Home / Livestock / Cattle / