17

Summary
Eric Kolver
Dairying Research Corporation
Hamilton
Nutrition Guidelines
For The High
Producing Dairy
Cow
The pri ori ti es when feedi ng
suppl ements are fi rst to get the
appropriate farm system in place that
will make profits from supplements,
and second to consider feed type and
mix of feeds.
The amount of supplementary feed to
be used will be determined by the feed
deficits in the farm system.
The type of suppl ementary feed
requi red wi l l be determi ned by
profi tabi l i ty, by the amount of
supplementary feed being used, and
by the nutrients first-limiting milksolids
production.
Nutritional guidelines can be used to
meet the nutritional requirements of the
high producing dairy cow and to avoid
health problems.
The New Zealand dairy cow has a large
potenti al to grow and produce
milksolids when fed well.
Introduction
Successful dairying systems in New Zealand
grow grass and efficiently convert this grass into
milk and money. For those farmers that do this
well, what is the next step? For many, the only
options are to get bigger or more intensive. The
profitability of the intensification option will depend
on how wel l suppl emental feed can be
incorporated into the pasture system.
A cow has clear nutrient requirements to
produce certain levels of milksolids, and many of
the principles used in intensive diets overseas
can be applied in New Zealand, with some
modification for fresh pasture diets.
This paper will discuss the farm system within
which supplementary feed can be profitable, how
to decide what mix of feeds to use, and the use
of feeding guidelines to develop pasture-based
rations for high producing dairy cows.
Get the System Right
Most of the extra profit gained from feeding
supplements will be achieved by getting the
correct farm system in place. When this is done,
feed combinations can be incorporated into the
system. The principles of how best to use
supplements in a pasture-based system are
known, and have been discussed at Ruakura
Farmers Conferences (Kidd, 2000; Macdonald,
1999; Penno 1998; Van der Poel, 1996). These
principles were demonstrated in the 1.75t MS/ha
farm systems experiment at DRC No. 2 Dairy in
which extra feed inputs in the form of maize grain,
mai ze si l age, or a bal anced rati on were
incorporated into a highly stocked pasture
system (Table 1). While pasture growth curves
on individual farms throughout New Zealand may
be different to DRC No. 2 Dairy, the principles of
this farm system can be broadly applied. These
principles are:
18
1. Increased cow milking days: High per cow and
per ha milksolids production is achieved by using
supplements to increase cow milking days by first
extending lactation through earlier calving or
milking more cows longer, and second by
allowing a higher stocking rate.
2. Increased stocking rate: Once pasture and
extra feed are being efficiently utilised, the farm
effectively becomes a milking platform onto which
more feed can be brought and more cows milked.
3. Fill true feed deficits: Supplementary feeds will
decrease profitability if used when adequate
pasture is available. Therefore profits are made
when supplements are used to fill true feed
deficits, which result from the higher stocking rate
and the extended lactation. How do we decide
when to supplement the milking cows? Decision
rules developed from the 1.75t/ha research at No.
2 Dairy are used to supplement high stocked
systems when:
Intake falls below targeted intakes of 15-16 kg
DM/cow/day (early lactation)
Intake falls below 12 kg DM/cow/day (late
lactation).
4. Feed energy: Energy is the key driver of milk
production. Every kg of DM put into the DRC No.
2 Dairy farm system produced 78-99 g MS
(immediate and carryover response). This
resulted in the supplemented cows producing 363
to 407 kg MS/cow compared with 269 kg MS/cow
(Table 1). The balanced ration resulted in a 10%
increase in milksolids production compared with
the maize grain diet during summer. But this
difference made little impact on total milksolids
production per cow over the year. This milksolids
response indicates that while imbalances in the
pasture and maize grain diet existed during
summer, this ration was reasonably balanced for
much of the year. When expressed on an energy
basis, the maize grain, maize silage, and
balanced ration all gave a similar annual response
of 7.5 g MS/MJ ME.
5. Cost structure: The profitability of these
systems wi l l depend on the pri ce of the
supplementary feed and the labour and capital
cost structures associated with this system.
These have been described for the 1.75t MS/ha
experiment (Macdonald, 1999).
Table 1: Milksolids response to supplements for four farmlet herds stocked at 4.42 cows/ha in
the 1.75t MS/ha trial at DRC No 2 Dairy (for details and EFS see Macdonald 1999).
Herd
Control Maize grain Maize silage Balanced
Milksolids, kg/cow 269 400 363 407
Milksolids, kg/ha 1190 1768 1606 1800
Supplement, kg DM/cow 68 1395 1279 1458
Response, g MS/kg DM fed 99 78 99
Get the Feed Right
Once the system is in place, the type of
supplement used becomes the next priority. As
a general rule, if less than 25-30% of the diet is
provided by supplementary feed, the main priority
is to ensure that the supplement provides high
quality energy. Exceptions to this rule are rapidly
digested carbohydrates, e.g. molasses, which
have maximum recommended feeding levels
considerably less than 25% of the ration. When
the farm system has large feed deficits that
require more than 30% of the diet to be fed as
supplements, using the right type or mix of feeds
can become i mportant to avoi d nutri ent
imbalances and health problems such as
acidosis and laminitis.
