NDSU Beef Feedlot - NDSU Agriculture - North Dakota State ...
NDSU Beef Feedlot - NDSU Agriculture - North Dakota State ...
NDSU Beef Feedlot - NDSU Agriculture - North Dakota State ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2009 – Volume 32<br />
2009<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong><br />
Research Report
Introduction to Livestock Research and Education<br />
The <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center is pleased to collaborate with our Agricultural<br />
Experiment Station colleagues in presenting the 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report. This<br />
report represents the latest results and background from beef feedlot research projects from across the<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong>-AES. The research projects reported in Vol.32 build upon the wealth of knowledge that our beef<br />
research faculty have accumulated and reported on over the years.<br />
<strong>Agriculture</strong> in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> is a vibrant industry representing the primary economic sector of our state’s<br />
economy. The sustained significance of agriculture in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> is partially due to the diversity of<br />
agricultural enterprises and the synergies of crop and livestock operations. The number of producers<br />
and enterprises that background or finish beef cattle in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> have increased in recent years.<br />
This trend is welcome and encouraging as many of us see cattle feeding as a sector of our agricultural<br />
economy that has great potential for expansion. The state of <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> is blessed with a multitude<br />
of feedstuffs including the diverse grains, co-products, and forages. Expanded cattle feeding through<br />
background or finishing operations is a good opportunity to add value to these feeds. Ultimately, this<br />
abundance of product will be utilized either here in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> or shipped elsewhere for use by cattle<br />
feeding operations in other states or countries.<br />
It is our hope that the 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report will again prove useful and effective<br />
in assisting the viability of our livestock industry and the broader constituency who supply the feeds<br />
investigated. We wish to thank the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> state legislature, selected commodity groups and the<br />
various grant programs that have empowered our research faculty to address the beef feedlot issues<br />
that we now report upon.<br />
Blaine G. Schatz<br />
Director, <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
Thanks for taking the time to review what <strong>NDSU</strong> has to offer in the way of feedlot research. This report<br />
details the collective efforts of scientists from across the state of <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> and represents the latest<br />
in feedlot research. Our scientists collaborate on projects ranging from nutrition to nutrient<br />
management and do their best to bring you meaningful research which you can use to make profitable,<br />
sustainable decisions in your operation.<br />
Please feel free to provide us with feedback related to ways we can improve the research which we<br />
deliver to you each year. We’d love to hear how we can better serve the beef industry in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
and the region.<br />
Greg Lardy, Ph.D.<br />
Department Head, Animal Sciences<br />
A very special thank you to Myrna Friedt and Stacey Rzaszutak at the Carrington Research Extension<br />
Center for proofreading, organizing, and formatting this publication. The authors appreciate the<br />
excellent animal care, data collection and other support of the many technicians who worked in support<br />
of research presented in this publication.<br />
Page 1 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Contact Information<br />
If you have questions or comments, please e-mail individuals (see addresses below) or call the<br />
Carrington Center at (701) 652-2951. These proceedings are also published at the Carrington<br />
Research Extension Center website at www.ag.nodak.edu/carringt/ under the livestock bullet.<br />
Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
Vern Anderson, Ph.D., P.A.S., Animal Scientist Vern.Anderson@ndsu.edu<br />
Breanne Ilse, Livestock Research Specialist Breanne.Ilse@ndsu.edu<br />
Karl Hoppe, Ph.D., Area Ext. Livestock Specialist Karl.Hoppe@ndsu.edu<br />
Steve Metzger, Farm Business Management S.Metzger@ndsu.edu<br />
Ron Wiederholt, Nutrient Management Research Ron.Wiederholt@ndsu.edu<br />
Chris Augustin, Ext. Nutrient Management Specialist Chris.Augustin@ndsu.edu<br />
Department of Animal Sciences<br />
Greg Lardy, Ph.D., Department Chair Gregory.Lardy@ndsu.edu<br />
Eric Berg, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Meat Science Eric.P.Berg@ndsu.edu<br />
Rob Maddock, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Meat Science Rob.Maddock@ndsu.edu<br />
Kasey Carlin, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Meat Science Kasey.Maddockcarlin@ndsu.edu<br />
Charlie Stoltenow, D.V.M., Ext. Veterinarian Charles.Stoltenow@ndsu.edu<br />
Kim Vonnahme, Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Reprod. Physiology Kimberly.Vonnahme@ndsu.edu<br />
<strong>North</strong>ern Crops Institute<br />
Kim Koch, Ph.D., Manager, Feed Production Center Kim.Koch@ndsu.edu<br />
Hettinger Research Extension Center<br />
Chris Schauer, Ph.D., Director Chris.Schauer@ndsu.edu<br />
Michele Thompson, Asst. Animal Scientist Michele.Thompson@ndsu.edu<br />
Veterinary and Microbiological Sciences Department<br />
Neil Dyer, D.V.M., Director Neil.Dyer@ndsu.edu<br />
Michelle Mostrum, D.V.M, Ph.D., Toxicologist Michelle.Mostrum@ndsu.edu<br />
Cow/calf pairs grazing summer pasture, August 2009.<br />
Page 2 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Acknowledgements<br />
Research, education, and facility development activities conducted at the <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Center are<br />
supported by numerous individuals and organizations. Our heartfelt appreciation is expressed to the<br />
following for their support:<br />
AgInfoLink, Longmont, CO<br />
Ameriflax, Grace City, ND<br />
ADM-Ethanol Division, Walhalla, ND<br />
Barton Meats, Carrington, ND<br />
<strong>Beef</strong> Magazine<br />
Cargill Malt, Spiritwood, ND<br />
Carrington Area Farm Business Management Program, Carrington, ND<br />
Coteau Hills Enterprises, McClusky, ND<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> Dry Bean, Inc., Crary, ND<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Club, Turtle Lake, ND<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong>Land Feeds, Huron, SD<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> Growers Pasta Company, Carrington, ND<br />
FUMPA BioFuels Inc., Redwood Falls, MN<br />
G and R Grain and Feed, Inc., New Rockford, ND<br />
Haybuster Equipment, Inc., Jamestown, ND<br />
Igenity, Inc., Bismarck, ND<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Barley Council<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> Commission<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Corn Utilization Council<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Department of <strong>Agriculture</strong><br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Department of Commerce<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Natural <strong>Beef</strong>, LLC<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Oilseed Council<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Rural Electric Cooperatives, Bismarck, ND<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> Board of Agricultural Research and Education<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> University<br />
Department of Animal Sciences<br />
Hettinger Research Extension Center<br />
Veterinary and Microbiological Sciences Department<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s Association Feeder Council, Bismarck, ND<br />
<strong>North</strong>ern Crops Institute, Fargo, ND<br />
<strong>North</strong>ern Pulse Growers Association, Bismarck, ND<br />
R & B Manufacturing, Steele, ND<br />
Ralco Nutrition, Inc., Marshal, MN<br />
Sartec, Inc., Anoka, MN<br />
Schering Plough Inc., Kenilworth, NJ<br />
Tim Olson, CATL Resource PC, Sturgis, SD<br />
Tyson Fresh Meats, <strong>Dakota</strong> Dunes, SD<br />
United <strong>State</strong>s Department of <strong>Agriculture</strong><br />
National Research Initiative – Equipment Grants Program<br />
Cool Season Food Legume Program<br />
Westway Products, Inc., Mapleton, ND<br />
Trade names and companies used are for clear communication. No endorsement is intended, nor criticism<br />
implied, of products mentioned or not mentioned.<br />
Page 3 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table of Contents<br />
<strong>Feedlot</strong> Schools Are Educational Opportunity for New or Experienced <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Cattle Feeders .... 5<br />
Observations on the Palatability of an Inorganic Salt Product for Mitigation of High Sulfur Levels in<br />
<strong>Feedlot</strong> Diets .................................................................................................................................... 7<br />
Influence of Thiamin Supplementation on Hydrogen Sulfide Gas Concentrations in Ruminants Fed<br />
High-Sulfur Diets ............................................................................................................................ 11<br />
An Evaluation of a Mixed Co-product Protein Feed in Finishing Rations .............................................. 15<br />
Effects of Dried Distillers Grains With Solubles on Growing and Finishing Steer Intake, Performance,<br />
Carcass Characteristics, Color and Sensory Attributes .................................................................. 18<br />
Effect of Glycerol Level in <strong>Feedlot</strong> Diets on Animal Performance and Carcass Traits .......................... 24<br />
Impact of Weaning Date on Calf Growth and Carcass Traits ............................................................... 30<br />
Growth and <strong>Feedlot</strong> Performance of Steer Calves Born From <strong>Beef</strong> Cows Supplemented with<br />
Linseed Meal During Late Gestation .............................................................................................. 36<br />
Effect of Distillers Grains on Natural vs. Conventional Supplements and Production Methods on<br />
<strong>Feedlot</strong> Performance, and Carcass Characteristics ....................................................................... 41<br />
Discovering Value in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Calves; The <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show Feedout Project VIII ......... 45<br />
Forage Production Costs and Yields for South-Central <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> .................................................. 49<br />
Challenges and Opportunities for <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong>s in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> ........................................................ 51<br />
Diagnostic Note – Infectious Bovine Keratoconjunctivitis (Pinkeye) ..................................................... 54<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> BBQ Boot Camps 2009<br />
Celebrating the Products of Livestock Production .......................................................................... 56<br />
Creating a silage bunker.<br />
Page 4 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
<strong>Feedlot</strong> Schools Are Educational Opportunity for New or Experienced<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Cattle Feeders<br />
W. Becker 1 and V.L. Anderson 2<br />
1 Foster County Extension Agent<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> cattlemen produce exceptional quality feeder cattle that are in demand by feedlot<br />
operators in other states. However, resources are available for feeding cattle in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> to<br />
capture value from the excellent genetics and utilize some of the available feedstocks. Many producers<br />
now background their spring-born calves at least until January, and there is increasing interest in<br />
finishing cattle for terminal markets.<br />
The <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> University <strong>Feedlot</strong> School was developed to help educate and inform<br />
producers about cattle feeding. The <strong>Feedlot</strong> School is an annual program initiated in 1996. It is an<br />
intensive two-day school that offers training in all aspects of the feedlot enterprise.<br />
Background<br />
To evaluate the legitimate potential and competitiveness of feeding cattle in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> versus the<br />
large commercial feedyards in Kansas and Nebraska, a multi-year research study was conducted with<br />
producer-owned calves in the early 1990s. Calves were gathered at the Carrington Research<br />
Extension Center and one group transported to commercial yards in Nebraska or Kansas during the<br />
three-year project. The results indicated that the lower feed costs per pound of gain (~$.05 advantage)<br />
and feed availability were major advantages to cattle feeding in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> even though gains were<br />
slightly higher in southern yards. Subsequent research in successfully mitigating winter weather with<br />
bedding and wind protection further supports the potential for cattle feeding in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>. Feeds in<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> are very competitively priced compared to commercial feeding regions in the High Plains.<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> feeds include corn, barley, field peas, oats, wheat, several oilseed meals, corn distillers<br />
grains, wheat midds, barley malt sprouts, corn gluten feed, beet pulp, field pea chips, and soyhulls plus<br />
low cost forages and crop residues. New incentive programs for upgrading or building feedlots through<br />
EPA 319 and NRCS Equip program monies and new risk protection programs are available.<br />
<strong>Feedlot</strong> School Curriculum<br />
The program is an intensive two-day educational course that is offered for cattle feeders, industry<br />
personnel, educators, and anyone interested in feedlot management. The school visits commercial and<br />
research feedlots for observations in bunk reading, facilities, animal processing, and an update on<br />
current research activities. Attendees network with experienced <strong>NDSU</strong> field staff and specialists, and<br />
fellow students. The faculty includes veterinarians, nutritionists, meat scientists, marketing experts,<br />
experienced feeders, and other qualified instructors. Comprehensive printed resource materials are<br />
provided to those attending.<br />
The topics presented at the <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Schools include:<br />
1. Feeding enterprises for specific markets including backgrounding, finishing, heifer development,<br />
and cull cow feeding.<br />
2. Feed ingredients, nutritional value, and compatibility.<br />
3. Recommended usage of feeds to meet animal requirements.<br />
4. Ration formulation for optimum animal growth and profit.<br />
5. Feed supplements, additives, and implants.<br />
Page 5 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
6. Grain processing, mixing rations, and feed bunk management.<br />
7. Health management, vaccinations, detection of sick animals, and treatment.<br />
8. Facility planning and design including working facilities, pens, and containment.<br />
9. Manure management, composting, and spreading as fertilizer.<br />
10. Marketing cattle, industry grids, carcass traits and value.<br />
11. Risk management, hedges, puts and forward pricing.<br />
In the 13 years that the feedlot school has been held, there have been 20 different schools that<br />
provided information to over 500 participants, with some repeat participants. The sessions are held<br />
annually at the Carrington Research Extension Center during late January. The same basic school has<br />
been offered at other locations some years, including Fargo, Hettinger, Williston, and Sidney, Montana.<br />
A feedlot school was offered in Maine modeled after the <strong>NDSU</strong> program, and a college course and<br />
training certification program in Colby, Kansas, was spurred by the <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> School. The<br />
program has reached producers in eight states and one province including South <strong>Dakota</strong>, Montana,<br />
Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, Maine, and Manitoba. An evaluation is given at the end of<br />
every school that asks participants for honest feedback. The curriculum is adapted to producer needs<br />
based on these responses and has evolved over the years of the school.<br />
According to the most recent <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>Agriculture</strong> Statistics Service <strong>Feedlot</strong> Survey (2008), from<br />
2004 through 2007 the total number of feeding operations with 500 head or more capacity, has<br />
increased 16% from 130 to 151 feedlots. Total capacity has increased 20% from 189,000 to 226,300<br />
head. The future of the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> School is to continue with the ongoing interest of the<br />
producers. Planning is underway for an ―advanced‖ feedlot school for those that want a deeper<br />
understanding of nutrition, marketing, and management. The goal is to provide the utmost quality<br />
programming that makes the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> University <strong>Feedlot</strong> School partnership successful.<br />
With the increasing interest in feeding cattle to slaughter weights in the <strong>North</strong>ern Plains, and the ample<br />
supply of cattle, feed grains, forages, and co-products for feedlot use across the area, the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
<strong>Feedlot</strong> School has helped producers increase their working knowledge of feedlot operation. In<br />
addition to the material presented, the school serves a function to network feeders and faculty for future<br />
communications. All of the principles taught in the school are relevant to other regions as well and<br />
serves any area interested in feeding cattle. This program requires extensive collaboration between<br />
cooperating agencies, industry, and private operators all with the intent to make the cattle feeding<br />
business better for all parties involved. For information on attending an <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> School, contact<br />
the Foster County Extension office at (701) 652-2581 or the Carrington Research Extension Center at<br />
(701) 652-2951 or email: <strong>NDSU</strong>.Carrington.REC@ndsu.edu.<br />
Page 6 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Observations on the Palatability of an Inorganic Salt Product for<br />
Mitigation of High Sulfur Levels in <strong>Feedlot</strong> Diets<br />
V.L. Anderson 1 , B.R. Ilse 1 , P. Gruel 2 and S. McLeish 2<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2 Sartec, Inc.<br />
Introduction<br />
Distillers grains are often the lowest cost protein feed available for cattlemen. This ingredient can be<br />
used in cow/calf production as well as feedlot diets. However, distillers grains often contain high levels<br />
of sulfur. There is significant variation in the sulfur content of distillers grains from plant to plant and<br />
