A study evaluated the effects of two wintering systems (cornstalk grazing and drylot feeding) on cow- calf performance in a summer- calving intensively managed cowherd at two locations. Grazing cow- calf pairs on cornstalks resulted in lower ending BW of cows and reduced ADG of calves when compared to drylot cow- calf pairs at weaning. A partial budget of incorporating winter cornstalk grazing into an intensive production system suggests that cows wintered on cornstalks were $136.85 more profitable when compared to cows wintered in the drylot

Bittner, Curtis J., Bittner

Bondurant, Robert G.

Erickson, Galen E.

Gardine, Shelby E.

Jenkins, Karla

Klopfenstein, Terry J.

Luebbe, Matt K.

Rasby, Richard J.

Warner, Jason M.

English

UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department
2017
Effects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf
Performance in a Summer- Calving Intensive
Production System
Shelby E. Gardine
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, sgardine2@unl.edu
Jason M. Warner
University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Curtis J. Bittner Bittner
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, curtis.bittner@unl.edu
Robert G. Bondurant
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, robby.bondurant@unl.edu
Karla Jenkins
University of Nebraska - Lincoln, kjenkins2@unl.edu
See next page for additional authors
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr
Part of the Large or Food Animal and Equine Medicine Commons, Meat Science Commons, and
the Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health Commons
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.
Gardine, Shelby E.; Warner, Jason M.; Bittner, Curtis J. Bittner; Bondurant, Robert G.; Jenkins, Karla; Rasby, Richard J.; Luebbe, Matt
K.; Erickson, Galen E.; and Klopfenstein, Terry J., "Effects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a Summer- Calving
Intensive Production System" (2017). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 943.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/943
Authors
Shelby E. Gardine, Jason M. Warner, Curtis J. Bittner Bittner, Robert G. Bondurant, Karla Jenkins, Richard J.
Rasby, Matt K. Luebbe, Galen E. Erickson, and Terry J. Klopfenstein
This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/943
2017 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report · 19 
©  Th e Board Regents of the University of 
Nebraska. All rights reserved.
Prior to trial initiation, cows were 
grouped in a single drylot pen within 
location during the summer calving season 
(mean calving date: ENREC=July 7; PRE-
C=July 11). A distillers and corn residue 
based diet was limit- fed to cow- calf pairs 
during this time.
Trial initiation corresponded to the 
beginning of cornstalk grazing within each 
location (ENREC=Nov 11 and PREC=Dec 
4). Cow- calf pairs assigned to the CS treat-
ment were hauled to irrigated cornstalk 
fi elds, while cow- calf pairs assigned to DL 
treatment remained in drylot pens.
Drylot pairs within location were limit- 
fed a common diet (Table 1) formulated to 
maintain a lactating cow in early gestation. 
Dry matter off ered increased monthly 
throughout the study to account for the 
increasing intake of the growing calves.
Stocking rate for cow- calf pairs grazing 
cornstalks was calculated using estimated 
residue intakes of the cow and calf (2009 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 13- 14) and 
assuming 8 lb of husk and leaf residue (DM) 
were available per bushel of corn yield.
is limited on the performance of a lactating 
