Two experiments were conducted to evaluate effects of corn dry distiller grains plus condensed solubles (DDGS) supplementation level on performance digestion characteristics of steers grazing native range during the forage growing season. In the performance study, 72 (206 ± 23.6 kg; 2008) and 60 (230 ± 11.3 kg; 2009) English crossbred steer calves were used in a randomized complete block design replicated over 2 yr. The grazing periods lasted 56 and 58 d and started on August 11 and 18 for 2008 and 2009, respectively. Each year, steers were blocked by BW (light, medium, and heavy), stratified by BW within blocks, and randomly assigned to 1 of 4 grazing groups. Each grazing group (6 steers in 2008 and 5 in 2009) was assigned to a DDGS supplementation levels (0, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6% BW). Grazing group served as the experimental unit with 12 groups per year receiving 1 of 4 treatments for 2 yr (n = 6). In the metabolism study, 16 English crossbred steers (360 ± 28.9 kg) fitted with ruminal cannulas grazing native range during the summer growing season were used in a completely randomized design to evaluate treatment effects on forage intake and digestion. The experiment was conducted during the first and second weeks of October 2008. Steers were randomly assigned to supplement level (0, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6% BW; n = 4) and grazed a single native range pasture with supplements offered individually once daily at 0700 h. In the performance study, ADG (0.64, 0.75, 0.80, and 0.86 ± 0.03 kg/d for 0, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6% BW, respectively) increased linearly (P = 0.01) with increasing DDGS supplementation level. In the metabolism study, forage OM, NDF, CP, and ether extract (EE) intake decreased (P ≤ 0.05) linearly with increasing DDGS supplementation level. Total CP and EE intake increased (P ≤ 0.002) with increasing DDGS supplementation level. Digestibility of OM, NDF, and EE increased (linear; P ≤ 0.008) whereas the soluble CP fraction of forage masticate sample linearly increased (P = 0.01) and slowly degradable CP fraction linearly decreased (P = 0.05) with increasing DDGS supplementation level. Forage in situ masticate DM and NDF disappearance rate decreased (quadratic; P ≤ 0.05) and DDGS in situ DM disappearance rate increased (linear; P = 0.03) with increasing supplementation levels. These results indicate that DDGS supplementation enhanced grazing performance and total-tract digestion of steers grazing native range during the forage growing season.

Objectives of this study were to determine whether feeding high-linoleic safflower seed to gestating ewes increases cold tolerance and survival in lambs, and whether brown adipose tissue (BAT) stores in lambs are affected by prepartum safflower seed supplementation. In Trial 1, 234 gestating ewes (122 in yr 1 and 112 in yr 2; 75.5 and 81.2 +/- 0.6 kg initial BW for yr 1 and 2, respectively) were allotted randomly to one of two dietary treatments (four pens*treatment(-1)*yr(-1)). Ewes were fed alfalfa-based diets containing (DM basis) either 2.8 (LF) or 5.7% (HF) dietary fat beginning 55 (yr 1) and 42 (yr 2) +/- 1 d prepartum. In Trial 2, 40 Rambouillet cross ewes gestating twins (82.9 +/- 1.7 kg BW) were used in 2 yr (20/yr) and were fed diets containing (DM basis) either 1.9 (LF) or 4.9% (HF) dietary fat beginning 53.4 +/- 1.4 d prepartum. The basal diet was 37.5% each of grass and alfalfa hays and 25% corn silage (DM basis). Cracked safflower seeds (18% CP, 32% fat, 25.6% linoleic acid; DM basis) were used as the supplement in HF, whereas safflower meal and corn were used as the supplement in LF for both trials. At parturition, one lamb from each ewe was selected randomly for slaughter. Perirenal (PR) and pericardial (PC) BAT was excised and weighed, and the carcass was frozen for compositional analysis. In Trial 1, more lambs from HF 0.03; 15.4 vs. 5.8 +/- 2.8%), and dams survived (P = 0.03; 88.4 vs. 78.3 +/- 2.9%), fewer died due to starvation (P = there was a tendency for fewer to die due to pneumonia (P = 0.07; 0.0 vs. 1.7 +/- 0.6%). Ewes fed HF tended to wean more lambs per ewe (P = 0.09; 1.4 vs. 1.2 +/- 0.06) but had similar lamb weight weaned per ewe (P = 0.51; 23.1 +/- 1.22 kg). In Trial 2, prepartum ewe plasma NEFA and glucose concentrations increased with advancing gestation (P < 0.001). Lamb rectal temperature tended (P = 0.08) to be higher in LF lambs and tended (P = 0.06) to increase following parturition. Perirenal BAT weight did not differ among treatments (33.01 +/- 1.66 g; P = 0.28; 0.62 +/- 0.30% BW; P = 0.60). Lambs from LF dams tended (P = 0.08) to have greater PC BAT weight; however, the effect was not significant when expressed as a percentage of BW (0.13 +/- 0.007; P = 0.98). High-linoleic safflower seeds fed during the last 45 d of gestation may be beneficial in improving lamb survivability. Our data do not indicate this response was a result of increased BAT stores. More research is necessary to determine mechanisms that enhance lamb survival when high-linoleic saf-flower seed is fed during gestation.

