Title: comparison of artificially flavored concentrate feeds with plain concentrates for young dairy calves
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00091691/00001
 Material Information
Title: comparison of artificially flavored concentrate feeds with plain concentrates for young dairy calves
Physical Description: Book
Creator: Wing, J. M.
Publisher: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station,
Copyright Date: 1962
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00091691
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: 312478355 - OCLC

Full Text


FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
Gainesville, Florida


Dairy Science Mimeo Report 62-2
January 10, 1962


A Comparison of Artificially Flavored Concentrate Feeds
With Plain Concentrates for Young Dairy Calves1"

J. M. Wing2.


Artificial flavors have been used in the feed of animals with varying
degrees of success for many years. Anything which stimulates young calves
to consume solid feeds would seem to be desirable because a quick transition
from milk or milk replacement formulas to solid feeds is economical. It
appears also that calves with good appetites for hay and concentrate feeds
are less subject to digestive disturbances.

Molasses has been used as a flavoring material for animal feeds, and
calves prefer concentrates containing molasses as compared to plain feeds.
Anise oil was used for many years in calf feeds but it is no longer included.
Recent controlled experiments showed that addition of anise oil significantly
decreased the acceptability of feeds to young calves.

Solutions containing sugar have been offered to young calves and the
animals appeared to relish them. Coating concentrate feeds with sugar
appeared to increase palatability in recent studies with young calves. The
present study involved the use of a complex flavoring material which had a
very noticeable pleasant odor. The flavor mixture contained sodium saccharin
and sodium cyclamate, ethyl lactate and other esters, vanillin and other
aldehydes, citric acid and other organic acids, gamma nonyl lactone, diacetyl,
vegetable gum and sugar.

The first phase of the work involved a group of 10 new-born calves. The
purpose was to determine whether young calves would select more of a flavored
or plain feed when given the choice of the two. A series of feeding trials
was conducted to determine the possible desirability of adding flavor com-
pounds to the concentrate feed offered to young calves. Two feeds were
prepared, one of which contained flavor additives while the other was plain.
These were placed in separate containers on opposite sides of the pens with
each equally accessible to the calves. The order of the containers was
changed periodically so that consumption would be affected by voluntary choice
rather than convenience or accessibility. The calves were housed in individ-
ual pens. Feeds were weighed in daily and refusals recorded.

During the first 30 days the calves consumed 159 lbs. of plain feed
compared to 184.4 lbs. of flavored concentrates. During the second
of 30 days, 301.1 Ibs. of plain feed were consumed. This compa t
370.4 Ibs. of the flavored feed. During the next period of 30 q the pl


1. This study was supported in part, and flavoring materials
the Flavor Corporation of America, Chicago, Illinois.
2. ate Dairy Husbandman
Associate Dairy Husbandman








and flavored feeds consumed were, respectively, 760.8 and 893.4 Ibs. These
differences (shown in Table 1) were significant statistically at a level
P < 0.025. While this phase of the study indicated the preference of
individual calves for the concentrate feed in which flavors were added, it
did not imply that greater concentrate consumption would occur by calves fed
the flavored concentrates compared to calves offered the concentrates without
flavoring additives. Thus additional work appeared to be desirable.

The second phase of the experiment involved two groups of calves, one of
which received plain feeds and the other flavored feeds. Each group of
calves included Jerseys, Guernseys and Holsteins. The treatment groups were
balanced with respect to breed, sex, initial weight and height at withers.
All the calves were removed from their mothers as soon as possible after they
were born. They were confined to individual pens which were located inside
a concrete block barn. Each pen was bedded with a byproduct of the cane
sugar industry which was very absorptive of moisture and all pens were cleaned
thoroughly once each day. All animals were inspected carefully three times
daily for evidence of abnormalities, particularly of digestive disturbances.
All the feeds used during the period of 90 days were.mixed at the beginning
of the experiment using a freshly prepared flavoring mixture and newly
processed feed ingredients.

Concentrate feeds and chopped grass hay were supplied free-choice through-
out the experimental period. The concentrate feed contained 300 parts by
weight of ground snapped corn, 200 dried citrus pulp, 125 ground oats, 50
wheat bran, 100 soybean oil meal, 7 common salt and 14 parts of steamed bone-
meal. In addition, the experimental feed contained 1 lb. per ton of the same
type flavoring materials used in phase one.

