Group Title: Animal husbandry mimeograph series - University of Florida Department of Animal Husbandry and Nutrition ; 57-4
Title: A comparison of two methods of planting millet for summer swine pastures (drilling vs. 38 inch rows with cultivation) and a study of full feeding concentrates vs. feed restriction on these pastures
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00072862/00001
 Material Information
Title: A comparison of two methods of planting millet for summer swine pastures (drilling vs. 38 inch rows with cultivation) and a study of full feeding concentrates vs. feed restriction on these pastures
Series Title: Animal husbandry mimeograph series
Physical Description: 5 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Wallace, H. D ( Harold Dean )
University of Florida -- Dept. of Animal Husbandry and Nutrition
Publisher: University of Florida, Dept. of Animal Husbandry and Nutrition
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1956
 Subjects
Subject: Millets -- Planting -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Swine -- Feeding and feeds -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: H.D. Wallace ... et al..
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "December 1956."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00072862
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 76950849

Full Text



Animal Husbandry Mimeograph
Series No. 57-4 December 1956


A Comparison of Two Methods of
Planting Millet for Summer Swine Pastures
(Drilling Vs. 38 inch rows with cultivation)
And a Study of Full Feeding Concentrates
Vs. Feed Restriction on These Pastures

H. D. Wallace, G. E. Combs, Jr., A. Z. Palmer and J. W. Carpenter


Millet is a good summer pasture for swine. However, to obtain maximum

returns from a given acreage it is necessary to manage the crop properly. The

very rapid growth of millet necessitates heavy stocking at times and may also

require frequent clipping for optimum production of palatable forage.

This study was undertaken to learn more about the effect of method of

planting on subsequent grazing qualities of millet. A second objective was

to determine the relative merits of full feeding concentrates as compared to

restricting concentrates for growing-fattening swine finished on these pastures.


Experimental Procedure

Four pasture lots each containing approximately one acre were used in

this experiment. The lots were plowed and a good seed bed prepared during

the first week of June. Two lots were seeded by the use of an ordinary grain

drill. The other two were seeded with a corn planter which spaced rows at

Intervals of 38 inches. A 6-6-6 fertilizer was broadcast at the rate of 200

Ibs. per acre on the drilled plots and disced in prior to seeding. For the

rowed plots the rate of fertilization was the same; however, it was delivered

to the rows at the time of planting. All lots were seeded to star mill

June 7 and grazing commenced on June 30. III
JAN 11
I 'IA
Wallace, Associate Animal Husbandman; Combs, Assistant Animal Husba n;
Palmer, Associate Animal Husbandman; Carpenter, Plant Manager of Mea
Laboratory, Department of Animal Husbandry and Nutrition, University & /R;h
Florida, Gainesville, Florida. "A_





-2-


Thirty-six pigs of purebred Duroc and Spotted Poland China and Hampshire

breeding were'divided into four similar experimental groups and managed ac-

cording to the following plan:

Lot I Pasture drilled millet

Concentrates restricted to 3/4 of a full ration by twice per
day hand feeding

Lot 2 Pasture millet in 38" rows

Concentrates restricted to 3/4 of a full ration by twice per
day hand feeding
Lot 3 Pasture drilled millet

Concentrates self fed

Lot 4 Pasture millet in 38" rows

Concentrates self fed

The concentrate mixture fed to all lots is shown in Table I.


Table 1

Concentrate Mixture



Ingredients Percent

Ground yellow corn 80.0

Soybean oilmeal (44%) 20.0

Ground limestone 1.0

Steamed Bonemeal 0.5

Salt-trace minerals 0.5

102.0

Results and Discussion

It was observed soon after the millet came up that the fertilizer was ex-

hibiting a much greater effect on the lots planted in 38 inch rows than on the

drilled millet. The rowed lots grew faster, maintained a darker green color,

and required five clippings during the course of the experiment as compared to









four for the drilled lots. The drilled to+s.were inflitrated early with native

grasses and generally showed a lack of sufficient fertilizer. The rowed lots

were cultivated three times during the experiment and this kept the millet

almost free of undesired plant growth.

Although no measurement of forage production was made it was evident that

the total forage produced was far greater in the rowed plots. Quality of the

forage was also clearly superior. The better utilization of applied fertilizer,

control of native grasses and weeds by periodic cultivation, and less trampling

by the animals while grazing seemed to be the factors responsible for this dif-

ference.

