I mentioned that I learned some other interesting things from my forage lab results from last fall. In the past, I’d just lumped all the samples together, in a rough attempt to represent the ratio of grass, clover, and other broadleaf plants we have in all three of our fields. But I feel that I have been getting less lamb growth on our Reed Canarygrass (RCG) field. So I wanted to test that separately this time, to see if I could explain the difference. RCG has a good reputation for being high protein, so it seems odd that my sheep don’t seem to perform as well on it. They are also more prone to diarrhea while in that pasture.
Our RCG field is pretty much a monoculture. There are a couple of spots of buttercup and a bull thistle here and there, but hardly anything else can compete or cohabitate with RCG. Our other field is a more traditional cultivated pasture with several varieties of pasture grass; plus white clover, buttercup, and dandelion. I did include some of those broadleaf plants in with the grass, doing my best to represent the ratio in the field in the sample ratio.
Below is a comparison table between the two fields, along with notes I have about each metric. The numbers in bold are areas of interest where the two fields differed.
|
Sample/Year |
2011 |
2011 RCG |
Notes |
|
%Moisture |
67.80% |
60.50% |
Calculated out for the rest of the values |
|
CP |
25.4 |
29.7 |
8% adequate for dry ewes, 12-14% for growing lambs, 16% ideal for post-weaning age group |
|
ADF |
21.50% |
21.10% |
Acid Detergent Fiber |
|
NDF |
34.90% |
36.40% |
Neutral Detergent Fiber |
|
RFV |
192 |
185 |
Relative Feed Value 100 = alfalfa in full bloom (late stage, early stage alfalfa is higher) |
|
TDN |
75.6 |
76.1 |
60+ is good, 55 adequate for dry ewes, 70 good for growing lambs, 72-74 for post-weaned lambs |
|
DP |
21.00% |
25.30% |
Digestible protein |
|
DDM |
72.1 |
72.5 |
Digestible dry matter |
|
DMI |
3.4 |
3.3 |
Dry matter intake |
|
DE |
3.33 |
3.35 |
Digestible energy |
|
ME |
2.92 |
2.94 |
Metabolizable energy |
|
NEL |
1.74 |
1.75 |
Net Energy Lactation |
|
NEM |
2.3 |
2.32 |
Net Energy Maintenance |
|
NEG |
1.6 |
1.62 |
Net Energy Gain |
|
Sulfur |
0.37% |
0.42% |
0.1% recommended, 0.4% max; interferes w/ copper, Se, and thiamine absorption |
|
Phosphorous |
0.53% |
0.47% |
0.3% recommended |
|
Potassium (K ) |
3.60% |
3.52% |
0.65% recommended, 3.0% max; hi levels can block magnesium, risking grass tetany. Depresses Ca, Mg and Boron uptake. |
|
Calcium |
0.44% |
0.45% |
.4%+ adequate |
|
Magnesium |
0.27% |
0.26% |
0.1 recommended, 0.4% max. Nutritionist recommends supplementing with this, to offset high K. |
|
Zinc |
37 mg/kg |
56 mg/kg |
10+ adequate; high zinc depresses copper |
|
Manganese |
74mg/kg |
156 mg/kg |
40+ adequate, 1K max |
|
Copper |
11 mg/kg |
10 mg/kg |
7+ adequate, 115 max; 14-20 recommended for sheep w/ high Mo |
|
Iron |
578 mg/kg |
133 mg/kg |
levels above 400 cause copper tie-up; 50 recommended, 1K max; also binds with zinc,potass, & vit E |
|
Molybdenum |
not tested |
not tested |
Ideal below 1, above 3 causes copper tie-up, 6 max. Tested in 2009, was 4ppm. |
|
Ca:Phos Ratio |
0.83 |
0.96 |
1.3:1 – 1.5:1 is ideal, 2:1 or 3:1 may be OK- too high reduces phos absorption, causes bone problems. Urinary calculi from reverse: too much phos. |
|
Cu:Mo Ratio |
2.75 |
2.5 |
Ratio below 4:1 causes copper tie-up (using 2009 value for Mo) |
|
N:S Ratio |
10.98 |
11.31 |
|
|
Ca:Mg Ratio |
1.63 |
1.73 |
Desirable 2:1 |
|
Ca:K Ratio |
0.12 |
0.13 |
Ideal 1:1 |
|
Se |
1.25 mg/kg |
1.39 mg/kg |
<0.1ppm is deficient, >2ppm is toxic. |
Crude Protein
The RCG is higher protein, at a whopping 29.7%. From my notes from the Woody Lane lecture in 2009, here’s how it stacks up with other common feedstuffs:
Relative Feed Value
The Relative Feed Value (RFV) is a little lower, and the Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF) is a little higher than the traditional pasture. RVF is an inverse function of NDF and ADF (Acid Detergent Fiber), an reflects an estimate of both intake and digestibility. Since the NDF tells us the RCG grass is a little more “bulky,” it’ll fill the sheep up a little quicker than the regular grass, and render less calorie intake.
