A commercial trial was conducted to compare feeding 20% alkaline treated corn stalks (TRT) in place of 14% dry-rolled corn and 6% native stalks (CON). Both diets contained dry-rolled corn (40 or 54%), 35% wet distillers grains plus solubles, and 5.17% supplement. Alkaline treatment was performed by adding 5% calcium oxide to 95% ground corn stalks (DM basis) and water to equal 50% DM. Cattle fed TRT had lower ADG and poorer F:G with equal DMI. The changes in gain were due to lower live and carcass weights. Carcass quality was impacted subtly, and reflects the lower gain with equal days fed between the two treatments

Cooper, Rob

Dicke, Bill

Erickson, Galen E.

Jordon, D. J., Jordon

Macken, Casey

Scott, Tony

English

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - LincolnDigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - LincolnNebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department2014Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover atElevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot CattleRob CooperCattlemens Nutrition ServicesBill DickeCattlemens Nutrition ServicesD. J. Jordon JordonCattlemens Nutrition ServicesTony ScottCattlemens Nutrition ServicesCasey MackenPerformance Plus LiquidsSee next page for additional authorsFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcrThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Animal Science Department at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln.Cooper, Rob; Dicke, Bill; Jordon, D. J. Jordon; Scott, Tony; Macken, Casey; and Erickson, Galen E., "Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle" (2014). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 780.http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/780AuthorsRob Cooper, Bill Dicke, D. J. Jordon Jordon, Tony Scott, Casey Macken, and Galen E. EricksonThis article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/780© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 69 Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattlecompared to a 5% untreated stalk control (2013 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 70-73). Treatment process in all of these university trials includ-ed 5% CaO (Mississippi Lime, Sto-verCalO, granulated quicklime) with 95% corn stalks (DM basis) and then mixed with enough water to produce a final mix that was 50% DM. No data are available using commercial treat-ment technologies and mixing and storing for seven days prior to feed-ing. Likewise, no data are available on commercial feedlot performance using alkaline treated stalks in place of a portion of corn. Therefore, the objective was to evaluate feedlot per-formance and carcass characteristics when 20% treated stalks were fed compared to a conventional control ration.ProcedureThis study was completed at a commercial feedlot in Northeast Colorado (Timmerman Feeding Co., Sterling, Colo.). Steers were received and processed in two separate groups and blocked by source. Block 1 consisted of 513 yearling steers originating from the Northern Plains, weighing 805 lb across eight pens. Block 1 steers were started on June 6, 2012, and fed 141 days to Oct. 24, 2012. Block 2 steers were yearling steers of Mexican origin weighing 750 lb across eight pens. Block 2 steers were started on June 13, 2012, and fed 153 days to Nov. 11, 2012. Steers in both blocks were fed a common distillers grains-based grower ration until the respective day of treatment initiation, upon which steers were removed from pens and alley-sorted two steers each way until pen replicates were filled. Steers were then uniquely identified with numbered tags, vaccinated with Pyramid® 5 (Zoetis Animal Health) and treated for internal and external parasites with an injection of Cydectin® (Zoetis Animal Health) and an oral dose of Safe-Guard® (Merck Animal Health).  Steers were also given a Revalor-XS implant (Merck Animal Health). Following processing, steers were pen weighed and these weights served as initial weight for each pen replicate. Initial weights were assumed to be shrunk, so no pencil shrink was assigned to initial pen weights. Two treatments were evaluated in this study with eight pen replicates per treatment, four within each block. The study design was a randomized block design with 16 total pens, two blocks with four replications per block, and eight total replications per treatment. Diets included a control (CON) with 6% stalks, 35% wet dis-tillers grains plus solubles, dry-rolled corn and supplement compared to a diet with 20% alkaline treated corn stalks, 35% wet distillers grains plus solubles, dry-rolled corn and supple-ment (TRT; Table 1). Treated stalks replaced untreated stalks and dry-rolled corn. The only other differ-ence between the two diets was that limestone was not included in the supplement for TRT, as calcium was provided by the alkaline-treated corn stalks.  