Table 2 lists the nutrient content of commonly
available energy, fibre, and protein feeds, and less
conventional feeds. Macro mineral sources such
as calcium (limeflour), phosphorus (dicalcium
phosphate), salt (agsalt), and magnesium
(causmag) are also available. Sourcing cheap
feed is an exercise in negotiation and creative
thinking to maintain quantity and consistency of
feed supply, especially for large herds.
1
9
Table 2: Nutrient composition of supplementary feeds.
DM ME CP BP Sol CP NDF eNDF SC Starch Fat Ash Ca P Mg K S Na Cl
(%) (MJME/kg) (%) (%CP) (%CP) (%) (%NDF) (%) (%SC) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
PASTURE
Pasture, spring 12-18 11-12.5 18-35 20-30 25-50 35-45 40 7-25 2-4 3-6 10-12 0.2-1.5 0.2-0.6 0.1-0.4 1.5-4.5 0.1-0.6 0.03-0.6 0.1-1.5
Pasture, summer 15-20 9.5-10.5 14-22 25-35 20-35 42-52 50 7-25 4-8 3-5 10-12 0.2-1.5 0.2-0.6 0.1-0.4 1.5-4.5 0.1-0.6 0.03-0.6 0.1-1.5
Pasture, summer dry 20-30 8-9.5 9-14 35-45 15-25 52-65 100 7-15 4-8 2-4 8-10 0.2-1.5 0.2-0.6 0.1-0.4 1.5-4.5 0.1-0.6 0.03-0.6 0.1-1.5
SILAGE
Pasture, good 23 10.0 17.0 22 52 45 90 22.0 7 3.0 10.0 0.80 0.30 0.21 2.30 0.24 0.10 0.20
Pasture, poor 38 9.0 15.0 29 44 55 90 15.0 8 3.1 9.5 0.55 0.28 0.14 2.0 0.20 0.16 0.19
Barley 33 9.8 11.9 15 70 57 65 19.9 100 2.9 8.3 0.52 0.29 0.19 2.57 0.24 0.12 0.00
Lucerne 20 9.5 20.0 23 54 51 82 16.7 45 3.5 9.5 1.29 0.29 0.25 2.84 0.29 0.05 0.34
Maize 33 10.3 8.0 31 48 49 80 35.1 100 3.1 4.0 0.25 0.23 0.18 1.20 0.13 0.01 0.00
Pea 33 8.8 13.1 22 63 59 61 18.3 100 3.3 9.0 0.87 0.34 0.23 3.08 0.25 - -
Wheat/Oat 36 10.5 13.0 24 67 59 61 16.1 100 3.6 8.3 0.57 0.32 0.20 2.85 0.25 0.07 0.07
HAY
Pasture, good 85 9.7 17.0 31 31 54 100 17.7 44 2.6 9.0 0.80 0.40 0.20 2.32 0.26 0.20 0.62
Pasture, poor 85 7.3 7.0 37 29 66 100 14.6 45 2.6 6.3 0.40 0.30 0.18 1.67 0.20 0.15 0.60
Barley straw 87 6.5 4.3 76 20 80 100 6.7 100 1.9 7.1 0.30 0.07 0.23 2.37 0.17 0.14 0.67
Pea straw 85 6.7 6.3 - - - - - - - - 1.60 0.12 - - - - -
Wheat straw 89 6.3 3.6 76 20 79 100 7.8 100 1.8 7.8 0.18 0.05 0.12 1.42 0.19 0.14 0.32
CONCENTRATE
Barley 89 13.0 11.0 27 31 21 34 61.4 90 2.0 2.8 0.06 0.44 0.18 0.57 0.17 0.03 0.18
Bran (wheat) 89 9.8 17.1 29 42 51 19 20.6 95 4.4 6.9 0.13 1.31 0.60 1.50 0.25 0.04 0.05
Lupin 89 12.0 34.2 32 26 33 23 22.0 90 5.5 5.1 0.26 0.44 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maize grain 89 13.6 8.0 52 12 9 5 75.1 99 4.3 1.6 0.02 0.31 0.12 0.40 0.12 0.003 0.05
Meat & bone meal 94 10.7 54.0 49 15 0 0 4.0 0 10.4 31.5 9.50 4.7 0.25 0.49 0.45 0.70 0.30
Oats 89 11.5 13.0 17 27 31 34 47.5 90 4.9 3.6 0.10 0.41 0.15 0.53 0.19 0.01 0.11
Peas 87 13.0 24.0 - - 23 - 46.2 - 1.8 5.0 0.14 0.43 0.17 1.80 - 0.01 -
Soya bean 90 12.9 50.0 35 20 14 23 27.3 90 1.4 7.3 0.30 0.68 0.30 2.12 0.37 0.01 0.08
Wheat 89 12.6 11.3 24 23 14 3 70.2 90 1.9 2.6 0.07 0.36 0.13 0.46 0.16 0.01 0.08
Whole cotton seed 88 16.0 23.0 41 27 44 100 3.7 90 18.0 4.5 0.16 0.60 0.37 1.20 0.26 0.01 -
2
0
Table 2: Nutrient composition of supplementary feeds (cont'd from previous page).