even within a plant as sulfuric acid may be added to batches to improve fermentation efficiency by<br />
altering the pH. Sulfuric acid is also used to clean equipment. While sulfur level is often between 0.65<br />
and 0.85% on a dry-matter basis, levels as high as 1.25% sulfur have been analyzed.<br />
<strong>Beef</strong> cattle can tolerate a maximum of 0.40% sulfur in the diet (NRC, 1996) before polio-like symptoms<br />
of sulfur toxicity are generally observed, with the first noticeable sign often being death. Toxic<br />
symptoms and death have been reported when a diet contains as low as 0.25% sulfur in grain-based<br />
diets. Grain diets are thought to be less tolerant to high sulfur levels but with forage diets, sulfur<br />
tolerance may be greater. It is unknown how many health and reproductive problems have occurred<br />
due to sub acute sulfur toxicity from feeding distillers grains, high-sulfate content water, or sulfur in<br />
other feed sources. Survey data may be inconclusive due to the unwillingness of producers to admit to<br />
these losses, or inconclusive diagnosis by producers or their veterinarians. Any feed ingredient or<br />
management technique that would mitigate sulfur toxicity and allow increased use of distillers grains<br />
with less potential for illness or death will be well received in the livestock industry. New feed products<br />
are under development that may tie up sulfur and reduce negative effects of higher sulfur levels in the<br />
diet of cattle. The objective of this field study was to determine the effect of adding a proprietary<br />
inorganic salt product to feedlot finishing diets on feed intake, gain, and carcass traits.<br />
Experimental Procedures<br />
Forty-eight Angus feeder calves were blocked by sex (heifers and steers) and assigned within block to<br />
one of two treatments. One pen of steers and one pen of heifers were fed the proprietary inorganic salt<br />
product developed to mitigate sulfur levels in feedlot rations. The second pen of steers and heifers was<br />
fed the same diet without the inorganic salt product. The inorganic salt product was fed at 13.8 grams<br />
per head per day based on recommendations of the manufacturer. This product was mixed into the<br />
feedlot supplement (Table 1) which was added to the grain component of the ration in the daily ration<br />
preparation. The supplements were manufactured at the <strong>North</strong>ern Crops Institute (NCI) on the campus<br />
of <strong>NDSU</strong> under the direction of Dr. Kim Koch, manager of the NCI Feed Production Center.<br />
Supplements were transported to the Carrington Research Extension Center in tote bags.<br />
Supplements were formulated to be fed at 0.33 pounds per head per day, and contain minerals,<br />
vitamins, Rumensin (300 mg/hd/d), and carrier feed products (Table 1). Supplements were formulated<br />
to be identical except for the addition of the inorganic salt product.<br />
Page 7 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1. Supplements with and without organic salt to mitigate sulfur.<br />
Control Inorganic Salt<br />
Supplement Supplement<br />
% DM basis<br />
Corn, ground 25.00 25.00<br />
Distiller grains 13.75 13.75<br />
Malt sprouts 23.50 14.40<br />
Calcium carbonate 12.00 12.00<br />
Potassium chloride 11.25 11.25<br />
Zinc sulfate 0.20 0.20<br />
Dical-Phosphate (18.5%) 3.75 3.75<br />
Feed-grade salt 8.25 8.25<br />
Rumensin (80 g/lb) 1.10 1.10<br />
Vit A-D 10:1 <strong>Beef</strong> 0.30 0.30<br />
Vitamin Premix 0.90 0.90<br />
Inorganic salt 0.00 9.10<br />
Total 100.00 100.00<br />
Cattle were fed in the morning after bunk calls were made for increase, decrease or no change in the<br />
ration. Increases or decreases were done at 2.5% of the diet dry matter for each pen. Feed delivered<br />
to each pen was recorded daily. The ration was assembled, mixed and delivered using a Knight LA-9<br />
Little Augie, three-auger mixer box. The corn-based ration was formulated at 62 Mcal NEg/lb, (Table<br />
2). It included a minimum of 20% modified (50% moisture) distillers grains and solubles (dry matter<br />
basis) procured from the Blue Flint Ethanol facility in Underwood, ND. Samples of each ingredient<br />
were collected monthly and submitted to a commercial laboratory for dry matter, NEm, NEg, crude<br />
protein, fat, sulfur, calcium, and phosphorous. Water samples tested contained 74 mg/l sulfates, which<br />
is very low.<br />
Inorganic salt could become useful in high-sulfur distillers grains diets.<br />
Page 8 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. Ration for cattle fed sulfur-mitigating inorganic salt.<br />
Ingredient Percent, DM basis Percent, As Fed<br />
Corn # 2 62.00 50.83<br />
Dist grains, wet 20.00 34.84<br />
Straw 10.00 8.20<br />
Canola meal 5.00 3.87<br />
Supplement 2.00 1.55<br />
Calcium carbonate 1.00 0.71<br />
Total, Percent 100 100<br />
Nutrient content<br />
Dry Matter, %<br />
NEg, Mcal/lb<br />
Crude Protein, %<br />
Calcium, %<br />
Phosphorous, %<br />
Potassium, %<br />
Sulfur, %<br />
69.68<br />
62.71<br />
13.61<br />
0.64<br />
0.35<br />
0.59<br />
0.36<br />
All calves were weighed individually at the start of the trial on March 14, 2009, and when the trial was<br />
completed and the cattle went to market on May 4. Dry-matter intake, gain, and feed efficiency were<br />
calculated for each animal and averaged for each pen and for each treatment. Cattle were marketed<br />
as a group.<br />
Results<br />
The base diet fed in this study was 0.36% sulfur, with distillers grains as the primary source of sulfur.<br />
The primary question of the study was to determine if the inorganic salt product had any negative effect<br />
on feed intake or animal performance. There were insufficient replications to conduct confident<br />
statistical comparisons so the raw data is reported on a pen and sex-of-calf basis. The results of this<br />
field study (Table 3) suggest that feed intake was not affected. While this cannot be deduced from the<br />
limited replications, numerical values suggest some potential for positive effects on intake and gain<br />
from the addition of the inorganic salt. No health issues or illnesses were observed for the calves<br />
during the 50-day feeding period.<br />
Page 9 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Performance of feeder cattle fed<br />
inorganic salt product for sulfur mitigation.<br />
Control<br />
Inorganic<br />
Salt<br />
No. head<br />
Heifers 11 11<br />
Steers 12 12<br />
Start wt., lb.<br />
Heifers 957.4 960.7<br />
Steers 987.5 971.4<br />
AVG 972.5 966.1<br />
End wt., lb.<br />
Heifers 1125.5 1135.3<br />
Steers 1141.1 1159.7<br />
AVG 1133.3 1147.5<br />
DMI, lb/hd/day<br />
Heifers 22.73 22.52<br />
Steers 20.89 23.76<br />
AVG 22.07 23.18<br />
ADG, lb/hd/day<br />
Heifers 3.40 3.65<br />
Steers 3.49 3.50<br />
AVG 3.45 3.58<br />
Feed Efficiency (DM/gain)<br />
Heifers 6.68 6.16<br />
Steers 5.99 6.78<br />
AVG 6.41 6.48<br />
As distillers grains continue to be a significant feed source and sulfuric acid is used in the process, a<br />
product such as the inorganic salt could become useful especially in scenarios where ethanol plants<br />
produce high-sulfur distillers grains or where the price of distillers grains is low enough to use at more<br />
than nominal levels. More research is needed to prove the efficacy of this product, however, followed<br />
by commercial availability and documented economic advantages.<br />
Page 10 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Influence of Thiamin Supplementation on Hydrogen Sulfide Gas<br />
Concentrations in Ruminants Fed High-Sulfur Diets<br />
B.W. Neville 1 , C.S. Schauer 2 , and G.P. Lardy 1<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Hettinger Research Extension Center<br />
The objective of this research was to evaluate the influence of thiamin supplementation on hydrogen<br />
sulfide gas concentration and ruminal pH in lambs fed high-sulfur diets. Moderate levels of thiamin<br />
supplementation seem to decrease hydrogen sulfide concentrations. Our data suggests that changes<br />
in ruminal hydrogen sulfide concentration cannot be attributed solely to ruminal pH and are likely<br />
affected by multiple factors that interact within the ruminal environment and in the animal.<br />
Summary<br />
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of increasing levels of thiamin supplementation on<br />
ruminal gas cap hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration and pH in lambs. Twenty crossbred lambs (84.5<br />
± 7 pounds) were adapted in 28 days to a finishing diet consisting of (dry-matter [DM] basis) 60% dried<br />
distillers grains with solubles, 21.4% corn, 15% alfalfa hay and 3.6 % supplement. Treatment diets<br />
differed in the amount of supplemental thiamin supplied; diets were formulated to provide: 1) CON (no<br />
supplemental thiamin), 2) LOW (50 milligrams per head per day [mg·hd -1 ·d -1 ] thiamin), 3) MED (100<br />
mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), 4) HIGH (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin) or 5) HIGH+S (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin with<br />
dietary sulfur [S] increased from 0.71 percent to 0.87 percent (DM basis) with the addition of dilute<br />
sulfuric acid to dried distillers grains with solubles [DDGS]). Thiamin supplementation was based on an<br />
estimated daily dry-matter intake (DMI) of 3 lb.·hd -1 ·d -1 .<br />
Hydrogen sulfide and rumen fluid pH were collected via rumen puncture on day minus 6, minus 4, 0, 3,<br />
7, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24, 28 and 31. No differences in H2S concentration (P > 0.10) among treatments<br />
were apparent until day 10, at which point lambs fed LOW had lower H2S concentrations than all other<br />
treatments. Lambs fed HIGH had the greatest concentrations of H2S on day 31 (7,700 parts per million<br />
[ppm] H2S; P < 0.009). Ruminal pH for lambs fed CON and MED were not different from day 0<br />
throughout sampling (P > 0.18). Ruminal pH of LOW, HIGH and HIGH+S groups decreased (P < 0.03)<br />
through time. Thiamin appears to influence ruminal H2S concentrations, although the mechanism by<br />
which this occurred remains unknown. Changes in H2S concentration cannot be attributed solely to<br />
ruminal pH and likely are affected by multiple factors that interact within the ruminal environment and in<br />
the animal.<br />
Introduction<br />
One of the challenges with use of ethanol coproducts is the potential for high dietary S levels. High S<br />
diets can cause polioencephalomalacia (PEM) in ruminants. Inclusion of large percentages of<br />
coproduct feeds, such as dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS), in finishing rations has been<br />
avoided, in part, due to problems with PEM as well as concerns about optimal animal performance and<br />
carcass characteristics. Thiamin supplementation is one proposed method of reducing or preventing<br />
PEM in ruminant animals. The efficacy of thiamin supplementation in preventing PEM likely is<br />
impacted by the mechanisms by which PEM is caused (for example, long-term thiamin deficiency or<br />
high hydrogen sulfide gas concentration). Further, the effect and dose of thiamin necessary to prevent<br />
such cases of PEM requires more investigation. Hydrogen sulfide gas, as previously mentioned, has<br />
been implicated as a cause of PEM in ruminants. Both high-sulfur feed (Niles et al., 2002) and water<br />
(Loneragan et al., 2005) sources can cause increases in H2S production. No published literature that<br />
evaluates the effect of dietary thiamin concentrations on ruminal H2S gas concentration is available.<br />
Therefore, our objective was to evaluate the effect of increasing level of thiamin supplementation on<br />
Page 11 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
uminal gas cap H2S concentration and ruminal pH in lambs being adapted to a finishing diet containing<br />
60% DDGS.<br />
Procedures<br />
Twenty western white-face wether lambs (84.5 ± 7 pounds) were sampled during the adaptation period<br />
(receiving ration to a final finishing ration). Adaptation was accomplished by increasing the amount of<br />
concentrate on a weekly basis; adaptation diets are outlined in Table 1. The final finishing diet was<br />
balanced to contain 60% DDGS (DM basis; Table 2). Treatment diets differed in the amount of<br />
supplemental thiamin supplied; diets were formulated to provide: 1) CON (no supplemental thiamin), 2)<br />
LOW (50 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), 3) MED (100 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), 4) HIGH (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin) or 5)<br />
HIGH+S (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin with dietary S increased from 0.71 percent to 0.87 percent (DM basis)<br />
with the addition of dilute sulfuric acid to DDGS). Thiamin supplementation was based on an estimated<br />
daily DMI of 3 lb·hd -1 ·d -1 . Feed was offered daily on an ad libitum basis with refusals collected and<br />
weighed weekly.<br />
Table 1. Adaptation diets fed to lambs (% DM basis).<br />
Ingredient, %<br />
Arrival Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5<br />
day -6 day 0 day 7 day 14 day 21 day 28<br />
Alfalfa Hay 46 46 46 35 25 15<br />
Corn 50.38 35.88 21.38 21.38 21.38 21.38<br />
DDGS 0 14.5 29 40 50 60<br />
Supplement 1<br />
3.62 3.62 3.62 3.62 3.62 3.62<br />
1 Supplement contained: (% of total diet DM) 0.5% ammonium chloride, 2.25% limestone,<br />
0.085% lasalocid, 0.78% trace mineral and 0.002% copper sulfate, and was formulated to<br />
provide one of four levels of thiamin (0, 50, 100 or 150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 ).<br />
Page 12 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. Ingredient and nutritional composition (DM basis) of final finishing rations<br />
fed to lambs.<br />
Item CON LOW MED HIGH HIGH+S<br />
Ingredient ,%<br />
Alfalfa Hay 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0<br />
Corn 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.4<br />
DDGS 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0<br />
Supplement 2<br />
3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6<br />
Nutrient 3<br />
CP, % 23.3 23.6 23.4 22.7 23.5<br />
ADF, % 10.8 11.0 11.6 11.6 11.3<br />
S, % 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.9<br />
Ca, % 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.8<br />
P, % 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9<br />
Thiamin 4<br />
0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 150.0<br />
1 Treatments: CON (no supplemental thiamin), LOW (50 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), MED (100 mg·hd -1 ·d -1<br />
thiamin), HIGH (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin) and HIGH+S (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin with 0.87% S).<br />
2 Supplement (% total diet): 0.5% ammonium chloride, 2.25% limestone, 0.085% lasalocid, 0.78%<br />
sheep mineral 12 (Hubbard Feeds, Mankato, Minn.), 0.002% copper sulfate and 0, 0.004, 0.007 or<br />
0.11% thiamin mononitrate.<br />
3<br />
Laboratory analysis of nutrient concentration.<br />
4<br />
Formulated level (ppm), thiamin inclusion in diet calculated based on an estimated DMI of 3.0<br />
lb·hd -1 ·d -1 .<br />
Treatments 1<br />
Sampling for ruminal H2S was conducted on 12 occasions beginning six days prior to initiation of<br />
treatment diets. Gas cap samples from these lambs were collected on day minus 6, minus 4, 0, 3, 7,<br />
10, 14, 17, 21, 24, 28 and 31 of the feeding period. Hydrogen sulfide gas was measured on H2S<br />
detector tubes (GASTEC © , Kanagawa, Japan). Ruminal fluid was collected at the same time for<br />
determination of rumen fluid pH.<br />
Results<br />
The influence of hydrogen sulfide gas on incidence of PEM in ruminants could be impacted by the way<br />
H2S concentration changes during adaptation to finishing rations. In the present study, no differences<br />
in H2S concentration among treatments (P > 0.10; Table 3) were apparent until day 10, at which point<br />
lambs fed LOW had lower H2S concentrations than all other treatments. At this point in adaptation, the<br />
amount of roughage included in the diet had not changed although the inclusion of DDGS had<br />
increased from 0% to 29% of dietary DM. Those lambs fed the HIGH treatment diet showed the most<br />
dramatic increases in ruminal H2S concentration; on day 21 of adaptation, dietary hay was decreased<br />
from 35% to 25% and DDGS increased from 40% to 50% of dietary DM. During the course of the next<br />
three days, ruminal H2S concentration increased by more than 3,000 ppm and within seven days had<br />
increased by 4,700 ppm H2S.<br />
Page 13 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Influence of thiamin and sulfur level on hydrogen sulfide production in<br />
lambs fed a 60% DDGS-based finishing diet.<br />
Day CON LOW MED HIGH<br />
-6 0 0 0 190.6<br />
-4 66.7 0 112.5 25<br />
0 71.5 0 146.9 71.9<br />
3 531.3 375 310.5 737.5<br />
7 778.1 575 759.4 1,237.5<br />
10 2,200.0 a<br />
887.5 b<br />
2,200.0 a<br />
2,453.1 a<br />
14 2,390.6 a<br />
1,087.5 b<br />
1,875.0 a<br />
1,906.3 a<br />
17 2,852.6 a<br />
1,418.8 b<br />
2,609.4 a<br />
21 3,312.5 a<br />
1,531.3 c<br />
2,328.1 abc<br />
24 2,062.5 a<br />
3,287.5 b<br />
3,275.0 b<br />
4,991.6 c<br />
28 4,687.5 a<br />
2,662.5 b<br />
2,906.3 b<br />
6,657.8 c<br />
31 5,687.5 a<br />
2,650.0 b<br />
Treatment 1,2<br />
3,843.8 c<br />
2,406.3 ab<br />
1,958.2 bc<br />
7,701.3 d<br />
abc Means with different superscripts within a row differ at P < 0.10.<br />
Page 14 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report<br />
HIGH+S<br />
75<br />
28.1<br />
93.8<br />
475<br />
1,350.0<br />
2,378.1 a<br />
2,015.6 a<br />
2,406.3 ab<br />
3,140.6 ab<br />
3,046.9 ab<br />
4,390.6 a<br />
4,859.4 ac<br />
1 Treatments: CON (no supplemental thiamin), LOW (50 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), MED (100<br />
mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin), HIGH (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin) and HIGH+S (150 mg·hd -1 ·d -1 thiamin<br />
with 0.87% S).<br />
2 When tube measurement was below 100 ppm, tube was considered to read 0.<br />
While the hydrogen sulfide concentrations in the lambs did not reach the levels in steers reported by<br />
Niles et al. (2002), the peak concentrations were above those reported by Loneragan et al. (2005); both<br />
of these studies had steers with positive cases of PEM. These results indicate that the concentration of<br />
H2S required to cause symptoms of PEM may vary depending on species.<br />
Of further interest is the way the H2S concentration in lambs fed HIGH+S changed during adaptation.<br />
Specifically, on days 7, 14 and 21, the concentration of H2S was greater in HIGH+S than HIGH;<br />
however, after three days of adaptation (days 10, 17, 24) the concentration of ruminal H2S from<br />
HIGH+S was lower or equal to that found in HIGH fed lambs.<br />
Multiple factors influence the conversion of dietary S into H2S in the rumen during adaptation. Among<br />
these are decreases in ruminal fluid pH, increases in the proportion of sulfur-reducing bacteria and<br />
increases in dietary S. In this study, ruminal pH did not differ among treatments (P = 0.13) at any time<br />
point (data not shown). Lambs fed CON and MED were not different from day 0 throughout sampling<br />
(P > 0.18). However, ruminal pH of LOW, HIGH and HIGH+S groups did decrease (P < 0.03) through<br />
time. Decreases in ruminal pH also may impact incidence of PEM by other means.<br />
Our research suggests that thiamin may influence ruminal H2S concentrations, but we did not<br />
investigate the fate of the H2S. Further, our data suggests that changes in ruminal hydrogen sulfide<br />
concentration cannot be attributed solely to ruminal pH and likely are affected by multiple factors that<br />
interact within the ruminal environment and in the animal.