cow and her calf while grazing cornstalk 
residue. Th erefore, the objective of this 
study was to investigate a winter manage-
ment system incorporating winter cornstalk 
residue grazing on cow and calf perfor-
mance in a summer- calving intensively 
managed cow- calf production system.
Procedure
A study was conducted within two 
locations: the Eastern Nebraska Research 
and Extension Center (ENREC) feedlot 
and the Panhandle Research and Extension 
Center (PREC) feedlot. Seventy- six (n=47 at 
ENREC; n=29 at PREC) lactating, composite 
(Red Angus x Red Poll X Tarentaise x South 
Devon x Devon) beef cows with summer- 
born calves were utilized in the study. With-
in each location, cow- calf pairs were blocked 
by cow BW (ARDC=4; PREC=3 blocks for 
drylot and 2 blocks for cornstalk grazing), 
stratifi ed by calf age, and assigned randomly 
to one of two treatments: 1) dry lot feeding 
(DL) or 2) cornstalk grazing (CS).
Shelby E. Gardine
Jason M. Warner
Curtis J. Bittner
Robert G. Bondurant
Karla H. Jenkins
Rick J. Rasby
Matt K. Luebbe
Galen E. Erickson
Terry J. Klopfenstein
Summary with Implications
A study evaluated the eff ects of two 
wintering systems (cornstalk grazing and 
drylot feeding) on cow- calf performance 
in a summer- calving intensively managed 
cowherd at two locations. Grazing cow- calf 
pairs on cornstalks resulted in lower ending 
BW of cows and reduced ADG of calves 
when compared to drylot cow- calf pairs at 
weaning. A partial budget of incorporating 
winter cornstalk grazing into an inten-
sive production system suggests that cows 
wintered on cornstalks were $136.85 more 
profi table when compared to cows wintered 
in the drylot.
Introduction
Th e conversion of grassland to crop 
production has stimulated the cattle 
industry to seek alternative production 
systems. Research has shown that intensive 
management of cows can be utilized as an 
alternative system to traditional pasture 
beef production (2015 Nebraska Beef Cattle 
Report, pp. 16- 18). More acres used for 
grain crop production has also resulted in 
greater availability of corn residue for fall/
winter grazing. An economic analysis of 
an alternative production system would 
suggest that integrating cornstalk residue 
grazing in a partial intensive management 
system could reduce production cost for 
a cow- calf enterprise (2015 Nebraska Beef 
Cattle Report pp. 19- 21). However, research 
 Eff ects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a 
Summer- Calving Intensive Production System
Table 1. Ingredient and nutrient composition of diets fed to cow- calf pairs in drylot by location1
Location
Ingredient, % ENREC PREC
Modifi ed wet distillers grains plus solubles 55.0
Wet distillers grains plus solubles — 58.0
Wheat Straw 40.0 40.0
Supplement 5.0 2.0
Calculated Composition
 DM, % 62.4 47.0
 CP, % 19.3 18.8
 TDN, % 79.1 81.0
 NDF, % 54.0 54.9
 ADF, % 31.0 21.6
 Ca, % 0.79 0.77
 P, % 0.52 0.49
1All values presented on a DM basis
2Supplements included limestone, trace minerals, and vitamin A,D,E premix
20 · 2017 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report
A dried distillers grain based pellet (Ta-
ble 2) was supplemented in bunks (space: 
2 linear feet per pair) to pairs wintered on 
cornstalks at a rate of 5.3 lb. (range of 3.7 
lb. to 7.1 lb.) DM/pair daily. Th e amount 
supplemented each day was calculated to 
provide the pairs on cornstalks the same 
energy intake of the DL pairs. Estimat-
ed DM intake of the cow and calf (2009 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 13- 14) 
