Chapter 6.

The energy and protein nutrition of grazing sheep

Introduction | Metabolisable energy | Metabolisable protein | Energy requirements of the

animal | Dry sheep equivalents, DSEs | Pasture Production | Feed intake of grazing animals |
Grazing Management | Diagnosis of dietary deficiencies of energy and protein | Concentrate
feeding | Feeding and management of sheep and cattle during drought | Recommended
reading

Return to Sheep Health & Production Index

Introduction

For the last 20 years in Australia, the energy requirements of ruminant animals and the
energy value of feeds have been expressed using a system based on metabolisable energy
(ME). The system now favoured for describing protein nutrition was introduced in 1992. This
system is based on metabolisable protein (MP).
ME and MP values are estimated through feeding experiments and in laboratory analyses.
ME values for many ruminant feeds are known and published in tables. MP values are not yet
widely available but will become increasingly available as the system is more widely used. At
present, MP values must be inferred from crude protein (CP) values and estimates of rumen
degradability. Both ME and MP values are usually cited per kg of dry matter (DM).
Feed requirements for body maintenance, growth, pregnancy and lactation can be expressed
directly in terms of ME once it is known how efficiently feed ME is used for these purposes.
The efficiency of use depends on the ME value of the feed; feeds with a lower ME value being
used less efficiently.

Metabolisable energy

To understand what ME is, consider first the total energy produced by the burning (oxidation)
of a feedstuff. The gross energy (GE) produced is the total heat produced when the feed is
combusted in oxygen in an adiabatic calorimeter. Most feeds eaten by ruminants have GE
values largely determined by carbohydrates like cellulose, of about 17.6 MJ/kg, but influenced
upwards by varying amounts of protein (which has a GE of about 24 MJ/kg) and fat (about 36
MJ/kg). For a wide range of pastures, conserved forages and grains which have varying
proportions of carbohydrate, fat and protein, the total GE usually falls between 17 and 20
MJ/kg with an average of about 18.8 MJ/kg.
Not all of the gross energy of the feed is available to the animal through its digestive
processes. Some is lost in faeces, some in urine and some in gases lost by eructation.
Metabolisable energy is the portion of feed energy which can be utilised after losses in
faeces, urine and combustible gases, mainly methane.
ME = GE - FE - UE - ME (1)
For a given feed source, the ME declines as the level of feeding increases, due to variation in
the amounts of energy lost in faeces, urine and methane. ME, therefore, is defined as the
value measured at maintenance level of feeding. ME is usually quoted per kg DM and MJ of
ME per kg DM is expressed in shorthand as M/D or ’M over D’. The ME contents of a variety
of commonly available feedstuffs are shown in Table 6.2.
The sum of energy losses in urine and methane are usually around 19% of GE but sometimes
as low as 12%. Faecal losses vary with the quality (digestibility) of the feed, ranging from 20%
to 65% of GE.

Figure 6.1 The partition of feed energy during ruminant digestion (from APC 1990)

Digestibility

The most important single measure of the energy value of a feed is its digestibility determined
in vivo or in vitro. The figure for digestibility usually quoted is dry matter digestibility or DMD
and it is defined as
DMD = (Feed DM - Faeces DM)/Feed DM (2)
While ME values are now usually quoted, digestibility is still frequently used, particularly in
reference to pastures. DMD can be approximately converted to ME using the expression
M/D (MJ/kg) = 0.156 x DMD% - 0.535 (3)

Metabolisability

The metabolisability (qm) of the GE of a feed at maintenance is defined as

qm = ME/GE (4)
This term is being used increasingly to describe the nutritional value of feed in place of M/D
and digestibility, particularly for ration formulation.

Efficiency of use of ME

ME is used with varying degrees of efficiency for purposes of maintenance and production. In
other words, it is converted to net energy (NE), where it is stored as growth of muscle, bone,
fat, wool, conceptus, or excreted as milk, or used for exercise or other forms of work energy,
with varying degrees of efficiency. That portion of ME which is not used for maintenance or
production is lost as heat; some heat is lost in ruminal fermentation, most is produced during
the use of ME at tissue level. Thus
NE = ME - heat
and, if we use the letter k to represent the efficiency of conversion of ME to NE,
NE = k x ME
and
heat = (1 - k) x ME
The efficiency with which ME is converted to NE also varies with the quality (specifically, the
metabolisability of the diet). Standard values for k are
for maintenance: km = 0.35 x qm + 0.503 (5)
for lactation: kl = 0.35 x qm+ 0.420 (6)
for growth: kg = 0.78 x qm + 0.006 (7)
For some forms of production, k is independent of qm;
for growth of conceptus: kc = .133 (8)
utilisation of mobilised body tissue for lactation
kt = 0.840 (9)
The ME used to maintain an animal results in no weight gain, no milk production and no work,
except that necessary for basal metabolism. Thus, in the case of ME used for maintenance,
heat = MEm
For other forms of production, such as growth,
heat = (1 - kg) x ME
Energy released by heat is not necessarily ’lost’ to the animal. In ambient temperatures below
thermoneutrality, the heat produced by the ’inefficient’ use of ME helps maintain
homeothermy. In fact, if heat produced by functions associated with maintenance, grazing,
growth and/or lactation is insufficient to maintain body temperature, additional ME must be
expended specifically to produce heat.

Fermentable metabolisable energy

It is necessary to estimate fermentable metabolisable energy (FME) of a feed to use the

Metabolisable Protein system proposed by AFRC (1993).
FME = ME - MEfat - MEferm (10)
MEfat is the ME in dietary fat and oils. Whilst highly digestible in the ruminant digestive tract,
they cannot supply molecules of energy-yielding ATP to the rumen microbes. Most of the
commonly used sheep feeds have some fat content; the FME of oats, for example, is about
1.4 MJ less than its ME. MEferm is the ME of fermentation acids, mostly lactic, acetic, propionic
and butyric acids, in partially fermented forages, such as silage, and brewery and distillery by-
products. These acids are themselves products of fermentation and cannot yield more energy
in the anaerobic conditions in the rumen, although they are absorbed and metabolised.

Metabolisable protein

The microbial population in the rumen degrades a proportion of the total crude protein intake
to simpler nitrogenous molecules, mostly ammonia, and uses these as substrates for the
synthesis of microbial cell protein and other cellular constituents. The rumen degraded protein
is termed RDP. The balance of the protein passes out of the rumen undegraded (UDP).
Usually about 80% of dietary protein in roughage feeds and grains is degraded in the rumen.
In protein supplements, such as meat meal, only 30% to 40% is degraded().
Ruminants whose diet is deficient in RDP can be effectively supplemented with non-protein
nitrogen (NPN) sources such as urea. Since urea is broken down quickly by rumen microbes
to ammonia, it can adequately supplement dietary crude protein in providing effective rumen
degradable protein (ERDP). ERDP is defined as a measure of the total N supply that is
actually captured and utilised by the rumen microbes. It can include non-protein sources of
rumen ammonia but does make allowance for some loss of soluble quickly degradable protein
(QDP) which escapes capture by rumen microbes. To prevent ammonia toxicity urea must be
fed with care. ARC (1980) (page 168) recommend an upper limit of urea of 0.5g/kg
bodyweight because animals could not effectively use more than this amount. The use of
NPN in ruminant diets is further discussed by APC (1990) (page 122).
An additional source of nitrogen (N) for the micro-organisms is endogenous material entering
the rumen in forms which include proteins in saliva, sloughed epithelial cells and urea
excreted in saliva and across the rumen wall. As well as N, the ruminal microbes require other
nutrients for their survival, reproduction and growth, particularly sulphur, and cobalt for vitamin
B12. The main factor, however, which usually limits the synthesis of microbial protein is the
amount of energy available in the rumen. Rumen microbes require an energy source for
protein and cellular synthesis. When N and other essential nutrients are not limiting, about 8g
of microbial protein are synthesised from rumen ammonia for every MJ of dietary ME
consumed, and about 8g of RDP are necessary to produce the ammonia for the synthesis of
8g of microbial protein. Production of microbial protein may, therefore, be limited by the
availability of either energy or RDP.

Energy supply for microbial protein synthesis

The major supply of energy for the rumen microbes comes from the fermentation, by the
microbes, of dietary carbohydrates. The major by-products of the fermentation, in addition to
heat and methane, are the volatile fatty acids (VFAs) acetic, propionic and butyric, which
themselves provide the ruminant ’host’ with around two thirds of the total amount of ME they
gain from their diets. Only those nutrients which yield ATP on fermentation provide the fuel to
drive the rumen microbes’ synthetic processes. The yield of microbial crude protein flowing
from the rumen to the stomach and intestines is, therefore, related to the fermentable
metabolisable energy (FME). At maintenance, about 9g of microbial protein is produced per
MJ of dietary FME. Diets high in silage may be low in FME and may produce less MCP than
predicted by its ME value. Animals on silage diets may respond to protein supplements,
particularly those supplements high in UDP.

Rumen retention time and outflow rate

The time for which ingesta is retained in the rumen is highly correlated with the level of
feeding (L); as L increases, the rumen empties faster. Ruminal outflow rates vary from about
2% to 8% of total contents per hour. Outflow rates for three levels of feeding are shown in
Table 6.1.
Retention time has an effect on the degradability of dietary crude protein. Dietary protein
which is slowly degraded (SDP) will be less degraded and produce more UDP as retention
time falls. For example, soybean meal at feeding level 1 is predicted to have 50g UDP and
360g RDP but, at level 3, 160g UDP and 250g RDP.

Effect of feeding level

Feeding level (L) has an effect on a number of nutrient parameters, including digestibility,
metabolisability and the degradability of dietary crude protein, as described above. It also has
an effect on the amount of microbial crude protein (MCP) produced per MJ of dietary FME
(Table 6.1). The outflow of MCP per MJ of FME increases with L, principally because there is
less recycling of microbial protein in the rumen as the outflow rate increases (assuming
supply of N is not limiting).

Table 6.1 : Effect of level of feeding on microbial protein synthesis (from AFRC 1993)

Level of feeding (L) Rumen outflow rate MCP synthesis per MJ

(% per hour) of FME
1 x maintenance 2% 9g
2 x maintenance (growing, pregnant) 5% 10g
3 x maintenance (lactating ewe) 8% 11g

Nitrogen supply for rumen protein synthesis

If dietary crude protein is insufficient or insufficiently degradable, then the synthesis of

microbial protein will be limited by RDP supply. Recycling of urea to the rumen will help
replace some of the deficiency of dietary RDP but ultimately, feed intake will decline.
If dietary RDP is available in excess quantities, FME limits MCP. RDP is wasted, blood
ammonia and urea levels rise. Ideally, for greatest efficiency of nutrient use,
ERDP/FME = 9, 10 or 11 for feeding levels of 1,2 or 3
The components of metabolisable protein (MP)

MP is the total digestible true protein available to the animal for metabolism after digestion
and absorption of the feed in the animal’s digestive tract. MP has 2 components.
1. Digestible microbial true protein (MTP); produced by the proteogenic activities of the rumen
microbes. About 25% of MCP is present as nucleic acids which cannot be used by the
ruminant. Of the remaining 75%, 85% is digestible in the intestine. Thus
DMTP = 0.75 x 0.85 x MCP = 0.6375 MCP (11)
2. Digestible UDP (DUP); from zero to 90% of UDP is digestible post-rumen, depending on
the feed, its composition and pre-treatment. DUP is usually 60% to 80% of UDP.

