Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Type in report

The annual meeting of WCC-201 was held in Davis, CA in June. The following are the reports from each station per the stated objectives of the coordinating committee.

Objective 1. To promote dialog and exchange of ideas and information among all relevant North American participants in the development and use of barley and barley-based by-products, including animal scientists, plant genetics/breeders, animal feed industry representatives, livestock and crop extension specialists, animal feeding managers, the National Barley Growers Association, state barley growers associations, US Grains Council, and representatives from the malting and brewing industries.

Planning to coordinate a half-day conference was initiated at this meeting. It was decided that the Pacific Northwest Animal Nutrition Conference audience would be an excellent audience to present current understanding of barley quality factors for feed users. The targeted year to host the barley "mini-symposium" in coordination with the PNWANC was set at 2001. The University of Idaho would be the host of the conference meeting in Boise that year. A slate of barley speakers were proposed to submit to the PNWANC planning committee; WCC-201 committee members would begin coordinating our objective for the barley mini-symposium with members of the 2001 PNWANC planning committee.

In addition to planning the barley mini-symposium the following is a description of an educational program provided by North Dakota State University:

Project 1. North Dakota Feedlot School.

A. Objective

Provide classroom and hands-on instruction in grain processing, beef cattle nutrition, feedlot management, and nutrient planning for existing or new feedlot operators in the Northern Great Plains.

B. Personnel Contributing to the Project

Greg Lardy, Vern Anderson, Karl Hoppe, Kurt Froelich, Steve Metzger, Scott Birchall.

C. Summary

A two day feedlot school was held in Carrington at the Carrington Research and Extension Center. The objective of the school is to provide both a hands on and a classroom based educational experience for feedlot operators, feed industry personnel, veterinarians, and others interested in the feedlot industry. This school is limited to 25 students and each student receives a comprehensive manual detailing items covered in the lectures and workshops. Topics covered include: nutrition, health care, grain processing, management, marketing, beef quality assurance, nutrient and waste management, and ration balancing. Surveys of people attending the school indicate that this type of learning environment is very popular with beef cattle producers in the Northern Plains states (ND, SD, MN, MT). Since barley is a major feed grain in this cattle production region, management of cattle on barley based finishing diets is covered extensively during this workshop.


Objective 2. To educate end users about variation in nutritional or feed quality of barley, including research information that has not been previously summarized and disseminated.

University of Idaho: The following abstracts/papers were presented at the Western Section ASAS meeting in Davis, CA:

Evaluation of barley characteristics that are associated with digestible energy

Sanford, B.J., C.W. Hunt, J.G. Andrae, and G.T Pritchard.

The feed quality of barley is typically measured by bulk density; however, current literature indicates that bulk density does not always accurately reflect the energy value of barley. We hypothesize that chemical compositional factors of barley more accurately reflect digestible energy of barley. Forty beef steers (360 kg average initial BW) were used in completely randomized design to determine the in vivo digestibility of eight barley sources varying by variety, growing location and growing year. The sources were selected from 32 original sources to represent barleys from the entire spectrum of bulk density, starch and fiber content. Steers were assigned to barley source treatments and fed diets containing 78 percent rolled barley plus 22 percent chopped alfalfa hay (DM basis). Digestibility measurements were determined using chromic oxide as an external marker in two experimental periods (10 observations per barley source). Barley starch and ADF content ranged from 53 to 64.1 percent and 4.8 to 10.4 percent, respectively. Bulk density varied from 57 to 70.2 kg/hL. Diet digestibility of DM, OM, GE, NDF and ADF was affected (P < .05) by barley source. Starch digestibility was complete (greater than 99 percent) for all diets indicating the importance of barley starch content. Calculated barley DE content and DM digestibility were positively correlated (P < .05) with starch content (r = .73 and .77, respectively) and negatively correlated (P < .05) with ADF content (r = -.71 and -.76, respectively). Bulk density was not correlated with barley DE or DM digestibility. Starch content was most predictive of barley DE content in the following equation: DE = 1.4862 + .0386 starch. Attempts to improve the DE predictive equation with data transformations and additional variables were not successful. Results of this study indicate a large variability in barley DE content that was predictable by starch and ADF content but not by bulk density.