Seventy-two (36 in each of two consecutive years) lactating, British-crossbred cows (609 +/- 19 kg) were used to evaluate effects of feeding a feather meal-blood meal combination on performance by beef cows fed grass hay. Bromegrass hay (9.6% CP, DM basis) was offered ad libitum and intake was measured daily in individual Calan electronic headgates. Acclimation to Calan gates began approximately 20 d after parturition, and treatments were initiated 21 d later. Cows were assigned randomly to one of four treatments (DM basis) for 60 d: 1) nonsupplemented control (CON), 2) energy control (ENG; 790 g/d; 100% beet pulp), 3) degradable intake protein (DIP; 870 g/d; 22% beet pulp and 78% sunflower meal), or 4) undegradable intake protein (UIP; 800 g/d; 62.5% sunflower meal, 30% hydrolyzed feather meal, and 7.5% blood meal). Net energy concentrations of supplements were formulated to provide similar NE(m) intakes (1.36 Mcal/d). The DIP and UIP supplements were calculated to supply similar amounts of DIP (168 g/d) and to supply 64 and 224 g/d of UIP, respectively. Forage DMI (kg/d) decreased in supplemented vs. nonsupplemented (P = 0.03) and DIP vs. UIP (P = 0.001); however, when expressed as a percentage of BW, forage DMI was not different (P = 0.23). Supplemented cows tended (P = 0.17) to lose less BW than CON. Body condition change was not affected (P = 0.60) by postpartum supplementation. No differences were noted in milk production (P = 0.29) or in calf gain during the supplementation period (P = 0.74). Circulating insulin concentrations were not affected by treatment (P = 0.42). In addition, supplementation did not affect circulating concentrations of NEFA (P = 0.18) or plasma urea nitrogen (P = 0.38). Results of the current study indicate that supplementation had little effect on BW, BCS, milk production, or calf BW when a moderate-quality forage (9.6% CP) was fed to postpartum, winter-calving cows in optimal body condition (BCS > 5). Supplemental UIP did not enhance cow performance during lactation. Forage UIP and microbial protein supply were adequate to meet the metabolizable protein requirements of lactating beef cows under the conditions of this study.

Over 3 yr, 250 calves (236 kg initial BW; 133 steers and 117 heifers) were used to compare a low-input pasture backgrounding system (PAST) to a highinput drylot system (DLOT) to evaluate performance and profit during the backgrounding (BACKGRD; weaning to 42 to 45 d) and finishing (FINISH; end BACKGRD to slaughter) phases. Calves were randomly assigned to PAST or DLOT treatments during BACKGRD. The DLOT calves were fed a corn-wheat midds-based pellet plus alfalfa hay (0.68 to 1.13 kg/d), and PAST calves were supplemented with a 32% CP range cube (0.57 kg/d; 3 times/wk). During BACKGRD, DLOT calves gained more BW (P < 0.01) and had a greater final value (P = 0.03), but feed and total costs were more than 4-fold greater (P < 0.01). Net income during BACKGRD was $45 greater (P < 0.01) for PAST than DLOT.

Three studies were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of field peas as a protein source in diets for beef cattle. In the first study, 4 cultivars of field pea were incubated in situ to determine rate and extent of CP disappearance. Results indicate that field pea cultivars vary in CP content (22.6, 26.1, 22.6, and 19.4%, DM basis for Profi, Arvika, Carneval, and Trapper, respectively). Soluble protein fraction ranged from 34.9% for Trapper to 54.9% for Profi. Degradable CP fraction was greater (P = 0.01) for Trapper compared with the other cultivars, and no differences (P ≥ 0.25) were observed among Profi, Arvika, and Carneval. Rate of CP degradation differed (P ≤ 0.03) for all cultivars, with Profi being the greatest and Trapper the smallest (10.8, 10.0, 8.1, and 6.3 ± 1.4%/h for Profi, Carneval, Arvika, and Trapper, respectively). Estimated RDP was not different (P = 0.21) for all 4 cultivars. In the second study, 30 crossbred beef steers (301 ± 15 kg) were individually fed and used to evaluate effects of field pea processing (whole, rolled, or ground) on steer performance. Diets contained 40% field pea grain. Growing steers consuming whole field pea had greater ADG (P = 0.08) than those consuming processed field pea (1.69, 1.52, and 1.63 ± 0.05 kg/d, for whole, rolled, and ground, respectively). However, DMI (kg/d and as % of BW) and G:F were not different (P ≥ 0.24). In the third study, 35 individually fed gestating beef cows (694 ± 17 kg) were used to evaluate the use of field pea as a protein supplement for medium quality grass hay (9.3% CP). Treatments consisted of whole field peas at 1) 0 g (CON), 2) 680 g (FP680), 3) 1,360 g (FP1360), and 4) 2,040 g (FP2040), and 5) 1,360 g of 74% barley and 26% canola meal (BCM). Total intake (forage + supplement) of gestating beef cows increased with increasing field pea level (linear, P = 0.01; supplemented vs. nonsupplemented, P = 0.01). In summary, protein quantity and rate of ruminal protein degradation vary across sources of field peas used in this study. Additionally, because of source variability, nutrient analysis and animal requirements should be considered when field pea is incorporated into beef cattle diets. Processing field pea does not improve performance of growing steers. Supplementation of field pea to gestating cows consuming medium-quality grass hay increased total DMI. Overall, our data indicate field pea can be used in a wide variety of beef cattle diets.