Literature Cited<br />
Loneragan, G, D. Gould, J. Wagner, F. Garry and M. Thoren. 2005. The magnitude and patterns of<br />
ruminal hydrogen sulfide production, blood thiamin concentration, and mean pulmonary arterial<br />
pressure in feedlot steers consuming water of different sulfate concentrations. The Bovine<br />
Practitioner. 39:16-22.<br />
Niles, G.A., S. Morgan, W.C. Edwards and D. Lalman. 2002. Effects of dietary sulfur concentrations on<br />
the incidence and pathology of polioencephalomalacia in weaned beef calves. Vet. Human Toxicol.<br />
44(2):70-72.<br />
An Evaluation of a Mixed Co-product Protein Feed in Finishing Rations<br />
V.L. Anderson and B.R. Ilse<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> produces approximately three million tons of co-product feeds in a year including<br />
significant amounts of soybean meal and soybean hulls. Historically, we have exported these feed<br />
ingredients individually to feed markets around the world. Most of the multitude of co-products have<br />
some unique properties that could be improved upon by mixing with other co-products to improve<br />
nutritional and physical properties. Mixing three or more co-product feeds together and pelleting the<br />
mixture creates a new feed commodity. The nutrient content of the new feed is obviously based on the<br />
formulation which can potentially be adapted to specific market opportunities. The new pelleted<br />
commodities have greater bulk density for shipping advantages. They also may be more flexible in end<br />
use, nutrient profile, longer shelf life, improved flow properties, simplified feeding for end users, and<br />
improved safety.<br />
Experimental Procedures<br />
Steer calves (n=176) from 43 different ranches belonging to the <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Club at Turtle<br />
Lake, ND, were consigned to the Carrington Research Extension center in the fall of 2008. Each ranch<br />
consigned three to eight steers for the feedout project to observe the feedlot performance and carcass<br />
value from their respective breeding program. After a preconditioning program, steers were individually<br />
weighed, blocked by weight and allotted within weight block to one of four treatments. Steers from<br />
each ranch were allotted to different treatments to reduce ―ranch‖ effects. The treatments were<br />
designed to provide increasing levels of a mixed co-product ―superfeed‖ formulated with 50% soybean<br />
meal, 35 percent distillers grains, and 15 percent field peas.The co-product protein supplement was<br />
manufactured by the <strong>North</strong>ern Crops Institute feed production center in Fargo, ND. This 35 percent<br />
crude protein feed was included in the treatment diets at 0, 5, 10, and 15 percent of the dry matter as a<br />
protein supplement. Canola meal was used as the control protein source. Ration formulations are<br />
provided in Table 1. A totally-mixed corn-based ration was fed to appetite daily in fenceline bunks.<br />
Steers were provided wind protection and bedded during the relatively severe winter. Steers were<br />
weighed every 28 days with feed intake summarized for each weigh period. Feed efficiency was<br />
calculated based on average dry matter intake and average daily gain for each period and overall.<br />
Steers were marketed to Tyson Meats, <strong>Dakota</strong> City, NE on May 6, after evaluation by visual appraisal<br />
that 60% or more would grade USDA Choice. Carcass traits were evaluated after a 24-hour chill by<br />
trained personnel.<br />
Page 15 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1. Rations for steers fed increasing coproduct formulation as protein supplement.<br />
Treatment<br />
Ingredient 0% 5% 10% 15%<br />
Percent, Dry matter basis<br />
Corn, dry rolled 69.2 69.3 69.4 69.5<br />
Co-product protein suppl 0.0 5.0 10.1 15.2<br />
Canola meal 15.6 10.4 5.2 0.0<br />
Straw, chopped 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9<br />
Corn silage 6.5 6.6 6.5 6.6<br />
Calcium carbonate 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5<br />
Suppl (Rumensin, vit, min) 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3<br />
Nutrient Content<br />
Dry Matter, % 78.78 78.67 78.77 78.66<br />
Neg, Mcal/lb 60.33 61.51 62.72 63.91<br />
Crude Protein, % 13.94 13.64 13.39 13.11<br />
Calcium, % 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.41<br />
Phosphorous, % 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.35<br />
Potassium, % 0.60 0.62 0.64 0.66<br />
Results and Discussion<br />
Despite the severe winter weather, steer performance in all treatment groups was very satisfactory. We<br />
observed no statistical difference between the treatments in this trial for any of the feedlot performance<br />
measures (Table 2). The energy density (NEg) increased slightly as the proportion of ―superfeed‖<br />
increased in the ration, however, protein content decreased from 13.94 to 13.11 percent from 0 to 15<br />
percent superfeed. Feed intake for the steers in the respective treatments was 21.01, 22.10, 22.43,<br />
and 22.47 for 0, 5, 10, and 15 percent superfeed treatments. Gains throughout the feeding period<br />
averaged 3.65, 3.68, 3.67, and 3.85 respectively, for 0, 5, 10, and 15 percent superfeed in the diet.<br />
Feed efficiency (feed per gain) was calculated at 4.84, 5.17, 5.24, and 4.80 for increasing superfeed.<br />
Despite severe winter weather, steer performance was very satisfactory.<br />
Page 16 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. <strong>Feedlot</strong> performance of cattle fed mixed coproduct supplement (CPS) at increasing levels.<br />
Percent Co-Product supplement Contrasts<br />
Item<br />
Live Wt, lbs<br />
0% 5% 10% 15% Std. Error P-Value<br />
CPS vs.<br />
no CPS linear quadratic<br />
Initial Wt (29-Jan) 963.8 988.5 971.6 957.9 39.7 0.24 0.51 0.50 0.14<br />
Period 1 Wt. (25-Feb) 1071.4 1093.1 1082.1 1074.5 43.8 0.60 0.42 0.99 0.28<br />
Period 2 Wt. (06-Apr) 1209.6 1237.1 1215.7 1219.8 40.7 0.60 0.41 0.89 0.46<br />
Period 3 Final Wt. (06-May) 1314.4<br />
DM Intake, lb/hd/day<br />
1346.4 1321.6 1328.1 42.7 0.57 0.38 0.83 0.47<br />
Period 1 19.05 19.92 20.45 20.65 1.38 0.87 0.44 0.41 0.82<br />
Period 2 21.92 23.06 23.09 22.96 1.18 0.87 0.42 0.55 0.60<br />
Period 3 22.08 23.31 23.73 23.80 0.91 0.54 0.19 0.22 0.56<br />
Overall DMI 21.02 22.10 22.43 22.47 1.16 0.80 0.34 0.38 0.67<br />
Average Daily Gain, lb/hd/day<br />
Period 1 (27d) 3.98 3.88 4.04 4.33 0.21 0.48 0.67 0.22 0.40<br />
Period 2 (40d) 3.45 3.63 3.67 3.63 0.16 0.65 0.65 0.72 0.81<br />
Period 3 (30d) 3.48 3.65 3.60 3.60 0.29 0.98 0.69 0.81 0.78<br />
Overall ADG<br />
Feed Efficiency<br />
3.65 3.68 3.67 3.85 0.11 0.57 0.55 0.27 0.51<br />
Gain:Feed Period 1 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.93 0.86 0.85 0.76<br />
Gain:Feed Period 2 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.01 0.92 0.83 0.93 0.63<br />
Gain:Feed Period 3 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.99 0.78 0.72 0.99<br />
Overall G:F 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.01 0.99 0.75 0.90 0.75<br />
Feed:Gain Period 1 4.84 5.17 5.24 4.80 0.56 0.91 0.72 0.98 0.50<br />
Feed:Gain Period 2 6.45 6.41 6.86 6.34 0.41 0.81 0.85 0.94 0.56<br />
Feed:Gain Period 3 6.48 6.55 6.79 6.66 0.60 0.99 0.79 0.78 0.88<br />
Overall F:G 5.79 5.97 6.17 5.83 0.37 0.90 0.65 0.84 0.51<br />
Carcass traits were similar except for backfat and USDA Yield Grade (Table 3). The steers on 5<br />
percent superfeed had more backfat than 10 percent superfeed with 0, and 15 percent treatment steers<br />
intermediate. Yield Grade was lowest for the 10% treatment, and highest for the 5 percent treatment<br />
with 0 and 15 percent intermediate. Marbling scores were not statistically different, but we observed a<br />
numerical increase in the percent USDA Choice carcasses with increasing superfeeds. The number of<br />
choice or better carcasses was 61.36, 67.44, 76.74, and 77.27 percent respectively, for 0, 5, 10, and 15<br />
percent superfeed. This factor could have significant value for the feeder as the value of a lean choice<br />
carcass such as observed with 10 percent superfeed would be attractive to the industry and return<br />
greater value per pound.<br />
Page 17 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Carcass traits of cattle fed mixed coproduct protein supplement at increasing levels.<br />
Percent Co-Product supplement Contrasts<br />
Item 0% 5% 10% 15% Std. Error P-Value CPS vs. no CPS linear quadratic<br />
Hot Carcass Wt., lbs. 789.2 820.8 794.2 806.5 25.09 0.31 0.23 0.65 0.46<br />
Dressing Percent 63.25 64.18 63.26 63.95 0.38 0.39 0.11 0.32 0.26<br />
Back Fat, in 0.40 0.46 0.37 0.42 0.03 0.02 0.78 0.47 0.59<br />
Ribeye Area, sq in 13.50 13.62 13.62 13.71 0.27 0.85 0.47 0.43 0.93<br />
Kidney Pelvic Heart, % 2.43 2.43 2.44 2.42 0.02 0.94 0.94 0.75 0.66<br />
USDA Yield Grade* 2.66 2.90 2.51 2.71 0.10 0.07 0.67 0.50 0.84<br />
Marbling Score** 421.8 434.9 445.7 438.9 16.04 0.79 0.36 0.41 0.56<br />
Percent Choice*** 61.36 67.44 76.74 77.27 - - - - -<br />
* USDA Yield Grade is a calculated value that is determined by a formula comparing fat to lean muscle in the carcass.<br />
** Marbling score is based on intermuscular fat in the ribeye: 400-499 = low Choice , 500-599 = Avg Choice.<br />
*** Percent choice was not statisitically analyzed.<br />
Implications<br />
The results of this study suggest that a mixed co-product ―superfeed‖ may be successfully marketed<br />
based on animal performance and especially based on percentage of USDA Choice carcasses. The<br />
ease of use, safety, and handling properties of this pelleted commodity are superior to any single feed<br />
ingredient. Using soybean meal as a base ingredient helps increase the value of the meal and diversify<br />
the market potential to other species or production scenarios. This study gives confidence to livestock<br />
producers interested in using a combinatorial feed comprised of multiple co-products. It remains to be<br />
seen if feed manufacturing businesses are interested in developing commodities from combining coproducts<br />
into commercial pelleted feeds to produce products that can be labeled as <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
―Superfeed.‖<br />
Effects of Dried Distillers Grains With Solubles on Growing and Finishing<br />
Steer Intake, Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Color and Sensory<br />
Attributes<br />
J.L. Leupp 1 , G.P. Lardy 1 , M.L. Bauer 1 , K.K. Karges 2 , M.L. Gibson 2 , J.S. Caton 1 and R.J. Maddock 1<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
2 <strong>Dakota</strong> Gold Research Association, Sioux Falls, SD<br />
The objectives of this study were to determine the effects of dried distillers grains with solubles on<br />
growing and finishing performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality traits. These data suggest<br />
dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) can be included at 30 percent dietary dry matter (DM) in<br />
both the growing and finishing period, partially replacing dry-rolled corn, with no detrimental effects on<br />
performance, carcass characteristics or sensory attributes, although DDGS may affect color negatively.<br />
Summary<br />
Seventy-two crossbred and purebred beef steers (653 ± 20 pounds initial body weight [BW]) were used<br />
in a completely randomized design to determine effects of dried distillers grains with solubles (29.2%<br />
crude protein [CP], 9.7% fat, DM basis; DDGS) on growing and finishing steer intake, performance,<br />
carcass and meat quality traits. The study contained two feeding periods, growing and finishing, which<br />
resulted in four treatments: 0:0, 30:0, 0:30 and 30:30 (diet DDGS percentage fed during growing and<br />
Page 18 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
finishing periods, respectively). Steers were fed individually a growing diet (65% concentrate) for 57<br />
days then acclimated to and fed a finishing diet (90% concentrate) for 80 or 145 days. Dietary<br />
ingredients included dry-rolled corn, corn silage, grass hay, concentrated separator byproduct and<br />
supplement.<br />
During the growing period, dry-matter intake (DMI) was not different (P ≥ 0.63). Steer performance,<br />
including average daily gain (ADG) and gain:feed (G:F), were not affected (P ≥ 0.14) by treatment<br />
during the growing period and final BW at the end of the growing period was not different (P = 0.99).<br />
During the finishing period, DMI, ADG and G:F were not different (P ≥ 0.22). As a result, final BW was<br />
not different (P ≥ 0.28). Carcass traits (ribeye area; 12th rib fat; kidney, pelvic and heart fat (KPH);<br />
yield grade; and marbling) were not different (P ≥ 0.16).<br />
Results from the trained panel indicated no differences (P ≥ 0.16) in tenderness; however, steaks from<br />
steers fed 30% DDGS during the finishing period tended (P = 0.10) to be juicier and more flavorful than<br />
steaks from control steers. Inclusion of 30% DDGS in the growing period tended to lower L (muscle<br />
lightness) (P = 0.08) and lowered B (muscle yellowness) (P = 0.01) of steaks. Overall feeding of DDGS<br />
lowered B (P = 0.02) compared with feeding dry-rolled corn (0:0). Feeding DDGS during the finishing<br />
period lowered A (muscle redness) (P < 0.001) of steaks. Furthermore, overall feeding of DDGS<br />
lowered A (P < 0.001) compared with feeding dry-rolled corn (0:0). Feeding 30% DDGS did not impact<br />
any performance or carcass characteristics but did influence steak sensory attributes and color.<br />
Introduction<br />
Dried distillers grains with solubles can be used as a protein and energy source depending on the<br />
amount included in the diet (Ham et al., 1994). Feeding up to 40% wet or dry distillers grains in<br />
growing and finishing diets improves ADG and G:F in steers compared with feeding dry-rolled corn only<br />
(Ham et al., 1994).<br />
<strong>Beef</strong> consumers want a high-quality product that is tender, juicy and flavorful. Research is limited in<br />
evaluating effects of feeding DDGS to growing and finishing steers on meat quality. Roeber et al.<br />
(2005) fed finishing Holstein steers up to 50% dried distillers grains (DDG) and reported no differences<br />
in tenderness or sensory traits compared with corn-based diets.<br />
Little quantitative information is available on the effects of short- and long-term feeding of DDGS to<br />
steers on performance and carcass quality. Therefore, our objectives were to determine the effects of<br />
DDGS on growing and finishing steer intake, performance, carcass characteristics, color and sensory<br />
attributes.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
Seventy-two crossbred and purebred beef steers were used in a completely randomized design. The<br />
study contained two feeding periods, growing and finishing, which resulted in four treatments: 0:0, 30:0,<br />
0:30 and 30:30 (diet DDGS percentage fed during growing and finishing periods, respectively). Steers<br />
were fed individually a growing diet (65% concentrate) for 57 days then acclimated for 14 days to a<br />
finishing diet (90% concentrate) and fed for 80 or 145 days. Diets were based on dry-rolled corn, corn<br />
silage, grass hay, concentrated separator byproduct and supplement (Table 1). Diets included 27.5<br />
parts per million (ppm) of Rumensin and 11 ppm of Tylan and were formulated to contain a minimum of<br />
12.5 percent CP, 0.70 percent calcium (Ca) and 0.30 percent phosphorus (P).<br />
Page 19 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1. Formulated dietary composition of growing and finishing diets containing 0 or 30<br />
percent corn dried distillers grains with solubles offered to beef steers (% dietary DM).<br />
0% DDGS 1<br />
30% DDGS 0% DDGS 1<br />
Diet, % of dietary DM<br />
Growing Finishing<br />
Item<br />
30% DDGS<br />
Dry-rolled corn 50 20 80 50<br />
DDGS — 30 — 30<br />
Corn silage 20 20 5 5<br />
Grass hay 20 20 5 5<br />
CSB 2<br />
5 5 5 5<br />
Wheat middlings 2.18 2.53 1.00 2.18<br />
Soybean meal — — 1.00 —<br />
Limestone 1.40 2.10 1.58 2.45<br />
Urea 0.75 — 0.75 —<br />
Dicalcium phosphate 0.30 — 0.30 —<br />
Salt 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25<br />
Trace mineral premix 3<br />
0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05<br />
Vitamin A, D premix 4<br />
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02<br />
Vitamin E premix 5<br />
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02<br />
Monensin premix 6<br />
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02<br />
Tylosin premix 7<br />
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01<br />
---------------Analyzed composition---------------<br />
Crude Protein 12.80 17.90 16.10 22.70<br />
Neutral Detergent Fiber 37.30 39.50 26.10 33.20<br />
Acid Detergent Fiber 20.30 18.50 9.40 10.00<br />
Calcium 1.23 1.23 1.87 2.13<br />
Phosphorus 0.32 0.44 0.54 0.71<br />
1 Dried distillers grains with solubles; nutrient content of DDGS used averaged 29.2% CP, 34.7%<br />
NDF, 9.5% ADF, 9.7% crude fat, 0.03% Ca and 0.81% P.<br />
2<br />
Concentrated separator byproduct (de-sugared molasses).<br />
3 Contained 250 ppm Co, 25.6 ppt Cu, 1.05 ppt I, 6.50 ppt Fe, 40.0 ppt Mn and 160 ppt Zn.<br />
4 Contained 22.0 kIU/pound vitamin A and 2.10 kIU/pound vitamin D.<br />
5 Contained 20 IU/kg vitamin E.<br />
6<br />
Contained 176.4 ppt monensin (Elanco Animal Health, Indianapolis, Ind.) to provide 27.5 ppm of<br />
dietary DM.<br />
7<br />
Contained 88.2 ppt tylosin (Elanco Animal Health, Indianapolis, Ind.) to provide 11 ppm of dietary DM.<br />
Steers were assigned to treatment and fed individually. Steers received a Ralgro implant on day 0 and<br />
Revalor IS on day 60. Final weights were calculated from hot carcass weight (HCW) using an average<br />
dressing percentage of 62.5 percent and a 4 percent shrink. Average daily gain and G:F were<br />
Page 20 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
calculated based on this data. Cattle were sent to a commercial abattoir for slaughter on either March<br />
24 or May 28. Steers marketed on March 24 were estimated to have at least 0.4 inch backfat as<br />
measured by ultrasound. The remaining steers were marketed on May 28 when the majority of the<br />
steers had an estimated 0.4 inch backfat as measured by ultrasound.<br />
One steak from each steer was used for simulated retail display shelf-life analysis. A colorimeter was<br />
used to measure longissimus lean L (muscle lightness), A (muscle redness) and B (muscle yellowness)<br />
color space values through the overwrap polyvinyl chloride (PVC) film for each postmortem display day<br />
at 9 a.m. each day.<br />
One steak from each steer was used for evaluation of tenderness using the Warner-Bratzler shear<br />
force machine (WBSF). Steaks were thawed for 24 hours at 35° Fahrenheit, weighed and then cooked<br />
in clamshell-style grills at 350° F until the steaks reached an internal temperature of 158° F. Six 0.5inch<br />
cores from each steak were removed parallel to the muscle fiber.<br />
Sensory panel analysis was conducted with a trained panel. Steaks were thawed at 35° F for 24 hours<br />
and cooked as previously described for WBSF evaluation. Steaks then were cut into pieces of<br />
approximately 0.5 by 0.5 by 1 inch and served to panelists for evaluation. Panelists scored 10 samples<br />
each day using an 8-point scale where 1 equaled extremely tough, dry and bland and 8 equaled<br />
extremely tender, juicy and intense beef flavor.<br />
Results<br />
During the growing period, two steers from the 30% DDGS treatment were removed from the study due<br />
to conditions unrelated to treatment. One steer was removed prior to initiation of treatments and the<br />
other removed due to chronic bloat; therefore, 70 steers were used during the growing period. Steers<br />
were fed growing diets for 57 days. Initial BW of steers was not different (P = 0.57) and averaged 653 ±<br />
20 pounds. Steer performance, including DMI (22.5 lbs./d), ADG (3.85 lbs./d) and G:F (0.17 lbs./lb.)<br />
were not affected (P ≥ 0.14) by treatment during the growing period. Final BW at the end of the<br />
growing period also was not different (P = 0.99) and averaged 937 ± 13 pounds.<br />
Three steers were removed from the data set due to low feed intakes during the finishing portion of the<br />
trial. Two of the steers removed were on the 30 percent DDGS treatment and one steer was from the 0<br />
percent DDGS treatment. Days fed during the finishing period were not different (P ≥ 0.27; Table 2)<br />
across treatments and averaged 102 ± 8 days. No treatment differences (P ≥ 0.22) were observed for<br />
DMI, ADG or G:F. Ham et al. (1994) fed cattle 40 percent DDGS, which partially replaced dry-rolled<br />
corn in finishing diets, and observed improved ADG and G:F when compared with cattle consuming<br />
dry-rolled corn diets. In the current study, no differences (P ≥ 0.28) in final BW were observed.<br />
Similar to final BW, no differences were found in HCW (P ≥ 0.28; 791 ± 22 lbs.; Table 2). Longissimus<br />
muscle area (12.1 ± 0.5 inch 2 ), 12th rib fat thickness (0.50 ± 0.04 inch) and KPH (2.48 ± 0.16%) were<br />
not different (P ≥ 0.16); therefore, no differences (P ≥ 0.35; 3.33 ± 0.17) were observed for yield grade.<br />
No differences (P ≥ 0.43) were observed for marbling, which averaged 431 (small 0 = 400; Table 2).<br />
Page 21 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. Performance and carcass characteristics of steers fed growing and finishing diets containing<br />
0 or 30 percent corn dried distillers grains with solubles.<br />
Item 0:00 30:00:00 0:30 30:30:00 SEM 2<br />
Growing Finishing<br />
Corn vs.<br />
DDGS 4<br />
Steers, number 18 15 16 18 — — — —<br />
Days on Feed 99 106 97 106 8 0.27 0.87 0.61<br />
Performance<br />
Final BW, lb. 1193 1226 1204 1239 33.00 0.28 0.73 0.41<br />
DMI, lb./hd/d 18.40 18.80 19.90 17.60 1.50 0.51 0.92 0.80<br />
ADG, lb./hd/d 3.46 3.22 3.51 3.40 0.15 0.22 0.48 0.58<br />
G:F, lb./lb. 0.22 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.03 0.91 0.89 0.52<br />
Carcass Characteristics<br />
HCW, lb. 798 783 807 22.00 0.28 0.73 0.41<br />
LM area, in 2<br />
12.10 12.50 11.80 11.80 0.50 0.60 0.34 0.95<br />
12th rib fat, in 0.46 0.53 0.48 0.52 0.04 0.16 0.90 0.21<br />
KPH, % 2.41 2.60 2.44 2.47 0.16 0.46 0.73 0.59<br />
Marbling 5<br />
430 448 440 407 21.00 0.71 0.43 0.96<br />
Yield grade 3.20 3.33 3.44 3.33 0.17 0.95 0.45 0.35<br />
1 Dietary dried distillers grains with solubles percentage fed during growing and finishing periods, respectively.<br />
2 n = 15.<br />
3<br />
Growing = main effect of feeding dried distillers grains with solubles during the growing period; Finishing =<br />
main effect of feeding dried distillers grains with solubles during the finishing period; Corn vs. DDGS = feeding<br />
dry-rolled corn (0:0) vs. feeding dried distillers grains with solubles during the growing and finishing periods<br />
(30:0 + 0:30 + 30:30).<br />
4<br />
Corn distillers dried grains with solubles.<br />
5 Marbling Score: Small 0 = 400.<br />
Treatment 1<br />
Page 22 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report<br />
Contrast 3<br />
Warner-Bratzler shear force and cooking loss were not different (P ≥ 0.13) across treatments (Table 3).<br />
Results from the trained panel indicated no differences (P ≥ 0.16) in tenderness, which averaged 6.03 ±<br />
0.16 (8-point hedonic scale; Table 3); however, steaks from steers fed 30% DDGS during the finishing<br />
period tended (P = 0.10) to be juicier and more flavorful than steaks from the control steers (6.01 vs.<br />
5.83 ± 0.11 and 6.02 vs. 5.89 ± 0.08, respectively).
Table 3. Shear force, color analysis and sensory characteristics of steaks from steers fed growing<br />
and finishing diets containing 0 or 30 percent corn dried distillers grains with solubles.<br />
Item 0:00 30:00:00 0:30 30:30:00 SEM 2<br />
Growing Finishing<br />
Corn vs.<br />
DDGS 4<br />
Steaks, number 17 15 16 18 — — — —<br />
Shear force, lb. 8.20 8.49 7.98 7.52 0.49 0.86 0.19 0.68<br />
Cooking loss 5 , oz. 1.77 1.51 1.64 1.62 0.11 0.17 0.92 0.13<br />
Color 6<br />
L 49.03 48.69 48.77 48.48 0.19 0.08 0.19 0.04<br />
A 21.69 22.33 20.27 19.99 0.24 0.41
Effect of Glycerol Level in <strong>Feedlot</strong> Diets on Animal Performance and<br />
Carcass Traits<br />
B.R. Ilse 1 , V.L. Anderson 1 , T.M. Jeske², R.J. Maddock 2 , and E.P. Berg 2<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
Abstract<br />
Two separate feedlot trials were conducted (receiving and finishing) to evaluate the effects of<br />
increasing levels of glycerol on animal performance. Receiving trial steers (n = 198) were allotted by<br />
BW (622.6 ± 34.32 lbs.) in a randomized complete block design and sorted into 16 identical pens (four<br />
pens per treatment). Treatments were 0, 6, 12, and 18 percent glycerol (70% DM; water was added to<br />
reach 70% DM to increase the viscosity and decrease freezing temperature) on a DM basis replacing<br />
dry-rolled corn and co-products in the diet (55 Mcal/lb NEg). Dry matter intake was quadratically<br />
affected during the 30-d feeding period (P = 0.05) with 20.38; 21.07; 21.13; 19.47 pounds consumed for<br />
0, 6, 12, and 18 percent glycerol, respectively. Gains were not affected by glycerol level (P = 0.79) and<br />
feed efficiency was similar (P > 0.92) among treatments. Finishing trial heifers (n = 132; BW = 911.5 ±<br />
33.22 lbs.) were blocked by weight and allotted to one of 16 pens, assigned to 0, 6, 12, 18 percent<br />
glycerol (85% DM) dietary treatments (60 Mcal/lb NEg). Dry matter intake linearly decreased during the<br />
102-d feeding period with increasing glycerol level (P = 0.05; 28.11; 27.97; 27.71; 26.16 lbs. for 0, 6,<br />
12, and 18% glycerol, respectively). Gains were not affected by glycerol level (P = 0.26) during any of<br />
the four individual 28-d weigh periods or overall. Feed efficiency was also similar (P > 0.22) among<br />
treatments. If the availability of feed-grade glycerol increases with the increase in biodiesel production,<br />
glycerol could be a viable alternative to corn in feedlot diets.<br />
Key words: glycerol, beef, feedlot<br />
Introduction<br />
The glycerol (or glycerine) supply may increase dramatically throughout the <strong>North</strong>ern Plains states and<br />
Canadian provinces with the development of the biodiesel industry. Glycerol is a three-carbon alcohol<br />
produced by transesterification of vegetable oil (e.g. soybean) or animal fat. Approximately 10 percent<br />
of the original weight of the vegetable oil is converted to glycerol in the process to produce biodiesel.<br />
This glycerol or glycerine product is primarily utilized in industrial products such as cosmetics, liquid<br />
soap, antifreeze, and lubricants. If glycerol can be used successfully as a feed, beef cattle are the<br />
largest potential year-around market outlet in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>. A few research trials with dairy cattle<br />
support the use of glycerol as an energy source for ruminants, but no production feedlot research has<br />
been reported in the <strong>North</strong>ern Plains (DeFrain et al., 2004; Linke et al., 2004; Bodarski et al., 2005).<br />
Glycerol is currently used in some formulations of liquid feed products. The energy value of glycerol is<br />
about equal to corn on a pound for pound basis and therefore could be of great value for a livestock<br />
feed based on competitive pricing and availability. This trial was designed to study the effects of<br />
glycerol included as an energy source in receiving and finishing rations on animal performance.<br />
Page 24 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Feed-grade glycerol added to totally-mixed ration in a<br />
truck-mounted mixer wagon.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
Animals were housed at the Carrington Research Extension Center. Individual animals were weighed,<br />
blocked by weight and randomly allotted within block to one of four ration treatments. There were four<br />
pens or replicates for each treatment utilizing 16 pens. The four treatments included glycerol in the<br />
ration at 0, 6, 12, or 18 percent of the diet DM. The diets (Table 1) were fed as a totally-mixed ration<br />
that included wheat middlings, distillers grains, field peas, and decreasing levels of corn (60, 40, 20,<br />
and 0%, respectively). Animals were fed once daily to appetite based on morning bunk readings, with<br />
feed recorded daily and summarized for each weigh period. The average daily DMI, gain, and feed<br />
efficiency were calculated for each pen for each weigh period (~ 28 d). The glycerol for this study was<br />
donated to the CREC by Westway Feeds Products, Inc. of New Orleans, LA, and FUMPA BioFuels of<br />
Redwood Falls, MN.<br />
Receiving Ration Finishing Ration<br />
Item DM% Percent of diet DM basis Percent of diet DM basis<br />
Glycerol, % 85.1 0 6 12 18 0 6 12 18<br />
Corn, % 86.6 43 37 31 25 60 40 20 10<br />
Field Peas, % 90.7 15 15 15 15 12 12 12 12<br />
Wheat Midds, % 88.9 5 5 5 5 5 13 21 29<br />
MDGS, % b<br />
Table 1. Receiving and Finishing ration formulation with increasing levels of glycerol<br />
57.5 20 20 20 20 12 18 24 30<br />
Straw, % 85.2 15 15 15 15 8 8 8 8<br />
Rumn & MGA, % 90.0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2<br />
CaCO3, % 95.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1<br />
a .<br />
a Rations formulated to meet or exceed NRC (1996) recommendations<br />
b Modified distillers grains with solubles.<br />
Page 25 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Receiving Trial<br />
Fall 2008<br />
One hundred ninety-eight mixed breed steers (BW = 622.6 ± 34.3 lbs.) from 40 different ranches that<br />
were part of the <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf feedout program were utilized in the receiving trial. Steers were<br />
weighed individually at the initiation and completion of the receiving trial (30 d). Rations were<br />
formulated (56 Mcal/lb.) to meet or exceed NRC (1996) recommendations.<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf club steers consuming a ration<br />
with increasing levels of glycerol.<br />
Finishing Trial<br />
Summer 2008<br />
One hundred thirty-two yearling Black Angus cross heifers (BW = 911.5 ± 33.2 lbs.) were purchased<br />
from a commercial source and utilized for the finishing trial. The finishing rations (65 Mcal/lb.) were<br />
formulated to meet or exceed NRC (1996) recommendations.<br />
Glycerol levels were increased in stepped increments as follows: all glycerol treatment groups were fed<br />
the 6% glycerol ration during the first seven days of the trial; the 12 and 18% treatment groups were<br />
increased to 12% during the second week; and the 18% glycerol treatment pens were increased to the<br />
final glycerol level at the start of the third week.<br />
Heifers were weighed at 28-d intervals during the 102 days on feed. All heifers were marketed at the<br />
same time when visual appraisal of the animals determined that 60 percent would grade USDA choice.<br />
Page 26 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Heifers on glycerol finishing trial replacing corn in TMR diet up to 18%.<br />
Results and Discussion<br />
Receiving Trial<br />
Dry matter intake was quadratically affected by treatment during the 30-d feeding period (P = 0.05) with<br />
28.11; 27.97; 27.71; 26.16 pounds consumed for 0, 6, 12, and 18 percent glycerol, respectively. Gains<br />
were not affected by glycerol level (P = 0.79) and feed efficiency was similar (P = 0.92) among<br />
treatments.<br />
Table 2. Growth performance and efficiency of steers in a receiving trial with glycerol replacing corn up to 18%.<br />
Treatment % Glycerol Contrasts<br />
Item<br />
Weight, lbs.<br />
0 6 12 18 St. Error P-Value<br />
Glyc vs.<br />
No Glyc Linear Quadratic<br />
Initial Wt. 624.84 625.65 625.59 623.08 34.60 0.69 0.97 0.50 0.35<br />
Period 1 (Nov. 4) 670.33 677.16 669.20 668.58 32.50 0.53 0.80 0.90 0.42<br />
Period 2 (Dec. 4)<br />
Dry Matter Intake<br />
798.07 808.78 804.92 793.16 41.75 0.58 0.67 0.78 0.21<br />
Intake, lbs./hd/d 20.38 21.07 21.13 19.47 1.04 0.17 0.78 0.27 0.05<br />
Average Daily Gain, lbs. 4.26 4.39 4.53 4.16 0.38 0.79 0.76 0.72 0.37<br />
Finishing Trial<br />
Dry matter intake linearly decreased during the 102-d feeding period due to glycerol level (P = 0.05;<br />
28.11; 27.97; 27.71; 26.16 lbs. for 0, 6, 12, and 18% glycerol, respectively). Gains were not affected by<br />
glycerol level (P = 0.26) during any of the four individual 28-d weigh periods or overall. Feed efficiency<br />
was also similar (P = 0.22) among treatments.<br />
Page 27 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Heifer body weight averages by treatment and period, glycerol replacing corn at 0, 6, 12, and 18% of the TMR.<br />
Treatment % Glycerol Contrasts<br />
Item 0 6 12 18 St. Err P-Value<br />
Glyc vs.<br />
No Glyc Linear Quadratic<br />
Initial Wt. (June 11) 909.0 920.4 917.0 906.5 33.91 0.75 0.65 0.81 0.31<br />
Period 1 Wt. (July 9) 1018.5 1027.4 1023.0 1011.1 36.36 0.56 0.83 0.49 0.23<br />
Period 2 Wt. (Aug. 6) 1131.6 1147.9 1146.2 1126.4 39.17 0.22 0.38 0.64 0.05<br />
Perod 3 Wt. (Sept. 3) 1249.3 1257.3 1257.9 1237.3 38.27 0.39 0.89 0.40 0.15<br />
Final Live Period 4 Wt. ab<br />
1312.7 1321.7 1329.8 1299.6 46.80 0.48 0.79 0.62 0.18<br />
HCW 802.9 808.4 813.4 794.9 28.63 0.48 0.79 0.62 0.18<br />
a<br />
Final Live weigh twas back calculated from HCW 63%<br />
b Includes 3% Shrink<br />
Table 4 . Daily dry matter intake and gain of heifers receiving 0, 6, 12, and 18% glycerol finishing ration.<br />
Treatment % Glycerol Contrasts<br />
Item<br />
DM Intake (lbs.)<br />
0 6 12 18 St. Err P-Value<br />
Glyc vs.<br />
No Glyc Linear Quadratic<br />
Period 1 28.70 27.95 28.52 27.13 0.71 0.12 0.13 0.06 0.49<br />
Period 2 26.82 28.16 27.20 25.59 0.79 0.10 0.84 0.13 0.04<br />
Period 3 28.65 28.17 27.59 26.04 0.80 0.17 0.16 0.04 0.52<br />
Period 4 28.35 27.38 27.43 25.70 1.36 0.50 0.30 0.17 0.76<br />
Overall DMI 28.11 27.97 27.71 26.16 0.80 0.18 0.28 0.05 0.29<br />
AD Gain (lb./hd/d)<br />
Period 1 3.91 3.83 3.79 3.73 0.29 0.98 0.71 0.67 0.96<br />
Period 2 4.04 4.30 4.40 4.12 0.27 0.67 0.40 0.75 0.26<br />
Period 3 4.20 3.90 3.99 3.96 0.20 0.74 0.30 0.49 0.51<br />
Period 4 3.53 3.58 4.00 3.46 0.59 0.81 0.77 0.91 0.51<br />
Overall 3.92 3.90 4.04 3.82 0.21 0.77 0.99 0.82 0.51<br />
Page 28 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table. 5 Carcass traits, USDA Quality Grade and USDA Yield Grade from heifers fed glycerol at<br />
differing treatment levels.<br />
St. Err a P -value<br />
Item 0% 6% 12% 18%<br />
Hot Carcass Wt., lbs. 803.5 810.6 812.3 779.8 23.37 0.76<br />
Ribeye Area, cm² 13.08 13.63 13.42 13.55 0.24 0.40<br />
Backfat, in 0.63 0.61 0.63 0.57 0.24 0.49<br />
Kidney, Pelvic and Heart Fat 2.69 2.58 2.83 2.56 0.10 0.24<br />
Marbling Score b Treatment<br />
461 461 459 450 16.90 0.96<br />
Quality grade CH- CH - CH - CH - - -<br />
Yield grade 3.49 3.27 3.45 3.15 - -<br />
a Standard error of treatment means<br />
b Marbling score: Small 0 = 400<br />
The results of this study suggest that glycerol is an excellent energy source for finishing diets up to 18<br />
percent of dry matter intake. The fact that corn decreased from 60 percent of the diet to 0 percent while<br />
glycerol increased, along with the co-products, wheat middlings and distillers grains, indicates that high<br />
percentage co-product diets can be competitive with corn-based diets. The protein content of the diet<br />
increased with co-product level, with excess protein potentially metabolized as an energy source and<br />
the nitrogen excreted.<br />
Handling glycerol<br />
Glycerol was handled as a liquid even though the lab analysis reports it at 85 percent DM. Feed grade<br />
glycerol, a three-carbon alcohol, has a high viscosity and does not flow well in colder temperatures,<br />
essentially below freezing. The viscosity decreases and the flow properties improve when water is<br />
added to the product. Adding up to 50 percent water will improve flow properties down to -29.9° F.<br />
This practice is necessary if glycerol is to be used as a single ingredient throughout the winter. Ration<br />
adjustments must be made to account for the change in dry matter content.<br />
References<br />
Bodarski, R., T. Wertelecki, F. Bommer, S. Gosiewski. 2005. The changes of metabolic status and<br />
lacation performance in dairy cows underfeeding TMR with glycerine (glycerol) supplement at<br />
periparturient period. Animal Husbandry Vol. 8. Issue 4.<br />
DeFrain, J. M., A. R. Hippen, K. F. Kalscheur, and P. W. Jardon. 2004. Feeding glycerol to transition<br />
dairycows: Effects on blood metabolites and lactation performance. J. Dairy. Sci. 87:4195-4206.<br />
Linke, P. L., and A. R. Hippen, 2005. Ruminal and plasma responses in dairy cows to drenching or<br />
feeding glycerol. J. Undergraduate Research Vol. 3, pp 49-60 SDSU.<br />
NRC. 1996. Nutrient Requirements of beef cattle. 7th Revised Edition. National Academy of Sciences,<br />
Washington, D.C.<br />
Page 29 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Impact of Weaning Date on Calf Growth and Carcass Traits*<br />
M.M. Thompson 1 , C.S. Schauer 1 , V.L. Anderson 2 , B.R. Ilse 2 and R.J. Maddock 3<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Hettinger Research Extension Center<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
3 <strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
Introduction<br />
Traditional northern Great Plains cattle producers usually calve out their brood cows in the late winterearly<br />
spring months (February and March) to guarantee ranch resources, time and labor will be<br />
available for spring crop planting and fieldwork. Some producers, however, have chosen to push their<br />
calving cycles further into the spring months (May and June) to follow nature’s traditional growth<br />
patterns for pasture grasses. For these producers, high-quality grazing diets are readily available for<br />
their lactating brood cows and nursing calves, further maximizing milk production and calf growth.<br />
The definition of early weaning varies; generally, calves weaned before 150 days of age are considered<br />
early-weaned (Loy et al., 1999). Most research on early weaning has focused on late winter-early<br />
spring calving (Schoonmaker et al., 2001; Story et al., 2000) with little research evaluating early<br />
weaning outcomes on late spring-born (May and June) calves. Our study objective was to evaluate the<br />
impact of weaning date (early vs. normal) on calf growth and carcass traits in spring-born Angus calves<br />
during the grow-finish period.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
The <strong>NDSU</strong> Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved all protocols. The experiment was<br />
conducted at the <strong>NDSU</strong> Hettinger Research Extension Center’s feedlot in Hettinger, ND, and the <strong>NDSU</strong><br />
Carrington Research Extension Center’s feedlot in Carrington, ND. Sixty-two Angus steer and heifer<br />
calves (average birth date = April 16 ± 1.4 days) from the <strong>NDSU</strong> Hettinger Research Extension<br />
Center’s cowherd were assigned to one of two weaning dates early wean = September 15 and 16,<br />
2008, (EW), or normal wean = November 3 and 4, 2008, (NW). On their respective weaning dates, EW<br />
and NW calves were hauled (five miles) to the feedlot after morning gathering and weighing in the<br />
pasture. Normal wean calves remained on pastures with their dams until their respective weaning date.<br />
At feedlot arrival, calves were stratified by weight and sex and allotted to one of 10 pens (six or seven<br />
calves/pen; five pens/weaning date) to evaluate the effect of weaning date on calf growth and<br />
performance. At the start of their respective receiving periods, all calves were dewormed, vaccinated<br />
for respiratory, clostridial, Hemophilus somnus, and Mannheimia diseases, and tagged with a radiofrequency<br />
identification tag (RFID) for enrollment in an age and source verification program<br />
(AgInfoLink, Longmont, CO). All calves were fed the same receiving ration (total-mixed ration) for the<br />
first 21 days (EW) and 20 days (NW) after weaning. The receiving diet consisted of ground-mixed hay,<br />
cracked corn, dried distillers grains with solubles (donated by POET Nutrition Inc., Sioux Falls, SD), a<br />
medicated growing supplement (containing Rumensin ® , Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN and<br />
Melengesterol acetate [MGA], Pfizer Animal Health, New York, NY), deccox crumbles, sodium<br />
bicarbonate and limestone (dry matter basis [DM]; 14.8% crude protein; 0.52 megacalories/pound of<br />
net energy for gain; Table 1).<br />
Page 30 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1. Dietary ingredient and nutrient concentration of calf growing diets.<br />
Item<br />
Ingredient, % DM basis<br />
Receiving diet Growing diet<br />
Cracked corn 31.8 31.7<br />
Deccox crumbles 1.5 1.5<br />
Dried distillers grains w/solubles 12.6 12.6<br />
Growing supplement a<br />
3.9 4.2<br />
Limestone 0.5 0.5<br />
Mixed hay b<br />
39.8 39.6<br />
Oat silage 9.3 9.3<br />
Sodium bicarbonate 0.6 0.6<br />
Nutrient Concentration c<br />
DM, % 77.1 74.9<br />
CP, % DM basis 14.8 13<br />
NE g, Mcal/lb. 0.52 0.56<br />
Ca:P 2 2.1<br />
a Calf growing supplement contained minimum 7.2% CP, 3.375% Ca, 0.27% P, 1.0%<br />
K, no animal byproducts, 350 mg/lb. Rumensin ® and MGA (melegesterol acetate) at<br />
0.5 mg (as fed).<br />
b Mixed hay composed of equal parts of ground barley and alfalfa-grass hays.<br />
c Analytical results from growing diets are from composited samples.<br />
At the onset of the background periods, weights were measured on the calves prior to morning feeding<br />
(October 14 and 15, 2008; December 4 and 5, 2008). All calves were implanted with a Ralgro implant<br />
