Performance, carcass traits and fatty acid profiles of yearling beef cattle supplemented with self-fed byproducts on pasture

Kiesling, Daniel

doi:10.31274/etd-180810-1893

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Feeding mostly GRASS to cattle results in a more favorable rumen pH, leading to more efficient biohydrogenation [ 75 , 76 ]. However, SH has the potential to increase the CLA content of beef compared to grain-diets, mainly because of their high fiber content resulting in a more optimal rumen pH for biohydrogenation to occur [ 87 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Hay, Baleage, and Soybean Hulls Waste Used as Supplemental Feeds on the Nutritional Profile of Grass-Finished Beef

Krusinski

Maciel

Sergin

et al. 2022

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grass-finished beef (GFB) has demonstrated wide nutritional variations with some GFB having a considerably higher n-6:n-3 ratio compared to grain-finished beef. To better understand these variations, the current study investigated the effects of commonly used supplemental feeds on the nutritional profile of GFB. This two-year study involved 117 steers randomly allocated to one of four diets: (1) grass+hay (G-HAY), (2) grass+baleage (G-BLG), (3) grass+soybean hulls (G-SH), and (4) baleage+soybean hulls in feedlot (BLG-SH). Feed samples were analyzed for their nutritional value, and beef samples underwent analysis for fatty acids (FAs), vitamin E, minerals, lipid oxidation, and shear force. FAs were measured by GC-MS, vitamin E was analyzed chromatographically, minerals were analyzed by ICP-MS, and lipid oxidation was measured via a thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) assay. G-SH beef had the highest n-6:n-3 ratio (p < 0.001), while BLG-SH beef contained less vitamin E (p < 0.001) and higher TBARS values (p < 0.001) compared to the other groups. G-HAY beef contained more long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated FAs compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). In conclusion, G-HAY beef had the most beneficial nutritional profile, while soybean hulls increased the n-6:n-3 ratio of beef.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Hay, Baleage, and Soybean Hulls Waste Used as Supplemental Feeds on the Nutritional Profile of Grass-Finished Beef

Krusinski

Maciel

Sergin

et al. 2022

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, a reduction in the intensity of grassy flavor by SH supplementation may increase palatability of GFB to consumers. In another study, CLA concentrations and n−3 PUFAs were greater and the n−6:n−3 ratio was lower in cattle fed a SH supplement compared to cattle fed a corn supplement (Kiesling, 2013). CLA and n−3 PUFAs were also increased and the n−6:n−3 ratio decreased in lambs when SH were included as a replacement for corn (Costa et al, 2012).…”

Section: Soybean Hullsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…According to the USDA, "hay, haylage, baleage, silage, crop residue without grain, and other roughage sources" may be added to grass-fed cattle diets, but these feeds are nutritionally different from fresh forage (Food Safety Inspection Service, 2019). Further, in some cases, additional supplementary feeds such as soybean hulls (SH) or grapeseed extracts may be added to forage-fed beef to improve beef quality and utilize byproducts of other industries (Kiesling, 2013;Muñoz-González et al, 2019). It is important to note that the addition of feed supplements described in this section varies by labeling organizations and does not necessarily reflect what is permitted in "grass-fed" labels outside of the U.S. such as certification by A Greener World in the United Kingdom or by the Pasture-fed Cattle Assurance System in Australia (A Greener World; PCAS).…”

Section: Supplementation: Effects Of Different Supplementary Feeds In...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There was not a comparison group to cattle or lambs fed purely forages in the aforementioned studies, but the results indicate that SH could be a better supplement than corn. It is hypothesized that since SH contain significant amounts of fiber and maintain ruminal pH at optimal levels, more biohydrogenation can occur, leading to greater amounts of CLA and TVA (Kiesling, 2013). Further studies need to be done to clearly elucidate the effects of SH supplementation and the mechanisms for these effects.…”

Section: Soybean Hullsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attention to the Details: How Variations in U.S. Grass-Fed Cattle-Feed Supplementation and Finishing Date Influence Human Health

Krusinski

Sergin

Jambunathan

et al. 2022

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the global population increases, so does meat consumption. This trend is accompanied by concerns regarding the meat industry, and consumers are demanding transparency on the environmental and health effects of the products they are purchasing. Many leading health organizations recommend reducing red meat consumption. Nevertheless, no differentiation is made among red meats and beef. The beef production system is generally ignored despite nutritional differences between grain- and grass-fed beef. Compared to grain-fed beef, grass-fed beef contains a healthier fatty acid profile, including more omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid, and increased concentrations of phytochemicals desired by health-conscious customers. However, there is a lack of consistency among grass-fed beef in the United States regarding clear product labeling and cattle dietary components. Grass-fed beef labeling confusion has emerged, including misunderstandings between grass-fed and grass-finished beef. Along with this, previous studies observed significant nutritional variation among grass-finished beef from different producers across the country. Cattle diet has the strongest influence on the nutritional composition of beef. Therefore, understanding differences in feeding practices is key to understanding differing nutritional quality of grass-fed beef. Feeding cattle diverse pastures composed of multiple plant species including grasses and legumes managed in a rotational grazing fashion results in higher omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and phytochemical levels in beef compared to feedlots and monocultures. Seasonal differences including changes in temperature, rainfall, grazing practices, and plant growth cycles affect the nutritional composition of feeds and ultimately meat. Additional feeds utilized in grass-fed beef production systems such as conserved forages may reduce or increase health-promoting nutrients in grass-fed beef, while supplements such as grape byproducts and flaxseed may improve its nutritional profile. Further research should measure the effects of individual feedstuff and the finishing period on the nutritional profile on grass-fed beef. A better understanding of these details will be a step toward the standardization of pasture-raised ruminant products, strengthening the relationship between grass-fed beef consumption and human health.

show abstract

Performance, carcass traits and fatty acid profiles of yearling beef cattle supplemented with self-fed byproducts on pasture

Cited by 2 publications

References 38 publications

Effects of Hay, Baleage, and Soybean Hulls Waste Used as Supplemental Feeds on the Nutritional Profile of Grass-Finished Beef

Effects of Hay, Baleage, and Soybean Hulls Waste Used as Supplemental Feeds on the Nutritional Profile of Grass-Finished Beef

Attention to the Details: How Variations in U.S. Grass-Fed Cattle-Feed Supplementation and Finishing Date Influence Human Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About