Alkaline-treated stalks were pro-vided by a nearby commercial feedlot that was treating stalks on a weekly basis. The treatment process utilized a Roto Grind (Burrows Enterprises, Greeley, Colo.) where ground corn stalks (4 inch tub ground) were added to the Roto Grind. During grinding, water and calcium oxide (Stover CalO, Mississippi Lime, St. Louis, Mo.) were added using a continuous flow sys-tem developed by Performance Plus Liquids (Palmer, Neb.). This system targets adding water to reach a final DM of 50% in the treated stalks and 5% calcium oxide on a DM basis. The calcium oxide product, Stover CalO, is granular, pure, reactive calcium oxide or quicklime that has particles Rob CooperBill DickeD.J. JordonTony ScottCasey MackenGalen E. Erickson1SummaryA commercial trial was conducted to compare feeding 20% alkaline treated corn stalks (TRT) in place of 14% dry-rolled corn and 6% native stalks (CON). Both diets contained dry-rolled corn (40 or 54%), 35% wet distillers grains plus solubles, and 5.17% supplement. Alka-line treatment was performed by adding 5% calcium oxide to 95% ground corn stalks (DM basis) and water to equal 50% DM. Cattle fed TRT had lower ADG and poorer F:G with equal DMI. The changes in gain were due to lower live and carcass weights. Carcass qual-ity was impacted subtly, and reflects the lower gain with equal days fed between the two treatments.IntroductionAlkaline treatment of forages im-proves fiber digestibility by disrupt-ing bonds. Treating crop residues was researched heavily in the 1970s to improve forage quality and cost effec tiveness. With recent increases in commodity prices, there is renewed interest in applying this to feedlot diets today that include wet distill-ers grains plus solubles. In four of five controlled UNL feedlot trials, performance was similar between feeding 20% treated stalks and 5 to 10% untreated roughage in diets with 40% distillers grains (2013 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 70-73; 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 106-107; 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 108-109; 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report , pp. 72-74). However, in one yearling study, a significant 6.7% increase in F:G was observed when (Continued on next page)Page 70 — 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.less than ¼ inch. Following treatment and grinding, stalks were stored in a loosely packed pile for 7 to 14 days prior to feeding.Both finishing diets included simi-lar feed additives added via a micro nutrient machine. Targeted con-sumptions for Rumensin® (340 mg/steer), Tylan® (80 mg/steer), vitamin A (30,000 IU/steer), vitamin D (3,000 IU/steer), and vitamin E (100 IU/steer) were equal across treatments.After initial BW were collected, steers were adapted to finishing diets. Grain adaption was slightly different between the two treatments due to a greater amount of stalks included in TRT. For the CON treatment, steers were fed three grain adaptation diets prior to the finishing diet, containing 45 and 33% alfalfa hay for steps 1 and 2, respectively.  Step 3 contained 14% alfalfa hay and 5% untreated stalks, whereas the CON finishing ration contained 6% untreated stalks, all on a DM basis.  The TRT fed cattle were adapted using two adaptation diets prior to the finishing ration. Alfalfa hay was fed at 25, 13, and 0% while treated stalks were kept constant at 20% inclusion in all steps. For both treatments, each adaptation diet was fed five full days followed by 1-3 days of transition between steps.  As a result , cattle fed TRT were adapted to their final diet eight days faster than CON and using less alfalfa hay.When visually appraised as being finished across treatments within a block, steers were removed from pens, weighed live at the pen scale and shrunk 4%, and shipped by entire blocks for slaughter (Cargill Meat Solutions, Fort Morgan, Colo.). On day of slaughter, hot carcass weights were collected. Following a 24-hour chill, fat depth, Longissimus muscle area, called USDA Quality Grade, and called USDA Yield Grade were col-lected on a pen basis. Table 1.  Diets fed to finishing steers comparing 6% stover (CON) to 20% alkaline-treated stover (TRT).  Ingredient CON TRTDry-rolled cornWet distillers grains plus solublesCorn stalks, groundTreated stalks, groundLiquid supplement53.8335.06—5.1739.8335.0—20.05.17Nutrient composition, formulated (actual) DM CP Ca P K S50.88  (49.5)16.3  (18.5)0.67  (0.72)0.44  (0.53)0.79  (1.00)0.37  (0.37)47.03  (47.9)15.8  (18.0)0.87  (1.08)0.41  (0.50)0.96  (1.15)0.38  (0.36)Table 2.  