And the other number that plays into this is %moisture. This is calculated on the grass samples when they arrive in the lab, but then it’s equated out of the rest of the values (all the rest of the numbers are calculated as 100% dry matter). The traditional grass sample had more water than the RCG; so even though the RCG has more bulk, it’s probably true that if a sheep eats three pounds of either grass and gets full, it’ll get about the same TDN.
Total Digestible Nutrients
TDN is the main score used to calculate rations, and is awesome on both samples. Well into the range of feed which is good for growing meat lambs.
Minerals
As for minerals, here are what I think are interesting differences in the RCG.
Higher in sulfur
Both pastures are on the high end, and earlier in the year I had additional sulfur in the supplement. I am going to back off on this. Though sulfur tangles with copper and thiamine, this isn’t my main concern.
Lower in phosphorus
Both fields have an imperfect calcium: phosphorous ratio, the phos is too high. It’s less of a problem in the RCG field. I have gone back and forth with mixing in dolomite into their supplement (this is calcium magnesium carbonate); and am returning to it to help bring up the calcium. This is mainly a concern for male sheep, as when this ratio slips (which is exacerbated by grain feeding) it can cause urinary calculi.
Higher in zinc
Yay, this is good, and both fields are plentiful in zinc; though oddly my sheep livers are testing too low in it, still. Zinc is really important for hoof health. I had really high zinc in my supplements all year, so there must be something going wrong with its binding with copper and iron.
Much higher in manganese
Our fields are higher than needed, but not even close to an excessive amount; and the sheep livers test high-normal. So it’s not that interesting in itself, other than to note that it also hinders iron absorption. I am backing off on this in the supplement just due to that. 
Much lower in iron
Both fields are in the ok range for amount of iron, and I was feeding piles if iron in my supplements all year. Yet, my sheep are still too low in iron. I’ve seen a few cases of bottle jaw which I do not think were caused by parasites. So something is awry here. I suspect that the RCG field is telling me that once the sheep drop below a certain level of iron intake, it’s limiting their growth. Since the iron is there, I need to back off on the things that interfere with it: namely copper and manganese.
Higher in selenium
I talked about this in a prior blog post, that I was surprised to find out that we have plenty of selenium, and I was probably bordering on excess given the supplements I was using. So, this could be another area where this field was just tipping the balance a little too much and curtailing growth.
Next Iteration
So there’s my assignment for this year: keep zinc and iron as high as possible, lower copper, manganese, sulfur, and selenium, increase calcium. I believe I can achieve this by mixing the Cattlemen’s supplement with dolomite and one of American Stockman’s mixtures, or Morton’s IOFixt.
March 31, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Wow, that is a whole ton of information to sort through to determine the best course of action. Good luck with that!
All I know from the handful of sheep that we had, they much preferred the field that had the most variety of greenstuff. Dandelions, they loved them. I have video of them specifically choosing dandelions. I just think of the long dandelion tap roots, bringing up minerals that the more shallow rooted plants don’t have access to. Buttercup too, they ate lots of that without adverse effect. Variety was the spice in their life!
