Summer Supplementation: Plant,Animal and Environmental

Response ─ A Nebraska Perspective

Terry Klopfenstein, WillGriffin, Kelsey Rolfe

Animal Science, UNL

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0 0.15 0.3 0.45

Level of escape protein, lb/hd/d

Da

ily g

ain

, lb

Gain response to escape protein.

Price of DDG and Pasture

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006Year

$/t

on

, DM

DDGPasture

y = 0.06x + 1.50 r2 = 0.45

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0.0 1.0 2.1 3.1 4.2Supplemental Dried Distillers Grains (lb per day, DM)

AD

G (

lb p

er d

ay)

Linear Response (P = 0.10)

Figure 1. Effect of supplemental dried distillers grains on ADG.

Effect of Supplementation (P = 0.16)

y = 0.07x + 1.71

R2 = 0.79 P < 0.01

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

DDGS (lb)

AD

G (

lb)

Effect of Supplemental Dried Distillers Grains

on Average Daily Gain

520 lb heifers 5 lb (DM) DDGS daily Controls 1.0 ADG Supplemented 2.5 ADG MP, -145 g/day

DDG Supplementationon Sandhills

650 lb heifers 1, 2.1, 3.1 or 4.2 lb daily Energy control

DDG Supplementationon Brome

Supplementation Study

Objective

• Determine the effect of supplemental DDGS on performance of steers grazing cool season sub-irrigated meadow

• Evaluate whether the response is due to supplemental UIP or energy

Procedures

• 2 Experiments:

– Gudmundsen Research Lab (Whitman, Ne)

• Experiment 1: (May 7, 2007 to August 8, 2007) – 28 spring born steers (640 ± lb)– DDGS supplement = 0.6% of BW/d (based on initial

BW)

• Experiment 2: (May 21, 2008 to August 20, 2008)– 48 spring born steers (618 ± 45 lb) – DDGS supplement = 0.6 or 1.2% of BW/d (initial BW)

Procedures

• Both experiments:

– 3-d limit fed weights to determine initial BW and ending BW (Limit fed hay = 1.8% of BW)

– Stratified by Initial BW and randomly assigned to treatment

– Steers were individually penned 6 d/wk at 0700 hr and individually supplemented

– Steers were penned until all DDGS was consumed

Experiment 1

Item Con DDGSa SEM

Initial BW, lb 638 641 13

Ending BW, lb 818 831 13

Grazing days 92 92 --

Grazing ADG, lb/d 1.95 2.060.07

aSteers supplemented DDGS 0.6% of initial BW.

Experiment 2

Item Con Lowa Highb SEM Trtc Ld Qe

Initial BW, lb 616 623 616 20 0.91 0.93 0.67

Ending BW, lb 793z 829y 851x 13 0.02 < 0.01 0.79

Grazing days 91 91 91 --- --- --- ---

Grazing ADG, lb/d 1.97z 2.26y 2.62x 0.09 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.85aSteers supplemented DDGS at 0.06% of initial BW.bSteers supplemented DDGS at 1.2% of initial BW.cP-value for protected F test.dLinear P-value.eQuadratic P-valuexyzMeans with differing superscripts are different.

Forage Intake

• 1996 NRC Model– Nutrient analysis from diet samples

• Animal Performance:– Average BW– ADG

• Determine MP Balance

NRC Results

Item Exp. 1 Exp. 2

Inputs

Average BW, lb 728 706

ADG, lb/d 1.95 1.97

NE adjusters 100 100

Results

Calc. forage intake, lb/d 17.9 20.2

MP balance, g/d - 43 - 22

Meta Analysis• Grazing

35 treatment means394 yearling cattleKS & NESmooth Brome, Bermudagrass, Sandhills range60-196 hd

• Pen-fed348 calveshay, alfalfa, sorghum silage82-95 d

Pen ADG

y = -0.0202x2 + 0.3235x + 1.2059

Pasture ADG

y = -0.013x2 + 0.1894x + 1.4732

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00

Supplemented DDGS, lb/d

AD

G,

lb/d

Figure 1. Effect of DDGS supplementation on ADG for growing\cattle supplemented DDGS

DDG Supplementationy = x

Forage Intake

y = -0.049x2 - 0.1103x + 12.718

Total Intake

y = -0.0494x2 + 0.8899x + 12.719

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

Supplemented DDGS, lb/d

Inta

ke,

lb/d

Effect of DDGS supplementation on intake for cattle fed in pens

Pasture studies:Final BW, lb 826 860 885 900 906 903 <0.01 0.08ADG, lb/d 1.47 1.73 1.92 2.06 2.14 2.16 <0.01 0.14