Performance and carcass characteristics of commercial feedlot steers fed either alkaline treated corn stover at 20% of diet DM (TRT) or a conventional control with 6% stover (CON) blocked by two different types of steers and arrival date. CON TRT SEMP-values1Diet Block Int.PerformanceInitial no., nSlaughter no., nPens, nDays of FeedInitial BW, lbDMI, lb/dayLive Final BW, lb ADG, lb F:GCarcass-adjusted Final BW, lb ADG, lb  block 1  block 2 F:G Total Gain, lb  block 1  block 2593592614778023.36 13724.045.7914014.254.683.815.53622660584595594614777523.5813533.945.9913704.054.363.755.83594616573————80.23100.030.05100.040.060.0568————0.700.530.190.060.010.04<0.01<0.01<0.01————<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01<0.01————0.980.440.520.240.970.250.05 0.370.07Carcass CharacteristicsHot Carcass WeightDressing %  block 1  block 2Fat DepthRibeye AreaYield Grade882.864.3564.6564.050.51313.333.29862.963.7863.7563.80   0.48813.083.216.30.090.130.0090.100.050.04<0.010.070.110.29<0.010.05<0.010.32<0.010.250.030.190.730.29Quality Grade Distribution % Prime % Choice % Select % < Standard0.4557.9438.662.950.3051.7442.645.330.161.701.531.070.530.020.090.14<0.010.03<0.010.040.530.170.640.151P-values for effect of diet (CON vs TRT), block, and interaction (Int.) between block and diet.© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 71 ResultsCattle performance and carcass characteristics are provided in Table 2. Steers had similar (P =0.98) ini-tial BW as expected when assigned in sorting alleys. Steers had similar DMI between treatments (P = 0.23) and consumed approximately 2.14% of BW for CON steers and 2.20% of BW for TRT using average of initial and carcass-adjusted final BW. On a live basis, steers fed TRT were 19 lb numeri cally lighter (P = 0.19) in shrunk live BW at the end of the feeding period compared to CON. As a result, ADG was decreased by feeding TRT compared to CON  (P = 0.06) and cattle were less efficient (P = 0.01), with a 0.20 increase in F:G.Carcass weights were 20 lb lighter (P = 0.04) for TRT fed steers com-pared to CON. Therefore, when per-formance was adjusted for 63% dress final BW, ADG was decreased  (P < 0.01) by 0.20 lb/day for TRT com-pared to CON. Less gain resulted in poorer F:G for TRT steers compared to CON (P < 0.01). There was a signif-icant block by treatment inter action for carcass-adjusted ADG, which was tested due to four replications per block. Feeding TRT decreased ADG by 0.32 lb/day in block 1 (northern cattle) whereas ADG only decreased by 0.06 lb/day in block 2 (Mexican cattle) compared to CON. Similar to carcass-adjusted ADG, there was a decrease in dressing per-centage caused by feeding TRT; how-ever, there was an interaction between block and dietary treatment. Dressing percentage for steers in block 1 were impacted by dietary treatment more than steers in block 2, with a 0.9 per-centage unit decrease by feeding TRT compared to CON for block 1 and only a 0.25 percentage unit decrease in dressing percentage for block 2. Other carcass characteristics reflect the per-formance results. In general, feeding TRT tended to decrease fat depth  (P = 0.07) and LM area (P = 0.11), and decreased percent USDA Choice grade (P = 0.02) compared to CON. These data likely reflect the lower ADG observed with feeding TRT as all cattle were slaughtered at one time point within blocks and were equal across dietary treatment.As a general rule, feeding TRT resulted in lighter carcasses, and lower dressing percentage. With no change in intake, the decrease in ADG resulted in poorer feed conversions and some subtle impacts on carcass quality, which reflect poorer ADG. It is unclear the cause of the depression in ADG observed in this commercial study relative to previous research. One of the five experiments conducted at UNL matches these results where feeding 20% treated stalks did not result in similar perfor-mance. Interestingly, similar to the current study, that particular study (2013 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 70-73) was conducted with yearlings fed in the summer and resulted in a 6.7% increase in F:G for steers fed 20% treated stalks. For comparison, in the current study we observed a 5.4% increase in F:G when steers were fed TRT compared to CON. It is un-clear if cattle type, season, or some other variable impacts cattle perfor-mance when replacing corn with alka-line treated stalks.1Rob Cooper, Bill Dicke, D.J. Jordon, and Tony Scott, consulting nutritionists, Cattlemens Nutrition Services, Lincoln, Neb.; Casey Macken, consulting nutritionist, Performance Plus Liquids, Palmer, Neb; Galen E. Erickson, professor, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Department of Animal Science, Lincoln, Neb.

Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle

UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department
2014
Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at
Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle
Rob Cooper
Cattlemens Nutrition Services
Bill Dicke
Cattlemens Nutrition Services
D. J. Jordon Jordon
Cattlemens Nutrition Services
Tony Scott
Cattlemens Nutrition Services
Casey Macken
Performance Plus Liquids
See next page for additional authors
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Animal Science Department at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln.
Cooper, Rob; Dicke, Bill; Jordon, D. J. Jordon; Scott, Tony; Macken, Casey; and Erickson, Galen E., "Impact of Feeding Alkaline-
Treated Corn Stover at Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle" (2014). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 780.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/780
Authors
Rob Cooper, Bill Dicke, D. J. Jordon Jordon, Tony Scott, Casey Macken, and Galen E. Erickson
This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/780
© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 69 
Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at Elevated 
Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle
compared to a 5% untreated stalk 
control (2013 Nebraska Beef Cattle 
Report, pp. 70-73). Treatment process 
in all of these university trials includ-
ed 5% CaO (Mississippi Lime, Sto-
verCalO, granulated quicklime) with 
95% corn stalks (DM basis) and then 
mixed with enough water to produce 
a final mix that was 50% DM. No data 
are available using commercial treat-
ment technologies and mixing and 
storing for seven days prior to feed-
ing. Likewise, no data are available 
on commercial feedlot performance 
using alkaline treated stalks in place 
of a portion of corn. Therefore, the 
objective was to evaluate feedlot per-
formance and carcass characteristics 
when 20% treated stalks were fed 
compared to a conventional control 
ration.
Procedure
This study was completed at a 
commercial feedlot in Northeast 
Colorado (Timmerman Feeding Co., 
Sterling, Colo.). Steers were received 
and processed in two separate 
groups and blocked by source. Block 
1 consisted of 513 yearling steers 
originating from the Northern Plains, 
weighing 805 lb across eight pens. 
Block 1 steers were started on June 
6, 2012, and fed 141 days to Oct. 24, 
2012. Block 2 steers were yearling 
steers of Mexican origin weighing 750 
lb across eight pens. Block 2 steers 
were started on June 13, 2012, and 
fed 153 days to Nov. 11, 2012. Steers 
in both blocks were fed a common 
distillers grains-based grower ration 
until the respective day of treatment 
initiation, upon which steers were 
removed from pens and alley-
sorted two steers each way until pen 
replicates were filled. Steers were then 
uniquely identified with numbered 
tags, vaccinated with Pyramid® 5 
(Zoetis Animal Health) and treated 
for internal and external parasites 
with an injection of Cydectin® (Zoetis 
Animal Health) and an oral dose of 
Safe-Guard® (Merck Animal Health).  
Steers were also given a Revalor-XS 
implant (Merck Animal Health). 
Following processing, steers were pen 
weighed and these weights served as 
initial weight for each pen replicate. 
Initial weights were assumed to be 
shrunk, so no pencil shrink was 
assigned to initial pen weights. 
Two treatments were evaluated in 
this study with eight pen replicates 
per treatment, four within each block. 
The study design was a randomized 