Figure 6.2 Ruminant digestion of crude protein (CP) described by the Metabolisable
Protein system (from AFRC 1993)
Table 6.2 : Composition of some common forages (per kg DM) (from AFRC 1993
Appendix 1 and various NSW sources where indicated)

Forage ME(MJ) FME(MJ) EE(g) CP(g) ERDP2(g) DUP2(g) ERDP5(g) DUP5(g) ERDP8(g) DUP8(g)
Temperate 12.6 11.7 25 190 159 20 134 42 117 58
grass
early 11.6 10.7 25 150 118 17 103 30 92 40
vegetative
late vegetative 9.5 8.8 19 120 85 22 72 33 64 40
early flowering 7.5 6.9 16 97 64 23 52 33 45 40
in seed
Hays
lucerne 8.5 8.1 13 183 141 26 131 34 123 40
lucerne 9.1 169
(NSW)
clover 8.5 125
(NSW)
oaten 8.7 88
(NSW)
Silage
maize 11.3 9.0 32 98 69 11 67 13 65 14
maize 8.7 75
(NSW)
sorghum 7.9 69
(NSW)
oats 6.9 56
(NSW)
Straw
wheat 6.1 19
(NSW)
edible trees5.8 128
(NSW)
mulga 7.7 96
kurrajong 8.0 142
wilga
Grains
wheat (NSW) 13.1 150
triticale (NSW) 13.0 169
barley (NSW) 12.2 113
sorghum 12.5 131
(NSW)
sorghum 11.1 119
(NSW)
oats (NSW) 12.1 10.7 41 105 83 6 82 8 81 9
oats 12.9 350
lupins (NSW) 14.2 10.5 104 342 288 22 251 44 226 59
lupins 11.1 8.8 66 375 268 70 222 109 195 132
Cottonseed 11.6 450
meal
Cottonseed 13.1 13.0 4 118 94 0 94 0 94 0
meal (NSW)
Molasses
Molasses 12.6 40
(NSW)
Urea 0 0 0 2600 2080 0 2080 0 2080 0

ME : metabolisable energy
FME : fermentable metabolisable energy
EE : ether extract, an estimate of fat content
CP : crude protein
ERDP: effective rumen degradable dietary protein with the potential to be captured by rumen
microbes at rumen digesta outflow rates of 2%, 5% or 8% per hour (feeding levels 1, 2 or 3).
DUP: digestible undegraded rumen protein

Energy requirements of the animal

Energy requirements for maintenance

In nutritional parlance, the term ’maintenance’ can have different interpretations depending on
the particular circumstances in which it is applied. Strictly, the maintenance requirement is the
energy required to maintain a fasted, penned, adult animal at zero weight change under
thermoneutral conditions. For relevance in situations where sheep are run at pasture, energy
allowances for zero weight change must include expenditure on grazing activities and
temperature regulation.
Basal energy requirements vary with liveweight. Heavier animals, however, are able to meet
basal metabolic functions with greater efficiency than light ones, at least partly because the
demand for energy for those functions is related to surface area rather than volume of the
animal. Energy for maintenance requirements, therefore, has been found to increase linearly
with metabolic liveweight, which is liveweight raised to a power less than 1, usually 0.75
(W.75).
Young animals have higher requirements for energy, even after scaling for metabolic
liveweight. This effect declines at a decreasing rate with age, an effect which can be
described with an exponential function. NE requirements for sheep at maintenance can be
estimated from the expression
NEm = 0.26 xW.75 x e-.03A (12)
where A = age in years. The term e-.03A evaluates to 0.99 for sheep of 3 months of age to 0.84
for sheep of 6 years.
NE requirements do not vary with M/D or metabolisability, but ME requirements do, as
inferred by the equation defining km on page . Consequently, ME requirements can be
described by equation 13 (Figure 6.3)
MEm = (0.26 x W.75 x e-.03A) / km (13)
Figure 6.3 Relationship between MEm and W (equation 13) for confined animals
(assuming M/D = 11 & km = 0.72). Animal require less energy for maintenance as they
age, regardless of liveweight.

Prolonged low level feeding

Sheep fed under drought conditions are usually allowed to fall to low bodyweights (35kg for
medium frame strains of Merino) and maintained at those weights, usually with rations of
predominantly cereal grain. ME intake for maintenance under conditions of confinement and
mild temperatures for adult 35kg sheep may be as low as 4.5 MJ ME per day with a wheat
plus roughage ration (M/D of 11). This estimate, based on feeding trials, is lower than that
predicted from equation 13 (illustrated in Figure 6.3) indicating a probable increase in
efficiency of conversion of ME to NE in sheep on prolonged low energy diets. Publications
commonly recommend 2.7 to 3.0kg of wheat per week for 35kg adult sheep; about 5MJ ME
per day. (See also Table 6.14.)

Increase in maintenance with high level feeding

There is evidence also that the inescapable non-productive energy expenditure, the
’maintenance’ requirement, does vary directly with feed intake. In other words, as feed intake
increases above maintenance levels and the animal stores or secretes NE in some form of
product, the portion of energy intake assigned to maintenance increases. The reason for this
probably includes an increase in the size and metabolic activity of a number of organs and
tissues with changes in the rates and energy costs of blood flow, protein turnover, sodium and
potassium ion transport and other essential processes. Consequently, APC (1990) advise that
the term 0.09 x MEI (ME intake) be added to the maintenance component of above-
maintenance rations.
Energy for grazing

Compared to pen-fed or confined sheep, grazing sheep expend additional energy walking,
climbing and, possibly, additional energy eating if feed availability at pasture is less than that
in a pen. (It usually is.) A 50kg sheep, for example, which walks 5 kilometres per day, climbs
500 metres and eats for 4 hours longer at pasture than would occur in a pen, will require an
additional 2 MJ ME per day above maintenance for those activities. As a general rule, sheep
in good grazing conditions (high stocking densities) may require an additional 20% to 40%
above maintenance for grazing; in extensive, hilly country that may increase to 50%.

Energy for temperature regulation

At temperatures below thermoneutrality, animals must increase heat production to maintain

body temperature. The highest ambient temperature at which this occurs is termed the lower
critical temperature (LCT). The LCT, and the rate at which heat must be generated to maintain
homeothermy at temperatures below it, depend particularly on the animal’s insulation which,
in turn, is strongly influenced by the depth of wool (Table 6.3).

Table 6.3 : Lower critical temperature in dry still air(from APC 1990)

Age Condition Coat LCT(EC)

Lamb Newborn -- 28
Lamb 1 month old -- 10
Adult Maintenance Shorn (5 mm) 25
Adult Fasted Shorn (5 mm) 31
Adult Fully fed Shorn (5 mm) 18
Adult Maintenance 50 mm 9
Adult Maintenance 100 mm -3
Maximum attainable heat production is termed summit metabolism. The summit metabolism
of adult sheep is about 2.16 MJ/kgW.75 which is about 8 x maintenance in thermoneutral
conditions. This rate of heat production can only be sustained for a few hours. Half summit
metabolism can be sustained for several days.
As described earlier, heat production occurs as an unavoidable consequence of maintenance
and productive functions such as growth or lactation. The inefficient conversion of ME to NE
produces heat so, consequently, animals being fed for higher levels of production, such as
lactating ewes, will unavoidably produce more heat than those fed at lower levels, such as
adult wethers at maintenance. One would expect, therefore, that the LCT of the latter would
be higher than lactating ewes.
Wool provides much insulation, as indicated in Table 6.3. The sheep which are most likely to
require the diversion of energy into heat production and suffer the risk of death from
hypothermia are lambs and any class of sheep off-shears. Sheep undergo a dramatic change
in their ability to withstand cold temperatures at shearing. Loss of insulating fleece is
compounded by a usual decline in feed intake immediately after shearing. This decline in
intake has two causes; one a direct effect of shearing which has been observed even in
penned sheep and, two, a reduction as a consequence of enforced deprivation during yarding
and shedding for shearing which leads to a decline in rumen microbial population. Both
effects are reversed after a few days and feed intake returns to higher levels than those
before shearing. In the immediate post-shearing period, however, the sheep may be
extremely susceptible to chilling. The provision of shelter and, if conditions are severe, the
provision of external heat in a shed, may be a more appropriate action than the provision of
extra feed to cold-stressed sheep off-shears.
As an example, a fully fed adult wether off-shears has an LCT of 18”C (Table 6.3). In a
temperature of 0”C, heat loss is 13MJ per day, 5MJ per day greater than that produced by
’maintenance’ heat production. The same increase in heat loss would be achieved by a wind
of 12 km/hr (5 km/hr at sheep height) and a temperature of 10”C. 5MJ represents a 60%
increase in energy requirements above maintenance at thermoneutral temperatures. Severe
conditions, such as freezing conditions and 25 km/hr winds (at sheep height) increase heat
loss to 24 MJ per day. (The nomograms necessary to calculate energy requirements for
homeothermy are published in APC (1990).)

Summary of energy requirements for maintenance in grazing conditions

The general equation for maintenance requirements for sheep, an extension of that shown on
page , is
MEm = (0.26 x W.75 x e-.03A)/km + 0.09 x MEI + Egraze/km + Ecold (14)
For adult sheep of 40 to 50 kg in thermoneutral conditions, MEm is generally in the range of 7
to 8 MJ per day but this value can be significantly increased by low quality feed(lowering km),
extensive grazing conditions, or cold stress.

Energy requirements for productive functions

Gestation

The rate of energy storage in the foetus, placenta and uterus increases exponentially
throughout pregnancy and, by term, the ME required to match the energy demands of a
single pregnancy approaches that required for maternal maintenance alone; for a twin
pregnancy, ME requirements exceed 2 x maintenance.
Figure 6.4 illustrates the rapid increase in energy requirements which occurs in the last 30
days of gestation. For a single pregnancy in a 50kg ewe, the ME required to satisfy the
energy demands of the foetus and associated maternal structures is around 5.6MJ, on top of
around 8MJ required for ewe maintenance. (The term 0.09 x MEI is not included in calculating
energy requirements for gestation.)
Figure 6.4 : Daily energy requirements to maintain a 50kg pregnant ewe, allowing an
additional 2MJ above maintenance for grazing, with a single foetus weighing 4kg at
term, on high quality (M/D = 11) pasture (from APC 1990).

