August 27, 2010
US scientists focus on cost-saving benefits of cornstalk residue in feed
In a recent study, University of Illinois researchers have found that that feeding co-products and cornstalk residue in the winter can save ruminant producers up to US$1 per day per cow as compared to feeding hay.
With feed comprising 60% of a producer''s costs, any measures producers take to minimise expenses can make the difference between profit or no profit at the end of the year.
"Most feed costs occur in the winter when cows can''t graze and utilise pasture," said University of Illinois animal scientist Dan Shike. "Typically cow-calf producers feed large round bales because they are easy, but that can be pretty expensive, especially when prices hit record highs like they did in 2008. Feeding harvested and stored feeds is a common practice, but it''s also costly."
As ethanol production increases, so has the availability of corn co-products. Shike said more corn residue such as cornstalks are also being used as an energy source.
"Cornstalk bales are an adequate source of energy, but they are low in protein and need to be supplemented, especially when fed to cows in early and peak lactation," he said.
Researchers conducted two experiments on a herd of Angus and Simmental cows at the Orr Research Center in Baylis, Ill., and discovered many ways producers can save money. The cows calved between January and March and were evaluated from calving until breeding.
The first experiment compared new co-products developed from improved fractionation processes. The study compared free-choice cornstalk residue with 14.3 pounds of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS), free-choice cornstalk residue with 9.7 pounds of corn bran and 4.8 pounds of DDGS, free-choice cornstalk residue with 11.2 pounds of corn bran and 3.3 pounds of high-protein (HP) DDGS (a low-fat distillers grain with 40% or more crude protein content), and free-choice hay.
"We wanted to find the most economical way to feed cows in the winter without sacrificing performance," Shike said. "Our study revealed that producers could save about US$1 a day per cow when feeding a combination of cornstalk residue and co-products as compared to hay."
Feeding methods and delivery systems formed the basis of the second experiment. Researchers compared free-choice cornstalk residue and 14.3 pounds of DDGS, a total mixed ration of 14.1 pounds of ground cornstalk residue and 14.3 pounds of DDGS, a total mixed ration of 9.9 pounds of ground cornstalk residue and 16.5 pounds of HP-DDGS, and free-choice hay.
"Again our goal wasn''t to find performance differences in this study," Shike said. "We fed diets that should achieve similar performance results. In this experiment, we wanted to find the most economical delivery method within various herd sizes ranging from 50-350 cows."
In a 50-cow herd, the least expensive winter feeding strategy is to offer free-choice cornstalk residue and handfeed DDGS, he said. If producers use a tractor to feed DDGS instead of buckets, they are better off to feed free-choice hay. Feeding total mixed rations requires more equipment which in turn increases cost for the producer.
In a 100-cow herd, handfeeding with buckets is not the most practical, but it is the cheapest. With this size of a herd, producers can use a tractor to deliver DDGS to the cattle at a more economical price per day than free-choice hay.
The major savings occurs in a bigger cow herd with more than 200 cows. The total mixed rations at US$2.33 per cow a day become even more comparable to feeding free-choice cornstalk residue and DDGS at US$2.21 per cow a day. In contrast, the free-choice hay is US$3.21 per cow a day.