block design with 16 total pens, two 
blocks with four replications per 
block, and eight total replications per 
treatment. Diets included a control 
(CON) with 6% stalks, 35% wet dis-
tillers grains plus solubles, dry-rolled 
corn and supplement compared to a 
diet with 20% alkaline treated corn 
stalks, 35% wet distillers grains plus 
solubles, dry-rolled corn and supple-
ment (TRT; Table 1). Treated stalks 
replaced untreated stalks and dry-
rolled corn. The only other differ-
ence between the two diets was that 
limestone was not included in the 
supplement for TRT, as calcium was 
provided by the alkaline-treated corn 
stalks.  
Alkaline-treated stalks were pro-
vided by a nearby commercial feedlot 
that was treating stalks on a weekly 
basis. The treatment process utilized 
a Roto Grind (Burrows Enterprises, 
Greeley, Colo.) where ground corn 
stalks (4 inch tub ground) were added 
to the Roto Grind. During grinding, 
water and calcium oxide (Stover CalO, 
Mississippi Lime, St. Louis, Mo.) were 
added using a continuous flow sys-
tem developed by Performance Plus 
Liquids (Palmer, Neb.). This system 
targets adding water to reach a final 
DM of 50% in the treated stalks and 
5% calcium oxide on a DM basis. The 
calcium oxide product, Stover CalO, 
is granular, pure, reactive calcium 
oxide or quicklime that has particles 
Rob Cooper
Bill Dicke
D.J. Jordon
Tony Scott
Casey Macken
Galen E. Erickson1
Summary
A commercial trial was conducted to 
compare feeding 20% alkaline treated 
corn stalks (TRT) in place of 14% dry-
rolled corn and 6% native stalks (CON). 
Both diets contained dry-rolled corn (40 
or 54%), 35% wet distillers grains plus 
solubles, and 5.17% supplement. Alka-
line treatment was performed by adding 
5% calcium oxide to 95% ground corn 
stalks (DM basis) and water to equal 
50% DM. Cattle fed TRT had lower 
ADG and poorer F:G with equal DMI. 
The changes in gain were due to lower 
live and carcass weights. Carcass qual-
ity was impacted subtly, and reflects the 
lower gain with equal days fed between 
the two treatments.
Introduction
Alkaline treatment of forages im-
proves fiber digestibility by disrupt-
ing bonds. Treating crop residues 
was researched heavily in the 1970s 
to improve forage quality and cost 
effec tiveness. With recent increases in 
commodity prices, there is renewed 
interest in applying this to feedlot 
diets today that include wet distill-
ers grains plus solubles. In four of 
five controlled UNL feedlot trials, 
performance was similar between 
feeding 20% treated stalks and 5 to 
10% untreated roughage in diets with 
40% distillers grains (2013 Nebraska 
Beef Cattle Report, pp. 70-73; 2012 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 106-
107; 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, 
pp. 108-109; 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle 
Report , pp. 72-74). However, in one 
yearling study, a significant 6.7% 
increase in F:G was observed when (Continued on next page)
Page 70 — 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.
less than ¼ inch. Following treatment 
and grinding, stalks were stored in 
a loosely packed pile for 7 to 14 days 
prior to feeding.
Both finishing diets included simi-
lar feed additives added via a micro 
nutrient machine. Targeted con-
sumptions for Rumensin® (340 mg/
steer), Tylan® (80 mg/steer), vitamin 
A (30,000 IU/steer), vitamin D (3,000 
IU/steer), and vitamin E (100 IU/steer) 
were equal across treatments.
After initial BW were collected, 
steers were adapted to finishing diets. 
Grain adaption was slightly different 