Pen studies:Final BW, lb 685 724 755 779 795 803 <0.01 <0.01ADG, lb/d 1.21 1.65 1.99 2.25 2.42 2.49 <0.01 <0.01

Total intake, lb/d 12.7 13.9 14.9 15.7 16.3 16.6 <0.01 <0.01Forage intake, lb/d 12.7 12.4 11.9 11.2 10.3 9.1 0.31 <0.01Forage replacementc, lb/d 0.0 0.3 0.8 1.5 2.4 3.6 --- ---Forage replaced/DDGSd, lb/lb 0.00 0.20 0.27 0.33 0.40 0.48 --- ---

DDGS supplementationa: 0.0 1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5 Linb

Quadb

Effect of increasing supplemental level of dried distillers grains plus solubles (DDGS) to growing cattle

aSupplemented level of DDGS (DM-basis) in lb/hd daily.bEstimation equation linear and quadratic term t-statistic for variable of interest response to DDGS supplementation level.cForage replacement calculated using forage intake at 0.0 lb/d supplementation and subtracting forage intake value for respective level of supplementation.dThe amount of forage replaced per lb of DDGS supplemented.

Pen ADG

y = -0.0202x2 + 0.3235x + 1.2059

Pasture ADG

y = -0.013x2 + 0.1894x + 1.4732

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00

Supplemented DDGS, lb/d

AD

G,

lb/d

Effect of DDGS supplementation on ADG for growing\cattle supplemented DDGS

Objectives

Determine the effects of supplementing Determine the effects of supplementing modified distillers grains with solubles modified distillers grains with solubles (MDGS) while grazing native range.(MDGS) while grazing native range.

Design

240 yearling steers (BW = 726 240 yearling steers (BW = 726 ± 35 lb).± 35 lb).

Backgrounding:Backgrounding:

Late fall to April 21 (144 d).Late fall to April 21 (144 d).

Supplemented 5.0 lb/hd/d WCGF.Supplemented 5.0 lb/hd/d WCGF.

Smooth brome grazing:Smooth brome grazing:

April 22 to May 11 (21 d).April 22 to May 11 (21 d).

Design

Summer grazing: Barta Bros. Ranch.Summer grazing: Barta Bros. Ranch.

May 12 to September 23 (135 d).May 12 to September 23 (135 d).

2 Treatment groups:2 Treatment groups:

No supplementation (CON).No supplementation (CON).

MDGS supplementation at 0.6% MDGS supplementation at 0.6% BW (SUPP). BW (SUPP).

Results

ItemItem CONCON SUPPSUPP PP value value

Initial BW, lbInitial BW, lb 506 506 504504 0.800.80

Spring BW, lbSpring BW, lb 695695 693693 0.750.75

Summer BW, lbSummer BW, lb 731731 736736 0.540.54

Feedlot entry BW, lbFeedlot entry BW, lb 914914 10301030 <0.01<0.01

ADG, lbADG, lb 1.341.34 2.162.16 <0.01<0.01

Results

0.74 lb grass 0.74 lb grass was saved for was saved for every 1.0 lb every 1.0 lb MDGS fed!MDGS fed!

ResultsResults

Griffin et al., 2009, Neb. Beef ReportGriffin et al., 2009, Neb. Beef Report

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Supplementation, % BW

AD

G,

lb

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Supplementation, % BW

AD

G,

lbResults

ADGCON = 1.36 lb

ADGSUPP = 2.20 lb

Treatments

• 3 year study• 3 trt and 3 reps

– Fertilization (FERT)• 80 lb/ac • 4 AUM/ac

– Supplement (SUPP)• 5 lb/hd/d DDG• 4 AUM/ac

– Control (CONT)• 69% stocking rate• 2.75 AUM/ac

CONTCONT FERTFERT

1.47

726 724

CONT SUPP

1.5End BW, lb

1

FERT

726

10492.02

968 961

Initial BW, lb

ADG, lb

Item

1 limit fed BW.a,b Means without a common superscript differ (P<0.01).

Animal Performance

Pasture Performance

Treatment

a a b

a a b

1160 160 160Days

No TRT x Year interaction P = 0.65

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

0 50 100 150 200

Grazing Period, d

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

ADG Response, lb

ADG, lb

Effects of Varying N Fertilizer and DDGSPrices on Costs of Gain for Steers Grazing Smooth Bromegrass in Eastern Nebraska