Total energy requirements for ewes in late pregnancy are seldom met by ingested feed, not
least because the physical limitation on feed intake during pregnancy makes it unlikely that
ewes can consume sufficient feed unless it is of high quality (high metabolisability). When the
deficit between the demands of the pregnancy and the supply of dietary energy is small, ewes
can manage to meet the requirements from bodily reserves. When this compensatory
capacity is overloaded, however, serious consequences including pregnancy toxaemia
become likely.

Energy requirements for liveweight gain

The NE stored per kg of liveweight gain varies with the age and sex of the animal and with the
rate of gain because the proportion of fat, protein and water in the gain varies. In young
animals, a lower proportion of the gain is fat and a higher proportion is protein and water than
in older animals. At higher rates of gain, more of the gain is fat. The NE stored for each kg of
liveweight gain varies approximately from 12MJ at 10kg liveweight, to 20MJ in a half-grown
sheep, to 26.5MJ in a mature animal (APC 1990, p 45).
The efficiency of conversion of ME to NE for liveweight gain (equation 7) varies from 0.3 for
feeds of low quality (qm = 0.38, M/D = 7) to 0.51 for feeds of high quality (qm = 0.65, M/D =12).
Thus, for a half grown animal, 1kg of liveweight gain will require 39MJ ME on a high quality
diet (3.25kg of feed DM) to 53MJ ME on a low quality diet (7.5kg of feed DM), above
maintenance requirements.
The ability to predict liveweight gain is important in the preparation of rations for meat sheep
being grown for sale, in the prediction of rates of gain at pasture and in the supplementation
of sheep on inadequate pasture. In grazing sheep, particularly wool-producing breeds,
liveweight gain is an opportunistic response to good feed conditions rather than a result of a
deliberate attempt to increase liveweight. While not formally predicted by wool producers,
liveweight gains in wool-producing flocks are still essential components of normal sheep
management - to enable the growth of young animals, the recovery of lost liveweight of ewes
post-weaning and the development of body reserves to provide nutrition when feed conditions
deteriorate.

Energy requirements for milk production

The NE of ewes’ milk varies with the fat content and day of lactation but is around 5MJ/kg.
The efficiency of conversion of ME to NEl (equation 6) varies from 0.55 (qm = 0.38, M/D = 7) to
0.6 (qm = 0.65, M/D = 12). The ME required for 1kg of milk, therefore varies usually in the
range from 8 to 9MJ.
The milk production of sheep varies with breed, age, number of lambs, feed quality and
availability, and stage of lactation. Merino ewes given adequate pasture at commercial
stocking rates will usually produce, on average, 1kg of milk for the first 4 to 6 weeks of
lactation and sustain lamb liveweight gains of 200 to 300g/day.

Energy requirements for wool production

The energy required for wool growth is relatively small and usually ignored when formulating
feed rations. Wool growth occurs in wool breeds at maintenance and even sub-maintenance
feeding levels so can be considered effectively as a part of maintenance.
What is of interest, however, is the wool growth response to additional levels of feeding,
particularly supplementary feeding, as the high value of wool may, at times, justify additional
expense on supplements. APC (1990) report that 0.5g to 0.9g of clean wool is grown per MJ
of dietary ME in non-lactating, non-pregnant sheep. Thus, an additional kilogram of DM of
supplementary grain (M/D = 11) will result in an additional 5g to 10g of clean wool().

Dry sheep equivalents, DSEs

As we will read in the following section of this chapter, pasture provides the major source of
nutrition for grazing sheep in Australia. The relationship between the variable provision of
energy and protein from pastures and the requirements of the animals grazing the pastures is
very complex. Producers, however, through experience and intuition, develop the ability to
predict the performance of animals at pasture and know approximately how many animals
can be nourished per hectare of each of their paddocks. To do so, they frequently use a
system of describing the nutritional requirements of their flocks and herds relative to a
standard ’animal’. In Australia, the system most widely adopted uses a wether (a ’dry sheep’)
as the standard and animals are rated as ’dry sheep equivalents’. So, instead of calculating
the requirements of animals in MJ of energy and attempting to predict the energy availability
of the pastures in the same units, it is much simpler to describe an animal’s requirements in
terms of DSEs and a pasture’s ability to provide nourishment as a ’carrying capacity’ of so
many DSEs per hectare.
A dry sheep equivalent is defined thus :
The DSE of a wether is generally considered to be 1.0. More correctly, this should be
adjusted for mature size, so that the DSE of a fine wool wether is 1.0, a medium wool wether
(mature weight 50 kg) 1.08, a South Australian strain wether (mature weight 55 kg) 1.16. As
DSE values are commonly used for within-flock comparisons, the variation between strains is
often ignored.
The DSE of a ewe is commonly quoted, somewhat uselessly, as the relative requirements of
a ewe at peak lactation and maintained at constant liveweight. A much more useful definition
recognises that lactating ewes lose liveweight in lactation as a normal event and, provided it
is not excessive, maintain adequate health and productivity.

The DSE value of a ewe varies throughout the year, depending on the stage of the
reproductive cycle. It varies also with the mature size and, if we are concerned with the
average DSE of a ewe flock, the reproductive rate.
An estimate of the minimum levels of feed required to allow for acceptable levels of
production and health are shown in Tables 6.4 and 6.5. These values allow for weight loss of
the ewe in early lactation and a slight weight gain in late lactation.
Confusion often arises in discussions about the ’annual’ DSE value of a ewe. For example, a
producer wishes to compute the number of ewes which will replace a mob of 400 wethers in
one paddock, to remain in the one paddock all year. What DSE value should be attributed to a
ewe?

Table 6.4 : Requirements of a flock of 1000 ewes and 800 lambs, relative to a flok of
1000 wethers[1]

Post-lambing[1] Post
weaning
1st month 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd
month month month month
Relative requirements1.36 1.73 1.84 1.69 1.73

At some times of the year the DSE value of a ewe is less than 1.0 (ewes are smaller than
wethers) and sometimes the DSE value approaches or exceeds 2.0. Should we use average
values, or peak values? In real life, the matter of concern to the producer is that the level of
nutrition for the ewe flock at the most feed limiting time of the year should be similar, relative
to their requirements, to that which had been provided to the wethers. Consequently, the
value we should use is the DSE value for the ewes in the most feed limiting month. It is this
value which determines how many ewes should be stocked in the paddock for the entire year.
If the ewes are lambing in June, the relative requirements of ewes in the feed-limiting months
of July and August will be 1.73 and 1.84 (see Table 6.4), relative to wethers. Thus the
paddock should not carry more than 400 / 1.84 = 219 June lambing Merino ewes.
Table 6.5 DSE values of a range of grazing livestock

Species Animal Physiological condition DSE Comment

value
Sheep 33 kg hogget maintaining weight 0.79 no allowance for
growth
Fine wool Merino3rd month after lambing, 80%1.84 includes requirements
ewe raising lambs of lambs
Strong wool3rd month after lambing, 80%2.16 ””
Merino ewe raising lambs
”” 3rd month after lambing,2.36 ””
100% raising lambs
BL — Mo xbred”” 2.53 ””
ewe
Cattle 250 kg weaner maintaining weight 4.83 no allowance for
growth
Hereford cow dry, last trimester of7.92 ””
pregnancy
Hereford cow 4th month after calving 11.66 includes 100% calves
Simmental cow 4th month after calving 14.92 ””

This definition of a ewe DSE is the only appropriate definition for a producer who wants to
know how many ewes can be carried in a particular area all year round and how that number
can be varied with time of lambing. The feed limiting months could be in autumn or in winter,
depending on the district, the time of lambing, the timing of stock sales and purchases, and
may coincide with late pregnancy or a post-weaning period.
In any event, this approach is only ever used for predicting the most likely outcomes of
planned strategies, or for attempting to explain past events such as disease outbreaks
associated with undernutrition. Most times we are asked to deal with the actual health and
production responses of flocks of sheep to current feed availability. Graziers must try to match
feed requirements to pasture availability well in advance - they cannot readily ’put and take’
stock on their property at short notice. Often veterinarians are asked to advise graziers who
have stock which are underfed because seasonal pasture growth has been worse than
expected. The notions of a DSE and feed limiting periods help us to understand what we
observe and to plan for increased efficiency of production in the future. Table 6.5 shows DSE
values for a range of sheep and beef cattle.

Pasture Production

Seasonal Patterns and Species

Figure 6.5 Pasture production varies from district to district but follows a similar
pattern in general. Low temperatures and, in some districts, lack of moisture, limit
winter growth. Lack of effective rainfall (precipitation less evaporation) limits pasture
growth in late summer and early autumn. Pasture growth rates are highest in spring.

Pasture growth is determined mainly by rainfall and soil temperature. Rain falls mainly in the
summer in northern Australia and winter in southern Australia. Moving north from Victoria and
SA, summer rainfall increases, so that on the northern Tablelands there is normally sufficient
rain for substantial pasture growth in the summer. Pasture growth is strongly seasonal and
the average pattern of pasture growth varies from district to district. In general, pasture growth
is limited in winter, by low temperatures and also by lack of moisture in the summer rainfall
zones. In southern Australia, pasture growth peaks in spring with a less marked peak in late
autumn-early winter. In northern NSW, pasture production peaks in late spring-early summer
(Figure 6.5).
In South Australia and Western Australia there is a consistent and distinct dry season in the
summer and early autumn. In the low rainfall zone and parts of the medium rainfall zone the
dry period is so long (ò5 months) that perennial plants will not survive. For this reason annual
plants form the basis of pastures. These germinate in the autumn and are productive for 6-9
months after which the only pasture available is comprised of mature dessicated residues.
Annual pastures are also widely planted in central NSW and northern Victoria. In the wetter
areas of the medium rainfall zone and in the high rainfall zone, as well as annual species
pastures include perennial grasses such as phalaris, perennial rye grass and cocksfoot.
These plants are dormant during the dry summer-autumn period but will not die out provided
the length of the dry period is not excessive (as a guide, less than 5 months). In some areas
there is sufficient rainfall during the summer to allow useful growth from perennial species,
such as lucerne.
The main pasture legume grown in southern Australia is subterranean clover, of which there
are several varieties to suit areas with annual rainfall from 400 to 800 mm. The varieties differ
in their time of flowering. Early flowering varieties are best adapted to low rainfall areas
because they can set viable seed before the growth season ends. Sub-clover has a unique
survival mechanism whereby the plant buries its seed in the spring. These seeds have a hard
coat which repels moisture and thus prevents germination during brief periods of rain which
may occur during the summer, particularly in the north. In drier areas, annual medics such as
snail and barrel medic are grown.
Where there is good summer rainfall or irrigation, white and red clovers are grown. White
clover is perennial and red clover is a short-lived summer-growing perennial. Where there are
deep, well-drained soils which are neutral to alkaline, lucerne, which is a perennial, is grown.
The very deep rooting system of lucerne allows it to survive very dry conditions whilst, with
irrigation, it can be very productive (>25 tonnes DM/ha).
In the ley-farming zone, also known as the wheat-sheep zone, annual grasses grow with the
annual legumes. These grasses include annual ryegrass, barley grass and silver grass. On
the Tablelands perennial grasses grow with the annual and perennial legumes. In all areas,
grasses extend the growing season and increase pasture production potential beyond that
achievable by legumes alone. Native grasses, such as Microlena (weeping ricegrass) and
Danthonia (white top or wallaby grass) can be as nutritious as introduced grasses, with better
persistence and drought tolerance but with lower levels of productivity in winter.

easonal variation in pasture quality

In general, pasture plants are highest in energy when they are green, actively growing and
before flowering and seeding occurs. As they mature and then, in some cases, die, the
digestibility and ME level decline. The decline in quality is rapid over the period of flowering
and seeding. Pasture quality and the corresponding growth stages are shown in Table 6.6.
Note that these are average energy values about which there is variation due to differences
between plant species and between leaves and stems.

