Comparative Value of Alfalfa Pasture, Alfalfa Greenchop,
or Alfalfa Hay for Lactating Dairy Cows ''~
D. A. STILES, E. E. BARTLEY, G. L. KILGORE, F. W. BOREN, and H. B. PERRY
Southeast Kansas Branch Station, Mound Valley, and
Department of Dairy and Poultry Science, Kansas State University
Abstract
Thirty Holstein cows, distributed among
three groups of 10 each, were assigned
randomly to treatments of alfalfa hay,
alfalfa pasture, or alfalfa greenchop. A
grain ration was offered at 1 kg p e r 3.5 kg
milk. To prevent bloat, cows pastured on
alfalfa or fed alfalfa greenehop received
20 g poloxalene daily. The first nine weeks,
cows grazing on alfalfa pasture produced
significantly more milk (2.5 kg p e r cow
p e r day) than those fed hay but not sig-
nificantly more (1.4 kg) than those fed
greenchop. Cows fed greenehop did not
produce significantly more milk (1.1 kg)
than those fed hay. The three groups
showed no significant differences in fat
and solids-not-fat content of the milk or
in body weight. Cows fed poloxalene did
not bloat.
Introduction
Previously we (14) demonstrated that cows
produce significantly more milk when they are
pastured on alfalfa than when fed alfalfa hay
or pastured on bromegrass. Also, Holstein
steers and heifers on alfalfa pasture gained
significantly more in height and weight than
those fed alfalfa hay or greenchop (12).
This study presents additional information
on the value of alfalfa pasture for lactating
cows, especially the relative value of alfalfa
pasture and alfalfa greenchop. Previously it
has been difficult to assess the full potential
of legume pastures for lactating cows because
of the tendency of the cows to bloat. Several
workers have compared pasture containing mix-
tures of grasses and legumes with stored feed.
Generally milk production has been greater on
pasture mixtures than on stored feed (5, 7, 11).
Received for publication April 8, 1970.
1 Contribution 20, Southeast Kansas Branch
Station, Mound Valley, and no. 787, Kansas Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, Manhattan.
2Supported in part by a grant from Smith
Kline and French Laboratories, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
65
Manhattan 66502
Porter and Skaggs (12), in a system of con-
trolled grazing to control bloat, found no sig-
nificant differences in milk yield among a l f a l f a
pasture, greenchop, or silage. Pasturing o f
alfalfa was the most economical method. Poloxo
alene, established (2, 3, 7, 13) as an effective
bloat-preventive agent, was used to p r e v e n t
bloat among cows on alfalfa pasture or a l f a l f a
greenchop.
Experimental Procedure
Thirty Holstein cows were distributed among
three groups, each as similar as possible in milk
production, stage of lactation, milk composition,
age, and body weight. During 14 days prelimi-
nary all cows were held in drylot and fed,
ad libitum, alfalfa hay and a grain ration con-
taining 12% crude protein (as fed). The ra-
tion consisted of 42.75% ground corn, 42.75%
ground sorghum grain, 7.5% soybean meal,
5% molasses, 1% salt, and 1% dicaleium phos-
phate. The alfalfa hay (third cutting) was of
excellent quality.
Following the preliminary period, groups
were assigned randomly to one of these treat-
ments: a) alfalfa (Medicago sativa) pasture,
b) alfalfa greenchop, and c) alfalfa hay.
During preliminary and experimental periods
grain was fed twice daily before each milking
at 1 kg for 3.5 kg milk. Each cow on alfalfa
pasture or greenchop was fed 38 g Bloat Guard 3
containing 20 g poloxalene daily in her grain
ration. H a l f the Bloat Guard was fed before
each milking. All cows received dicalcium
phosphate and salt free choice. A l f a l f a hay a n d
fresh-cut alfalfa greenehop (cut twice daily)
were fed ad libitum. The hay and greenchop
were from the same field, but the hay was har-
vested in the year previous to the year of this
experiment.
Pasture consisted of a series of four plots
averaging 2.025 ha each. Cows were moved
from one plot to the next as each pasture was
grazed down, in this rotation scheme: 1, 2, 4, 3,
1, 2, 4, 3. A f t e r cows were moved from a plot,
3 Trade name of Smith Kline and French Labo-
ratories' product containing 53~'o poloxalene.
 66 STILES ET AL.