DM ME CP BP Sol CP NDF eNDF SC Starch Fat Ash Ca P Mg K S Na Cl
(%) (MJME/kg) (%) (%CP) (%CP) (%) (%NDF) (%) (%SC) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
BY PRODUCTS
Apple pomace 22 10.4 5.4 51 11 41 34 44.0 100 4.7 5.0 0.23 0.11 0.00 0.53 0.11 0.00 0.00
Bread 63 14.0 13.0 - - 18 - 60.3 90 5.7 3.0 0.17 0.15 0.40 0.19 - 0.80 -
Brewers grains 24 10.0 23.0 45 10 49 18 11.2 100 7.3 4.4 0.30 0.60 0.10 0.10 0.36 0.20 0.17
Cabbage 8 13.2 19.0 - - 29 0 60.4 - 3.4 9.0 0.60 0.30 0.19 3.13 - 0.23 -
Carrots 12 13.2 9.9 - - 9 0 59.4 - 1.4 8.2 0.40 0.35 0.20 2.80 0.17 1.04 0.50
Chocolate 95 19.6 12.9 20 50 4.7 0 30.4 - 48.7 3.3 0.07 0.17 0.10 0.37 0.13 0.09 -
Fishmeal 92 11.7 66.7 60 12 1.47 10 2.0 90 10.5 20.8 5.65 3.16 0.16 0.76 0.49 0.43 0.60
Molasses 75 12.0 4.0 0 95 0 0 82.8 0 0.1 13.1 1.10 0.09 0.43 3.30 0.47 0.15 3.10
Onion 10 13.0 11.6 - - 18 - 65.1 100 1.6 3.7 0.20 0.33 0.10 1.57 0.10 0.03 0.20
Pizza waste 54 17.0 21.7 - - - - - - 30.2 4.8 0.26 - - - - 1.20 -
Potato 23 13.0 10.0 - - 7.6 - 77.2 100 0.4 4.8 0.04 0.24 0.14 2.17 0.09 0.09 0.28
Pumpkin 8.4 12.9 16.0 - - 5.9 - 67.4 100 1.2 9.5 0.25 0.52 0.14 4.0 - 0.01 -
Tallow 99 31.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 99.0 1.0 0.57 0.06 0.06 0.32 0.00 0.01 0.00
Urea 99 0.0 281 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Where ME=metabolisable energy, CP=crude protein, BP=bypass protein, Sol P=soluble protein, NDF=neutral detergent fibre, eNDF=effective fibre, SC=soluble carbohydrates.
Data from Fox et al., 1999; Holmes and Wilson, 1987; NRC, 1989.
21
What Nutrients Limit Production
on Pasture?
To decide what feed or mix of feeds to use,
consider:
Price (cents/MJ ME).
The proporti on of the di et fed as
supplementary feed (determined by the size
of the feed deficits in the farm system).
The targeted level of milksolids production,
as different nutrients will be first-limiting
mi l ksol i ds producti on as producti on
increases.
On good quality pasture (e.g. 11.5-12 MJME/
kg DM, 24-28% crude protein (CP), 38-45%
neutral detergent fibre (NDF), 80% organic matter
(OM) digestibility), energy will generally be the
nutrient first-limiting milk production up to 25 kg
milk/cow/day (2 kg MS/cow/d) (Table 3). This
means that milksolids will increase if energy
intake is increased, but milksolids yield is unlikely
to increase if protein or other nutrients are
increased. To produce more than 30 kg milk/cow/
day (2.4 kg MS/cow/day), both protein and energy
intake will need to be increased. To produce more
than 35 kg milk/cow/day (2.8 kg MS/cow/day),
additional protein will be required.
Kolver and Muller (1998) studied exactly why
cows grazing ad lib on good quality pasture
produced less milk than cows fed ad lib with a
balanced total mixed ration (TMR). Cows that
were fed TMR and produced 44.1 kg milk/cow/
day were compared with control cows grazing
all pasture and producing 29.6 kg milk/cow/day.
Why did the grazing cows produce 15.4 kg less
milk than the cows fed TMR? By using a computer
model (Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein
System), this difference in milk production could
be explained by five variables.