It was apparent that the pigs in the lots where concentrates were restric-

ted consumed greater quantities of forage. This, of course, was to be expected.

Even so, the nine animals in each of the four one-acre lots did little toward

utilizing the total forage produced and frequent clippings, as previously men-

tioned, were necessary.

The carrying capacity of millet, when growing conditions are satisfactory,

is quite high. A conservative estimate of the number of pigs which might have

been finished on an acre of the rowed millet when fed a 3/4 ration of concen-

trates is 40-50. For the drilled lots with similar feeding 30-40 animals pro-

bably could have been finished on an acre. When given a full concentrate ration

10-15 additional pigs could be grazed on an acre.

The performance of the four lots of pigs is summarized in Table 2. The

pigs fed the restricted ration (Lots I and 2) gained at a rate of 1.29 pounds

per day compared to 1.60 pounds per day for the full fed pigs (Lots 3 and 4).

The restricted pigs required approximately the same amount of concentrates per

pound gain as the full fed pigs (3.81 compared to 3.80), thus indicating that

the extra pasture which they consumed did not reduce their requirement for con-

centrates. Approximately two weeks of additional feeding time was required




-4-


Table 2

The Effect of Restricting Concentrates on the
Performance of Pigs Finished on Millet Pastures

Lot I Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4
3/4 of Full Ration 3/4 of Full Ration Av. Full Ration Full Ration Av.
Treatment Millet Drilled Millet Rowed Lots I and 2 Millet Drilled Millet Rowed Lots 3 and 4

No. pigs 9 9 9 9 9 9

Av. initial wt.,Ib. 116.0 115.4 115.7 115.3 118.7 117.0

Av. final wt., lb. 204.3 201.0 202.6 207.4 206.0 206.7

Av. daily gain, Ib. 1.33 1.25 1.29 1.60 1.61 1.60

Daily feed per pig, lb. 4.98 4.94 4.96 5.97 6.23 6.10

Feed per lb. gain, lb. 3.74* 3.87* 3.81* 3.73* 3.87* 3.80*

Av. No. days on test 66.4 68.5 67.5 57.4 53.8 55.6

Carcass measurements:
Backfat, in.I 1.53 1.47 1.50 1.51 1.46 1.49
Carcass length, in.2 29.38 29.25 29.32 29.50 29.06 29.28
Distribution of carcasses
in various grades:
Choice No. I 6 4 5.0 7 5 6.0
Choice No. 2 0 I 0.5 I 1 1.0
Choice No. 3 I I 1.0 0 0 0.0
Medium 2 3 2.5 I 3 2.0

Dressing percentage3 73.99 74.88 74.43 74.83 73.81 74.32
I Average of measurements at first rib, last rib, and last lumbar vertebra
2 Measured from first rib to point of aitch bone
3Chilled carcass, head off, leaf fat in
* In addition to millet pasture









for the limited fed groups to reach market weight. It should be pointed out

too that they were slaughtered at an average final weight of four pounds less

than the full fed groups.

Surprisingly, the restriction of concentrates did not greatly affect car-

cass merit of the animals. The full fed pigs actually had somewhat thinner

average backfat measurements and graded some better on the average than the re-

stricted pigs. The variation in backfat measurement was greater in the restric-

ted lots. Some of the fattest and also thinnest animals were found in the re-

stricted lots. Either this was due to the initial allotment of animals or some

of the pigs were consuming more than their share of the feed allowance. This

could have happened, since the pigs were fed as a group and the feed allowance

was not individually controlled.


Summary

In this study it was observed that the planting of millet in rows (38 inch

intervals), which permitted weed control by periodic cultivation, was a more

satisfactory method of seeding than use of the grain drill. For optimum pro-

duction of good forage it is necessary to stock millet very heavily or clip

it back regularly.

Restricting the consumption of concentrates to approximately 3/4 of a

full ration failed to reduce the total requirement for concentrates and did

not improve the quality of carcasses produced with pigs fed on millet pasture.

The full fed pigs reached market weight two weeks sooner and considerably less

labor was expended in feeding them due to the earlier marketing and the use

of self feeders.




An. Husb.
12/20/56
200 copies




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs