Forage utilization to improve productivity of dual-purpose cattle systems in central Veracruz, Mexico

1. Forage utilization to improve productivity of dual-purpose cattle systems in central Veracruz, Mexico Victor Absalón-Medina Animal Science Department Morrison Hall 112

2. Veracruz State • Variety of natural resources and agro-ecosystems • Lumber, coffee and dairy cattle (high-lands) • Dual-purpose cattle and other crops (lowlands) such as staples (maize), fruits More pictures at http://www.flickr.com/photos/81651699@N00/sets/

3. Cattle: Key farming system • Mexico’s premier producer of beef • >4.1 million head (2002) produce… • >214,000 metric tons of carcass weight (2003) • 50,000 are dairy cows • 2,000,000 are DP cows whose • Calves supply the beef market • Beef cattle

4. Dual-purpose production system • Most common system in Veracruz. • Beef and milk are important products. • Utilizing Bos taurus and Bos indicus crosses • Brown Swiss x Brahman and Holstein x Brahman cows

5. Dual-purpose system defined “Family-owned and –operated enterprise with small capital investment located on marginal land with few alternative uses under current infrastructure and market conditions. Management practices on dual-purpose farms often lack the sophistication of specialized operations; few farmers keep formal records, uncontrolled natural mating is predominant.” Nicholson et al., 1994

6. Dual-purpose system defined [2] • Dual-purpose (DP) cattle operations in Veracruz: low outputs and productive efficiency • In which productive parameters? • Comparison of DP systems in Latin America… • Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Bolivia, Colombia, Brazil, and Venezuela.

7. Productive Parameters

8. Previous research • Juárez et al. (1999) categorized and assessed different grass species • Determined the productive potential of each forage alternative • Based on chemical composition, digestion kinetics and simulations of their productivity potentials. • Predicted milk yields • Metabolizable energy allowable milk • Metabolizable protein allowable milk • Grasses with low protein content • Protein was first limiting… also energy

9. Previous research [2] • Opportunities from combinations of forages • Rueda et al. (2003), Brazil • Shelton (2004), Australia • Juárez data base: A critical information resource • Contains grasses and legumes. • Research need: Ex ante evaluation of most promising options

10. Challenges • Research information is frequently specific to narrow disciplinary objectives, such as improving genetic potential, improved forage yield or reproductive performance, rather than holistic, systems objectives. • Producers might invest to improve milking performance by artificial insemination but the nutritional requirements will be higher and costly. (Holmann et al., 1990)

11. INIFAP-funded project • Three research sites (target ecozones) • Campo experimental “La Posta” • Paso del Toro, Veracruz (coastal plain) • Campo experimental “Las Margaritas” • Hueytamalco, Puebla (highlands) • Campo experimental “El Verdineño” • Nayarit (Pacific coastal plain) • Research approach (Rueda et al., 2005) • Integrated, multidisciplinary approach • Mathematical models, system dynamics and geographic information system • To enhance the productivity of dual-purpose cattle systems while protecting and conserving watersheds. • My project will focus on CNCPS evaluations of energy and protein allowable milk yield and body tissue reserve status throughout a calving interval. • A contributing study that is part of this INIFAP project

12. Management information needs • Assumptions • Nutritive quality of grasses varies throughout the year (poorest in the dry season) • A mode of calvings coincides with the dry season • Low dietary nutrient availability results in low lactational and reproductive performances • Objectives • Evaluate a representative herd scenario to understand current performance and limitations • How do current systems work? • Evaluate alternative nutrition management scenarios • To improve milk income • To shorten calving intervals (relieve energy deficits) • To evaluate preferred calving seasons

13. Expectations • Earlier puberty (1st heat) in heifers • More rapid repletion of body tissue reserves • Earlier return to the ovarian cyclicity • Shorter calving intervals • More milk for calves and sales. • Earlier weaning and/or weaning weight improved or both. • More profit

14. Input information • Distribution of supply and nutritive quality of forages throughout the year • Annual rainfall • Calving distribution throughout the year • Chemical composition and digestion rates of forages (Juárez et al.,2002…. key data base) • Production parameters (for the CNCPS) • Age at first calving • Body condition scores, score changes • Milk production • Milk composition • Body weights, weight changes • Breed • Physiological status • Early lactation (negative EB), mid/late lactation, dry period

15. Targeted agro-ecozone

16. Targeted agro-ecozone [2] • Climate (Köppen classification) • Aw1 based on annual and monthly average temperatures and rainfall • A = tropical moist climates: all months with average temperatures ≥18 C. • w = tropical wet and dry or savanna with extended dry season during winter • Representative soil types • Arenosol • Predominantly sandy, has a superficial layer of organic matter (1.15 %), pH of 5.4-5.6, more than 15% of clay; it is susceptible to be eroded. • Luvisol • Gathers clay in the subsoil, also susceptible to erosion.

17. Rainfall T. 1800 4 1 2 3 Management seasons of the year T. 1700

18. Temperature

19. Forages used by Farmers 4 1 2 3 & Seasons

20. Chemical composition and digestion rate of forages

21. Growth: management groups • Age/growth requirements • Heifers, first-lactation and second-lactation cows • Mature cows • Physiological status • Early lactation • From calving until 90 days • Mid-late lactation • From 90 days post-partum to ~250 days • Early dry and late dry • Late = 90-day period prior to calving • Meet nutritional requirements • Growth and lactation • Replete catabolized tissue • Help assure longer productive life • Age at first calving sooner • Overcome anestrous postpartum sooner

22. Current management • Dry season • Forage scarcity • Cows freely roam • Supplementation with commercial feed in May • Wet season • Few paddocks in the meadow • Faster grass performance • Inadequate management of nutrient stocks and flows in pasture lands • Empirical fertilization of pastures and crops • Little soil analysis information • Inefficient economic investment in fertilization

23. Base scenario ofanimal management groups (S) Star grass: Cynodon plectostachyus (Ll) Llanero grass: Andropogon gayanus (C) Commercial feed

25. Alternative Scenario (G) Gliricidia sepium, (L) Leucaena leucocephala, (P) Pangola grass: Digitaria decumbens (M) Mulato grass: Brachiaria spp

27. Preliminary results • Dry season: Increases in MP and ME allowable milk but still low… • Rainy season: Negative energy balances were overcome. • More analyses needed for the dry season, other scenarios.

28. Suggestions • Supplement with commercial feed or available agricultural by-products to compensate protein deficits at the beginning of the dry season. • Evaluate the cost and benefits from this practice. • Substitute better quality forages for star grass. • Cultivate another forage for the dry season. Guazuma ulmifolia is a good prospect for this purpose.

29. Thank YOU!!! Courtesy of professor R.W. Blake