2013 North Dakota Beef Report 41

Finishing beef cattle on totally mixed and self-fed rationsC. L. Engel1, B.R. Ilse2 and V. L Anderson1

1Carrington Research Extension Center, NDSU 2Big Horn County Extension office, Montana State University

The objective of this study was to evaluate self-fed rations compared with a totally mixed ration fed daily for finishing beef calves. Treatments consisted of two self-fed rations and one totally mixed ration (TMR). Cattle on both self-fed diets had similar average daily gains (≥2.99 pounds/head/day), while cattle on the totally mixed ration had the greatest average daily gain at 3.20 pounds/head/day. Overall, feed efficiencies (feed/gain) were similar among treatments. Carcass traits were similar in all treatment groups. The total cost of gain was slightly higher for the self-fed groups even though the yardage cost was lower than daily bunk feeding. Self-feeding may be a viable option for smaller beef producers who want to finish their own feeder cattle.

SummaryMixed small and medium-frame

Angus steer and heifer calves (n = 207) were used in a three-year winter feeding study to evaluate finishing beef cattle on self-fed (SF) rations as a low-overhead option, compared with totally mixed rations (TMR) bunk fed daily. Animals were blocked by sex and randomly allot-ted to three treatments each year to evaluate performance and econom-ics of self-feeding. The two SF diets were corn and wheat midds (SF-CM) or corn, wheat midds and bar-ley (SF-CMB), with free-choice grass hay offered in large round bale feed-ers. The TMR diet included corn, wheat midds and tub-ground grass hay delivered to the fence-line bunk daily. Feed intake or disappearance during the entire finishing phase was numerically higher (P = 0.13) for the self-fed diets (25.27 and 26.26 pounds per day), compared with the TMR (23.38 pounds per day). Overall average daily gains (ADG)

were similar (P = 0.64) between both SF diets (2.99 and 3.03 pounds per day for SF-CM and SF-CMB diets, respectively). The TMR diet overall ADG of 3.20 pounds per day was greater (P ≤ 0.04) than for both SF diets. All carcass traits were similar (P ≥ 0.20) among dietary treatments, with the exception of dressing percent. The SF-CM diet tended (P = 0.08) to have a lower dressing percent at 61.41 percent, compared with the SF-CMB and TMR diets at 52.15 ± 0.26 percent. Yardage costs were lower for self-fed cattle, but total costs per pound of gain were within 5 percent of TMR cattle. Total costs for SF treatments were 91 and 95 cents per pound of gain, respec-tively, for SF-CM and SF-CMB), compared with TMR cattle (90 cents per pound of gain) due to apparent feed waste and lower gains for SF diets. Hay feeders that reduce waste would improve the economics of self-feeding.

IntroductionMost cow-calf producers

background their heifers for use as replacements in their cow herd. Some cattle producers background

their steer calves on a modest en-ergy diet after weaning. Fewer cattle producers feed calves to a finished market weight. Finishing enterprises usually include high-energy, totally mixed diets fed daily in traditional feedlot facilities. This type of opera-tion requires specialized equipment and daily management.

Producers with small beef herds may be interested in capturing value from their herd but are challenged by the economies of scale. A three-year study evaluating finishing calves with self-feeding as a low-overhead cattle finishing option during the winter was conducted at the NDSU Carrington Research Extension Center.

Experimental ProceduresAngus steer and heifer calves

raised at the NDSU Hettinger Research Extension Center were delivered to the Carrington Re-search Extension Center research feedlot in mid-December in each of three successive years (n = 207; 102 heifers and 105 steers during the three years). The small and medium-frame calves had been weaned and fed a growing ration for 60 days prior to arrival.

Calves were weighed indi-vidually on delivery and randomly allotted within sex groups to one of three treatment groups. The feeding system treatments were 1) bunk-fed corn-based totally mixed ration (TMR) fed to appetite daily, 2) self-fed corn and midds ration with free-choice grass hay (SF-CM) and 3) self-fed corn, midds and barley (SF-CMB)-based ration with free-choice grass hay (Table 1). Corn and barley were dry rolled, and wheat midds were fed as a pellet. Supplements were included in the TMR and self-

42 2013 North Dakota Beef Report

fed grain mixtures at approximately equal amounts and contained the ionophore Rumensin, calcium car-bonate and a high-calcium vitamin-mineral mix for finishing cattle.

The intent was to include higher fiber feed ingredients (wheat midds) to reduce the potential for acidosis in the self-feeder and include anoth-er grain option (barley) to explore mixing grains in the self-feeder. Cattle were adapted to the finishing ration from a lower-energy mixed diet and to the self-feeders during approximately two weeks without any morbidity or mortality.

The 200-bushel capacity com-mercial self-feeders (Werk-Weld Inc., Armour, S.D.) allowed approxi-mately 25 inches of bunk space per head. Grass hay was fed in large, round bale feeders to the self-fed treatments, with chopped grass hay added to the TMR ration. Calves were weighed approximately every 28 days with feed intake, average daily gain (ADG) and feed effi-ciency calculated for each respective weight period (Table 2).