Barley, Digestible energy, Starch, Fiber

Montana State University. The following are barley-related citations and abstracts presented by MSU scientists during 2000.

Bowman, J.G.P., T. K. Blake, and L.M.M. Surber. 2000. Barley Feed Quality for Ruminants. Proc. 8th International Barley Genetics Symposium, 22-27 October, 2000, Adelaide, South Australia.

Blackhurst, Travis Craig. 2000. Feed Quality of Two Recombinant Inbred Barley Lines, LB6 and LB57, from a Lewis X Baronesse Cross. M.S. Thesis, Montana State University.

Milner, Timothy James. 2000. Influence of Starch Digestion Rate on Feedlot Performance and Site of Starch Digestion in Beef Steers Fed High Concentrate Diets of Corn or Barley. M.S. Thesis, Montana State University.

Blackhurst, T. C., J.G.P. Bowman, L.M.M. Surber, T. K. Daniels, and T. K. Blake. 2000. Improving the feed value of barley for finishing steers. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:30-33.

ABSTRACT: The objectives of this project were to evaluate feedlot performance, nutrient digestion, and carcass characteristics of steers fed two experimental barley lines, LB6 and LB57, developed by crossing Baronesse (2-row, feed type) and Lewis (2-row, feed and malting type). Eighty crossbred steers (avg initial wt 374 kg) were allotted to 16 pens in a randomized complete block design. During the 159-d feeding trial steers consumed an 83% barley diet based on: 1) Baronesse; 2) Lewis; 3) LB6; or 4) LB57. All diets were formulated to contain 13% CP. Steers were weighed, and diet, ort, and fecal samples were collected every 28 d. Acid insoluble ash was used as an internal marker to estimate fecal output. Steers were slaughtered when 70% were visually estimated to grade Choice. Data were analyzed by the GLM procedure of SAS to detect treatment differences with pen as the experimental unit. Planned comparisons were made between LB6 and the mean of Baronesse and Lewis, and between LB57 and the mean of Baronesse and Lewis. No differences (P > 0.10) were found in ADG between barley lines (avg 1.5 kg/d). No differences (P > 0.10) were found between LB57 and the parent varieties in DMI, DM digestibility (DMD), starch digestibility or feed efficiency (kg gain/100 kg feed). Dry matter intake was 4.7% greater (P = 0.004) by steers fed Baronesse and Lewis than by steers fed LB6 (avg 8.9 vs 8.5 kg/d). Feed efficiency was 5.4% higher (P = 0.07) for steers fed LB6, than steers fed parent lines (13.6 vs avg 12.9, respectively). LB6 steers had greater (P = 0.03) in vivo DMD than steers fed the parent lines (74.7 vs avg 73.2%). Steers fed LB6 had lower (P = 0.06) marbling scores (small 40 vs avg small 75) than steers fed parent lines. No other differences (P > 0.10) were found in carcass traits. Results indicate that experimental barley line LB6 had improved feed efficiency and in vivo DMD compared with the parent cultivars, Baronesse and Lewis.

Surber, L.M.M., J.G.P. Bowman, T. K. Blake, D. D. Hinman, D. L. Boss, and T. C. Blackhurst. 2000. Prediction of barley feed quality for beef cattle from laboratory analyses. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:454-457.

ABSTRACT: The objectives of this research were to determine if feedlot performance by cattle fed barley-based diets could be predicted from barley feed quality characteristics as measured by laboratory procedures. Fifty-six observations (each observation was a diet mean in a feedlot study) of animal performance used for these analyses were from 18 feedlot trials conducted in Montana and Idaho, during 1993 through 2000. Dry rolled barley diets fed were based on 21 different barley genotypes, including 14 cultivars and 7 experimental lines. Dry rolled barley samples from each of the diets fed were evaluated for starch, ADF, 3 h in situ DMD (ISDMD), and particle size as measured by dry sieving. Barley NEm and NEg (Mcal/kg) contents were calculated using NRC equations, and in vivo DMI, average BW, and ADG. Correlations and regressions were made using SAS. There was a negative correlation between ISDMD and ADG (r = -0.36, P = 0.007), ISDMD and barley NEm and NEg (r = -0.59, P < 0.001), and ISDMD and gain/feed (r = -0.37, P = 0.007). Barley starch content was positively correlated with NEm and NEg (r = 0.34, P = 0.02), and with gain/feed (r = 0.33, P = 0.02). Barley NEm could be predicted from starch and ISDMD (R2 = 0.42, P < 0.001). ADG could be predicted from NEm, ADF, starch and particle size (R2 = 0.75, P < 0.001). Feed efficiency could be predicted from NEm, starch and ISDMD (R2 = 0.66, P < 0.001). Selection of barley grain for low ISDMD, low ADF, high starch and large particle size could be used to improve feed quality characteristics.

