Millen D D, Pacheco R D L, Arrigoni M D B, Galyean M L, Vasconcelos J T
Departamento de Melhoramento e Nutrição Animal, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Anim Sci. 2009 Oct;87(10):3427-39. doi: 10.2527/jas.2009-1880. Epub 2009 Jul 2.
Feedlot consulting nutritionists were invited to participate in a survey of feedlot nutritional and management practices in Brazil. Thirty-one nutritionists completed the survey on a Web site that was designed for collection of survey data. The survey consisted of 94 questions that included general information (n = 10); commodity information (n = 12); and questions about the use of coproducts (n = 5), roughage source and levels (n = 5), finishing diet adaptation methods (n = 7), supplements and micronutrients (n = 8), feed mixers (n = 6), feeding management (n = 3), cattle management and type of cattle fed (n = 16), formulation practices (n = 17), information resources used for nutritional recommendations (n = 2), and 2 additional questions. One final question addressed the primary challenges associated with applying nutritional recommendations in practice. The number of animals serviced yearly by each nutritionist averaged 121,682 (minimum = 2,000; maximum = 1,500,000; mode = 120,000; total = 3,163,750). Twenty-two respondents (71%) worked with feedlots that feed less than 5,000 animals/yr. Labor, along with availability and precision of equipment, seemed to be the main challenges for the nutritionists surveyed. Most of the nutritionists surveyed used TDN as the primary energy unit for formulation. More than 50% of the clients serviced by the 31 nutritionists did not manage feed bunks to control the quantity of feed offered per pen, and 36.6% fed cattle more than 4 times daily. The NRC (1996) and Journal of Animal Science were the most used sources of information by these nutritionists. Overall, general practices and nutritional recommendations provided by the 31 nutritionists surveyed were fairly consistent. Present data should aid in development of new research, future National Research Council models, and recommendations for Brazilian feeding systems in which Bos indicus cattle predominate.
育肥牛场咨询营养师受邀参与一项关于巴西育肥牛场营养与管理实践的调查。31位营养师在一个专为收集调查数据设计的网站上完成了该调查。该调查包含94个问题,包括基本信息(10个)、畜产品信息(12个)、关于副产品使用的问题(5个)、粗饲料来源及水平(5个)、育肥期日粮调整方法(7个)、补充剂和微量营养素(8个)、饲料搅拌机(6个)、饲养管理(3个)、牛群管理及所饲养牛的类型(16个)、配方实践(17个)、用于营养建议的信息资源(2个)以及另外2个问题。最后一个问题涉及在实践中应用营养建议所面临的主要挑战。每位营养师每年服务的动物数量平均为121,682头(最小值 = 2,000;最大值 = 1,500,000;众数 = 120,000;总数 = 3,163,750)。22位受访者(71%)所在的育肥牛场每年饲养的牛少于5000头。劳动力以及设备的可用性和精准度似乎是接受调查的营养师面临的主要挑战。大多数接受调查的营养师在配方中使用总可消化养分(TDN)作为主要能量单位。31位营养师服务的客户中,超过50%没有管理饲料槽以控制每栏提供的饲料量,36.6%的客户每天喂牛超过4次。这些营养师最常使用的信息来源是美国国家研究委员会(NRC,1996)和《动物科学杂志》。总体而言,接受调查的31位营养师提供的一般实践和营养建议相当一致。目前的数据应有助于开展新的研究、完善未来的美国国家研究委员会模型,并为以印度瘤牛为主的巴西饲养系统提供建议。