and estimated digestibility values of the 
cornstalk residue throughout the grazing 
period (2004 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, 
pp. 13- 15) were used to calculate supple-
mentation rate. Supplemental feed was only 
fed to grazing pairs if snow cover prevented 
grazing.
Th e trial was completed when winter 
cornstalk grazing ended on April 12 (EN-
REC) or April 14 (PREC). Weaning of the 
calves also coincided with the completion 
of the grazing season.
Cow BW and body condition score 
(BCS) were recorded over two consecu-
tive days at trial initiation and completion 
to determine changes in BW and BCS. 
Calf weights were also collected over two 
consecutive days at trial initiation and 
completion to calculate gain.
Prior to being weighed at trial initiation, 
all pairs were limit- fed for a minimum of 5 
consecutive days to reduce weight variation 
due to gastrointestinal tract fi ll. At trial 
completion, cow and calves were separated 
and limit- fed a minimum of 5 days before 
being weighed.
Cows were exposed to bulls (approxi-
mately 1 bull: 10 cows) from Sept 25 to Nov 
30 for a 66 day breeding season at both lo-
cations. All bulls were examined for breed-
ing soundness and approved by a licensed 
veterinarian prior to breeding season.
Results include 2 years of data from 
ENREC (1 year of previous data; 2016 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 5- 7) and 
1 year of data from PREC. Data were ana-
lyzed as a randomized block design using 
the mixed procedure of SAS. Th e model 
included pen or paddock as the experimen-
tal unit, wintering system as the fi xed eff ect, 
and block as a random eff ect. Signifi cance 
was declared at P ≤ 0.05.
Table 2. Supplement fed to cow- calf pairs grazing cornstalks
Ingredient, %
Dried distillers grains plus solubles 94.06
Limestone 5.49
Pelleting binder (urea formaldehyde polymer and calci-
um sulfate)
0.21
Vitamin A,D,E 0.12
Trace mineral3 0.11
1All values presented on a DM basis
2Fed at 5.3 lb per pair per d (DM)
3Cobalt, Copper, Manganese, Zinc, Iodine, Limestone Carrier
Table 3. Performance of cows by wintering system1
Item CS2 DL3 SEM P- value
Cow BW, lb
 Initial 1183 1187 62 0.93
 Ending 1121 1322 57 <0.01
Cow BW Change, lb - 64 132 16 <0.01
Cow BCS4
 Initial 5.3 5.3 0.3 0.92
 Ending 4.6 5.9 0.2 <0.01
Cow BCS change4 - 0.7 0.5 0.2 <0.01
1Two years of data from ENREC and 1 year of data from PREC
2CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks
3DL= pairs wintered in drylot
4BCS on a 1 (emaciated) to 9 (obese) scale
Table 4. Performance of calves by wintering system1
Item CS2 DL3 SEM P- value
Initial age, d4 125 129 5 0.49
Ending age, d5 282 284 3 0.51
Calf BW, lb
 Initial 331 326 9 0.68
 Ending 541 642 13 <0.01
Calf ADG, lb 1.33 2.04 0.1 <0.01
BW•d- 1•age- 1, lb6 1.96 2.32 0.1 <0.01
1Two years of data from ENREC and 1 year of data from PREC
2CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks
3DL= pairs wintered in drylot
4Initial age= age at initiation of cornstalk grazing period
5Ending age= age at collecting weights following weaning
6Weight per d of age at collecting weights following weaning
2017 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report · 21 
season. In contrast, the DL wintering sys-
tem was estimated at $2.16 per pair day or 
$356.40 per pair per grazing season.
In the CS wintering system, additional 
feed was required for the cow to compen-
sate for BW and body condition reductions 
observed throughout the winter. Conse-
quently, additional post- weaning feed for 
the CS cow cost approximately $16. Th e 
lighter weaning weight of CS calves resulted 
in a reduced return of $60 per calf when a 
$20/cwt price slide is used between the calf 
weaning weights of the CS and DL winter-
ing systems. A net change of $136.85 per 
pair was observed when winter cornstalk 
grazing was incorporated into an intensive 
production system.
Conclusion
Cow- calf pairs winter grazing cornstalks 
had poorer performance than pairs fed a 
complete diet throughout the winter in 
the drylot. However, lower winter produc-
tion inputs may be signifi cant enough to 
compensate for the reduced performance of 
calves when cow- calf pairs are wintered on 
cornstalks.
Shelby E. Gardine, graduate student
Jason M. Warner, graduate student
Curtis J. Bittner and Robert G. Bondurant, 
research technicians, Department of 
Animal Science, Lincoln
Karla H. Jenkins, assistant professor, 
Panhandle Research and Extension Center, 
Scottsbluff 
Rick J. Rasby, professor, Department of 
Animal Science, Lincoln
Matt K. Luebbe, assistant professor, 
Panhandle Research and Extension Center, 
Scottsbluff 
Galen E. Erickson and Terry J. Klopfenstein, 
professors, Department of Animal Science, 
Lincoln
increase in BCS. Calves in the drylot had 
a greater ending BW compared to calves 
grazing cornstalks (Table 4). Similarly, DL 
calves had greater ADG and BW per d of 
age compared to CS calves. Th e breeding 
season was nearly complete before the ex-
perimental treatments were applied. Th ere-
fore, the eff ect of treatment on reproduction 
could not be measured until the following 
breeding season. Only 29 cows (of the total 
112) meet these criteria. Overall, pregnan-
cies were 90%, but the number of cows was 
too small to make a treatment comparison.
A partial budget (Table 5) was utilized 
to economically compare the reduced 
performance, as well as decreased winter 
production cost of the CS wintering system. 
Winter production inputs for grazing corn-
stalks were estimated to be approximately 
$0.87 per pair per day, resulting in a total 
of $143.55 per pair for a 165 winter grazing 
Results
Cow- calf pairs at ENREC grazed from 
Nov 11 to April 19 (160 d). An ammoniated 
corn stalk bale was fed (approximately 147 
lb DM per pair) due to snow cover. Th e 
cornfi eld at ENREC produced a grain yield 
of 217 bu per acre. Estimated removal of 
available corn residue was 32%. At PREC, 
the grazing period was 133 days (Dec 4 to 
April 15). Th e average yield for the cornfi eld 
was 245 bu per acre. Cow- calf pairs removed 
approximately 20% of the available residue.
Drylot cow- calf pairs were limit- fed 27.9 
lb DM (ENREC) or 28.3 lb DM (PREC) 
throughout the trial. Drylot cows had a 
greater ending BW and BCS compared to 
cows grazing cornstalks (Table 3). Cows 
wintered on cornstalks lost BW and had 
a 0.7 unit decrease in BCS, while cows in 
the drylot gained BW and had a 0.5 unit 
Table 5. Partial budget of winter cornstalk grazing
Inputs, $/pair/day CS1 DL2
Cornstalk rent3 0.20 —
Yardage 0.30 0.50
Ration4 — 1.66
Supplement4 0.37 —
Net cost, $/pair/day 0.87 2.16
Net cost, $/pair/wintering season 143.55 356.40
Extra post- weaning feed, $/pair5 16.00 —
Lighter weaning wt, $/pair6 60.00 —
Net change, $/pair 136.85
1CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks
2DL= pairs wintered in drylot
3Cornstalk rent = $12 per acre
4Distillers priced at 100% of corn assuming $3.50 per bu of corn
5 Cost to feed an additional 3.6 lb. (DM) of ration at $0.06 per lb. for 75 days to compensate for body condition reduction of cow
6Th e diff erence in calf value at weaning between treatments; calf price, April 30; $20/cwt price slide