(36 mg zeranol; Schering-Plough Animal Health Corp., Kenilworth, NJ) post weighing. During the<br />
growing period, calves were fed a 49:51 forage:concentrate diet (13% crude protein; 0.56<br />
megacalories/lb. of net energy for gain growing diet; DM basis; Table 1). All diets were formulated for<br />
2.20 pounds of daily gain. Diets were fed once daily (8 a.m.) and slick bunk management was used to<br />
determine individual pen daily feed allotments. Calves had free access to water in ice-free automatic<br />
fence-line water fountains.<br />
Calves were checked daily for signs of bloat and respiratory illness. Calf weights were recorded on day<br />
0, 1, 20, 21, 51, 52, 71, 72, 114, and 115. Initial and final weights were unshrunk body weights<br />
measured over two consecutive weigh days before morning feeding. Diet samples were collected (day<br />
6, 35, 37, 72, 78, 91, 103 and 113), composited by diet and analyzed by a commercial laboratory<br />
(Midwest Laboratories, Omaha, Neb.) for nutrient components.<br />
After backgrounding, calves (n=58) were shipped to the <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center,<br />
Carrington, ND, for finishing on January 21, 2009. During the finish period, calves were fed a diet<br />
containing 61 megacalories/pound of net energy for gain during a 105-day feeding period. Calves were<br />
fed to a common end weight (1,100 lbs.) and backfat thickness (0.4 inch) prior to harvest. During the<br />
course of finishing, 13 calves (EW = 5 and NW = 8) were harvested at a local abattoir (Barton Meats,<br />
Carrington, ND). Consequently, no carcass characteristics were measured on those calves. The<br />
remaining calves (n = 45) were harvested at Tyson Foods, <strong>Dakota</strong> City, NE, on May 5, 2009. Following<br />
Page 31 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
a 24-hour chill, qualified university personnel, in concert with USDA graders, collected carcass data on<br />
the individual carcasses. Carcass traits measured included hot carcass weights; marbling scores; 12 th<br />
rib fat thickness; longissimus areas; kidney, pelvic and heart fat measures; and USDA yield grades.<br />
Calf growth and carcass traits were analyzed as a completely randomized design with the<br />
backgrounding phase pen serving as the experimental unit. Treatment means were separated by least<br />
square means following a protected F-test (P < 0.05).<br />
Results and Discussion<br />
This is the third year of analyzing early weaning impacts on calf growth and carcass traits in May-born<br />
Angus calves at the Hettinger Research Extension Center. This year, the calves’ average birth date<br />
was two weeks earlier (mid April) as compared to previous years (Thompson et al., 2009; Stamm et al.,<br />
2007).<br />
The effects of weaning strategies on calf performance and health are displayed in Table 2. Final<br />
veterinary medicine costs, respiratory illness treatments and calf mortality were unaffected by treatment<br />
during the growing period (P > 0.05). Two EW and one NW calves died and another EW calf had to be<br />
removed from the study because of bloat. Because the ruminal bloat occurred during the early stages<br />
of the study, sodium bicarbonate was added to the calf diets to promote saliva production through<br />
increased cud chewing, resulting in increased rumen-buffering capacity. All performance data from the<br />
removed calves was deleted from subsequent performance analyses. Two EW calves were treated for<br />
respiratory illness. Of the calves treated for respiratory symptoms, one EW calf required additional<br />
treatment with a second antibiotic during the feeding period.<br />
Hettinger Research Extension Center’s early weaned calves.<br />
Page 32 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. Weaning strategy effects on calf performance.<br />
Early<br />
Item<br />
Weaning a<br />
Normal<br />
Weaning b<br />
SEM c<br />
P- value d<br />
No. head 30 32 - -<br />
Age at weaning, days<br />
Period 1, day 0 to 50<br />
178 227 1.34 -<br />
Initial weight, lb. 590 - - -<br />
DMI, lb./d 17.7 - 0.45 -<br />
Weight gain, lb. 170 - 17.3 -<br />
ADG, lb./d 3.33 - 0.34 -<br />
Gain:feed 0.14 - 0.03 -<br />
Feed cost, $/lb. of body weight gain e<br />
Period 2, day 51 to 114<br />
0.48 - 0.03 -<br />
Initial weight, lb. - 723 - -<br />
DMI, lb./d 22.6 23.2 0.35 0.29<br />
Weight gain, lb. 149 140 12.3 0.6<br />
ADG, lb./d 2.33 2.18 0.19 0.6<br />
Gain:feed 0.1 0.26 0.11 0.36<br />
Feed cost, $/lb. of body weight gain e<br />
1.17 g<br />
0.84 f<br />
Overall, day 114<br />
0.1 0.047<br />
Final weight, lb. 838 801 18.5 0.2<br />
DMI, lb./d 21.1 f<br />
23.2 g<br />
0.36 < 0.001<br />
Weight gain, lb. 314 g<br />
138 f<br />
10.4 < 0.001<br />
ADG, lb./d 2.73 g<br />
2.17 f<br />
0.14 0.02<br />
Gain:feed 0.13 g<br />
0.09 f<br />
0.007 0.002<br />
Feed cost, $/lb. of body weight gain e<br />
Treatments<br />
0.74 0.85 0.05 0.16<br />
Veterinary medicine costs, $/hd 14.64 11.8 2.15 0.38<br />
Treatment for respiratory illness, % of calves<br />
Once 6.6 0 4.67 0.35<br />
Twice 3.34 0 2.36 0.35<br />
Mortality, % of calves 6.68 3.34 5.28 0.54<br />
a Early wean calves; wean date = Sept. 15 and 16, 2008.<br />
b Normal wean calves; wean date = Nov. 3 and 4, 2008.<br />
c Standard error of mean; n = 5 observations per treatment.<br />
d<br />
P- value for F-test of treatment.<br />
e<br />
Cracked corn = $0.09/lb.; deccox crumbles = $0.36/lb.; growing supplement = $0.23/lb.;<br />
limestone = $0.11/lb.; ground mixed hay = $0.05/lb; oat silage = $ 0.01/lb, salt block =<br />
$0.10/lb, sodium bicarbonate = $0.28/lb.<br />
f, g<br />
Means with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05).<br />
Page 33 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
By design, weaning dates influenced weaning weights; EW calves were lighter and younger at weaning<br />
(523 lbs.; 178 days of age) compared with NW calves (660 lbs.; 227 days of age; P < 0.001). Feed<br />
intake of early weaned calves averaged 17.7 pounds/day and average daily gain (ADG) was 3.33<br />
pounds/day. As a result, feed costs averaged $0.48/lb. gained during the first 50 days of<br />
backgrounding. Normal weaned calves, placed on feed for 64 days, had similar feed intakes and daily<br />
gains as compared to EW calves (P > 0.05; Table 2). Though not statistically different, feed efficiency<br />
(gain:feed) for NW calves was numerically higher than EW calves (0.10 vs. 0.26 for EW and NW<br />
calves, respectively; P = 0.36) while feed cost/pound of gain differed across treatment ($1.17/lb. gained<br />
vs. $0.84/lb. gained for EW and NW calves, respectively; P = 0.047) for the same period. The<br />
difference in feed cost/pound of gain may be contributed to the decreased potency of the Ralgro<br />
implant in the EW calves (Ralgro implant potency period is approximately 90 days post-implanting).<br />
Although final weights were similar across treatment and averaged 820 ± 18.5 pounds (P = 0.20),<br />
background weight gain differed by treatment (314 and 139 lbs. for EW and NW, respectively; P <<br />
0.001). Calf weight gain was influenced directly by the number of days on feed. Early-weaned calves<br />
spent 51 days more on higher energy rations (based on weaning date) as compared with the NW<br />
calves (EW = 115 days vs. NW = 64 days). Overall, EW calves had nine percent lower dry matter<br />
intake as compared to NW calves (21.1 vs. 23.2 pounds for EW and NW calves, respectively; P <<br />
0.001). This may be attributed to their weaning date and weight, incidences of bloat, and respiratory<br />
illness events that affected the EW calves, resulting in lower feed intakes over the course of the study.<br />
Although feed costs/pound of gain was comparable across treatments and averaged $0.80/pound (P =<br />
0.16), EW calves had greater ADG (2.73 lbs. vs. 2.17 lbs.; P = 0.02) and feed efficiencies (0.13 vs.<br />
0.09; P = 0.002) compared to NW calves for the background period.<br />
The impact of weaning date on carcass traits is presented in Table 3. In this study, all carcass traits<br />
measured were similar at harvest (P > 0.05), regardless of treatment.<br />
Early-weaned steer at the bunk.<br />
Page 34 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Weaning strategy effects on carcass traits.<br />
Item EW a<br />
NW b<br />
SEM c<br />
P -value d<br />
No. head 22 23 - -<br />
Hot carcass weight, lb. 700 723 13.4 0.26<br />
Marbling score e<br />
Treatments<br />
496 503 11.75 0.7<br />
12 th rib fat thickness, in. 0.56 0.57 0.02 0.72<br />
Longissimus area, in. 2<br />
12.5 12.4 0.21 0.76<br />
Kidney, pelvic and heart fat, % 2.4 2.32 0.05 0.31<br />
USDA Yield Grade (adjusted) f<br />
3.04 3.16 0.06 0.15<br />
a EW: early weaned calves; wean date = Sept. 15 and 16, 2008.<br />
b NW: normal weaned calves; wean date = Nov. 3 and 4, 2008.<br />
c Standard error of mean; n = 5 observations per treatment.<br />
d P -value for F-test of treatment.<br />
e The amount and distribution of intramuscular fat; Modest = 400 to 499; Moderate = 500 to 599.<br />
f Yield grades determined by the following calculation: YG = 2.5 + (2.5x adjusted fat thickness,<br />
in.)+(0.20 x kidney, pelvic and heart fat %) - (0.32 x longissimus area, sq. in) + (0.0038) x hot<br />
carcass weight, lb.). Yield grade is defined as the comingled yield of closely trimmed,<br />
boneless retail cuts from the round, loin, rib and chuck. Yield grades are denoted by numbers<br />
1 through 5 with yield grade = 1 representing the highest cutability.<br />
Implications<br />
In the present study, calves that were weaned at 178 days of age had lower dry matter intake and<br />
greater feed efficiency than those weaned at 227 days of age. Carcass measurements were not<br />
different between early-weaned or normally-weaned calves when they were managed collectively<br />
during the finishing phase. In this trial, days on feed had a direct influence on weight gained during the<br />
feeding period. Early weaning of spring-born calves appears to be a feasible production option for<br />
cattle producers who calve between mid April and mid June. More research is warranted to determine<br />
what effects early weaning has during the finishing phase of feedlot feeding.<br />
Literature Cited<br />
Loy, D., D. Maxwell and G. Rouse. 1999. Effect of early weaning of beef calves on performance and<br />
carcass quality. Iowa <strong>State</strong> Univ. <strong>Beef</strong> Res. Rep. AS 641, Leaflet R1632, Ames. Pp. 22-24.<br />
Schoonmaker, J. P., F. L. Fluharty, S. C. Loerch, T. B. Turner, S. J. Moeller and D. M. Wulf. 2001.<br />
Effect of weaning status and implant regimen on growth, performance, and carcass characteristics of<br />
steers. J. Anim. Sci. 79: 1074-1084.<br />
Stamm, M. M., C. S. Schauer, V. L. Anderson, B. R. Ilse, D. M. Stecher, D. Drolc, and D. Pearson.<br />
2007. Influence of weaning date (early or normal) on performance, health, and carcass<br />
characteristics of May-born Angus calves. <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Res. Rep. 30: 23-28.<br />
Story, C. E., R. J. Rasby, R. T. Clzarck and C. T. Milton. 2000. Age of calf at weaning of spring-calving<br />
beef cows and the effect on cow and calf performance and production economics. J. Anim. Sci. 78:<br />
1403-1413.<br />
Page 35 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Thompson, M. M., C. S. Schauer, V. L. Anderson, B. R. Ilse, J. C. Galbreath, and R. J. Maddock.<br />
2009. Effect of weaning and production management strategies on calf growth and carcass traits.<br />
2008 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> Cattle and Range Res. Rep. Pp 28-33.<br />
Acknowledgements<br />
The authors would like to thank POET Nutrition Inc., Sioux Falls, SD, for their donation of the dried<br />
distillers grains with solubles used in this study and David Pearson, Don Stecher, Donald Drolc, Dale<br />
Burr, Tim Schroeder and Tyler Ingebretson for their assistance in conducting this trial.<br />
*Partial support for this research was provided by the U. S. Department of <strong>Agriculture</strong>-Agricultural<br />
Research Service <strong>North</strong>ern Great Plains Research Laboratory, Mandan, ND. Specific Cooperative<br />
Agreement No. 58-5445-7-315. Disclaimer: Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations<br />
expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the<br />
U.S. Department of <strong>Agriculture</strong>.<br />
Growth and <strong>Feedlot</strong> Performance of Steer Calves Born From <strong>Beef</strong> Cows<br />
Supplemented with Linseed Meal During Late Gestation<br />
B.R. Ilse 1 , V.L. Anderson 1 , J.D. Kirsch 2 , D.S. Buchanan 2 , and K.A. Vonnahme 2<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
Abstract<br />
This study examined the effects of supplementing beef cows with phytoestrogen rich linseed meal<br />
(LSM) during late gestation on steer calf growth performance and carcass characteristics. Multiparous<br />
cows (n = 72) were allotted randomly to one of 12 pens, with six pens supplemented with pelleted LSM<br />
and six pens fed a control sunflower meal (SFM) pellet. Diets were formulated to be isocaloric and<br />
isonitrogenous. Treatment supplements were included in a totally-mixed ration each day for the last 60<br />
d of gestation. Steer calves (n = 41) were followed from birth to finishing. Birth weight, actual weaning<br />
weight, and ADG and carcass characteristics were recorded. Steer birth and weaning weight were not<br />
different between treatments (P > 0.05; 96.9 vs. 95.6 ± 2.50 lb.; 561.7 vs. 574.8 ± 9.13 lb., for LSM vs.<br />
SFM, respectively). Final live weight was significantly different due to cow gestational supplementation<br />
(P = 0.04; 1206.2 vs. 1286.3 ± 21.31 lbs., for LSM vs. SFM, respectively) Steer ADG overall was not<br />
different due to treatment (P > 0.05; 2.82 vs. 2.98 ± 0.18 lbs., for LSM vs. SFM, respectively). Carcass<br />
characteristic parameters were not different due to treatment. Supplementation of LSM during late<br />
gestation does not appear to negatively impact growth rate in calves.<br />
Key words: phytoestrogen, linseed meal, cattle<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> is the national leader in flax production (USDA, NASS 2008). Linseed meal (LSM) is a<br />
byproduct of flax where the oil has been removed and is commonly used in livestock diets. Recent<br />
research has hypothesized that the maternal diet during gestation can have an effect on the lifetime<br />
productivity of the offspring. Flaxseed and LSM contain high levels of the plant phytoestrogens. Fetal<br />
exposure to phytoestrogen during gestation from that maternal diet may affect the offspring’s<br />
development and lifetime productivity.<br />
Page 36 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
We hypothesized that 10 percent LSM supplementation of the maternal diet during late gestation would<br />
influence calf weight, lifetime gain performance and carcass characteristics.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
Animals and Diets<br />
This study was approved by the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> University Institutional Animal Care and Use<br />
Committee. At approximately 215 d of gestation, the Carrington Research Extension Center’s<br />
multiparous, Red Angus x Simmental cows (n = 72) were randomly assigned to one of two treatments:<br />
1) 10 percent LSM pelleted supplement or 2) a control supplement, sunflower meal (SFM). Pelleted<br />
supplements were offered (5 lbs. per hd/d) in a totally-mixed ration (Table 1) until parturition. Cows<br />
were assigned to treatments using cow weight as a blocking criterion. Additionally calf birth weight and<br />
previous calf birth weight were equalized between treatments as much as possible. Animals were<br />
allotted to 1 of 12 pens, with six pens supplemented with LSM and six pens fed the SFM pellet.<br />
Cow-calf pair: Calf born from LSM-supplemented cow during<br />
the last 60 d of gestation.<br />
Table 1. Gestational cow diet last 60 days until parturtion a .<br />
Item<br />
Ingredient LSM SFM<br />
----------% DM----------<br />
LSM Pellet 9.7 -<br />
SFM Pellet - 9.7<br />
Light Barley 27.6 27.6<br />
Straw 32.8 32.8<br />
Corn Silage 29.9 29.9<br />
a<br />
Cow ration formulated by recommened requirements (NRC,<br />
2000).<br />
Page 37 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Diets were formulated to provide required nutrients for an approximately 1,475-pound, late-gestation,<br />
mature beef cow as suggested by the National Research Council (NRC, 2000).<br />
Upon parturition, cows were comingled and cow-calf pairs managed similarly. Calves were weaned at<br />
an average age of 170 d.<br />
Steer calves (n = 41) were followed from birth through finishing period to harvest. Birth weight, actual<br />
weaning weight, ADG, and carcass characteristics were recorded for steer calves. Steers were<br />
managed similarly and fed as suggested by the National Research Council (NRC, 2000) throughout the<br />
course of the study.<br />
Table 2. Steer receiving and finishing period diets. a<br />
Item<br />
Ingredient Receiving Finishing<br />
----------% DM -----------<br />
Rumensin 1.4 1.2<br />
CaCo 3 0.56 0.5<br />
Corn 29 34.7<br />
Peas 8.9 11.8<br />
Midds 18 -<br />
MWDGS 16.9 12<br />
Corn Silage 16.3 16.8<br />
Clean Out Barley - 14.6<br />
Hay 8.9 -<br />
Straw - 8.3<br />
a<br />
Steer rations formulated by recommened requirements<br />
(NRC, 2000).<br />
Statistical analysis<br />
Data were analyzed by least squares (Proc Mixed, V.9.1; SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Pen was the<br />
experimental unit for weaning weight, period weights, ADG and carcass characteristics. The statistical<br />
model included the fixed effects of gestational diet of the cow and cow weight block.<br />
Results and Discussion<br />
Growth performance<br />
Steer birth weight and weaning weight (Table 3) were not affected by treatment (P > 0.05; 96.9 vs. 95.6<br />
± 2.5 lbs.; 561.7 vs. 574.8 ± 9.13 lbs., for LSM vs. SFM, respectively). Similarly, Stalker et al. (2006)<br />
found supplementation of 42 percent CP versus. no CP supplement prepartum in beef cows did not<br />
affect birth weight, but calves born from supplemented cows had greater weaning weights. Conversely,<br />
Larson et al. (2009) reported protein supplement offered to cows during late gestation resulted in<br />
