Beef Nutrition (Efficiency) - PDF Free Download

Beef Nutrition (Efficiency) (North West Beef & Sheep Conference 11 th June 2014) (1) Net Feed Efficiency (Stabiliser Cattle Company) (2) Efficiency in beef finishing systems Dr Jimmy Hyslop - SAC Beef Specialist

Efficiency in beef production What is it? Better conversion of feed into meat (FCR) Net Feed Efficiency (RFI) Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Carbon Footprint) Also More calves / 100 cows mated (fertility) Improved animal health (more calves to sell) More output / spent on fixed costs (More profit & lower environmental impact / kg beef) 2

Implications for beef systems - EFFICIENCY IS KEY Waste / Pollution e.g. GHG & NH 3 Inputs Feed Fixed costs Processes Cellular Tissue (rumen) Animal System Outputs Supply for human needs/wants e.g. Beef The way to reduce Global warming in practice is to improve the efficiency of the processes that we use to turn raw inputs into a supply of human needs/wants 3

Efficiency in beef production How do we measure it in an R&D sense? Measure main inputs (feed intake) Quantify beef outputs (LWG, carcass wt etc) Measure CH 4 & N 2 O etc (Carbon Footprint) (More profit & lower environmental impact / kg beef) 4

Net Feed Efficiency (NFE) (Latest results from the Stabiliser project) Dr Jimmy Hyslop - SAC Beef Specialist

Feed efficiency in suckler beef systems Why measure feed efficiency in suckler systems? 60-70 % of feed in whole beef system is associated with the breeding cow herd Variation in feed efficiency between individual animals on same finishing system can be 30-50 / head (major savings can be achieved in both) 6

Feed efficiency in suckler beef systems Why NFE? 60-70 % of feed in whole beef system is associated with the breeding cow herd 60-90 % of nutrient use in complete suckler beef systems is used for maintenance rather than growth So efficiency measure in suckler beef should focus on efficiency of nutrient use for maintenance as well as growth NFE does this FCR does not (DMI/LWG) 7

Net Feed Efficiency what is it? NFE it is a biological measure of feed use efficiency particularly suited to suckler beef systems (also known as RFI) but NFE is one that scales feed intake to:- the size of the animal (metabolic LW) its rate of growth (DLWG) its degree of carcass fatness (fat depth by ultrasound) NFE is a measure of feed efficiency derived NET for any:- given unit of animal size (kg); growth rate (kg/d) or carcass fat levels (mm) 8

Wold Farm NFE project NFE measured in young breeding bulls and finishing steers over an eight week period Three key measurements need to be undertaken very accurately:- Dry matter intake Daily liveweight gain Carcass fat depth 9

Wold Farm NFE project 7 full batches through the system (Breeding bulls) 319 young Stabiliser breeding bulls (10-13 months old) (& 5 + 34 Beef Shorthorns) (Finishing steers) 198 Stabiliser steers (15-19 months old) Results for Batch 6 steers & Batch 7 bulls 10 10

Wold Farm NFE project results Batch 6 NFE results 80 Stabiliser steers 11 11

NFE results Batch (80 Stabiliser steers) NB: @ feed cost of 165/t DM - 12 weeks on Wold farm NFE test Low NFE Mid NFE High NFE Mean LW (kg) 585 594 585 DLWG (kg/d) 1.82 1.87 1.80 Fat depth (mm) 6.8 7.2 6.8 DMI (kg/d) 12.1 13.2 13.7 FCR (DMI:LWG) 6.7 7.1 7.7 NFE (kg/d) -0.79-0.04 +0.83 Cost deviation from average - 15 0 + 7 12 12

NFE results Batch (80 Stabiliser steers) - slaughter Low NFE Mid NFE High NFE Sale LW (kg) 642 650 639 CCW (kg) 341.8 344.8 341.8 KO (g/kg) 533 531 535 Fat score (1-15) 8.58 8.97 8.39 Conf score (1-15) 8.00 7.77 7.89 MusD (mm) 73 72 72 EMA (cm 2 ) 82 82 81 IMF (%) 4.7 5.0 5.3 13 13

NFE & MEQ (2 batches of steers ) Does selecting for NFE impair MEQ? No evidence of NFE vales having any influence on MEQ 14 14

Wold Farm NFE project results Key findings for Batch 6 steers:- For same size animals, same DLWG, same fat depth:- low NFE beef cattle eat 12 % less feed had 13 % better FCR cost 22 less to feed over a 12 week period compared to high NFE beef cattle No apparent effect on MEQ 15 15

Wold Farm NFE project results Batch 7 NFE results 78 Stabiliser bulls 16 16

NFE results 7 th batch of bulls NB: @ feed cost of 165/t DM - 12 weeks on Wold farm NFE test Low NFE Mid NFE High NFE Mean LW (kg) 480 474 500 DLWG (kg/d) 1.54 1.64 1.63 Fat depth (mm) 5.0 4.6 5.0 DMI (kg/d) 9.4 10.1 11.1 FCR (DMI:LWG) 6.2 6.3 7.0 NFE (kg/d) -0.68 0.02 +0.66 Cost deviation from average - 10 0 + 14 17 17

Wold Farm NFE project results Key findings for Batch 7 bulls:- For same size animals, same DLWG, same fat depth:- low NFE beef cattle eat 17 % less feed had 13 % better FCR cost 24 less to feed over a 12 week period compared to high NFE beef cattle 18 18

NFE (kg/d) Wold Farm NFE project results Steers vs Bulls 2.00 1.50 1.00 Net Feed Efficiency (82 Stabiliser Bulls) Low NFE Mid NFE High NFE NB: @ feed cost of 155/t DM - 12 weeks on Wold farm NFE test 0.50 0.00-0.50-1.00-1.50-2.00 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 Bull Steers Bulls Mean LW (kg) 578 591 DLWG (kg/d) 1.47 1.84 Fat depth 7.4 5.2 DMI (kg/d) 12.81 12.80 FCR (DMI:LWG) 8.8 7.1 Cost difference p/kg LWG 135 108 (20 % less for bulls) 19 19

NFE & MEQ (earlier work) Selecting for low NFE does not appear to impair MEQ Interestingly bulls are no worse than steers for slice shear force (beef tenderness) Steers 160.1 N Bulls 139.5 N (16-18 months of age) (13-15 months of age) 20 20

Acknowledgements Project Partners In-kind support from Morrisons & Eblex Funding was provided by the Technology Strategy Board 21 21

Technical efficiency in finishing systems some basics 23 23

Live Weight Gain (kg/day) Pattern of live weight gain in intensively finished beef 2.20 2.00 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 Weaning Weaning Housing 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 Live Weight (kg) Holstein Bulls Suckled calves 24

Feed Intake (kg/day) Pattern of DMI in intensively finished beef 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 Live Weight (kg) Holstein Bulls Suckled calves 25

FCR (kg feed/ kg gain) Pattern of FCR in Barley Beef animals 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 Live Weight (kg) Holstein Suckled calves 26

Typical finishing systems Feed conversion ratio & costs Time to finish (months) 12 18 24 30 FCR 5-7 12 16 20 (kg LWG/kg DMI) Feed costs High Med Low Low (per tonne) Feed costs Low/ Med Med High (over lifetime) Med Fixed costs Low Med Med High (over lifetime) 27 27

Efficiency Barley beef LWG basis Breed AAx LIMx s.e.d Sig DMI (kg/d) 12.20 11.29 0.270 ** Slaughter LW (kg) 675 649 8.45 ** LWG (kg/d) 1.93 1.80 0.072 FCR 6.37 6.46 0.207 (kg DMI/kg LWG) 28 28

Efficiency Barley beef - Carcass gain basis Breed AAx LIMx s.e.d Sig DMI (kg/d) 12.20 11.29 0.270 ** CCW (kg) 367.2 362.3 4.88 CCWG (kg/d) 1.08 1.13 0.0502 FCR 11.6 10.3 0.550 * (kg DMI/kg CCWG) KO (g/kg) 544 559 3.66 *** 29 29

Efficiency Forage type diets 2012 2013 Conc Forage Conc Forage DMI (kg/d) 11.5 10.6 11.0 12.0 Slaughter LW (kg) 639 615 680 694 LWG (kg/d) 1.66 1.55 1.40 1.54 FCR 6.93 6.84 7.86 7.79 (kg DMI/kg LWG) Quality of forage is key 30 30

Finishing systems improving efficiency Practical issues Intensive/housed Practical issues - Grass finishing Build concentrates up gradually Make sure its ad lib (i.e. really 24 hrs) Don t over process barley (acidosis) ad lib fibre source (straw best -??) Use yeast, sodium bicarb etc if needed Keep troughs etc clean & feed palatable Get mineral inclusion right Manage grass heights 6-8 cm early season, 8-10 cm late season integrate grazing & silage to get right stocking rate use fertiliser, optimise turnout date, re-seed fields Worm cattle if needed (& fluke) Identify cattle that won t finish off grass Use concs @ grass (save housing costs) 31 31

What finishing system? - FIXED COSTS (2nd BSP payment not there any more) Keeping cattle indoors for 2 winters or more is a costly option Fixed costs = labour, machinery, buildings, capital, other Winter Winter System Spr Sum Aut Win Spr Sum Aut Win Spr Sum Suckler Suckling ad lib conc 12 mths Dairy Milk ad lib conc Suckler Suckling For:conc Grazing:conc 18 mths Dairy Milk Grazing For:conc Grazing:conc Suckler Suckling Forage Grazing For:conc 24 mths Dairy Milk Grazing Forage Grazing For:conc Suckler Suckling Forage Grazing Forage Grazing 30 mths Dairy Milk Grazing Forage Grazing Forage Grazing 32 32

Make fixed costs work harder & produce more Finishing unit (Feed lot) 24 months system (2 winters) Output = 100 finished cattle 100 stores @ 4 m 2 each = 400 m 2 100 finishers @ 6 m 2 each = 600 m 2 1000 m 2 13-15 months system (1 winter) Output = 167 finished cattle 167 finishers @ 6 m 2 each = 1000 m 2 Same, building, labour, machinery & land costs (i.e. reduced fixed costs/head) BSP not there anymore (finish cattle sooner) 33 33

Body condition sco Herd Fertility - 5 key principles Spring calv ers 3.2 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.5 At calving At service At housing At turnout S pring S um m er Autum n S pring Management of cow condition Bulls - soundness, fertility and calving ease Avoiding difficult calvings Heifers - hit target bulling weight Herd health - keep out disease 34 34

Improving efficiency in beef production Strategies to improve efficiency in livestock (beef) systems Choose to finish weaned animals using efficient, short duration finishing systems Minimise animal productivity losses due to adverse animal health problems Adopt measures to ensure high fertility rates in the breeding herds/flocks Manage cow (ewe) BCS to minimise use of winter feed Calve heifers for the 1 st time at 2 rather than 3 years of age Use creep feed to minimise performance checks at weaning Ration animals according to feed quality and animal requirements 35 35

Key messages We re not farming direct subsidies any more Seek cost efficiencies (i.e. unit costs of production) both variable (feed) & fixed Improve your output (from existing fixed costs) Decide what you (your farm) does best Match your beef production system & market outlet 36 36

Efficiency will always be important Dr Jimmy Hyslop, Beef Specialist 37

38 38