Effects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a Summer- Calving Intensive Production System

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - LincolnDigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - LincolnNebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department2017Effects of Wintering System on Cow and CalfPerformance in a Summer- Calving IntensiveProduction SystemShelby E. GardineUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, sgardine2@unl.eduJason M. WarnerUniversity of Nebraska - LincolnCurtis J. Bittner BittnerUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, curtis.bittner@unl.eduRobert G. BondurantUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, robby.bondurant@unl.eduKarla JenkinsUniversity of Nebraska - Lincoln, kjenkins2@unl.eduSee next page for additional authorsFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcrPart of the Large or Food Animal and Equine Medicine Commons, Meat Science Commons, andthe Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health CommonsThis 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.Gardine, Shelby E.; Warner, Jason M.; Bittner, Curtis J. Bittner; Bondurant, Robert G.; Jenkins, Karla; Rasby, Richard J.; Luebbe, MattK.; Erickson, Galen E.; and Klopfenstein, Terry J., "Effects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a Summer- CalvingIntensive Production System" (2017). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 943.http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/943AuthorsShelby E. Gardine, Jason M. Warner, Curtis J. Bittner Bittner, Robert G. Bondurant, Karla Jenkins, Richard J.Rasby, Matt K. Luebbe, Galen E. Erickson, and Terry J. KlopfensteinThis article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/9432017 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report · 19 ©  Th e Board Regents of the University of Nebraska. All rights reserved.Prior to trial initiation, cows were grouped in a single drylot pen within location during the summer calving season (mean calving date: ENREC=July 7; PRE-C=July 11). A distillers and corn residue based diet was limit- fed to cow- calf pairs during this time.Trial initiation corresponded to the beginning of cornstalk grazing within each location (ENREC=Nov 11 and PREC=Dec 4). Cow- calf pairs assigned to the CS treat-ment were hauled to irrigated cornstalk fi elds, while cow- calf pairs assigned to DL treatment remained in drylot pens.Drylot pairs within location were limit- fed a common diet (Table 1) formulated to maintain a lactating cow in early gestation. Dry matter off ered increased monthly throughout the study to account for the increasing intake of the growing calves.Stocking rate for cow- calf pairs grazing cornstalks was calculated using estimated residue intakes of the cow and calf (2009 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 13- 14) and assuming 8 lb of husk and leaf residue (DM) were available per bushel of corn yield.is limited on the performance of a lactating cow and her calf while grazing cornstalk residue. Th erefore, the objective of this study was to investigate a winter manage-ment system incorporating winter cornstalk residue grazing on cow and calf perfor-mance in a summer- calving intensively managed cow- calf production system.ProcedureA study was conducted within two locations: the Eastern Nebraska Research and Extension Center (ENREC) feedlot and the Panhandle Research and Extension Center (PREC) feedlot. Seventy- six (n=47 at ENREC; n=29 at PREC) lactating, composite (Red Angus x Red Poll X Tarentaise x South Devon x Devon) beef cows with summer- born calves were utilized in the study. With-in each location, cow- calf pairs were blocked by cow BW (ARDC=4; PREC=3 blocks for drylot and 2 blocks for cornstalk grazing), stratifi ed by calf age, and assigned randomly to one of two treatments: 1) dry lot feeding (DL) or 2) cornstalk grazing (CS).Shelby E. GardineJason M. WarnerCurtis J. BittnerRobert G. BondurantKarla H. JenkinsRick J. RasbyMatt K. LuebbeGalen E. EricksonTerry J. KlopfensteinSummary with ImplicationsA study evaluated the eff ects of two wintering systems (cornstalk grazing and drylot feeding) on cow- calf performance in a summer- calving intensively managed cowherd at two locations. Grazing cow- calf pairs on cornstalks resulted in lower ending BW of cows and reduced ADG of calves when compared to drylot cow- calf pairs at weaning. A partial budget of incorporating winter cornstalk grazing into an inten-sive production system suggests that cows wintered on cornstalks were $136.85 more profi table when compared to cows wintered in the drylot.IntroductionTh e conversion of grassland to crop production has stimulated the cattle industry to seek alternative production systems. Research has shown that intensive management of cows can be utilized as an alternative system to traditional pasture beef production (2015 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 16- 18). More acres used for grain crop production has also resulted in greater availability of corn residue for fall/winter grazing. An economic analysis of an alternative production system would suggest that integrating cornstalk residue grazing in a partial intensive management system could reduce production cost for a cow- calf enterprise (2015 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report pp. 19- 21). However, research  Eff ects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a Summer- Calving Intensive Production SystemTable 1. Ingredient and nutrient composition of diets fed to cow- calf pairs in drylot by location1LocationIngredient, % ENREC PRECModifi ed wet distillers grains plus solubles 55.0Wet distillers grains plus solubles — 58.0Wheat Straw 40.0 40.0Supplement 5.0 2.0Calculated Composition DM, % 62.4 47.0 CP, % 19.3 18.8 TDN, % 79.1 81.0 NDF, % 54.0 54.9 ADF, % 31.0 21.6 Ca, % 0.79 0.77 P, % 0.52 0.491All values presented on a DM basis2Supplements included limestone, trace minerals, and vitamin A,D,E premix20 · 2017 Nebraska Beef Cattle ReportA dried distillers grain based pellet (Ta-ble 2) was supplemented in bunks (space: 2 linear feet per pair) to pairs wintered on cornstalks at a rate of 5.3 lb. (range of 3.7 lb. to 7.1 lb.) DM/pair daily. Th e amount supplemented each day was calculated to provide the pairs on cornstalks the same energy intake of the DL pairs. Estimat-ed DM intake of the cow and calf (2009 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 13- 14) and estimated digestibility values of the cornstalk residue throughout the grazing period (2004 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 13- 15) were used to calculate supple-mentation rate. Supplemental feed was only fed to grazing pairs if snow cover prevented grazing.Th e trial was completed when winter cornstalk grazing ended on April 12 (EN-REC) or April 14 (PREC). Weaning of the calves also coincided with the completion of the grazing season.Cow BW and body condition score (BCS) were recorded over two consecu-tive days at trial initiation and completion to determine changes in BW and BCS. Calf weights were also collected over two consecutive days at trial initiation and completion to calculate gain.Prior to being weighed at trial initiation, all pairs were limit- fed for a minimum of 5 consecutive days to reduce weight variation due to gastrointestinal tract fi ll. At trial completion, cow and calves were separated and limit- fed a minimum of 5 days before being weighed.Cows were exposed to bulls (approxi-mately 1 bull: 10 cows) from Sept 25 to Nov 30 for a 66 day breeding season at both lo-cations. All bulls were examined for breed-ing soundness and approved by a licensed veterinarian prior to breeding season.Results include 2 years of data from ENREC (1 year of previous data; 2016 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, pp. 5- 7) and 1 year of data from PREC. Data were ana-lyzed as a randomized block design using the mixed procedure of SAS. Th e model included pen or paddock as the experimen-tal unit, wintering system as the fi xed eff ect, and block as a random eff ect. Signifi cance was declared at P ≤ 0.05.Table 2. Supplement fed to cow- calf pairs grazing cornstalksIngredient, %Dried distillers grains plus solubles 94.06Limestone 5.49Pelleting binder (urea formaldehyde polymer and calci-um sulfate)0.21Vitamin A,D,E 0.12Trace mineral3 0.111All values presented on a DM basis2Fed at 5.3 lb per pair per d (DM)3Cobalt, Copper, Manganese, Zinc, Iodine, Limestone CarrierTable 3. Performance of cows by wintering system1Item CS2 DL3 SEM P- valueCow BW, lb Initial 1183 1187 62 0.93 Ending 1121 1322 57 <0.01Cow BW Change, lb - 64 132 16 <0.01Cow BCS4 Initial 5.3 5.3 0.3 0.92 Ending 4.6 5.9 0.2 <0.01Cow BCS change4 - 0.7 0.5 0.2 <0.011Two years of data from ENREC and 1 year of data from PREC2CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks3DL= pairs wintered in drylot4BCS on a 1 (emaciated) to 9 (obese) scaleTable 4. Performance of calves by wintering system1Item CS2 DL3 SEM P- valueInitial age, d4 125 129 5 0.49Ending age, d5 282 284 3 0.51Calf BW, lb Initial 331 326 9 0.68 Ending 541 642 13 <0.01Calf ADG, lb 1.33 2.04 0.1 <0.01BW•d- 1•age- 1, lb6 1.96 2.32 0.1 <0.011Two years of data from ENREC and 1 year of data from PREC2CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks3DL= pairs wintered in drylot4Initial age= age at initiation of cornstalk grazing period5Ending age= age at collecting weights following weaning6Weight per d of age at collecting weights following weaning2017 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report · 21 season. In contrast, the DL wintering sys-tem was estimated at $2.16 per pair day or $356.40 per pair per grazing season.In the CS wintering system, additional feed was required for the cow to compen-sate for BW and body condition reductions observed throughout the winter. Conse-quently, additional post- weaning feed for the CS cow cost approximately $16. Th e lighter weaning weight of CS calves resulted in a reduced return of $60 per calf when a $20/cwt price slide is used between the calf weaning weights of the CS and DL winter-ing systems. A net change of $136.85 per pair was observed when winter cornstalk grazing was incorporated into an intensive production system.ConclusionCow- calf pairs winter grazing cornstalks had poorer performance than pairs fed a complete diet throughout the winter in the drylot. However, lower winter produc-tion inputs may be signifi cant enough to compensate for the reduced performance of calves when cow- calf pairs are wintered on cornstalks.Shelby E. Gardine, graduate studentJason M. Warner, graduate studentCurtis J. Bittner and Robert G. Bondurant, research technicians, Department of Animal Science, LincolnKarla H. Jenkins, assistant professor, Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Scottsbluff Rick J. Rasby, professor, Department of Animal Science, LincolnMatt K. Luebbe, assistant professor, Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Scottsbluff Galen E. Erickson and Terry J. Klopfenstein, professors, Department of Animal Science, Lincolnincrease in BCS. Calves in the drylot had a greater ending BW compared to calves grazing cornstalks (Table 4). Similarly, DL calves had greater ADG and BW per d of age compared to CS calves. Th e breeding season was nearly complete before the ex-perimental treatments were applied. Th ere-fore, the eff ect of treatment on reproduction could not be measured until the following breeding season. Only 29 cows (of the total 112) meet these criteria. Overall, pregnan-cies were 90%, but the number of cows was too small to make a treatment comparison.A partial budget (Table 5) was utilized to economically compare the reduced performance, as well as decreased winter production cost of the CS wintering system. Winter production inputs for grazing corn-stalks were estimated to be approximately $0.87 per pair per day, resulting in a total of $143.55 per pair for a 165 winter grazing ResultsCow- calf pairs at ENREC grazed from Nov 11 to April 19 (160 d). An ammoniated corn stalk bale was fed (approximately 147 lb DM per pair) due to snow cover. Th e cornfi eld at ENREC produced a grain yield of 217 bu per acre. Estimated removal of available corn residue was 32%. At PREC, the grazing period was 133 days (Dec 4 to April 15). Th e average yield for the cornfi eld was 245 bu per acre. Cow- calf pairs removed approximately 20% of the available residue.Drylot cow- calf pairs were limit- fed 27.9 lb DM (ENREC) or 28.3 lb DM (PREC) throughout the trial. Drylot cows had a greater ending BW and BCS compared to cows grazing cornstalks (Table 3). Cows wintered on cornstalks lost BW and had a 0.7 unit decrease in BCS, while cows in the drylot gained BW and had a 0.5 unit Table 5. Partial budget of winter cornstalk grazingInputs, $/pair/day CS1 DL2Cornstalk rent3 0.20 —Yardage 0.30 0.50Ration4 — 1.66Supplement4 0.37 —Net cost, $/pair/day 0.87 2.16Net cost, $/pair/wintering season 143.55 356.40Extra post- weaning feed, $/pair5 16.00 —Lighter weaning wt, $/pair6 60.00 —Net change, $/pair 136.851CS= pairs wintered on cornstalks2DL= pairs wintered in drylot3Cornstalk rent = $12 per acre4Distillers priced at 100% of corn assuming $3.50 per bu of corn5 Cost to feed an additional 3.6 lb. (DM) of ration at $0.06 per lb. for 75 days to compensate for body condition reduction of cow6Th e diff erence in calf value at weaning between treatments; calf price, April 30; $20/cwt price slide

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1953&amp;context=animalscinbcr

Effects of Wintering System on Cow and Calf Performance in a Summer- Calving Intensive Production System

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNL | Libraries

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska