Effects of diet type on nutrient utilization and energy balance in drylot heifers1.

Feeding cattle in intensified settings allows cow-calf producers to decrease their reliance on grazed forage and utilize alternative feedstuffs. During times of intense management, diet type may alter energy utilization. Fourteen pregnant MARC III heifers (405 ± 44 kg BW) were used in a 180 d experiment to determine effects of diet type on nutrient and energy utilization. Heifers were randomly assigned to one of two treatments, a forage diet (FOR; 2.10 Mcal metabolizable energy [ME]/kg; 95.75% forage) or a concentrate diet (CONC; 2.94 Mcal ME/kg; 71% concentrate), and individually fed to meet maintenance energy requirements (0.135 Mcal ME/kg BW0.75). The CONC diet contained dry-rolled corn, corn stalks (10.16 cm grind size), soybean meal, corn silage (approximately 45% corn grain; stored in a plastic bag), dicalcium phosphate, urea, and a premix pellet; FOR contained alfalfa hay (harvested at mid-bloom), corn silage, dicalcium phosphate, and a premix pellet. Measurements of energy intake and digestibility were measured over a 4-d period on days 116, 172, and 235 of gestation. Using portable headbox calorimeters, measurements of O2, CO2, and CH4 gases were collected over a period of 24 h. Data were analyzed in a completely randomized design with diet as fixed effect. Dry matter and organic matter digestibility were greater for CONC than FOR (P < 0.01). Intake of gross energy (GE) and digestible energy (DE) were greater for FOR (P < 0.01), but by design, ME intake was not different between treatments (P = 0.26). Energy lost as methane (% of GE intake) was not different between treatments (P = 0.49). The ratio of ME to DE was greater for CONC (86.8 vs. 82.8; P = 0.01) than FOR. Heat production relative to ME was not different between treatments (P = 0.85). Maternal tissue energy did not differ and was 1.2 Mcal/d for CONC and 0.9 Mcal/d for FOR (P = 0.73). Greater nitrogen (N) consumption was observed for FOR (192.2 g/d) than CONC (134.0 g/d; P < 0.01), and retained N was greater for FOR than CONC (P < 0.01) on days 116 and 235 of gestation. Neither concentrate-based or forage-based diets affected body condition score (P = 0.26). Heifers fed concentrate-based diets retained more energy in part because they had larger calves, but this energy was not recovered in maternal tissue.

Evaluation of net protein contribution, methane production, and net returns from beef production as duration of confinement increases in the cow-calf sector1.

Intensification of cow-calf production may provide a sustainable solution for meeting increasing beef demand in the face of diminishing resources. However, intensification with its greater reliance on cereal grains potentially decreases the upcycling of human-inedible protein into beef. A previously described model was used to evaluate cow-calf intensification on beef's ability to meet human protein requirements. Four scenarios were compared, based on a 1,000 cow herd: 1) Conventional cow-calf production system (0CON), 2) cows limit-fed in confinement for 4 mo after weaning (4CON), 3) cows limit-fed in confinement for 8 mo after breeding (8CON), or 4) cows limit-fed in confinement year-round (12CON). Changes were not made to either the stocker or feedlot segments of the beef value chain. Net protein contribution (NPC) was calculated by multiplying the ratio of human-edible protein (HeP) in beef produced to HeP in feed by the protein quality ratio. A NPC >1 indicates that the production system is positively contributing to meeting human requirements, whereas a NPC <1 indicates the sector or value chain is competing with humans for HeP. Methane was estimated based on proportion of forage in diet and total methane production was reported per kg HeP. In the cow-calf sector, HeP conversion efficiency (HePCE) decreased from 2,640.83 to 0.37 while methane production decreased from 4.53 to 1.82 kg/kg HeP produced as the length of intensification increased from 0CON to 12CON. Decreased HePCE resulted in NPC values for cow-calf sector of 8,036.80, 4.93, 2.19, and 1.28 for 0CON, 4CON, 8CON, and 12CON, respectively. Protein quality ratio of the entire beef value chain increased from 3.15 to 3.33, while HePCE decreased from 0.99 to 0.39 as length of intensification increased from 0CON to 12CON. For the beef value chain, NPC was 3.11, 2.30, 1.73, and 1.31 for 0CON, 4CON, 8CON, and 12CON, respectively. Across the value chain, confinement of cows for 12 mo decreased enteric methane from 3.05 to 1.53 kg/kg HeP (0CON and 12CON, respectfully). Additionally, profitability of the cow-calf operation decreased from $249.34 to $102.16 per cow as intensification increased. Of confinement scenarios, probability of loss to an operation was least (4%) for 4CON. Feed costs increased by $260.79 per cow for 0CON when drought conditions existed (0COND). Total methane production was reduced by intensification and none of the scenarios evaluated competed with humans for HeP.

Limit feeding as a strategy to increase energy efficiency in intensified cow-calf production systems.

Two experiments were conducted to measure efficiency of energy use in limit-fed cows. In Exp. 1, 32 pregnant, crossbred cows were used to examine the effects of dietary energy concentration and intake level on energy utilization and digestion. In a 2 × 2 factorial treatment arrangement, cows received diets formulated at either 1.54 Mcal NEm/kg high energy (H) or 1.08 Mcal NEm/kg low energy (L); amounts of each diet were fed at amounts to achieve either 80% (80) or 120% (120) of maintenance energy requirements. Fecal grab samples were collected on days 14, 28, 42, and 56 for determination of energy digestion and metabolizable energy (ME) intake. Acid detergent insoluble ash and bomb calorimetry were used to estimate fecal energy production. Cow body weight and 12th rib fat thickness were used to estimate body energy, using 8 different methods, at the beginning and end of a 56-d feeding period. Energy retention (RE) was calculated as the difference in body energy on days 0 and 56. Heat energy (HE) was calculated as the difference in ME intake and RE. Energy digestion increased (P = 0.04) with intake restriction. Cows consuming H tended to have greater (P = 0.08) empty body weight (EBW) gain than cows consuming L, but no difference was observed (P = 0.12) between cows fed 120 compared with cows fed 80. Estimates of HE were greater for L than H (P < 0.01) and greater for 120 than 80 (P < 0.01), such that estimated fasting heat production of H (57.2 kcal/kg EBW0.75) was lower than that of L (73.3 kcal/kg EBW0.75). In Exp. 2, 16 ruminally cannulated, crossbred steers were used to examine the effects of dietary energy concentration and intake level on energy digestion. Treatment arrangement and laboratory methods were replicated from Exp. 1. Following a 14-d adaptation period, fecal samples were collected, such that samples were represented in 2-h intervals post-feeding across 24 h. Diet × intake interactions were observed for nutrient digestibility. Energy digestibility was greater in steers fed H than in steers fed L (P < 0.01); however, digestibility of each nutrient increased by approximately 10% in steers fed H80 vs. those fed H120 (P ≤ 0.03); nutrient digestibility was similar among levels of intake in steers fed L (P = 0.54). These results suggest that intake restriction may increase diet utilization and that the magnitude of change may be related to diet energy density.

Net protein contribution of beef feedlots from 2006 to 2017.

