Duration: 10/01/2024 to 09/30/2029

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Forage resources are a primary limiter of beef production in the North Central Region. Due to a reduction in land that produces perennial pasture and hay, efficiently utilizing forage resources that are available and enhancing those that can be produced within cropping systems is critical to the future of the cow/calf and stocker industry. Our goal is to develop strategies for beef producers to make the best use of available forage resources now and in the future. To achieve our goal will conduct experiments that 1) Evaluate management that enhances productivity and profitability of pasture, rangeland, and other forage resources, 2) Evaluate productivity, sustainability and profitability of using annual forages in integrated crop and livestock systems, and 3) Optimize alternative production systems for cow-calf operations with limited perennial pasture. We will conduct outreach to inform and work with cattle producers interested in implementing the successful novel management that result systems from our experiments. Ultimately, this will lead to improved sustainability, productivity and profitability of cow/calf and stocker producers in the North Central Region. By assisting producers with implementation of novel management practices, we are helping producers turn forage into high quality protein which will ensure that the public has access to safe, affordable, and healthy beef.

Statement of Issues and Justification

The states of Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota have 7.4 million head of beef cows, which comprise over 25% of the nation's beef cows (USDA, 2023). Efficiently utilizing forage resources that are available and enhancing those that can be produced within cropping systems is critical to the future of the cow/calf and stocker industry. During the time period of 1998 to 2018, the cropland acres in ND, SD, NE and KS increased from 80.1 million to 85.0 million. Much of this increase resulted from the conversion of acres producing perennial forages (Wright, and Wimberly, 2013). The decrease in supply of perennial acres has also resulted in doubling of the rental rates for range and pastureland in this region.  Rental rates per animal unit month increased 35% from 1998 to 2008 and an additional 45% from 2008 to 2017 in these states (NASS, 2018). To maintain the efficiencies of beef cattle production systems, synergistic use of land resources in a sustainable manner is essential. In addition to grasslands, this includes the complementary use of crop residues, cover crops and annual forages. Thus, systems that take advantage of opportunities to integrate cattle and crop production are vital to sustaining or increasing beef cow and stocker numbers in the region.

When asked their opinions on research needs related to cow/calf production, Nebraska and Iowa cattle producers indicated that limited availability of perennial pasture was a significant issue; however, they also suggested that there are opportunities to integrate cattle and crop production. In 2018, 43 innovative producers across 5 focus groups held across the state were asked their opinions on the research and education needs regarding cow/calf production. The need to evaluate integrated crop and cattle systems in terms of economics, risk and adaptability to markets and weather was in the top four research priorities identified by all of the producer groups.  In addition, the groups expressed the need to explore options to extend the grazing season to overcome early spring and fall deficiencies and the need to investigate variability of cattle response when grazing corn residue (Drewnoski et al., 2018).  

In 2022, another producer focus group was held in southeastern Nebraska, identified decreasing feed costs as a top priority and wanted to know “what opportunities are there to reduce feed costs by capitalizing on resources such as cover crops, crop residues and strategic supplementation?”. The second item they wanted addressed was related to making money from grazing forage rather than cultivating row-crops on marginal land. They specifically wanted to know “can annual or perennial forages be cost competitive with cash crops on marginal land and how do we optimize management of these forage?” (Drewnoski et al., 2022).

These questions are not limited to Nebraska; similar questions have continued to be raised by Iowa cattle producers.  In 2013, Iowa cattle producers indicated that land access for grazing was their #1 concern (Gunn and Loy, 2015). The producers identified the need for more grazing opportunities with interest in reverting marginal row-crop lands back to pasture, effective use of cover crops in a grazing system, and research on palatability of modern varieties of corn residue. In January 2019, Iowa cattle producers were again asked about their research and education needs. Once again, pasture loss and increased rent was their #1 issue. The need for more knowledge of the potential for cover crop grazing and alternative cropping systems was a top priority. Confinement of cow-calf pairs was discussed at 5 out of 6 of their focus groups (Lippolis, 2019).

Planting annual forages would increase forage supply and could enhance system resilience. Additional forage from planting warm season annuals for forage on marginal land and within interseeded pastures can be used to support stocker enterprises, which would increase market options and provide additional opportunities to capitalize on favorable market conditions. Furthermore, additional forage would provide a buffer against drought conditions for cow/calf producers.

This project will be conducted at research stations throughout the North Central Region (NCR). Participants have access to experimental pastures and cropland, livestock handling and feeding facilities, and laboratories at their respective institutions. Researchers at the participating institutions have a history of successful collaborative research through previous committees. The advantages of a multi-state effort include synergistic relationships among multi-disciplinary colleagues at the different institutions, ability to evaluate management practices over wide north-to-south and east-to-west climatic gradients, and the ability to disseminate research findings to a broad regional audience. Several project faculty members have cooperative extension appointments and will assist with the dissemination of research findings. The conversion of range and pasturelands to cropland is widespread in these states, and the potential to incorporate beef production into crop production systems is high. Furthermore, perennial grass forages still encompass a major portion of the NCR; the land area potentially affected by effective management and the number of producers that could benefit is extensive.

