Objective: Compare and determine the effects on animal performance between a conventional high roughage diet and a limit-fed, high energy diet during the receiving and growing phase.
Study Description: Crossbred heifer calves (n = 418) originating from Texas and New Mexico were used to determine performance when limit-fed a high energy diet initially offered at 85% of feed intakes from cattle fed a conventional high roughage diet ad libitum at the Kansas State University Beef Stocker Unit.
The Bottom Line: Limit-feeding a high energy diet consisting primarily of dry-rolled corn and Sweet Bran (Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE) can improve rate of gain while significantly decreasing dry matter consumption over conventional high roughage diets fed ad libitum, and cattle exhibit greater muscling and fat deposition

Allen, L.

Blasi, D. A.

Hissong, C. E.

Hollenbeck, W. R.

Johnson, M. A.

Montgomery, S. P.

O\u27Quinn, T. G.

Scilacci, M. A.

Tarpoff, A. J.

Thomson, D. U.

Titgemeyer, E. C.

Tonsor, G. T.

Vahl, C. I.

Objective:Compare and determine the effects on animal performance between a conventional high roughage diet and a limit-fed, high energy diet during the receiving and growing phase.
Study Description:Crossbred heifer calves (n = 418) originating from Texas and New Mexico were used to determine performance when limit-fed a high energy diet initially offered at 85% of feed intakes from cattle fed a conventional high roughage diet ad libitum at the Kansas State University Beef Stocker Unit.
The Bottom Line:Limit-feeding a high energy diet consisting primarily of dry-rolled corn and Sweet Bran (Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE) can improve rate of gain while significantly decreasing dry matter consumption over conventional high roughage diets fed ad libitum, and cattle exhibit greater muscling and fat deposition

Kansas State University

Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports Volume 7 Issue 1 Cattlemen's Day Article 10 2021 Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage Diets M. A. Scilacci Kansas State University, morgan08@k-state.edu M. A. Johnson Kansas State University, mjohnson28@k-state.edu C. E. Hissong Kansas State University, hissongce@k-state.edu See next page for additional authors This report is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. Copyright 2021 Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. Contents of this publication may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. Brand names appearing in this publication are for product identification purposes only. No endorsement is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products not mentioned. K-State Research and Extension is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr  Part of the Beef Science Commons Recommended Citation Scilacci, M. A.; Johnson, M. A.; Hissong, C. E.; Montgomery, S. P.; Tarpoff, A. J.; Titgemeyer, E. C.; Allen, L.; O'Quinn, T. G.; Tonsor, G. T.; Vahl, C. I.; Thomson, D. U.; Hollenbeck, W. R.; and Blasi, D. A. (2021) "Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage Diets," Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: Vol. 7: Iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5977.8028 Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage Diets Abstract Objective: Compare and determine the effects on animal performance between a conventional high roughage diet and a limit-fed, high energy diet during the receiving and growing phase. Study Description: Crossbred heifer calves (n = 418) originating from Texas and New Mexico were used to determine performance when limit-fed a high energy diet initially offered at 85% of feed intakes from cattle fed a conventional high roughage diet ad libitum at the Kansas State University Beef Stocker Unit. The Bottom Line: Limit-feeding a high energy diet consisting primarily of dry-rolled corn and Sweet Bran (Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE) can improve rate of gain while significantly decreasing dry matter consumption over conventional high roughage diets fed ad libitum, and cattle exhibit greater muscling and fat deposition. Keywords limit feeding, growing calves, feed conversion Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Cover Page Footnote National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, Kansas Corn Commission Authors M. A. Scilacci, M. A. Johnson, C. E. Hissong, S. P. Montgomery, A. J. Tarpoff, E. C. Titgemeyer, L. Allen, T. G. O'Quinn, G. T. Tonsor, C. I. Vahl, D. U. Thomson, W. R. Hollenbeck, and D. A. Blasi This beef cattle management is available in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol7/iss1/10 Cattlemen's Day 2021KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITYCATTLEMEN’S DAYKansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service1Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage DietsM.A. Scilacci, M.A. Johnson, C.E. Hissong, S.P. Montgomery,1 A.J. Tarpoff, E.C. Titgemeyer, L. Allen,2 T.G. O’Quinn, G.T. Tonsor, C.I. Vahl, D.U. Thomson,3 W.R. Hollenbeck, and D.A. BlasiAbstractRecent research suggests that limit feeding a high-energy diet to growing cattle improves performance, with no increased incidence of morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to compare the performance impacts of limit feeding a high-energy diet to a traditional high roughage diet fed ad libitum. Crossbred heifer calves (n = 418) were used in an 84-day growing and receiving study at the Kansas State University Beef Stocker Unit with two treatment diets, including a high-energy, limit-fed treatment consisting primarily of dry-rolled corn and Sweet Bran (Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE), and a high roughage, ad libitum treatment. Pen performance statistics were measured throughout the study. Compared to the high roughage, ad libitum treatment, the high-energy, limit-fed cattle gained 14.7% more (P < 0.01) with 25.5% less dry matter consumption (P < 0.01). According to ultrasound scanning data, high-energy, limit-fed cattle showed a greater extent of muscle depth over the ribs and more marbling in the ribeye (P < 0.02).IntroductionPrevious research conducted at the Kansas State Beef Stocker Unit has demonstrated the possible benefits of limit feeding high-energy diets based on dry-rolled corn and corn co-products for newly received growing cattle. This study was conducted to further explore subsequent feedlot performance and carcass merit implications. During the receiving and growing phase of production, roughage-based diets are commonplace in the industry. However, in times of drought, or when forage prices are high, producers often seek alternative, yet readily available feedstuffs such as corn, distiller’s grains, 1  Corn Belt Livestock Services, Papillion, NE.2  Cattle Performance Enhancement Company, Oakley, KS. 3  Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service2Cattlemen's Day 2021or wet corn gluten feed. Coupled with limit feeding, the use of high-energy feeds is a powerful means to achieve comparable, or even improved performance in young growing cattle prior to feedlot entry.Experimental ProceduresA total of 418 weaned, crossbred heifers (body weight = 615 ± 53 lb) were purchased at auction markets in Texas and New Mexico, assembled at two different farms approxi-mately 90 miles southwest of Amarillo, TX, then shipped 570 miles to the Kansas State University Beef Stocker Unit, Manhattan, KS, on May 28, 2019. The heifers were used in a completely randomized block design, 84-day receiving and growing study to evaluate the impact of a high-energy, limit-fed diet containing dry-rolled corn and Sweet Bran (Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE) to a high roughage diet fed ad libitum on animal performance. Cattle were randomized by arrival weight and assigned to pens, each containing 13 or 14 heifers. Additionally, each pen was randomly assigned to one of two treatments in a “treatment pair” (one high-energy, limit-fed pen, and one high roughage, ad libitum pen). There was a total of 32 pens. The high roughage and high-energy diets were formulated to provide either 45 or 60 Mcal of net energy for gain/100 lb of dry matter, respectively. Feed intakes of the high-energy, limit-fed groups were initially set at 85% of the feed intakes of the high roughage, ad libitum groups. However, this percentage was reduced when it became apparent that 