This study indicated that the bite-count and fecal analysis methods give similar results for estimating major components of cattle diets in Texas. The bite-count method could not be used on large, brush-infested pastures with rough terrain; however, the fecal analysis method was easily used under such conditions. Other advantages of fecal analyses were: samples were collected with a minimum of field work, diets of wild and domestic animals could be obtained, and bad weather and poor field conditions were not problems. Major disadvantages of the fecal analysis technique were: forages with dense stellate trichomes were overestimated; mesquite beans were retained in the digestive tract for abnormally long periods; the laboratory phase required a trained technician; and the work was tedious. This material was digitized as part of a cooperative project between the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. The Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information. Migrated from OJS platform August 2020
Scholarly peer-reviewed articles published by the Society for Range Management. Access articles on a rolling-window basis from vol. 1, 1948 up to 5 years from the current year. Formerly Journal of Range Management (JRM). More recent content is available by subscription from SRM.