The likely impacts from successfully completing this work include: 1) increased productivity and profitability of pasture, rangeland and other forage resources used for beef cattle production, 2) improved sustainability, productivity and profitability of integrated crop and livestock systems, and 3) increased understanding of systems for cow-calf production with limited perennial acres.

The economic impact of beef production has been estimated to be from $1850 to $5200 per cow, depending on whether the economic impact of the feeder and finishing sector is separated from the cow/calf sector. If the cow herd were expanded from 29 million head to 33 million head as a result of the strategies proposed herein, the economic impact would be estimated at $7.4 billion for the cow-calf sector, and over $20 billion for the beef industry as a whole. Much of the potential to expand the cow herd exists in the NCR because of the potential use of traditional and non-traditional forages and co-products in the region.

Related, Current and Previous Work

Several regional committees work in the general area of forage use and beef cattle. One regional committee is (W3012) Optimizing and Characterizing Sustainable Beef Cattle Production in Forage Based Systems on Western Rangelands, but their focus is on selecting beef cattle that are “optimal” for the environment.  Similarly, W3010 Integrated Approach to Enhance Efficiency of Feed Utilization in Beef Production Systems is focused on animal selection. However,  no projects are focused on 1) use and management of alternative forages in cattle systems and 2) cow systems with limited perennial pasture as described in this project.

This project was preceded by the multistate project NC1181 entitled “Optimizing land use for beef cattle production”. The group continues to feel that forage resources are a primary limitation to beef production. Strategies were developed to take advantage of available forage resources now and in the future.

The objectives of this past project were to:

• Enhance productivity and efficient use of pasture, rangeland, and other forage resources


• Create and evaluate opportunities to incorporate forage production within cropping systems


• Develop management strategies for cows/calf systems that use limited or no perennial pasture


• Assess economic performance, resiliency, and adaptability of the systems and management practices explored


• Improve stakeholder understanding of the systems and management practices evaluated

The current proposed project seeks to build on the knowledge gained in the past project to continue to develop strategies to increase and sustainably use forages in the North Central Region (NCR).

One major forage resource available in the NCR is corn residue. It was recently estimated that the economic gross value of grazing corn residue is over $191 million for Nebraska, South Dakota, Kansas, and North Dakota (Redfearn et al., 2019). It is well-established that corn residue biomass is positively correlated to corn grain yield. Thus, for corn residue grazing, the recommended stocking rates are based on grain yield. The general rule of thumb is that corn residue can be stocked at 1 cow for one month for each 6.3 Mg ha^-1 (100 bushels per acre) of corn grain produced based on research conducted in the 1980’s (Fernandez and Klopfenstein, 1987b; Fernandez et al., 1987). However, beef cattle producers in Nebraska reported that beef cow response when grazing corn residue at the recommended stocking rate is more variable now than it used to be. We conducted a corn hybrid experiment evaluating the effects of corn grain yield on the resulting quantity and quality of corn residue and found that as corn grain yield increased, the amount of grain relative to whole plant biomass (harvest index) increased, indicating less total residue produced per kilogram of corn grain produced. Additionally, the quality of husk and leaf declined as grain yield increased. The average amount of digestible organic matter from leaf plus husk was 3.6 kg/25.4 kg of grain (25.4 kg = 1 U.S. bushel) and declined from 5.8 to 2.5 kg. Therefore, the concentration of nutrients in corn residue declined as grain yield increased, meaning higher yielding corn had lower quality residue. The impacts of this decline in diet quality on cow performance should be evaluated to determine if recommendations need to be adjusted.

Cover crops planted after corn silage harvest, spring wheat, or hybrid seed corn harvest provide an opportunity for grazing growing calves or cows in late fall and into winter.  Several studies were conducted to evaluate the use of late summer planted cover crops for fall forage. Late summer planted oats are high quality forage and can maintain lactating cows in peak lactation (Carlson et al., 2022). Inclusion of brassicas into late summer oats can further improve the feeding value. It was found that inclusion of rapeseed into late-summer planted oats improved calf gain and lowered the cost of gain of growing steers grazing in late fall and winter (Jakub et al., 2022). However, efficiency of forage use when grazing oats in the fall appears to vary dramatically from year to year with wet years resulting in excessive trampling losses (Calus et al., 2022). There is a need to explore management strategies such as strip grazing to more efficiently utilize these forage resources in the fall.

As the value of corn and soybean grain has increased, so has the usage of marginal cropland for grain production. When Nebraska cattle producers were asked their opinions on research needs, they indicated that the usage of this marginal cropland was a significant issue. They expressed an interest in developing a system that would allow them to incorporate grazing on marginal land while maintaining flexibility to take advantage of high grain markets. One way to maintain flexibility is to use double cropped annual forages on marginal crop ground, however, there is little data to base practical management decisions surrounding 1) economics of grazing forage rather than cultivating row crop on marginal land and 2) best grazing management practices for annual forage resources.