The finished animals were mar-keted at a commercial abattoir (Ty-son Fresh Meats, Dakota City, Neb.) when we estimated that 80 percent or more would grade U.S. Depart-ment of Agriculture Choice. A certi-fied grader evaluated the carcasses for traits used to determine value (Table 3). This project was approved by the NDSU Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Results and DiscussionInitial body weights averaged

793 pounds/head (P = 0.93), with final body weights averaging 1,147 pounds/head (P = 0.88; Table 2). Dry-matter (DM) disappearance (dry-matter intake plus waste) was numerically greater for the self-fed treatments, overall, with an average of 25.27 and 26.26 pounds of daily DM disappearance for the SF-CM and the SF-CMB treatments, com-

Table 1. Diets for steer and heifer calves fed a totally mixed or self-fed rations.

Totally Self-fed Self-fed Mixed Ration Corn-Midds Corn-Midds-Barley (TMR) (SF-CM) (SF-CMB)

Item Percent Dry Matter (DM) Basis

Corn, dry rolled 52.33 40.51 26.81 Wheat midds, pelleted 30.14 40.05 27.32 Barley, dry rolled ---- ---- 26.03 Hay1 15.20 17.13 17.51 Supplement, w/ionophore 2.33 2.32 2.34Diet Nutrient Density Crude Protein, %1 11.38 12.27 11.91 Estimated NEg, Mcal/lb.1 0.51 0.48 0.49Dietary Component DM Disappearance Grain, lb./hd/d 19.74 20.94 19.66 Forage, lb./hd/d 3.54 4.32 6.6

1Hay for self-fed diets was offered free choice in ring feeders; values are not corrected for waste.

Table 2. Feedlot performance of steers and heifers fed totally mixed or self-fed rations.

Treatments Treatment

TMR SF-CM SF-CMB Std Err1 P Value

Live wt. lbs. Initial wt. 790 796 794 11.34 0.93 Period 1 884 879 887 12.32 0.91 Period 2 975 968 975 12.97 0.92 Period 3 1,069 1,045 1,059 12.79 0.43 Final wt. 1,151 1,142 1,147 12.95 0.88Avg. daily gain, lb. Period 1 3.35a 2.97b 3.29ab 0.12 0.07 Period 2 3.27 3.18 3.15 0.12 0.78 Period 3 3.36a 2.77b 3.00b 0.13 0.01 Period 4 3.00 3.37 3.02 0.18 0.26 Overall 3.20a 2.99b 3.03b 0.06 0.03Dry matter intake, lb./hd/d Period 1 20.25a 24.88b 26.48b 0.90 0.01 Period 2 22.83 24.19 24.91 0.97 0.37 Period 3 25.20 25.39 28.19 1.52 0.36 Period 4 23.92 26.03 26.44 1.47 0.48 Overall 23.28 25.27 26.26 0.89 0.13Feed Efficiency, lb. Dry Matter Disappearance/lb. gain Period 1 6.01a 8.40b 8.05b 0.63 0.07 Period 2 6.92 7.62 7.91 0.35 0.20 Period 3 7.97 9.61 9.62 1.32 0.62 Period 4 9.09 8.33 9.33 1.56 0.90 Overall 7.37 8.49 8.66 0.26 0.28

1n = 207. a,bValues within rows with different superscripts are significantly different, P ≤ 0.10.

2013 North Dakota Beef Report 43

pared with 23.28 pounds for the TMR treatment (P =0.13). Overall, the pounds of grain concentrate disappearance was 19.74, 19.66 and 20.94 pounds/head/day for the TMR, SF-CMB and SF-CM diets, respectively. Hay disappearance was 3.54, 6.6 and 4.32 pounds/head/day for the TMR, SF-CMB and SF-CM diets, respectively (Table 1).

Hay waste was not quantified for the SF diets; observationally, minimal to no waste was observed with the TMR diet. Some varia-tion in DM disappearance occurred among feeding systems during specific weight periods (Table 2), but overall, no consistent differences were detected between the two SF systems and the TMR treatments (P = 0.13).

Average daily gain was not dif-ferent throughout the 123-day feed-ing period between the two self-fed diets (P = 0.65). Cattle fed the TMR diet had greater (P = 0.03) overall ADG (3.20 pounds), compared with the SF-CM diet (2.99 pounds) and the SF-CMB diet (3.03 pounds/day). The TMR diet did have a higher cal-culated energy value based on DM disappearance, which could account for some of the improved perfor-mance over the SF diets. However, hay wasted (not quantified) and not consumed may be slightly con-founding to the whole diet energy value calculations (Table 1).

Feed efficiency (pounds of DM disappearance/pounds of gain) does not appear to be different dur-ing the entire finishing phase (P = 0.28) among diets with feed-to-gain ratios of 7.37 for the TMR calves, 8.49 for the SF-CM and 8.66 for the SF-CMB.

However, treatment differences (P ≤ 0.07) for feed efficiency were observed in the first weigh period. This is consistent with greater DM disappearance and lower ADG for the SF diets during this period. These differences may be attributed

to hay waste from the initial hay bales deposited in the ring feeders and cattle continuing to adapt to SF diets in period one of the trial.