it was mowed and the hay harvested. Pastures
were fertilized February 1968; soil additives
were similar in kind and quantity to those
reported previously (14). Average distance
traveled to and from pastures each d a y ' w a s
2,865 m. No shade was available for any group.
Fresh water always was available in drylot and
within 91 m for those on pasture. Forage dry-
matter intake of cows on pasture was measured
by the cage method described by Hodgson et al.
(9). Five wire cages (1.0 by 1.0 m and 0.6 m
high) were placed randomly on each hectare.
The pasture under the cages was clipped to a
height representative of what remained in the
pasture after grazing. The cows were pastured
May 2 to July 3, 1968.
H a y and grain fed and refused were recorded.
Proximate composition of pasture, greenehop,
(representative samples taken from the pasture
harvested under the cages) hay, and grain fed
was determined by AOAC methods (1). Indi-
vidual milk weights were recorded at each milk-
ing. Individual 24-hour composite milk samples
were collected at intervals shown in Table 1.
Samples were analyzed for fat by methods
outlined i n AOAC (1) and for solids-not-fat
( S N F ) by the Golding bead method (8). All
cows were weighed at 7, 21, 35, 49, 56, and

TABLE 1. Mean daily milk yield and milk composition of 30 cows (10 per group) pastured on
alfalfa or fed alfalfa greenchop or hay.
Group Weeks Milk Milk fat Solids-not-fat
(kg) (%) (kg) (%) (kg)
Pasture Basal 24.7 3.4 0.84 8.4 2.07
1 24.5 3.3 0.80 8.4 2.04
2 25.3 0.81 2.05
3 26.2 3.2 0.84 8.1 2.13
4 25.8 0.80 2.07
5 23.8 3.1 0.74 8.1 1.91
6 22.6 0.53 1.82
7 23.9 2.4 0.56 8.0 1.93
8 24.4 2.8 0.65 8.4 2.04
9 24.4 3.1 0.74 8.3 2.01
Mean 24.5a 2.9a 0.72a 8.2a 2.00a

Greenchop Basal 24.6 3.5 0.86 8.4 2.05

1 23.7 3.2 0.75 8.3 1.95
2 23.9 0.70 1.96
3 24.9 3.0 0.73 8.2 2.05
4 23.4 0.68 1.91
5 22.3 3.0 0.65 8.1 1.82
6 23.3 0.75 2.03
7 23.3 3.3 0.76 8.7 2.04
8 22.7 3.0 0.66 8.2 1.86
9 21.8 3.5 0.74 8.3 1.81
Mean 23.3ab 3.2a 0.71a 8.3a 1.94a