Research in Nebraska from 2021-2023 began to address part of this knowledge gap by evaluating a double crop system consisting of grazing triticale in spring and harvesting pearl millet hay in summer.  The research found triticale biomass yields averaged 8.08 and 3.53 Mg ha^-1 under unfertilized conditions in 2021 and 2022, the latter reduced by drought.  With application of 60 kg N ha^-1 in the form of granular urea, triticale yields increased to 9.37 and 5.58 Mg ha^-1 across those years. Across the summer period, pearl millet yield varied with year:4.02 and 1.49 Mg ha^-1 in 2021 and 2022, but it did not differ between fertilized and unfertilized conditions.   Seeding forage soybean with pearl millet contributed additional biomass, but it did not result in significantly greater forage yield relative to unfertilized pearl millet.  Across all management conditions, forage yield in summer averaged 4.83 and 1.73 Mg ha^-1 in 2021 and 2022.  Summed across both the spring and summer periods of growth, total double crop biomass yield averaged 13.35 and 6.04 Mg ha^-1 in 2021 and 2022. 

We also conducted a 4 year evaluation of early season grazing of winter hardy small cereals and found that winter wheat, cereal rye, and winter triticale resulted in high rates of cattle weight gain, with an average daily gain (ADG) of 3 lb/d in April. However, in a year where freezing conditions occurring after cattle started grazing, cattle grazing cereal rye had the greatest ADG, likely due to greater forage growth. Thus, cereal rye may be a better choice if early spring grazing is the goal. Additional experiments are needed to evaluate species selection and management when using these species in an annual forage rotation that allows for grazing later into the spring.  Continued research evaluating double cropping annual forages is needed to be able to determine the economics and provide information about best management practices. This includes evaluating various cool and warm season species combinations, termination and planting dates, fertilization programs and grazing management strategies.

Previous work has also evaluated meeting cow needs while limit feeding rations in confinement (Shike et al. 2009, Jenkins et al., 2015; Warner et al. 2015, Meteer et al., 2018).  However, understanding how forage intake in the beef cow, particularly during late gestation and early-lactation, is impacted by forage quality and management is critical for implementing best nutritional management practices when not limit feeding.  Data from which forage intake predictive equations in cows have been developed are limited, and while previous work has evaluated the use of ionophores (Gadberry et al., 2022) and protein supplementation on intake, inconsistent responses have been observed in cows based on few studies.  Likewise, few studies have evaluated how forage intake and behavior in the beef cow changes during late-gestation and early-lactation (Linden et al., 2008), and more current data, particularly regarding the impacts of ionophore use and protein supplementation with forages of varying qualities, would aid in our understanding of this biologically critical period.  Additionally, most research with cow-calf pairs in confinement has been conducted on a pen basis and characterizing forage intake on an individual animal basis would greatly aid our efforts to better understand requirements and make sound recommendations to producers.

Objectives

1. Evaluate management that enhances productivity and profitability of pasture, rangeland, and other forage resources
   
2. Evaluate productivity, sustainability and profitability of using annual forages in integrated crop and livestock systems
   
3. Optimize alternative production systems for cow-calf operations with limited perennial pasture
   

Methods

Objective 1. Adaptability of cow-calf operations to weather conditions and economic viability are main drivers.  There is a large incentive for producers to keep their herds together even in extreme weather events (i.e. droughts, both short and long-term) or extremely inflated prices for renting grazing lands.  We propose to evaluate the practice of supplemental feeding cows on grass as a method to 1. manage for toxicities in fescue pastures; 2. reduce grazing pressure on the pasture during drought conditions; or 3. be able to increase stocking rates to take advantage of ideal moisture conditions and high calf prices.  To accomplish these, two concurrent studies will be conducted in Southeast Kansas with the same feeding regimen.  Both studies will involve supplemental feeding of fall-bred cows with corn silage at 1% of body weight daily (which should provide a maximum of ½ of daily dietary intake).  In one study, the forage base will be fescue to evaluate the ability to alleviate reduced performance due to fescue toxicity.  The fescue pastures (n = 16) are split into two categories based on variety of fescue planted.  The two categories are toxin producing fescues (K31 variety) or non-toxin producing varieties (novel endophyte and endophyte-free pastures).   There are 8 pastures of each fescue category.  The treatment design will be a 2x2 factorial with 2 levels of feeding (non-supplemented and supplemented) and 2 types of fescue (toxic or non-toxic).  Forty-eight cows will be placed on the pastures in mid-April (approximately mid-gestation) and grazed until breeding in November.  The second study will evaluate the same supplemental feeding method on bermudagrass.  Depending on forage production, the put-and-take method will be employed on the supplemented pastures to achieve similar forage production as the non-supplemented pastures.  This will be used to test the ability of supplementation to reduce grazing pressure on the pasture during drought conditions or increase stocking rates depending on moisture conditions.  Weight, rump fat, hair score, hair length, and blood samples will be collected at turnout, beginning of 3rd trimester, immediately prior to calving, and at breeding.  The blood samples will be analyzed for measures of heat stress.  Calf birth weight and milk production will be measured post calving. This will have a minimum of 3 years of replication.