Surber, L.M.M., J.G.P. Bowman, T. K. Blake, V. E. Nettles, A. L. Grindeland, M. T. Stowe, R. L. Endecott, K.N. Robison, B. L. Robinson, and D. R. See. 2000. Determination of genetic markers associated with forage quality of barley for beef cattle. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:295-298.

ABSTRACT: Despite the importance of forage quality to animal performance, barley forage quality has not been used as a selection criterion in barley breeding programs. Our objectives were to evaluate the Steptoe/Morex doubled haploid (DH) population for forage quality, identify Quantitative Trait Loci (QTLs) for forage quality, and determine if there is a genetic basis for nitrate accumulation. The 145 DH lines were grown in a replicated field trial under irrigated conditions in Bozeman, MT. Forage samples were collected at plant anthesis. A 0.15 m clip sample of one row was cut at stubble height and dried at 600C for 48 h. Dry matter forage yield (FY) was determined. Forage samples were ground to pass a 5-mm screen. In situ DM digestibility (ISDMD) at 48 h was determined. A sub-sample of each line was evaluated for NDF, ADF, N, and NO3-N. Data was analyzed using the GLM procedure of SAS. Genetic variation was present between lines for NDF, ADF, ISDMD, N and NO3-N (P < 0.04). Population ISDMD ranged from 68.6 to 84.2% (CV = 3.2%), ADF ranged from 21.3 to 35.1% (CV = 6.3%), N ranged from 2.3 to 4.1% (CV = 9.3%), and NO3-N ranged from 0.22 to 1.1% (CV = 22.2%). Correlation analysis indicated that ISDMD was positively correlated (r = 0.70, P < 0.001) with N and negatively correlated with ADF (r = -0.57, P < 0.001) and NDF (r = -0.69, P < 0.001). Nitrogen was positively correlated (r = 0.52, P < 0.001) with NO3-N and negatively correlated (r = -0.69, P < 0.001) with ADF. Forage ISDMD could be predicted from ADF, NDF and N (R2 = 0.54, P < 0.001). Major QTL markers were identified for all traits. Molecular markers associated with ISDMD, ADF and N were identified on chromosome 2, 4, and 5. Results suggest that genetic differences among Steptoe/Morex DH lines have an impact on forage digestion in the rumen, and this information could be used to select improved forage-quality barley varieties.


North Dakota State University. The following are barley-related activities conducted by NDSU scientists during 2000.

Project 1. Development of Barley Feeding Bulletins.

A. Objective

Develop scientifically based bulletins detailing the latest in barley feeding research and recommendations for beef cattle, dairy, sheep, swine, and poultry.

B. Personnel Contributing to the Project

Greg Lardy, Marc Bauer, Vern Anderson, J.W. Schroeder, Bob Harrold.

C. Summary

Copies of each bulletin are attached.

Project 2. North Dakota Barley Feeders, LLLP, Proposes to Add Value to North Dakota Commodities.

A. Objective

Develop a means by which farmers, ranchers, and others in local communities can invest in the feeding industry in North Dakota. Provide a means to place cattle on feed at local feedlots.

B. Personnel Contributing to the Project

Vern Anderson, Carrington Research Extension Center, and Audie Baca, Butts Feedyard.

C. Summary

Most grain farmers and many cattlemen are aware of the abundance of under-valued feeds in North Dakota from increased acres of crops (corn, wheat, barley, potatoes, sugar beets), grains infected with disease (barley and wheat), increased processing capability for some crops (corn, wheat, barley, potatoes, sugar beets), and new crops grown in sustainable rotations (field peas, hulless oats, and grain sorghum). There are also significant amounts of several different oilseed meals (canola, sunflower, soybean, crambe, linseed, and safflower) from a number of processing plants. In addition, abundant and inexpensive forages from legumes (alfalfa), residues (small grain and corn), and rotation crops are available. The five-year price outlook for grains is not very exciting according to predictions published by FAPRI, an agricultural economics organization at Iowa State University.

North Dakota is known for its progressive beef breeding programs and the high quality feeder cattle produced. Currently, we export a high percentage of our feeder cattle and sell our feed at discounted prices. Substantial research by North Dakota State University (NDSU) at several sites (Carrington, Fargo, Dickinson, Streeter) and commercial experience across the state support the fact that North Dakota feedlots can compete biologically and economically with commercial feedyards in other states. We have the opportunity and the resources to feed more calves from weaning to market weight in North Dakota in spite of past impressions, weather considerations, and other previous limitations.

The North Dakota Barley Council and other agencies are supporting the development of a large-scale investor organization to add value to North Dakota commodities by feeding North Dakota cattle in the state. The North Dakota Barley Feeders, LLLP (NDBF) has been formed, and during the summer of 2000 will be raising investment capital. The operational scenario is to initially feed cattle in existing yards across the state. NDBF will be a customer at commercial yards and work with existing management to insure optimum performance of the animals. Least cost rations will be used irrespective of barley, as the objective is to maximize profit. There are a number of yards that have expressed interest in participating in the NDBF program. These yards will be expected to meet certain criteria for management and nutrition of feedlot cattle. Cattle will be sold using current terminal markets with payment based on carcass quality grids employed when it is advantageous. Risk will be managed for cattle and feed by forward pricing, using options and futures, and taking opportunity if high profit windows occur.

The NDBF has completed its business plan and legal requirements with the assistance of the accounting firm of Eide Bailly and attorney Steve Noack. Using the new limited liability, limited partnership structure, producers and non-producers can invest at their own comfort level. The minimum initial investment is $5,000. By combining the resources of many investors, economies of scale can be achieved and professional results obtained, with limited risk to individuals. Markets cycle up and down, so this organization will provide professional risk management to take maximum advantage of profit windows and limit downside exposure. A major feature of this concept is that there will be no capital investment in facilities and equipment at the outset. With feeding experience and accumulated resources, leasing, purchasing, or constructing a new feedyard may be considered. The investment objective is $2 million which will be leveraged to $6 million with lenders. A number of lenders are interested in servicing this partnership. Return on investment is predicted for the next five years to be between 10 and 30% with cattle cycles and feed prices the primary sources of variation.

This type of an organization is unique and new to North Dakota in that, previously, all livestock enterprises were developed by individuals, families, or formal partners who shouldered substantial individual risk. Investing in the NDBF will give many individuals a knowledge base and real world experience in cattle feeding at minimal risk. With positive results, investors may choose to expand their own cattle feeding operations or develop a new feeding enterprise. Others may increase their investment in existing cattle feeding enterprises.

The NDBF will be operated by a Board of Directors elected from the investor members. Mr. Audie Baca will manage the feeding operations. He has extensive feedlot management experience from yards in Texas, Kansas, and most recently, North Dakota. Members of the interim board include Louis Arnold, Esmond, Chair; Jim Broten, Dazey, General Partner; Stu Richter, New Rockford; Rod Bachmeier, Mandan; and Dr. Vern Anderson, Carrington. Offerings are currently available and can be obtained by contacting Dr. Anderson, 663 Highway 281 North, Carrington, ND 58421, Phone 701.652.2951, email vanderso@ndsuext.nodak.edu.


Objective 3. To identify critical new research issues, including new and/or improved products and processes, for the use of barley as feed and food.

North Dakota State University. The following are results of studies conducted by NDSU scientists during 2000 that pertain to Objective 3.


Project 1. Effects of tempering and a yeast/enzyme mixture on intake, ruminal fermentation, and in situ disappearance in steers fed barley-based finishing diets.

A. Objective

Evaluate two methods of processing (dry-rolled vs. tempered-rolled) and yeast/enzyme mixture (YEM) on intake, ruminal fermentation, and in situ disappearance of barley.

B. Personnel Contributing to the Project

Staff Members: G.P. Lardy, V.L. Anderson, J.S. Caton, and M.L. Bauer.
Graduate Students: A.E. Radunz.

C. Summary

Introduction

The perceived benefits of tempering include reduction of fines and dust, more uniform particle size and a more optimal dietary moisture content. Research in Idaho indicated tempering barley in finishing feedlot diets resulted in an 8% increase in feed intake, 5% increase in average daily gain, and 6% improvement in feed efficiency. Yeast supplementation to high-barley diets was reported to increase feed intake. Yeast‘s proposed action is to increase lactate utilization in the rumen of high-concentrate diets, therefore, decreasing acidosis. Fibrolytic enzymes may provide additional fiber digestion which can become depressed in high-concentrate diets.

Material and Methods

Four ruminal cannulated steers (1465 + 57 lbs initial weight) were used in a 4 x 4 Latin square to evaluate tempering barley and a yeast/enzyme mixture (YEM) on intake, fermentation and in situ digestion of a barley-finishing diet. Two forms of processing (tempered-rolled barley and dry-rolled barley) and YEM (with or without) were compared. The four treatments were: 1) TRB without YEM, 2) TRB with YEM, 3) DRB without YEM, and 4) DRB with YEM. Diets were offered ad libitum twice daily and consisted of 80% barley, 10% corn silage, 5% wheat straw, and 5% supplement. Diets were formulated to contain at least 12% CP, 0.70% Ca, 0.34% P, and 200 mg/kg Monensin. The YEM contained Yea-Sacc 8417 (9 g/d) and Fibrozyme (15 g/d), both marketed by Alltech, Inc., hand-mixed into the diet at each feeding. The experimental periods were 14 days in length which included a 9-day adaptation phase. Daily intake was measured the last 5 days of each period. Starting on day 12, in situ bags containing either DRB or TRB were inserted into the rumen of each steer for 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, and 48 hours. Ruminal fluid samples were collected and pH recorded at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 hours post feeding on day 13. Ruminal evacuations, conducted on day 14, were taken prior to feeding to estimate dry matter and organic matter fill. Ruminal fluid was also taken from all treatments and incubated with DRB, TRB and barley hulls to estimate IVDMD.

Results and Discussion

No difference was observed in DM intake, DM ruminal fill, or mean ruminal pH (P > .20) among the treatments (Table 1). Processing did not affect ammonia level, however with the addition of YEM ammonia was greater (P < .01). For substrate effects, TRB had a greater IVDMD (Table 2) than DRB, and both were much greater than barley hulls (P < .001). YEM tended to decrease IVDMD (P < .09) for ruminal fluid, but processing was not different among treatments. In situ DM disappearance rate (Table 3) was greater (P < .05) for TRB than DRB, 10.7%/hr and 9.2% /hr, respectively, however, no difference was observed in DM disappearance with addition of YEM. An interaction existed between processing and YEM (P < .001) with in situ disappearance rate of ADF. Processing did not affect ADF disappearance rate without YEM; however, ADF disappearance was faster for DRB than TRB with the addition of YEM.

Summary

The objective of this study was to evaluate two methods of processing (dry-rolled vs. tempered-rolled) and yeast/enzyme mixture (YEM) on intake, ruminal fermentation, and in situ disappearance of barley. No difference was observed in DM intake or ruminal pH (P > .20) among the treatments. The addition of YEM increased ruminal ammonia (NH3-N) level (P < .01). In vitro DM disappearance (IVDMD) was different among substrates (P < .001), TRB was greater than DRB and both were much greater than barley hulls. The addition of YEM tended to decrease IVDMD (P < .09) for ruminal fluid but processing was not different among treatments. In situ DM disappearance rate was greater (P < .05) for TRB than DRB. Processing did not affect ADF disappearance rate without YEM; however, ADF disappearance was faster for DRB than TRB with the addition of YEM. Tempering improved DM digestion of barley; however, with the addition of YEM, tempering resulted in slower ADF disappearance.

Conclusion

Tempering may improve dry matter digestion of barley and, with the addition of yeast/enzyme mixture to tempered barley, may slow ADF disappearance.
Table 1. Effect of treatment on intake, fill, and ruminal fluid.
Treatments
Processing YEM
Item TRB DRB - + SEM
DMI, lbs 30.7 30.8 31.4 30.0 1
DM fill, lbs 30.3 27.0 29.7 27.6 1
pH 6.19 6.22 6.24 6.17 .04
NH3-N, mg/dL 14.09 13.72 12.66 15.15 .58


Table 2. Effect of treatment on IVDMD.
Treatments
Processing YEM
Item TRB DRB - + SEM
TRB, % 80.7 80.2 81.1 79.7 .7
DRB, % 77.7 76.9 78.0 76.7 .8
Barley hulls, % 59.5 59.5 60.5 58.5 .7


Table 3. Effect of treatment on in situ disappearance.
Treatments
- YEM + YEM
Item TRB DRB TRB DRB SEM
DM, %/hr 10.6 9.3 10.7 9.1 .2
ADF, %/hr 3.7 3.6 2.0 3.2 .1


Project 2. Malting barley co-products or wheat midds in corn based diets for growing yearling steers.

A. Objective

Compare malting barley co-products or wheat midds in growing diets for feedlot steers when fed in combination with corn.


B. Personnel Contributing to the Project

Vern Anderson and Eric Bock, Carrington Research Extension Center.

C. Summary

Introduction

Wheat and barley are the most common feed grains in the Northern Plains states. Value added processing of these grains is increasing in order to generate more income for grain growers who cooperatively own some of the processing plants. Barley is used to produce malt resulting in a palatable and nutritious co-product called sprouts. Wheat is milled for flour or semolina resulting in an abundant supply of wheat middlings or midds. Both feeds are useful for a wide range of livestock diets. This trial compared these two co-product feeds in growing diets for feedlot steers when fed in combination with corn.

Materials and Methods

Forty-two steer calves were allotted to four pens at the Carrington Research Extension Center Livestock Unit and blocked by weight. Steers were fed either barley malt sprout pellets and corn, or wheat midds and corn, with the rest of the diet consisting of alfalfa hay, corn silage, and an ionophore/mineral supplement. Barley malt sprouts were included at 50, 60, and 80% of the pellet formulation for Periods 1, 2, and 3, respectively, with barley screenings making up the remainder. Diets were balanced to meet the nutrient requirements of the growing steers (NRC, 1996) and had a concentrate to roughage ratio of 61/39. Steers were weighed on consecutive days at the beginning and end of the trial, as well as every 28 days during the trial. Steers were fed a totally mixed diet once per day in a fenceline bunk. Steers were implanted with Ralgro prior to trial.

Table 1. Nutrient content of barley pellets with 50, 60, and 80% malt sprouts and wheat midds.
Item 50% MaltSprouts 60% MaltSprouts 80% MaltSprouts WheatMidds
Dry matter, % 94.84 92.34 92.28 87.38
----------------------- Dry Matter Basis -----------------------
Crude protein, % 19.74 13.20 16.96 16.39
Acid detergent fiber, % 21.96 20.88 20.44 9.80
Neutral detergent fiber, % 52.52 49.58 49.11 35.91
Ash, % 6.46 8.42 6.16 4.41
Calcium, % .19 .21 .15 .10
Phosphorus, % .46 .33 .43 .75






Results and Discussion

Overall, steers fed the two different diets had similar dry matter intake. However, the steers fed wheat midds had an 11% advantage in ADG, as well as 10% better feed efficiency, and a cost of gain that was $0.02 less than the steers fed barley malt sprouts.

In period 3, the steers fed barley malt sprouts most closely matched the performance of the steers fed wheat midds.

