Feeding Value of Field Pea and Hull-less Oat in Growing Calf Diets

North Dakota Agricultural Research
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105

Feeding Value of Field Pea and Hull-less Oat in Growing Calf Diets (continued)

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and
Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions/
Implications

References

Project
Background

Results
Animal performance. The control diet in Exp 1 was formulated to contain .54 Mcal NEg/lb and 13.5% CP (Table 2). Although steer calves had higher ADG (P<.08) than heifers, DMI (P=.93) and feed efficiency (FE, gain/feed; P=.25) were not affected by sex (Table 4). Feed conversion (feed/gain) averaged 5.6 in this experiment.

Initial BW (P<.05) was affected by dietary treatment group (Table 4); however, final BW (P=.80) and ADG (P=.66) were not affected by dietary treatment and averaged 3.09 lb. Dry matter intake (P<.05) was affected by dietary treatment. Pens of calves that were fed HOAT1 had lower DMI than calves that were fed either CONT1 or FPEA1. Dry matter intake was similar between calves fed CONT1 or FPEA1. Due to differences in DMI with similar gains, FE (P=.10) was affected by dietary treatment. Calves fed HOAT1 had the best efficiency, while FE in calves fed CONT1 and FPEA1 did not differ. Calves consuming hull-less oat required .75 to 1.0 pounds less feed to produce a pound of liveweight gain.

The control diet in Exp 2 was formulated to contain .46 Mcal NEg/lb and 11.5% CP (Table 3). By design, initial weight block affected initial (P<.01) BW (Table 5). Average daily gain (P=.84) was not affected by initial weight block. Final BW (P<.01) and FE (P=.08) were also affected by initial weight block. Final BW reflected differences in initial BW, while the lighter initial weight block of calves tended to be more efficient than the medium or heavy initial weight blocks. Feed conversion averaged 7.6.

Table 4. Animal performance in Experiment 1.

	-------- Treatment --------				---- Sex ----
Item	CONT1	FPEA1	HOAT1	SE	Steer	Heifer	SE

DMI^a, lb/d	17.2^w	18.1^w	15.5^x	.24	17.0	16.9	.35
Initial BW, lb	586.5^w	582.8^w	573.7^x	1.51	606.0	556.0	8.13
Final BW, lb	778.0	776.0	772.2	5.86	809.6^y	741.1^z	6.58
Gain, lb	191.5	193.1	198.5	5.05	203.6^y	185.2^z	1.55
ADG, lb/d	3.04	3.07	3.15	.080	3.23^y	2.94^z	.025
Gain/Feed	.177^y	.170^y	.203^z	.0058	.191	.176	.0043
Feed/Gain	5.73	6.05	5.00	--	5.31	5.88	--

^aDry matter intake. ^w,xRow means within a group without a common superscript differ (P<.05). ^y,zRow means within a group without a common superscript differ (P<.1).

Table 5. Animal performance in Experiment 2.

	----------- Treatment -----------					------ Block ------
Item	CONT2	FPEA2	NOAT2	COMB2	SE	Heavy	Medium	Light	SE

DMI^a, lb/d	25.1^b	22.5^c	21.2^c	22.9^bc	.53	23.6	23.2	21.2	--
Initial BW, lb	693.6	694.5	690.0	692.0	1.74	754.0^b	705.0^c	618.6^d	5.71
Final BW, lb	888.0	888.0	875.5	898.2	8.38	950.4^b	897.3^c	814.6^d	8.16
Gain, lb	194.5	193.6	185.4	206.1	7.54	196.4	192.2	196.0	5.56
ADG, lb/d	3.09	3.06	2.95	3.28	.12	3.13	3.04	3.11	.09
Gain/Feed^x	.123	.137	.141	.143	.0059	.133^e	.132^e	.143^f	.0038
Feed/Gain	8.39	7.50	7.29	7.05	--	7.76	7.78	7.14	--

^aDry matter intake. ^b,c,dRow means within a main effect without a common superscript differ (P<.01). ^e,fRow means within a main effect without a common superscript differ (P=.08). ^xTreatment effects tended to be significant (P=.17).

Initial (P=.39) and final (P=.38) BW and ADG (P=.36) were not affected by dietary treatment (Table 5). Dry matter intake (P<.01) was affected by dietary treatment. Calves fed CONT2 had the highest DMI. Intake of FPEA2 and HOAT2 were the lowest, while intake of COMB2 was intermediate. Effects of dietary treatment on intake coupled with similar gains were not large enough to result in significant differences in FE (P=.17). However, there was a tendency for calves consuming FPEA2, HOAT2 and COMB2 to be numerically more efficient when compared to CONT2 (Table 5). Calves fed diets containing pea and/or hull-less oat tended to require .9 to 1.3 pounds less feed to produce a pound of BW gain.

Net energy concentration. Calculated and estimated NE concentration for diets fed in Exp 1 and Exp 2 are shown in Table 6. In both experiments, estimated NE concentration (calculated from actual intake and animal performance) was approximately 8.5% greater than calculated values (assuming known concentration in each feedstuff). Estimated NE concentrations for pea and hull-less oat are also shown in Table 6. Estimates for hull-less oat were numerically similar between experiments and averaged 1.17 and .84 Mcal/lb for NEm and NEg, respectively. Concentrations relative to pea were not similar across experiments. Estimated NE concentrations of pea were increased 123 and 163% in Exp 2 when compared to Exp 1. Estimated dietary NE concentration of COMB2 was numerically similar to FPEA2 and HOAT2.

Table 6. Calculated and estimated net energy (NE) concentrations (Mcal/lb) in Exp 1 and 2.

	-------- Exp 1 --------			-------------- Exp 2 --------------
Item	CONT1	FPEA1	HOAT1	CONT2	FPEA2	HOAT2	COMB2

Calculated
Dietary^a:
-- NEm	.82	--	--	.71	--	--	--
-- NEg	.54	--	--	.44	--	--	--

Estimated
Dietary^b:
-- NEm	.88	.85	.97	.76	.83	.84	.85
-- NEg	.59	.56	.67	.48	.54	.56	.56

Grain^c:
-- NEm	.93	.76	1.15	.93	1.69	1.20	--
-- NEg	.64	.49	.81	.64	1.29	.88	--

^aDietary NE concentrations are calculated assuming known concentrations for each feed and actual DM percentage of each feed in control diet. ^bDietary NE concentrations are estimated using methodology described by Zinn et al., 1986. ^cNE concentration of barley is assumed (NRC, 1984) and of test grains is estimated using estimated dietary NE concentration and percentage of grain in diet (Zinn et al., 1986).

NEXT | BACK
Table of Contents – Summer 1998

NDSU is an equal opportunity institution.