85% of the high roughage, ad libitum intakes resulting in ad libitum intakes for the high-energy, limit-fed treatment. Both diets were formulated to contain 40% Sweet Bran on a dry matter basis (Table 1). At the time of arrival, all calves were evaluated for disease and lameness. Each animal was individually weighed, given a visual identification ear tag, and was vaccinated for typical respiratory diseases. Cattle were fed once daily, and each pen was weighed once per week. A 24-hour shrunk weight was measured at the end of the study to calculate pen performance statistics. Pen was the experimental unit. On day 84, ultrasound was performed on all cattle to determine muscling and fat differences by a technician from the Cattle Performance Enhancement Company, and preliminary carcass data were obtained. Results and DiscussionPerformance and growth results are provided in Table 2 for each treatment group. Ultrasound data are shown in Table 3. Overall, the high-energy, limit-fed cattle out-gained the high roughage, ad libitum cattle (P < 0.01). Inherently, dry matter intakes were considerably lower for the high-energy, limit-fed cattle; their efficiency was also markedly better, with gain-to-feed and feed-to-gain ratios better than the high roughage, ad libitum treatment (P < 0.01). Body weight was not different between treatments (P = 0.22) on day 84. Initially, the high-energy, limit-fed feed intake was set at 85% of the feed intakes of the high roughage, ad libitum treatment. However, the high roughage, ad libitum cattle consumed more dry matter than expected. Conse-quently, over subsequent weeks, each high-energy, limit-fed pen’s intake was decreased to maintain limit-fed conditions according to each adjacent high roughage, ad libitum contemporary pen. Although 85% may work for some groups of cattle, this percentage is highly variable and depends on several factors such as breed type, age, weight, weather Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service3Cattlemen's Day 2021conditions, and eating experience. In practical producer settings, it would be more economical and convenient to base limit-fed cattle intakes on a fixed percentage of body weight to achieve a targeted rate of gain. In ultrasound scans, high-energy, limit-fed cattle showed greater muscle depth (P < 0.01) and marbling in the ribeye (P = 0.02). Furthermore, this treatment group also deposited more backfat (P < 0.01). These outcomes may allow for shorter times on feed to achieve desired carcass indices. ImplicationsLimit feeding a high-energy diet, as compared to feeding a traditional high roughage diet ad libitum in growing cattle can result in comparable, or even improved, feed conversion without negatively affecting rate of gain. Moreover, limit feeding the higher energy diet also increases muscling depth and fat deposition.AcknowledgmentsNational Cattlemen’s Beef AssociationKansas Corn CommissionBrand names appearing in this publication are for product identification purposes only. No endorsement is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products not mentioned. Persons using such products assume responsibility for their use in accordance with current label directions of the manufacturer.Table 1. Composition of experimental diets fed in the backgrounding phaseItemDiet1 High roughage, ad libitumHigh-energy, limit-fedIngredient, % dry matter inclusionAlfalfa 22.50 6.50Dry rolled corn 8.57 38.82Prairie hay 22.50 6.50Sweet Bran2 40.00 40.00Supplement 6.43 8.181 Diets were formulated to contain 45 or 60 Mcal net energy for gain/100 lb dry matter, respectively.2 Cargill Animal Nutrition, Blair, NE.Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service4Cattlemen's Day 2021Table 2. Performance data collected from heifers in an 84-day backgrounding studyItemDiet1 Standard error of the least square means P-valueHigh roughage, ad libitumHigh-energy, limit-fedNumber of pens 16 16Number of animals 205 204Body weight, lbDay 0 618 615 13.5 0.89Day 42 753 748 14.2 0.81Day 84 811 837 14.6 0.22Average daily gain, lb/dayDay 0–84 2.30 2.64 0.04 < 0.01Dry matter intake, lb/dayDay 0–84 23.26 17.32 0.4 < 0.01Feed to gain, lb/lbDay 0–84 10.15 6.55 0.2 < 0.01Gain to feed, lb/lbDay 0–84 0.100 0.153 0.002 < 0.011 Diets were formulated to contain 45 or 60 Mcal net energy for gain/100 lb dry matter, respectively, and were fed to each pen once/day. Weekly pen weights were measured, and feed intakes were adjusted accordingly.Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service5Cattlemen's Day 2021Table 3. Ultrasound scanning data from heifers in the backgrounding phase and predicted carcass traitsItemDiet1 Standard error of the least square means2 P-value High roughage, ad libitumHigh-energy, limit-fedCarcass quality traits in back-grounding phase3 Backfat, in 0.20a 0.22b 0.01 < 0.01Muscle depth, in4 2.11a 2.25b 0.02 < 0.01Marbling score5 4.78a 4.92b 0.04 0.02Predicted carcass quality traits upon slaughter6Days on feed 139.0a 126.0b 3.6 0.02Pay weight, lb 1246.0 1229.7 8.1 0.16Hot carcass weight, lb 787.1 775.1 5.8 0.15Backfat, in 0.57 0.58  0.01 0.19Marbling score 6.93 6.92 0.06 0.93Probability of final yield grade7 Yield grade 2, % 29.6 27.5 0.01 0.16Yield grade 3, % 62.3 63.7  0.01 0.21Yield grade 4, % 6.6a 7.5b  0.01 0.03ab Least square means with different superscripts are different (P < 0.05).     1 Diets were formulated to contain 45 or 60 Mcal net energy for gain/100 lb of dry matter, respectively, and were fed to each pen once/day in the 84-day backgrounding phase. 2 Standard error (largest) of the least square means.3 Carcass quality traits observed by ultrasound scanning on day 84.4 Measured by the Cattle Performance Enhancement Company software program from the bottom backfat line to the rib bones.5 A number between 4.00–4.99 indicates “select” marbling, and 5.00–5.99 indicates “low choice” marbling. 6 Predicted carcass quality traits for cattle upon slaughter, based on day 84 ultrasound scan data and prediction equa-tions from the Cattle Performance Enhancement Company.7 Probability (from 0–100%) that the final yield grade of a carcass will be 2, 3, or 4 upon slaughter, based on U.S. Department of Agriculture standards.

Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage Diets

https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8028&amp;context=kaesrr

Limit-Fed, High-Energy Diets Can Achieve Improved Feed Conversion Rates Without Compromising Rate of Gain When Compared to Conventional High Roughage Diets

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Kansas State University