Feedlot efficiency increases as technologies are adopted and new feed ingredients, especially byproducts, become available and incorporated into diets. Byproduct availability increased in response to the renewable fuels standard of 2005, creating substantial amounts of feedstuffs best used by ruminants. Cereal grains have been partially replaced with human-inedible byproducts, as they provide comparable levels of energy in cattle diets. To evaluate the effects of changes in diet and feedlot production practices on net protein contribution (NPC) and human-edible protein conversion efficiency (HePCE) across time, a deterministic NPC model was used. NPC was assessed for the feedlot industry using lot level production data from 2006 to 2017 for eight commercial feedlots. Ingredient and nutrient composition was collected for a representative starter and finisher diet fed for each year from each feedlot. NPC was calculated by multiplying human-edible protein (HeP) in beef produced per unit of HeP in feed by the protein quality ratio (PQR). Systems with NPC >1 positively contribute to meeting human protein requirements; NPC < 1 indicates competition with humans for HeP. NPC was regressed on year to evaluate temporal change in NPC. Feedlots were categorized as increasing NPC (INC; slope > 0) or constant NPC (CON; slope = 0) according to regression parameter estimates. Four feedlots were categorized as INC and four were CON. The rate of change in PQR was similar for CON and INC (P ≥ 0.79), although rates of change among INC and CON differed for byproduct and cereal grain inclusion (P ≤ 0.01) across years evaluated. Feedlots categorized as INC reduced HeP consumed by 2.39% per year, but CON feedlots did not reduce HeP consumed each year (0.28%). Cattle received and shipped by INC were lighter than those in CON feedlots (P < 0.01). Across years, INC produced more HeP (20.9 vs. 19.2 kg/hd) than CON (P < 0.01), and both feedlot types tended to improve HeP gained over time (0.1 kg per year; P = 0.10). Differences in slope over time for INC and CON were observed for conversion efficiency of HeP (P < 0.01). NPC increased 0.027 units per year for INC (P < 0.01) and was 0.94 in 2017. NPC by the feedlot sector improved from 2006 to 2017, decreasing the amount of human-edible feeds required to produce more high-quality protein from beef.

Estimation of human-edible protein conversion efficiency, net protein contribution, and enteric methane production from beef production in the United States.

A model was developed to estimate beef's contribution toward meeting human protein requirements using a summative model of net protein contribution (NPC) and methane production. NPC was calculated by multiplying the ratio of human-edible protein (HeP) in beef to the HeP in feedstuffs by the protein quality ratio (PQR). PQR describes the change in biological value of HeP that occurs when plant-derived HeP is converted to beef. An NPC > 1 indicates that the production system is positively contributing to meeting human requirements; systems with NPC < 1 reduce the net protein available to meet human requirements. Scenarios were arranged as a 2 × 2 factorial with two sets of dietary inputs and two sets of production parameters. Dietary inputs represented either inputs used in a previous report estimating HeP (previous diet; PD) or inputs more representative of conventional beef production systems (current diet; CD). Production parameters were either drawn from previous reports (previous parameters; PP) or chosen to characterize current industry standards (current parameters; CP). The HeP conversion efficiency (HePCE) for current industry diets and production parameters (CDCP) (kg HeP yield/kg HeP input) was greatest in the cow-calf sector (2,640.83) compared with stocker (5.22) and feedlot (0.34), and other scenarios followed a similar trend. In addition, the entire production system had an HePCE of 0.99 for CDCP; the previous model diets and production parameters (PDPP) scenario estimated HePCE to be 0.46, and other scenarios were in between. For the CDCP scenario, 56%, 10%, and 34% of the HeP were produced in the cow-calf, stocker, and feedlot sectors; PDPP was similar (59%, 13%, and 28%, respectively). PQR averaged 3.04, 3.04, and 2.64 for cow-calf, stocker, and feedlot sectors, respectively, indicating each sector enhances the biological value of the HeP fed. The NPC was greatest for the cow-calf sector (8,794), followed by the stocker and feedlot sectors (8.85 and 0.23, respectively). The entire beef value chain had a PQR of 2.68 and NPC ranged from 1.01 to 3.11, which correspond to PDPP and CDCP, respectively. Overall, 3.05 kg of CH4 were produced per kilogram HeP for CDCP and 2.58 for PDPP, with the cow-calf sector being greater than the feedlot sector (4.53 vs. 0.94 kg CH4/kg HeP, CDCP). Our results suggest that each individual beef sector and the entire value chain produce more high-quality HeP than is consumed in production. Accordingly, beef is a net contributor to meeting human protein requirements.