increased birth weight compared to non-protein supplemented calves. Tou et al. (1998) reported lighter<br />
birth weights in rat offspring born from rat dams supplemented with 10 percent flaxseed.<br />
Steer ADG was not different due to treatment (Table 3). Overall ADG (P = 0.05) was 2.82 pounds for<br />
steers born from supplemented LSM cows and 2.98 ± 0.18 for the SFM treatment.<br />
Page 38 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 3. Steer perfomance born from cows supplemented with LSM or<br />
control diet during last 60 d of gestation.<br />
Item LSM SFM St. Error P- value a<br />
Birth Date, Julian 91.00 88.58 2.70 0.57<br />
Birth Wt., lb. 96.91 95.58 2.51 0.73<br />
Weaning Wt . Lb. 561.73 574.80 9.13 0.37<br />
Wt. Period 1 617.13 630.36 9.05 0.36<br />
Wt. Period 2 728.63 751.13 11.72 0.24<br />
Wt. Period 3 847.32 877.02 14.09 0.20<br />
Wt. Period 4 957.42 990.47 16.85 0.23<br />
Wt. Period 5 1046.23 1087.68 20.08 0.21<br />
Wt. Period 6 1121.53 1169.60 19.32 0.14<br />
Wt. Period 7 1149.47 1234.05 28.52 0.09<br />
Final Live Wt. 1206.17 1286.25 21.31 0.04<br />
Initial ADG 1.98 1.98 0.098 0.9696<br />
Mid ADG 2.62 2.70 0.109 0.6418<br />
Final ADG 2.38 3.48 0.458 0.1543<br />
Overall ADG 2.82 2.98 0.184 0.5438<br />
a P-values < 0.05 are considered signicantly different.<br />
Finished CREC steers born from cows supplemented during gestational period.<br />
Carcass quality performance<br />
Steers’ hot carcass weight (HCW), backfat, ribeye area (REA) and final yield grade were not affected<br />
significantly by cow supplemented treatment during gestation (Table 4). However, dressing percentage<br />
was significantly affected (P = 0.02; 63.3% and 59.7% ± 0.008, for LSM vs. SFM, respectively).<br />
Page 39 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Marbling number approached significance (P = 0.09) indicating a trend that marbling score was<br />
affected by gestational treatment. Steers born from cows supplemented with SFM had greater<br />
marbling than those supplemented with LSM (459.5 vs. 507.39 ± 16.24, LSM vs. SFM, respectively).<br />
Table 4 . Performance of steers born from cows supplemented with LSM or<br />
control diet during last 60 d of gestation.<br />
Item LSM SFM St Error P- value a<br />
Hot Carcass Wt. lb. 760.85 767.85 7.00 0.53<br />
Marbling Score 459.50 507.39 16.24 0.09<br />
Backfat, in. 0.39 0.41 0.05 0.77<br />
REA, sq. in. 13.03 12.66 0.15 0.13<br />
KPH, % 2.46 2.45 0.05 0.59<br />
Final YG 2.31 2.57 0.16 0.34<br />
a<br />
P-values < 0.05 are considered signicantly different.<br />
Summary<br />
Linseed meal can be fed to beef cattle during late gestation without any negative effects on calf birth<br />
date or birth weight, calf growth performance or carcass quality parameters. Even though final live<br />
weight was significantly different, this was contributed to the allotment of steers born from cows treated<br />
during gestation. Further beef cattle research on fetal programming during the fetal development<br />
stages and early postnatal growth should continue to determine the effects of the cow diet on calf<br />
lifetime performance.<br />
Literature Cited<br />
Larson, D. M., J. L. Martin, D. C. Adams, and R. N. Funston. Winter grazing system and<br />
supplementation during late gestation influence performance of beef cows and steer progeny. 2009.<br />
J. Anim. Sci. 87:1147-1155.<br />
NRC. 2000. Nutrient Requirements of <strong>Beef</strong> Cattle. 7 th Revised Ed. National Academy Press,<br />
Washington, DC.<br />
Stalker, L. A., D. C. Adams, T. J. Klopfenstein, D. M. Feuz and R. N. Funston. Effects of pre- and<br />
postpartum nutrition on reproduction in spring calving cows and calf feedlot performance. 2006. J.<br />
Anim. Sci. 84:2582-2589.<br />
Tou, J. C. L., J. Chen, L. U. Thompson. 1998. Flaxseed and its lignan precursor, secoisolariciresinol<br />
diglycoside, affect pregnancy outcome and reproductive development in rats. J. Nutr. 128:1861.<br />
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Field Office. June 2008. Ag Statistics No.<br />
77.<br />
Page 40 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Effect of Distillers Grains on Natural vs. Conventional Supplements and<br />
Production Methods on <strong>Feedlot</strong> Performance, and Carcass<br />
Characteristics<br />
B.R. Ilse 1 , V.L. Anderson 1 , M.M. Thompson 2 , and C.S. Schauer 2<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2 <strong>NDSU</strong> Hettinger Research Extension Center<br />
Abstract<br />
This trial was initiated to determine the effects of natural production methods for beef cattle during the<br />
finishing period versus conventional management in diets containing 20 percent modified distillers<br />
grains with solubles (MDGS). Seventy-two backgrounded steers were assigned to one of two<br />
treatments: 1) conventionally (CON) managed calves received growth promotants (implants/<br />
ionophores) and antibiotics if required and 2) natural (NAT) calves were not given growth promotants or<br />
antibiotics. In place of the ionophore in the natural diet, a supplement comprised of a commerciallyproduced,<br />
live yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, was included in the totally-mixed ration. Overall the<br />
steers managed and fed conventionally consumed more feed, were heavier and had greater average<br />
daily gains compared to naturally-managed calves (P < 0.0001). Efficiency overall for pounds of feed/<br />
pound of gain was significantly different due to treatment (P = 0.02) and hot carcass weight, REA, and<br />
KPH were all significantly affected (P < 0.04) by treatment. Backfat was not affected by treatment (P =<br />
0.48). Yield grade was not significantly different due to treatment (P = 0.53). However, NAT steers had<br />
higher marbling score (P = 0.02).<br />
Introduction<br />
Growth in the ethanol industry has increased the amount of distillers grains available for feed. Natural<br />
beef production has become of interest and demand. Natural beef, which must meet the criteria of<br />
―never-ever‖ receiving implants, ionophore or antibiotics, and reasonably priced ethanol byproducts<br />
could allow <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>’s cattlemen to create a natural cattle feeding industry within the state.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
Seventy-two black Angus steers were backgrounded at the Hettinger Research Extension Center and<br />
shipped to the Carrington Research Extension Center for finishing. Upon arrival at Carrington, the<br />
steers were allotted in one of two production management treatments: natural (NAT) in which the steers<br />
received no implants, antibiotics or ionophores, or conventional (CON) in which the steers were<br />
managed receiving all common conventional finishing practices. Finishing diets (65 Mcal/lb.) were<br />
formulated to meet or exceed NRC (1996) nutritional beef cattle recommendations (Table 1).<br />
Page 41 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report<br />
Steers fed the finishing diet<br />
including 20% MDGS with natural<br />
or conventional supplement.
Table 1. Finishing ration with 20% MDGS in<br />
natural and conventional diets.<br />
---------------% DM-------------<br />
Item Conventional Natural<br />
Corn 58.40 58.71<br />
Canola 2.89 2.93<br />
MDGS 22.19 22.29<br />
Silage 7.21 7.56<br />
Straw 7.58 7.65<br />
CaCO 3 0.50 0.57<br />
Ionophore 1.21 -<br />
Natural Suppl - 0.28<br />
The finishing ration was formulated to contain a minimum of 20 percent modified distillers grains with<br />
solubles (MDGS) and to include a conventional supplement in the form of an ionophore at 300 mg/hd/d,<br />
or a natural yeast-based supplement Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 400 mg/hd/day. Steers were fed<br />
once daily ad libitium and had free access to fenceline waterers. Steers were weighed every 28 d and<br />
feed delivery was recorded daily until harvest. Conventional steers were re-implanted with a terminal<br />
trenbolone acetate (TBA) commercial implant. Steers were harvested when cattle were observed to<br />
have obtained 60 percent choice by trained CREC personnel. Steers in the CON treatment reached<br />
this visible appraisal 13 d earlier than the NAT steers, so steers were harvested by treatment block 13 d<br />
apart.<br />
Results<br />
Growth Performance and Efficiency<br />
Dry matter intake for all periods except period one was significantly different (Table 2). Overall the<br />
steers managed and fed conventionally consumed 24.63 pounds/hd/d where as the natural consumed<br />
only 21.50 ± 0.62 pounds/hd/d. Final body weight (P < 0.0001) was 1383.15 vs. 1296.40 ± 13.89<br />
pounds for CON versus NAT, respectively. Overall ADG (P< 0.0001) was 3.97 vs. 3.26 ± 0.07 pounds<br />
for CON versus NAT treatments. Anderson et al. (2008) did not report significant differences in DMI or<br />
ADG in cattle managed conventionally versus naturally, but did report differences in efficiency in favor<br />
of the ionophore supplement that was comprised of yucca schidigera extract and cobalt. Efficiency<br />
overall for pounds of feed/ pound of gain was significantly different due to treatment (P = 0.02; CON<br />
6.18 vs. NAT 6.60 ± 0.15). Gain pounds / feed pounds was not significantly different overall (P = 0.09;<br />
0.16 vs. 0.15 ± 0.01) for CON versus NAT, respectively.<br />
Page 42 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 2. Intake gain and efficiency of calves fed using natural or conventional<br />
production methods.<br />
Item Conventional Natural St. Error P-value a<br />
Weight, lb.<br />
Initial Wt., Feb 11 856.31 832.53 7.50 0.010<br />
Period 1, Mar. 11 974.74 927.49 12.86 0.004<br />
Period 2, Apr 8 1114.82 1033.11 12.70
Table 3. Carcass performance of calves fed MDGS using natural or conventional production<br />
methods.<br />
Item Conventional Natural St. Error P-value a<br />
HCW lb. 860.72 764.00 6.36
Discovering Value in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Calves; The <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show<br />
Feedout Project VIII<br />
Progress Report Year 2008-2009<br />
K. Hoppe 1 , and P. Carpentier 2<br />
1 <strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
2 McLean County Extension<br />
Abstract<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> cattle producers continue to explore the value of the calves they produce by measuring<br />
feedlot performance and carcass characteristics. The <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show Feedout project was<br />
developed to discover the actual value of spring-born beef steer calves, provide comparisons between<br />
herds, and benchmark feeding and carcass performance. Cattle consigned to the feedout project<br />
averaged 648.5 pounds upon delivery to the Carrington Research Extension Center Livestock Unit on<br />
October 18, 2008. After an average 198-day feeding period with 1.52 percent death loss, cattle<br />
averaged 1260.1 pounds (at plant, shrunk weight). Average daily feed intake per head, as fed, was<br />
29.6 pounds while pounds of feed required per pound of gain were 9.9. Diet dry matter was 78 percent.<br />
The pen-of-three calves averaged 404 days of age at harvest. Overall pen average daily gain was<br />
2.98 pounds. Feed cost was $0.553 per pound and total cost of gain without interest was $0.752. The<br />
cattle were marketed on May 5, 2009 and marbling scores averaged 437.6 (low choice). Profit before<br />
interest expense ranged from $121.68 per head for pen-of-three cattle with superior growth and<br />
carcass traits to a loss of ($63.70) per head return for a pen-of-three with poorer feedlot and carcass<br />
performance.<br />
Introduction<br />
Determining calf value is a continuing experience for cow-calf producers. To remain competitive with<br />
other livestock and poultry in the meat industry, cow-calf producers need to identify superior genetics<br />
and management. At time of bull selection, a producer must also estimate the type of animal desired<br />
by buyers 1½- 2 years before sale. Marketplace premiums are provided for calves that have<br />
exceptional feedlot performance and produce a high quality carcass. In addition, superior cost effective<br />
feeding performance is needed to justify the expense of feeding cattle past weaning. Since <strong>North</strong><br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> feeds were low cost and climate is favorable, low feeding cost per pound of gain can be<br />
accomplished. This feedlot project was developed to provide cattle producers with an understanding of<br />
cattle genetics and cattle feeding in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
The <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show was developed for cattle producers willing to consign steer calves to a<br />
show and feedout contest. The calves were received in groups of three or four on October 18, 2008 to<br />
the Turtle Lake Weighing Station, Turtle Lake, ND for weighing, tagging, processing and showing. The<br />
calves were evaluated for conformation and uniformity with the judges providing a discussion to the<br />
owners at the beginning of the feedout. The calves were then shipped to the Carrington Research<br />
Extension Center, Carrington, ND for feeding. Prior to shipment, calves were vaccinated, implanted,<br />
dewormed, and injected with prophylatic long acting oxytetracycline. Calves were then sorted and<br />
placed on corn based receiving diets. After a two week adaptation period, the calves were moved on to<br />
a corn-based 80% grain diet. Cattle were weighed every 28 days and updated performance reports<br />
provided to the owners.<br />
An open house was held on February 12, 2009, at the Carrington Research Extension Center Livestock<br />
Unit, where the owners reviewed the calves and discussed marketing conditions.<br />
Page 45 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
The number of cattle consigned was 198 of which 153 competed in the pen-of-three contest. Cattle<br />
were implanted with Synovex S upon arrival and reimplanted with Synovex Choice during the feeding<br />
period The cattle (193 head) were harvested on May 5, 2009. Cattle were sold to Tyson Fresh Meats,<br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> City NE on a grid basis with premiums and discounts. Carcass data was collected after<br />
harvest. Ranking in the pen-of-three competition was based on the best score obtained. Overall score<br />
was determined by adding the index score for weight per day of age (20% of score), average daily gain<br />
on test (20% of score), marbling score (20% of score), and retail product value divided by weight per<br />
day of age (40% of score). The <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show provided cash awards for the top placing<br />
pens of steers.<br />
Results and Discussion<br />
Cattle consigned to the <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show Feedout project averaged 648.5 pounds upon<br />
delivery to the Carrington Research Extension Center Livestock Unit on October 18, 2008. After an<br />
average 198-day feeding period cattle averaged 1260.1 pounds (at plant, shrunk weight). Three deaths<br />
or 1.52 percent death loss occurred during the feeding period. Two steers where returned to a<br />
producer due to hoof and leg structure problems. Average daily feed intake per head was 29.6 pounds,<br />
as fed basis, and 23.1 pounds, dry matter basis. Pounds of feed required per pound of gain were 9.9,<br />
as fed basis, and 7.7 pounds, dry matter basis. Overall feed cost per pound of gain was $0.553.<br />
Overall yardage cost per pound of gain was $0.093. Combined cost per pound of gain including feed,<br />
yardage, veterinary, trucking and other expenses except interest was $0.752. The carcass<br />
characteristics were collected and used in calculating indexes for scoring. The cattle were harvested<br />
May 5, 2009, contained USDA Quality Grades at 2.1% Prime, 65.8% Choice or better (including 16.6%<br />
Certified Angus <strong>Beef</strong>), 29.5% Select and 2.6% Standard and USDA Yield Grades at 14.5% YG1, 46.6%<br />
YG2, 32.1% YG3, 5.7% YG4, and 1.1% YG5. Carcass value per cwt was calculated by using the<br />
actual base carcass price plus premiums and discounts. Grid prices were: May 9, 2009 - $137.63<br />
Choice YG3 base with premiums of Prime $8.08, CAB $2.79, YG1 $4.00, YG2 $2.00, and discounts of<br />
Select $-2.28, Standard $-10.30, YG4 $-11.40, YG5 $-19.33. Retail product value was calculated as<br />
carcass weight, pound * percent retail product *(((carcass value per cwt /100)/ retail product yield) /<br />
retail product markup) where retail product yield = 0.65, and retail product markup = 0.75. Percent<br />
retail product value was calculated as 0.825 - (calculated yield grade *0.05). Results from the calves<br />
selected for the pen-of-three competition are listed in Table 1. Overall, the pen-of-three calves<br />
averaged 404 days of age and averaged 1263.0 lbs. per head at harvest. Overall pen-of -three<br />
average daily gain was 3.36 lbs. while weight per day of age was 3.23 lbs. Overall pen-of-three<br />
marbling score was 437.6 or low choice marbling category. Retail product value averaged $1543.35<br />
per head. Retail product value divided by day of age averaged $3.82.<br />
Calves consigned to the <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show Feedout.<br />
Page 46 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1. Feeding performance - 2008-2009 <strong>Dakota</strong> Feeder Calf Show Feedout<br />
Pen Best Three Average Average Average Average Weight Marbling Ave Retail Product Ave Feeding Profit<br />
Score Total Birth Date Harvest Weight Daily Gain per Day of Age Score<br />
Value /DOA or Loss / Head<br />
1 3.485 11-Mar-08 1,346.95 3.703 3.356 663.3 4.205 $ 121.68<br />
2 3.440 2-Apr-08 1,293.63 3.533 3.399 650.0 4.188 $ 80.31<br />
3 3.306 9-Apr-08 1,345.99 3.682 3.601 400.0 4.648 $ 50.33<br />
4 3.280 28-Mar-08 1,366.52 3.739 3.545 470.0 4.260 $ 37.66<br />
5 3.265 29-Mar-08 1,424.13 3.891 3.705 383.3 4.408 $ 33.99<br />
average of top 5 3.355 28-Mar-08 1,355.444 3.710 3.521 513.333 $ 4.34 $ 64.79<br />
6 3.232 8-Apr-08 1,228.39 3.691 3.280 583.3 3.793 $ 43.16<br />
7 3.211 17-Mar-08 1,348.38 3.953 3.405 410.0 4.260 $ 61.25<br />
8 3.210 11-Mar-08 1,377.02 3.353 3.425 483.3 4.266 $ 47.62<br />