Hay Basal 24.6 3.4 0.84 8.4 2.07

1 23.5 3.1 0.72 8.4 1.93
2 23.0 0.81 1.85
3 22.5 3.5 0.79 8.1 1.83
4 22.5 0.74 1.84
5 21.5 3.3 0.71 8.1 1.76
6 20.9 0.60 1.77
7 21.7 2.9 0.62 8.0 1.84
8 22.3 3.2 0.71 8.4 1.86
9 21.3 3.5 0.74 8.3 1.79
Mean 22.1b 3.3a 0.72a 8.2a 1.83a
a,b Values in a column sharing a common letter are not significantly different (P ~ .05).
~OURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE VOL. 54, NO. 1
 ALFALFA-PASTURE, GREENCHOP OR HAY
TABLE 2. Mean daily grain and forage dry matter consumption p e r ~ w and mean body weight.
Forage
dry
Treatment Grain matter 7 21
.... (kg)--
Pasture 5.9a 13.6a 550b
Greenchop 5.4a 13.6a 576e
Hay 6.3a 14.7a 560a
a,b,c Values in a column sharing a common letter are not significantly different (P ( . 0 5 ) .
63 days (Table 2). Weather data were obtained
from the official U.S. Weather Station at the
Southeast Kansas Branch Experiment Station.
Results and Discussion
Weekly milk production and composition
were adjusted to a common prestudy produc-
tion average by covariance (Table 1). The first
nine weeks cows on alfalfa pasture produced
more ( P <: .05) milk than did those fed alfalfa
hay but not significantly more than cattle fed
alfalfa greenchop. Cows fed greenchop did not
produce significantly more milk than did those
fed hay.
The mean fat content of the milk from the
three groups was not significantly different.
During six of the first nine weeks, cows receiv-
ing hay produced milk of higher (P ( . 0 5 )
fat content than did those on pasture. During
Weeks 2 and 3 cows fed hay produced a higher
(P <: .05) fat-content milk than did those fed
greenchop.
The mean milk fat production for the three
groups was not significantly different. That was
expected in that milk fat content was slightly
lower but milk production higher for the cows
on pasture.
Solids-not-fat content of milk from the three
groups was not significantly different indicat-
ing that solids production was related to milk
production. The pasture group which produced
the most milk also produced the most S N F ;
the greenchop group produced the next most,
and the hay group produced the least quantity
of SNF. Difference in mean S N F production
was not significant.
There were no significant differences in grain
consumption among the three groups (Table 2).
Although grain was fed according to milk pro-
duction, grain intake was not related to milk
production because cows fed pasture or green-
chop refused portions of their grain during
periods of high-forage intake; cows fed hay
ate all the grain offered. Forage dry matter
intake was the same for the pasture- and
67
Body weight
Days
35 49 56 63
(kg)
549b 548b 561a 556a 551a
567a 559ab 567a 565a 561a
572a 565a 564a 555a 571a
greenehop-fed cows (Table 2). H a y - f e d cows
consumed more forage dry matter than did
either of the other groups, but the difference
was not statistically significant.
Hay-fed cows gained slightly in weight dur-
ing the trial (Table 2) ; pasture-fed cows main-
tained their weight; those fed greenchop lost
slightly. Weight differences were significant
only during the early weeks of the trial.
I n 1967 at this station (14) cows pastured
on alfalfa produced significantly more milk,
fat, and solids-not-fat than did those fed al-
falfa hay. I n this study (1968) pastured cows
also produced significantly more milk than did
those fed hay. The increase in milk production
(2.5 kg per cow p e r day) for pastured cows
over hay-fed cows in 1968 was similar to the
increase (2.4 kg) in the 1967 study. I n the
:i967 study alfalfa pasture was better and
alfalfa hay poorer than in 1968. The proximate
composition of the feeds in 1968 is in Table 3;
composition of those in 1967 appears in the
p a p e r by Stiles et al. (14). I n 1967 the aver-
age crude protein content of both pasture and
hay was 22%; crude fiber of pasture was 28%
and of hay, 25%. I n 1968 the average crude
protein content of pasture and hay was 18 and
23%; crude fiber was 24% for pasture and
21% for hay. Weather accounted for the dif-
ference in quality between the two years. I n
1968 rainfall was lower and average tempera-
ture higher (Table 4) than in 1967. Undoubt-
edly the poorer quality of pasture in 1968
accounted for the lower forage dry-matter in-
take in 1968 compared with 1967. Even so, the
milk stimulus from the pasture was similar for
the two years causing us to speculate on what
portion of the stimulus resulted from improved
nutrition and what from such factors as estro-
genic substances in alfalfa pasture (5).
Cows fed alfalfa greenchop did not produce
as well as pasture-fed cows but better than
those fed hay. Slightly lower in protein and
considerably higher in fiber content than the
hay, greenchop appeared to have a better proxi-
~OUI~I~AL OF DAIRY SCIENCE VOL. 54, NO. 1
68 S T I L E S E T AL.

TABLE 3. Proximate composition of feeds.

Dry basis
Crude Ether Crude N-free
Feed Weeks protein Ash extract fiber extract
(%)
A l f a l f a pasture
1 16.2 7.1 2.2 34.9 39.6
2 16.2 7.1 2.2 34.9 39.6
3 15.8 7.0 2.0 37.2 38.1
4 23.2 9.5 2.3 28.5 36.6
5 20.7 8.6 2.3 32.2 36.3
6 21.1 10.1 2.3 29.2 37.3
7 16.6 7.4 2.2 37.4 36.4
8 18.4 8.0 2.2 34.5 37.0
9 15.8 7.1 2.4 35.8 38.9
Mean i8.2 7.9 2.2 33.8 37.8
A l f a l f a greenchop
1 23.4 10.0 4.0 24.3 38.4
2 20.7 9.8 1.7 36.5 31.3
3 20.0 9.9 2.4 36.2 31.5
4 20.] 9.7 2.0 37.5 29.8
5 22.1 9.2 1.2 32.0 35.7
6 20.7 8.8 1.4 27.4 41.7
7 18.2 7.7 1.2 29.9 43.0
8 20.9 8.0 3.9 26.0 41.2
9 23.2 8.5 2.9 24.8 40.7
Mean 21.0 9.1 2.4 30.5 37.0