The milk feeding schedule included colostrum from birth through 4 days of
age, a mixture of one-half colostrum and one-half reconstituted skimmilk
containing 1 lb. of air-dried solids per gallon from 5 days through 21 days,
and skimmilk alone from the 22nd through 60th day of age. During the last
30 days of the experiment, from 61st through 90th day, all animals subsisted
on hay and concentrate feeds only. The results of phase two are shown in
Table 2.

All calves in both groups were healthy and no abnormalities were noticeable
throughout the experiment. No differences which could be considered signifi-
cant occurred in the tendency of young animals to consume either type of
concentrate feed or hay. The gains in body weight and in height at withers
were highly satisfactory in both groups.

The results of the second trial appear to cast considerable doubt upon the
feasibility of using added flavoring materials in the feed of young calves;
yet the results of phase one show that calves at least prefer feeds with
added flavor. The final decision must be an individual one based on the type
of feeds available and the cost of possible flavor additives.






TABLE 1
Selection of plain versus flavored concentrate feeds by young
calves which could choose at random
Days on experiment
0-30 31-60 61-90
Calf . .. ...
No. Plain Flavored Plain Flavored Plain Flavored
lb. lb. lb. lb. lb. lb.
1 4.6 4.1 19.1 28.1 45.8 74.2
2 14.8 17.7 18.3 26.8 46,6 66.4
3 13.6 17.5 27.3 36.7 65.9 98.6
4 23.2 16.3 29.6 25.5 41.1 37.6
5 9.8 11.9 14.3 13.9 23.3 17.8
6 7.3 10.0 24.9 28.1 60.3 62.7
7 1.4 2.5 19.0 21.9 49.8 62.4
8 17.8 21.0 47.5 51.9 113.7 121.7
9 30,1 40.5 36.3 64.7 127.3 163.2
10 36.4 42.9 64.8 72.8 187.0 188.8
Total 159.0 184.4 301.1 370.4 760.8 893.4

TABLE 2
Performance of young calves on plain versus artificially flavored feeds
Calf Int. Int.
No. Colostrum 1/2+1/2 Skimmilk Concentrate Hay Wt. Gain Ht. Gain
lb. lb. lb. lb. lb. Ib. lb. cm. cm
FLAVOR
JB9B 23.0 80.9 272.0 46.8 66.8 52.0 75.0 67.0 12.5
0500 30.6 98.4 357.4 103.7 33.2 68.0 79.0 75.0 12,0
JB51B 24.0 85.2 321.7 148.3 24.6 54.0 80.0 66.0 15.0
G487B 33.0 118.8 345.0 123.6 19.7 73.0 72.0 75.5 11.5
H68B 41.0 149.2 486.5 94.1 10.1 92.0 143.0 76.5 14.0
JB12 25.0 85.8 268.1 87.5 25.8 56.0 62.0 69.5 12.5
H76 36.0 135.3 475.6 160.9 35.0 80.0 121.0 75.0 17.0
H65B 22.0 80.6 266.2 123.4 15.2 50.0 110.0 69.0 14.0
Total 234.6 834.2 2792.5 888.3 230.4 525.0 742.0 573.5 108.5
Ave. 29.3 104.3 349.1 111.0 28.8 65.6 92.8 71.7 13.6
PLAIN
G501 29.4 97.8 326.2 50.0 41.6 67.0 59.0 71.0 11.0
JB16B 23.0 83.0 265.6 51.9 24.3 51.0 35.0 66.4 9.1
JB14B 24.0 81.2 324.1 116.7 16.8 54.0 70.0 66.5 16.0
G482B 26.4 119.6 349.3 153.6 11.6 74.0 118.0 74.5 14.0
H84 22.6 114.4 437.3 246.8 35.5 85.0 145.0 72.5 18.0
H69B 42.0 107.2 555.2 252.0 33.2 93.0 152.0 77.0 15.5
JBO1 24.0 83.6 265.8 56.9 33.8 53.0 55.0 67.5 15.0
H66B 24.0 95.6 337.2 121.0 24.4 57.0 114.0 70.0 12.5
Total 215.4 782.4 2860.7 1048.9 221.2 534.0 748.0 565.6 111.1
Ave. 26.9 97.8 357.6 131.1 27.7 66.8 93.5 70.7 13.9
!' ~ ~ ~-'" ,




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