September 1964

Frequency of

  E Feeding Pmtem Supplement
To Range Cattle  

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY o College Station, Texas ’
TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, R. E. Patterson, Director

Summary

 

Three groups of wintering Hereford heifers
and cows were supplementally fed cottonseed cake
on pasture in the Davis Mountain area of Texas
during four winters, 1958-62. The accompanying
feeding schedules were used.

9 Two pounds per head daily the first year and
3 pounds daily the last 3 years.

9 Seven pounds per head on Tuesdays and Satur-
days during the first year and 10.5 pounds the
last 5 years.

0 Four and two-thirds pounds per head on Tues-
days, Thursdays and Saturdays the first year
and 7 pounds the last 3 years.

The three groups were rotated among the pas-
tures during the winter to minimize pasture differ-
ences as much as possible. All cattle were pastured
together during the balance of the year.

Although slight but nonsignificant differences
in weight changes were observed among the three
groups of cows, the difference in frequency of
feeding cottonseed cake had no significant effect
upon percent calf crop weaned, weaning weight
of calves or weaned calf weight produced per cow.
At the end of the fourth year the females fed twice
weekly showed Slight advantage in weight and in
percent calf crop weaned. They also tended to
graze more widely over t-he pasture without wait-
ing for supplemental feed than did those fed more
frequently.

Feeding twice per week was as satisfactory as
more frequent feeding and resulted in" savings of
approximately 6O percent in labor and travel as
compared with daily feeding.

Contents"

Acknowledgment: 

The cooperation of the Joe T. Lane Ranch, Marfa,
for furnishing labor, cattle and pastures, and the Pecos
Cottonoil Co., Pecos, for supplying cottonseed cake is
gratefully acknowledged.

COVER: Cows and calves from all groups a few days
before the 1962 calf crop was weaned. Photo: courtesy,
Texas Hereford Association.

Summary .................................................................. --
Acknowledgments ................................................... __
Introduction ............................................................. _-
Procedure .................................................................. -_
Results and Discussion __________________________________________ __
Weight Gain or Loss of Cows ...................... --
Grazing Habits of Cows ________________________________ __
Savings of Labor and Travel .......................... --
Performance of Heifers in Drylot __________________ __
Production of Cows ..... _-

Literature Cited ______________________________________________________ __ -

Reprint September 1965

   
   
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
   
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 

1
. §

=4

our THE SOUTHWEST, winter roughage for
 cattle is cured native grass. In the Trans-
7 of Texas this cured grass provides adequate
 is deficient in protein during winter and
, ths (3, 4, 6, 13). Therefore, adequate and
iplementation of this roughage to correct defi-
i nutrients is important in successful beef cattle
N (7, s).

irecent years, range cattle have been fed protein
p» usually on a daily basis. This daily feed-
les a substantial expenditure for labor and
 As labor has become more difficult to
 more costly, numerous systems of saving
pplemental feeding have been developed and
Some are listed:

 ' ing salt with cottonseed meal or other con-
 trate feeds to permit self-feeding, yet limit
‘nsumption to a desired level (2, 9, 10).

lending urea with molasses to permit self-
Feeding and sometimes adding other ingredients
 ch as phosphoric acid and vitamin A (1, 11, 12).
-. ufacture of protein blocks of specified pro-

’  hardness to regulate level of intake.

.

 these practices proved satisfactory, but a type
Yimust be provided for the first two. For years
i. ; cottonseed cake on a daily basis was the
od of protein supplementation in Texas
‘iicattlemen were reluctant to change their feed-
'ces. Little information was available with
ithe influence of less frequent feeding of pro-
i." ent upon the production of range beef cows,
ifqwork with sheep in Australia indicated that
x maintenance or submaintenance ration once a

ybetter than daily feeding (5).

 experiment was designed to determine the
iifeeding beef cows under range conditions in
Pecos area the same total quantity of cotton-
irper week on a daily, three times weekly and
a y schedule. The work was carried out on
A» Ranch at Marfa and at the Livestock Unit,
j‘ Experiment}. Station, Balmorhea.

{Trans-Pecos aiea is the portion of the state
y Pecos River. It comprises 34,444 square
l is larger than several of the Eastern states.
4' area is mountainous with intervening plateaus,
i, associate animal husbandman, in charge of Live-

 " Trans-Pecos Experiment Station, Balmonhea, and
"Department of Animal Science, College Station, Texas.

'n, mineral and vitamin A content but varying »

ueney of Feeding Protein Supplement t0 Range Cattle

A. A. Melton and  K. Riggs*

Figure 1. The elevation varies from 1,200 feet, where
the Pecos River empties into the Rio Grande, to 8,751
feet at the peak of the Guadalupe Mountains. The aver-
age annual rainfall varies from approximately 8 inches
in the extreme west portion of the area to more than
2O inches at some of the higher elevations of the Davis
Mountains.‘ However, the rainfall in most of the area
ranges from 11 to 16- inches. Approximately 75 percent
of the annual rainfall is received from‘ May through
October with the larger portion coming in July, August
and September.

Because of rainfall distribution, the best grazing
season is usually from midsummer until frost in October
or November. Therefore, the breeding season is sched-
uled to produce calves ready to wean at or near the
end of the growing season.

At the time of frost there is usually more forage cover
than at any other time of the year. About this time rain-
fall almost ceases, and the cured range grasses stay
well preserved. Therefore, supplemental feeding is not
necessary until calving begins in January or February.
Supplemental feeding usually continues until the summer
rains begin about June 1.

The location for this experiment was the Highland
area of the Trans-Pecos which has an average elevation
of 4,500-5,000 feet.
mountains to plateaus.
where this experiment was conducted. The predominant
grasses are blue grama, sideoats grama, black grama,
bluestems and tabosa.

The rainfall average varies from
It is about 14 inches annually

Procedure

Three groups of 50 Hereford heifer calves, aver-
aging 483 pounds, were placed in separate pastures on
February 17, 1959. Individual weights were taken at
the start and close of this winter feeding period. They
were fed 14 pounds of cottonseed cake per head per
week from February 17 to May 29, 1959. One group
received 2 pounds of cottonseed cake per head daily.
A second group received 7 pounds per head on Tues-
days and Saturdays, Figure 2, and the third received
42/5 pounds per head on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Satur-
days.

The three groups were rotated among pastures
every 2 weeks during the last 7 weeks of the feeding
period. After May 29, all groups were pastured to-
gether until the original groups were re-formed for the
1959-60 wintering test. Bulls were turned in with the
heifers about April 1 each year. All heifers were preg-

3

 

1

nancy-tested on September 15. Five were open in the to move some of the heifers from the groups fed twic,

 

groups fed daily and twice a week and six were open and three times weekly to the group fed daily to hav
in the group fed three times a week. These were removed equal numbers per group. This was done after initi
from the test. weighing on December 9, 1959.

Only 111 heifers, in groups of 37 each, were avail- Calving began in Jaunary 1960. Supplemental feed
able for the second winter, 1959-60. It was necessary ing began February 5 to those which had calved. As each

Figure 1. Pictures depicting the topography of the urea where this experiment was conducted.

 

,iqil7rling heifers receiving 7 pounds of cottonseed cake
 weekly.

   
  
  
   
 
  
  
    
  
  
   
  
   
  
  
  
   
   
  
  
   
  
  
   

.eid, she was placed in her respective feeding
h calf was num-bered and its birth date was

 ree groups of heifers were continued on the
 schedule as in 1959, but were fed a
it pounds of cottonseed cake per head per week.
_ he amount fed per head per week each year
 The groups were rotated among the pas-
i 2 weeks. Winter feeding was discontinued
i 1 when cow weights were taken as the groups
 together for summer pasturing. The calves
 ed and weaned and the cows were pregnancy-
 ctober 21, 1960. One cow in each group was
 i and these were removed from the test.

 the breeding season of 1960, 28 of the 50
 in a winter feedlo-t test in 1959-60, described
i ‘added to the three breeding groups on the
. ividual weights were again taken on December
at the end of the summer period and at the
'  the 1960-61 wintering period.

iisecond calving season began in ]anuary 1961.
 e numbered and birth dates were recorded as
d. supplemental feeding commenced on February
i cows were again fed on the same frequency
 "in 1959 and 1960. .Each group remained in
 pastures 4 to 5 weeks before rotation, rather
 s as in previous years. Feeding was disco-n-
fie 5, 1961, when weights were taken and the
Ere again turned together for summer pas-
i e calves were weighed and weaned and the
‘~ pregnancy-tested on October 16, 1961. There
 cows in any of the groups.

ifhird calving season began in Ianuary 1962.
i procedure used in the two previous seasons
ed. Feeding was discontinued May 29, 1962.
 were weighed land weaned anid the cows were
i-tested on October 8, 1962. There were no
ales in the group fed daily, but there were
“in the groups fed twice and three times weekly.
is of calves were not available in 1962.
 Hereford heifer calves, averaging 555 pounds,
ided into three groups of 10 each and placed

in the station feedlots on December 23, 1959 to check
the pasture feeding test. The frequency of feeding was
as previously described for range-fed cattle with an allow-
ance of 1.4 pounds of cottonseed cake hand-fed per head
per week. Once each week, 10 pounds of cottonseed
cake were replaced by 10 pounds of cottonseed meal for-
tified with vitamin A. Each group was self-fed hegari
stover for 79 days. During the last 32 days, 25 percent
of the hegari stover was replaced by cottonseed hulls.

The feedlot test was repeated in 1960-61 with a
fourth group added. The fourth group was fed cotton-
seed cake every 5 days. The other three groups were
fed on the same schedule as during the previous year.
The roughage was from a dual-purpose grain sorghum
and was self-fed to all groups. The heifers averaged 515
pounds in initial weight and all groups were on test
for 111 days.

Since the feedlot results with heifer calves for 2
years showed no practical differences from frequency
of feeding, the twice and three times weekly schedules
were discontinued in 1961-62. Feeding supplement at
daily, 5 and 7 day intervals was tried during the 111-day
period. The average beginning weight of the 3O heifers
was 516 pounds.

Results and Discussion

Weight Gain or Loss of Cows

The results of 4 years of feeding ‘supplement to
beef cows on the range are summarized in Table 1 and
Figure 5. The average weight gain for the first winter
and the average loss during the second winter for the

TABLE 1. WEIGHT CHANGES OF COWS FED COTTONSEED CAKE
DAILY, TWICE WEEKLY AND THREE TIMES WEEKLY UNDER RANGE
CONDITIONS

Frequency of feeding
supplement

Twice Three times

Daily wee-kly weekly

Average gain or loss, pounds

Winter gain 1958-59-—101 days 91 88 38
Number heifers 50-50-50

Summer gain 1959-194 days 218 » 240 271
Number heifers 27-42-43 ‘ ‘

Total gain 2/11 to 12/9/s9 309 32a 309
Winter loss 1959-60—174 days — 60 — 62 — 37
Number cows 37-37-37

Summer gain 1960-204 days 178 177 151
Number cows 36-36-36 . '

Total gain 2/11/s9 to 12/21/60 409 432 423
Winter loss 1960-61-166 days — 80 —121 — 98
Number cows 46-45-44

Summer gain 1961-198 days 178 206 169
Number cows 45-45-44

Total gain 2/11/59 to 12/20/61 s01 s11 494
Winter loss 1961-62-161 days —167 —176 —170
Number cows 45-45-44

Summer gain 1962—204 days 206 218 211
Number cows 28-29-31 i

Total gain 2/11/s9 to 12/19/62 s64 s10 sas

Average weight of cows, pounds
I075 "

 ,__ oeeeeeeFQd 
——-- Fed twice weekly
Fed three times weekly

900"‘

80D-

700-

600 '-

500l- I

475 J I I I I I I I J

241-59 5-29-59 12-9-59 5-51-50 iz-zi-eo e-s-ei lz-zo-ei 5-29-ezIz-I9-e2

Figure 3. Spring and fall weights of cows fed cottonseed cake

daily, twice weekly and three times weekly u-nder range conditions
during 4 winter months.

groups fed daily and twice weekly were similar, while
those fed three times weekly gained considerably less
during the first winter but also lost considerably less
during the second winter. Since the calves were not
rotated from pasture to pasture until the last half of
the first wintering period it is possible that pasture dif-
ferences accounted for the much lower gain of the group
fed three times weekly. Pasture differences could not
account for the smaller amount of loss the second winter,
since the cattle were rotated in the pastures every 2 weeks.

During the third winter the cows fed twice weekly
lost 5O percent more weight than tho-se fed daily, with
those fed thrice weekly being intermediate. The losses
for each group during the fourth winter were in the same
sequence as in’ the third winter, but there was a dif-

TABLE 2. WEIGHT GAINS. OF HEIFERS FED COTTONSEED CAKE DAILY, TWICE WEEKLY, THREE TIMES WEEKLY, EVERY 5 DAYS AND ON

   
   
   
  
   
   
 
  
 
  
 
   
   
   
 
   
 
   
  
  

ference of only 9 pounds from the lowest loss of 167:
pounds for daily feeding to the highest of 176 pound  
for twice weekly feeding. I

In general, summer weight gains were inversel
related to weight gain or loss during the previous winter:
To-tal weight gain for the 4-year period was slightly i‘
favor of the cows fed twice weekly. The weight loss pe
cow was less variable for that igrioup than for the cow
fed daily. Those fed thrice weekly were intermediate if
this respect. It took approximately 2 hours for the cow
fed twice weekly to consume their 101/2 pound shar
of cottonseed cake. The timid or slow-eating co-wsiha
more opportunity to get their portion of feed which coul
account for the smaller variation in weight loss observe
in this group.

Although Table 1 shows the average gain or los
for all the cows in each group during each summe
and winter period, for purposes of statistical analysi,
only cows in the test from beginning to end were in A
cluded. This changed slightly the gain o-r loss figur I
shown in Table 1, but the differences in gain or los,  
of the groups were not statistically significant in 
period during the test.  

Grazing Habits 0f Cows

The grazing habits of the cows in all groups wer‘
observed the day before feeding and on the iday of feedin
On the days prior to feeding the cows in all groups woul
lie down at approximately 10:00 a.m. About noon, co
in the groups fed twice and three times weekly bega
grazing again, while the cows fed daily did not begi
grazing until about 2:00 p.m. Through the remaind
of the day 60-75 percent of the cows in all groups graze
The grazing habits of the less frequently fed co-ws differe
depending upon whether or not they had been fed th
day. a

The grazing habits of the cows fed daily remain, I
constant every day. The cows fed two or three tim
weekly lay down soon after eating. About 4:00 p.m j
on the same day, those fed three times weekly bega I~
to graze, but those fed twice weekly did no-t, althoug
they went to water late in the afternoon. ~

 

WEEKLY IN DRYLOTS

Dafly Twice Three times Every
wee-kly weekly five days

Winter gain 1959-60-41] days 164 152 . 171
Number heifers 10-10-10
Winter gain 1960-61-111 days 138 142 122 145
Number heifers 10-10-10-10
Ave-rage gain for 2 years 151 147 147
Winter gain 1961-62—111 days 221 166

Number heifers 10-10-10

Frequency of feeding supplement

6

Tlgroup of cows fed twice weekly receiving 101/; pounds
 cake per head.

iws fed twice weekly grazed more widely over
 re and did not follo-w a pickup, but came
> horn was blown for them. The cows fed
iv- more in a group and followed a pickup
It appeared, while those fed three times weekly
mediate between the other two groups in

 
   
  
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
  
   
    
  
   
  
  
   
  
 
  

50f Labor and Travel

;percent of labor and travel saved in feeding
;jthree times weekly, rather than daily, was con-
 Since the cows fed twice and three. times
 more scattered over the pasture, it took
to find them than it did those fed daily. In
 ces the cows fed twice weekly were so scattered
could not be gathered into one group for
I t had to be fed in small groups where found,
 However, approximately 6O and 5O percent
Jilin travel were saved by feeding twice and three
fly, respectively.

Since of Heifers in Drylot

 year's results of supplementally feeding heifer
I ‘rylot are shown in Table 2. During the first
 e weight gains followed no pattern with
 frequency of feeding, an-d the averages for
iere similar: 151, 147 and 147 pounds. The
 every 5 days during 1960-61 gained an aver-
 pounds, which was slightly but not signifi-
pie than the average for the three groups fed
Silently. During the 1961-62 test, the group
gained co-nsiderably more than those fed every
 thus indicating that feeding once a week
ending the interval between feedings too long
 ults.  P

'on 0f Cows

  gh weight changes are useful aids in evalu-
 a response to feed treatments, the calf pro-
 the three groups of cows is more important
 or loss of weight. Table 3 and Figures

 

5, 6 and 7 summarize these results for the 3 years. Each
year there were slight differences in average weaning
weights and in pounds of calf weaned per cow, but
when weights were adjusted to a 205-iday steer equivalent
basis, these differences were smaller and not significant,
indicating that frequency of feeding had no effect. Since
59 head were removed from the test before the beginning
of the first calving season, and one cow in the group fed
daily became unaccounted for between the second breed-
ing season and calving time, calculations of percent
calf crop and pounds of calf weaned per cow are based
on the number of cows in the herd at the beginning

of the calving season. »

The average difference in the ages of calves from
the three groups are shown in Table 3. The calves from

TABLE 3. PRODUCTION DATA OF RANGE COWS AS AFFECTED BY

FREQUENCY OF FEEDING COTTONSEED CAKE DURING FOUR
WINTERING PERIODS

Frequency of feeding

supplement
Three
Twice times
Daily weekly weekly
Number heifers 5O 5O 50
Open-pregnancy test—September 1959 5 5 6
1960
Number of cows 37 37 37
Number of calves weaned 27 27 25
Age difference of calves, clays 0 12 5
Weaning weights
Steers 401 . 419 409
Heifers 396 400 381
205-day adiusted steer equivalent 373 378 368
Calf weight weaned per cows
Steer equivalent 292 306 276
205-day adiusted steer equivalent 272 276 249
Open-pregnancy test, October 1960 1 1 a 1
Number of cows 37 37 37,
1961
Number of cows 46 45 44
Number calves weaned 41 43 43
Age difference of calves, days 0 13 5
Weaning weights
Steers 478 476 474
Heifers 440 l 463 455
205-day adiusted steer equivalent 433 417 429
Calf weight weaned per cow
Steer equivalent . 426 455 463
205-day adiusted steer equivalent 386 398 419
Open-pregnancy test, October 1961 0 0 0
Number of cows 45 45 44
1962
Number of cows 45 ’ 45 44
Number of calves weaned . 36 43 39
Weaning weights
Steers 440 440 413
Heifers 430 431 402

*Steer equivalent 440 449 413
Calf weight weaned per cow '

*Steer equivalent 352 420 366
Open-pregnancy test, October 1962 0 2 2
Number of cows 45 44 44

3-year summary
Possible number of calves 128 127 125
Number of calves weaned 104 113 107
Percent calf crop weaned 81.3 89 85,6
Calf weight weaned per cow
Steer equivalent 361 399 374
*205-day adiusted steer equivalent 335 343 341

*Ages not available in 1962 for 205-day adiustment.

Percent calf crop weaned
I00 —

90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
40-

30-

E Fed daily

Fed twice weekly

  

V/l. Fed three times weekly

 

Figure 5.

Weaning weight of calves, pounds

500

400

300

200

I00

0

Figure 6.

Average

I960
Yearly and 3-year averages of calf crop percentages with
three separate treatments.

l:___l Fed daily
i‘ 3 Fed twice weekly



Fed three times weekly

 

Average

I962

I960 l96l
Yearly and 3-year averages of calf weaning weights

(steer equivalent) with three separate treatments.

