred Holstein × Gyr cows, using open-circuit respiration chambers. Twenty-nine primiparous Holstein × Gyr crossbred cows with an initial BW averaging 563 ± 40.1 kg and 2.5 ± 0.09 yr old were used throughout lactation and dry periods. The cows were kept nonpregnant throughout the study to eliminate possible confounding factors. Apparent digestibility assays, followed by calorimeter measurements, were performed 6 times throughout the lactation period. In the dry-off period, the cows were also evaluated but fed with restricted intake (DMI = 1.1% BW/d) to achieve heat production close to maintenance. After 21 d of diet adaptation, an apparent digestibility assay followed by calorimeter measurements was performed. Parameter estimates for lactation period were obtained by mixed models including lactation stage as repeated measures. For restricted feeding at dry-off and fasting period assays, the requirements were estimated by exponential regression. For whole lactation, the values of the ME requirement for maintenance (MEM) and NEM were 0.588 and 0.395 MJ/BW0.75, respectively. The efficiencies of kl, kg, and kt were 0.672, 0.771, and 0.814, respectively. However, MEM and NEM were higher in early and mid lactation than late, whereas kl was higher in early than other lactation stages. Dry and nonpregnant cows had MEM of 0.434 MJ/BW0.75 and NEM of 0.351 MJ/BW0.75 for maintenance level, and MEM of 0.396 MJ/BW0.75 and NEM of 0.345 MJ/BW0.75 for fasting metabolism level, and efficiency of ME utilization for maintenance was 0.80. Our findings confirmed that F1 crossbred Holstein × Gyr dairy cows have differences in energy requirement and efficiency throughout the lactation stages, suggesting the use of different values in each stage. The estimated values of energy requirement for maintenance and efficiencies for primiparous lactating crossbred Holstein × Gyr were similar to those reported in the literature in specific studies and requirements systems.

Protein requirements for pregnant dairy cows

We aimed to estimate the protein requirements of pregnant Holstein × Gyr cows. A total of 61 Holstein × Gyr (HG) cows were used, with an average initial body weight (BW) of 480 ± 10.1 kg and age 5 ± 0.5 yr. Cows were divided into 3 groups: pregnant (n = 43), nonpregnant (n = 12), and baseline (n = 6). Baseline animals were slaughtered before starting the experiment to estimate the initial body composition of the remaining animals. Pregnant and nonpregnant cows received 2 diets: maintenance and ad libitum. Pregnant cows were slaughtered at 139, 199, 241, and 268 gestation days (GD). First, we used data only from nonpregnant cows to determine the requirements for maintenance and growth in adult cows. The requirements of metabolizable protein for maintenance (MPm; grams of empty metabolic BW [EBW0.75] per day) were estimated using a linear regression between the metabolizable protein intake (MPI, g/d) and average daily gain (g/d), and the MPm was defined as the intercept divided by the average metabolic BW. Net protein requirements for gain (NPg; g/d) were estimated by the first derivative of the allometric equation between final crude protein in the body (kg) and the final empty BW (EBW; kg). The efficiency of use of metabolizable protein for gain (k) was calculated from the regression between the retained protein (g EBW0.75/d) and the MPI (g EBW0.75/d), and k was the slope of this regression. The MPI was estimated by combining microbial protein synthesis (purine derivatives) with the digestible rumen undegradable protein [(total protein intake - rumen-degradable protein) × intestinal digestibility]. Second, an exponential model was used to fit the protein accumulation in the gestational components in the function of GD. The first derivative of that model was considered the net requirement for gestation (NPgest). The efficiency of protein utilization for gestation (kgest) was calculated by the iterative method using the equation Δ = MPI - (MPm + NPg/kg + NPgest/kgest), where kg is efficiency of protein utilization for gain. The iteration was performed aiming at a zero deviation between observed MPI and metabolizable protein (MP) estimated by the requirements determined herein. We obtained a value of 3.88 g EBW0.75/d for MPm. The estimation of NPg can be calculated according to the following equation: NPg = 0.716 × (EBWopen-0.308) × EBGc, where EBWopen is the EBW (kg) for nonpregnant animals and EBGc is the empty body gain (kg/d) corrected for the gestational component. The k was determined as 0.347. The NPgest requirements were determined as NPgest (g/d) = 0.0008722 × exp(0.01784 × GD) × (calf weight/35). The kgest was 0.625. It is important to highlight that different methods of MP estimates should not be mixed and that the proposed method requires the estimation of microbial protein (estimated via urinary estimates), which might limit practical application. In conclusion, new studies should be conducted to validate our results and the methodology adopted to determine protein requirements for pregnancy in dairy cows. Due to the pattern of protein accumulation in the gestational components, we suggest an exponential model to describe protein requirements for pregnancy for dairy cows.

