October 28, Oklahoma Panhandle Research & Extension Center Goodwell, Oklahoma

Transcription

1 October 28, 2008 Oklahoma Panhandle Research & Extension Center Goodwell, Oklahoma

2 Use of Ethanol By-Products in Beef Cattle Operations Tuesday, October 28, 2008, 5:00 p.m. Oklahoma Panhandle Research & Extension Center Goodwell, Oklahoma Program Integration of Distiller s Products into Nutrition and Management Programs...Justin Waggoner, Ph.D., Kansas State University Sulfur Concerns with Feeding of Distiller s Products...John Wagner, Ph.D., Colorado State University Complimentary Meal...Sponsored by Conestoga Energy Partners, LLC What is the Future of the Ethanol Industry?...Steve Amosson, Ph.D., Texas AgriLife Extension Service Use of Distiller s Products in Feedlots...Britt Hicks, Ph.D., Oklahoma State University Use of Distiller s Products in Stocker Operations...Ted McCollum, Ph.D., Texas AgriLife Extension Service Use of Distiller s Products in Cow/Calf Operations...Ted McCollum, Ph.D., Texas AgriLife Extension Service Meal Sponsor: Oklahoma State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture, State and Local Governments Cooperating. The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service offers its programs to all eligible persons regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, or status as a veteran, and is an equal opportunity employer.

3 Table of Contents Integration of Distiller s Products into Nutrition and Management Programs..1 Justin Waggoner, Kansas State University, Garden City Sulfur Toxicity in Feedlot Cattle 12 John J. Wagner, Southeast Colorado Research Center, Colorado State University, Lamar What is the Future of the Ethanol Industry?...21 Steve Amosson, Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Amarillo Use of Distiller s Products in Feedlots...33 Britt Hicks, OPREC, Oklahoma State University, Goodwell Use of Distiller s Grains (Wet & Dry) in Flaked Corn Diets for Finishing Beef Cattle 53 R.B. Hicks, Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Goodwell C.J. Richards, Dept. of Animal Science, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater P.K. Camfield, Oklahoma Panhandle State University, Effect of Inclusion of Wet Distiller s Grains in Corn Based Diets on Feeding Logistics in a Commercial Feedyard. 64 Britt Hicks, OPREC, Oklahoma State University, Goodwell Distiller s Grains in Cow/Calf and Stocker Programs 70 Ted McCollum, Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Amarillo

4 Integration of Distiller s Products into Nutrition and Management Programs J.W. Waggoner Extension Beef Systems Specialist Kansas State University Overview Wet vs. dry milling process Corn gluten vs. distillers Types of distillers products Nutrient content and variation Storage of WDGS Wet Milling Process (Corn Gluten Feed) Steep Corn Grind Steep Separation Starch, sweetener Gluten Meal Corn Oil Corn Bran Corn Gluten Feed 1

5 Dry Milling Process (Distillers Grains) Grain Grind, Wet, Cook, Enzymes Fermentation Still Alcohol & CO 2 Stillage Distillers Grains WDG, DDG WDGS DDGS Distillers Solubles Types of Distillers Products Distillers solubles (liquid or syrup) 20-30% DM Wet distillers grains + solubles (WDGS) 35% dry matter Types of Distillers Products Modified distillers grains (MDGS) 50% dry matter Dry distillers grains (DDG or DDGS) 90% dry matter 2

6 Nutrient Content Distillers Products, Dry Basis Solubles WDGS MDGS DDGS Dry matter TDN, % NEm, mcal/lb NEg, mcal/lb Protein, % Fat, % Ca, % < P, % S, % Loy, 2008 By-Product Feedstuffs By-product of a process Left-overs Some of the Good Stuff has been removed Concentrates Other Stuff (Good and Bad) Variation in product Nutrient Composition of WDGS Compared to Corn % of DM Item Corn WDGS Starch Crude Protein 9 30 Fat 4 12 NDF Calcium Phosphorous Sulfur

7 Nutrient Variation in Distillers Grains Six Nebraska Dry Milling Ethanol Plants (WDGS and MDGS) Sampled July, February, April, June 10 samples per day for 5 days 1 sample = 1 truck-load leaving plant From the truck or pile to be loaded Buckner et al., 2008 Dry Matter Content and Variation Ethanol Plant Min. DM% Max. DM% Plant Avg CV% Buckner et al., 2008 Protein Content and Variation, Dry Basis Ethanol Plant A B C D E F Plant Avg CV% Buckner et al.,

8 Fat Content and Variation Ethanol Plant A B C D E F Min. Fat, % Max. Fat % Avg. Fat % CV% Buckner et al., 2008 Phosphorous Content and Variation, Dry Basis Ethanol Plant A B C D E F Plant Avg CV% Buckner et al., 2008 Sulfur Content and Variation, Dry Basis Ethanol Plant A B C D E F Minimum S% Maximum S% Plant Avg CV% Buckner et al.,

9 Mean Nutrient Content Average all plants 31% Crude protein 11.9% Fat 0.83% Phosphorous 0.77% Sulfur Buckner et al., 2008 Summary (Nutrient Variability) Dry matter and sulfur more variable than protein or phosphorous Differences in plant procedures FEED TEST!!! Load to load differences Storage of WDGS Silage bags Bunkers 6

10 Storage of WDGS Excluding oxygen is the key to storage of WDGS Silage bag Maintain bag integrity Bunker Packing How well we pack the product? Mixing WDGS with Forage Improves handling characteristics Bulking agent Grind forages Mix with feed truck prior to Bagging Packing WDGS Ingredient Combinations Stored in Silage Bags or Bunkers (Dry Basis) Bag a Bunker Grass hay, % 15.0 (6.5) (17.0) Wheat straw, % 12.5 (5.5) (13) Alfalfa hay, % 22.5 (10.2) a 300 PSI. Wet distillers grains at 35% dry matter 65% moisture Red percentages are as-fed basis Adams et al University of Nebraska 7

11 8

12 9

13 Storage Considerations Cost to obtain WDGS Equipment required Storage materials Shrink? Bagged = 3-6% Bunker = 5-15% Interest Storage Considerations Evaluate total cost of product on dry basis relative to market value of WDGS at time of feeding University of Nebraska Co-product STORE worksheet costs_analyzer_july_2008.xls 10

14 Feeding Distillers By-Products Distillers by-products Excellent protein supplement 30% Crude protein High energy feedstuff Low starch, highly digestible fiber WDGS has a higher feeding value (~120%) than corn depending upon feeding level and other diet ingredients Thanks! J.W. Waggoner Extension Beef Systems Specialist Kansas State University 11

15 Sulfur Toxicity in Feedlot Cattle 1 John J. Wagner, Ph.D. Professor and General Manager Southeast Colorado Research Center Colorado State University Lamar, Colorado Introduction: Sulfur is an important component of many functions in the body and is an essential nutrient for beef cattle. It is an important part of the amino acids methionine, cysteine, and cystine. The B-vitamins thiamine and biotin also contain sulfur. Rumen microbes require sulfur for their normal growth and metabolism. A large portion of the sulfur found in typical feedlot diets is a component of the natural protein and most practical diets are adequate in sulfur (NRC, 1996). However, feeding diets high in non-protein nitrogen or high in rumen undegradable intake protein may reduce the amount of sulfur available for rumen microorganisms thus increasing the need for supplemental sulfur. The requirement for sulfur as stated by the National Research Council is 0.15% of diet dry matter and maximum tolerable level is listed as 0.40% of diet dry matter (NRC, 1996). Sources of Sulfur: Total sulfur intake from all feed and water sources must be considered when evaluating nutritional programs for sulfur adequacy or excess. Table 1 lists the sulfur concentration found in several common feed ingredients. Typical diet components for feedlot cattle, including corn, alfalfa hay, and corn silage contain relatively low to moderate concentrations of sulfur. Under most circumstances, typical combinations of these feeds generally used for cattle pose little or no danger for sulfur toxicity. Several feeds, especially the co-products from the grain wet or dry milling industries may be high in sulfur. As these products are included in the diet, sulfur concentration generally increases and the risk of experiencing sulfur toxicity rises. Sulfur concentrations in water can vary tremendously. In 1999 the National Animal Health Monitoring System conducted a study of feedlots with greater than 1000 head capacity (NAHMS, 2000). Two hundred and sixty three feedlots from 10 states supplied a water sample for analysis. Approximately 77% of the samples contained less than 300 ppm sulfate, 15% of the samples contained 300 to 999 ppm sulfate, and 8% of the samples registered greater than 1000 ppm sulfate. If a feedlot steer consumes 40 L (approximately 10 gallons) of water daily, sulfate intake from water is 4, 40, and 120 g per day if the water contained 100, 1000, or 3000 ppm sulfate. Sulfate is approximately one-third sulfur. Therefore, sulfur intake from water by the steer would be 1.3, 13.0, 40 g per head daily, respectively. If the steer was consuming 9 kg (19.8 LB) of dry matter daily that was 0.12 % sulfur, total sulfur intake expressed as a percent of dietary dry matter intake would be 0.13, 0.26, or 0.56%, respectively. It is highly likely that the steer consuming 3000 ppm sulfate would experience some degree of sulfur toxicity. At 100 or 1000 ppm the likelihood of sulfur toxicity is reduced considering the base diet was assumed to 1 Submitted for the Use of Ethanol By-Products in Beef Cattle Operations meeting. Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Goodwell, OK. October 28,