Table 6.6 Pasture nutritional value declines as plants mature

Pasture growth phase Pasture quality M/D DMD%

Vegetative (active growth), green Very high 12 80
Late vegetative, green High 11 74
Early flowering, green 10 67
Mid-flowering, some green, some dead Medium 9 61
Late-flowering, in head, some green, some 8 55
dead
Dry grass and leaf, all dead Low 7 48
Dry stalks Very low 6 42

Consequences of seasonal variation in pasture production and pasture quality

Not only does pasture growth and pasture quality vary throughout the year but the
requirements of grazing flocks and herds varies, according to variations in their size (as
animals are bought and sold) and their reproductive state. In a general sense, it is best to
match times of increased requirements of the grazing animals to increased availability of
pasture.
In many flocks, the reproductive cycle of sheep is managed so that ewes lamb at the start of
or just before the main season of pasture growth. This coincides with the increase in energy
demand by the ewe flock as the ewes lactate and the lambs grow and graze. This is one
important factor influencing the choice of time of lambing, discussed in Chapter 3.
If good quality pasture is produced for 5-6 months from lambing, it is possible to maintain
growth rates of 250-300 g/day and ’finish’ lambs at about 40 kg liveweight in the one season.
This is important for prime lamb production but of less importance in Merino production.
(Merino lambs rarely exceed 30 kg at 4 months of age.) In most areas, the pasture availability
and/or quality declines as shown in Table 6.6 and at least some lambs which are being raised
for meat production may have to be carried over to the next pasture growing season. Merino
lambs in self-replacing flocks are usually carried over the dry season and the provision of
supplementary feed or special purpose fodder crops is normal.

Assessment of pasture mass

Herbage mass is measured in terms of kg/ha of either total or green dry matter. The dry
matter content of herbage varies with stage of growth:

Table 6.7 Digestibility of plant material varies with its stage of growth

Stage of growth % DM
young vegetative 10 - 14
flowering 15 - 18
mature seeded 90
Animal performance is determined by intake of DM and its nutrient content and for this
reason, herbage availability is expressed in terms of DM. The nutrient content of green
herbage is usually much higher than that of dead herbage (see Table 6.6). Thus availability of
green DM gives a better prediction of animal performance than availability of total DM.
However this requires sorting pasture samples into green and dead material or estimating the
proportion of pasture which is green. Herbage mass can be estimated directly by cutting
sample quadrats or indirectly with a plate meter, an electronic probe or by eye assessment.

Feed intake of grazing animals

Sheep and beef cattle in Australia satisfy the majority of their nutritional requirements from
pasture. The successful and profitable management of sheep and cattle at pasture depends
on the provision of sufficient nutrients to allow a defined or expected level of production, but to
avoid providing more pasture than is required and thereby wasting opportunities to produce
more meat or wool by adding more animals.
To understand the complex inter-relationships between the growth of pastures and the
performance of animals grazing them, it is useful to explore some of the relationships one by
one. The first set of relationships we will discuss are those which relate the amount of pasture
on offer to the amount of pasture which animals consume.

Feed intake and quantity of pasture on offer

Within certain limits, the more pasture is offered to animals, the more they will eat. The
amount of pasture ’on offer’ is termed ’pasture availability’, and is measured in kilograms or
tonnes of pasture (expressed in terms of dry matter (DM)) per hectare. Generally, the denser
and taller the pasture, the greater the pasture availability. When pasture availability is low,
because it is too short or because the plant density is too low, animals cannot physically
prehend and ingest as much feed in the time they can spend grazing as they can when
pasture availability is high. To some extent, animals can extend their grazing time to
compensate for low pasture availability but the compensation is not complete. Even when
availability is very low, animals will not spend more than 11 or 12 hours per day foraging.
The general relationship between feed intake and pasture availability is shown in Figure 6.6. It
is clear that the pasture intake of sheep is strongly influenced by availability below 700kg/ha
but increases only slowly over 900kg/ha. While the general shape of this relationship remains
fairly constant, the actual values are, however, strongly influenced by a number of factors.
Figure 6.6 illustrates the case for an adult, non-lactating ewe of 55kg grazing pasture of four
different digestibilities, ranging from very low to very high and with about 30% of the pasture
present as clover.
Three of the most important factors which modify this relationship are

• the size of the sheep; in general, the bigger the animal, the greater the intake
• the reproductive status of the sheep; during lactation, ewes ingest more pasture at all
levels of availability. Potential intake peaks at about 60% above that of a dry sheep
30 days after lambing, and declines to 20% above at 80 days post-partum. Ewes with
twins have even higher intakes than ewes with singles, peaking at 90% above the
intake of a dry ewe 30 days post-partum
• the quality of the pasture; sheep eat less pasture when the digestibility is lower. This
last factor is probably more important than low pasture availability as a contributing
factor to poor animal nutrition leading to requests for veterinary advice, and is
discussed in more detail below

There are a number of other factors which also influence intake but less strongly than these
three factors. These include the age and condition of the sheep and the proportion of
leguminous plants in the pasture.

Feed intake and pasture quality

Pasture quality, in the nutritional sense rather than the agronomic sense, refers to the amount
of metabolizable energy (ME) which the grazing animal can release from each kilogram of
pasture dry matter. The level of ME is closely and directly related to digestibility. The higher
the quality of the pasture, the more digestible it is and the higher the ME level.
High quality pasture approaches 80% in digestibility and exceeds 11MJ ME /kg pasture DM.
Dead, dry grass may be as low as 40% digestible and produce only 5 to 6 MJ ME/kg DM.
This large variation in digestibility has large and important effects on feed intake because low
digestibility depresses energy intake in two ways; first, less pasture is eaten and second,
each kilogram of pasture eaten produces less ME (Figures 6.7 and 6.8).
It seems paradoxical that less feed is eaten when its energy content is lower. One might think
that animals would attempt to increase the intake of low energy feeds in order to maintain the
total energy content of the diet. The factor that limits the intake of low energy feeds, however,
is the rate at which feed is broken down and leaves the rumen. Feeds of lower digestibility
take longer to break down into particles small enough to leave the rumen, compared to feeds
of higher digestibility.
So, clearly, intake of MJ of energy falls even more rapidly with declining availability and
declining digestibility than does intake of pasture dry matter. Figure 6.7 illustrates the intake of
energy for the same range of digestibilities and availabilities as in Figure 6.6
Considering that adult dry sheep require about 8MJ ME per day to maintain body weight, it is
clear that diets of moderately low quality will not provide sufficient energy for weight
maintenance, no matter how much is provided. Figure 6.8 illustrates the variation in energy
intake with different feed quality and different levels of pasture availability for different classes
of sheep.

Figure 6.6 Pasture intake increases with pasture availability but is significantly affected
by the digestibility (D) of the pasture. The example illustrated is for a —dry’ adult sheep
of 50 kg.
Figure 6.7 Energy intake increases with pasture availability but is very strongly
affected by the digestibility of the pasture. This figure illustrates the predicted energy
intake of a 50 kg ’dry’ adult sheep.

Figure 6.8 Intake of metabolisable energy (ME) varies with pasture availability, pasture
quality, and the age, size and reproductive status of the sheep. Below certain levels of
availability and/or pasture quality animals cannot eat enough pasture to maintain
weight.

Top - For feed of any given quality (M/D = 9.6 in this case), intake increases with increasing
pasture avail-ability. This illustration predicts that an adult, dry (non-reproductive) sheep of 50
kg will not ingest sufficient pasture of that quality for maintenance of liveweight (requiring
about 9 MJ of ME per day) unless there is more than 600 kg DM/ha available. Even when
feed of this quality (moderate only) is at high availability, the sheep will not increase liveweight
very fast, because it cannot ingest much more energy than is required for maintenance.
Bottom — For feed of any given availability (2 t/ha in this case), adult dry sheep require diets
with more than 9 MJ/kg in order to ingest sufficient energy for liveweight maintenance. With
feeds of high quality (> 11 M/D), sheep can ingest substantially more than required for
maintenance, provided availability is satisfactory, and will therefore gain liveweight.

Feed intake and animal species

Most feeds have been evaluated for sheep and the nutritional values applied directly to cattle.
The assumption that the feeds are digested similarly between sheep and cattle is generally
true with minor exceptions. When DMD is about 0.66 or higher, values for DMD obtained with
sheep tend to overestimate the value for cattle. Conversely, cattle digest low DMD diets better
than sheep do, possibly because the feed remains longer in the rumen. Goats also appear to
digest fibrous feeds better than sheep.

Feed intake and pasture edibility

Sheep prefer leaf to stem and green to dead material. Legumes have a higher edibility than
grasses. Edibility is a plant property which affects quantitative intake by animals. With grasses
there is a strong positive relationship between M/D and edibility. With legumes, edibility is an
average of 17% higher than that of grasses of similar M/D. This is due to the more rapid rate
of particle comminution (reduction in size) in the rumen and consequent faster outflow rate
from the rumen. Legumes usually have a higher content of protein at an equivalent growth
stage, and a greater proportion of this protein escapes breakdown in the rumen, due to the
faster outflow rate. Thus legumes have very desirable nutritional properties as well as the
capacity to fix atmospheric nitrogen in the soil. Some varieties of legumes have undesirably
high contents of oestrogens which have adverse effects on fertility (Chapter 7). Legumes can
also cause bloat under some circumstances. On balance, legumes are highly desirable
components of pastures.

