4.7 Article

Maintenance Energy Requirements of Double-Muscled Belgian Blue Beef Cows

Journal

ANIMALS
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 89-100

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani5010089

Keywords

double-muscled; beef cows; energy; maintenance requirement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Simple Summary: Double-muscled Belgian Blue animals are extremely lean, characterized by a deviant muscle fiber type with more fast-glycolytic fibers, compared to non-double-muscled animals. This fiber type may result in lower maintenance energy requirements. On the other hand, lean meat animals mostly have a higher rate of protein turnover, which requires more energy for maintenance. Therefore, maintenance requirements of Belgian Blue cows were investigated based on a zero body weight gain. This technique showed that maintenance energy requirements of double-muscled Belgian Blue beef cows were close to the mean requirements of cows of other beef genotypes. Abstract: Sixty non-pregnant, non-lactating double-muscled Belgian Blue (DMBB) cows were used to estimate the energy required to maintain body weight (BW). They were fed one of three energy levels for 112 or 140 days, corresponding to approximately 100%, 80% or 70% of their total energy requirements. The relationship between daily energy intake and BW and daily BW change was developed using regression analysis. Maintenance energy requirements were estimated from the regression equation by setting BW gain to zero. Metabolizable and net energy for maintenance amounted to 0.569 +/- 0.001 and 0.332 +/- 0.001 MJ per kg BW0.75/d, respectively. Maintenance energy requirements were not dependent on energy level (p > 0.10). Parity affected maintenance energy requirements (p < 0.001), although the small numerical differences between parities may hardly be nutritionally relevant. Maintenance energy requirements of DMBB beef cows were close to the mean energy requirements of other beef genotypes reported in the literature.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available