16 contain 0.12% sulfur. However, if the base diet contained 30% wet distiller s grains on a dry matter basis, and if the distiller s grains contained 0.60% sulfur, an additional 0.14% (( )*0.30) sulfur would be added to the diet. In this instance, the steer consuming 1000 ppm water is now at risk of developing sulfur toxicity. Early in the growth of the ethanol industry, several feedlots that had successfully used marginal quality water ( 1000 ppm sulfate) for many years started to experience sulfur problems only after the addition of distiller s grains in the diet. Manifestation of Sulfur Toxicity: Elemental sulfur is considered one of the least toxic minerals, however, hydrogen sulfide, a product of sulfate metabolism in the rumen, is as toxic as cyanide (NRC, 2000). The manifestation of sulfur toxicity in feedlot cattle is often a condition called polioencephalomalacia (PEM) which is characterized by necrosis of the cerebral cortex. Symptoms of the condition include blindness, poor coordination, lethargy, and seizures. Very often affected cattle are observed standing in the corner of the pen like a saw horse with all four feet spread to the extreme corners of their body (Photograph 1). Pen riders, doctors, and other feedlot personnel often refer to cattle exhibiting these signs as brainers. This colorful name is appropriate when one considers that PEM literally means, as described by Gould (1998), softening (malacia) of the gray matter (polio) of the brain (encephalo). Gould (1998) listed a number of research findings linking PEM outbreaks to thiamin status including a reduction in the activity of a thiamin diphosphate dependent enzyme (transketolase) in blood and an increase in the levels of thiaminases in the gastrointestinal tract. PEM has been induced by feeding thiamin antagonists (Spicer and Horton, 1981). Davies (1965) demonstrated that calves recovered from the early symptoms of PEM if high doses of thiamin are administered. The large body of evidence that associates PEM with thiamin status has led to the often erroneous assumption that outbreaks of PEM are the result of altered thiamin status and intraveneous thiamin administration is often automatically used to treat cattle with PEM. The addition of 100 to 200 mg of thiamin per head daily is often added to diets of cattle perceived to be at risk of developing PEM. The results from efforts to treat or prevent PEM with thiamin are mixed. Much of the confusion surrounding thiamin therapy may be attributed to the fact that high sulfate intake may induce PEM through either one of, or a combination of, two distinct mechanisms. High sulfate intake has been shown to reduce duodenal thiamin flow (Goetsch and Owens, 1987) and sulfite, a product of sulfate reduction, can destroy thiamin in the rumen resulting in thiamin deficiency. This form of sulfate induced PEM may respond to thiamin therapy or may be prevented by thiamin supplementation. However, an alternative mechanism through which sulfate causes PEM may be involved particularly if sulfate intake is extremely high. Sulfides inhibit cytochrome C, an enzyme of the electron transport chain (Evans, 1967 as cited by Loneragan, 1998). Loneragan (1998) proposed that rumen generated sulfides escaped detoxification in the liver and were responsible for sulfate induced PEM. High sulfate intake results in extreme concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in the rumen gas cap. These sulfides are inhaled during eructation, absorbed into the blood stream in the lung, and transported to the brain, thus by-passing the liver. In addition, Loneragan (1998) also suggested that the high amounts of sulfides absorbed through the rumen wall and transported to the liver may overwhelm the capacity of the liver to detoxify sulfide. Thus a portion of these sulfides may also 13

17 reach the brain. Cattle experiencing PEM caused by the inhibition of cytochrome C will not respond to thiamin therapy. Cattle consuming high sulfur do not necessarily need to show symptoms of PEM to experience reduced feedyard performance (Wagner and Loneragan, 1996; Loneragan et al., 2001). Feedlot steers were provided with water of various sulfate concentrations ranging from 136 to 2360 ppm resulting in dietary sulfur concentrations ranging from 0.21 to 0.88% of DM. No clinically apparent symptoms of PEM were reported and performance by all steers in the study was outstanding. However, increasing sulfur concentration resulted in linear decreases in daily gain, gain to feed ratio, final weight, hot carcass weight, and dressing percentage (Table 2). Sulfur concentration by period interactions were evident for dry matter intake, average daily gain, and feed efficiency. Water sulfate concentration also influenced water intake. The effect of water sulfate on performance was greatest during the early periods of the trial and less evident toward trial completion. Water intake differences were greatest during the periods of the greatest performance reduction and not evident during the last period (Figure 1). The trial was started during the early summer (July 16) and ambient temperatures were greatest during this time. It appears that extreme water sulfate concentrations inhibit water intake by nearly 18%. It is possible that performance reductions observed for cattle consuming high sulfate water in summer may actually be a function of reduced ability of the cattle to effectively combat heat stress. Respiratory Distress and Heart Failure: Reports from the field are surfacing that link sulfur intake with respiratory distress, pulmonary edema, and heart failure. Bulgin et al. (1996) and Coghlin (1944) have noted pulmonary edema as a feature of sulfide poisoning. Loneragan (1998) observed elevated pulmonary arterial pressure with increasing sulfur intake. Mean pulmonary arterial pressures were 29.6, 33.7, and 38.1 mmhg for steers consuming water that contained 125, 500, and 2000 ppm sulfate. Furthermore, cattle from the 2000 ppm group experienced short periods of shallow breathing immediately following eructation. It is possible that chronic inhalation of H 2 S is lowgrade pulmonary damage. Nutritional Interventions: In addition to supplemental thiamin, several other nutritional manipulations have been proposed to help control sulfur induced PEM. Colorado State University scientists demonstrated up to a 37% reduction in the rate of hydrogen sulfide production from an in vitro fermentation system with the addition of nitrate (Gould 2, personal communication). Bracht and Kung (1996) demonstrated a 77% reduction in hydrogen sulfide production when an in vitro system was treated with molybdenum and a 71% reduction in hydrogen sulfide production when the system was treated with 9,10-anthraquinone. Hydrogen sulfide production rate was reduced by over 75% when an in vitro system was exposed to clinoptilolite, a form of zeolite (Dalke 3, personal communication). Feeding high levels of ammonium nitrate, molybdenum, or zeolite often reduced the hydrogen sulfide concentration in the rumen gas cap but did not improve feedlot 2 Dan Gould, Ph.D. Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO. 3 Brad Dalke, Ph.D. Formerly with Grant County Feeders, ContiBeef LLC. Currently with ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc. Quincy, IL. 14

18 performance by steers consuming high sulfate water ( 2000 ppm) in experiments conducted by the author at the Southeast Colorado Research Center in the late 1990 s. Bracht and Kung (1997) presented the information shown in Figure 2 at the 1997 Rumen Function Conference. In an In vitro batch culture system, it appears that the addition of Chlortetracycline or Oxytetracycline to the system containing high levels of sulfur inhibited H 2 S production. However, the addition of Lasalocid appeared to not affect H 2 S production but the addition of Monensin to the system increased the concentration of H 2 S. These results may have implications concerning the use of various feed additives when distiller s co-products are fed. The industry has accepted that using distiller s co-products in starter and step-up diets reduces the risk of sub-clinical acidosis due to their low starch content as compared with feed grains. Many step-up programs simultaneously introduce cattle to increased grain, distiller s coproducts (including sulfur), and monensin. As grain is introduced to the diet, the rumen becomes more acidic. The hydrogen ions generated by increased acidity are generally dealt with through the production of methane. Monensin is a very effective methane inhibitor. The hydrogen ions need to go somewhere and in the presence of sulfate, H 2 S is produced. Figure 3 shows the incidence rate for PEM from a commercial feedyard superimposed upon the concentration of H 2 S in the rumen gas cap. Peak PEM incidence rate and peak H 2 S concentration occur at approximately 21 days post feedlot arrival or about 6 days after the introduction of the finishing diet (28 30 g monensin per ton) to the cattle. These charts were originally interpreted to suggest that cattle adapt to high sulfur exposure and with time the incidence of PEM is diminished. Two peaks in H2S concentration, the first occurring almost immediately with the introduction of sulfur and the second occurring shortly after day 20 was thought to be a result of shifts in the microbial population to effectively deal with high sulfur. However, in light of the apparent effect of monensin on H 2 S, maybe the initial peak in H 2 S occurs as a result of exposure to Sulfur while the second peak occurs in response to the introduction of monensin. Perhaps the increase in H 2 S and PEM can be alleviated through alternative strategies to introduce monensin and/or the source of sulfur into the diet. Management Recommendations: 1. Sample all sources of water and evaluate for sulfate concentration. Blending water from various sources to reduce the sulfate concentration to less than 1000 ppm may reduce the risk of sulfur induced PEM and lost performance. 2. Sample all co-product feed ingredients and analyze for sulfur. 3. Make certain total (water plus feed) dietary sulfur intake expressed as a percentage of dry matter intake is less than 0.40%. 4. Avoid stacking sulfur risk factors. Feedyards forced to use marginal or poor quality water may simply not be able to successfully utilize grain milling co-products. Likewise, simultaneous use of several high sulfur grain milling co-products should be avoided. 5. Logic may suggest the elimination of high sulfur trace mineral sources such as copper or zinc sulfate from the diet. However, the amount of sulfur contributed to the diet by trace mineral source is minimal compared with the sulfur contribution from grain milling coproducts or marginal to poor quality water. 6. Thiamin supplementation or intravenous thiamin administration may provide some measure of success in managing PEM if thiamin metabolism is compromised in the 15