Mitigation of fescue toxicosis will also be investigated in stocker cattle.    Previous data reported modest weight gain by immature beef cattle when grazing endophyte-infected tall fescue pastures.  However, cattle in these projects would have grazed from April-October; right through the “summer slump”, a period of dormancy for tall fescue.  This summer slump is also a period when ergot alkaloid concentrations peak in tall fescue biomass.   We hypothesize that by grazing fescue for a shorter period of time (April 1 – July 1) we can increase weight gain per calf and per acre, largely by avoiding grazing during the summer slump.  By shortening the grazing period, we can increase stocking rate and graze tall fescue while in a vegetative state, a period of high forage quality that should be conducive to a higher plane of nutrition for the cattle.  We also aim to test the effectiveness of supplementing cattle with additional calories while grazing tall fescue.  Our plan is to provide 1% of body weight per day of loose soybean hulls as one of the treatments in our experiments. Beef cattle (~450 lb) will be sourced from a local auction market and randomly assigned to treatments arranged in a 2x2 factorial design.  The first factor is grazing season: Intensive Early (2.5 head per acre for 84 days) or Season-long (1.5 head per acre for 168 days).  The second factor is supplementation: none (control) or 1% of bodyweight per head per day of loose soyhulls.  Supplements will be offered daily.  Treatment combinations will be randomly assigned to one of 12 pastures (3 pastures per treatment combination per year).  Double stock cattle would be on the experiment for 84 days. Season long cattle would be on the experiment for 168 days.  We will collect individual body weight on day 0,1, 29, 57, 85, 86, 113, 141, 169 and 170 of the experiment.  We intend to generate data on body weight change over time, average daily gain, body weight gain per acre grazed, and an economic analysis of the various treatments. 

Supplementation strategies involving form of supplement (free-choice or hand-fed) and addition of feed additives such as rumensin will be investigated on brome grass.  These feeding methods will be used to evaluate cattle performance while on grass as well as the potential changes in forage availability and nutritional composition changes.

Variability in precipitation and spring and summer temperatures significantly affect the seasonal growth patterns and total annual production of native perennial grasslands.  This makes stocking rate decisions difficult to plan where producers may more accurately stock pastures to efficiently balance grazing demand with supply.  We plan to continue annual mid-June (peak cool-season) and end of growing season production sampling of upland Sandhills range sites (western and eastern Nebraska Sandhills) and mixed grass rangeland (central Kansas).  Production sampling will be conducted by hand-clipping non-grazed quadrats and plant material sorted by plant functional groups. All sites have automated weather stations for collection of that data. Weather and plant production data will be accumulated into a longer-term data set for further evaluation.

Timing of forage availability is often a challenge, with certain times of the year producing more forage and other less, especially in monoculture systems.  Perennial grass seeding experiments will be initiated in fall 2026 to evaluate stability and nutritive value of forage in low input systems. The goal of these experiments is not to maximize forage accumulation but rather improve stability of forage from week to week across spring and summer. Diverse mixtures consisting of perennial cool- and warm-season grasses will be evaluated across multi-state trials. Data collection will take place from 2027-2029. Forage samples will be analyzed for nutritive value and soil cover (i.e., bare ground, litter, and plant basal) will be assessed throughput the experiments.

Grazing management practices, such as strip grazing, have the potential to improve grazing efficiency. Incorporating grazing technologies may reduce labor and enhance adaptation of grazing management practices. A study will be conducted to evaluate the effects of strip grazing and use of grazing technologies on harvest efficiency, animal performance, animal behavior and economic feasibility. To evaluate the effects of strip grazing, a summer planted annual forage that is stockpiled and grazed in the winter will be subjected to 1) strip grazing and 2) continuous grazing. Additionally, three approaches to strip grazing will be evaluated 1) manual fence movement, 2) automated fence movement and 3) virtual fence.  This will be conducted over two-years and will be in a randomized block design with 4 replications across 2 states (Nebraska and North Dakota).

 

Objective 2. In areas where cool-season perennials are the predominant forage sources, there are times of the year (summer in particular) where there is poorer forage quality and/or quantity, that often result in a reduction in cattle performance. To offset these issues some operations have included addition of summer annuals or have converted a portion of the pastures or cropland to summer annuals.  The objective of this study is to evaluate impact of species selection when grazing warm season annuals on productivity for summer grazing.  During the summer evaluation, two summer annual forage treatments will be compared to perennial grass (Bermudagrass).  The annual forages are BMR sorghum-sudan (SS) and BMR sorghum-sudan with cowpea and sunflower (SS+).  There will be 3 pastures of SS, 4 pastures of SS+, and 3 pastures of Bermudagrass; each 4 acres in size.  All pastures will be rotationally grazed and stocked according to available forage.  During the winter grazing period, all pastures will be planted with a grazing variety of wheat to determine the grazing potential of the wheat in a rotation after either of the annuals or as in interseeding into bermudagrass.  Measurements will include biomass, quality, cattle gains, gain per acre, grazing days, and costs of production. This will be replicated a minimum of 4 years in Southeastern Kansas.