March 31, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Great information. I’m in the beginning stages of figures some of my ratios.
Not only do I have sheep but I also have horses and they they are a little on the thin side course that is in my eyes but I like them with a roundness not fat.
The last hay I bought was not good in nutrient, they ate it but I won’t be getting that again. Here it is alfalfa and that keeps everyone looking good. Plus I feed some grains. One thing I’ve noticed is since I’ve been putting out cobalt blocks they head for it daily, the black colors are deepening.
Elayne
March 31, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Elayne, I have had the same problem, wondering what’s in hay I buy. I wish more hay sellers did testing.
March 31, 2012 at 3:38 pm
Wyndsonfarm, indeed, I spend a lot of time staring at spreadsheets… My sheep love the broadleaf plants as well, I always cringe seeing them eat yellow dandelion heads, as I remember from childhood how bitter tasting those are- amazing that they can find them delicious! My sheep will eat buttercup, but they self-limit on it, which is interesting, since it’s supposed to be mildly toxic in excess.
April 1, 2012 at 3:46 am
You really think you have iron deficiency anemia? Really? Kill one of your bottle jawers and cut open the abdomen…..remove the stomach and open it up. Bet it has plenty of itsy bitsy barberpole worms. Don’t chase spread sheet data and grass cut samples to death. NRCS feed and tissue level recommendations are just that; if they aren’t sick and lame don’t sweat a few ppm’s or mg/dl outta range. Avoiding dangerous way out of bounds trends good; wasting valuable grazing time and expansion capability micro managing bad! Your sheep don’t really eat it that way. Some eat mostly grass, some mostly forbs, some an even mix, and there is no way in hell to adjust for it. Graze ‘em right, below the knee, above the ankle and on the same piece for no more than 7 days. If you have lambs on grass and milk that aren’t on grain don’t worry about the phos unless you are actually having problems. All that ammonia from the protein in the grass and the high water content make them pee out enough to not have a problem. If they can’t live and thrive on what you have, cull ‘em! Your self limiting buttercup eaters are a prime example. You wouldn’t want a 100%bc pasture, but you dang sure don’t have all day to hand pull every bc outta the ground. I gotta stop reading about other folks sheep management! Good luck Michelle
April 1, 2012 at 7:22 am
I had my soil tested last year and the guy who tested it looked at my results and asked me if I had saltwater under it. I Manganese and sulfur levels were high, which he associated with salt marsh conditions.
You’re a few miles up the valley, but I think that the tide does affect river levels for miles up the river — maybe at some point it was lower and saltwater is under your field, too.
To bring the field into shape for row crops the reccomended was 3 tons of lime per acre and a little nitrogen. The mucky soil we have in this valley is VERY fertile, and very acidic due to peat bog conditions up and down the valley.
I ended up applying lime at 2 tons per acre on 4 acres, and replanted with a standard wet pasture seed mix – mostly fescue – and figured that the RCG would recolonize by the seed bank present in the soil or ryzomes, which is has, mostly in the wetter areas of the pasture. I’m curious how the sheep will like it this year.
April 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Bruce, I think you’re right, we have similar boggy soil to you. I found a newspaper article about our farm from the late 1800s, describing the homesteading activity along our road. It described a lot of bog in the lowlands; and the farmers were busy carving the valley up into drainage ditches and channels to drain it so they could row crop. To this day, the soil is still jiggle-ey- if something heavy goes across it, or even if someone jumps up and down, you can feel the vibration under your feet 20 feet away.
I’m sure yours is the same, it feels a little like walking on the top of a bowl of Jell-O.
I had a similar recommendation for soil amendment on my fields; I haven’t done it yet. It seems like the soil test people are mostly focused on row crop mentality, of adjusting pH and nitrogen to get maximum green growth. And that’s one thing to manage, though right now we have plenty of grass volume, despite our slightly high acidity. I’m keen on Albrecht’s theories about correcting the mineral balance as well. And just the differences in performance of sheep fed on the two fields has me curious about what’s different between them that could be causing that. I think this has given me more clues to tinker with.