19 rumen. However, thiamin therapy or supplementation will likely be of limited value if exposure to hydrogen sulfide is excessive. 7. Avoid simultaneous adaptation of cattle to grain, distiller s co-products (read sulfur), and monensin. It may be more desirable to introduce cattle to sulfur only after they have been fully adapted to monensin. 8. To date, despite modest successes in laboratory in vitro systems and non-research based testimonials to the contrary, no dietary modifications have been shown to effectively control PEM or improve performance in feedlot cattle exposed to high sulfur intake. Literature Cited: Bracht, J.P. and L. Kung, Jr Inhibition of sulfide production in in vitro ruminal fermentations. J. Anim. Sci. 74:2276. Davies, E.T Cerebrocortical necrosis in calves. Vet. Rec. 77:290. Evans, C.L The toxicity of hydrogen sulfide and other sulfides. Quart. J. Exp. Physiol. 52:231. Goetsch, A.L. and F.N. Owens Effect of supplement sulfate (Dynamate) and thiamine HCl on passage thiamine to duodenum and site of digestion is steers. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 37:1075. Gould, D.H Polioencephalomalacia. J. Anim. Sci. 76:309. Loneragan, G.H Evaluation of the effects of sulfur intake on cattle. Master s Thesis. Department of Clinical Sciences. Colorado State University. Loneragan, G.H., J.J. Wagner, D.H. Gould, F.B. Garry, and M.A. Thoren Effects of water sulfate concentration on performance, water intake, and carcass characteristics of feedlot steers. J. Anim. Sci. 79:2941. NAHMS Water quality in U.S. feedlots. United States Department of Agriculture. Animal and Plant Inspection Service. NRC Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. Seventh revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. NRC Mineral tolerance of domestic animals. National Academy Press. Washington, DC. Spicer, E.M. and B.J. Horton Biochemistry of natural and amprolium-induced polioencephalomalacia in sheep. Aust. Vet. J. 57:230. Wagner, J.J. and G.H. Loneragan The effects of water sulfate content on feedyard performance, water intake, ruminal hydrogen sulfide production, and carcass merit in feedlot cattle. Continental Beef Research Res. Rep

20 Photograph 1. Steer exhibiting classic symptoms of PEM. 17

21 Table 1. Sulfur concentration in feeds typically fed to feedlot cattle. Feed commodity NRC, 1996 Practical Range a Alfalfa hay Corn silage Corn grain Corn gluten feed Corn gluten meal Condensed Corn Distiller s Solubles Wet Corn Distiller s Grains plus solubles Soybean meal a Based on the author s experience. Table 2. Effect of sulfur concentration (Feed + Water) on feedyard performance and carcass merit. S Concentration, % of DM Period SEM a Initial weight, lb Final weight, lb ADG, lb/hd/d DMI, lb/hd/d F/G HCW b Dressing % Fat depth, in Yield grade c Marbling d Ch & Pr e a Standard Error of the Mean. b Hot carcass weight, LB. c Calculated from carcass measurements. d Marbling score units, 5.00 = Small 00. e Percentage of individual carcasses grading low choice or higher. 18

22 Figure 1. Effect of water sulfate concentration on daily water intake by period Liter per head Period 19

23 Figure 2. Effect of various compounds on H2S Production. 20

24 What Is The Future Of The Ethanol Industry? Use of Ethanol By-Products In Beef Cattle Operations October 28, 2008 Presented By: Dr. Steve Amosson, Ph.D. Regents Fellow Professor and Extension Economist The World According to Steve Presentation Outline Review of the Ethanol Basics Observations on the Future Summary and Conclusions 21

25 Review of Ethanol Basics E85 Ethanol Motor fuel blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline E10 Motor fuel blend of 10% ethanol and 90% gasoline Currently, primarily comes from corn, but any grain crop will work Ethanol Basic Facts Currently one bushel of corn produces 2.8 gallons of ethanol By Products lbs. of distillers dried grain CO 2 22

26 Largely due to Government policies, ethanol production grew from about 62 million gallons in 1976 to over 2 billion gallons in 2002 Million gallons Energy Tax Act of 1978 gave ethanol a $0.40/gal credit on the Federal motor fuels tax 1978 Blender s Income tax credit of $0.40/gal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1983 increased ethanol tax exemption to $0.50/gal and the blender s income tax credit to $0.50/gal Regulations under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 started in Tax Reform Act of 1984 increased ethanol tax exemption to $0.60/gal and the blender s income tax credit to $0.60/gal MTBE discovered in California drinking water in 1998 RFG begins in In 1999 California Governor banned MTBE by 12/03 Energy policy Act of 1992 applied ethanol tax credits to lower blends Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration and USDA, ERS Ethanol Production September 2007 Status Plants Capacity (Billions of Gallons) Operating Under Construction Ethanol Production July 2008 Status Plants Capacity (Billions of Gallons) Operating Under Construction 51 est

27 Ethanol Production September 2008 Est. Status Plants Capacity (Billions of Gallons) Operating Under Construction Million Gallons 18,000 Ethanol 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Biofuels production: Largest producers Biodiesel Argentina Ukraine & Russia Brazil China Canada EU USA Source: USDA Agricultural Projections to

28 $/Gallon U.S. Average Regular Gas and Ethanol Prices, Monthly, Source: Renewable Fuels Association Ethanol Reg Gas Ethanol Prices Relative to Unleaded Gas Time Price Relationship Premium Basis $.64 Aug. 07 +$.10 Oct. 07 -$.45 25

29 Ethanol Breakevens Extrapolating Out - - $ Ethanol 0% Return 12% Return Corn Price DDG Price Corn Price DDG Price 50 mg $8.69 $ $8.15 $ mg $8.89 $ $8.47 $ Note: Breakevens are probably overstated because of rising energy prices. Energy Bill Signed into law 12/19/07 Requires 36 billion gallons of ethanol use by 2022 Mandates that 21 of the 36 billion gallons come from feedstocks other than corn 26

30 Applicable volume of Calendar renewable fuel Year (in billions of gallons): Source: High Plains Journal, 01/07/08 Problem 27

31 Bigger Problem I have established a goal to have 60 billion gallons of our fuel come from sustainable, affordable biofuels in 2022 Ethanol Processing Water Use Three to five gallons of quality water is necessary to produce a gallon of ethanol therefore 100,000,000 gallon plant will require 300,000, ,000,000 million gallons of water 28

32 Ethanol Processing Water Use in Prospective 100 million gallon plant requires 400 million gallons of water or 14,730 acre-inches Equivalent water use to: Irrigating acres of corn Obervations on the Future Distiller s Grain Corn for Ethanol (bu) 3,000,000 4,000,000 Distillers Grain (bu) 951,000 1,268,000 Net Corn Use (bu) 2,049,000 2,732,000 29

33 Questions What can you do with Distiller Grain? What do you think is going to happen to the DG price? Steve s Crystal Ball What s coming in the future? Wind/Solar Storage Improved Electric Cars Algae Oil H-H-O The Amosson Mobile 30

34 Summary and Conclusions Summary and Conclusions Ethanol production is probably here to stay for the foreseeable future. Expect continued growth in ethanol production in the short run. Ethanol production should level off within a couple of years. Ethanol is a thorn in the cattleman s side, however, DG s are a silver lining Summary and Conclusions (cont.) The energy situation will be resolved probably in ways you never would have imagined 5-years ago. It s always darkest before the dawn, the cattle industry will return to profitability sooner than you think. 31

35 Educational programs of Texas AgriLife Extension Service are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, religion, age or national origin. 32

36 Use of Distiller s Grains in Feedlots Britt Hicks, Ph.D., PAS Extension Livestock Specialist Oklahoma Panhandle Research & Extension Center Presentation Outline Dry vs. Wet (DDGS vs. WDGS) Grain Processing (DRC, HMC, & SFC) Corn vs. Sorghums Distiller's Grains Roughage Level & Sources Monensin/Tylosin Added Fat Degradable Protein (Urea) DDGS vs. WDGS 33