between the two treatments due to a 
greater amount of stalks included in 
TRT. For the CON treatment, steers 
were fed three grain adaptation diets 
prior to the finishing diet, containing 
45 and 33% alfalfa hay for steps 1 and 
2, respectively.  Step 3 contained 14% 
alfalfa hay and 5% untreated stalks, 
whereas the CON finishing ration 
contained 6% untreated stalks, all on 
a DM basis.  The TRT fed cattle were 
adapted using two adaptation diets 
prior to the finishing ration. Alfalfa 
hay was fed at 25, 13, and 0% while 
treated stalks were kept constant at 
20% inclusion in all steps. For both 
treatments, each adaptation diet was 
fed five full days followed by 1-3 days 
of transition between steps.  As a 
result , cattle fed TRT were adapted to 
their final diet eight days faster than 
CON and using less alfalfa hay.
When visually appraised as being 
finished across treatments within 
a block, steers were removed from 
pens, weighed live at the pen scale 
and shrunk 4%, and shipped by entire 
blocks for slaughter (Cargill Meat 
Solutions, Fort Morgan, Colo.). On 
day of slaughter, hot carcass weights 
were collected. Following a 24-hour 
chill, fat depth, Longissimus muscle 
area, called USDA Quality Grade, and 
called USDA Yield Grade were col-
lected on a pen basis. 
Table 1.  Diets fed to finishing steers comparing 6% stover (CON) to 20% alkaline-treated stover (TRT). 
 Ingredient CON TRT
Dry-rolled corn
Wet distillers grains plus solubles
Corn stalks, ground
Treated stalks, ground
Liquid supplement
53.83
35.0
6
—
5.17
39.83
35.0
—
20.0
5.17
Nutrient composition, formulated (actual)
 DM
 CP
 Ca
 P
 K
 S
50.88  (49.5)
16.3  (18.5)
0.67  (0.72)
0.44  (0.53)
0.79  (1.00)
0.37  (0.37)
47.03  (47.9)
15.8  (18.0)
0.87  (1.08)
0.41  (0.50)
0.96  (1.15)
0.38  (0.36)
Table 2.  Performance and carcass characteristics of commercial feedlot steers fed either alkaline 
treated corn stover at 20% of diet DM (TRT) or a conventional control with 6% stover 
(CON) blocked by two different types of steers and arrival date.
 CON TRT SEM
P-values1
Diet Block Int.
Performance
Initial no., n
Slaughter no., n
Pens, n
Days of Feed
Initial BW, lb
DMI, lb/day
Live
 Final BW, lb
 ADG, lb
 F:G
Carcass-adjusted
 Final BW, lb
 ADG, lb
  block 1
  block 2
 F:G
 Total Gain, lb
  block 1
  block 2
593
592
6
147
780
23.36 
1372
4.04
5.79
1401
4.25
4.68
3.81
5.53
622
660
584
595
594
6
147
775
23.58
1353
3.94
5.99
1370
4.05
4.36
3.75
5.83
594
616
573
—
—
—
—
8
0.23
10
0.03
0.05
10
0.04
0.06
0.05
6
8
—
—
—
—
0.70
0.53
0.19
0.06
0.01
0.04
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
—
—
—
—
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
—
—
—
—
0.98
0.44
0.52
0.24
0.97
0.25
0.05 
0.37
0.07
Carcass Characteristics
Hot Carcass Weight
Dressing %
  block 1
  block 2
Fat Depth
Ribeye Area
Yield Grade
882.8
64.35
64.65
64.05
0.513
13.33
3.29
862.9
63.78
63.75
63.80
   0.488
13.08
3.21
6.3
0.09
0.13
0.009
0.10
0.05
0.04
<0.01
0.07
0.11
0.29
<0.01
0.05
<0.01
0.32
<0.01
0.25
0.03
0.19
0.73
0.29
Quality Grade Distribution
 % Prime
 % Choice
 % Select
 % < Standard
0.45
57.94
38.66
2.95
0.30
51.74
42.64
5.33
0.16
1.70
1.53
1.07
0.53
0.02
0.09
0.14
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
0.04
0.53
0.17
0.64
0.15
1P-values for effect of diet (CON vs TRT), block, and interaction (Int.) between block and diet.
© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2014 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 71 
Results
Cattle performance and carcass 
characteristics are provided in Table 
2. Steers had similar (P =0.98) ini-