April 1, 2012 at 6:31 pm
PRD, thank you for your positive and kind comments.
Barberpole worm is actually not a key player in our climate, as it is in yours. Liver fluke is the prime suspect for parasite-induced anemia in our region. I do regular FEC monitoring on my sheep, both to assess the worm load of the highest and lowest performers, as well as verify that the de-wormers I use are effective. I follow SCSRPC’s recommendations for parasite management and do MIG most of the year, with the sheep grazing a new section every 2-5 days. Though liver fluke doesn’t always show up in FECs, the few singleton sheep I had that presented bottle jaw had been recently de-wormed.
Though you are absolutely correct that worms are the first consideration in diagnosing the cause of anemia and bottle jaw, they aren’t the only cause. I do lab sampling on the livers from my butcher lambs, and had recent results back indicating I have an excess in cobalt, and a global iron deficiency; both can present bottle jaw. I was using a supplement that had very aggressive amounts of cobalt, so I have corrected for that already.
I agree with you that minor variances away from recommended norms is nothing to be concerned about, especially if there are no problems. But in this case, I am testing because I’m seeing different levels of growth performance and animal condition between the two fields, same flock, same genetics, same management practices otherwise; so I believe that forage analysis can provide important clues about what would explain that disparity. And I believe it has.
I use a mineral mix that is custom-designed for our region, our local Cattlemen’s association works with a nutritionist on it. The mix is very aggressive in several minerals, including selenium; so it’s critically important for me to monitor this, since selenium is very risky in high doses. After doing some lab analysis on the grass and on livers from butcher lambs, I can see that the mix is too high for my system, and I need to change. And, the across-the-board low iron levels in my animals, paired with the fact that they all do more poorly on the pasture which is much lower in iron, and despite good parasite management practices, tells me I probably have a mineral imbalance that needs correction.
I agree with you that genetic selection is important. I use NSIP metrics to choose replacement breeding stock, and poor doers will definitely show up in those numbers. All my sheep come from well-respected breeders and lines, and most are from management systems similar to mine. But, there is also the “right now” aspect- things I can do immediately to improve my flock’s overall performance while I’m also working on long-term gains in genetic selection. We all always feed a mineral supplement, so if I can choose once which is optimal to complement my forage, then everything does better. And, if I’m not monitoring these things and am inadvertently poisoning my stock with too much of a toxic mineral, then all the best genetics in the world won’t help me. So I believe both nutrition management and genetic selection used together give the greatest potential for ideal performance. Plus, I’m an engineer; I just like science and math!
April 2, 2012 at 10:22 pm
Michelle,
If you insist on loving numbers………..lol…..then check your molybdenum levels. As noted above Molybdenum ties up copper and zinc. It is extremely common in mucky organic ground with reed canary grass. I know of molybdenum toxicosis with zinc and copper deficiencies in ground in Great Britian, Indiana, and Michigan. The zinc and copper are adequate in the soil or mineral supplements, but molybdenum loves to tie up many different kinds of metals.I have a vet friend that has tons of experience with it. He has a mucky RCG pasture for his commercial goat flock. Had many of the syptoms you have talked about.
You may be wise to break your RCG pasture into paddocks and shift ‘em in and out. Tank mix their rumen contents from different types of pasture. Won’t cure molybdenum toxicosis, but will help blend forage types and inputs. Level out performance swings. I only graze RCG a max of 3 days, and swing ‘em out to something else.
You may be surprised at variations of molybdenum based on time of year. Your 4 ppm number is enough to cause trouble, may be even higher depending which part of plant is tested. If your ewes only eat the leaves and tips of the stalk, that’s what you need to cut for samples. A lot of folks do whole plant cuts. Unfortunately, if you don’t cut what they eat, the analysis doesn’t mean much. If you have a problem in lambs, watch what they eat. If they only eat the newest little leaves, that’s what you need to check. There are often wild differences in leaves versus stalks, new sprouts versus lignified old leaves.