37 DDGS in Corn Based Finishing Diets DDGS Level, % of Diet DM Item DMI, lb ADG, lb Feed/Gain Feeding Value, % Marbling Source: Klopfenstein et al., 2008 Meta-analysis of five experiments (DRC, DRC/HMC, CC, or SFC) WDGS in Corn Based Finishing Diets WDGS Level, % of Diet DM Item DMI, lb ADG, lb Feed/Gain Feeding Value, % Marbling Source: Klopfenstein et al., 2008 Meta-analysis of eight experiments (DRC, HMC, or DRC/HMC) DDGS vs. WDGS Most data suggest there is little to no difference between dry and wet forms Feeding value (% of corn) decreases as inclusion level increases Based on feeding value, optimal level of DDGS was 10% Declined from 156% at 10% inclusion to 100% at 40% inclusion Based on feeding value, optimal level of WDGS was ~10 to 30% Only declined from 145% at 10% inclusion to 132% at 40% inclusion 34

38 DDGS vs. WDGS Other issues Cost per unit of dry matter Freight cost Storage Shrinkage Mixing Grain Processing Dry Rolled Corn (DRC) High Moisture Corn (HMC) Steam Flaked Corn (SFC) Effect of WDGS Level on Feed Efficiency in DRC, HMC, or SFC Based Diets 7 Feed/Gain DRC HMC SFC WDGS Level, % in Diets (DM Basis) Source: Corrigan et al.,

39 Feeding Value Feeding Value (% of Corn) of WDGS in DRC, HMC, or SFC Based Diets DRC HMC SFC WDGS Level, % in Diets (DM Basis) Source: Corrigan et al., 2007 Grain Processing In this Nebraska trial, optimal feedlot performance was observed with: 40% WDGS in DRC diet 27.5% WDGS in HMC diet 15% WDGS in SFC Feeding Value, % of Corn Feeding Value of Corn WDGS in DRC, HMC, or DRC/HMC Based Diets WDGS Level, % in Diets (DM Basis) Source: Klopfenstein et al., 2008 Meta-analysis of eight experiments 36

40 Grain Processing Summary Optimal level of WDGS in DRC and/or HMC based diets is 30 to 40% In these diets, WDGS has a feeding value of 130 to 140% of corn Optimal level of WDGS in SFC based diets is 10 to 15% Feeding value ranges anywhere from 70 to 115% of corn (average of ~100%) Corn vs. Sorghum WDGS in SFC Based Diets 24 Effect of Corn WDGS Level on DMI (SFC Diets) Dry Matter Intake, lb WDGS Level, % Corrigan et al., 2007 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 Hicks et al.,

41 Average Daily Gain, lb Effect of Corn WDGS Level on ADG (SFC Diets) WDGS Level, % Corrigan et al., 2007 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 Hicks et al., Effect of Corn WDGS Level on Feed Efficiency (SFC Diets) 7.5 Feed/Gain WDGS Level, % Corrigan et al., 2007 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 Hicks et al., % Feeding Value of Corn WDGS (% of SFC) Feeding Value, % of Corn 130% 120% 110% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% WDGS Level, % Corrigan et al., 2007 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 MacDonald et al., 2008 Hicks et al.,

42 24 Effect of Sorghum WDGS Level on DMI (SFC Diets) Dry Matter Intake, lb WDGS Level, % Daubert et al., 2005 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 May et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Brown and Cole, 2008 Brown and Cole, 2008 MacDonald, 2008 Hicks et al., Effect of Sorghum WDGS Level on ADG (SFC Diets) Average Daily Gain, lb WDGS Level, % Daubert et al., 2005 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 May et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Brown and Cole, 2008 Brown and Cole, 2008 MacDonald, 2008 Hicks et al., Effect of Sorghum WDGS Level on Feed Efficiency (SFC Diets) 7.5 Feed/Gain WDGS Level, % Daubert et al., 2005 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 May et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Brown and Cole, 2008 Brown and Cole, 2008 MacDonald, 2008 Hicks et al.,

43 Feeding Value of Sorghum WDGS (% of SFC) Feeding Vlaue, % of Corn 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% WDGS Level, % Daubert et al., 2005 Vasconcelos et al., 2007 May et al., 2007 Depenbusch et al., 2007 Brown and Cole, 2008 Brown and Cole, 2008 MacDonald, 2008 Hicks et al., 2007 NEg Content of WDGS (% of SFC) Sorghum WDGS Brown and Cole, 15% 81 Brown and Cole, 15% 79 MacDonald, 25% 73 Corn/Sorghum WDGS (~70/30) Hicks et al., 10, 20, & 30% 86, 76 & 89, respectively Corn WDGS MacDonald, 20% 100 MacDonald, 35% 103 Corn vs. Sorghum WDGS in SFC Based Diets Summary These data suggest that corn WDSG is of greater value than sorghum WDGS Why the difference? May not be due to grain source Recent data suggest it could be due to NDF levels in WDGS (MacDonald, personal communication) The higher the NDF content, the lower the energy content Ratio of grains to solubles in product Starch levels in product 40

44 Relationship of NDF and Energy in Distiller s Grains 120 Energy value, % SFC y = x y = x R 2 = R 2 = NDF, % DM Source: MacDonald, personal communication Roughage Level & Sources Replacing grain (starch) in the diet with roughage generally reduces the incidence of subacute acidosis. Distiller s grains contain little starch since most of the starch in the grain is converted to ethanol. NDF content increases by about 3-fold compared with corn (from 12 to 36%). The removal of starch and increase in NDF suggests that the incidence of subacute acidosis should be reduced with the feeding of distillers. Can the roughage level be reduced? Effect of Distiller s Grains on Rumen ph Research with rumen cannulated steers suggests that feeding distiller s grains actually reduces rumen ph (more acidic) Corrigan et al., 2008 Uwituze et al., 2008 May et al.,

45 Can the Roughage Level be Reduced? May et al., 2008 evaluated the effects of reducing roughage level in SFC based feedlot diets with and without corn DDGS 0% DDGS and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS and 5% corn silage Results: Reducing roughage decreased DMI by ~5% Slight improvement in efficiency Tended to increase incidence of live abscesses Can the Roughage Level be Reduced? May et al., 2008 evaluated the effects of reducing roughage level in DRC or SFC based feedlot diets with and without corn DDGS 0% DDGS with DRC and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS with DRC and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS with DRC and 5% corn silage 0% DDGS with SFC and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS with SFC and 15% corn silage 25% DDGS with SFC and 5% corn silage Results: Reducing roughage decreased DMI but did not effect ADG Improved efficiency by ~6.5% Can the Roughage Level be Reduced? Depenbusch, 2008 evaluated the effects of reducing roughage level in SFC based feedlot diets with 15% sorghum DDGS or WDSG DDGS and 0% alfalfa hay DDGS and 6% alfalfa hay WDGS and 0% alfalfa hay WDGS and 6% alfalfa hay Results: Feeding no alfalfa reduced DMI and ADG No effect on feed efficiency 42

46 Can the Roughage Level be Reduced? MacDonald, 2008 evaluated the effects of reducing alfalfa hay level in SFC based feedlot diets with 25% sorghum WDSG 0% WDGS and 10% alfalfa hay 25% WDGS and 7.5% alfalfa hay 25% WDGS and 10% alfalfa hay 25% WDGS and 12.5% alfalfa hay Results: 7.5% alfalfa was adequate to maximize performance Roughage Level & Sources Benton et al., 2007 evaluated feeding different roughage sources on equal NDF basis in diets containing 30% corn WDGS with DRC/HMC diet. Control no roughage 4% alfalfa 6% corn silage 3% corn stalks 8% alfalfa 12% corn silage 6% corn stalks Results: In general, high roughage levels increased DMI, ADG, and profitability Steers fed 3% corn stalks performed similar to steers fed high level of roughage Feeding no roughage reduced DMI, ADG, and profitability Implications of Research Apparently even though distiller s grains provide NDF they don t supply roughage ( scratch factor ) Eliminating roughage is not an option May be feasible to reduce roughage levels May be able to use lower quality roughage (corn stalks) with distiller s without reducing performance 43

47 Monensin/Tylosin Monensin is fed to improve feed efficiency and is commonly used as a management tool to modulate feed intake and thus help control acidosis. Tylosin is fed to reduce the incidence of liver abscesses. The removal of starch and increase in NDF suggests that the incidence of subacute acidosis should be reduced with the feeding of distillers. Monensin/Tylosin Meyer et al., 2008 evaluated the effects of monensin and tylosin in DRC/HMC (1:1 ratio) based feedlot diets containing 25% corn WDGS. 1. Corn + RT no WDGS with 33.3 g/ton monensin and 90 mg/hd/day tylosin 2. DG WDGS with no monensin and tylosin 3. DG + R WDGS and 33.3 g/ton monensin and no tylosin 4. DG + RT WDGS with 33.3 g/ton monensin and 90 mg/hd/day tylosin 5. DG + High RT - WDGS with 44.4 g/ton monensin and 90 mg/hd/day tylosin Is Monensin/Tylosin Needed? Item Corn DG + DG + DG + DG + RT R RT High RT DMI, lb 23.5 abc 23.9 a 23.6 ac 23.4 bc 23.0 b ADG, lb 3.72 a 3.87 b 3.93 b 3.97 b 3.87 b Gain/Feed a b b b b Liver Abscesses Total, % 17.0 a 42.4 b 40.8 b 8.3 a 8.9 a A+, % 4.4 a 16.5 b 19.1 b 3.8 a 7.0 a Feeding monensin in the WDGS diet increased gain efficiency (gain to feed ratio) by 3.1% Feeding monensin plus tylosin increased gain efficiency by 4.9% Feeding of WDGS did not control liver abscesses Incidence of total liver abscesses and severe liver abscesses (A+) was reduced when tylosin was fed. Source: Meyer et al.,