Grazing Management

The object of grazing management is to convert pasture into animal product and to optimise
the level of inputs to maximise the profit of the grazing enterprise. Producers use agronomists
and other specialised advisers to assist with the management of pastures, but veterinarians
need to have a clear understanding of the relationship between pasture production and the
nutritional state and the productivity of the grazing flocks and herds.
We have discussed already how livestock have different requirements for feed energy
depending on their age, size and reproductive state, and how pasture availability and pasture
quality determine the amount of energy livestock can harvest from pastures. How, then,
should pastures be managed to best meet the needs of the grazing livestock?
Most sheep and cattle farms have relatively stable flock and herd numbers for periods of
months at a time. Graziers determine how many animals they wish to have present for the
rest of the year or some other time period and buy or sell stock to achieve that number.
Certainly, adjustments can be made in response to unexpected seasonal events, like drought
or above average rainfall, but these adjustments are generally minor or involve low sale
prices (in droughts) or high purchase costs (in good seasons).
Thus, in any one year, the pastures present on a farm are the result of past management,
seasonal effects like rainfall and soil temperatures and current grazing management. In sheep
and beef cattle production, little can be done profitably to change the productivity of pastures
in the short-term. Unless stock are moved off-farm or very high levels of supplementation are
used, the only way in which a grazier can change the amount of herbage on offer in any one
paddock is to move stock to or from another paddock. A decrease in stocking rate on one
pasture will lead to an increase on another, and vice versa. So, within a season, the amount
of pasture on offer is a consequence of seasonal effects, which are beyond the producer’s
control, and stocking rate, which is under the producer’s control.
Because feed intake is determined by pasture availability and pasture quality, it is possible to
predict the performance (weight gain or loss, level of wool or milk production, et cetera) of a
group of grazing animals from an assessment of the pasture on offer to them. Table 6.8
shows the expected level of production for sheep of different classes from high quality pasture
for a range of pasture availabilities.
Grazing management decisions, therefore, should be an attempt to balance the amount of
pasture available to each class of stock to achieve the best combination of animal production
levels from each class of stock. For example, it would not be rational to graze adult wethers
on pastures with an availability of 800 kg DM/ha when, on the same farm, lactating ewes are
grazing pastures of 600 kg/ha (see Table 6.7). The wethers would be gaining nearly 0.5 kg of
liveweight per week while the ewes, particularly the twin rearing ewes, would be losing weight
rapidly and reducing their lactations to levels which threaten the survival of their lambs. It
would seem more rational to ensure that pasture availability is more fairly distributed -
perhaps 400 kg/ha for wethers and 800 kg/ha for ewes. The grazier will achieve this by
changing the stocking rate of the pastures.

Table 6.8 Expected levels of animal production from different levels of herbage mass

Rates of liveweight gain (g/day)

-----------Lactating ewes----------
Pasture availability Wethers Weaners ---Pregnant Single Twin
ewes--- lamb lambs
(kg DM/ha) 48 kg 20 kg 90 days 120 daysEwe Lamb Ewe Lambs
400 0 40 —30 —70 —80 100 —130 60
600 30 80 15 —10 —50 160 —100 105
800 60 115 40 15 —30 200 —80 130
1000 80 140 50 30 —15 220 —50 150
1200 90 150 60 40 —5 230 —50 160
1400 100 160 70 50 5 240 —45 170

It should be noted that the production levels shown in Table 6.8 are given for highly digestible
green pasture. The predictions are based on the expected level of performance of fine wool
Merino sheep grazing pastures with a green component of high digestibility (73%) with a 15%
legume content and 500 kg/ha of dead herbage. Predictions for lactation are for 25 days after
lambing. When the pasture is of lower digestibility, lower levels of productivity will be
achieved.
Even under set-stocking regimes, pasture availability does not stay constant but varies with
the pasture growth rate. Thus any attempt to equate the level of nutrition of a group of grazing
animals to the pasture availability must include consideration of seasonal changes which may
have influenced, or may in the future influence pasture growth.
For example, at the end of winter, ewes lambing on pastures with herbage masses of 600
kg/ha may be under nutritional stress because they are ingesting substantially less than they
require for maintenance of bodyweight (Table 6.8). Provided that their condition is moderately
good and that the expected seasonal improvement in pasture growth occurs (Figure 6.5), the
short period of undernutrition will not have any permanent deleterious effects.
There is no ’ideal’ level of pasture for grazing animal production and attempts to match
pasture availability to a particular desired level of production will be thwarted by seasonal
variations in pasture growth, unless a ’put-and-take’ system of moving animals is practised.
Such a system may achieve the desired result on one pasture but presumably other pastures
on the farm are being penalised simultaneously.
Similarly, there is no ’ideal’ condition score or growth rate for any particular class of stock at
any particular time. If a producer seeks to achieve desired condition scores or growth rates in
one group of animals at pasture, it will usually be at the expense of another group.
In profitable grazing systems, animals will fluctuate in liveweight and condition score
throughout the year. At times they will be fed above maintenance, at other times below
maintenance. No two years will be exactly the same and the condition scores or pasture
availabilities which are associated with good grazing management in one year may be
inappropriate in another year. In some years it may be necessary to use supplementary feed
to avoid financial losses from undernutrition.
The objective of grazing management should always be to share pasture and other resources
between the classes of grazing animals to maximise the enterprise profits. The way in which
these resources are combined will be different from year to year, month to month and from
farm to farm.

Stocking rate

Stocking rate (SR) is a major determinant of profit, as discussed in Chapter 3. It also has a
major effect on pasture composition and the persistence of productive, edible pasture plants.
If stocking rate is too low, productivity is too low and the enterprise is unprofitable. If the SR is
too high, there may be insufficient nutrients for all of the grazing animals to produce efficiently
or even to survive. In addition there may be undesirable changes in pasture composition and
exposure of soil to erosion by wind and water. Stocking rate is often defined in terms of
DSE/ha.
The reason that SR has such a profound influence on productivity and profitability is because
it has a large influence on how much pasture each animal consumes and the proportion of the
total mass of pasture which grows that is consumed, rather than left uneaten and decaying.
As SR increases, there are more animals present per unit area to eat the pasture. As pasture
availability (on set stocked pastures) is the result of a balance between pasture growth and
pasture consumed and lost from trampling and decay, it follows that pasture availability will be
lower at higher stocking rates. It has already been shown that pasture intake per head
declines with lower pasture availability (Figure 6.6). Consequently, we would expect that as
SR increases, pasture availability will decline and pasture intake per head will decline.
This process in itself does not lead to any increase in grazing efficiency - indeed one might
expect the opposite because more nutrients are being used for maintenance of body mass at
high stocking rates than low stocking rates. In addition, pasture growth rates usually decline
as herbage mass declines below an optimum level.
Increases in grazing efficiency do occur, however, as SR increases from low levels. The
reason is that a higher proportion of the total pasture grown is consumed at high SR than at
low SR. At low SRs, for example, perhaps only 20% of the pasture grown might be
consumed. The rest of the pasture will be trampled or left ungrazed to die and decay. At high
SRs, as much as 80% of the pasture grown will be consumed.
Thus, as SR increases from low levels, pasture availability declines, feed intake per head
declines but a higher proportion of the available pasture is consumed and the total mass of
pasture consumed increases. Animal production responses to stocking rate are illustrated in
Figure 6.9.

Figure 6.9 Relationship between SR and production parameters

For sheep, an increase in stocking rate has a negative effect on wool production per head
and a positive effect on wool production per hectare at low stocking rates, then a negative
effect on wool production per hectare at high stocking rates. For all grazing animals, the same
relationship applies to liveweight gain, and number of offspring conceived, reared and
weaned. Fibre diameter of wool is reduced as SR rises, which increases the value of the wool
up to a point, above which under-nutrition causes a break in the staple and consequent loss
of value.
Figure 6.10 illustrates the general relationship between the main economic measures of farm
production, based on Figure 6.9. Generally, gross income per hectare increases with
production per hectare. (This will not be completely true if the quality of the product declines
as SR increases, but is approximately true in most cases.) Variable costs rise linearly with SR
because both variable costs and SR are directly related to the number of head per hectare.
(In fact, variable costs will often increase exponentially, mainly because of increasing levels of
supplementary feed which are required at higher SR.) The gross margin is the difference
between gross income and variable costs and it is curvilinear like gross income, but reaches a
maximum at a lower SR than the maximum gross income. The maximum gross margin occurs
at a point which is referred to in simple economic theory as the ’optimum stocking rate’. It is
the point at which profit is maximised, rather than production. In real life, the optimum SR is
often considered to be slightly lower than that predicted in this way, for reasons associated
with risk.

Figure 6.10 Relationship between SR and economic parameters

Optimal stocking rates for districts are strongly influenced by rainfall, rainfall pattern and soil
type. For farms within the same district, optimal stocking rates are influenced by soil fertility
(fertilizer application history or innate fertility) and pasture species. As a guide to the highest
stocking rates which might be considered optimal, the following table indicates predicted
optimal stocking rates and ’usual practice’ stocking rates for a range of average annual
rainfall categories.

Table 6.9 Optimum and usual stocking rates vary with the expected rainfall for a farm

Growing season Expected optimal ’Usual practice’

rainfall (mm) stocking rate stocking rate (DSE/ha)
(DSE/ha)
300 3.5 1—2
400 8.8 3—3
500 15.6 4—9
600 20.4 8 — 12

Grazing systems

Continuous grazing is the simplest form of grazing management which minimises

management inputs. Pasture is rarely spelled from grazing and animals concentrate on
preferred pasture species. If stocking rate is too high these species may be eliminated.
Set stocking can be used to describe continuous grazing, although the term is often used to
refer to relatively short grazing periods when stock are not moved, eg for lambing.
Rotational grazing involves regular movement of stock between paddocks. It is widely
practised in the belief that it improves both pasture and animal production. Experimental proof
for this is lacking. Most experiments have shown little or no improvement in animal
production. However, some pasture species require regular resting if they are to survive, in
particular lucerne and kangaroo grass. Experiments on the southern Tablelands indicate that
it is possible to maintain stands of lucerne with resting periods of 55 days and grazing periods
of 5 days, with 20 ewes/ha; this would require 12 paddocks to operate this system. Other
proven reasons for rotational grazing are:

• to avoid pugging damage following irrigation

• to avoid nitrate poisoning by grazing too soon following application
• of nitrogen fertiliser (not usually done in wool or beef production)
• to concentrate stock on undesirable species (eg barley grass) at flowering time to
prevent seeding
• to concentrate stock on desirable species which are already present at high density
and which may be starting to produce flowering stems; hard grazing will remove
these stems and maintain the sward in a vegetative state

Benefits claimed for rotational grazing are:

• pasture may be rationed so that more is available when it is most needed; (there is no
firm evidence for this; pasture which is saved deteriorates and the pasture which is
grazed harder may be adversely affected)
• growth of pasture may be increased; (there is no evidence for this)
• adverse effects of excreta on intake may be reduced; (this is unlikely)
• transmission of parasites may be reduced (this is virtually always untrue)

Cell grazing is a form of rotational grazing which involves having a large number of paddocks
or cells (40 or more), and grazing at very high stocking rates, with frequent movement of the
stock. Sheep are rotated rapidly around the many cells during periods of rapid growth and
more slowly during periods of slow growth. Thus sheep are prevented from grazing newly-
emerged shoots. Heavy concentration of stock for short period ensures that grazing is
uniform, although severe. Thus grazing selection is largely prevented. This form of grazing
management was first developed in Zimbabwe by Alan Savory and was designed to simulate
the grazing activity of large herds of wild ungulates moving across savannas.
Currently, a firm of agricultural consultants is promoting the technique through courses which
are being well received by farmers. There is, as yet, no experimental proof that the technique
is superior to conventional forms of grazing management. NSW Agriculture has laid down
experiments to compare the systems and results will be available in the next few years.
Major benefits which are likely with cell grazing are those arising from closer monitoring of
stock and pastures, due to the frequency of moving stock. This would allow problems with
stock and pastures to be identified and corrected sooner. Also it would develop the
observational skills of the grazier due to the frequency with which management decisions
have to be made on stock movement.
Stocking density is the term used to describe the number of stock per unit area on a grazing
area at any one time. Both stocking rate and stocking density may be expressed in terms of
stock numbers, but are better expressed as numbers of a particular class of stock eg wethers,
or DSE/ha. Stocking rate is the same as stocking density with continuous grazing. With
rotational or cell grazing, stocking density is much higher than stocking rate, eg with rotational
grazing around 20 paddocks, the stocking density is 20 x the stocking rate.
Subdivision increases the flexibility of grazing management and therefore the potential
pasture production. Basic subdivision is usually determined by the availability of water,
differences in soil and pasture types, and differences in slope and aspect. Further subdivision
is determined by convenient mob size. Electric fencing has made subdivision much less
expensive.