If the grazing cows, which had a DM intake of
19 kg DM/cow/day, had the same DM intake as
the cows fed TMR (23.4 kg DM/cow/day), an extra
9.4 kg of milk could have been produced (a total
of 38 kg of milk/cow/day). The energy used for
grazing and walking cost an estimated 3.7 kg of
milk/cow/day; the energetic cost to the cow of
converting surplus nitrogen in pasture to urea cost
1.8 kg of milk/cow/day; and differences in milk
composition and live weight accounted for the
rest of the difference in milk production. This
shows that if grazing dairy cows could simply eat
more high energy pasture, potential production
could largely be achieved by feeding a pasture-
only diet.
However, there are limits to the extent that a
cow can increase DM intake of fresh pasture. For
a 500-kg cow, a DM intake of 18 kg of high quality
pasture could potentially produce 2 kg MS/cow/
day, and a DM intake of 20 kg/cow/day could
produce 2.3 kg MS/cow/day. Based on studies
from around the world with high producing dairy
cows grazing high quality pasture, DM intake of
high quality pasture seems to be limited to 19 to
20 kg DM/cow/day. To achieve higher levels of
production (e.g. 2.9 kg MS/cow/day), a DM intake
of 24 kg DM/cow/day would be required. This is
more than the cow can achieve on pasture alone,
and a significant proportion of the diet (e.g. 40%)
would need to be supplementary feed to achieve
this high DM intake and production level. High
quality pasture will allow high levels of milksolids
production, but it is likely that a diet containing
more than just pasture will be required for
extremely high levels of production.
Table 3: Nutrients first-limiting milk production on high quality pasture diets.
kg milk/cow/day Nutrient first-limiting milk production
20 Energy
25 Energy
30 Energy and protein
35 Protein
22
Theory and Practice of Feeding
Cows Well
The nutrient requirements of dairy cows have
been well researched, and various feeding
recommendations have been developed around
the world. While the nutrients required to produce
high levels of milksolids will be the same for New
Zealand cows as for overseas cows, our reliance
on fresh pasture as a major feed means that
some of these nutritional recommendations
require some adaptation for pasture-based diets.
The fol l owi ng di scussi on outl i nes the
theoretical nutrient requirements of the high
producing dairy cow, and how in practice these
recommendations can be applied to pasture-
based diets.
Energy
Theory: Energy, expressed as mega joules of
metabolisable energy (MJ ME/kg DM), is the key
driver of milk production. To produce one kg of
milksolids requires 62 MJME (Jersey; 6.0%
milkfat, 4.2% protein), 64 MJME (Friesian-Jersey
cross; 5.0% milkfat, 3.7% protein), and 65 MJME
(Friesian; 4.5% milkfat, 3.5% protein) (Table 4).
Example: A 500 kg Friesian producing 2 kg MS/
day and losing 0.25 kg/day would require an
energy intake of 186 MJ ME/day:
maintenance + milksolids - live weight loss
64 MJ ME + (2 kg MS/d x 65 MJ ME/kg MS) -
(0.25 kg LW x 32 MJ ME/kg LW loss)
If pasture contained 11 MJ ME/kg DM, DM intake
would need to be 17 kg DM/cow/day (186 MJ ME
per day/11 MJ ME per kg DM).
Practice: Use high quality feed (greater than 10.5-
11 MJ ME/kg DM) to achieve high levels of
milksolids production.
Question: What is the best energy source to
use?
Answer: The cheapest, priced per MJ of ME.
Generally, very high ME feeds will have maximum
levels at which they can be fed to prevent rumen
acidosis, e.g. molasses. Fats, such as tallow or
oils, are the most energy dense feeds but have
strict maximum feeding levels to avoid reduction
in pasture digestibility (Table 4).
Protein
Theory: Recommended protei n l evel s for
overseas TMR require diets for high producing
cows to contain 18% of the diet DM as crude
protein, of which 65% is degradable in the rumen,
35% bypasses the rumen, and 32% is soluble.
New Zealand pastures have 20-30% protein, of
which 80% is potentially degradable, 20% is
bypass, and 30-40% is soluble. In theory, the
protein profile of high quality pasture does not
meet the recommended levels.
Practice: In practice, high protein pastures meet
the protein requirements for high levels of
milksolids production. Table 4 shows that the
protein required to produce 20 kg of milk/cow/
day will be supplied by high quality pasture if the
pasture contains more than 18% crude protein.
For higher levels of production (30 kg milk/cow/
day) protein requirements will be met if high
quality pasture contains more than 24% crude
protein. Despite the highly degradable nature of
protein in pasture, the required amount of
metabolisable protein can be supplied to the cow.
This is because, first, rumen microbes grow
extremely well on high quality pasture, and
second, the high passage rate out of the rumen
(4-7%/h) means that a significant amount of
protein bypasses the rumen. As a result, protein
supplements are not required for cows grazing
high quality pasture.