Alfalfa hay 22.7 10.0 1.8 20.9 44.6

Grain ration 14.3 4.0 2.9 3.0 75.8

mate composition than did pasture. Cows on half to two-thirds of the alfalfa plant and may
alfalfa pasture selectively grazed the top one- have received better forage than indicated by
the analysis (Table 3) of the p l a n t harvested
TA~.~ 4. Weekly temperature and rainfall from the cages. Greenchop-fed cows may have
(1968). received more of the fibrous stem than did pas-
tured cows. That could partially explain pro-
Temperature duction difference between those two groups.
Weekly
Weeks Maximum Minimum rainfall H a y in this trial was harvested the previous
year. However, hay harvested on similar land
(c) (c) (em) to that used for pasture and greenchop pro-
1 26 12 1.07 vided two cuttings during experiment. The
2 24 14 3.48 first cutting yielded 3.36 metric tons p e r hectare
3 22 10 ...... and the second 1.12 metric tons or a total yield
4 22 11 10.16 of 4.48 metric tons hay dry matter. Total hay
5 28 18 0.38 fed during the experiment was 10.64 metric
6 32 20 ...... tons (9.25 tons consumed, 1.39 tons refused).
7 31 18 2.01 To provide 10.64 tons would require 2.37 ha
8 33 20 2.49 (10.64 tons -- 4.48 tons p e r hectare).
9 29 18 3.89 Cows in the pasture group had access to
Total 8.09 ha of pasture. During the experiment
23.6 metric tons of hay dry matter were har-
JOURNAL O~ ~AIRY SCIEI~CE ~OL. 54, ~O. 1
 A L F A L F A - P A S T U R E , G R E E N C H O P O1~ H A Y
TAB~ 5. Average income over grain-concentrate ration costs for total trial (63 days).
]~¢Iilk Valuea
produced/ of
Treatment cow milk
(kg) ($)
Hay 1,395 169.13
Pasture 1,549 187.78
Greenehop 1,461 177.16
a Milk price, $5.50 per cwt.
b Grain price, $2.50 per cwt.
e Income over grain or grain plus Bloat Guard costs.
vested from the 8.09 ha in addition to the quan-
tity grazed. The cows consumed a total of
8.5 metric tons of pasture dry matter (deter-
mined by cage measurement). Total yield of
the 8.09 ha of pasture was 32.1 metric tons
(23.6 -~ 8.5). Total yield per hectare was
3.97 metric tons (32.1 -- 8.09). Therefore, to
supply the 8.5 tons consumed by the cows,
2.14 ha (8.5 -- 3.97) of pasture would have
been required. The hay produced from these
8.09 ha would probably have been of poorer
quality than hay produced on unpastured land.
Consequently, the 2.14 ha figure ascribed to
pasture is probably low. A total of 2.19 ha of
land was used for the production of greenchop.
I t would appear that the land requirement for
hay, pasture, and greenchop in this study is
similar.
Pasturing cows eliminates harvesting and
feeding costs, utilizes surplus forage in early
spring or late fall, frees dairymen from winter
routines, and relieves cattle from drylot fatigue.
But by ignoring those advantages (to which
it is difficult to assign a monetary value) and
by considering the cost of pasture, greenchop,
or hay equal, it was possible to calculate milk
income over cost of grain plus Bloat Guard
for each form of roughage as in Table 5. Cal-
culated o~ that basis, milk income was highest
for the pasture-fed cows, second highest for
greenchop-fed cows, and lowest for hay-fed
COWS.
I n two successive years, 1967 and 1968, cows
pastured on alfalfa produced significantly more