9 3.194 26-Mar-08 1,343.29 3.868 3.469 433.3 4.116 $ 26.10<br />
10 3.147 16-Apr-08 1,271.51 3.458 3.457 440.0 4.175 $ 31.30<br />
11 3.138 17-Mar-08 1,348.38 3.853 3.406 500.0 3.689 $ 34.42<br />
12 3.130 20-Mar-08 1,358.72 3.640 3.460 440.0 4.015 $ 34.13<br />
13 3.128 17-Apr-08 1,281.38 3.668 3.495 420.0 4.059 $ 12.38<br />
14 3.119 1-Feb-08 1,359.36 3.502 3.106 640.0 3.395 $ 64.13<br />
15 3.113 6-Mar-08 1,405.51 3.435 3.458 396.7 4.268 $ 44.60<br />
16 3.090 27-Mar-08 1,303.82 3.569 3.377 420.0 4.064 $ 56.97<br />
17 3.070 15-Apr-08 1,208.97 3.398 3.283 516.7 3.731 $ (9.20)<br />
18 3.064 8-Apr-08 1,269.92 3.442 3.396 433.3 3.985 $ (2.14)<br />
19 3.058 25-Mar-08 1,329.12 3.577 3.419 373.3 4.136 $ 25.46<br />
20 3.058 9-Mar-08 1,358.25 3.721 3.363 480.0 3.620 $ 19.71<br />
21 3.057 27-Mar-08 1,270.08 3.401 3.290 446.7 3.988 $ 25.85<br />
22 3.051 15-Mar-08 1,333.10 3.614 3.347 476.7 3.683 $ 47.59<br />
23 3.044 26-Mar-08 1,329.76 3.147 3.430 423.3 4.111 $ (1.49)<br />
24 2.998 2-May-08 1,211.68 3.420 3.445 370.0 4.030 $ (7.43)<br />
25 2.996 13-Apr-08 1,151.21 3.462 3.107 433.3 3.923 $ 40.05<br />
26 2.992 15-Mar-08 1,347.42 3.539 3.390 483.3 3.482 $ (63.70)<br />
27 2.992 24-Mar-08 1,278.84 3.480 3.287 370.0 4.070 $ 33.02<br />
28 2.984 28-Mar-08 1,311.62 3.802 3.400 373.3 3.782 $ (12.29)<br />
29 2.978 13-Apr-08 1,257.83 2.995 3.398 376.7 4.206 $<br />
2.03<br />
30 2.972 26-Jan-08 1,438.93 3.560 3.238 533.3 3.277 $ (34.93)<br />
31 2.966 10-Apr-08 1,170.14 3.186 3.134 483.3 3.750 $<br />
6.18<br />
32 2.963 16-Mar-08 1,206.11 3.583 3.045 443.3 3.741 $ 46.47<br />
33 2.955 1-Apr-08 1,262.13 3.226 3.308 426.7 3.837 $ 15.50<br />
34 2.955 16-Apr-08 1,166.64 3.084 3.178 430.0 3.979 $<br />
4.39<br />
35 2.953 16-Apr-08 1,102.83 3.205 3.002 500.0 3.702 $ 16.62<br />
36 2.925 18-Mar-08 1,253.53 3.306 3.175 436.7 3.730 $ 28.34<br />
37 2.924 26-Mar-08 1,237.78 3.157 3.193 396.7 3.976 $ 28.62<br />
38 2.916 30-Mar-08 1,181.92 3.339 3.078 506.7 3.434 $<br />
1.92<br />
39 2.916 25-Mar-08 1,317.66 3.400 3.392 350.0 3.898 $ (45.90)<br />
40 2.914 13-Apr-08 1,202.29 3.363 3.248 353.3 3.984 $ 12.90<br />
41 2.871 12-Apr-08 1,132.59 3.081 3.052 423.3 3.816 $ (7.99)<br />
42 2.870 4-Apr-08 1,185.26 3.073 3.127 406.7 3.846 $ 10.58<br />
43 2.869 15-Mar-08 1,293.63 3.016 3.252 386.7 3.888 $<br />
9.77<br />
44 2.866 17-Apr-08 1,164.73 3.116 3.182 363.3 3.965 $<br />
1.81<br />
45 2.848 29-Feb-08 1,218.52 3.089 2.959 473.3 3.574 $ 13.30<br />
46 2.842 30-Mar-08 1,250.83 3.342 3.265 430.0 3.420 $ (24.10)<br />
47 2.823 6-Apr-08 1,176.03 3.233 3.122 380.0 3.723 $ (22.23)<br />
48 2.797 27-Mar-08 1,201.33 3.183 3.107 436.7 3.430 $ (29.42)<br />
49 2.560 14-Feb-08 1,109.35 2.868 2.602 430.0 3.174 $ (22.17)<br />
average of bottom 5<br />
with no deads 2.774 16-Mar-08 1,191.214 3.143 3.011 430.000 3.464 (16.924)<br />
50 (1 dead) 2.149 27-Mar-08 1,247.78 2.424 2.481 300.0 2.746 $ 12.54<br />
51 (2 deads) 1.013 2-Apr-08 835.26 1.189 1.157 140.0 1.282 $ (5.82)<br />
Average 2.974 26-Mar-08 1,263.060 3.364 3.231 437.647 3.818 $ 17.53<br />
Standard Deviation 0.348 18.520 102.372 0.428 0.368 85.313 0.497 32.876<br />
Number 51 51 51 51 51 51 51 51<br />
Page 47 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
The highest combined index score per pen-of-three was 3.485. While the highest overall scoring pen<br />
did place first in marbling score, it did not place first in harvest weight, weight per day of age, feedlot<br />
average daily gain and percent retail product value divided by weight per day of age. Correlation<br />
between index score total and profit was fair (r = 0.4291). Correlations between profit and average<br />
daily gain, weight per day of age, marbling score, or percent retail product value divided by weight per<br />
day of age are shown in Table 2.<br />
Table 2. Correlation between profit and various production measures.<br />
Correlation<br />
Cofefficient<br />
Profit and Index Score 0.4291<br />
Profit and Average Birth Date -0.0945<br />
Profit and Average Harvest Weight 0.2941<br />
Profit and Average Daily Gain, 0.3368<br />
Profit and Weight per Day of Age 0.2162<br />
Profit and Marbling Score 0.4173<br />
Profit and Percent Retail Product Value divided by day of age 0.3917<br />
Profit or loss was calculated using initial calf price as price per 100 lbs., $ = 123.25321 – (0.03767 *<br />
initial calf weight). Profit or loss accounted for initial calf price, feed, yardage, veterinary, freight, brand<br />
inspection, beef check off, ultrasound and carcass data collection costs. Interest costs on cattle or<br />
feeding expenses were not included in calculating profit or loss. Final carcass value was assessed<br />
using the actual grid pricing for the harvest group.<br />
Overall, cattle feeding provided a $-91.82 per head loss including death loss but not interest expense.<br />
However, the top profit pen-of-three calves with superior genetics returned $121.68 per head while<br />
bottom pen of three calves returned $-63.70 per head loss. The average of the top five scoring pensof-steers<br />
averaged $64.79 per head while the average of the bottom five scoring pens-of steer (dead<br />
loss not included) averaged $-16.92 per head. The overall pen-of-three average was $17.53 per head<br />
profit.<br />
Implications<br />
Calf value is improved with superior carcass performance. <strong>Feedlot</strong> performance is also important for<br />
increased weight gain and heavier carcass weights. Exceptional average daily gains, weight per day of<br />
age, marbling score and retail product value can be found in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> beef herds. Feedout projects<br />
provide a source of information for cattle producers to learn about feedlot performance, genetic<br />
differences, and discover cattle value.<br />
Page 48 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Forage Production Costs and Yields for South-Central <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
S. Metzger<br />
Carrington Area Farm Business Management Program<br />
As livestock feeders who produce both beef and forages look for more viable cash flows, they will need<br />
to be aware of the true cost of producing forages and what that may mean to the bottom line of their<br />
feeding enterprises. These beef and forage producers will be challenged to find the most profitable<br />
combination of concentrates and forages that produces both the desired gain as well as the desired<br />
profit.<br />
Forage production data for this study was gathered directly from producers enrolled in the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
Farm Business Management Program in Region 3 at Bismarck, Casselton, Carrington, Enderlin,<br />
Jamestown, Napoleon, and Wahpeton. Each of these sites collected and summarized the data for its<br />
own area, after which the data was combined into an annual regional report. Farms or ranches located<br />
within the Red River Valley or west of Bismarck were deleted from the Region 3 report and were<br />
included in the regional reports that were more reflective of the corresponding areas.<br />
The data for this study included corn silage, alfalfa hay, grass hay and mixed alfalfa-grass hay. These<br />
forage crops comprised a total of 30,141 acres. The annual field data came from an average of 54<br />
farms or ranches with some duplication as some farms or ranches produced more than one of the<br />
forages in any given year. The FINPACK system was used to do the individual forage enterprise<br />
analysis for the 2006 to 2008 time frame. To secure as large a database as possible, a limited number<br />
of owned forage enterprises were converted to a cash-rent equivalency by elimination of the real estate<br />
taxes and long-term interest and then assigning to those limited enterprises a cash-rent amount that<br />
was in line with the historic cash rents for those forages and the specific yearly rent for those forages.<br />
The greatest amount of forage dry matter per acre was from corn, which at an average of 11.44 tons<br />
and a harvest time moisture of 65% still yielded 4.0 tons of dry matter. This was followed by alfalfa hay<br />
and grass hay, with alfalfa-grass hay finishing in fourth place at 1.31 tons per acre harvested at an<br />
estimated 15% moisture or approximately 1.11 tons of dry matter.<br />
The greatest cost per ton of dry matter was also attributed to corn silage at $61.90 while the least cost<br />
was associated with grass hay at $33.85 per ton. Alfalfa hay and alfalfa-grass hay came in at $49.36<br />
and $45.37, respectively. While cost per ton of dry matter is one method of comparing forages, it is<br />
vital to note that the quality and specific nutrient content of the various forages must always be<br />
addressed. While grass hay may have one of the lowest costs per ton of dry matter produced, it may<br />
also be much lower in energy and specific nutrients than some higher cost forages such as corn silage.<br />
It should also be noted that hay produced on CRP ground would most likely have been included as<br />
alfalfa-hay because of the mix of forages found within it.<br />
The main value of knowing the real costs of forage production lies in being able to more correctly<br />
correlate the cost of the forage to the nutrient content of the forage. A forage such as corn silage may<br />
be more expensive, but it may be a better fit for a specific livestock enterprise as opposed to a much<br />
lower cost forage such as grass hay. In addition, this knowledge will also help producers to more<br />
adequately compare home-grown forages to purchased forages. Producers often express some<br />
surprise that home-grown forages are as costly as they are, when all costs, including overhead<br />
expenses are considered. All of these things can help beef producers to control their expenses while<br />
working towards the best bottom line possible.<br />
Page 49 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Table 1 Forage Crop Production 2006-2008 in Region 3, South Central <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>.<br />
Corn Silage Alfalfa Hay Grass Hay Alfalfa-Grass<br />
Years 2006-2008 Region 3 At 65% Moist. 10-15% Moist. 10-15% Moist. 10-15% Moist.<br />
Number of Fields 47 44 39 76<br />
Number of Farms 42 39 31 51<br />
Acres per field 55.0 112.7 178.8 205.6<br />
Total Acres of Forage Crop 2,583 4,960 6,974 15,624<br />
Yield in Tons per Acre 11.44 2.20 1.52 1.31<br />
Operator Share 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00<br />
Value per Ton, includes LDP $22.43 $55.07 $27.51 $41.10<br />
Total product return/acre $256.56 $121.33 $41.73 $53.70<br />
Misc. Income per acre $7.50 $2.08 $0.00 $2.16<br />
Gross Value per Acre $264.06 $123.41 $41.73 $55.86<br />
Direct Expenses/Acre<br />
Seed $39.96 $1.81 $0.00 $0.00<br />
Fertilizer $42.18 $4.06 $0.00 $0.09<br />
Crop Chemicals $14.16 $0.71 $0.00 $0.12<br />
Crop Insurance $12.96 $0.48 $0.00 $0.00<br />
Fuel and Oil $19.14 $12.21 $9.87 $8.55<br />
Repairs $17.22 $10.64 $9.74 $6.63<br />
Custom Hire $20.55 $1.02 $0.03 $1.58<br />
Land Charge $35.16 $33.49 $10.22 $11.11<br />
Misc. $4.14 $1.84 $1.50 $0.99<br />
Operating Interest $5.27 $3.86 $2.02 $4.46<br />
Total Direct Costs/Acre $210.74 $70.12 $33.38 $33.53<br />
Return over Direct Exp. $53.32 $53.29 $8.35 $22.33<br />
Overhead Expenses/Acre<br />
Hired Labor $7.62 $3.70 $2.08 $1.49<br />
Machinery & Building Leases $0.91 $0.25 $0.00 $0.14<br />
Farm Insurance $2.31 $2.08 $0.61 $2.04<br />
Utilities $2.08 $1.70 $0.48 $1.10<br />
Interest $3.30 $2.68 $0.96 $2.33<br />
Mach. and Building Depreciation $16.73 $11.19 $5.88 $8.99<br />
Miscellaneous $4.17 $3.29 $1.63 $2.39<br />
Total Overhead Expense/Acre $37.12 $24.89 $11.64 $18.48<br />
Total Listed Expenses/Acre $247.86 $95.01 $45.02 $52.01<br />
Net Return per Acre without Direct or CC $16.20 $28.40 ($3.29) $3.85<br />
Direct Expense per Ton $18.42 $31.87 $21.96 $25.60<br />
Total Listed Expense per Ton $21.67 $43.19 $29.62 $39.70<br />
Net Return per Ton $1.42 $12.91 ($2.16) $2.94<br />
Breakeven Yield in Tons per Acre $10.22 $1.52 $1.64 $1.17<br />
Estimated Cost per Ton of Dry Matter $61.90 $49.36 $33.85 $45.37<br />
Farm Program Payments per Acre $11.09 $9.24 $0.00 $1.64<br />
Net Return/Acre Including Prog. Payments $27.29 $37.64 ($3.29) $5.49<br />
* Data Source, Region 3 Reports, 2006-2008, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Farm Business Management Program<br />
Page 50 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Challenges and Opportunities for <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong>s in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
V.L. Anderson<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> Carrington Research Extension Center<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> is known as a beef cow/calf state, with nearly a million cows scattered across much of the<br />
state. The feeding industry is not well developed in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> so the question has often been<br />
asked, what is the potential for this segment of the beef industry? In one three-year study conducted at<br />
the Carrington Research Extension Center in the early 1990s, 130 head of <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> feeder cattle<br />
were gathered up each fall from cooperating producers and fed to finishing weight at the Carrington<br />
Center or at commercial feedyards in Kansas or Nebraska. Cattle in the southern yards gained faster<br />
on diets with steam-flaked corn and added fat. Cattle finished at Carrington were less efficient but the<br />
cost of gain was $.046 less per pound. This paper is a discussion of the positive and negative aspects<br />
of the resources, geography, markets, attitudes, education, research and other factors that may affect<br />
the development and success of beef feedlots in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>.<br />
Background<br />
Farmers and ranchers have diversified their crop base in the past 40 years from primarily wheat and<br />
barley to include soybeans, corn, sunflower, canola, dry beans, field peas, potatoes, sugarbeets, and<br />
other crops. All of these crops have potential to be used as feed or produce feed products after<br />
processing. Several crop processing operations have developed across the state, producing up to 3<br />
million tons of co-product feeds per year.<br />
Most operating feedyards in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> are associated with crop production enterprises to capture<br />
value from home-raised feeder cattle, feeds (grains and forages), utilize manure as fertilizer, and keep<br />
employees busy throughout the year. Cropping systems that include deliberate feed production<br />
increase the options for crop rotations.<br />
Farmer-feeders may be able to expand their livestock enterprises without significant attention.<br />
However, developing new, stand alone, larger-scale livestock enterprises (beef feeding, dairy, or swine)<br />
may draw attention and criticism from those competing for land, urban folks who think their country<br />
homes should not be exposed to odors and noises of farming, and even animal rights activists who<br />
oppose any livestock enterprise. Community support is essential to successful development in these<br />
scenarios. Many rural communities in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> would welcome the development of new or<br />
expanding livestock enterprises.<br />
Resources for <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Operations<br />
Feed<br />
The single greatest expense for feedlot operators, after the purchase of the cattle, is feed. There is a<br />
smörgasboard of feeds available in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>. Grains grown and available in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> include<br />
corn, barley, field peas, feed-grade wheat, and oats. Regarding corn, high-moisture grain, earlage, or<br />
silage may be the harvest and storage method of necessity in some years. Several co-products are<br />
available in volume from many different processing plants throughout the state. These co-products<br />
vary in moisture, protein, fiber, energy, and mineral content. The list of co-products includes wheat<br />
middlings, barley malt sprouts, distillers grains with solubles, corn gluten feed, sugarbeet pulp, canola<br />
meal, sunflower meal, soybean meal, linseed meal, crambe meal, potato waste, dry bean splits, barley<br />
hulls, soybean hulls, pea hulls, oat hulls, and screenings of all kinds. Procurement of co-products<br />
needs to be planned ahead of time, in some cases many months to insure feeds are available at a<br />
agreed-upon price.<br />
Page 51 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Off-quality commodities such as sunflower seeds, canola, and other crops can be fed with some<br />
limitations. Opportunity purchases of feed products such as sprouted wheat or heat-damaged corn can<br />
lower feed costs but should be fed with care and diluted in the rations.<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> has published several circulars and research papers on the nutritional value and recommended<br />
uses of many of these feeds. Commodity groups and processing plants also have information on their<br />
respective feed ingredients.<br />
Grains and forages are typically much less expensive in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> than other regions of the country.<br />
Corn grain averages $.50 to $.75 per bushel lower in cash price at Carrington than in the High Plains<br />
feeding areas. Forage prices reported in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> are often half the price of forages in other<br />
regions of the nation. Co-products tend to be priced closer to other regions of the country, but shipping<br />
increases the cost to livestock producers in the west or south.<br />
Feeder Cattle<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> feeder cattle are in demand at commercial feedlots in the High Plains. Steers often have<br />
more marbling and grade higher than the national average of about 55 to 60% USDA Choice, with<br />
steers from some herds consistently grading 95% Choice. British-influence crossbred cattle account for<br />
a very high percentage of <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> feeder cattle. A major concern in developing a year-round<br />