Annual forage crop seeding experiments will be conducted in Nebraska and Kansas to identify annual forage crop mixtures that enhance forage accumulation, nutritive value, and stability. Field plot experiments will first be conducted in 2025 and 2026 to identify annual grass and legume mixtures that enhance forage accumulation and nutritive value in summer (Table 1). Grasses evaluated will be expected to have traits supportive of grazing: medium to deep roots, good to excellent regrowth, and dry matter yield potential. Legumes will have upright growth, good forage quality, and tolerance to shade. Harvests will occur at 90 days after planting (i.e., one cut) to allow for greater forage accumulation and uninterrupted growth for legumes in the mixtures and at 45 and 90 days after planting (i.e., two cut) to improve nutritive value and simulate more frequent grazing. Forage accumulation and nutritive value of one- vs. two-cut stands will be compared among the monocultures, except for corn, at 90 days after planting. Grass-legume mixtures will be compared with monocultures of each grass at full seeding rates, and full seeding rates will be compared with half seeding rates among grass-legume mixtures. Corn will not be evaluated at 45 and 90 days after planting because of expected poor regrowth after harvest. Mixtures will be drill seeded into no-till seedbeds at each multi-state research location, and plantings will take place on the same soil at each location, two years in a row (i.e., 2025 and 2026). Depending on expected soil moisture availability, mixtures should be seeded in mid- to late-spring after harvest of a fall- or early spring-seeded small grain forage crop to simulate a double crop system. The small grain and each mixture will be fertilized at the same rate (60 kg N/ha) with granular urea, i.e., 120 kg N/ha total.

Table 1. Mixtures to be evaluated in multi-state field plot trials in 2025 and 2026.

Mixture	Drilled seeding rate, lb//acre	Harvests, days after planting
Piper sudangrass	15	50 & 90
Piper sudangrass	15	90
Piper sudangrass & Laredo soybean	15 & 50	90
Piper sudangrass & Laredo soybean	7.5 & 25	90
Piper sudangrass &Hubam sweetclover	15 & 12	90
Piper sudangrass &Hubam sweetclover	7.5 & 6	90
Tifleaf III pearl millet	20	50 & 90
Tifleaf III pearl millet	20	90
Tifleaf III pearl millet & Laredo soybean	20 & 50	90
Tifleaf III pearl millet & Laredo soybean	10 & 25	90
Tifleaf III pearl millet & Hubam sweetclover	20 & 12	90
Tifleaf III pearl millet & Hubam sweetclover	10 & 6	90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan	30	50 & 90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan	30	90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan & Laredo soybean	30 & 50	90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan & Laredo soybean	15 & 25	90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan & Hubam sweetclover	30 & 12	90
BMR dwarf Sorghum Sudan & Hubam sweetclover	15 &6	90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan	30	50 & 90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan	30	90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan & Laredo soybean	30 & 50	90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan & Laredo soybean	15 &25	90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan & Hubam sweetclover	30 &12	90
Super sugar Sorghum Sudan & Hubam sweetclover	15 & 6	90
BMR84 grazing corn	40	90
BMR84 grazing corn &Laredo soybean	40 &50	90
BMR84 grazing corn &Laredo soybean	20 &25	90
BMR84 grazing corn &Hubam sweetclover	40 &12	90
BMR84 grazing corn &Hubam sweetclover	20 & 6	90

Calves in South Dakota are often “backgrounded” or fed a high-roughage diet between weaning and being placed on a high-grain finishing diet. This system offers excellent potential to add value to raised feedstuffs and to enhance economic activity, but feedstuff availability can limit implementation, corn silage is traditionally a primary roughage source for growing cattle as well as cow-calf wintering diets. Annual forages (winter or summer) could be used as a substitute for corn silage. These alternative forages have advantages in reduced input costs and improved system resiliency. We propose conducting cattle growing experiments to evaluate production system options for backgrounding calves. We intend to compare a traditional corn silage/hay system with one using winter or summer annual forages that may fit into an existing row crop rotation (e.g., potential double-cropping with rye and sorghum), and to a limit-feeding strategy that reduces the need for forage. These research projects will evaluate what, if any, differences there are between feed systems and combine that information with crop production and input data to assess impacts on an integrated crop – livestock system.

Objective 3.

The cow-calf industry has traditionally been based on grazing pasture the majority of the year, and cows are supplemented or fed in drylots during the winter when forage quality and availability is limited. Producer interest in alternative systems using readily available feedstuffs has increased as land availability has decreased, and pasture rentals have increased. Land price, feed availability, equipment sharing with row crop enterprises, and manure utilization make the Midwest ideal for an intensive, alternative systems. However, limited research has been done to identify best management practices within these alternative systems during the summer months.

University of Illinois Extension conducted a survey in 2022 of cow-calf producers utilizing alternative housing systems (Drayer et al., 2023) to help understand current management practices and identify areas for future research. Over 50% of producers responded that their cows were over-conditioned in these confinement systems. All producers were feeding a TMR but ingredient inclusions and formulations varied greatly. There has been multiple experiments conducted on different ingredient inclusions and TMR types in gestating cows during the winter months. However, this work is lacking for lactating cows in extended drylot cow/calf systems. Calves begin eating forage as early as 2 months of age and intake increases to 4.5 lb/d by 4 months of age and 10 lb/d by 6 months of age (Adcock et al., 2011). If no supplemental feed is offered to the calves, they will attempt to eat the TMR offered to cows or the bedding material. When the TMR includes less forage and is not as bulky, cows will likely consume it all in less than 3 hours resulting in minimal opportunity for calves to consume. However, if the TMR is formulated with greater roughage inclusion and is more bulky, cows may take more than 8 hours to consume, providing much greater opportunity for the calves to also consume the TMR. The cow/calf survey (Drayer et al., 2023) also revealed there were significant variation in bedding practices, manure handling, and cow and calf health. Our previous drylot work (Myerscough et al., 2022) reported that cow locomotion score worsened during the experiment and that 36% of cows were treated for foot rot or digital dermatitis. Cow-calf producers need more information on the impacts of moderate roughage, limit fed TMR compared to high roughage, bulky TMR on cow and calf performance, bedding use, manure production, and health outcomes.

Spring-calving Angus × Simmental mature cows (n = 72; 650 ± 35 kg) at the Orr Research Center (Baylis, IL) will be utilized in a randomized design to determine the effects of moderate and high roughage inclusion TMR in a confinement, drylot system on cow-calf production. Both TMR will be formulated to be isocaloric and meet the energy requirements of the lactating cow. Body weight (BW) and body condition score (BCS) of the dams and sex and BW of the calves (n = 72; 85 ± 20 d of age) will be used to stratify pairs for assignment to 12 pens with 6 pairs/pen, and pen (n = 6/treatment) will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatments (LimitTMR or BulkyTMR).

Cows will be maintained in concrete lots with open-front sheds and fence-line feed bunks. Both total mixed ration (TMR) will be formulated to meet NASEM (2016) requirements for lactating cows in mid to late-gestation and will utilize corn silage, grass hay, corn stalk residue, distillers grains, and corn. The LimitTMR will have 40% roughage inclusion and target DMI of 1.7% of cow BW. The BulkyTMR will have 60% roughage inclusion and target DMI of 2.1% of cow BW. The treatment period will occur during the summer from the time of breeding until weaning (~170 days of age). Cows will be artificially inseminated (AI) at d 0. Ten days following AI, one bull (which passed breeding soundness exams) will be put in each pen of cows for a 45 day breeding season. A trained technician will collect AI conception rate at d 41 and overall pregnancy rates at d 83. Body weight will be collected on 2 consecutive days at the beginning and end of the treatment period. All cows will be limit-fed the LimitTMR at 1.7% of BW for the final 5 days of the experiment to minimize differences in BW in cows and calves due to gut fill. Cow BCS will be assessed at d 0, 42, 84. At d 42, milk yield will be determined using the weigh-suckle-weigh technique (Beal et al., 1990). Milk samples will also be collected at this time via hand stripping to assess milk composition. Cow behavior (standing, lying, eating TMR at bunk, and eating bedding) will be assessed 1 day each week at 0800, 1200, and 1600. Cow health and lameness will be monitored daily, recorded, and treated as necessary. Sheds will be bedded with straw as needed. Cows will be assessed a hygiene score at 2 timepoints (1-4 scale; 1 – no manure, 4 confluent plaques of manure). Manure in pens will be scored at 2 timepoints (1-5 scale; 1 - very liquid consistency, 5 – firm fecal balls). Manure production will be measured by scraping and weighing manure from pens and manure samples will be collected for composition analysis at d 42 and d 84. Feed ingredient samples will be collected every 2 weeks and composited for analysis. Economic analysis of feed costs and weaned calf value will be performed for preweaning period.

Calves will not be excluded from bunks but bunk space will be industry standard for cows and no additional allowance will be provide for calves. All calves will have ad libitum access to a pelleted creep feed for the final 3 weeks prior to weaning. Calf BW will be collected at d 0, 42, 84. Calves will be weaned at d 84 at approximately 170 days of age. Calf behavior (standing, lying, eating TMR at bunk, and eating bedding) will be assessed 1 day each week at 0800, 1200, and 1600. At the time of weaning, calves will be weighed and transported 160 miles to the Illinois Beef Cattle and Sheep Field Laboratory in Urbana, IL. Upon arrival, calves will be weighed, sorted by sex and placed into pens at opposite ends of the same barn and given ad libitum access to feed and water. Percent shrink due to shipping will be calculated using pre-shipping and arrival BW. Calves will be weighed again at d 41 and 42 of receiving period. Orts will be collected at the end of every week for the 6 weeks of receiving period to determine feed intake. Calf health will be monitored daily for the duration of the trial. Calves will be assessed for clinical symptoms or respiratory disease, including droopy ears, poor appetite, coughing, increased respiratory effort, fever, and abnormal nasal discharge. Calves diagnosed with these symptoms will be treated with antibiotics. Economic analysis of feed costs and calf value at end of receiving phase will be conducted at conclusion of the receiving phase.

A multi-year project will be conducted at Kansas State University to evaluate the effects of gestation and lactation, ionophore use, protein supplementation, and forage quality on intake and intake behavior by beef cows and calves in both grazing and drylot fed settings.  Accurately estimating forage intake by grazing beef cows is critical for making informed nutrition and management decisions, yet it is one of the most challenging aspects of beef cattle nutrition.  Likewise, measuring voluntary forage intake by beef cows in fed or confinement situations and understanding the impact of biological and management factors on forage intake is necessary for sound nutrition management of the cow.  Data with which forage intake estimations are currently made are generally limited and relatively little work has been recently done.  To evaluate this, forage and supplement dry matter intake will be measured on pregnant cows and cows in early-lactation with calves at side in an automated individual feed intake management system in a confinement setting. Thus, individual animal will serve as the experimental unit for these experiments.  For estimation of grazed forage intake, cows will graze native tall-grass Flint Hills pastures from approximately November through May and forage intake will be estimated based on marker dosing and fecal output using an individual feed intake management system to provide supplement for marker dosing.  Individual animal will serve as the experimental unit for these trials as well.  In all trials, beginning approximately 60 days prior to and for 90 days following parturition, cows will be grouped by age and/or body weight across multiple breeds and assigned to various forage quality, protein supplementation, and ionophore treatments depending on year as specific treatments applied will vary by year.  Cow body weight, body condition score, milk production and composition, reproductive performance, and animal behavior will be measured. Calf performance and behavior will be subsequently evaluated.  This research will add to the body of data to better understand 1) how forage intake in the beef female changes due to stage of production and 2) how forage quality, protein intake, and ionophore use interact to influence forage intake at different stages of production. These data will aid in developing predictive intake equations for use by researchers enabling for more accurate estimations of forage consumption by cows as impacted by various factors. This will ultimately have value for producers and professionals in research, Extension, and allied industries by providing more current information with which intake estimates may be made, and allowing for more informed forage and range management decisions in alignment with the overall objectives of this proposal.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• Data to assist in adaptive management of perennial pasture based on weather conditions
• Development of best management practices for double cropping annual forages
• Development of novel feeding strategies for growing calves
• Refinement of predictive intake equations for late gestation and early lactation cows

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Implementation of novel management practices for optimized environmental and economic outcomes of integrated crop-cattle systems
• Improved profitability of cow/calf and stocker producers in the North Central Region
• Retention or expansion of beef cattle herd in the North Central Region

Milestones

(2025):Begin conducting experiments on (objective 1) strip grazing annual forages, supplemental feeding on tall fescue and bromegrass, double stocking vs. season long grazing of tall fescue, evaluating annual forages in place of cash crops, (objective 2) annual forages mixtures for grazing vs. perennials forages, forage mixtures for improved stability, annual forage silages for growing cattle, (objective 3) forage intake of beef cows and diet types when cows are in confinement.

(2026):Continue conducting experiments. Initiate experiment evaluating (objective 1) perennial grass mixture evaluation for stability and (objective 3) different roughage inclusions in confinement cow-calf system.

(2027):Continue conducting experiments. Initiate experiment on (objective 3) different creep feed formulations in confinement cow-calf system. Complete economic analyses (partial budgeting, capital budgeting and multi-criteria decision analysis) of strip grazing and fencing type to determine feasibility. Model summer annual production and subsequent beef production under different moisture conditions. Conduct outreach.

(2028):Continue conducting experiments. Initiate experiment on (objective 3) evaluating creep feed duration in confinement cow-calf system. Continue outreach.

(2029):Finish experiments. Conduct enterprise budgets and whole farm analysis for evaluation of forage crop production in place of cash crop production on marginal land. Develop model that could be used to evaluate whether to use corn silage or a winter/summer forage system to grow beef cattle from an enterprise and whole farm perspective. Continue outreach.

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

The goal of the proposed research is to improve the productivity and efficiency of cattle production, but the research has to be translated and implemented for an impact to be realized. The participants of this committee will use a vast array of Extension outreach platforms, including extension websites, podcasts, newsletters and social media to provide information to producers. Outputs (such as articles, podcasts, and webinars) will be shared with the other members of the committee to distribute using their Extension platforms to further increase the number of clientele reached. Train-the trainer sessions will be held with Extension educators at professional development events to provide training on how to interpret and present the results to producers.

Organization/Governance

The project will be governed by two officers: a chair and a secretary. Project participants will initially elect the two officers who will serve the first year. For each succeeding year, the secretary will become the chair for the following year and a new secretary will be elected. Terms for each will start at the end of the annual meeting. The chair and secretary will be responsible for conducting necessary business in close coordination with the administrative advisor. The duties of the secretary will be to take meeting minutes and prepare the approved minutes and the annual report. The secretary will coordinate the annual report. The chair will conduct the annual meeting. The chair will appoint subcommittees for each project objective. Subcommittees will be responsible for drafting uniform research procedures for each objective, subject to approval by project members and preparation of materials and meetings for technology transfer.

Literature Cited

Calus, K. J., M.M. Briton, B. H. Hansen, K. M. Ulmer, Z. E. Carlson, F. H. Hilscher, M. E. Drewnoski, J. Parsons and J. C. MacDonald. 2022. Economics of Grazing Calves on Oats Planted after Corn Silage in Eastern Nebraska. Nebraska Beef Report. MP 115:34-36.

Carlson, Z. E., L. J. McPhillips, G. E. Erickson, M. E. Drewnoski, and J. C. MacDonald. 2022. Production cow-calf responses from perennial forage-based and integrated beef-cropping system. Translational Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txac090

Drewnoski, M. E., J. Parsons and D. Redfearn. 2018. Needs of producers using integrated cropping and cattle systems. https://beef.unl.edu/ffar

Drewnoski, M. E., J. Parsons and D. Redfearn. 2022. Nebraska Extension works with focus group to identify needs of producers using integrated cropping and cattle systems in Southeastern Nebraska. https://beef.unl.edu/ffar

Gadberry, S., P. Beck, M. Moore, F. White, S. Linneen, and D.Lalman. 2022. Meta-analysis of the effects of monensin on performance of beef replacement heifers and beef cows. Translational Animal Science, txac086, https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txac086

Gunn, P. and D. Loy. 2015. Opportunities and Challenges in a Changing Beef Industry: Results of a Statewide Needs Assessment in Iowa. JOE. 53 (5) #5RIB2

Hall, A. K., A. M. Sartin, K. J. Calus, M. T. Grabau, D. D. Redfearn, R. B. Mitchell, M. E. Drewnoski. 2024. Cereal Rye, Winter Triticale or Winter Wheat: Which is Best for Early Spring Grazing? MP118: 42-44.

Jakub, D. A, H. E. Riley, K. E. Hales, S. D. Shackelford, H. C. Freetly and M. E. Drewnoski. 2022. Effect of Rapeseed Inclusion in Late-Summer Planted Oats Pasture on Growing Performance of Beef Steers. Nebraska Beef Report. MP 115:32-33.

Jenkins, K. H., S. A. Furman, J. A. Hansen, and T. J. Klopfenstein. 2015. Limit feeding high-energy, by-product-based diets to late-gestation beef cows in confinement. Prof. Anim. Sci. 31:109-113.

Linden, D.R., D. E. Anderson, L.A. Pacheco, J.W. Bolte, N.A. Sproul, M.D. Thomas, K.C. Olson, J.R. Jaeger,  and K. L. Holcomb. 2008.Forage intake by pregnant and lactating first-calf heifers. Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports. https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5977.1529

Lippolis, K. 2019. What keeps you up at night? Iowa Cow-Calf Commentary.  Iowa Beef Center Growing Beef Newsletter. March. https://mailchi.mp/47231264053d/growing-beef-newsletter-march-2019

Meeter, W.C., L.M. Shoup, W.P. Chapple, W.T. Meteer, and D.W. Shike. 2018. Effects of feeding high-moisture corn stover to gestating and lactating beef cows as an alternative to hay and corn silage on performance and reproduction. Prof. Anim. Sci. 34:210-217.

Redfearn, D., Parsons, J. Drewnoski, M. E., Schmer, M., Mitchell, R., MacDonald, J. C., Farney, J., Smart, A. 2019. Assessing the Value of Grazed Corn Residue for Crop and Cattle Producers. Agric Environ. Lett. 4:180066.

Shike, D.W., D.B. Faulkner, D.F. Parrett, and W.J. Sexten. 2009. Influences of corn co-products in limit-fed rations on cow performance, lactation, nutrient output, and subsequent reproduction. Prof. Anim. Sci. 25:132-138.

Warner, J.M., K. H. Jenkins, R. J. Rasby, M. K. Luebbe, G. E. Erickson, T. J. Klopfenstein. 2015. The effect of calf age at weaning on cow and calf performance and feed utilization by cow-calf pairs. Prof. Anim. Sci. 31:455-461; doi:10.15232/pas.2015-01393

Watson, A. K., MacDonald, J. C., Erickson, G. E., Kononoff, P. J., Klopfenstein, T. J. 2015. Optimizing the use of fibrous residues in beef and dairy diets. J. Anim. Sci. 2015.93:2616–2625 doi:10.2527/jas2014-8780

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

IL, KS, MO, ND, NE, SD, WY

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions