rick kohn department of animal and avian sciences
DESCRIPTION
Feed Management to Reduce N and P Losses to the Environment. Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences. Overview. The role of animal feeding on reducing N and P losses to the environment Use of milk urea nitrogen to track improvements in protein nutrition - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Rick KohnRick KohnDepartment of AnimalDepartment of Animal
and Avian Sciencesand Avian Sciences
Feed Management to Reduce Feed Management to Reduce N and P Losses to the EnvironmentN and P Losses to the Environment
![Page 2: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
OverviewOverview
The role of animal feeding on The role of animal feeding on reducing N and P losses to the reducing N and P losses to the environmentenvironment
Use of milk urea nitrogen to track Use of milk urea nitrogen to track improvements in protein nutritionimprovements in protein nutrition
Incentive programs to improve Incentive programs to improve feedingfeeding
![Page 3: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
A simple farm modelA simple farm model
InputsInputs MilkMilkMeatMeat
LossesLosses
![Page 4: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
N loss = N inputs – N in productsN loss = N inputs – N in products
N loss = LossN loss = Lossairair + Loss + Losswaterwater + N + N22
Recommendation: Decrease total reactive N losses from farms.
![Page 5: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
N CyclingN Cycling
FeedHerdSoil
Forage NUptake N = 11 T/yrGrain P= 11 T/yr Milk N = 5.0 T/yrMeat N = .5 T/yrIntake
Manure N = 16.5 T/yrN unaccounted for = 13.75 T/yrLegume N = 5.5 T/yrFertilizer N = 2.75 T/yr
NN
![Page 6: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Typical EfficienciesTypical Efficiencies
S u b - s y s t e m e f f i c i e n c y L o w H i g h
Animal Product N / Feed N .16 .24
Feed N / Soil Available N .50 .75
Soil Available N / Manure N .25 .50
Kohn, et al., 1997. J. Environmental ManagementKohn, et al., 1997. J. Environmental Management
![Page 7: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
N Losses per ProductN Losses per Product
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Nitrogen Loss per Product N (kg/kg)
Level of Management
LowEfficiency
ImproveHerd
Feeding
ImproveCrop
Uptake
ImproveManure
Availability
HighEfficiency
Kohn, et al., 1997. J. Environmental ManagementKohn, et al., 1997. J. Environmental Management
![Page 8: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Milk Urea NitrogenMilk Urea Nitrogen
![Page 9: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Nitrogen MetabolismNitrogen Metabolism
Kohn, et al., 1997. MD Nutrition ConferenceKohn, et al., 1997. MD Nutrition Conference
![Page 10: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Urine N vs. MUNUrine N vs. MUN
y = 12.54x
R2 = 0.72
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Milk Urea Nitrogen (mg/dl)
Urine N Excretion (g/d)
Jonker, et al., 1998. J. Dairy ScienceJonker, et al., 1998. J. Dairy Science
![Page 11: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Target vs. Observed MUNTarget vs. Observed MUN
02468
101214161820
0 100 200 300DIM
MUN (mg/dl)
ObservedTarget
Jonker, et al., 1999. J. Dairy ScienceJonker, et al., 1999. J. Dairy Science
![Page 12: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Target MUNTarget MUNMUN Target Concentrations for
Holstein Herds
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
15,000 17,000 20,000 22,500 25,000
Rolling Herd Avg (lb/cow/yr)
MUN (mg/dl)
Kohn et al., 2002. J. Dairy ScienceKohn et al., 2002. J. Dairy Science
![Page 13: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Lab DifferencesLab Differences
NIRS is not as repeatable as wet NIRS is not as repeatable as wet chemistrychemistry
After Sep. 17, 1998 MUN analyses were After Sep. 17, 1998 MUN analyses were reduced about 4 units.reduced about 4 units.
![Page 14: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Check ListCheck List
✓ Milk ProductionMilk Production✓ Feed intakeFeed intake✓ Diet FormulationDiet Formulation✓ Feed AnalysisFeed Analysis✓ Feed DigestibilityFeed Digestibility✓ Feeding ManagementFeeding Management✓ Feeding BehaviorFeeding Behavior
![Page 15: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Typical ResultsTypical Results
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
440
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
600
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
MUN NI
BestBest
![Page 16: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Study on feeding in Study on feeding in Chesapeake Bay WatershedChesapeake Bay Watershed
Surveyed and sampled 450 farms in regionSurveyed and sampled 450 farms in region Used milk analysis and survey results to Used milk analysis and survey results to
predict N intake, N in urine, N in feces, and predict N intake, N in urine, N in feces, and N utilization efficiency.N utilization efficiency.