I used to be a professional consultant working with large herds and flocks. I quit because the numbers lie. They lie because we don’t know where and when to get them. And we forget things like water mineralization. Milk is 83-87% water give or take. If you don’t know your water minerals, you only get part of the picture. More important when they lactate and drink more. And of course, really important to performance of nursing offspring who may be getting different levels based on what the mammary gland is pulling out of the blood stream.
Best of luck. If you check just leaf cuts and find high molybdenum let me know. My vet friend would love to consult with your vet about it. He has some products he has worked with to overcome some of the issues. Curious about your water.
April 3, 2012 at 4:36 am
PRD, indeed, we do have high Mo here, I have tested it in the past, but the test costs extra, so now that I know it’s high, I don’t re-test, but rather just work with that in consideration. (And that’s one of those “generally known” things about our region, we have high Mo, and copper deficiency is common here in cattle; though I’m learning to not make too many assumptions about the “generally known” thing, since sometimes even what people have been saying for generations turns out to be wrong.) That is why I supplement with a lot more zinc and copper than most people do. But I think I may have crossed the line to overdoing it, and thus, rendering the iron deficiency I see in liver samples. I was actually focusing on making healthier hooves, which I think I’ve done, but maybe I’ve pushed it too far, and have now introduced some other problems and need to back off.
You may be right that I will need to rotate in and out of RCG, though at least right now, I’m not very well set up for it, so will try to work with what I can. We mow our RCG 1-3 times during summer, because it’s way more than our flock can eat, and it gets too reedy when tall. And definitely the sheep won’t eat the stalks… So I try to only graze them on it when it’s less than knee high, though don’t always succeed in managing it as precisely as I’d wish. It’s a difficult grass to work with, for sure. But it sure produces volume like nothing else.
I’m not as concerned with milk content, since the lambs are only benefiting from that for 60-90 days; and the bulk of their growth is happening after that when they are are just eating grass- I don’t butcher them until they are 6-8 months old. We also have an interesting pasture, we live in a river valley, and there is so much heavy dew, our grass is very, very wet most of the year; so our sheep don’t really drink very much from tanks. So I think the forage is the first place to concentrate for correcting nutrition in areas where I think they are not doing as well as they could. I think I do better than most people, but I also know of some people who get better results from I, with similar genetics- so am always seeking what I can do to improve.
We don’t have any more full time sheep vets here. We have some good nutritionists still at the feed mills, who have graciously helped me a lot with ideas, and I learn from the university vets when I get chances to pick their brains. But a lot of it is just trial and error, constant tinkering… My day job is partly doing Lean Six Sigma, so I guess I just always have that mindset, of identifying the next biggest problem area, the most promising solution, and then experimenting to see if I can shift the bell curve where I want it to go.
Thanks for your thoughts.
April 3, 2012 at 8:29 pm
Michelle,
About your foot health. I had a dairy herd that had seasonal lameness issues. TMR fed confinement herd. Nothing new there. However it was seasonal, it occured in only the heifers, and usually started 60-90 days after they began feeding green chopped RCG as a portion of the tmr. Only group fed this way on the farm. We went through all the hoops with disease, hygiene, normal minerals,effective NDF and energy levels etc. After studying zinc, copper, biotin and other levels to death I discovered the whole high Molybdenum thing. In my research, I turned up data about humans with high Mo levels, primarily vegetarians eating legumes and leafy greens from the same types of mucky organic soils we’d find RCG in, and they had very high levels of gout. Not the typical thing you’d expect in folks that don’t eat nitrate-cured meats .
The heifers were experiencing inflammation at the coronary band, insult lines around the hoof, cracking and separation of the hoof wall as those insult lines grew down to meet the white line juncture of the sole. Classic laminitis, without the high energy grain, low ndf diet associated with it. My belief was some kind of vascular inflammation, as well as inflammation of the laminae caused by the Mo, directly or indirectly. We backed down inclusion rates of RCG to no more than 25% of total dry matter forage basis on a second group and saw a pretty amazing turn around starting about 30-45 days after reduction versus the control group. It might not just be copper and zinc tie up, but some kind of vascular inflammation from the Cobalt, it’s metabolites, precipitates, etc that has caused some of your issues. As you could imagine, the dairyman wouldn’t let me kill a couple of animals from each group to compare tissue samples.
