03005naa a2200361 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001910000190006024501310007926000090021030000080021952020420022765000130226965000210228265000120230365000110231565000220232665000220234865000120237065000160238265300110239865300100240965300130241965300200243265300220245265300100247465300200248470000200250470000160252470000170254070000200255777300660257714004832022-12-06       1999    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d1 aCARDOSE, E. C.  aMineral status of buffaloes and cattle grazing Brachiaria humidicola pastures in Marajo Island, Brazil.h[electronic resource]  c1999  cil.  aSixteen crossbred cattle (Bos indicus) and 16 crossbred buffalo (Bubalus bubalis Linn.) were assigned equally to one of two treatrnents (TI or TI) : treatrnent 1 animais (cattle or buffalo) received mineral supplementation and T2 animaIs (cattle or buffalo) received no mineral supplementation. Mineral status was evaluated and the effect of mineral supplementation on animal perforrnance and mineral concentration in bone and liver was deterrnined. Eight four hectare paddocks of Brachiaria humidicola pastures were utilized by two replication treatrnents of foui animais each. Grass samples were col!ected and animal mineral supplement consumption was deterrnined each 28 days. Bone and liver were col!ected at the end of dry season and at the end of the rainy season. Calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) were deterrnined in grass and in animal bone tissue. Copper (Cu), Cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe) and zinc (Zn) were deterrnined in grass and in liver tissue. B. humidicola had P, Cu and Zn nutritional limitations for both grazing buffaloes and cattle. In both animal species, mineral supplementation increases the Ca : P ratio and ash concentration in bone and the Cu content in Iiver. Cattle and buffalo consumed more mineral supplement in the dry season than in the rainy season. Buffalo mineral consumption was lower than cattle, particularly at the beginning of the experiment. Animal Iiveweight gain was higher in the rainy season than in the dry season, and it was higher in buffalo than cattle at the end of the dry season and in the middle ofthe rainy season. Although not significant (P&gt0.05), mineral supplementation appeared to increase weight gains in both bufTalo and cattle. Although mineral supplement consumption differs between cattle and buffalo, it is dependent on a number offactors inc1uding season and nutritional quality ofthe forage. Buffalo Iivestock production at Majaró Island could be more suited for cattle, but more research is needed in mineral nutrition for this species in tropical regions.  aAmazonia  aanimal nutrition  agrazing  aBovino  aNutrição Animal  aNutriente Mineral  aPastejo  aPerformance  aBrasil  aBront  aBubalino  aIlha de Marajó  aMineral nutrients  aPará  aWater buffaloes1 aMcDOWELL, L. R.1 aVALE, W. G.1 aVEIGA, J. B.1 aSIMÃO NETO, M.  tInternational Journal of Animal Sciencegv. 14, p. 1-7, 1999.