One hundred sixty crossbred steers were used to determine the energy value of wet distillers grains in high forage diets. By design, steers had similar intakes and gains across treatments. Diets included either wet distillers grains (WDGS) or dry rolled corn, sorghum silage, grass hay and supplement (DRC). Diets were formulated to meet degradable intake protein and metabolizable protein requirements. The energy value of wet distillers grains was calculated using the National Research Council model (1996). In this study, wet distillers grains contained 130% of the energy of dry rolled corn when fed in forage-based diets

Benton, Joshua R.

Erickson, Galen E.

Klopfenstein, Terry J.

Luebbe, Matt K.

Nuttelman, Brandon

Stalker, Leslie Aaron

English

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department 2009 Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets Brandon Nuttelman University of Nebraska-Lincoln Matt K. Luebbe University of Nebraska - Lincoln, mluebbe2@unl.edu Joshua R. Benton University of Nebraska-Lincoln, jbenton2@unl.edu Terry J. Klopfenstein University of Nebraska-Lincoln, tklopfenstein1@unl.edu Leslie Aaron Stalker University of Nebraska-Lincoln, stalkera@byui.edu See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr  Part of the Animal Sciences Commons Nuttelman, Brandon; Luebbe, Matt K.; Benton, Joshua R.; Klopfenstein, Terry J.; Stalker, Leslie Aaron; and Erickson, Galen E., "Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets" (2009). Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 520. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/520 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 Brandon Nuttelman, Matt K. Luebbe, Joshua R. Benton, Terry J. Klopfenstein, Leslie Aaron Stalker, and Galen E. Erickson This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/520 Page 28 — 2009 Nebraska Beef Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage DietsBrandon L. NuttelmanMatthew K. LuebbeJosh R. BentonTerry J. KlopfensteinL. Aaron StalkerGalen E. Erickson1SummaryOne hundred sixty crossbred steers were used to determine the energy value of wet distillers grains in high for-age diets. By design, steers had similar intakes and gains across treatments. Diets included either wet distillers grains (WDGS) or dry rolled corn, sorghum silage, grass hay and supplement (DRC). Diets were formulated to meet degrad-able intake protein and metabolizable protein requirements. The energy value of wet distillers grains was calculated using the National Research Council model (1996). In this study, wet dis-tillers grains contained 130% of the energy of dry rolled corn when fed in forage-based diets.IntroductionIn forage-based diets, feeding starch as an energy source can sup-press forage digestion. In the dry milling process, starch is removed from corn to produce ethanol. There-fore, replacing corn with WDGS can reduce the negative associative affects that the energy from starch can have on fiber digestion. In feedlot rations, the energy value of WDGS ranges from 100% to 140% of the value of corn. In forage-based diets, dried dis-tillers grains have been shown to con-tain 118% to 130% of the energy value of DRC depending upon level fed (2003 Nebraska Beef Report, pp. 8-10). However, research evaluating the en-ergy value of WDGS in forage-based diets is limited. Therefore, the objec-tive of this study was to determine the energy value of WDGS relative to dry rolled corn (DRC) in forage-based diets. ProcedureOne hundred sixty crossbred steers (630 + 41 lb) were used in a 67-day growing trial to compare the energy value of WDGS to DRC in a forage-based diet. Calves were blocked into two weight groups, stratified within block and then randomly assigned to one of ten pens (16 steers/pen). Pens were assigned randomly to one of two treatment diets: either 1) WDGS or 2) DRC. Five days prior to collecting ini-tial and final BW, steers were limit fed a common diet to reduce variation in gut fill. The limit-fed diet contained 47.5% alfalfa hay, 47.5% wet corn gluten feed and 