Abstract #341
Section: Ruminant Nutrition
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: General
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 4:45 PM–5:00 PM
Location: Panzacola H-3
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: General
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 4:45 PM–5:00 PM
Location: Panzacola H-3
# 341
Performance and economics of supplementing calves with distillers grains or fertilization of smooth bromegrass pastures.
Cody A. Welchons*1, Terry J. Klopfenstein1, James C. MacDonald1, Andrea K. Watson1, Robert G. Bondurant1, 1University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.
Key Words: beef cattle, grazing, supplementation
Performance and economics of supplementing calves with distillers grains or fertilization of smooth bromegrass pastures.
Cody A. Welchons*1, Terry J. Klopfenstein1, James C. MacDonald1, Andrea K. Watson1, Robert G. Bondurant1, 1University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.
Ten years of performance data were summarized to evaluate distillers grains supplementation and smooth bromegrass fertilization on cattle performance and economics. Each year, 45 steer calves (321 kg, SD = 21 kg) were assigned to 1 of 3 treatments with 3 replications per treatment. Treatments included non-fertilized control pasture (CON), fertilized pasture (89.75 kg N/ha; FERT), or non-fertilized and supplemented with distillers grains plus solubles (DGS) at 0.6% of BW daily for an average of 152 d (SUPP). Cattle on FERT and SUPP were stocked at 9.88 AUM (308 kg of forage)/ha while CON cattle were stocked at 6.82 AUM/ha. Pastures had 5 test animals and put and take animals were used to maintain similar grazing pressure among treatments. Cattle on CON and FERT treatments gained the same through the grazing period (0.77 kg/d; P = 0.67); however, fertilized pastures had greater gain per hectare. Supplemented cattle gained 0.31 kg/d more than FERT or CON (P < 0.01), resulting in 45.4 kg more BW at the end of the grazing season. Utilizing performance data from this 10 year period, 3 corn prices ($3, $4, and $5/25.4 kg) and 3 DGS prices (95, 105, and 115% price of corn) were used in a partial budget to compare profit potential of these treatments. To account for the greater BW of SUPP cattle at the end of grazing, a $10/45.4 kg price slide was used to calculate SUPP cattle revenue. At all prices, CON cattle were set to breakeven for profit comparisons. Across all scenarios, fertilizer costs were offset by savings in land rent, resulting in a $16.71/animal profit for FERT relative to CON (P < 0.01). As price of corn increased, profit of SUPP relative to CON decreased; however, SUPP cattle had greater profit than CON and FERT (P < 0.01) at all prices evaluated. For every 10% increase in DGS price relative to corn, SUPP profit decreased $5.32, $7.09, and $8.86 per animal for $3, $4, and $5/25.4 kg corn, respectively. Using an average DGS price of 105% the value of corn, SUPP cattle were $80.76, $62.14, and $43.52/animal more profitable than CON (P < 0.01) at corn prices of $3, $4, and $5/25.4 kg, respectively. In these scenarios, supplementing cattle grazing smooth bromegrass pasture with DGS increased ADG and profitability.
Key Words: beef cattle, grazing, supplementation