search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Initial Silage Results Indicate Prospects for the Winter


With over 650 samples now analysed, Trouw Nutrition GB say the picture for first cuts has been influenced by cutting date, suggesting some specific challenges and opportunities. Commenting on the results of crops analysed so far this year, Dr Liz Homer, Ruminant Technical Development Manager says that samples have been received considerably earlier this year, reflecting both the growing season and a swing towards multicut production systems. “We have seen a big spike in early samples meaning we can talk


about a representative picture sooner than usual. The season is roughly two weeks ahead of 2018, with the first samples arriving in late April. Numbers dropped back during June,” she explains. “The good weather and better early growth will have contributed


to this and we know more farmers have opted for more cuts, bringing the date of first cut forward. We also analysed considerably more pre- cutting grass samples as farmers looked to time cutting more precisely based on grass quality.” Dr Homer says the very early samples were well fermented but


characterised by higher NDF and lignin compared to the general dataset, an indicator of a higher proportion of more mature grass. This will affect how these silages will feed as they will be less fermentable. Overall Dr Homer says that first cuts analysed so far this year are


well fermented with higher dry matters, a result of optimal harvesting conditions. At the same time, sugar content is higher. “While dry matter is higher at 34.1% compared to 31.2% last


season, lactic acid is lower which is what we would expect with a drier crop. There is a significant range in lactic acid content, indicating some poorer fermented crops compared to the average. “Farmers should be aware that a combination of higher dry


matter and increased sugars are indicators of a greater risk of heating when clamps are opened, particularly if clamps were not adequately consolidated which is an added risk with drier crops. “We would recommend farmers faced with these crops to plan


how they will manage feedout carefully to reduce the impact of heating on nutrient degradation and ration quality. Minimising the amount of silage exposed to the air, moving across the face quickly and sharp cutter knives can all help reduce the extent of heating.” Looking at the nutritional analysis (see table), Dr Homer says that


average ME content is higher at 11.5MJ/kgDM. And crude protein is marginally lower at 15.4%. However, a concern is that while NDF content is similar to 2018, lignin content is elevated at 35.2g/kg compared to 26.3g/kg. “This is indicative of the rapid growth at the start of the season


resulting in a more mature crop despite an earlier harvest. The consequence is that this will affect how silages will perform in the rumen.


“The combination of increased dry matter and lignin means that


both rapidly and slowly fermentable carbohydrates are lower than in 2018. Overall, fermentable carbohydrate averages are low when compared to fermentable protein. This means that there is an excess of rumen fermentable protein which could impact on rumen balance in the total diet. “To balance this, it may be necessary to increase the proportion of


rapidly fermentable energy sources in supplementary feeds, possibly feeding more cereals to optimise rumen energy and microbial protein levels.


“The good news is that we are seeing lower acid loads than in


2018 as a result of the reduced fermentable carbohydrate supply and lower lactic acid levels. At the same time we are generally seeing a


PAGE 70 JULY/AUGUST 2019 FEED COMPOUNDER


higher fibre index than last year. Together these mean it should be possible to formulate diets containing more cereals safely, without increasing the acidosis risk.” Dr Homer says the overall picture is that the average silage has


a Dynamic Energy content down from 6.7MJ/kgDM to 6.2MJ/kgDM. While this still indicates a good energy level, the reduced fermentability could affect milk production potential. A cow eating 10kgDM/day would be expected to produce M+8.1 litres from silage provided the total diet is correctly balanced in terms of rapidly and slowly fermentable carbohydrate and protein. ”Encouragingly we are seeing higher intake potential, up from


97.3% in 2018 to 106.4% this year. This means cows should be enthusiastic about eating higher quantities which could be good news given that in many parts of the country first and second cuts have been good, and with some heavy third cut crops in the field farmers may be able to increase the proportion of grass silage in the diet this winter.” Dr Homer believes prospects for first cut are good, but overall


performance will depend on the quality of forage on farm, and also on the yield and quality of subsequent cuts. “As in any other year, the average masks a considerable variation


in actual crops. While they indicate a trend, they cannot take the place of regular analysis of the clamps on the farm. “We strongly advise having a representative sample from every


clamp being fed analysed monthly with the diet fine –tuned to reflect both forage quality and quantity, ensuring diets are correctly balanced to optimise the contribution from forage and overall production and


rumen health.” Unit


Dry Matter pH


NH-3 of Total N VFA


Lactic Acid


Crude Protein D Value ME


Sugar NDF ADF


Lignin Ash


NutriOpt parameters


Rapid Fermentable. Carbohydrates (RFC)


Total Fermentable. Carbohydrates (TFC)


Rapid Fermentable. Protein (RFP)


Total Fermentable. Protein (TFP)


Acid Load Fibre Index


Dynamic Energy MJ/kgDM g/kgDM g/kgDM g/kgDM g/kgDM 188.3 439.8 94.5 116.2 49.8


183.8 6.2


% %DM


g/kg DM g/kg DM % DM % DM


MJ/kg DM % DM % DM % DM


g/kg DM % DM


Average 2019


34.1 4.3 3.2


18.9 74.2 15.4 71.8 11.5 3.1


45.8 28.5 35.2 8.9


Average 2018


31.2 4.2 3.1


18.5 90.9 15.9 70.6 11.3 2.3


45.1 30.5 26.3 8.8


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76