Limit-Fed High-Energy Growing Programs for Feedlot Steers

Wagner, J.J.; Mader, Terry L.; Guthrie, L.D.; Baker, Frank

doi:10.15232/s1080-7446(15)32267-1

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Restricted feeding of a high-grain diet at 80% of the intake achieved with ad libitum feeding of a traditional corn silage-based growing diet for 77 d, followed by ad libitum access to a high-concentrate finishing diet to harvest at 149 d, decreased intake for the overall feeding period and improved feed efficiency [27]. Restricting intake of an allconcentrate diet to 80 or 90% of ad libitum resulted in a linear improvement in feed efficiency but increased days on feed to achieve a similar final weight [28].…”

Section: Production Responses With Restricted Feedingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding Management Strategies to Mitigate Methane and Improve Production Efficiency in Feedlot Cattle

Galyean

Hales

2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mitigation of greenhouse gases and decreasing nutrient excretion have become increasingly important goals for the beef cattle industry. Because feed intake is a major driver of enteric CH4 production and nutrient excretion, feeding management systems could be important mitigation tools. Programmed feeding uses net energy equations to determine the feed required to yield a specific rate of gain, whereas restricted feeding typically involves decreasing intake relative to the expected or observed ad libitum intake. In the context of growing/finishing systems typical of those in the United States and Western Canada, experimental results with programmed and restricted feeding have often shown decreased overall feed intake and increased gain efficiency relative to ad libitum feeding, but too much restriction can negatively affect harvest weight and associated carcass quality. Slick feed bunk management is a time-based restriction that limits day-to-day variation in feed deliveries, but the effects on intake and performance are not well defined. Simulations to estimate enteric CH4 emission and nitrogen excretion indicated that programmed feeding of a high-grain diet could appreciably decrease CH4 emissions and nitrogen excretion compared with traditional growing programs based on high-forage diets. For feedlot finishing, programming gain for a portion of the feeding period will decrease CH4 emission and N excretion only if cattle perform better than expected during the programmed phase or if compensatory growth occurs when cattle are transitioned to ad libitum feeding. Optimal approaches to implement programmed or restricted feeding that will yield increased efficiency should be the subject of future research in this area.

show abstract

Section: Production Responses With Restricted Feedingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding Management Strategies to Mitigate Methane and Improve Production Efficiency in Feedlot Cattle

Galyean

Hales

2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limit-fed high energy diets can improve feed efficiency in growing calves compared with traditional high-roughage diets fed ad libitum ( Wagner et al, 1990 ; Spore et al, 2019 ). One concern associated with limit feeding is that bunk requirements may need to be increased when feed is restricted in order to ensure that all calves can eat simultaneously.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bunk space requirements for growing beef cattle limit-fed a high-energy corn and corn co-product diet

Duncan

DeBord

Pflughoeft

et al. 2022

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bunk requirements for optimal growth performance of growing calves limit-fed high energy corn and corn co-product diets have not been widely evaluated. Three-hundred eighty-five crossbred steers (initial body weight = 215 ± 25 kg) were purchased in Texas, transported to the Kansas State Beef Stocker Unit, and weighed at arrival. Steers were stratified by body weight and randomly assigned to 1 of 28 pens containing 12 to 14 head. Within block, pens were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 bunk allotment treatments: 25.4, 38.1, 50.8 or 63.5 cm of bunk per head for a 58-d receiving period. Calves were fed at 0700 h once daily at 1.8% of bodyweight (dry matter basis) from February 2 to March 13, 2021; thereafter the daily feed allotment was increased to 2.0% of bodyweight. The diet contained (dry matter basis) 39.5% dry-rolled corn, 7.5% supplement, 40% wet corn gluten feed, and 13% prairie hay. Steers were individually weighed on d 29 and d 58 and pen weights were measured weekly to determine feed offered for the following week. Body weights on d 29 and 58, dry matter intake, or gain-to-feed ratio during the receiving period did not differ (P ≥ 0.34) between treatments. During the first 29-days, average daily gain (ADG) increased linearly as bunk space increased (P = 0.03); however, no treatment effects were observed thereafter. In addition, ADG standard deviation from d 0 to 29 responded quadratically (P = 0.05) where ADG standard deviation tended to be greater in the 38.1-cm allotment and was greater in the 50.8-cm allotment compared with the 25.4-cm allotment (P = 0.07 and P = 0.04, respectively). Bunk score tended to decrease linearly as bunk allotment decreased (P = 0.06). Following the receiving period, steers were blocked by bunk treatment and randomly assigned to 1 of 18 pastures. Steers were grazed for 90-d from May to August at a targeted stocking density of 280 kg live-weight ˖ ha -1. During the grazing season, ADG increased linearly with reduced (P < 0.01) bunk allotment; however; body weights did not differ (P = 0.91) between bunk treatments at the completion of the grazing period. In addition, overall total body weight gains and ADG from the receiving and grazing periods did not differ (P > 0.57) between bunk treatments. We interpreted our data to suggest that bunk space allotments of 25.4 to 63.5 cm per head had minimal impact on growth performance during a 58-d receiving period and did not affect final body weights following a 90-d grazing season.

show abstract

Metabolic Heat Production of Brahman × Angus and Hereford × Angus Steers at 0, 5, and 15 C

Boyles

Riley

Lusby³

et al. 1991

The Professional Animal Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limit-Fed High-Energy Growing Programs for Feedlot Steers

Cited by 3 publications

References 3 publications

Feeding Management Strategies to Mitigate Methane and Improve Production Efficiency in Feedlot Cattle

Feeding Management Strategies to Mitigate Methane and Improve Production Efficiency in Feedlot Cattle

Bunk space requirements for growing beef cattle limit-fed a high-energy corn and corn co-product diet

Metabolic Heat Production of Brahman × Angus and Hereford × Angus Steers at 0, 5, and 15 C

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About