milk than did those fed excellent-quality alfalfa
hay. Cows fed alfalfa greenehop did not pro-
duce significantly more than those fed alfalfa
hay. The value of greenehop requires further
investigation. Incidence of bloat in cows on
pasture or fed greenchop was nil.
Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assis-
tance of Dr. S. F. Scheidy, veterinary medical
69
Cost
Grainb
consumed/ Bloat Ineome¢/
cow Grain b Guard COW
(kg) ($) ($) ($)
393 21.66 147.47
373 20.56 6.30 160.92
341 18.80 6.30 152.06
director, and Dr. S. M. ~'ree, director of bio~tat-
ics, Smith Kline and French Laboratories, Phila-
delphia, for their assistance.
References
(1) Association of 0ffieial Agricultural Chemists.
1960. Official Methods of Analysis. 9th ed.
Washington, ]D.C.
(2) Bartley, E. E. 1965. Bloat in cattle. VI.
Prevention of legume bleat with a nonionie
surfactant. J. ])airy Sci., 48: I02.
(3) Bartley, E. E., H. Lippke, H. B. Pfost, R. J.
Nijweide, IN-.L. Jacobsen, and R. M. Meyer.
1965. Bloat in cattle. X. E~caey of polox-
alene in controlling alfalfa bloat in dairy
steers and in lactating cows in commercial
dairy herds. J. Dairy Sei., 48: 1657.
(4) Baxter, H. D., J. R. Owen, M. J. Montgom-
ery, D. R. Waldo, and J. T. Miles. 1969.
Pasturing vs. harvesting of a grass-legume
mixture. Tennessee Agr. Exp. Sta., Bull.,
454.
(5) Biekoff, E. M. Oestrogenie constituents of
forage plants. 1968. Review Series No. 1/
1968. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux,
Farnham Royal, Bucks, England.
(6) Bryant, H. T., R. E. Blaser, J. T. Huber,
and R. C. Hammes, Jr. 1965. The value of
combinations of hay and pasture with dif-
ferent levels of concentrate for dairy cows.
Virginia Polytechnic Inst. Agr. Exp. Sta.,
Bull., 564.
(7) Foote, L. E., R. E. Girouard, Jr., J. :E.
Johnston, J. Rainey, P. B. Brown, and
W. H. Willis. 3968. Poloxalene for the
prevention of legume bloat. J. Dairy Sci.,
51 : 584.
(8) Golding, N. S. 1964. Procedure for the
Golding Plastic Bead Test for solids-not-fat
in milk. Washington State Univ. l~.xt. Circ.
340.
(9) Hodgson, R. E., J. C. Knott, V. L. Miller,
and ~. B. Wolberg. 1942. Measuring the
yield of nutrients of e.xperimental pastures.
Washington Agr. Exp. Sta., Bull., 411.
(10) Huffman, C. F. 1959. Summer feeding of
dairy cattle. A review. J. Dairy Sci, 42:
1495.
(11) Porter, R. M., and S. R. Skaggs. 1958. For-
JOUR~A/~ OF DAIRY SCIENCE VOIJ. 54, ~ 0 . 1
70
age and milk yields from alfalfa under
three different harvesting methods. Abstr.
J. Dairy Sci., 41: 736.
(12) Stiles, D. A., E. E. Bartley, A. D. Dayton,
H. B. Perry, G. L. Ki]gore, and 1~. W.
Boren. 1970. Growth of Holstein calves
fed alfalfa pasture, alfalfa greenchop, or
alfalfa hay. J. Dairy Sci., 53: 489.
(13) Stiles, D. A., E. ]~. Bartley, A. B. E r h a r t ,
JOURlCAL OF DAIRY SCIENOZ YOL. 54, N0. 1
STILES ET AL.
1%. M. Meyer, and F. W. Boren. 1967.
Bloat in cattle. X l I I . Efficacy of molasses-
salt blocks containing poloxalene in control
of alfalfa bloat. J. Dairy Sci., 50: 1437.
(14) Stiles, D. A., E. E. Bartley, G. L. Kilgore,
1~. W. Boren, R. L. Ott, and J. G. Clark.
1968. Comparative value of a l f a l f a pasture,
bromegrass pasture or alfalfa hay for lac-
t a t i n g dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 51: 1620.