Abstract #371

# 371
Can we produce more with less? A critical look at technology in the feedlot sector.
Clint R. Krehbiel*1, Casey L. Maxwell1, Bryan C. Bernhard2, Blake K. Wilson1, Cathy L. Haviland1, Michelle S. Calvo-Lorenzo1, Sara E. Place1, Deb L. VanOverbeke1, Gretchen G. Mafi1, Chris J. Richards1, D. L. Step1, 1Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, 2Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.

Adoption of technologies has enhanced beef cattle production and efficiency. With the increasing world population, use of technologies that are economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable is needed to meet protein demand. Long-term use of growth-enhancing technologies (implants, ionophores, β-adrenergic agonists) in the feedlot sector has proven that compounds enhance lean-tissue deposition, and changes in performance result in an economic benefit to both consumers and producers. Land needed and environmental impact is decreased when growth technologies are used. We determined the effects of feedlot production systems with the use of growth technologies compared with an all-natural program on cattle performance and carcass characteristics. Treatments consisted of an all-natural treatment (NAT; no technologies), a conventional treatment (CONV; ionophore and implant), and a CONV treatment with the addition of a β-adrenergic agonist (CONV-Z). There was a 35.7% increase in carcass gain and a 32.6% improvement in carcass efficiency for CONV-Z steers compared with NAT steers. Hot carcass weight was increased by 46 kg for CONV-Z steers compared with NAT steers. An increase in yield grade (YG) 1 and a decrease in YG 3 carcasses was observed for CONV-Z compared with CONV steers. Based on per capita beef consumption of 37.2 kg, added HCW for a single CONV-Z steer compared with a NAT steer would feed 1.2 more US Citizens per year. As society has concern over technologies used in animal production, it is imperative to communicate how increased animal productivity, reduced environmental impact and improved animal well-being are interrelated. Our results suggest that growth promoting products do not affect behavior, mobility, or the overall observed health and well-being of finishing beef steers. Food security depends on developing technologies for improving production efficiencies of beef cattle while adapting to climate change, protecting animal health, and improving the nutritional quality and safety of meat products for consumers. Developing technologies that can improve beef cattle production while minimizing environmental impact, enhancing animal well-being, and ensuring the health and safety of consumers should be our goal.

Key Words: beef cattle, growth-enhancing technologies, production

Speaker Bio
Clinton R. Krehbiel was raised on a farm near McPherson, KS.  He holds degrees from Hutchison Community College, Kansas State University, and the University of Nebraska, and received the Ph.D. degree in 1994.  Clint joined the Department of Animal Science at Oklahoma State University in 2000.  He has over 350 publications and has received over $3 million is extramural funding.  Clint has been a member of ASAS since 1988 and has served on the Editorial Board and as Associate Editor.  He has received several awards at the local and national level for his research in the area of receiving calf and feedlot cattle nutrition, management and health.  Clint and his wife Shelly have three daughters, Madison, Megan, and Emma.