48 Monensin/Tylosin Depenbusch et al., 2008 evaluated the effects of monensin and tylosin in SFC based feedlot diets containing corn WDGS 1. 0% WDGS with no monensin/tylosin 2. 0% WDGS with 300 mg of monensin daily 3. 0% WDGS with 300 mg of monensin plus 90 mg of tylosin daily 4. 25% WDGS with no monensin/tylosin 5. 25% WDGS with 300 mg of monensin daily 6. 25% WDGS with 300 mg of monensin plus 90 mg of tylosin daily Is Monensin/Tylosin Needed? Feeding WDGS had no effect on the incidence of liver abscesses Use of monensin or monensin plus tylosin had no effect on growth performance or carcass characteristics The incidence of total liver abscesses was not altered by the presence of tylosin. However, tylosin addition tended to decrease the incidence of severe liver abscesses in diets containing only SFC but not in diets containing WDGS. Concluded that monensin and tylosin may not be as effective when used in SFC based diets with 25% WDGS. Monensin/Tylosin Summary Feeding distiller s grain does not reduce the incidence of subacute acidosis or liver abscesses. Feeding monensin and tylosin in DRC/HMC corn based diets containing WDGS enhances performance and reduces the incidence of liver abscesses. Kansas study suggests that monensin and tylosin may not be as effective in a SFC based diet containing WDGS Additional research is needed. 45

49 Added fat Since WDGS contains ~10 to 12% fat, is there a benefit to adding additional fat to diet? Silva et al., 2007 evaluated feeding sorghum WDGS in SFC based diets with or without yellow grease 0% WDGS, 0% fat 0% WDGS, 3% fat 15% WDGS, 0% fat 15% WDGS, 1.5% fat 15% WDGS, 3% fat Is Added Fat Needed? WDGS Level: 0% 0% 15% 15% 15% Yellow Grease: 0% 3% 0% 1.5% 3% DMI, lb ADG, lb Feed/Gain Hot Carcass wt Data suggest that adding up to 1.5% added fat in 15% WDSG diets may improve performance Adding more than 1.5% fat tended to reduce growth performance Source: Silva et al., 2007 Degradable Protein (Urea) Distiller s grains plus solubles are high in crude protein (~30%) but low in degradable intake protein (DIP, ~30%) Will feeding distiller s provide adequate DIP to meet rumen microbe needs? Is urea needed in diet with distiller s? 46

50 Degradable Protein (Urea) Vasconcelos et al., 2008 evaluated whether additional DIP (urea) was needed feeding sorghum WDGS was fed in SFC based diets Control: 0% WDGS, 13.5% CP, 8.4% DIP (1% urea) Thee diets with 10% WDGS 0DIP: Formulated to have same CP concentration as control diet (and therefore potentially deficient in DIP), 13.5% CP, 7.2% DIP (0.68% Urea) 50DIP: 50% DIP, 14% CP, 7.8% DIP (0.89% urea) 100DIP: 100% DIP of the difference in the DIP concentration between the 0DIP and control diet, 14.5% CP, 8.4% DIP (1.09% urea) Is Added DIP Needed? DIP Restored, % Item Control DMI, lb ADG, lb Feed/Gain DMI and ADG appeared to decrease as with increasing levels of DIP Data suggest that rumen N recycling was sufficient to meet DIP requirements Source: Vasconcelos et al., 2008 Summary & Conclusions Little difference between dry and wet forms However, optimal level of dry may be ~10 to 20% as opposed to 20 to 30% with wet Can feed up to 40% WDGS in DRC or HMC diets (~130% value of corn) Optimal level of WDGS in SFC based diets is 10 to 15% Corn WDGS may be of greater value than sorghum WDGS May be function of NDF content (research needed) 47

51 Summary & Conclusions Roughage is still needed in diet but may be able to feed less and lower quality roughages Monensin/tylosin is still recommended Up to 1.5% added fat in diets may still improve performance Supplemental DIP (urea) may not be needed Other Issues Manure management Feeding 20% corn WDGS increased manure output (DM basis) by ~16% (MacDonald, 2008) Nitrogen output increased ~16% Phosphorus output increased ~19% Potassium output increased ~25% Logistics of feeding WDGS Due to the low DM content (~35%) and high density (~58 lb/cu ft) of WDGS, feeding WDGS could substantially affect the number of truck loads required to feed a given number of cattle. Mixer maintenance may increase (Mark Cooksey, Roto-Mix LLC, personal communication) Questions? 48

52 WDGS in SFC Based Diets Sorghum WDGS Daubert et al., 2005 Level Kansas DMI lb heifers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 161.6% 162.6% 110.7% 93.3% 87.1% Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Level Texas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed (avg) Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 85.9% 49.3% 22.4% May et al., 2007 Level Kansas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed (avg) Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 72.7% 66.6% 83.1% Depenbusch et al., 2007 Level 0 15 Kansas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 69.6% Brown and Cole, 2008 Level 0 15 Texas DMI lb heifers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 88.4% NEg, % of SFC 81.1 Brown and Cole, 2008 Level 0 15 Texas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 95.3% NEg, % of SFC 78.7 MacDonald, 2008 Level 0 25 Texas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain sorghum WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 67.5% NEg, % of SFC 73 49

53 WDGS in SFC Based Diets Corn WDGS Corrigan et al., 2007 Level Nebraska DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 113.6% 100.7% 101.8% Vasconcelos et al., 2007 Level 0 10 Texas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed (avg) Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 87.7% Depenbusch et al., 2007 Level 0 15 Kansas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 95.9% Depenbusch et al., 2008 Level 0 25 Kansas DMI lb heifers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 70.9% MacDonald et al., 2008 Level 0 20 Texas DMI lb heifers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 122.4% NEg, % of SFC 99.9 MacDonald et al., 2008 Level 0 35 Texas DMI lb steers ADG days on feed Feed/Gain corn WDGS Gain/Feed FV, % of SFC 100% 106.9% NEg, % of SFC 103 Corn/Sorghum WDGS Hicks et al., 2007 Level Oklahoma DMI lb steers ADG days on feed (avg) Feed/Gain mixed WDGS Gain/Feed ~70/30 corn/sorghum FV, % of SFC 100% 93.3% 72.0% 90.1% NEg, % of SFC

54 Literature Sources Benton, J. R., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, K. J. Vander Pol, and M. A. Greenquist Effects of roughage source and level with the inclusion of wet distillers grains on finishing cattle performance and economics. Nebraska Beef Report MP 90: Corrigan, M. E., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, K. J. Vander Pol, M. A. Greenquist, and M. K. Luebbe Effect of corn processing and wet distillers grains inclusion level in finishing diets. Nebraska Beef Report MP 90: Corrigan, M. E., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, N. F. Meyer, C. D. Buckner, and S. J. Vanness Effects of corn processing method and wet distiller's grains with solubles inclusion level on nutrient metabolism in steers. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: 115 (Abstr.). Daubert, R. W., J. S. Drouillard, E. R. Loe, J. J. Sindt, B. E. Depenbusch, J. T. Fox, M. A. Greenquist, and M. E. Corrigan Optimizing use of wet sorghum distiller's grains with solubles in flaked corn finishing diets. Kansas State Univ Cattlemen's Day. Report of Progress 943: Depenbusch, B. E., J. S. Drouillard, E. R. Loe, J. J. Higgins, M. E. Corrigan, and M. J. Quinn Efficacy of monensin and tylosin in finishing diets based on steam-flaked corn with and without corn wet distillers grains with solubles. J. Anim. Sci. 86: Depenbusch, B. E., J. S. Drouillard, E. R. Loe, M. E. Corrigan, and M. J. Quinn Optimizing use of distiller s grains with solubles (DGS) in finishing cattle diets. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research 2007 Report of Progress 978: Hicks, R.B., C.J. Richards, and P.K. Camfield Use of distiller s grains (wet & dry) in flaked corn diets for finishing beef cattle. Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center Research Highlights, p Klopfenstein, T. J., G. E. Erickson, and V. R. Bremer Board-invited review: Use of distillers by-products in the beef cattle feeding industry. J. Anim. Sci. 86: MacDonald, J Interaction of corn processing method (DRC and SFC) and 20% WDGS inclusion. High Plains Biofuels Co-Product Nutrition Conf. MacDonald, J. C., K. H. Jenkins, and N. A. Cole Trial 3: Effects of roughage level in steam-flaked corn based finishing diets containing 25% sorghum wet distiller s grain plus solubles. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: 95. MacDonald, J. C., K. H. Jenkins, F. T. McCollum, III, and N. A. Cole Trial 1: Effects of 20% corn wet distillers grain's plus solubles in steam-flaked and dry-rolled corn- based finishing diets. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: MacDonald, J. C., K. H. Jenkins, F. T. McCollum, III, and N. A. Cole Effects of 20% corn wet distiller's grains plus solubles in steam-flaked and dry-rolled corn based diets. Beef Cattle Research in Texas (in-press). MacDonald, J. C., K. H. Jenkins, F. T. McCollum, III, and N. A. Cole Trial 2: Effects of 35% corn wet distillers grain s plus solubles in steam-flaked and dry-rolled corn- based finishing diets. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: MacDonald, J.C. and K.H. Jenkins Texas AgriLife Research at Amarillo. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19:

55 May, M. L., J. S. Drouillard, M. J. Quinn, and C. E. Walker Wet distiller s grains with solubles in beef finishing diets comprised of steam-flaked or dry-rolled corn. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research Report of Progress 978: May, M. L., M. J. Hands, M. J. Quinn, B. E. Depenbusch, J. O. Wallace, C. D. Reinhardt, K. K. Karges, M. L. Gibson, and J. S. Drouillard Dried distiller s grains with solubles in steam-flaked or dry-rolled corn diets with reduced roughage levels. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research 2008 Report of Progress 95: May, M. L., M. J. Hands, M. J. Quinn, J. O. Wallace, C. D. Reinhardt, L. Murray, and J. S. Drouillard Digestibility of dried distiller s grains with solubles in steam-flaked or dry-rolled corn diets. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research Report of Progress 95: May, M. L., M. J. Quinn, B. E. Depenbusch, K. K. Karges, M. L. Gibson, and J. S. Drouillard Dried distiller s grains in steam-flaked corn finishing diets with decreased roughage levels. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research 2008 Report of Progress 95: Meyer, N. F., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, J. R. Benton, M. K. Luebbe, and S. B. Laudert Effect of rumensin and tylan in feedlot diets containing wet distillers grains plus solubles fed to beef steers. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: 124 (Abstr.). Silva, J. C., N. A. Cole, M. S. Brown, C. H. Ponce, and D. R. Smith Effects of dietary fat and wet sorghum distiller s grains plus solubles on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of finishing heifers. Beef Cattle Research in Texas: Uwituze, S., G. L. Parsons, M. K. Shelor, B. E. Depenbusch, J. M. Heidenreich, J. J. Higgins, C. D. Reinhardt, and J. S. Drouillard Ruminal ph and ruminally available protein may be key factors influencing digestion of dried distiller's grains. Plains Nutrition Council Spring Conference Pub. No. AREC 08-19: 131 (Abstr.). Vasconcelos, J. T., L. M. Shaw, K. A. Lemon, N. A. Cole, and M. L. Galyean Effects of graded levels of sorghum wet distiller s grains and degraded intake protein supply on performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle fed steam-flaked corn-based diets. Prof. Anim. Sci. 23:

56 Use of Distiller s Grains (Wet & Dry) in Flaked Corn Diets for Finishing Beef Cattle 1 R.B. Hicks, Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Goodwell C.J. Richards, Dept. of Animal Science, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater P.K. Camfield, Oklahoma Panhandle State University, Goodwell Abstract One hundred and eighty mixed steer calves (898 ± 62 lb) were blocked by weight (six blocks) and randomly allotted into six head pens to evaluate inclusion of distillers grain in flaked corn finishing diets. Treatments were: 1) steam flaked corn control finishing diet, or inclusion of 2) 10% dry distillers grains, 3) 10% wet distiller s grains, 4) 20% wet distiller s grains, or 5) 30% wet distiller s grains. All diets contained 8.0% chopped alfalfa and inclusions replaced flaked corn. Cattle averaged 123 days on feed with a range of 101 to 143. There was no difference (P > 0.11) in final body weight, average daily gain, or dry matter intake which averaged lb, 3.83 lb/d, and lb, respectively. There was no difference (P > 0.12) in carcass weight, dressing percentage, fat thickness, kidney pelvic heart fat, rib eye area, or yield grade which averaged 887 lb, 64.96%, o.52 in, 2.36%, sq in, and 3.15, respectively. Feed efficiency calculated with final live weights shrunk 4% resulted in a treatment tendency (P = 0.06) with a linear decrease (P = 0.05) as level of wet distillers grains increased. Feed efficiency calculated with carcass adjusted final weights resulted in no treatment affect (P = 0.32) with an average of 6.02 lb of DMI per lb of gain. Marbling score resulted in a treatment difference (P = 0.03) where the contrast of control diet (384) vs inclusion of 10% dry distillers grain (416) was significant (P < 0.02). For marbling score, contrast of inclusion of 10% dry vs 10% wet distillers grains, linear wet distillers grain level and quadratic wet distillers grain level were not significant (P > 0.23). The average marbling score was 392. This experiment indicates that inclusion of up to 10% dry or 30% wet distillers grains into steam flaked corn finishing diets did not result in any consistently detectable influence on animal performance or carcass characteristics. However, numerical trends were similar to results observed by other researchers. These data suggest that distiller s grains contain approximately 86% the energy of steam flaked corn. Key Words: cattle, feedlot, flaked corn, wet distiller s grains, dry distiller s grains Introduction As the U.S. ethanol industry continues to expand, the availability of by-products generated from milling processes will increase. Current and planned ethanol plant constructions within about 100 miles of the Oklahoma panhandle could eventually produce about 500 million gallons of ethanol per year. Along with ethanol, about 5 million tons of wet distiller s grains (33% dry matter) will be produced per year (~13,700 tons/day). Therefore, there will be tremendous opportunity for Oklahoma cattle feeders to take advantage of and use this by-product in their operations. The majority of the research evaluating the use of distiller s grains in feedlot rations has been done with dry-rolled corn (DRC) or high-moisture corn (HMC) based diets in the northern Great Plains, whereas, most feedyards in the southern Great Plains feed steam-flaked corn (SFC) based diets. In Nebraska research, Vander Pol et al. (2006b) fed yearling steers (773 lb initial weight) 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50% (DM basis) of corn wet distiller s grains plus solubles (WDGS) in DRC/HMC (1:1 ratio) 1 Published in Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center 2007 Research Highlights. 53

57 based diets. WDGS improved performance at all inclusion levels with the optimum response occurring with 30 to 40% WDGS which improved feed efficiency 11 to 13%. In an additional experiment, Vander Pol et al. (2006a) evaluated the effects of six corn processing methods in feedlot diets containing 30% WDGS (DM basis) fed to yearling steers (701 lb initial weight). Treatments consisted of whole corn, DRC, DRC/HMC mix, SFC and fine ground corn. Results indicated that there was a performance advantage when feeding WDGS with corn processed as either dry-rolled or high-moisture. In contrast, cattle fed SFC did not gain or convert as well as expected. Some evidence suggests that the optimum inclusion level is considerably lower than 40% for diets based on SFC. Daubert et al. (2005, Kansas State University) fed heifers (849 lb initial weight) 0, 8, 16, 24, 32 or 40% sorghum WDGS in diets based on SFC. Although heifers were only fed for 58 days, feed efficiency was improved 9% for heifers fed 16% WDGS and efficiency became similar to the control heifers after diets contained more than approximately 24% WDGS. In the southern Plains (Texas Tech University), Vasconcelos et al. (2007) fed feedlot steers (889 lb initial weight) diets containing 0, 5, 10, or 15% sorghum WDGS or 10% corn WDGS (DM basis) in SFC based diets. In contrast to previous studies which reported improved daily gains and feed efficiency in cattle fed WDGS, there was a linear decrease in both gain and efficiency with increasing sorghum WDGS concentration. There was no difference in performance between steers fed 10% sorghum WDGS or 10% corn WDGS. Additional Nebraska research (Corrigan et al., 2007) fed feedlot steers (692 lb initial weight) WDGS at 0, 15, 27.5, or 40% of the diet (DM basis) in DRC, HMC and SFC based diets. Optimal feedlot performance was observed with 40%, 27.5%, and 15% WDGS in DRC, HMC, and SFC based diets, respectively. These researchers concluded that a greater response to WDGS was observed with less intensely processed corn. Additional Kansas research (May et al., 2007) evaluated feeding feedlot steers (997 lb initial weight) WDGS at levels of 0, 10, 20, or 30% (DM basis) in DRC and SFC based diets. In this trial, adding WDSG to DRC based diets improved performance, whereas, adding WDSG to SFC based diets appeared to reduce performance. In summary, data evaluating the use of corn WDGS in SFC based feedlot diets suggest that the optimal inclusion level may be less than that observed with other forms of processed corn. With the anticipated construction of primarily corn ethanol plants in the southern Great Plains and thus, increased availability of distiller s grains, additional research evaluating the use of increasing levels of corn WDGS in SFC diets is needed. In addition, since feedyards in the Southern Great Plains tend to be larger than yards in the Northern Great Plains, management concerns with the feeding of WDGS may differ. The objectives of this experiment were to determine effects of feeding high levels of WDGS in SFC diets and compare a lower level of WDGS to a similar level of dry distiller s grains plus solubles (DDGS) that is representative of current feeding practices in the region. Material and Methods On April 17 and 21, 2007, 157 crossbred yearling steers (initial BW = 886 ± 59.9 lb) and 50 crossbred yearling steers (869 ± 63.2 lb), respectively, were received at the Henry C Hitch feedyard in Guymon, OK. On arrival, each animal was individually weighed, ear tagged, and treated for internal and external parasites with Dectomax Injectable (Pfizer Animal Health, Exton, PA), vaccinated with Bovi-Shield Gold 5(IBR, BVD Types 1 and 2, PI3, BRSV; Pfizer Animal Health, Exton, PA) and 7 Guage (Clostridium chauvoei-septicum-novyi-sordellii-perfringens types C & D bacterin toxoid; Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc.; St. Joseph, MO for Walco International), and implanted with Component TE-S with Tylan (120 mg of trenbolone acetate and 24 mg of 54

58 estradiol with 29 mg of tylosin tartrate; manufactured for VetLife by Ivy Laboratories, Overland Park, KS). All cattle were placed in a single pen and fed a diet containing 29.4% HMC, 19.6% SFC, 20% chopped alfalfa, 15% corn silage, 9.7% DDGS, 4.3% pelleted supplement, and 2% fat (DM basis). On April 30, 2007, 180 steers were sorted off from the original 207 head based on initial weight, behavior, and health to be used in this trial. These 180 steers were shipped to the Oklahoma Panhandle State University farm at Goodwell, OK on May 3, The steers were weighed on two successive days (May 3 and 4; 898 ± 59.7 lb, 3% pencil shrink), blocked by weight and randomly allotted to 30 pens (six hd/pen). Five treatments were randomly assigned to pens within each block. The five dietary treatments (Table 1) were: 1) steam flaked corn control finishing diet (CON), or inclusion of 2) 10% dry distillers grains (D10%), 3) 10% wet distillers grains (W10%), 4) 20% wet distillers grains (W20%), or 5) 30% wet distillers grains (W30%). All diets contained 8.0% chopped alfalfa and inclusions replaced SFC. All diets were balanced to contain a minimum of 13 percent crude protein and meet 105% of the estimated degradable intake protein requirement. The WDGS was obtained from an ethanol plant in Oakley, KS and stored in plastic silage bags for the duration of the experiment. At the time the WDGS was produced, the plant was receiving about 70% corn and 30% sorghum. The SFC (28 lb/bu) was picked up two to three times per week at the Henry C Hitch feedyard and stored in a commodity bay. On the first two days of the trial (May 4 and 5), the cattle were fed the same diet that they were fed at the feedyard. On day 3, the cattle were adapted to the final diets by sequentially feeding 32, 24, and 16% alfalfa diets for five days each. Cattle were fed twice daily (0630 and 1430) in quantities sufficient to ensure ad libitum consumption. Feed bunks were evaluated visually each day of the experiment at 0630 to determine the quantity of feed to offer each pen. The bunk management strategy was designed to allow for 0 to 2 lb of feed remaining at the time of evaluation. Samples of WDGS and SFC were collected two to three times per week for DM analysis in a 105ºC forced air oven for three hours. Cattle were weighed individually (full weights) at 28-d intervals. All weights are presented with a 4% pencil shrink. Four steers were removed from the trial during the feeding period for reasons unrelated to the experimental treatments (two cripples and two hard breathers). When the block was expected to have an average backfat thickness of 0.5 inches based on visual appraisal, cattle were shipped approximately 134 miles to an Excel Beef slaughter facility in Dodge City, KS. The trial ended on d 101 for two blocks, d 130 for three blocks and d 143 for the last block. On each of these days, the cattle were shipped to the slaughter facility. Carcass data were obtained by personnel from Oklahoma State University. Carcass measurements included hot carcass weight (HCW), longissimus muscle (LM) area, marbling score of the LM, percentage of kidney, pelvic and heart fat (KPH), backfat thickness, calculated USDA yield grade, and USDA quality grade. Dressing percent (average = 64.96%) was used to calculate carcass-adjusted final body weight from HCW and to subsequently calculate carcass-adjusted ADG and feed/gain ratio (F:G). The quantity of feed offered was recorded daily throughout the trial. At the end of each weigh period, feed bunks were swept, and any remaining feed was weighed and subtracted from the total quantity of feed offered to the pen. Pen records for average body weight and feed consumption were used to calculate ADG, DMI, and F:G for each weigh interval and for the total duration of the trial. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design using the MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Variables included were BW, DMI, ADG, F:G, HCW, carcass 55

59 adjusted variables (calculated using carcass-adjusted final BW which is equal to HCW divided by the average dressing percent), and other carcass traits. Pen was the experimental unit for all analyses. The model statements included the fixed effect of treatment and the random effect of block. Data for steers not completing the trial were removed prior to analyses. The following preplanned contrasts were evaluated: 1) response to increasing levels of WDGS (linear and quadratic), 2) comparison of D10% vs. W10%, and 3) CON vs. D10%. Results and Discussions The effects of feeding distiller s grains on steer performance are presented in Table 2. Final body weight averaged 1365 lb. Body weight on d 84 decreased linearly with increasing levels of WDGS (P = 0.03). Feed treatment tended to effect final body weight (P = 0.11) with body weight tending to decrease linearly as level of WDGS increased (P = 0.09). No differences in carcass adjusted final body weight were observed. Feed treatment tended to effect overall ADG on a live BW basis (P = 0.15) with a tendency for ADG to decrease linearly as level of WDGS increased P = 0.14). Overall ADG averaged 3.83 lb/d. Treatment did not affect DMI (overall DMI averaged lb/d). Feed efficiency over the first 84 d on feed was altered by treatment (P = 0.01) with a linear decrease as level of WDGS increased (P = 0.005). Feed conversion calculated with final live weights resulted in a linear increase in the amount of feed required per pound of gain (P = 0.05) as level of WDGS increased (average of 6.02 lb of DMI per lb of gain). Feed conversion calculated with carcass adjusted final weights resulted in no treatment effect. The effects of feeding distiller s grains on carcass characteristics are presented in Table 3. There was no treatment difference in HCW, dressing percentage, fat thickness, KPH, or USDA yield grade. Treatment tended to affect LM area (P = 0.12) with a linearly tendency for LM area to decrease with increasing levels of WDGS (P = 0.05). The average LM was sq in. Marbling score resulted in a treatment difference (P = 0.03) where the contrast of CON (384) vs D10% (416) was significant (P<0.02). For marbling score, contrast of D10% vs W10%, linear WDGS level and quadratic WDGS level were not significant. The average marbling score was 392. The percent of carcasses grading USDA choice tended to be influenced by treatment (P = 0.06) with the comparisons of D10% vs W10% (P = 0.08: 59.4 vs 38.9%) and CON vs D10% (P = 0.05: 36.1 vs 59.4%) approaching significance. Level of WDGS had no effect on the percent of carcasses grading choice. The effects of feeding distiller s grains on net energy values of the diet are shown in Table 4. Net energy values of each diet were calculated from actual performance data and intakes using generalized quadratic formulas based on Beef NRC (2000) equations. Using the calculated net energy values of the control diet and book values for energy for the alfalfa and the supplement, net energy values for the SFC were determined by difference. The net energy values for the SFC calculated in this manner were and Mcal/lb for NEm and NEg, respectively. These values are similar to those reported in the Beef NRC (2000) of and Mcal/lb for NEm and NEg, respectively. These calculated net energy values for the SFC and the book values for the alfalfa and the supplements were then used to calculate the energy contents of the various diets excluding the distiller s grains. The difference between these energy values excluding distiller s grains and the previously calculated energy values (based on performance and NRC equations) was then divided by the proportion of distiller s grain in the diet to determine the energy content of the distiller s grains. These data suggest that the NEg content of distiller s grains is approximately 86% that of SFC. This value is similar to that observed by Texas researchers. Texas A&M data from Bushland (MacDonald, 2008) suggest the NEg content of WDGS is 99.8% of SFC when 20% WDGS is fed in SFC based diets. Data from West Texas A&M University (Brown and Cole, 2008) 56

60 suggest the NEg content of WDGS 81% of SFC when 15% sorghum WDGS is fed in SFC based diets. In contrast, Nebraska research (Vander Pol, et al., 2006b) suggested the energy value of WDGS relative to HMC/DRC (1:1 ratio) was 121 to 178% when fed at levels of 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50% (DM basis). In this research, the energy value of WDGS decreased as dietary inclusion rate increased from 10 to 50%. These data clearly suggest that the value of WDGS is considerably lower when fed in SFC based diets as compared to DRC or HMC based diets. In summary, significant differences in performance were not observed. However, the observed numerical trends in ADG, DMI, and feed efficiency were similar to that observed by other researchers (Figure 1 to 3). These data and other data suggest that the optimal level of WDGS in steam flaked corn based is about 10 to 15%. Feeding increasing levels of WDGS appear to reduce the performance of feedlot cattle (ADG and feed efficiency). In this experiment, feeding 10% DDGS appeared to improve marbling scores and thus, increase the percent of carcasses grading USDA choice compared to the control treatment. Feeding levels of WDGS up to 30% had no effect on marbling or resulting USDA quality grade. These data suggest that distiller s grains contain approximately 86% the energy of SFC. Literature Cited Brown, M. and N.A. Cole Feeding value of wet sorghum distiller s grains in highconcentrate diets. High Plains Biofuels Co-Product Nutrition Conf. Corrigan, M. E., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, K. J. Vander Pol, M. A. Greenquist, and M. K. Luebbe Effect of corn processing and wet distillers grains inclusion level in finishing diets. Nebraska Beef Report MP 90: Daubert, R. W., J. S. Drouillard, E. R. Loe, J. J. Sindt, B. E. Depenbusch, J. T. Fox, M. A. Greenquist, and M. E. Corrigan Optimizing use of wet sorghum distiller's grains with solubles in flaked corn finishing diets. Kansas State Univ. Cattlemen's Day Report of Progress 943: MacDonald, J Interaction of corn processing method (DRC and SFC) and 20% WDGS inclusion. High Plains Biofuels Co-Product Nutrition Conf. May, M. L., J. S. Drouillard, M. J. Quinn, and C. E. Walker Wet distiller s grains with solubles in beef finishing diets comprised of steam-flaked or dry-rolled corn. Kansas State Univ. Beef Cattle Research Report of Progress 978: NRC Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle 7th rev. ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. Vander Pol, K., G. E. Erickson, M. A. Greenquist, T. J. Klopfenstein, and T. Robb. 2006a. Effect of corn processing in finishing diets containing wet distillers grains on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of finishing steers. Nebraska Beef Cattle Report MP 88-A: Vander Pol, K. J., G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein, M. A. Greenquist, and T. Robb. 2006b. Effect of dietary inclusion of wet distillers grains on feedlot performance of finishing cattle and energy value relative to corn. Nebraska Beef Cattle Report MP 88-A: Vasconcelos, J. T., L. M. Shaw, K. A. Lemon, N. A. Cole, and M. L. Galyean Effects of graded levels of sorghum wet distiller s grains and degraded intake protein supply on performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle fed steam-flaked corn-based diets. Prof. Anim. Sci. 23:

61 Table 1. Composition and formulated nutrient content of diets (DM basis). Treatment 1 Item CON D10% W10% W20% W30% Ingredient Steam-flaked corn Alfalfa DDGS WDGS Pelleted supplement Supplement Composition, % of DM Wheat middlings Cottonseed meal Urea Limestone Dicalcium phosphate Potassium chloride Salt Trace mineral premix Rumensin Vitamin premix Tylan Thiamine Nutrient Composition DM, % CP, % Ca, % P, % K, % S, % Fat, % DIP, % of DM Treatments were as follows: CON = control; D10% = 10% dried distiller s grains with solubles; W10% = 10% wet distiller s grains with solubles; W20% = 20% wet distiller s grains with solubles; and W30% = 30% wet distiller s grains with solubles. 2 Contained 0.12% cobalt, 3.6% copper, 2% iron, 0.5% magnesium, 15% manganese, 0.132% selenium, 20% zinc, and 0.23% iodine. 3 Contained 2,000,000 IU/lb vitamin A; 20,000,000 IU/lb vitamin D; and 50,000 IU/lb vitamin E. 4 Formulated to provide 60 mg/hd/d. 58

62 Table 2. Effects of wet distiller s grains and dried distiller s grains on performance of feedlot steers. Treatment 1 Contrast 2 CON D10% W10% W20% W30% SE TRT 2 D vs W Linear Quad Body Weights, lb 3 Initial d d d Final Adj. Final ADG, lb d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to end Adj. d 0 to end DMI, lb/d d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to end F:G d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to d d 0 to end Adj. d 0 to end Treatments were as follows: CON = control; D10% = 10% dried distiller s grains with solubles; W10% = 10% wet distiller s grains with solubles; W20% = 20% wet distiller s grains with solubles; and W30% = 30% wet distiller s grains with solubles. 2 Observed significance level for treatment and contrasts: D vs W = D10% vs W10%; Linear = Linear for WDGS treatments; Quad = Quadratic for WDSG treatments. 3 Initial weight is presented with a 3% pencil shrink. All body weights after initial are presented with a 4% pencil shrink. 4 Cattle were on feed an average of 123 d. 5 Adjusted final weight was calculated from hot carcass weight divided by the average dressing percent (64.96%) of all the cattle after which ADG and F:G values were recalculated using the adjusted final weight. 59

63 Table 3. Carcass characteristics of steers fed wet distiller s grains and dried distiller s grains. Treatement 1 Contrast 2 CON D10% W10% W20% W30% SE TRT 2 D vs W Linear Quad Hot carcass weight, lb Dressing percent Fat thickness, in % KPH LM area, in Yield grade Marbling score USDA choice, % Treatments were as follows: CON = control; D10% = 10% dried distiller s grains with solubles; W10% = 10% wet distiller s grains with solubles; W20% = 20% wet distiller s grains with solubles; and W30% = 30% wet distiller s grains with solubles. 2 Observed significance level for treatment and contrasts: D vs W = D10% vs W10%; Linear = Linear for WDGS treatments; Quad = Quadratic for WDSG treatments. 3 Marbling score: 300 = slight; 400 = small. 60

64 Table 4. Effect of distiller s grains on net energy values of the diets. 1 Treatment 2 CON D10% W10% W20% W30% Diet NEm, Mcal/lb Diet NEg, Mcal/.lb NE Values of Distiller s Grains NEm, Mcal/lb NEg, Mcal/lb NEm, % of SFC NEg, % of SFC Used following NEm and NEg values (Mcal/lb) for SFC, alfalfa and supplements: SFC and Alfalfa and Control supplement and D10% supplement and W10% supplement and W20% supplement and W30% supplement and Treatments were as follows: CON = control; D10% = 10% dried distiller s grains with solubles; W10% = 10% wet distiller s grains with solubles; W20% = 20% wet distiller s grains with solubles; and W30% = 30% wet distiller s grains with solubles. 3 Calculated based on actual performance and intakes using NRC equations. 4 Example calculation: (Diet NEm of D10% - Diet NEm excluding DDGS)/level of DDGS in diet ( )/0.1 = NEm of distiller s grains/1.041 X NEg of distiller s grains/0.720 X

65 OSU Average Daily Gain, lb KS 2005 (849 lb hfr) TX 2007 (889 lb str) NE 2007 (692 lb str) KS 2007 (997 lb str) OK 2007 (898 lb str) WDGS Level, % Figure 1. Effect of WDGS inclusion level on ADG in published research OSU Dry Matter Intake, lb KS 2005 (849 lb hfr) NE 2007 (692 lb str) OK 2007 (898 lb str) TX 2007 (889 lb str) KS 2007 (997 lb str) WDGS Level, % Figure 2. Effect of WDGS inclusion level on DMI in published research. 62

66 Feed/Gain OSU KS 2005 (849 lb hfr) TX 2007 (889 lb str) NE 2007 (692 lb str) KS 2007 (997 lb str) OK 2007 (898 lb str) WDGS Level, % Figure 3. Effect of WDGS inclusion level on feed efficiency in published research. 63

67 Effect of Inclusion of Wet Distiller s Grains in Corn Based Diets on Feeding Logistics in a Commercial Feedyard Britt Hicks, Ph.D., PAS Oklahoma Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Oklahoma State University, Goodwell Introduction Due to the low dry matter content (~35%) and high density (~58 lb/cu ft) of wet distiller s grains plus solubles (WDGS), feeding WDGS could substantially affect the feeding logistics in a feedyard (number of truck loads required to feed a given number of cattle). The two factors affecting the amount of feed that a feed truck can haul are the weight and density of the feed. Since WDGS contains only about 35% DM, the as fed intake of cattle will increase necessitating more feed being delivered to a pen of cattle. In contrast, since WDGS is denser than steam flaked corn (58 vs 22.5 lb/cu ft), feeding WDGS may allow one to haul more feed in a given volume. However, I am aware of only one research trial attempting to address this issue. Dr. Mike Brown with West Texas A&M University recently touched on this issue at the High Plains Biofuels Co-Product Nutrition Conference held in Garden City, KS on February 20, 2008 (Brown and Cole, 2008). Brown suggested that feeding an equal volume of feed per truck load would increase the number of loads required to feed cattle by about 10% when a steam flaked corn (SFC) based diet containing 15% sorghum WDGS is fed. Feeding an equal weight of feed per truck load would increase the number of loads required to feed cattle by about 23% (Figure 1). Figure 1. Increase in number of loads (900 cu ft each) required for wet sorghum distiller s grains plus solubles. Assume DMI, ration density, and ration DM of 20 lb, 14.2 lb/cu ft, and 83.37%, respectively, for 0% WDGS and 21 lb, 16.6 lb/cu ft, and 67.63% for 15% WDGS. Source: Brown and Cole, 2008 Procedures In an attempt to better evaluate the effect of feeding WDGS on feeding logistics in a commercial feedyard, I looked at the density of corn based rations containing increasing levels of WDGS (0, 10, 20 and 30% of DM). All diets contained 8.0% ground alfalfa. 7.5% of a pelleted 64