Performance of newly arrived 576 lb steer calves, fed two complete feeds or a control ration was evaluated. Treatment diets were fed for 30 or 31 days and includeda control receiving diet consisting of alfalfa hay, Sweet Bran® , dry-rolled corn, and supplement or one of two complete feeds: RAMP and Test Starter which contained a high level of Sweet Bran and a minimal amount of forage. RAMP increased ADG when compared with the control diet. Cattle fed Test Starter had similar performance to the control receiving diet

Erickson, Galen E.

Griffin, William A.

Klopfenstein, Terry J.

Nuttelman, Brandon J.

Rolfe, Kelsey M., Rolfe

Schneider, Cody J.

Smith, David R.

English

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department 2012 Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter for Receiving Cattle Cody J. Schneider University of Nebraska-Lincoln Brandon J. Nuttelman University of Nebraska-Lincoln Kelsey M. Rolfe Rolfe University of Nebraska-Lincoln, krolfe2@unl.edu William A. Griffin University of Nebraska-Lincoln, wgriffin2@unl.edu David R. Smith University of Nebraska-Lincoln, dsmith8@unl.edu See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr  Part of the Animal Sciences Commons Schneider, Cody J.; Nuttelman, Brandon J.; Rolfe, Kelsey M. Rolfe; Griffin, William A.; Smith, David R.; Klopfenstein, Terry J.; and Erickson, Galen E., "Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter for Receiving Cattle" (2012). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 682. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/682 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. Authors Cody J. Schneider, Brandon J. Nuttelman, Kelsey M. Rolfe Rolfe, William A. Griffin, David R. Smith, Terry J. Klopfenstein, and Galen E. Erickson This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/682 © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 87 (Continued on next page)Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starterfor Receiving CattleCody J. SchneiderBrandon L. NuttelmanKelsey M. RolfeWill A. GriffinDavid R. SmithTerry J. KlopfensteinGalen E. Erickson1Summary Performance of newly arrived 576 lb steer calves, fed two complete feeds or a control ration was evaluated. Treat-ment diets were fed for 30 or 31 days and included a control receiving diet consisting of alfalfa hay, Sweet Bran® , dry-rolled corn, and supplement or one of two complete feeds: RAMP and Test Starter which contained a high level of Sweet Bran and a minimal amount of forage. RAMP increased ADG when compared with the control diet. Cattle fed Test Starter had similar performance to the control receiving diet.Introduction RAMP is a complete-feed starter ration developed by Cargill, which contains a high level of Sweet Bran and a minimal amount of forage. RAMP is intended to serve as an alternative to a mixture of grain and forage for receiving cattle or adapting cattle to grain, therefore eliminating a large portion of the forage needed in feedlots and the need to mix a starter diet. Test Starter, another complete feed developed by Cargill, is very similar to RAMP but contains more forage. The objective of the current study was to compare performance and health characteristics of cattle fed two complete feeds (RAMP and Test Starter) during the receiving period.ProcedureCrossbred steers (n = 965; BW = 576 ± 11 lb) from two livestock auc-tion markets were received at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln Agricultural Research and Develop-ment Center, Mead, Neb., over two consecutive days: Oct. 14 and Oct. 15, 2010. Steers were blocked by arrival date and randomly allocated to pens within block based on pro-cessing order, resulting in 15 and 20 cattle per pen for blocks 1 and 2, respectively, with 17 pens per treat-ment. During processing, steers were identified with an individual ear tag, individually weighed, vaccinated with Bovi-Shield® Gold 5, Somubac®, and Dectomax® Injectable, and orally drenched with Safe-Guard®. Thirteen days subsequent to initial processing, cattle were revaccinated with