DOI: 10.23637/rothamsted.991v9
title: Individual animal liveweight and daily liveweight gain, and pasture herbage mass recorded in a dairy x beef grazing study comparing contrasting grazing methods: set-stocked versus cell-grazed on a temperate permanent pasture.

description: This dataset is currently under embargo. If you wish to access the data before the embargo is lifted, please contact jordana.rivero-viera@rothamsted.ac.uk. 

This dataset provides measures of pasture herbage mass (commonly referred as ‘cover’), livestock performance (cattle liveweight and daily liveweight gain) and land productivity (liveweight gained per hectare) from a replicated grazing experiment comparing the effect of set-stocking versus cell grazing, where grazing intensity is higher but animals are moved more regularly. The data are from a 4-year study in the SW of the United Kingdom. Cattle numbers on the 8.25 ha experiment varied by year, ranging from 31 to 53.
description: The TechnoGrazing experiment consisted of two treatments, set stocking and cell grazing, each replicated in three blocks. An image of the site is given in Technograzing_Layout.png. The set stocking treatment had plots of 1.75 ha (except in 2018, when they were 1.5 ha due to the cattle that were grazing being younger and therefore smaller). Cattle had access to the whole area for grazing across the season, unless the average pasture cover was &lt; 2,000 kg DM/ha. Below this threshold, animals were removed from the plots for their welfare, and returned once the available herbage mass and predicted pasture growth allowed. Animals removed from the plots were grazed in the same field, on the buffer areas surrounding the plots.

The cell grazing plots were 1 ha each and rectangular. Each plot was divided into 42 cells, organised in two lanes, which were rotationally grazed. Livestock moved in a circular direction around the cells so that they were always moving onto pasture that had had longest to recover since grazing. Animals were moved regularly, typically after 1-2 days in the cell, according to the current herbage dry matter availability, predicted pasture growth, and estimated dry matter requirements of the livestock. Similar to the set stocking treatment, animals were removed from the experiment if there was insufficient grazing for them. The set stocking treatment is represented by a C in the Plot_ID columns, and the cell grazing treatment by a T.

This dataset covers four years of the TechnoGrazing experiment (2018-2021). In this time, the treatments were grazed by two cohorts of cattle. Each cohort grazed for two seasons, and were over-wintered indoors as a single group on grass silage and concentrates. In spring 2018, 42 autumn-born mixed breed dairy x beef steer calves with Aberdeen Angus, British Blue, Fleckvieh, Hereford, Montbelliarde and Simmental breeds were bought. These were split into 6 equal groups, according to age, liveweight, and balanced for breed (native versus continental). In spring 2020, 52 autumn-born mixed breed dairy x beef steer calves with Fleckvieh and Hereford breeds were bought. In 2020, some additional cattle were added to the cell grazing plots due to the amount of herbage growth; these Stabiliser cattle were a similar age and liveweight to the dairy x beef cattle already grazing the plots. Livestock numbers varied across years according to herbage availability. Due to cattle being bigger in the second year of a cohort, fewer cattle were used in these years (on both treatments) to maintain a similar initial stocking rate as the first year. In total, 41, 38, 53 and 31 cattle were used in 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 respectively. Animals were returned to the same treatment in the second year as they had grazed in the first year, but not necessarily the same replicate. Liveweights of animals were collected approximately monthly during the grazing season, with cattle weighed in livestock handling facilities with an electronic scale. Furthermore, animals were weighed every time prior to them being introduced to or removed from the plots (e.g., when cell grazing stocking rates were adjusted, or when animals were removed from plots due to lack of herbage dry matter availability or adverse weather conditions (i.e., extremely hot, or wet). Blank values in one of the LWt_(date) columns of a Cattle_LWt_(year).csv file indicates that an animal was not on the plot on the date given in the column header. If this was during the grazing year (and the blank values were not because animals had yet to enter the plot for the first time, or had already been taken off for the last time), the preceding and following columns with weights give the removal and replacement dates respectively. On the additional weighing dates, necessitated by animal movement on to or off of the plots, not all animals were weighed. The NA values in the LWt_(date) columns indicate that an animal was not weighed and remained on the plot on this date.

Measurements of livestock weight are given in two formats. The files Cattle_LWt_2018.csv, Cattle_LWt_2019.csv, Cattle_LWt_2020.csv, and Cattle_LWt_2021.csv provide the liveweight measurements in a wide format, where columns headings provide the date on which the measurement was made. In this format, it is simple to see what gaps there are in the data, as not all animals were weighed on every occasion. These files also provide a measure of liveweight gain while on the experimental plots (both as a cumulative total, on a per hectare basis, and the average daily liveweight gain). The file Cattle_LWt_collated provides the daily liveweight gain as the average between two consecutive measurements for the animal. In the data relating to 2018 (both Cattle_LWt_2018.csv and Cattle_LWt_collated), care should be taken when using the cattle weights on 2018-10-15, as in some cases the weights were considerably lower than on 2018-10-04, and this affects the liveweight gain estimation for the grazing season, as given in Cattle_LWt_2018.csv. Users may wish to examine the data and consider whether to exclude the data from this date.

Pasture herbage mass is given in Pasture_DM_herbage_mass.csv. Average herbage mass of each plot was estimated by measuring compressed sward height using a rising plate meter (EC20, Jenquip, New Zealand) approximately weekly during the grazing season. From within the software, the compressed sward height (cm) was averaged across the plot, and converted to herbage dry matter yield (kg DM/ha) using the following equation: kg DM/ha = (compressed sward height (cm) x 125) + 640.

Further experimental details, including soil, pasture and fertilizer details, can be found in the associated manuscript (DOI to be added upon publication).