Generally, our results are similar to a self-feeding field trial by Kreft et al. (2002), who reported 3.51 pounds ADG for TMR-fed steers, compared with 3.22 pounds for a self-fed ra-tion. Cattle in our study were small-framed and carried some condition at the start of the study each year. Offering high-energy diets in self-feeders to grazing yearling cattle may be another method of finishing cattle during the summer. Morrical et al. (2008) fed a diet containing 50 percent distillers grains, 25 percent soy hulls and 21 percent wheat midds with molasses and calcium carbonate to continuous or rotation-ally grazing cattle. Calves gained 3.16 pounds per day on both grazing programs.

Hot carcass weights were simi-lar (P = 0.20; Table 3) for TMR, SF-CM and SF-CMB diets (707, 686 and 695 pounds, respectively). Carcass traits showed little variation among

treatments (P ≥ 0.20; Table 3), with the exception of dressing percent (P ≤ 0.08). Dressing percent tended to be lower (P ≤ 0.08) for the SF-CM diet at 61.41 percent, compared with 62.23 and 62.07 percent for TMR and SF-CMB diets, respectively.

Rib-eye area and fat thickness were similar for all treatments, averaging 12.26 inches2 (P = 0.59) and 0.62 inch (P = 0.92), respectively. Yield grade was not different due to treatment, averaging 2.91 (P = 0.94). No differences (P = 0.94) were detected in marbling due to treat-ment, with 93.0 percent of carcasses grading choice or better (Table 3). In summer finishing studies compar-ing self-feeding with TMR, Kreft et al. (2002) and Morrical et al. (2008) reported no difference due to the feeding system for carcass traits.

Economic results were calcu-lated based on data reported by the North Dakota Farm Management program (Metzger and Hanson, 2013). A yardage cost of 35 cents per head per day was assessed for the TMR treatment and 15 cents per

Table 3. Carcass traits of steers and heifers fed totally mixed or self-fed rations.

Treatments

TMR SF-CM SF-CMB Std Err1 P Value

Hot carcass wt. lb. 707 686 695 8.01 0.20Dressing percent 62.23a 61.41b 62.07a 0.27 0.08Rib-eye area, sq. in. 12.32 12.15 12.32 0.14 0.59Fat thickness, in. 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.02 0.92KPH fat, % 2.39 2.43 2.42 0.03 0.51Marbling score2 544 539 544 14.51 0.97Yield grade, USDA3 2.94 2.92 2.89 0.09 0.94USDA quality grade, % of carcass grading: Select, % 5.1 6.3 9.5 Choice, % 84.7 84.1 79.3 Prime, % 10.2 9.5 11.1

1n = 207. a,bValues within rows with different superscripts are significantly different, P ≤ 0.10 2Based on scores of 300-399 = USDA Select quality grade, 400-499 = Low Choice; 500-599 = Average Choice; 600-699 = High Choice; 700+ = Prime. 3Yield grade is composite calculation of fat to lean yield in a carcass based on a relationship of hot carcass wt., rib-eye area, fat thickness and KPH; low values = lean carcasses.

44 2013 North Dakota Beef Report

head per day for self-fed cattle (S. Metzger, personal communication). The higher yardage cost of feeding a TMR translates to an increased production cost of $24 per head (120 days x 20 cents difference) versus SF diets.

Yardage charges can vary greatly depending on the economies of scale, equipment costs and other overhead expenses. Each producer is encouraged to determine his or her own real costs of equipment, pen depreciation, labor and feed. Given the yardage costs stated previously and current grain prices ($6.50 corn), the total cost of gain was 90 cents per pound for the TMR cattle, 91

cents per pound for the SF-CM cattle and 95 cents per pound for the SF-CMB cattle. Utilizing home-grown or locally available feeds may lower costs further.

All cattle were of equal value in the market based on similar carcass traits. While finishing cattle using TMR diets offers advantages with precision and efficiency that slightly enhance animal performance, self-feeding appears to have some potential for smaller producers with limited equipment. Self-feeding of-fers an opportunity for modest num-bers of animals to be fed for local or community markets.

AcknowledgmentsThis research was partially

funded by the North Dakota State Board of Agricultural Research and Education grant program. The authors express their appreciation for the technical and administra-tive support of Carrington Research Extension Center staff.

Literature CitedKreft, B., R. Cargo, J. Kreft and D

Schmidt. 2002. Low input cattle finishing. Beef Production Field Day Report. Carrington Research Exten-sion Center, NDSU. Vol. 25:16-17.

Morrical, D., M. Honeyman, J. Russell, D. Strohbehn, D. Maxwell, D. Busby and J. Sellers. 2008. Finishing beef cat-tle on grass with self-fed by-products, 2006 Results. Iowa State University Animal Industry Report. A.S. Leaflet R2277. 3pgs.

Metzger, S., and J. Hanson. 2012. North Dakota Farm Business Management Report. Carrington, N.D.