Question: Should I supplement my cows grazing
high quality pasture with a bypass protein, such
as fishmeal?
Answer: No. The cows are not limited by protein,
as long as protein levels in the pasture are above
18-20%. In fact, for cows in early lactation that
are losing body condition, bypass protein will
increase the loss of condition.
Question: My cows get 50% of their intake from
pasture, and 50% from high energy, low protein
feeds. Do I need to feed extra protein?
Answer: The protein requirements in this
situation will be closer to the recommendations
for TMR (Table 4), as pasture makes up a smaller
proportion of the diet. Check that protein supplies
the recommended 18% dietary protein. If pasture
protein is 25% and supplement protein is 9%, then
the ration will have 17% protein, which should be
adequate for milksolids production of 2.3 kg/cow/
d, provided energy intake is high.
Question: Does high protein pasture (25-35%
protein) reduce milksolids production?
Answer: Excreting excess nitrogen as urea
certainly requires energy, but the size of this
23
Table 4: Nutritional guidelines for all-pasture, pasture + supplement, and total
mixed ration (TMR) diets.
Macro minerals Mineral content of diet required (%DM)
All diets, for high production (2 kg MS/cow/day)
Calcium 0.6-0.8
Phosphorus 0.4-0.45
Magnesium 0.22-0.28
Potassium 1.0+
Sulphur 0.23
Sodium 0.20
Chlorine 0.25
Guidelines
In intensive systems, start feeding
supplements when: DM intake <15 kg/cow/day (early lactation)
DM intake <12 kg/cow/day (late lactation)
Energy Energy required
All diets
Maintenance (400 kg lactating cow) 54 MJ ME/cow/day
Every 50 kg change in LW from 400 kg 5 MJ ME/cow/day MORE or LESS for maintenance
4 weeks before calving requires an extra 25 MJ ME/cow/day for pregnancy
2 weeks before calving requires an extra 43 MJ ME/cow/day for pregnancy
Every 1 kg MS requires 62 MJ ME/cow/day(Jersey)
64 MJ ME/cow/day (Crossbred)
65 MJ ME/cow/day (Friesian)
Every 1 kg LW gained requires 38.5 MJME/cow/day
Every 1 kg LW lost supplies 32 MJME/cow/day
Protein Protein content of diet required, (%DM)
Good quality all pasture diets
kg milk/cow/day kg MS/cow/day
20 1.6 18
30 2.4 24
Pasture + supplement, TMR
kg milk/cow/day kg MS/cow/day
20 1.6 16 (65% degradable, 35% bypass, 32% soluble)
30 2.4 18 (65% degradable, 35% bypass, 32% soluble)
As a general rule for all diets:
Early lactation 18
Mid lactation 16
Late lactation 14
Dry cow 12
Fibre (% diet DM)
Good quality all pasture diets
Minimum NDF 35
Minimum effective fibre 17
Pasture + supplement, TMR
Minimum NDF 27-33
Minimum effective fibre 20
Minimum ADF 19-21
Soluble carbohydrate (% diet DM)
Pasture + supplement, TMR
Maximum total soluble carbohydrate 38
Maximum starch 30
Fat (% diet DM)
Pasture + supplement, TMR
Maximum additional unprotected fat 3
Maximum additional protected fat 3
24
energy cost is still uncertain for New Zealand dairy
cows. At low production levels the real effect may
be small. At higher levels of production (more
than 2 kg MS/day), when the cow is on the
metabolic knife-edge, the extra energy required
for the synthesis and excretion of urea could be
significant. At these levels of production, reducing
the protein content may reduce the loss of body
condition, rather than increase milksolids. In the
previously discussed experiment of Kolver and
Muller (1998), the cost of excreting the excess
nitrogen was calculated to be worth 0.1 kg MS/
cow/day for a cow producing 1.87 kg MS/cow/
day.
Fibre
Theory: The recommended level of fibre for a cow
fully fed on TMR requires a minimum of 27-33%
of NDF to sti mul ate chewi ng and sal i va
production, which in turn helps buffer the rumen
pH and promote growth of the rumen microbes
(Table 4). This recommended fibre level has
further been refined, and the term effective fibre
(eNDF) is used to describe the fibre that is most
effective at promoting chewing and saliva
production. A minimum level of 20% eNDF is
recommended in the diet, i.e. a diet may have
30% NDF, of which 67% is effective, resulting in
an eNDF of 20%. The theory states that when
the rumen pH falls below 6.2 and the rumen
becomes more acidic, microbes which digest
fibre slow down and digestion is reduced. The
acid detergent fibre (ADF) level can be used as a
quick guide to the level of eNDF in a feed.
Practice: In practice these benchmarks require
modification for pasture diets because first, the
fibre levels in fresh pasture are higher than 30%,
second, the fibre is much more fermentable (only
40-50% of the fibre in good quality pasture may
be effective; Kolver et al., 1998), and third, if
starchy concentrates are not fed then a lower
rumen pH can be tolerated by the rumen
microbes. Recent research at DRC has shown
that the average ruminal pH of cows fed spring
pasture (11.8 MJME/kg DM, 42% NDF, 25%
protein) is between 5.8 and 6.4 (De Veth and
Kolver, 1999). Digestibility remained high, even
when rumen pH was less than the recommended
6.2.
This was further investigated in a laboratory
experiment that set rumen pH at four levels, 5.4,
5.8, 6.2, and 6.6 (De Veth and Kolver, 1999).
Digestion was only reduced when rumen pH fell
below 5.8. There are probably two reasons for
the difference between these results for pasture,
and overseas recommendations that are based
on high concentrate diets. First, when starchy
concentrates are fed the rumen becomes more
acidic because lactic acid is produced instead of
volatile fatty acids. Lactic acid depresses microbial
growth to a much greater extent than volatile fatty
acids and also causes acidosis-related health
problems such as laminitis. Second, when
starchy feeds are fed, those rumen microbes that
can digest both fibre and starch will preferentially
digest starch, thereby reducing fibre digestion.
For pasture diets which include a high
proportion of starchy supplement (e.g. more than
25-30% of the diet as grains or potatoes), the
recommended minimum fibre levels of 27-33%
NDF and effective fibre levels of 20% are very
applicable (Table 4). However, for cows grazing
only high quality pasture, research at DRC
suggests that minimum levels of 35% NDF and
17% eNDF may be more appropriate. This means
that if pasture has less than 35% NDF, as
measured by a feed analysis, then rumen pH will
be significantly lower than 6.0 and cows will most
likely respond to supplements of effective fibre
like hay or straw. If the NDF is 42%, as most New
Zealand pastures are in spring and autumn, then
rumen pH will not be limiting and cows will not
need or respond to hay.
Question: Should I feed a kg of barley straw to
my cows grazing high quality pasture in spring
or autumn?
Answer: Send a pasture sample away for
analysis (FeedTech, Alan Johns Building,
Grasslands Research Centre, AgResearch,
Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North, Phone 06
356 8019, Fax 06 351 809, two day turn-around;
or Animal and Veterinary Sciences Group, Lincoln
University, Canterbury). If the NDF levels are less
than 35% (Table 4) then rumen pH will likely be
too low and cows will respond to extra effective
fibre. If the NDF levels are above 35-40% then
rumen pH will be OK and the cows wont need
any straw.
Question: Im planning on feeding 4 kg DM of
potatoes and 3 kg DM of barley to cows with a
pasture intake of 12 kg DM/cow/day (total DM
intake of 19 kg/cow/day). What do I do to avoid
acidosis and laminitis?
Answer: Work out if minimum fibre requirements
are being met (27-33% NDF, 20% eNDF; (Table
25
4), and if the amount of starch is below maximum
recommended levels (30%). If starch levels are
exceeded, reduce starch input. If fibre levels are
not being met, include an effective fibre source
(hay, straw, or silage). Assuming the pasture is
high quality (42% NDF, of which 50% is effective),
the above feeding scenario will result in starch
levels being 30% of the diet (at maximum
recommended levels), NDF at 31% and eNDF
13% of the diet (below recommended eNDF
levels). Feeding 2.5 kg DM of potatoes, 2.5 kg
DM of barley, and 2 kg DM of hay or straw will
satisfy minimum fibre and maximum starch
recommended feeding levels, and prevent
acidosis.
Soluble carbohydrates
Theory: Diets designed to fully feed the high
producing dairy cow recommend having 34-38%
of the diet as soluble carbohydrate (starch,
sugars, organic acids), with starch providing no
more than 30% of the diet (Table 4). Theoretically
these levels are needed to provide the energy to
the cow and the rumen microbes which need
energy to convert ammonia into protein. These
recommended levels are also used to avoid
health problems such as acidosis and laminitis.
High quality pastures, which contain 5-25%
soluble carbohydrate, appear out of balance
compared with the recommended levels.
Practice: The fibre in high quality pasture is very
fermentable, which provides energy for the cow
and for efficient growth of rumen microbes. In a
series of experiments at DRC, the effect of adding
soluble carbohydrates to a pasture diet has been
determined (Kolver 1998). When cows fed high
quality pastures are supplemented with soluble
carbohydrate, e.g. molasses, grains, potatoes
etc., no improvement in rumen microbial growth
or milksolids production is observed if overall
energy intake is not increased. On farm this
occurs when cows are well fed on good quality
pasture, and substitution rate is high. Simply
changing the ratio of soluble carbohydrate:fibre
in a high quality pasture diet has little impact on
microbial growth. If the substitution rate is low, or
if soluble carbohydrate supplements are given to
cows which have a restricted intake of pasture,
milksolids production will increase. This increase
is due to the additional energy supplied to the cow.
More microbial protein is produced, but this will
only be of use if the protein requirements of the
cow were not being met by pasture, i.e. if protein
levels in the pasture were less than approximately
18-20%.
Question: If my cows are well-fed on high quality
pasture, will I improve digestion and milksolids
production if I supplement them with 500 ml of
molasses?
Answer: No. The substitution rate will be high
and because the fermentable fibre in pasture
provides readily available energy, overall energy
availability in the rumen will not be increased.
Fat
Theory: If the base diet contains 3% fat, then an
additional 2-3% of the ration can be fed as
ruminally unprotected fat, such as vegetable oils
or tallow (Table 4). Generally fats are only used if
very cheap or if cows are producing more than
30 kg mi l k/cow/day. Feedi ng too much
unprotected fat will reduce digestion. To get more
energy into the cows at very high levels of milk
production (more than 40 kg milk/cow/day), an
additional 2-3% of ruminally-protected fat (e.g.
Golden flake, Megalac) may be included in the
diet.
Practice: Fresh pasture contains 3-5% fat and at
present the recommended feeding rates used in
rations overseas (above) are probably a good
guide for New Zealand diets.
Question: I have access to a cheap source of
tallow. How much should I feed?
Answer: For cows with a DM intake of 16-19 kg
DM, feeding 0.5-0.6 kg DM of tallow should be
safe. If milk protein content drops, feed less tallow.
Minerals
Theory: Recommended levels of minerals for the
high producing cow (e.g. 2 kg MS/cow/day) are
given in Table 4.
Practice: Cows grazing all-pasture usually require
supplemental magnesium during spring and
supplemental calcium (e.g. limeflour) if pasture
calcium levels are low (0.2-0.4% calcium). When
more than 25-30% of the diet is supplemental
feed, check that mineral requirements are being
met. Commonly calcium, magnesium, and
sodium will be limiting, especially with high maize
silage or grain feeding. This can be remedied
usi ng l i mefl our, causmag, and agsal t,
respectively. Trace minerals can be limiting,
especi al l y copper, sel eni um, and cobal t.
Supplying trace minerals two weeks before
calving and four weeks post-calving can be a
cheap insurance policy.
26
Question: Should I feed limeflour to my grazing
cows?
Answer: If you are targeting high production (2
kg MS/cow/d plus), and your pastures contain low
levels of calcium (0.2-0.4%) then milksolids
production will likely be increased when limeflour
is fed and the incidence of milk fever reduced. In
the long term, pasture calcium levels can be
increased through fertiliser. To prevent milk fever
in problem herds, drench with 180-200 g limeflour
during the four days the cows are in the colostrum
herd.
Additives
Before using additives ask yourself: what is the
response to this additive?, what are the returns?,
and what research is backing up the claims?
Yeast and probiotics: Yeast and probiotics (live
or dead bacteria) claim to enhance digestion by
stabilising the rumen environment. Many studies
have been made and the only consistent result
has been that milksolids responses are variable
and cannot be predicted. Even at very high levels
of production (more than 35 kg milk/cow/day) it
is difficult to justify the use of these additives.
Enzymes: Fibre-digesting enzymes are also
marketed, but if the enzyme is not protected from
the rumen microbes, the enzyme itself will be
digested before it can work. Recent enzyme
products have been protected against digestion,
but like yeast and probiotics, results to date have
been variable and the use of enzyme products is
difficult to justify.
Chelated minerals: Chelated minerals (minerals
bound to organic compounds) are sold on the
basi s that absorpti on i s enhanced when
compared with inorganic minerals. For some
products improvements in absorption is small,
but others can achieve considerably higher levels
of absorption. The main advantage of chelated
minerals is their high solubility, which allows water
trough treatment, e.g. zinc.
Vitamins: Pasture is high in vitamin A and D
especially, and supplements are not required,
although responses to other vitamins such as B
12
are common when these vitamins are in limited
supply. If cows respond to vitamin B
12
check for
a deficiency in cobalt.
Anionic salts: Anionic salts (sulphates, chlorides)
can be used in the 2-3 week period before calving
to prevent milk fever, but responses are variable.
Achieving the required intake of anionic salts to
reduce the DCAD (dietary cation anion difference)
to below zero can be difficult. If anionic salts are
to be used they must be used in conjunction with
other management changes such as using low
potassium feeds (hay, straw, or maize silage),
grazing paddocks with low potassium levels, and
ensuring that potassium fertiliser isnt applied
between May and September. Concerns
regarding the relevance of anionic salts in pasture-
based dairying systems have been raised and
discussed by Roche (2000). Supplementing with
100 g Ca for the four days following calving to
prevent milk fever is a recommended alternative
to anionic salts.
Rumensin: Rumensin (or monensin) is an
ionophore which, apart from preventing bloat, can
make the digestive process more efficient by
reducing methane and increasing energy
availability to the dairy cow. Rumensin is
extensively used in beef feedlots overseas.
Supplementation of grazing dairy cows with
rumensin has given variable responses that are
difficult to predict.
Buffers: Buffers such as sodium bicarbonate,
sodium bentonite, or magnesium oxide, are not
required for pasture-only diets, but can be
effective if a significant amount (more than 25-
30% of the diet) of readily digested grain or starch
is fed. Usually buffers are used in conjunction
with fibre to prevent or treat rumen acidosis.
Feeding to the Cow's Potential
By world standards New Zealand dairy cows have
low per cow production due to a quicker decline
in milk production after peak production, and a
short lactation. This is a result of the change in
pasture supply and quality during the year, rather
than genetics, because New Zealand genetics
are internationally competitive.
What is the potential of New Zealand cows to
produce milk when fully fed? At DRC, New
Zealand and Overseas Holstein Friesians (HF)
of the same breeding worth are being compared
when grazing pasture at a low stocking rate
(approximately 2.2 cows/ha) or fully fed on TMR.
The TMR contains maize silage, grass silage,
hay, whole cottonseed, and concentrate based
27
on mai ze, barl ey, soybean, corn gl uten,
molasses, fishmeal, oil, protected fat, minerals
and vitamins.
Results from the current season to 5
th
April
are shown in Table 5. Compared to New Zealand
HF grazing pasture, New Zealand HF fed TMR
produced 46% more milk, 37% more milksolids,
and were 11% heavier. The difference between
Overseas HF grazing pasture and Overseas HF
fed TMR was even greater; cows fed TMR
produced 69% more milk, 54% more milksolids,
and were 14% heavier.
Results from the first year of this trial and the
current seasons production clearly show that
New Zealand cows have the potential for high
milksolids production and growth when fed well.
These results also suggest that the current high
use of Overseas HF genetics in New Zealand will
require improved levels of feeding to ensure cows
reach target body condition scores at calving and
get in calf.
Conclusions
The New Zealand dairy cow has great potential
to grow and produce milksolids when fed well.
The priorities for making money from feeding
supplements to the high producing dairy cow are
firstly to get the appropriate farm system in place,
and then to consider feed type. The amount of
supplementary feed to be used will be determined
by the feed deficits generated within the farm
system. Which type of supplementary feed to use
will be determined by the amount of supplements
being fed and by the nutrients which first-limit
Table 5: Comparative performance of Overseas (OS) and NZ Holstein Friesian cows grazing
pasture at a low stocking rate (approximately 2.2 cows/ha) or fed total mixed ration
(TMR) ad lib for the 1999/2000 season to 5 April.
Pasture TMR
NZ OS NZ OS
Days in milk 255 227 250 236
Milk, kg/cow 3964 3990 5783 6746
Milksolids, kg/cow 340 307 467 472
Live weight, kg 444 500 495 570
Condition score 4.8 3.7 6.7 5.8
References
De Veth MJ, and Kolver ES, 1999. Digestion of
pasture i n response to rumi nal pH.
Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of
Animal Production 59: 66-69.
Hol mes CW, and Wi l son GF, 1987. Mi l k
Production from Pasture. Butterworths, New
Zealand.
Ki dd JM, 2000. Opti ons For Increasi ng
Profitability. Proceedings of the Ruakura
Farmers Conference 52:(in press).
Kol ver ES, 1998. Increasi ng the sol ubl e
carbohydrate content of spring pasture diets.
Page 8 in: Dairying Research Corporation
Research Update, June.
Kolver ES, and Muller LD, 1998. Performance and
nutrient intake of high producing Holstein cows
consuming pasture or a total mixed ration.
Journal of Dairy Science 81: 1403-1411.
Kolver ES, Muller LD, Barry MC, Penno JW,
1998. Evaluation and application of the Cornell
Net Carbohydrate and Protein System for dairy
cows fed diets based on pasture. Journal of
Dairy Science 81: 2029-2039.
Macdonald KA, 1999. Determining how to make
inputs increase your economic farm surplus.
Proceedi ngs of the Ruakura Farmers
Conference 51: 78-87.
milksolids production. Nutritional guidelines can
be used to meet the nutritional requirements of
the high producing dairy cow and to avoid health
problems.
28
National Research Council. 1989. Nutrient
requirements of dairy cattle. 6
th
rev. ed.
National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Penno JW, 1998. Principles of profitable dairying.
Proceedi ngs of the Ruakura Farmers
Conference 50: 1-14.
Roche JR, 2000. Feeding The Transition Cow -
The Myths And The Magic. Proceedings of the
Ruakura Farmers Conference 52:(in press).
Van der Poel J, 1996. Going for high production.
Proceedi ngs of the Ruakura Farmers
Conference 48: 5-10.