5.0% supplement. Weights were collected two consecu-tive days following each limit-feeding period.Diets were formulated using the NRC (1996) model and were formu-lated to meet energy and metaboliz-able protein (MP) requirements for a targeted gain of 2.25 lb/day. For diet formulation, WDGS was assumed to contain 127% the energy value of DRC (2003 Nebraska Beef Report, pp. 8-10). Bunks were evaluated daily and managed so that intakes were equal across both treatments. Feed refusals were collected weekly and DM of the feed refused was determined using a 60oC forced air oven. Dry matter refused was subtracted from DM offered to determine DMI.For both treatments, sorghum silage was fixed at 35% of the diet and grass hay was adjusted accord-ing to WDGS and DRC levels (Table 1). Analysis for fat content, % neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and % crude protein (CP) were conducted on in-dividual feed ingredients (Table 2). Supplement for both diets included urea to meet degradable intake pro-tein requirements . To prevent a per-formance response due to protein, Soypass® was included in the DRC supplement to provide undegradable intake protein to meet the metaboliz-able protein requirement. The NRC (1996) model predicts animal performance using feed intake and dietary energy content. There-fore, energy content of the feed can be predicted if animal performance and daily feed intake are known. Intake, diet composition, weights and weight gain were used to calculate the energy value of WDGS in the treatment diet. The energy value of DRC was cal-culated similarly so that results for WDGS could be expressed relative to those for corn.Data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS. The model included block and dietary treat-ment. Pen was the experimental unit (5 pens/treatment). Differences were considered significant when P < 0.05.ResultsInitial BW was not different  (P = 0.48, Table 2). By design, DM intake was similar between treat-ments. Although not different  (P > 0.11), ADG and feed-to-gain ratio (F:G) were numerically improved for Table 1. Diet composition. Composition, %DMIngredient WDGS DRCWDGS 25.00 —DRC — 33.60Grass hay 39.05 26.41Sorghum silage 35.00 35.00Soypass® — 3.35Selenium — 0.010Limestone 0.24 0.24Urea 0.30 0.90Tallow 0.02 0.12Salt 0.30 0.30Trace mineral premix 0.05 0.05Vitamin premix 0.015 0.015© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2009 Nebraska Beef Report  — Page 29 WDGS (0.17 and 0.46, respectively). Using the NRC (1996) model, animal performance was used to determine energy values for the DRC diet. The total digestible nutrients (TDN) value for corn was set at 83%, for hay at 52% and for sorghum silage at 65%. Net energy (NE) adjusters were set at 100%. The NE adjusters were reduced to 98.96% for calculat-ing the energy value of the WDGS because of the 0.17 lb/day greater gain. The resulting TDN value of the WDGS was 108%. Therefore, the esti-mated energy value of WDGS was 130% that of corn (108 ÷ 83).The energy values for DDGS determined previously were 130% when DDGS was fed at 10% of diet Table 2. Animal performance.Item  DRC WDGS SEM P-ValueInitial BW, lb 629 630 1 0.48Final BW, lb 811 824 6 0.07DMI, lb/day 17.9 17.7 0.7 0.72ADG, lb 2.72 2.89 0.09 0.11F:G 6.61 6.15 0.37 0.25dry matter and 118% when fed at 33% of ration dry matter. The value in this study is higher than would be predict-ed at the 25% level in the diet. With-out a direct comparison, we cannot conclude that WDGS has more energy in forage diets than DDGS. This trial confirms that distillers grains (wet or dry) have a high energy value relative to corn. This is likely due to the low level of starch and energy density of fat, undegraded protein and corn fiber.1Brandon L. Nuttelman, graduate stu-dent; Mathew K. Luebbe, research technician; Josh R. Benton, research technician; Terry J. Klopfenstein , professor; Galen E. Erickson, associate professor; Animal Science, Lincoln, Neb. L. Aaron Stalker, assistant professor, West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte, Neb.

Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets

UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln 
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln 
Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports Animal Science Department 
2009 
Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets 
Brandon Nuttelman 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln 
Matt K. Luebbe 
University of Nebraska - Lincoln, mluebbe2@unl.edu 
Joshua R. Benton 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, jbenton2@unl.edu 
Terry J. Klopfenstein 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, tklopfenstein1@unl.edu 
Leslie Aaron Stalker 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, stalkera@byui.edu 
See next page for additional authors 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr 
 Part of the Animal Sciences Commons 
Nuttelman, Brandon; Luebbe, Matt K.; Benton, Joshua R.; Klopfenstein, Terry J.; Stalker, Leslie Aaron; and 
Erickson, Galen E., "Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets" (2009). Nebraska Beef 
Cattle Reports. 520. 
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/520 
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 
Brandon Nuttelman, Matt K. Luebbe, Joshua R. Benton, Terry J. Klopfenstein, Leslie Aaron Stalker, and 
Galen E. Erickson 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/
animalscinbcr/520 
Page 28 — 2009 Nebraska Beef Report  © The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved.
Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets
Brandon L. Nuttelman
Matthew K. Luebbe
Josh R. Benton
Terry J. Klopfenstein
L. Aaron Stalker
Galen E. Erickson1
Summary
One hundred sixty crossbred steers 
were used to determine the energy 
value of wet distillers grains in high for-
age diets. By design, steers had similar 
intakes and gains across treatments. 
Diets included either wet distillers grains 
(WDGS) or dry rolled corn, sorghum 
silage, grass hay and supplement (DRC). 
Diets were formulated to meet degrad-
able intake protein and metabolizable 
protein requirements. The energy value 
of wet distillers grains was calculated 
using the National Research Council 
model (1996). In this study, wet dis-
tillers grains contained 130% of the 
energy of dry rolled corn when fed in 
forage-based diets.
Introduction
In forage-based diets, feeding 
starch as an energy source can sup-
press forage digestion. In the dry 
milling process, starch is removed 
from corn to produce ethanol. There-
fore, replacing corn with WDGS can 
reduce the negative associative affects 
that the energy from starch can have 
on fiber digestion. In feedlot rations, 
the energy value of WDGS ranges 
from 100% to 140% of the value of 
corn. In forage-based diets, dried dis-
tillers grains have been shown to con-
tain 118% to 130% of the energy value 
of DRC depending upon level fed 
(2003 Nebraska Beef Report, pp. 8-10). 
However, research evaluating the en-
ergy value of WDGS in forage-based 
diets is limited. Therefore, the objec-
tive of this study was to determine 
the energy value of WDGS relative to 
dry rolled corn (DRC) in forage-based 
diets. 
Procedure
One hundred sixty crossbred steers 
(630 + 41 lb) were used in a 67-day 
growing trial to compare the energy 
value of WDGS to DRC in a forage-
based diet. Calves were blocked into 
two weight groups, stratified within 
block and then randomly assigned to 
one of ten pens (16 steers/pen). Pens 
were assigned randomly to one of two 
treatment diets: either 1) WDGS or 2) 
DRC. Five days prior to collecting ini-
tial and final BW, steers were limit fed 
a common diet to reduce variation in 
gut fill. The limit-fed diet contained 
47.5% alfalfa hay, 47.5% wet corn 
gluten feed and 5.0% supplement. 
Weights were collected two consecu-
tive days following each limit-feeding 
period.
Diets were formulated using the 
NRC (1996) model and were formu-
lated to meet energy and metaboliz-
able protein (MP) requirements for a 
targeted gain of 2.25 lb/day. For diet 
formulation, WDGS was assumed 