Barley malt sprouts and wheat midds are priced similarly at $64 and $60/ton, respectively. They are also comparable in price on a protein basis with barley malt sprouts equivalent to $0.18/lb of protein and wheat midds at $0.195/lb protein. However, on the average, barley malt sprouts are higher in fiber, ash, and calcium, and lower in phosphorus and protein. The higher fiber fraction suggests lower digestibility, which would explain the lower feed efficiency. This, coupled with a slightly higher cost, leads to the increased cost/lb of gain.

Table 2. Performance of steers fed barley pellets with 50, 60, and 80% malt sprouts and wheat midds.
Item Period 1 Period 2
50% Sprouts Wheat Midds 60% Sprouts Wheat Midds
Initial weight, lbs 571.83 567.08 655.65 668.35
DMI, lbs 17.12 17.32 18.84 18.93
ADG, lbs 3.00 3.62 3.41 3.71
Feed/gain, lbs 5.71 4.79 5.52 5.11
Cost/lb gain, $ 0.18 0.14 0.16 0.14
Period 3 Overall
80% Sprouts Wheat Midds Malt Sprouts Wheat Midds
Initial weight, lbs 751.13 772.1 --- ---
DMI, lbs 19.41 19.36 18.57 18.71
ADG, lbs 2.75 2.85 3.09 3.43
Feed/gain, lbs 7.06 6.79 6.02 5.45
Cost/lb gaina 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.15
aCalculated with average feed prices: barley malt sprouts $65/ton, wheat midds $60/ton, corn $2/bushel, Monensin/supplement $280/ton, alfalfa hay $60/ton, and corn silage $20/ton.

Implications

Barley malt sprouts appear to be a palatable, low-cost feedstuff that can be readily utilized in growing diets. Performance and cost of gain were not as attractive as wheat midds, but it is still useful as a cost-effective energy and protein source.

Overall, both diets yielded results that were satisfactory for steers fed a growing diet. More research may be needed in the area of the nutrient content of the barley pellets at various levels of malt sprouts to be able to match this feed component to the nutrient requirement of the animal.


Project 3. A comparison of corn, corn/midds, and barley, as the grain source with potato co-product in finishing steer diets.

A. Objective
Determine the effect of three different grain sources (corn, corn/wheat midds, or barley) in potato waste-based finishing diets on finishing performance of beef steers.
B. Project Personnel

E.J. Bock and V.L. Anderson, Carrington Research Extension Center.

C. Summary

Introduction

The North Dakota potato industry has developed to a point where the disposal of its co-products is a serious problem. The disposal options are landfill, land application, or livestock. Ruminant livestock have the capacity to consume relatively large amounts of potato co-product in a variety of forms and moisture levels. Potato co-products contain substantial amounts of energy in the form of starch, but are low in fiber. Current potato processing methods employ steaming versus alkali peeling which yields a nutritionally different co-product than was available before.

Barley has been an under-utilized energy so

Bowman, J.G.P., T. K. Blake, and L.M.M. Surber. 2000. Barley Feed Quality for Ruminants. Proc. 8th International Barley Genetics Symposium, 22-27 October, 2000, Adelaide, South Australia.

Blackhurst, Travis Craig. 2000. Feed Quality of Two Recombinant Inbred Barley Lines, LB6 and LB57, from a Lewis X Baronesse Cross. M.S. Thesis, Montana State University.

Milner, Timothy James. 2000. Influence of Starch Digestion Rate on Feedlot Performance and Site of Starch Digestion in Beef Steers Fed High Concentrate Diets of Corn or Barley. M.S. Thesis, Montana State University.

Blackhurst, T. C., J.G.P. Bowman, L.M.M. Surber, T. K. Daniels, and T. K. Blake. 2000. Improving the feed value of barley for finishing steers. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:30-33.

Surber, L.M.M., J.G.P. Bowman, T. K. Blake, D. D. Hinman, D. L. Boss, and T. C. Blackhurst. 2000. Prediction of barley feed quality for beef cattle from laboratory analyses. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:454-457.

Surber, L.M.M., J.G.P. Bowman, T. K. Blake, V. E. Nettles, A. L. Grindeland, M. T. Stowe, R. L. Endecott, K.N. Robison, B. L. Robinson, and D. R. See. 2000. Determination of genetic markers associated with forage quality of barley for beef cattle. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 51:295-298.