Bovi-shield Gold 5, Ultrabac® 7/Somubac, injected with Micotil® and weighed. Treatments included a control receiving diet (35% alfalfa hay, 30% Sweet Bran, 30% dry-rolled corn, and 5% supplement; 16.7% CP, 36.7% NDF) and two complete feeds: RAMP (21.9% CP, 41.9% NDF) and Test Starter (23.4% CP, 43.5% NDF). Both complete feeds contained a high level of Sweet Bran and a minimal amount of forage, which was formulated and provided by Cargill Inc., Blair, Neb. All diets contained 25 g/ton Rumen-sin and 12 mg/lb thiamine (DM). Cattle were offered ad libitum access to treatment diets for 30 or 31 days followed by limit feeding a common diet (47.5% Sweet Bran, 23.75% grass hay, 23.75 alfalfa hay, and 5% supple-ment) for five days prior to collecting final BW to minimize variation in gut fill. Final BW were collected over two days following the five-day limit-fed period. Initial weight was not shrunk because steers were weighed within 12 hours of arrival and had no access to feed before weighing. Performance data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, N.C.) with pen as the experimental unit. Block was treated as a random effect, and treat-ment was a fixed effect. Treatment comparisons were made using a pro-tected F-test (P < 0.10) separated with Bonferroni t-test. Incidence of BRD was evaluated as the rate of respira-tory illness or the number of steers treated for BRD in a pen divided by the number of steers in that pen. Incidence of BRD was then analyzed using the GENMOD procedure of SAS. Incidence of BRD was affected by DMI and ADG; consequently, ADG and DMI were added to the model when assessing treatment effects on BRD. No significant effect of block existed so it was removed from the model. Treatment means for BRD incidence were calculated using the PROC MEANS function of SAS. Table 1.  Performance of cattle fed RAMP, Test Starter, or a control receiving diet.   Treatment     Item Control RAMP Test Starter SEM P-value Initial BW, lb 576 578 573 11.2 0.89Final BW, lb  645 657 645 10.3 0.36DMI, lb/day 13.4 13.8 13.9 0.27 0.14ADG, lb  2.73a 3.04b 2.81ab 0.13 0.07Feed:Gain1 4.91 4.54 4.95 0.22 0.17BRD incidence, %2 4.3 7.4 11.7 — —Treated for BRD, n 18/322 23/320 37/321 — —1Statistics calculated on Gain:Feed.2Control vs. RAMP P = 0.03; Control vs. Test Starter P < 0.01.a,bMeans within a row without a common superscript are different, (P = 0.03).Page 88 — 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.ResultsFeeding RAMP increased  (P = 0.02) ADG compared to the control diet (Table 1). Daily gain of cattle fed Test Starter was not different (P > 0.11) from cattle fed control or RAMP. Dry matter intake was not different (P = 0.14) among treatments, although approaching significance with the complete feed treatments having numerically greater DMI than the control. On approximately day 19 of the feeding period, intakes of Figure 1.  Dry matter intake over the receiving period for cattle fed control, RAMP, or Test Starter treatment diets.20151050DMI, lb/dayControlRAMPTest Starter0 5 10 15 20 25 30Days on feedthe control cattle seemed to plateau (Figure 1) and DMI of cattle on the complete-feed rations continued to increase, which might explain increased performance of the cattle fed RAMP. Final BW was not affected by treatment and F:G was similar for all treatments. Incidence of BRD was affected by DMI and ADG; consequently, varia-tion in ADG and DMI were accounted for in the analysis of treatment effects on BRD. Feeding both complete feeds increased (P < 0.03) the incidence of BRD; however, overall incidence of BRD was low (8%). Starting cattle on RAMP is a viable alternative to start-ing cattle on a mixture of grain and forage.1Cody J. Schneider, research technician; Brandon L. Nuttelman, research technician; Kelsey M. Rolfe, research technician; Will A. Griffin, research technician; David R. Smith, professor, University of Nebraska–Lincoln (UNL) Department of Veterinary and Biological Sciences; Galen E. Erickson, professor; Terry J. Klopfenstein, professor, UNL Department of Animal Science, Lincoln, Neb. 

Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter
for Receiving Cattle

UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln 
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department 
2012 
Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter for Receiving 
Cattle 
Cody J. Schneider 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln 
Brandon J. Nuttelman 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln 
Kelsey M. Rolfe Rolfe 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, krolfe2@unl.edu 
William A. Griffin 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, wgriffin2@unl.edu 
David R. Smith 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, dsmith8@unl.edu 
See next page for additional authors 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr 
 Part of the Animal Sciences Commons 
Schneider, Cody J.; Nuttelman, Brandon J.; Rolfe, Kelsey M. Rolfe; Griffin, William A.; Smith, David R.; 
Klopfenstein, Terry J.; and Erickson, Galen E., "Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter for 
Receiving Cattle" (2012). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 682. 
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/682 
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. 
Authors 
Cody J. Schneider, Brandon J. Nuttelman, Kelsey M. Rolfe Rolfe, William A. Griffin, David R. Smith, Terry J. 
Klopfenstein, and Galen E. Erickson 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/
animalscinbcr/682 
© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  — Page 87 
(Continued on next page)
Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter
for Receiving Cattle
Cody J. Schneider
Brandon L. Nuttelman
Kelsey M. Rolfe
Will A. Griffin
David R. Smith
Terry J. Klopfenstein
Galen E. Erickson1
Summary
 Performance of newly arrived 576 
lb steer calves, fed two complete feeds or 
a control ration was evaluated. Treat-
ment diets were fed for 30 or 31 days 
and included a control receiving diet 
consisting of alfalfa hay, Sweet Bran® , 
dry-rolled corn, and supplement or one 
of two complete feeds: RAMP and Test 
Starter which contained a high level of 
Sweet Bran and a minimal amount of 
forage. RAMP increased ADG when 
compared with the control diet. Cattle 
fed Test Starter had similar performance 
to the control receiving diet.
Introduction
 RAMP is a complete-feed 
starter ration developed by Cargill, 
which contains a high level of Sweet 
Bran and a minimal amount of forage. 
RAMP is intended to serve as an 
alternative to a mixture of grain and 
forage for receiving cattle or adapting 
cattle to grain, therefore eliminating 
a large portion of the forage needed in 
feedlots and the need to mix a starter 
diet. Test Starter, another complete 
feed developed by Cargill, is very 
similar to RAMP but contains more 
forage. The objective of the current 
study was to compare performance 
and health characteristics of cattle fed 
two complete feeds (RAMP and Test 
Starter) during the receiving period.
Procedure
Crossbred steers (n = 965; BW = 
576 ± 11 lb) from two livestock auc-
tion markets were received at the 
University of Nebraska–Lincoln 
Agricultural Research and Develop-
ment Center, Mead, Neb., over two 
consecutive days: Oct. 14 and Oct. 
15, 2010. Steers were blocked by 
arrival date and randomly allocated 
to pens within block based on pro-
cessing order, resulting in 15 and 
20 cattle per pen for blocks 1 and 2, 
respectively, with 17 pens per treat-
ment. During processing, steers were 
identified with an individual ear tag, 
individually weighed, vaccinated with 
Bovi-Shield® Gold 5, Somubac®, and 
Dectomax® Injectable, and orally 
drenched with Safe-Guard®. Thirteen 
days subsequent to initial processing, 
cattle were revaccinated with Bovi-
shield Gold 5, Ultrabac® 7/Somubac, 
injected with Micotil® and weighed. 
Treatments included a control 
receiving diet (35% alfalfa hay, 30% 
Sweet Bran, 30% dry-rolled corn, and 
5% supplement; 16.7% CP, 36.7% 
NDF) and two complete feeds: RAMP 
(21.9% CP, 41.9% NDF) and Test 
Starter (23.4% CP, 43.5% NDF). Both 
complete feeds contained a high level 
of Sweet Bran and a minimal amount 
of forage, which was formulated and 
provided by Cargill Inc., Blair, Neb. 
All diets contained 25 g/ton Rumen-
sin and 12 mg/lb thiamine (DM). 
Cattle were offered ad libitum access 
to treatment diets for 30 or 31 days 
followed by limit feeding a common 
diet (47.5% Sweet Bran, 23.75% grass 
hay, 23.75 alfalfa hay, and 5% supple-
ment) for five days prior to collecting 
final BW to minimize variation in gut 
fill. Final BW were collected over two 
days following the five-day limit-fed 
period. Initial weight was not shrunk 
because steers were weighed within 12 
hours of arrival and had no access to 
feed before weighing. 
Performance data were analyzed 
using the MIXED procedure of SAS 
(SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, N.C.) with pen 
as the experimental unit. Block was 
treated as a random effect, and treat-
ment was a fixed effect. Treatment 
comparisons were made using a pro-
tected F-test (P < 0.10) separated with 
Bonferroni t-test. Incidence of BRD 
was evaluated as the rate of respira-
tory illness or the number of steers 
treated for BRD in a pen divided by 
the number of steers in that pen. 
Incidence of BRD was then analyzed 
using the GENMOD procedure of 
SAS. Incidence of BRD was affected 
by DMI and ADG; consequently, ADG 
and DMI were added to the model 
when assessing treatment effects on 
BRD. No significant effect of block 
existed so it was removed from the 
model. Treatment means for BRD 
incidence were calculated using the 
PROC MEANS function of SAS. 
Table 1.  Performance of cattle fed RAMP, Test Starter, or a control receiving diet.
   Treatment     
Item Control RAMP Test Starter SEM P-value 
Initial BW, lb 576 578 573 11.2 0.89
Final BW, lb  645 657 645 10.3 0.36
DMI, lb/day 13.4 13.8 13.9 0.27 0.14
ADG, lb  2.73a 3.04b 2.81ab 0.13 0.07
Feed:Gain1 4.91 4.54 4.95 0.22 0.17
BRD incidence, %2 4.3 7.4 11.7 — —
Treated for BRD, n 18/322 23/320 37/321 — —
1Statistics calculated on Gain:Feed.
2Control vs. RAMP P = 0.03; Control vs. Test Starter P < 0.01.
a,bMeans within a row without a common superscript are different, (P = 0.03).
Page 88 — 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.
Results
Feeding RAMP increased  
(P = 0.02) ADG compared to the 
control diet (Table 1). Daily gain of 
cattle fed Test Starter was not different 
(P > 0.11) from cattle fed control or 
RAMP. Dry matter intake was not 
different (P = 0.14) among treatments, 
although approaching significance 
with the complete feed treatments 
having numerically greater DMI than 
the control. On approximately day 
19 of the feeding period, intakes of 
Figure 1.  Dry matter intake over the receiving period for cattle fed control, RAMP, or Test Starter treatment diets.
20
15
10
5
0
D
M
I,
 lb
/d
ay
Control
RAMP
Test Starter
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Days on feed
the control cattle seemed to plateau 
(Figure 1) and DMI of cattle on the 
complete-feed rations continued 
to increase, which might explain 
increased performance of the cattle 
fed RAMP. Final BW was not affected 
by treatment and F:G was similar for 
all treatments. 
Incidence of BRD was affected by 
DMI and ADG; consequently, varia-
tion in ADG and DMI were accounted 
for in the analysis of treatment effects 
on BRD. Feeding both complete feeds 
increased (P < 0.03) the incidence of 
BRD; however, overall incidence of 
BRD was low (8%). Starting cattle on 
RAMP is a viable alternative to start-
ing cattle on a mixture of grain and 
forage.
1Cody J. Schneider, research technician; 
Brandon L. Nuttelman, research technician; 
Kelsey M. Rolfe, research technician; Will A. 
Griffin, research technician; David R. Smith, 
professor, University of Nebraska–Lincoln 
(UNL) Department of Veterinary and Biological 
Sciences; Galen E. Erickson, professor; Terry J. 
Klopfenstein, professor, UNL Department of 
Animal Science, Lincoln, Neb. 


https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1698&amp;context=animalscinbcr

Use of Complete-feed Diets RAMP™ and Test Starter for Receiving Cattle

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

UNL | Libraries