My haven’t we gotten windy over a little reed canary grass.
Cheers,
Patrick
April 4, 2012 at 12:01 am
Patrick, yes, yes, yes! That is what I see, though it happens on my non-RCG field as well. Of course everyone wants to tell me it’s “just hoof rot” caused by our mud and damp in winter. But I find what I have doesn’t follow any of the rules-it’s worst in summer when the pasture is dry and clean and the grass is in full swing, goes away 100% in winter when it’s muddy and wet, and when they are on a modest hay diet. And though on occasion I do see/smell true hoof rot, other times the foot looks perfect on the outside, but the animal acts like it’s walking on razor blades, so it’s some kind of internal inflammation. Or, there’s no hoof rot smell, but the hoof wall just comes completely unglued.
Tweaking the minerals seems to have reduced the incidence to a very small percentage, and the severity in those is lowered; but maybe now I’ve introduced some new problems.
One nutritionist I talked to thought that the high protein grass was partly to blame- he said that it makes them tend to lay down hoof material very fast, with big, fat cells that don’t bind well to each other, so they are vulnerable to weakness and de-lamination.
So, that’s where I started, was wondering if I could improve feet with diet, and now I’m down this path of tinkering. Though of course it’s good to also cull for hoof problems. But since I see sheep go from spongy stumps in summer to rock-hard, perfect feet in winter and striding around with all the comfort in the world, I hate to cull only to find out it may just be the grass…
April 4, 2012 at 1:48 am
May have to find a breed of sheep originating from high Mo areas of Britian. That is why so many of certain breeds die so easily from Cu toxicity. High Mo in their native pastures always kept the Cu tied up, and the sheep that couldn’t hack the low tissue Cu levels croaked. And the sheep that could live croak on a high(mostly normal) Cu level. Find breeds from the peat bog regions of GB that haven’t been “improved” to damn much here.
In the end, you got the grass you got! Find something that can eat it. Maybe you oughta grass feed a few thousand head of geese a year and dump the sheep. Or maybe drag a bunch of down timber out there and enspore and harvest high end fungus. Maybe seed some low cost industrial diamonds in the bend of the river and host weekend “diamond camps”. Anything but more sheep! I know, you’re hopeless.
April 4, 2012 at 1:58 am
Texels have the highest copper toxicity of any breed. Bred from mucky lowlands in the Netherlands. Probably a good fit. Most of the “down” breeds also have relatively high copper toxicity occurance. They are also the least likely to have their feet blow off from inflammation when on high grain finishing diets. Too bad I don’t wanna be a researcher when I grow up. I think I’m onto something.
April 4, 2012 at 2:19 am
I promise to quit. Sorry to be a comment hog.
Eureka!
Mo is an essential component in xanthine oxidase, a common enzyme. Guess what it breaks down. Purine. Guess where purine is high in concentration. Animal muscle tissue. Guess what xanthine oxidase forms when it breaks down purine. Uric fricking acid. Mo is also part of several enzymes that break down aldehyde groups, as well as sulfite oxidase, which breaks down sulfur containing amino acids groups, like young muscle tissue.
Let me know if you can get a few texel feeder lambs and throw out on RCG versus a contemporary group of similar size & weight lambs of your current flock. I wonder if they develped a different ratio of enzymes, or a way to flush ‘em out or lock ‘em up in organs or tissues to keep them from playing hell with vascular and muscle tissue when on that kind of diet/land.
April 4, 2012 at 2:42 am
Haha, we’ll see, I actually had really good growth when I started, but bad feet. So maybe it’s still possible to balance out both, improve the feet and keep the growth.
I don’t want wool sheep, they are hard to manage here in large numbers in a pasture operation. Katahdins are not that improved compared to many American breeds. I have thought about experimenting with a Texel as a terminal sire.