Table 2.
Effect of mineral supplement availability on performance of suckled beef cows for years 1 and 2 of pasture treatments
| Treatment1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item | CON | SUPP | SE | P-value5 |
| Turn out BW, kg | 597.4 | 599.9 | 1.39 | 0.22 |
| Pasture removal BW, kg | 624.6 | 627.1 | 3.35 | 0.61 |
| Cow BW change2, kg | 26.6 | 26.2 | 3.42 | 0.95 |
| Pregnancy rate to AI3, % | 42.6 | 49.8 | 0.03 | 0.51 |
| Overall pregnancy rate4, % | 96.5 | 95.3 | 0.01 | 0.32 |
1Treatments were: CON—cows were grazing pastures with no access to a mineral supplement or SUPP—cows were grazing pastures with access to a mineral supplement.
2Cow BW change is the difference in BW (kg) from pasture turnout to pasture removal (weaning).
3Pregnancy rate to artificial insemination (AI) determined via transrectal ultrasonography at least 40 days following natural service bull removal. Fetuses detected were aged by a trained technician and classified as conceived to AI or natural service.
4Overall pregnancy rates included all detected fetuses via transrectal ultrasonography at least 40 days following natural service bull removal.
5Significance considered at P ≤ 0.05.