to contain 127% the energy value of 
DRC (2003 Nebraska Beef Report, pp. 
8-10). Bunks were evaluated daily and 
managed so that intakes were equal 
across both treatments. Feed refusals 
were collected weekly and DM of the 
feed refused was determined using 
a 60oC forced air oven. Dry matter 
refused was subtracted from DM 
offered to determine DMI.
For both treatments, sorghum 
silage was fixed at 35% of the diet 
and grass hay was adjusted accord-
ing to WDGS and DRC levels (Table 
1). Analysis for fat content, % neutral 
detergent fiber (NDF), and % crude 
protein (CP) were conducted on in-
dividual feed ingredients (Table 2). 
Supplement for both diets included 
urea to meet degradable intake pro-
tein requirements . To prevent a per-
formance response due to protein, 
Soypass® was included in the DRC 
supplement to provide undegradable 
intake protein to meet the metaboliz-
able protein requirement. 
The NRC (1996) model predicts 
animal performance using feed intake 
and dietary energy content. There-
fore, energy content of the feed can be 
predicted if animal performance and 
daily feed intake are known. Intake, 
diet composition, weights and weight 
gain were used to calculate the energy 
value of WDGS in the treatment diet. 
The energy value of DRC was cal-
culated similarly so that results for 
WDGS could be expressed relative to 
those for corn.
Data were analyzed using the 
MIXED procedure of SAS. The model 
included block and dietary treat-
ment. Pen was the experimental unit 
(5 pens/treatment). Differences were 
considered significant when P < 0.05.
Results
Initial BW was not different  
(P = 0.48, Table 2). By design, DM 
intake was similar between treat-
ments. Although not different  
(P > 0.11), ADG and feed-to-gain ratio 
(F:G) were numerically improved for 
Table 1. Diet composition.
 Composition, %DM
Ingredient WDGS DRC
WDGS 25.00 —
DRC — 33.60
Grass hay 39.05 26.41
Sorghum silage 35.00 35.00
Soypass® — 3.35
Selenium — 0.010
Limestone 0.24 0.24
Urea 0.30 0.90
Tallow 0.02 0.12
Salt 0.30 0.30
Trace mineral premix 0.05 0.05
Vitamin premix 0.015 0.015
© The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska.  All rights reserved. 2009 Nebraska Beef Report  — Page 29 
WDGS (0.17 and 0.46, respectively). 
Using the NRC (1996) model, animal 
performance was used to determine 
energy values for the DRC diet. 
The total digestible nutrients 
(TDN) value for corn was set at 83%, 
for hay at 52% and for sorghum silage 
at 65%. Net energy (NE) adjusters 
were set at 100%. The NE adjusters 
were reduced to 98.96% for calculat-
ing the energy value of the WDGS 
because of the 0.17 lb/day greater 
gain. The resulting TDN value of the 
WDGS was 108%. Therefore, the esti-
mated energy value of WDGS was 
130% that of corn (108 ÷ 83).
The energy values for DDGS 
determined previously were 130% 
when DDGS was fed at 10% of diet 
Table 2. Animal performance.
Item  DRC WDGS SEM P-Value
Initial BW, lb 629 630 1 0.48
Final BW, lb 811 824 6 0.07
DMI, lb/day 17.9 17.7 0.7 0.72
ADG, lb 2.72 2.89 0.09 0.11
F:G 6.61 6.15 0.37 0.25
dry matter and 118% when fed at 33% 
of ration dry matter. The value in this 
study is higher than would be predict-
ed at the 25% level in the diet. With-
out a direct comparison, we cannot 
conclude that WDGS has more energy 
in forage diets than DDGS. This trial 
confirms that distillers grains (wet or 
dry) have a high energy value relative 
to corn. This is likely due to the low 
level of starch and energy density of fat, 
undegraded protein and corn fiber.
1Brandon L. Nuttelman, graduate stu-
dent; Mathew K. Luebbe, research technician; 
Josh R. Benton, research technician; Terry J. 
Klopfenstein , professor; Galen E. Erickson, 
associate professor; Animal Science, Lincoln, 
Neb. L. Aaron Stalker, assistant professor, West 
Central Research and Extension Center, North 
Platte, Neb.


https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1524&amp;context=animalscinbcr

Energy Value of Wet Distillers Grains in High Forage Diets

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

UNL | Libraries