Pasture budgeting

Pasture budgeting is a planning exercise which compares the supply of pasture to the animal
requirements. The supply is determined by the initial availability plus the expected growth
rate, less the loss through decay and depradation of insects. The demand is determined by
the animal requirements (Table 6.10). Initial availability is estimated using the techniques
described earlier. Data on estimated growth rates can be obtained from district agronomists.
Techniques for more accurate prediction of pasture growth rates on particular properties and
paddocks are likely to be developed in the near future. They will be based on instruments
which measure available moisture and nutrient concentrations.

Paddock recording

Monitoring the carrying capacity of paddocks is a valuable aid to improving the efficiency of
grazing management. This is done by estimating herbage availability when stock enter and
leave a paddock, and recording the number of grazing days, number of stock and their DSE.
Estimation of condition score when stock enter and leave a paddock provides additional
valuable information. Collation and analysis of this type of data helps to identify superior
paddocks and plan stock movements and stocking rate.

Diagnosis of dietary deficiencies of energy and protein

Estimates of ME intake by grazing sheep are shown in Figure 6.8. These may be compared
with ME requirements in order to identify deficiencies which can lead to undernutrition. The
principles for calculating ME requirements are revised on pages 1 to 12 of this chapter. ME
requirements listed in Table 6.10 are based on a combination of information from APC (1990)
and AFRC (1993). The former is an Australian publication which deals more comprehensively
with principles of nutrition in a user unfriendly manner. The latter is a UK publication which is
more practically-based but has heavy emphasis on housed animals eating silage-based
rations.
Energy deficiency

ME requirements in Table 6.10 may be compared with expected ME intakes in Figure 6.8. The
following are major points which should be noted:

• Poor quality pasture (M/D 7.0 and lower), such as cereal stubble or mature pasture, is
inadequate to provide maintenance requirements for weaners or adult sheep, at any
level of herbage availability
• Medium and poorer quality pastures are inadequate, at any level of herbage
availability, for weaners to grow at 100 g/day. In order to sustain this level of growth or
better pastures of good quality (M/D 10.0) or better are required
• ME requirements increase rapidly in late pregnancy, being 63% higher than
maintenance for ewes with singles and more than double for ewes with twins. This
large difference justifies segregation of ewes when significant numbers of twins are
expected. Following pregnancy diagnosis, ewes carrying twins can be given preferred
access to better pastures, or fed supplements
• The effect of pasture quality on energy intake is potentially most serious for ewes in
late pregnancy and for lactating ewes and their lambs. Unless ewes in late pregnancy
are offered diets exceeding 9.5 M/D (or 10 for twin-bearing ewes), they will mobilise
body tissues to provide energy for foetal growth. With information from Figure 6.4 and
Figure 6.7, it can be seen that ewes cannot eat enough of a medium or lower energy
diet to meet all of their requirements for maintenance, no matter how high the pasture
availability is.

The penalty of requiring ewes to mobilise body tissues is not necessarily high. During
late pregnancy, ewes in good condition in mid-pregnancy may receive up to 15%
below their energy requirements for maintenance without undue penalty to lamb birth
weight. Ewes in moderate or good condition at lambing may receive 20% less and
lose " a condition score in the first weeks of lactation without penalising milk
production. Severe undernutrition may result in pregnancy toxaemia, low birth weight
lambs, delayed onset of lactation, poor maternal instinct and reduced milk output
leading to reduced lamb survival and reduced growth rate in survivors. Wool
production, wool quality and possibly future reproductive performance will also be
reduced[2]

• At least 1000 kg/ha of herbage DM of medium or better quality is necessary to

prevent severe restrictions to the nutrition of both lactating ewes and their lambs.
Lamb growth rates can be approximated as 20% of daily milk yield. Twin lambs need
about 1 kg of milk to survive (a growth rate of about 100 g/day) and single lambs
need about half that amount. At 600 kg/ha twin lambs are unlikely to survive and the
growth of single lambs will be severely reduced. Below this level, it is likely that a
significant proportion of the lambs in a flock will die at 2 to 3 weeks of age as the
lactation of the dams falls to very low levels or stops completely. The condition score
at lambing of the ewes influences their ability to sustain lactation in the face of low
 energy intake. The lower the condition score, the higher the ewe’s energy intake must
be to avoid lamb losses
• Crossbred ewes with high lactation potential can only produce to their potential when
they are grazed on abundant high quality pasture and they lamb in good body
condition

Protein deficiency

Protein requirements in terms of dietary concentrations may be compared with concentrations

in feeds (Table 6.2) for an approximate assessment of adequacy. For more detailed
assessment and calculation of supplementary feed requirements, it is necessary to calculate
intakes of metabolisable protein (MP) and compare with MP requirements. The
concentrations of MP in feeds are the sum of RP and UP for the appropriate rumen digesta
outflow rate (see Table 6.1 for the relationship between feeding level and rumen outflow rate).
For example, the MP intake by lactating ewes grazing grass at the late vegetative stage
(Table 6.2) would be:
92 + 40 = 132 g/kg DM intake.
In order to calculate MP intake it is necessary to predict DM intake (DMI), dividing ME intake
by the appropriate M/D concentration in the diet.
Intake prediction - For lactating ewes with singles grazing pasture with M/D of 9 at 1 tonne
DM/ha, DMI is:
13.3/9 = 1.5 kg/day
Protein intake - MP content of early flowering grass (M/D 9.5) is 64 + 40 = 104 g/kg DM when
eaten by lactating animals. Therefore MP intake is:
1.5 x 104 = 152 g/day
This may be compared with requirements, from which it appears that protein intake is likely to
be sufficient for single-rearing Merinos but not for crossbred sheep in early lactation.

Table 6.10 ME requirements for grazing sheep on pasture of medium quality (M/D 9.0)*
maintenance requirement increased by 20% to allow for energy cost of grazing[3]

Reproductive status ME requirements (MJ ME/day)

Dry 20 kg weaner at maintenance 4.6
20 kg weaner growing at 1007.7
g/day
20 kg weaner growing at 20011.2
g/day
50 kg ewe at maintenance 8.7
Pregnant Weeks
pregnant
16 20
50 kg ewe pregnant - single11.0 14.2
50 kg ewe pregnant - twins 12.8 18.0
Lactating Condition score at Condition score at
lambing < 3 [4] lambing > 3
Month Month
1 2 3 4 5 6
50 kg Merino ewe lactating -19.8 18.3 15.0 16.4 16.6 15.0
 single
50 kg Merino ewe lactating -24.9 22.7 18.5 21.5 21.0 0
twins
50 kg Xbred ewe lactating -26.6 23.6 18.5 23.2 21.9 18.5
single
50 kg Xbred ewe lactating -34.3 28.7 22.15 30.9 27.0 18.5
twins

Concentrate feeding

Veterinarians in sheep practice need a strong working knowledge of the nutritional basis of
supplementary feeding of sheep because undernutrition is an important and common
predisposing factor in a number of clinical conditions. By far the most important of these are
pregnancy toxaemia of ewes, a disease which is almost entirely based on nutritional
deprivation, and lamb pre-weaning lamb mortality, which is a complex of disorders in which
nutrition plays a large part. Such conditions arise when the available pasture supplies
insufficient energy and protein to maintain even minimal levels of health and production.
When the nutrient deficiency is minor and expected to be of short duration, it is customary for
sheep to be supplemented at pasture with high energy, high protein ’concentrate’ feeds like
cereal grains (wheat, barley, oats and maize) or legume grains (lupins, peas, beans).
Roughages, like hay, and milling by-products (such as brewers’ grain and pea hulls) are
occasionally used, depending on local availability.
’Drought’ refers to a severe and prolonged insufficiency of pasture. Under such conditions,
generally the entire flock needs hand-feeding for periods of weeks or months and concentrate
feeds form the basis of most drought rations.
Climatic conditions vary extensively from year to year but it is only the most extreme of the
’dry’ seasons which are considered droughts. The rest are broadly considered to fall in the
broad range classified as ’normal’ seasons. Within the range of normal seasons the
requirement for supplementary feeding varies widely. In some years, no animals require
hand-feeding; in other years, most or all mobs on the farm require supplementation. There is
also variation between farms in the frequency of hand-feeding. This may be a result of
particularly favourable and reliable weather patterns, the use of fodder crops or crop residues,
the choice of lambing season or stocking rate or other management procedures.

Supplementation at pasture and substitution

The need for supplementation at pasture occurs in response to one of two sets of
circumstances. The more common circumstance is that of low pasture quality. As pasture
senesces, nutritional value declines as the digestibility declines. The ME value (M/D) and,
usually, crude protein (CP) value both decline sharply. Low digestibility limits intake so,
paradoxically, as grazing animals need to eat more to maintain ME intake, they in fact eat
less. This form of nutritional deprivation is not very responsive to reductions in stocking rate.
While low stocking rates may allow some higher level of pasture selectivity, particularly of
scarce plants which are still vegetative, the basic problem is one of pasture quality rather than
availability. Supplementation due to low pasture quality is characteristic of summer grazing in
southern Australia, and winter grazing in northern New South Wales. The object of
supplementation in these circumstances is to raise the average nutritional value of the diet
and to increase intake.