Pounds calf weaned per cow

500

400

300

200

I00

0

Figure 7.

G Fed daily
 Fed twice weekly
'///. Fed three times weekly

I962

 

Average

(steer equivalent) with three separate treatments.

8

‘materially influenced by frequency of supplemental feiedin

Yearly and 3-year averages of calf pounds ,per cow

 
  
 
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
    
  
  
  
 
  
 
  
   
   
 
 
   
  
 
  
 
  
  
  
     
  
 
  

cows fed thrice weekly averaged 5 days older than if‘
from cows fed daily, in 1960 and 1961. Those fr
cows fed twice weekly averaged 12 days older in 19 _
an-d 13 days older in 1961. Ca.lving dates were n
available for 1962, but at first marking, when
calves on the ground were marked, there were more calv
in the group fed twice a week: than in either of t.
other two. Conversely, when thewlast calves were marke
fewer calves were marked from this group than from t“,
other two. It was evident, therefore, that the calvi
pattern was about the same in all 3 years and was n

No digestive disturbances were observed when c
tonseed cake was fed at levels of 7, 101/2 or 14 poun
per animal at one feeding. Since the observed diff
ences in weight loss of cows during the winter and 
weaning weights of calves and calf weight weaned -~i
cow were so nearly the same, it is evident that feedi
twice per week had no adverse effect but ‘did have mark
advantages over daily feeding. s"

Literature Cited

1. Berry, W. T., H. O. Kunkel and j. K. Riggs, 1958. A liq
supplement for range cattle. Texas Agricultural Progr
jan.-Feb. 1958 4(1)10. p

2. Cardon, B. P., E. B. Stanley, W. j. Pistor and j. C. Nesb' _
1951. The use of salt as a regulator of supplemental = ~
intake and its effect on the health of range livestock. ‘
zona Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 239. ,

3. Fraps, G. S. and V. L. Cory, 1940. Composition and utili
tion of range vegetation in Sutton and Edwards counti
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 586.

4. Fraps, G. S. and j. F. Fudge, 1945. The chemical comp
tion of grasses of northwest Texas as related to soils and
requirements for range cattle. Texas Agricultural Experim
Station Bulletin 669.

5. Franklin, M. C., 1952. Maintenance rations for Me '
sheep. Australian journal of Agricultural Research, Vol t
3, No. 2, April 1952. 

6. Hart, G. H., H. R. Guilbert, and H. Goss, 1932. Seas
changes in the chemical composition of range forage .
their relations to nutrition of animals. California Agricultu
Experiment Station Bulletin 543.

7. Knox, j. H. and W. E. Watkins, 1958. Supplements
range cows. New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Stati
Bulletin 425. g

8. Nelson, A. B., R. W. MacVair, W. D. Campbell and
B. Ross, 1955. Supplements of different protein and vita l
mineral content for wintering bred yearling heifers. O,
homa Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 460.

9. Riggs, j. K., j. C. Miller and A. j. Gee, 1950. Self-fee'
mixtures of salt and cottonseed meal to beef cows winter’
on pasture. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Progr
Report 1276. ‘ _

10. Riggs, j. K., R. W. Colby and L. V. Sells, 1953. The eff
of self-feeding salt-cottonseed meal mixtures to beef co
journal of Animal Science 12:379.

11. Riggs,  K. and H. W. Franke, 1955. Urea-molasses
sorghum gluten meal as supplements for wintering yearl
steers. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Progress 
port 1941.

12. Riggs, j. K., 1955. Urea-molasses vs. cottonseed meal -
molasses as supplements to sorghum silage for winter
two-year-old heifers. Texas Agricultural Experiment Stati
Progress Report 1842. 5 '

13. Savage, D. A. and V. G. Heller, 1947. Nutritional quali
of range forage plants in relation to grazing with l-
cattle on the Southern Plains Experimental Range. US
Technical Bulletin 943.

é