Dried distillers grains as a substitute for grazed forage

Stalker, Leslie Aaron; Klopfenstein, Terry J.; Schacht, Walter H.; Volesky, Jerry D.

doi:10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30418-6

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, supplement characteristics appear to be important in determining substitution effects on forage intake. Grazed forage intake was not reduced when yearling steers were supplemented only dried distillers grains plus solubles in studies by Gustad et al (2008) and Stalker et al (2012). Although previous work (MacDonald et al, 2007;Griffin et al, 2012) has suggested a substitution effect on forage intake when distillers grains are fed in forage-based diets, reductions in forage intake have not been great enough to allow for a 2-fold increase in stocking rate .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Case Study: Supplementation of cow-calf pairs grazing smooth bromegrass pastures with ethanol by-products and low-quality forages

Warner

Doerr

Erickson

et al. 2017

The Professional Animal Scientist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiparous, lactating, crossbred (Simmental × Angus) beef cows with spring-born calves at side (n = 16 per year; 4 per pasture) were used each of 3 yr to evaluate supplementing modified distillers grains plus solubles mixed with low-quality forage on cow and calf performance while grazing. Cow-calf pairs were assigned randomly to treatment with 2 replications (pasture) per year for 3 yr. Treatments were (1) recommended stocking rate of 9.46 animal-unit month/ha with no supplementation (CON) or (2) double the recommended stocking rate (18.9 animal-unit month/ ha) and supplemented with a 30:70 modified distillers grains plus solubles: cornstalks (DM) mixture (SUPP). To replace 50% of grazed forage DMI, SUPP pairs were fed an average of 1.13% of BW (DM) over the grazing season. Pairs grazed adjacent smooth bromegrass pastures for 130 d during the summer. Gain was not different (P = 0.19) between SUPP and CON cows (0.28 vs. 0.19 kg/d, respectively). Ending cow BW was not affected (P = 0.46) by treatment. Similarly, calf gain was not affected (P = 0.31) by supplementation. In studies where confined cow-calf pairs were fed average-quality (IVDMD = 52.9%) forage, DMI was 2.58% of pair BW. Based on these data, CON and SUPP pairs consumed 18.6 and 19.1 kg of DM, respectively, of total feed per pair daily. The SUPP pairs consumed 7.1 kg of DM/pair daily of the supplement, replacing approximately 35% of grazed forage intake. These data suggest mixtures of ethanol co-products and lowquality forages can be supplemented to replace grazed forage intake of cattle, allowing for increased stocking rate without affecting animal performance.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%