This example illustrates an important phenomenon associated with supplementary feeding of

grazing animals at pasture - that of substitution. When animals are offered supplements they
substitute part of their roughage diet (the pasture) for the supplement. The substitution rate is
the amount of roughage intake depression divided by the weight of supplement eaten. In the
above example, the substitution rate has been 120/200 = 0.6 or 60%. Substitution contributes
to the inefficiency of supplementation with low quality forages (such as hay with an M/D of 8)
of low quality pasture (with an M/D of 6, for example). A high substitution rate means that
each kg of hay may increase the energy content of the diet by only 4MJ, not the 8MJ for
which one might hope.
The less common circumstance requiring supplementation is low pasture availability. The
availability of the pasture (its height and density) also limits intake and ruminants have only a
limited ability to increase grazing time when availability is low. This form of pasture
insufficiency occurs frequently in the winter in southern Australia, when soil temperatures limit
pasture growth. Pasture is green, of reasonable nutritive value per kg DM, but is short.
Producers may be able to adjust the stocking rate to overcome the deficiency but generally
the period of low pasture growth is short and is often followed by a period of exuberant
pasture growth - so permanent changes of stocking rate which affect the number of sheep
present in spring are counter productive. Supplementation is frequently used to ’bridge’ the
nutritional deficit of the winter ’feed trough’. The object of supplementation is simply to
increase the total nutrients ingested rather than improve diet quality. Compared to the above
example where feed quality was low, the effect of substitution may be less in this case,
particularly where pasture availability is very low and the supplement is of high M/D.
The two circumstances of low quality and low availability of pasture can also occur together,
particularly in autumn in winter rainfall areas. By the end of a long summer dry period the
availability of the low quality senescent pasture falls and supplementation may become
necessary until autumn rains arrive.
When hand-feeding is required on farms, it rarely involves all groups of sheep on the property
at the same time. Generally, weaners or breeding ewes are the first to need supplementation,
adult wethers the last.

Weaners

Weaner sheep frequently require hand-feeding because they have a limited ability to maintain
health and productivity if they are losing liveweight for sustained periods[6]. High quality hay
can be used to maintain liveweight but concentrates are generally more efficient and,
consequently, are used more frequently. The amount of additional energy required by
weaners which have access to some pasture is generally low - of the order of 1 to 3
megajoules of metabolisable energy (MJ of ME) daily. 100 to 300 grams of grain will supply
this amount of ME - a feeding rate of 5 to 15 grams of grain per kg liveweight. Skill and
experience is required in estimating the contribution of pastures to total dietary needs.

Ewes in late pregnancy

The dramatic increase in the energy requirements of ewes in late pregnancy frequently
creates a need for supplementation and often at high rates. Roughage feeds rarely have
sufficient energy density to usefully increase energy intake. Ewes grazing low quality
senescent pastures may well require an additional 5MJ of dietary ME to prevent excessive
loss of body reserves and lower the risk of pregnancy toxaemia. Ewes carrying twin foetuses
may require a further 2MJ daily. Consequently, supplementation rates of 600 to 800 grams of
grain per head per day (12 to 16 grams per kg liveweight) are occasionally required.

Lactating ewes

The nutritional requirements for ewes in early lactation are quantitatively similar to ewes in
late pregnancy but they have additional requirements for protein and long fibre to sustain
satisfactory lactations. The voluntary food intake (VFI) of lactating ewes is significantly higher
than that of pregnant ewes, a fact which allows lactating ewes to perform relatively better than
pregnant ewes on deficient pastures, particularly pastures of low digestibility.

Wethers, dry ewes and hoggets

These classes of sheep need hand-feeding less often because they generally have a better
ability to tolerate periods of sustained weight loss. Nevertheless, in some seasons on some
farms, supplementation is necessary but rates required are usually lower than those
suggested for breeding ewes or weaners. Rates of concentrate feeding of 150 to 300 grams
per head per day (4 to 8 grams per kg liveweight) are common.

Recommendations for preventive action

Cases of undernutrition of breeding ewes and weaner sheep frequently require veterinary
intervention and advice to producers on the use of concentrate feeding. The advice given
should include:

• a list of suitable feedstuffs which will supply the deficient nutrients

• an estimate of the amount required, as ’kg per head per day’ or ’kg per head per
week
• instructions on the safest way to introduce the ration to avoid grain poisoning
• recommendations on the best frequency of feeding
Introducing concentrate feeds

Sheep are fed a variety of supplements when pastures are inadequate to meet their needs.
The normal practice is for grain to be fed in a trail along the ground. Occasionally troughs are
used, but for short-term feeding this is uncommon. Large grains, like lupins, can also be fed
by broadcasting - a process which effectively produces an artificial stubble. When cereal
grains or other high starch foodstuffs are used a number of precautions should be taken to
avoid grain poisoning (see Chapter 16).

1. Sheep should be ’trained’ to eat the ration. Training can involve daily feeding for a few
days and driving sheep to the trail or trough and holding them quietly near the feed.
Grain feeding of ewes before their lambs are weaned will facilitate the future training
of the lambs. Training is complete when the majority of sheep run to the trail when
feed is delivered and immediately start eating. It is recommended that feeding rates
do not exceed 10g/kg/feed during the training period; so, for a 50kg ewe, 500g per
feed is recommended as a maximum
2. Once training is complete the frequency of feeding can be reduced. Initially, the level
of feed should not exceed 5g/kg/day, but the feed can be given every 3 days at three
times the daily rate (15g/kg/feed)
3. After two feeds at three day intervals, the rate of feeding can be increased, if
nutritionally necessary, to 30g/kg/feed gradually over a 2 week period, if desired.
Some mild cases of grain poisoning may still occur, even if the increase is made
slowly
4. High levels of supplementation (over 45g/kg/feed) may be necessary to adequately
nourish ewes in late pregnancy or low weight weaners in poor seasons. A low
incidence of grain overload is almost unavoidable in such cases. To minimize losses:

• introduction should be gradual - over 3 to 4 weeks

• care should be taken not to disturb the routine. Changes from oats to barley or wheat
or from barley to wheat should be accompanied by a reduction in feeding rates for
several feeds
• some roughage should be offered if pasture roughage is in low supply
• some cereal grain can be replaced by lupin grain which has a much lower level of
fermentable carbohydrate[5]

Computer Models

GrazFeed

GrazFeed is a computer model developed by CSIRO[6]. It can be used to predict the

performance of grazing stock and either the response to nominated amounts of supplement
or the amounts of supplement to achieve nominated levels of production. It considers the
following factors:
Pasture: mass, % green, % clover
Animals: species, breed, age, liveweight, physiological state, wool depth, condition score
Climate: temperature, rainfall, wind speed
Topography:
Supplements: nutrient content in terms of M/D, crude protein and protein degradability
In order to use the model you need to have mastered the skills of assessing pasture in
quantitative and qualitative terms, as described in these notes. Also you need to be able to
assess condition score, which involves palpation of the spine and ribs; visual assessment of
sheep is usually totally inaccurate because the fleece masks the body outline.

Feeding and management of sheep and cattle during drought

Droughts are an unfortunate but inevitable occurrence which cause deficiencies of both feed
and water in most agricultural areas of Australia at irregular intervals. The effects of drought
can be exacerbated by over-stocking, poor livestock management and poor planning of farm
resources for storage and handling of animal feeds. It is advisable for graziers to have a
planned strategy to invoke whenever drought threatens. In practice the onset of a drought
usually is not apparent at the time. When rainfall is below average, and pasture production is
reduced, supplementary feeding may be necessary, and this can drift into total hand feeding.
Supplementary feeding may be practiced as a normal part of the annual cycle of feed supply.
However, before contemplating supplementary feeding which is not part of a normal annual
cycle, a drought management strategy should be invoked as follows:-

Initial appraisal

Numbers of animals, their condition, and market value should be determined according to the
following categories:

• suckling lambs and calves

• weaners
• lactating ewes and cows
• pregnant ewes and cows
• dry ewes and cows
• wethers and steers
• rams and bulls

Feed resources available on the property should be determined in terms of quantity, quality,
market value and negotiability:

• pasture
• hay and silage
• fodder shrubs and trees
• grains and other concentrates
Pasture can be used to take other people’s animals on agistment. Pit silage is the least
negotiable and has to be used on site. Round bale silage can be transported, although with
only about 50% DM, the cost of moving the dry matter is high. Hay and concentrates can be
sold off the property.
Feed available off the property should be determined in terms of quantity, quality and cost
delivered or agistment cost. Additional considerations include machinery and feeding facilities
available and the labour available for feed preparation and hand feeding.

Planning decisions

Alternative procedures for animal management are:

• sell and buy back after the drought

• send away on agistment
• feed at the production level and sell in prime condition
• feed at the maintenance level
• feed for survival only

The choice between these alternatives will be determined by feed resources and costs, and
the availability of labour, machinery and feeding facilities. The choice is likely to differ between
animal categories. The obvious animals to sell are culls from all categories and non-
breeding stock which are in good enough condition to sell for meat. The most valuable
animals to retain are those which have been selected as the nucleus of the breeding flock or
herd. If no particular selection has been practised, it may be more profitable to sell all
breeding stock and replace them at a later date.
When animals to be retained have been selected, feed resources should be allocated
preferentially to those animals which are most susceptible to drought. Animals which are
pregnant, lactating or suckling are the most likely to die during drought. Young and aged stock
are more susceptible than mature stock. Mature wethers and steers are most likely to survive.
Nutrient requirements of lactating stock can be greatly reduced by weaning lambs and calves
early. This can be done anytime after 5 weeks of age, providing that the weaners are given a
good quality ration. A decision to join breeding stock should only be made after carefully
considering the escalating cost of feeding such animals during pregnancy and lactation.
The choice to send animals away on agistment should be made only after personal
inspection of the property. Due allowance should be made for the costs of stock transport,
and regular inspection visits.
The choice to feed at a production level should be made on the basis of feed costs and the
quality margin between store and prime animals, which is usually substantial during a
drought. The attraction of feeding at production level is that the duration and cost of feeding,
as well as the likely returns, can be determined with reasonable accuracy.
In contrast, the choice to feed at a maintenance or survival level is an open-ended decision
in which the total costs of feeding are unknown. The decision should be based on a study of
the probability of rainfall at particular times in the future and the calculation the costs of
feeding are expected to be less than the replacement cost of equivalent livestock at the end
of the drought.

Feeding for maintenance or survival

When animals have a body condition score greater than 2 (scale 1-5), it is unnecessarily
expensive to feed them a maintenance diet. By feeding them at 50% of maintenance for a
period, they can be allowed to lose weight and so reduce their maintenance requirements.
This usually happens at pasture at the start of the drought. A guide to critical survival
liveweights is given in Table 6.11.
The energy made available to the animal from tissue mobilisation is about 84% of the gross
energy of tissue mobilised. The gross energy varies with age and fatness, ranging from 8
MJ/kg liveweight in animals which are young and lean to 34 MJ/kg in animals which are
mature and fat.
Feed requirements (in kg DM/day) for maintenance are calculated as:
(Fasting heat production x 1.1) x 1/k x 1/(M/D)
The fasting heat production of sheep is 250 kJ/W0.75 and that of cattle is 350 kJ/W0.75. The
fasting heat production is increased by 10% to allow for the energy cost of walking. If animals
are allowed to graze under conditions where pasture availability is very sparse, this energy
allowance for exercise could increase to 70% of fasting heat production. For this reason it is
preferable to confine animals in small paddocks during drought feeding.