Energy requirements of Holstein, Gyr, and Holstein × Gyr crossbred heifers using the respirometry technique

We aimed to determine the energy requirements for maintenance and gain of 18 prepubertal dairy heifers of three breed compositions (BC; Holstein, Gyr, and Holstein × Gyr). Diets were formulated for gains of 0, 400, and 800 g/day, corresponding to 1.0×, 1.5×, and 2.0× maintenance, respectively. Each dairy BC had six animals with an initial body weight (iBW) of 219.8 ± 32 kg, 215.8 ± 33 kg, and 228.3 ± 33 kg for Holstein, Gyr, and Holstein × Gyr, respectively. The experiment was designed as a completely randomized design in a factorial scheme 3 × 3 [three BC and three feeding levels (FL)]. Digestibility and metabolism assays were performed to determine energy losses through feces and urine. Heat production was determined using the continuous measurement of oxygen consumption, carbon dioxide production, and methane emissions in respiration chambers. Energy requirements for maintenance (NEm) were calculated based on the relationship between heat production (HP) and metabolizable energy intake (MEI). The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for maintenance (km) was obtained from the ratio between NEm and metabolizable energy requirements for maintenance. The net energy requirements for growth (NEg) were estimated from the model RE = β0 × EBW0.75 × EBGβ1, where RE is the retained energy (Mcal/day), EBW is empty body weight (kg0.75), and EBG is the empty body gain (kg/day). The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for gain (kg) was estimated as the slope of the regression between RE and MEI for gain. Gyr heifers presented NEm 15% lower (98 kcal/kg of BW0.75) than HG crossbred animals. Holstein and crossbred heifers had similar NEm, 102 and 112 kcal/kg of BW0.75, respectively. The km was 0.71, 0.74, and 0.75 for HG, Holstein, and Gyr, respectively. Net energy requirement for gain (NEg) did not differ across BC, and a single equation was fit for all BC: RE = 0.069 × BW0.75 × BGW0.852. A single kg of 0.65 was observed for all three BC. Breed composition affected the energy requirements for maintenance and the energy partition, and those differences should be considered when estimating requirements for Gyr, Holstein × Gyr crossbred, and Holstein heifers.

Feed Intake of Growing Dairy Heifers Raised under Tropical Conditions: A Model Evaluation Using Meta-Analysis

Several models for predicting dry matter intake (DMI) of replacement dairy heifers have been developed; however, only a few have been evaluated using data from heifers of different breeds raised under tropical conditions. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the DMI equations for dairy heifers managed under tropical conditions. A total of 230 treatment means from 61 studies using dairy heifers (n = 1513 heifers, average body weight = 246 kg) were used. The animals were grouped into two groups based on their genetics: (1) Bos taurus (Holstein, Jersey, Brown Swiss, and Holstein × Jersey) and (2) crossbred (Bos taurus × Bos indicus). Seven previously published DMI equations (HH, HHJ, QUI, STA, 2001 NRC, OFLin, and OFNLin) for heifers were evaluated using mean bias, slope bias, mean squared prediction errors (MSPE) and its decomposition, and other model evaluation statistics. For Bos taurus heifers, our results indicated that OFNLin and HHJ had lower mean bias (0.13 and 0.16 kg/d, respectively) than other models. There was no significant slope or mean bias for HHJ and OFNLin (p > 0.05), indicating agreement between the observed and predicted DMI values. All other models had a significant mean bias (p < 0.05), whereas the QUI model also presented a significant slope bias (p < 0.02). For crossbred heifers, the STA equation was the only one that did not present mean and slope bias significance (p > 0.05). All other DMI models had significant mean bias when evaluated using crossbred data (p < 0.04), and QUI, OFLin, and OFNLin also presented significant slope bias (p < 0.01). Based on our results, predictions from OFNLin and HHJ best represented the observed DMI of Bos taurus heifers (MSPE ≤ 1.25 kg²/d², mean bias ≤ 0.16 kg/d), whereas STA was the best model for crossbred heifers (MSPE = 1.25 kg²/d², mean bias = 0.09 kg/d). These findings indicate that not all available models are adequate for estimating the DMI of dairy heifers managed under a tropical climate, with HHJ and OFNLin for Bos taurus and STA for crossbreds being the most suitable models for DMI prediction. There is evidence that models from Bos taurus heifers could be used to estimate the DMI of heifers under tropical conditions. For heifer ration formulation is necessary to consider that DMI is influenced by breed, diet, management, and climate. Future work should also include animal genetic and environmental variables for the prediction of DMI in dairy heifers.