supply of market beef is the high percentage of spring-born calves with subsequent high volume sales<br />
of weaned calves in October and November. However, more cow/calf producers are backgrounding<br />
their steers into January. Summer grazing of yearlings is still practiced with heavy feeders available in<br />
the fall for short feeding to market weight. Cull heifers are sold in late winter.<br />
Co-mingling feeder cattle from smaller herds in the state is not a good management practice as disease<br />
exposure and resistance vary with ranch environment and vaccination programs. A thorough<br />
preventive maintenance vaccination and health care program is advised following <strong>Beef</strong> Quality<br />
Assurance guidelines.<br />
Infrastructure<br />
Virtually all the infrastructure needs for feedlot operations are available in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>. Water, roads,<br />
and electricity are fundamental to developing feeding enterprises and readily available throughout the<br />
state. Some areas of the state may be challenged to provide immediate veterinary services. There are<br />
adequate trucking firms, feed suppliers, farm equipment dealers including specialized feed processing,<br />
mixing and delivery equipment, livestock auction barns, and contractors for construction of feedyards.<br />
Professional engineers are available for designing facilities and contractors for construction. Some of<br />
the larger feedyards use the services of professional nutritionists and feed companies may provide<br />
information to feeders on ration formulation and feedyard management.<br />
Some lending agencies are more familiar and supportive of livestock enterprises than others.<br />
Feedyards should provide a solid business plan with documented information to their lenders.<br />
There are a number of supporting organizations for feedyard development and operations throughout<br />
the state. These include many rural communities with economic development programs, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
Department of Health for permit information, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Department of Commerce for zoning<br />
information, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s Association environmental program and Feeder Council, and<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>State</strong> University with animal science and nutrient management research and extension<br />
programs.<br />
Page 52 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
Weather<br />
The idea of ―winter‖ seems to be challenging and limits some from recognizing the opportunity for<br />
feeding cattle in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>. Certainly, there are challenges to operating a feedyard in the cold,<br />
wind, and snow. Planning and preparation with appropriate facilities and equipment are important to<br />
managing winter weather. Shelterbelts for catching snow, feed storage and access, water fountains,<br />
and snow removal all affect winter operations. A detailed analysis would be useful to assess the effects<br />
of feeding animals in the cold vs. warmer but potentially wet and muddy conditions farther south.<br />
British-crossbred cattle adapt to cold to some degree even though cold temperatures increase<br />
maintenance energy requirements. Winter weather can be mitigated by providing wind protection and<br />
in some cases bedding animals. Dry, bedded pens have been proven to improve gains and efficiency<br />
with a net advantage to bedding reported as high as $80 per head from improved performance and<br />
increased carcass grade and value. Bedding animals also sequesters up to three times more nitrogen<br />
in the manure, increasing the fertilizer value by creating an optimum carbon-nitrogen ratio. The<br />
logistics of bedding can be challenging in large feedyards. Some yards box scrape pens on a regular<br />
basis to provide snow-free dirt pads for animals.<br />
Land<br />
Land costs in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> are lower than virtually any state in the nation. Site selection for a livestock<br />
enterprise needs to consider water source and water table proximity, wind direction, proximity to towns<br />
or neighbors, durability of roads, rainfall, soil type, slope, feed sources, land to spread manure, and<br />
employee access. Information to assist in site selection is available from the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s<br />
Association environmental program director or from <strong>NDSU</strong> nutrient management specialists.<br />
Market Opportunities<br />
A number of auction markets operate throughout <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> where feeder cattle are offered for sale.<br />
The supply of feeder cattle is highly variable during the year based on marketing spring-born calves at<br />
weaning in the fall and into mid-winter. Spring and summer market volume is low.<br />
Terminal markets for fed cattle include large commercial packing houses (Tyson, Cargill, etc.), local<br />
butcher shops, and some auction markets. New terminal markets have been attempted in <strong>North</strong><br />
<strong>Dakota</strong> and some international business entities are working on plans for a new packing plant at this<br />
writing. The large commercial packing houses are located several hundred miles to the south, requiring<br />
significant expense to ship fat cattle to market.<br />
Labor<br />
People raised in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> generally have a good work ethic. Some are gifted with husbandry skills<br />
and instinctively know how to ―read‖ cattle and provide appropriate feed, management, and care for<br />
optimum performance. Labor for feedlot operations, including pen riders, truck drivers, maintenance<br />
people, and cattle processing crews can sometimes be challenging.<br />
Challenges<br />
In some areas, crop producers do not have appropriate appreciation for the value of manure as a<br />
fertilizer. It is important to capture income from every aspect of livestock production that has real value.<br />
This point is evidence that <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> has lost some of its livestock ―culture‖ or appreciation for the<br />
intergration of crops and livestock production. Although many young people have expressed interest in<br />
developing livestock enterprises, besides simply being interested in livestock production, the<br />
acceptance of risk and the annual cycle of the farm business must be accepted and managed.<br />
Knowing how to manage commodity price risk through market positions, futures, options and other<br />
instruments can increase the odds of approved credit lines from lenders, although some lending<br />
agencies are not livestock savvy or have had less than positive experiences with some livestock<br />
enterprises. New or expanding livestock producers need a good business plan that identifies all the<br />
Page 53 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
positive aspects of an enterprise and accounts for all the challenges and risks in a business-like<br />
manner.<br />
Summary<br />
All of the resources for feeding cattle in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> are present. People with the passion, business<br />
skills, and resources can succeed in this enterprise as there are a number of successful commercial<br />
feedyards in <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> that serve as examples. The owners, managers, and operators of these<br />
yards have been open and instructive in describing their operations. There are a number of education<br />
programs to help new and existing livestock producers gain knowledge and more carefully define their<br />
enterprises. These include site visits by <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s Association environmental programs<br />
director, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s Association feedlot intern programs, <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Schools and<br />
producer feeder calf finishing projects, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Farm Business Management Program records<br />
analysis, NRCS and <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Stockmen’s Association facilities grant programs, assistance from<br />
the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Department of <strong>Agriculture</strong> and the <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Department of Commerce, local<br />
economic development organizations, and individual assistance from a wide variety of people in the<br />
industry.<br />
Acknowledgements<br />
The author is appreciative of many livestock producers and colleagues in industry and universities that<br />
provided input for this paper.<br />
Diagnostic Note – Infectious Bovine Keratoconjunctivitis (Pinkeye)<br />
N. W. Dyer<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory<br />
Moraxella bovis is the primary known cause of infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis or pinkeye, the<br />
most important ocular disease of cattle worldwide. It is most commonly seen in the warmer months.<br />
While the disease is not a significant cause of mortality, it does cause considerable economic loss due<br />
to secondary problems related to corneal ulcers. It is well known that certain risk factors, such as<br />
ultraviolet radiation, dust, chaff, grass awns and face flies predispose an animal to pinkeye. Based on<br />
recent biochemical analysis, there are fifteen distinct subgroups of this bacteria, some of which are<br />
pathogenic and some not. Pathogenic strains possess proteins that allow them to attach to corneal<br />
epithelial cells, and cytotoxins that can degrade corneal proteins thus leading to ulcers and the clinical<br />
signs associated with them (tearing, sensitivity to light, and conjunctivitis). 6 Commercial vaccines<br />
provide protection against only a few pathogenic strains; therefore they will not be 100% effective<br />
against disease.<br />
Moraxella (now being changed from Branhamella to Moraxella) ovis has also been isolated from cases<br />
of pinkeye, but experts do not universally agree that it is a cause of pinkeye. The organism can be<br />
isolated from normal bovine eyes as well. Recent research shows that M. ovis produces toxins that<br />
degrades bovine red blood cells, white blood cells and corneal epithelial cells, and therefore may play a<br />
role in clinical disease. 3 It is not uncommon to isolate M. bovis and M. ovis from cases of pinkeye,<br />
suggesting a synergistic effect between the two organisms.<br />
Moraxella (formerly Mycoplasma) bovoculi is a recently identified related organism that has been<br />
isolated from calves with pinkeye. 2,5 Recent studies indicate that the organism may contribute to<br />
Page 54 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
pinkeye, and has been confused with Moraxella ovis. 1 A polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to<br />
differentiate M. ovis from M. bovoculi was recently developed, and can be performed on presumptive<br />
M. ovis isolates at the <strong>NDSU</strong>-VDL. The problem of cause is further confused by the fact that Moraxella<br />
bovoculi can be isolated from normal bovine eyes as well. Recent vaccine trials with an autogenous<br />
bacterin to M. bovoculi were unsuccessful in preventing clinical disease in infected groups of calves. 4<br />
This further calls into question the significance of M. bovoculi as a pathogen, and highlights the fact that<br />
more information is needed to define this organism as a cause or contributor to pinkeye.<br />
Currently, then, M. bovis is the only known cause of pinkeye, and can be isolated from ocular swabs<br />
and identified. It is not currently definitively known if M. ovis and M. bovoculi can cause pinkeye, and,<br />
while we can culture the organisms, PCR is needed to tell the two apart. There are no commercial<br />
vaccines that include protection against M. ovis and M. bovoculi. Autogenous vaccines can be made<br />
against these bacteria if isolated, but consulting with your veterinarian is advised when considering the<br />
efficacy and administration of such vaccines.<br />
From a standpoint of pathogenesis, it seems likely that some sort of trauma or co-infection causes<br />
enough damage to the surface of the eye that colonization by resident conjunctival bacteria becomes<br />
possible. This would explain why both M. ovis and M. bovoculi can be found in normal eyes, but can<br />
also be isolated from diseased eyes. Therefore, the need to differentiate M. ovis from M. bovoculi by<br />
PCR needs to be considered on an individual basis by the producer and the practitioner. M. bovis is<br />
clearly a cause of pinkeye and it’s recovery from ocular swabs should encourage some combination of<br />
management, therapy and vaccination. Consult your veterinarian and diagnostic laboratory with any<br />
questions.<br />
1 Angelos J. A., and Louise M. Ball. Differentiation of Moraxella bovoculi sp. nov. from other coccoid<br />
moraxellae by the use of polymerase chain reaction and restriction endonuclease analysis of<br />
amplified DNA. J Vet Diagn Invest 19:532-534 (2007).<br />
2 Angelos J. A., P.Q.Spinks,L.M. Ball, and Lisle W. George. Moraxella bovoculi sp. nov., isolated from<br />
calves with infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis. Int J of System and Evol Micro 57:789-795<br />
(2007).<br />
3 Cerny H E, D.G.Rogers,J.T. Gray,D.R Smith, and Susanne Hinckley. Effects of Moraxella<br />
(Branhamella) ovis cultures filtrates on bovine erythrocytes, peripheral mononuclear cells, and<br />
corneal epithelial cells. J of Clin Micro 44:772-776 (2006).<br />
4Funk L.,A.M. O’Connor, M. Maroney,T. Engelken, V.L. Cooper,J. Kinyon and P. Plummer. A<br />
randomized and blinded field trial to assess the efficacy of an autogenous vaccine to prevent<br />
naturally occurring bovine keratoconjunctivitis (IBK) in beef calves. Vaccine 27:4585-4590 (2009).<br />
5 Levisohn S., S.Garazi, I. Gerchman, and Jacob Brenner. Diagnosis of a mixed mycoplasma infection<br />
associated with a severe outbreak of bovine pinkeye in young calves. J Vet Diagn Invest 16:579-<br />
581 (2004).<br />
6 Postma C. G., J.C. Carfagnini, and Leonardo Minatel. Moraxella bovis pathogenicity: An update. Comp<br />
Immun Micro and Inf Dis 31:449-458 (2008).<br />
Page 55 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
<strong>NDSU</strong> BBQ Boot Camps 2009<br />
Celebrating the Products of Livestock Production<br />
D. Newman<br />
<strong>NDSU</strong> Department of Animal Sciences<br />
At the second annual round of BBQ Boot Camps, more than 800 <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong>ns learned the secrets of<br />
grilling a tasty steak, burger, chop or kabob and the importance of handling meat safely. <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong><br />
<strong>State</strong> University Animal Science faculty partnered with Food Science faculty and the <strong>NDSU</strong> Research<br />
Extension Centers and <strong>NDSU</strong> Extension Service to conduct 10 BBQ Boot Camps at 10 different<br />
communities throughout the state in spring and summer of 2009.<br />
The program introduced people to new cooking methods and practices; meat cut selection; food safety,<br />
such as proper cooking temperatures and using meat thermometers; using rubs, marinades and<br />
seasonings; and smoking, gas and charcoal cooking. Participants also heard about current topics in<br />
the beef, pork and lamb industries, including research and Extension activities at <strong>NDSU</strong>, and had a<br />
chance to sample a large variety of barbecued meat.<br />
Page 56 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
―BBQ Boot Camp is a unique opportunity to explain and discuss current topics in the meat and livestock<br />
industry at the grass-roots level, all while having a lot of fun with barbecue,‖ said <strong>NDSU</strong> Extension<br />
swine specialist David Newman, who helped organize and direct the events.<br />
The BBQ Boot Camp was very successful at reaching an entirely new demographic of individuals.<br />
Reaching this audience is very important as the consumers of agricultural products become more and<br />
more removed from the farm (a traditional agricultural background). This is true even in a state like<br />
<strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> where the economic base remains firmly grounded in agriculture.<br />
The Boot Camps were highly successful according to survey data collected at each event. A total of<br />
807 consumers attended 10 BBQ Boot Camps. Fifty-five percent of attendees were men and 45%<br />
were women. Of the 807 attendees, 675 volunteered to complete the pre- and post-surveys. The<br />
participants increased their knowledge and indicated they will change their behaviors based on the<br />
questions asked. The average ―bbq knowledge‖ score on the pre-event survey was 73.9%. After<br />
attending the Boot Camp, the average score on the post-event survey was 90.6% (a 16.7% increase).<br />
Overall, the program was very well received by those in attendance, generating an average approval<br />
rating of 4.77 out of 5, indicating that participants felt they learned something positive from the<br />
sessions.<br />
The <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> Commission, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Pork Producers Council, <strong>North</strong> <strong>Dakota</strong> Lamb and<br />
Wool Producers Association, <strong>North</strong>ern Plains Distributing Inc. and Cloverdale Foods helped sponsor<br />
the camps.<br />
There is potential for this program to continue in the future. For more information contact David<br />
Newman at (701) 231-7640 or david.newman@ndsu.edu.<br />
Page 57 2009 <strong>NDSU</strong> <strong>Beef</strong> <strong>Feedlot</strong> Research Report
<strong>NDSU</strong> is an equal opportunity institution.<br />
Direct inquiries to the Vice President for the Division of Equity, Diversity and Global Outreach, 205 Old Main, (701) 231-7708.<br />
This publication will be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities upon request, (701) 231-7881.