Jonker, et al., 2002, J. Dairy ScienceJonker, et al., 2002, J. Dairy Science
![Page 17: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Effect of milk per cow on N Effect of milk per cow on N utilization efficiencyutilization efficiency
15
20
25
30
35
40
15 20 25 30 35 40
Efficiency of Feed N Utilization (g N in milk and meat per 100 g N in feed)
4% Fat Corrected Milk (kg/d)
Jonker, et al., 2002, J. Jonker, et al., 2002, J. Dairy ScienceDairy Science
![Page 18: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Effect of intake N on Effect of intake N on N utilization efficiencyN utilization efficiency
15
20
25
30
35
40
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200
Efficiency of Feed N Utilization (g N in milk and meat per 100 g N in feed)
N intake – N required (g/d)
Jonker, et al., 2002, Jonker, et al., 2002, J. Dairy ScienceJ. Dairy Science
![Page 19: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Cost of Overfeeding ProteinCost of Overfeeding Protein
Farms feeding above N requirements 70.1%
Added feed cost per overfed cow $32.94
Total cost of N overfeeding in
Chesapeake Bay Watershed ($106)$17.86
Jonker, et al., 2002. J. Dairy Sci.Jonker, et al., 2002. J. Dairy Sci.
![Page 20: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Environmental Cost of Environmental Cost of Overfeeding ProteinOverfeeding Protein
Excess N excreted per overfed cow
(kg/yr/cow)18.6
Excess N in watershed from overfeeding
(106 kg/yr)10.1
N loss to water from overfeeding N
(106 kg/yr)7.6
Jonker, et al., 2002. J. Dairy Sci.Jonker, et al., 2002. J. Dairy Sci.
![Page 21: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Phosphorus BalancePhosphorus Balance
FeedHerdSoil
Forage PUptake = 1.2 T/yrGrain P= 1.4 T/yrMineral P = .7 T/yrMilk P = 1.0 T/yrMeat P = .1 T/yrIntake
Manure P = 2.2 T/yrP Accumulation = 1.0 T/yr
![Page 22: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
How Does P Excretion How Does P Excretion Change with Diet P Level?Change with Diet P Level?
01020304050607080
lbs P in Feces
0.4 0.45 0.6
Dietary P, % of DM
![Page 23: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Survey Results for 450 farms Survey Results for 450 farms in MD, VA, PA, WV & DEin MD, VA, PA, WV & DE
0
20
40
60
80
100
0.31 0.38 0.45
% of Farms
Positive P Balance
Negative P Balance
Dietary P Dietary P
P BalanceP Balance
Dietary P Dietary P
P BalanceP Balance
Dietary P, % of DM
![Page 24: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Fecal P IndicatorFecal P Indicator
Dou, et al., 2002Dou, et al., 2002J. Environ. Qual.J. Environ. Qual.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7
Total P
Soluble P
Diet P (g/kg)
Research Trials
![Page 25: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Feces vs. DietFeces vs. Diet
y = 1.8875x + 1.0323
R
2
= 0.4292
y = 1.0047x - 0.1853
R
2
= 0.3386
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
2.50 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50
P in diets (g kg
-1
DM)
P in feces (g kg
-1
DM)
TP in acid digest
Pt in water extract
Dou et al., 2003. J. Dairy Sci.Dou et al., 2003. J. Dairy Sci.
![Page 26: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Measured vs. FormulatedMeasured vs. Formulated
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
P in formulated rations (g kg-1 DM)
P in feed samples (g kg
-1 DM)
Dou et al., 2003. J. Dairy Sci.Dou et al., 2003. J. Dairy Sci.
![Page 27: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
US Dried Distillers Grain US Dried Distillers Grain (Gg/yr)(Gg/yr)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
![Page 28: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Composition Composition (% of DM)(% of DM)
FeedFeed NELNEL CPCP PP
CornCorn 1.901.90 9.49.4 0.300.30
Soybean MealSoybean Meal 2.092.09 53.853.8 0.700.70
Distillers GrainDistillers Grain 1.871.87 29.729.7 0.830.83
Required Required (45kg/d FCM)(45kg/d FCM) 1.551.55 16.316.3 0.380.38
National Research Council, 2001National Research Council, 2001
![Page 29: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Price HistoryPrice History
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004
DDGCornSBM (48%)
$/ton USDA National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2005$/ton USDA National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2005
![Page 30: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Feeding ProjectionsFeeding Projections
More ethanol productionMore ethanol production– Higher corn pricesHigher corn prices– Lower distillers grain pricesLower distillers grain prices– Lower soybean meal pricesLower soybean meal prices
More use of distillersMore use of distillersMore overfeeding of CP and PMore overfeeding of CP and P
![Page 31: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Chesapeake Bay ProgramChesapeake Bay ProgramDairy: Through feed management, achieve 20% reduction in manure nutrients in one-half the cows by 2015.
2.1 million lb/yr less N2.1 million lb/yr less N
0.27 million lb/yr less P0.27 million lb/yr less P
![Page 32: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
What reduces N & P ?What reduces N & P ?
Formulating closer to requirementsFormulating closer to requirementsReducing N with amino acidsReducing N with amino acidsSubstitution of low-P feeds Substitution of low-P feeds Improved digestibilityImproved digestibilityOtherOther
![Page 33: Rick Kohn Department of Animal and Avian Sciences](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/568140e2550346895dacae81/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
NRCS-funded ProgramNRCS-funded Program
Upgrade milk processor labs to enable Upgrade milk processor labs to enable routine, accurate analysis of MUNroutine, accurate analysis of MUN
Quality control of MUN analysesQuality control of MUN analysesEducation to nutritionists and farmersEducation to nutritionists and farmersProvide one-time incentive payments Provide one-time incentive payments
to farmers maintaining low MUNto farmers maintaining low MUN