Search

Forage-animal production agriculture is implementing infrastructure changes and management strategies to adjust to increased energy-related costs of fuel, feed grains, fertilizers, and seeds. The primary objectives of this position paper are to assess future research and extension scientific needs in forage utilization, financial support for the discipline, and changing status and number of scientists. A survey questionnaire returned from 25 land-grant universities in the eastern half of the United States rated the top 4 research needs as 1) pasture systems and efficiency of production; 2) interfacing with energy concerns; 3) forage cultivar evaluations and persistence; and 4) environment impacts. Plant-animal future research needs at 11 USDA-ARS regional locations are targeted at sustainable management and improved livestock performance, ecophysiology and ecology of grasslands, environment impacts, and improved technologies for nutritive value assessments. Extension scientists from 17 southern and northeastern states listed the top 3 needs as forage persistence, soil fertility and nutrient management, and pasture systems and efficiency of production. Grant funds currently provide more than 40% of land-grant university research and extension efforts in forage utilization, and scientists estimate that this support base will increase to 55 to 60% of the funding total by 2013. Reduced allocation of state and federal funding has contributed to a reduction in the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) scientists engaged in forage utilization research and extension activities. The current 25 state FTE conducting research number about 2.8 per state. This includes 10 states with >3, 11 states with <2, and 3 states with <1 FTE. Increased interest in cellulosic energy, climate change, and environmental impact may offer new opportunities for these FTE to participate in integrated cross-discipline research Extension programming, and technology transfer methods will change to accommodate reduced funding but with increasing numbers of novice, recreation-oriented landowners.

Experiments were conducted to determine the effects of increasing supplement protein concentration on performance and forage intake of beef cows and forage utilization of steers consuming stockpiled bermudagrass forage. Bermudagrass pastures were fertilized with 56 kg of N/ha in late August. Grazing was initiated during early November and continued through the end of January each year. Treatments for the cow performance trials were: no supplement or daily equivalents of 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 g of supplemental protein per kilogram of BW. Supplements were formulated to be isocaloric, fed at the equivalent of 0.91 kg/d, and prorated for 4 d/wk feeding. Varying the concentration of soybean hulls and soybean meal in the supplements created incremental increases in protein. During yr 1, supplemented cows lost less weight and condition compared to unsupplemented animals (P < 0.05). During yr 2, supplemented cows gained more weight (P = 0.06) and lost less condition (P < 0.05) compared to unsupplemented cows. Increasing supplement protein concentration had no affect on cumulative cow weight change or cumulative body condition score change. Forage intake tended to increase (P = 0.13, yr 1 and P = 0.07, yr 2) in supplemented cows. Supplement protein concentration did not alter forage intake. In a digestion trial, four crossbred steers were used in a Latin square design to determine the effects of supplement protein concentration on intake and digestibility of hay harvested from stockpiled bermudagrass pasture. Treatments were no supplement; or 0.23, 0.46, and 0.69 g of supplemental protein per kilogram of BW. Forage intake increased (P < 0.05) 16% and OM intake increased (P < 0.01) 30% in supplemented compared to unsupplemented steers. Diet OM digestibility increased (P = 0.08) 14.5% and total digestible OM intake increased (P < 0.05) 49% in supplemented compared to unsupplemented steers. Supplement protein concentration did not alter forage intake, total digestible OM intake, or apparent digestibility of OM or NDF. During the initial 30 d after first killing frost, beef cows did not respond to supplementation. However, later in the winter, supplementation improved utilization of stockpiled bermudagrass forage.