Table 6.11 Critical liveweights for survival by sheep and cattle; the liveweights are after
an overnight fast, and in the case of sheep, minus fleece weight; from NSW
Department of Agriculture

Species Type kg
Sheep small-frame Merino 30
medium-frame Merino 35
large-frame Merino 40
Merino cross 40-45
Dorset or Border Leicester 45-50
Cattle (Herefords) weaners 150
yearlings 225
adult dry stock 300
breeders 350

Nomograms have been devised for rapid determination of feed requirements for the
maintenance of sheep and cattle. Amounts of feed DM are converted to an as fed basis by
multiplying by 100/DM%. With pregnant animals, the feed allowance is 1.5 x maintenance
during the last 6-8 weeks of pregnancy. With lactating animals, the feed allowance is 1.6 x
maintenance for cows and 2.5 x maintenance for ewes.
When animals are fed at a low level of intake, heat arising from the diet is much less than in
well fed animals, so that their critical temperature is much higher than normal. Under cold
conditions, the actual critical temperature increases with wind speed and decreases with
pelage insulation. In sheep on a maintenance diet with only 1 cm depth of fleece, the critical
temperature is 30”C when the wind speed is 10 m/sec.
When the environmental temperature is less than the critical temperature, animals generate
heat to maintain homeothermy by breaking down body tissues. This can be averted by
increasing the maintenance allowance as shown in Table 6.12:

Table 6.12 Effects of wool depth on maintenance requirements of sheep under normal
winter conditions on the southern tablelands (0-10”C, wind speed 2 m/sec.)

Wool depth Extra ME requirement as

(cm) % of maintenance intake
1 126
3 62
5 29
10 0

Wet conditions exacerbate cold by increasing heat loss due to the latent heat of evaporation
of water. Clearly, shorn sheep in poor condition are especially susceptible to the effects of
cold. In practice, the feeding allowance should be increased 2-3 weeks before adverse
conditions are expected.

Selection of feedstuffs

Under drought conditions, the major limiting nutrient is energy. Feeds should be selected
primarily on the basis of lowest cost per unit of metabolisable energy at the point of
consumption. Due to the low density of roughages, costs of transportation are higher per unit
weight than with grains; also their energy concentration is lower than that of grains, so that
grains are invariably the cheapest source of metabolisable energy. Another problem with
roughages is that within a particular type, such as pasture hay, the nutrient content and
palatability varies substantially, according to the stage of cutting, presence of weeds, drying
conditions and possible mould development. Thus there is normally a greater risk in buying
good quality roughages than in buying good quality grains. Even with cereal grains, it has
been found that their energy content, if grown under drought conditions, can be very low; eg 8
M/D.
Advantages of hay and silage are that they are much less likely to cause digestive
disturbances than cereal grains and also acetate production is much greater on roughage
than on grain diets. For these reasons, roughages are necessary:

• during the period of adaptation to all-grain feeding

• for feeding to sick animals, including those suffering from scouring or anorexia due to
grain poisoning
• for feeding to lactating stock to ensure that milk fat levels are not depressed due to
excess propionate production

Depression of milk fat content has been shown to cause starvation in lambs. Of the main
roughages, hay and silage, silage is cheaper to store with little deterioration when stored in
pits. Silage in pits is a particularly useful drought reserve as it can be left for many years. In
contrast, hay is much more expensive to store when adequately protected from weather
damage, and is more susceptible to deterioration. A guide to the nutrient contents of potential
feeds for use in drought feeding is given in Table 6.2.
The values given in Table 6.2 are only a general indication of likely nutrient contents which
can differ substantially between sources of feeds. During droughts many unconventional
feeds are used and a guide to the nutrient content of many of these is given in ’Funny Feeds
Summary’ printed by NSW Agriculture Feeds Evaluation Service.
The risk of grain poisoning should be considered when selecting feedstuffs. See Chapter 16
for a detailed discussion of grain poisoning.
Protein grains and meals can be valuable in improving the efficiency of use of cereal grains
and roughages, by producing a better balance of nutrients at the tissue level, ie increasing the
proportion of amino acids and glucose (from amino acids). This is particularly necessary in
very young stock, as well as in pregnant and lactating stock, as indicated by their higher
protein requirements in Table 6.13.

Table 6.13 Minimum protein and energy concentrations for drought feeding (per kg DM)

Weaners Adults
(<20 kg)
Nutrient Maintenance Pregnancy midLactation
to late
Crude protein (grams) 150 80 100 120
ME (MJ) 9.5 7.5 8.0 to 10.0 9.5

Lupins contain very little starch so that there is much less likelihood of grain poisoning with
them; they are also very palatable and can be useful in adapting animals to grain rations.
Whole cottonseeds are sometimes available at low cost. They can be fed up to 50% of a grain
mixture (with higher levels the fat concentration inhibits rumen fermentation).

Mineral and vitamin supplements

Cereal grains are deficient in calcium and carotene. Calcium deficiency is most likely to affect
lactating animals and weaners, and vitamin A deficiency is most likely to affect weaners and
rams. Ground limestone can be mixed with the grain (15 g/kg) to provide Ca, and vitamin A
may be given as a drench or intramuscularly. With pregnant animals, the limestone should be
omitted from the ration for two or three periods of two days during the last three weeks of
pregnancy to stimulate Ca absorption and reduce the chances of hypocalcaemia.
Grain from some sources has a low sodium content, in which case addition of salt is
recommended at the rate of 5 g/kg for maintenance feeding and 15 g/kg for production
feeding; the higher level stimulates intake by increasing palatability.
Feeds such as straws, leaves from certain edible trees and molasses require
supplementation if animals are to survive. Of the edible trees, most experimental work has
been done with mulga. It has been found that the edibility of mulga by mature sheep can be
increased from about 400 to 600 g/day by giving 50 g/day molasses; the response is probably
attributable to the sulphur content of the molasses. Cereal straws require a protein
supplement or a supplement of cereal grain with urea. Molasses requires a supplement of
urea (1.5-3.0%)
Feeding allowances

Recommended feeding allowances are given in Tables 6.14.

Grains which are being fed to sheep do not need to be processed for effective digestion.
Indeed it is preferable to feed them whole as this stimulates more mastication which causes
the rumen pH to be higher than when processed grain is fed. Oats do not need to be
processed for feeding to cattle. Processing wheat and barley does stop the passage of whole
grains and increase digestibility by 5-10 units when roughage is not fed. This effect of
processing is much smaller than when roughage is fed, because the roughage reduces
retention time in the rumen. The cost of processing wheat and barley for drought feeding is
probably not justified.

Table 6.14 Daily drought feeding allowances for Merino sheep - as fed basis

Weaners Adults (dry) Pregnant ewes Lactating

Weeks before ewes
lambing
6 2
Weight (kg) 15 34 36 42 40
Nutrient/feedstuff
ME (MJ) 2.9 5.1 8.1 9.0 14.3
Oats (kg) 0.25 0.46 0.74 0.81 1.29
Wheat (kg) 0.21 0.39 0.631 0.69 1.09
Hay (kg) 0.34 0.60 0.95 1.06 1.68

Feeding Management

When animals are to be fed cereal grains, the grain should be introduced gradually in order to
minimise the possibility of grain poisoning and laminitis. When hand feeding commences,
animals should be fed on hay, and then grain should be introduced gradually as follows:
Days Ration Frequency
1-2 100% hay daily feeding
3-13 40% hay; 60% grain ” ”
14—24 25% hay; 75% grain ””
thereafter 0-5% hay twice weekly feeding

If scouring or laminitis occur during the period of adaptation, the progression to all-grain
feeding should be stopped.
During drought, feeding animals once or twice weekly has the following advantages:

• it provides shy feeders with more opportunity to feed, so that mortality rates are lower
than with daily feeding
• sheep produce more wool; this is presumably due to shorter retention time of dietary
protein in the rumen, so that more is available for digestion in the small intestine
• there is considerable saving in labour costs

Feeding once weekly provides more opportunity for scavengers to eat the grain, and for
weather damage to the grain. Feeding twice weekly is probably the best compromise.
Sheep are able to pick up grain from the ground with virtually no wastage, provided that the
ground is not too dusty or sandy. The grain should be spread out in a trail in order to allow as
many sheep as possible to gain access. When the ground surface is unsuitable, troughing
should be used; there are many inexpensive types of troughing, such as hessian bags
supported by wire. Cattle are able to pick up grain from the ground and can be fed this way if
insufficient troughing is available.
Animals which are poor doers or sick should be drafted off and fed in a separate paddock
which has shelter and a good water supply. Hay should be provided in addition to the
maintenance ration of grain.
Weaners should also be fed a better quality ration separately from adult animals. Equal parts
of lucerne chaff and oats has been found to be an effective mixture for weaners. At the end of
a drought it is important to continue feeding until adequate pasture growth has occurred.

Recommended reading

Foot JZ (1983) Nutrition of ewes pre- and post-lambing In Sheep Production and Preventive
Medicine, University of Sydney Post-graduate Committee in Veterinary Science, Proceedings
No 67, p 267
Leng RA (1986) Drought Feeding Strategies Theory and Practice Publ Penambul Books p
139
NSW Agriculture (1994) The Drought Survival Guide
Watt BR (1983) Drought feeding and management In Sheep Production and Preventive
Medicine, University of Sydney Post-graduate Committee in Veterinary Science, Proceedings
No 67, p 197

[1] Not all ewes lamb on the same day; these figures are based on the average requirements
of the mob, assuming lambing is spread over 5 weeks, most ewes lambing in the first 17
days.
[2] French R (1989) cited by Hutchings TR (1994) Integrated Pasture Management on the
Farm In Kemp D and Michalk D (1994) Pasture Management Technology for the 21st Century
Eds David Kemp and David Michalk Publ CSIRO
[3] When pastures are sparse &/or the terrain is hilly, maintenance requirements can increase
by 50% or more. Thus the maintenance requirements in the above table would increase by
another 25%.
[4] When ewes lamb in good, but not over-fat condition (3-4 on a 5 point scale), they are able
to mobilise body tissue and reduce their intake requirements for energy. The mobilised tissue
is predominantly fat, so that ewes in this state require a higher concentration of dietary protein
than those which are not mobilising tissue (Table 6.10)
[5] Bartsch BD and Valentine SC (1986) Grain legumes in dairy cow nutrition Proc Aust Soc
Anim Prod 16 p 32
[6] Marketed by Horizon Agriculture Pty Ltd, PO Box 679, Manley, NSW, 2095, Australia