Determination of energy and protein requirements of preweaned dairy calves: A multistudy approach

The first studies concerning nutrient requirements for preweaned dairy calves were from the 1920s and 1930s; however, few studies were published in the following decades. We aimed to determine energy and protein requirements of preweaning Holstein and Holstein × Gyr dairy calves in a multistudy meta-regression. We used a database composed of individual measurements of 166 preweaned male calves (138 submitted to treatments and 28 used as the reference group) from 4 studies that used the methodology of comparative slaughter. Animals with less than 15/16 of Holstein genetic composition were considered crossbred Holstein × Gyr, whereas other animals were considered Holstein. Net energy requirements for maintenance (NE_M) were determined by the regression between heat production and metabolizable energy intake (MEI). The metabolizable energy requirements for maintenance were calculated by the iterative method, and the efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for maintenance was obtained by NE_M divided by the metabolizable energy requirements for maintenance. Net energy requirements for gain (NE_G) were estimated using a regression of the retained energy (RE) as a function of empty body weight (EBW) and empty body gain (EBG). The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for gain was estimated by the regression of RE as a function of MEI, but with partitioning the MEI into MEI from liquid feed and MEI from starter feed. Additionally, the effect of a liquid feed (milk or milk replacer) was tested on the slope of the regression. The metabolizable protein requirements for maintenance (MP_M) were estimated using the intercept of the regression between the metabolizable protein intake (MPI) and average daily gain. The MP_M was determined as the ratio between the intercept and the metabolic body weight. Net protein requirements for gain (NP_G) were estimated by the regression between retained protein, EBG, and RE. The efficiency of use of metabolizable protein for gain was estimated by the regression of the retained protein as a function of MPI, but with partitioning the MPI into MPI from liquid feed and MPI from starter feed. Additionally, the effect of a liquid feed (milk or milk replacer) was tested on the regression slope. Breed did not influence any of the nutrient requirements' estimates. The NE_M was estimated as 70.2 kcal/metabolic body weight per day. The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for maintenance observed was 66%. The NE_G was estimated by the equation NE_G = 0.0901 × EBW^0.75 × EBG^0.9539. The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for gain was estimated as 57.6, 49.3, and 41.2% for milk, milk replacer, and starter feed, respectively. The MP_M was estimated as 4.22 g/EBW^0.75 per day, and the NP_G was determined by the equation: NP_G = 30.06 × EBG + 70.98 × RE. The efficiency of use of metabolizable protein for gain was estimated as 71.9, 59.2, and 44.4% for milk, milk replacer, and starter feed, respectively. We concluded that no differences were observed in energy and protein requirements between Holstein and Holstein × Gyr crossbred cows. The efficiencies of use of metabolizable energy and protein are greater for milk when compared with milk replacer and starter feed. Therefore, we propose that the equations generated herein should be used to estimate energy and protein requirements of preweaned Holstein and Holstein × Gyr crossbred dairy calves raised under tropical conditions.

Energy Requirements of Beef Cattle: Current Energy Systems and Factors Influencing Energy Requirements for Maintenance

Simple Summary

The accurate estimation of energy requirements for present-day genotypes under current feeding conditions is crucial for improving profitability and reducing the environmental impact of the beef industry. Equations for predicting energy requirements of beef cattle according to the Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC) are outdated and require an urgent update. The results from literature review confirmed previous reports on the under prediction of energy requirements for maintenance by the AFRC, especially for growing animals. This may have consequences on the efficiency of use of the dietary energy on productive functions. Although much less research has been conducted over the last decade on energy metabolism for suckler cows, the existing data appears to be relevant as a valid reference for updating AFRC recommendations. The present review also revealed the lack of data on the contribution of both animal and diet-related factors influencing on energy requirements for beef cattle and thus conclusions on this regard are difficult to draw.

Abstract

The present review compared features of the UK system for predicting energy requirements in beef cattle with a number of feeding systems developed from research institutes consortiums around the world. In addition, energy requirements for maintenance calculated from studies conducted at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) in Northern Ireland since the 1990s were compared with compiled data from recent peer-review papers published over the last decade (2009–2020). The mean metabolisable energy requirement for the maintenance (ME_m) of growing cattle was 0.672 MJ/kg^0.75 according to values obtained from calorimetry studies conducted at AFBI. This value is respectively 8.2 and 19.5% greater than the ME_m values obtained by the Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC), and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) equations, but it is in close agreement with the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) approach, when assuming a Bos taurus bull (300 kg LW) and an efficiency for converting energy for maintenance (k_m) of 0.65. Most of the literature data on energy requirements for the maintenance for this animal category were obtained from studies conducted with Bos indicus animals and their crossbreds in Brazilian conditions with this confirming lower requirements of these animals when compared to pure Bos taurus cattle. A simulation of the total ME requirements calculated for an Angus × Friesian steer (LW = 416 kg) offered good quality grass silage, indicated that both AFRC and NASEM systems overestimate (38.5 and 20.5%, respectively) the observed efficiency of converting ME for growth (k_g). When the total ME requirements (maintenance + growth) were assessed, both systems underpredicted total ME requirement in 15.8 and 22.1 MJ/d. The mean ME_m requirements for suckler cows obtained from the literature (0.596 MJ/kg^0.75) is on average 19.1% greater than predictions given by both AFRC and INRA (lactation) equations when considering a 550 kg cow and a k_m value of 0.72. Although no differences in net energy requirements for maintenance (NE_m) were detected between dry and lactating suckler cows, as expected the later displayed greater variation as a result of differences in milk production. On this regard, the INRA model recognise increased NE_m requirements for lactating animals compared to dry cows. The re-evaluation of the concept of diet metabolisability and the analysis of existing data on compensatory growth responses are recommended for future updates of the British system (AFRC) having in to account the particularities of grass-based systems in the UK.

Effects of Feeding Level and Breed Composition on Intake, Digestibility, and Methane Emissions of Dairy Heifers

The dairy Nutrients Requirements of Cattle (NRC) was developed using data from purebred Holsteins and it might not accurately predict the performance of crossbred cattle. Our objectives were to evaluate the effects of two feeding levels (FLs) and three breed compositions (BCs) on nutrient intake, digestibility, performance, and methane (CH₄) emissions of prepubertal dairy heifers. We used thirty-six heifers from three BCs: purebred Holstein (H), purebred Gyr (G), and F1 Holstein × Gyr (HG). Each BC had 12 animals and the experiment was designed as twelve incomplete three by three Latin squares, in a factorial arrangement three by two, with three BCs and two FLs (400 and 800 g/day). Total tract nutrient digestibility was determined using total fecal collection and DMI was individually measured. The data were analyzed using the PROC MIXED in SAS. Dry matter intake of all nutrients increased from the medium to high feeding level and the nutrients digestibility coefficients did differ among BCs. Achieved body weight gain in the medium FL treatment was greater than those predicted using the NRC, suggesting that crossbred and Gyr heifers have similar performance to Holsteins. Breed composition does not influence body weight gain of confined dairy heifers, but Holstein heifers fed a medium FL had higher feed efficiency and reduced CH₄ emissions intensity.

Energy requirements for pregnant dairy cows

This study aimed to estimate energy requirements of pregnant Holstein × Gyr cows. Different planes of nutrition were established by two feeding regimens: ad libitum or maintenance. Sixty-two nonlactating cows with average body weight of 480 ± 10.1 kg and an age of 5 ± 0.5 years were used. Cows were divided into three groups: pregnant (n = 44), non-pregnant (n = 12), and baseline reference (n = 6). The 56 pregnant and non-pregnant cows were randomly allocated into a feeding regimen: ad libitum or maintenance. To evaluate the effects of days of pregnancy, pregnant and non-pregnant animals were slaughtered at 140, 200, 240, and 270 days of pregnancy. Energy requirements for maintenance differed between pregnant and non-pregnant cows, thus two equations were developed. Net energy and metabolizable energy requirements for maintenance of non-pregnant cows were 82 kcal/kg empty body weight^0.75/day and 132 kcal/kg empty body weight^0.75/day, respectively. The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for maintenance of non-pregnant cows was 62.4%. Net energy and metabolizable energy for maintenance of pregnant cows were 86 kcal/kg empty body weight^0.75/day and 137 kcal/kg empty body weight^0.75/day, respectively. Efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for maintenance of pregnant cows was 62.5%. The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for gain was 41.9%. The efficiency of use of metabolizable energy for pregnancy was 14.1%. Furthermore, net energy requirement for pregnancy was different from zero from day 70 of pregnancy onwards. In conclusion, net energy and metabolizable energy requirements for maintenance of non-pregnant cows are different from pregnant cows. Furthermore, we believe that the proposed non-linear equations to estimate net energy requirements for pregnancy are more adequate than current NRC equation, and should be recommended for Holstein × Gyr cows.

Energy and protein requirements of Holstein × Gyr crossbred heifers

Nutrient requirements in cattle are dependent on physiological stage, breed and environmental conditions. In Holstein × Gyr crossbred dairy heifers, the lack of data remains a limiting factor for estimating energy and protein requirements. Thus, we aimed to estimate the energy and protein requirements of Holstein × Gyr crossbred heifers raised under tropical conditions. Twenty-two crossbred (½ Holstein × ½ Gyr) heifers with an average initial BW of 102.2 ± 3.4 kg and 3 to 4 months of age were used. To estimate requirements, the comparative slaughter technique was used: four animals were assigned to the reference group, slaughtered at the beginning of the experiment to estimate the initial empty BW (EBW) and composition of the animals that remained in the experiment. The remaining animals were randomized into three treatments based on targeted rates of BW gain: high (1.0 kg/day), low (0.5 kg/day) and close to maintenance (0.1 kg/day). At the end of the experiment, all animals were slaughtered to determine EBW, empty body gain (EBG) and body energy and protein contents. The linear regression parameters were estimated using PROC MIXED of SAS (version 9.4). Estimates of the parameters of non-linear regressions were adjusted through PROC NLIN of SAS using the Gauss-Newton method for parameter fit. The net requirements of energy for maintenance (NEm) and metabolizable energy for maintenance (MEm) were 0.303 and 0.469 MJ/EBW0.75 per day, respectively. The efficiency of use of MEm was 64.5%. The estimated equation to predict the net energy requirement for gain (NEg) was: NEg (MJ/day) = 0.299 × EBW0.75 × EBG0.601. The efficiency of use of ME for gain (kg) was 30.7%. The requirement of metabolizable protein for maintenance was 3.52 g/EBW0.75 per day. The equation to predict net protein requirement for gain (NPg) was: NPg (g/day) = 243.65 × EBW-0.091 × EBG. The efficiency of use of metabolizable protein for gain (k) was 50.8%. We observed noteworthy differences when comparing to ME and protein requirements of Holstein × Gyr crossbred heifers with other systems. In addition, we also observed differences in estimates for NEm, NEg, NPg, kg and k. Therefore, we propose that the equations generated in the present study should be used to estimate energy and protein requirements for Holstein × Gyr crossbred dairy heifers raised in tropical conditions in the post-weaning phase up to 185 kg of BW.

Energy partition, nutritional energy requirements and methane production in F1 Holstein × Gyr bulls, using the respirometric technique

The nutritional energy requirements of animals for maintenance and weight gain, such as the energy partition of the diet, were determined in different feeding plans. Fifteen F1 Holstein × Gyr, non-castrated male bovines with a mean initial liveweight of 302 kg were used. The diets were corn silage and concentrate, formulated to enable gains of 100, 500 and 900 g/day, called low, medium and high weight gains, respectively. Tests of digestibility and metabolism were conducted to determine energy losses through faeces, urine and methane emissions. Heat production was determined using respirometry chamber. Net energy for maintenance was calculated as the antilogarithm of the intercept of the regression of the logarithm of the heat production, as a function of the metabolisable energy intake. Retained energy was obtained by subtracting the heat production from the metabolisable energy intake. With the increased consumption of dry matter, there was an increase in faecal and urinary energy loss. Retained energy increased linearly with the metabolisable energy intake. The net energy for gain in the diet did not differ among the treatments, such as the efficiency of use of metabolisable energy for weight gain kg (0.34). The net energy for maintenance was 312 kJ/kg LW0.75, and the metabolisable energy for maintenance was 523 kJ/kg LW0.75. The daily methane production (g/day) increased with the dry matter level and the daily loss represented 5.31% of the gross energy consumption.