tial BW as expected when assigned 
in sorting alleys. Steers had similar 
DMI between treatments (P = 0.23) 
and consumed approximately 2.14% 
of BW for CON steers and 2.20% of 
BW for TRT using average of initial 
and carcass-adjusted final BW. On 
a live basis, steers fed TRT were 19 
lb numeri cally lighter (P = 0.19) in 
shrunk live BW at the end of the 
feeding period compared to CON. 
As a result, ADG was decreased by 
feeding TRT compared to CON  
(P = 0.06) and cattle were less efficient 
(P = 0.01), with a 0.20 increase in F:G.
Carcass weights were 20 lb lighter 
(P = 0.04) for TRT fed steers com-
pared to CON. Therefore, when per-
formance was adjusted for 63% dress 
final BW, ADG was decreased  
(P < 0.01) by 0.20 lb/day for TRT com-
pared to CON. Less gain resulted in 
poorer F:G for TRT steers compared 
to CON (P < 0.01). There was a signif-
icant block by treatment inter action 
for carcass-adjusted ADG, which was 
tested due to four replications per 
block. Feeding TRT decreased ADG 
by 0.32 lb/day in block 1 (northern 
cattle) whereas ADG only decreased 
by 0.06 lb/day in block 2 (Mexican 
cattle) compared to CON. 
Similar to carcass-adjusted ADG, 
there was a decrease in dressing per-
centage caused by feeding TRT; how-
ever, there was an interaction between 
block and dietary treatment. Dressing 
percentage for steers in block 1 were 
impacted by dietary treatment more 
than steers in block 2, with a 0.9 per-
centage unit decrease by feeding TRT 
compared to CON for block 1 and 
only a 0.25 percentage unit decrease in 
dressing percentage for block 2. Other 
carcass characteristics reflect the per-
formance results. In general, feeding 
TRT tended to decrease fat depth  
(P = 0.07) and LM area (P = 0.11), 
and decreased percent USDA Choice 
grade (P = 0.02) compared to CON. 
These data likely reflect the lower 
ADG observed with feeding TRT as 
all cattle were slaughtered at one time 
point within blocks and were equal 
across dietary treatment.
As a general rule, feeding TRT 
resulted in lighter carcasses, and 
lower dressing percentage. With no 
change in intake, the decrease in ADG 
resulted in poorer feed conversions 
and some subtle impacts on carcass 
quality, which reflect poorer ADG. 
It is unclear the cause of the 
depression in ADG observed in this 
commercial study relative to previous 
research. One of the five experiments 
conducted at UNL matches these 
results where feeding 20% treated 
stalks did not result in similar perfor-
mance. Interestingly, similar to the 
current study, that particular study 
(2013 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 
70-73) was conducted with yearlings 
fed in the summer and resulted in 
a 6.7% increase in F:G for steers fed 
20% treated stalks. For comparison, 
in the current study we observed a 
5.4% increase in F:G when steers were 
fed TRT compared to CON. It is un-
clear if cattle type, season, or some 
other variable impacts cattle perfor-
mance when replacing corn with alka-
line treated stalks.
1Rob Cooper, Bill Dicke, D.J. Jordon, and 
Tony Scott, consulting nutritionists, Cattlemens 
Nutrition Services, Lincoln, Neb.; Casey 
Macken, consulting nutritionist, Performance 
Plus Liquids, Palmer, Neb; Galen E. Erickson, 
professor, University of Nebraska–Lincoln 
Department of Animal Science, Lincoln, Neb.


https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1796&context=animalscinbcr

Impact of Feeding Alkaline-Treated Corn Stover at Elevated Amounts in Commercial Feedlot Cattle

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

UNL | Libraries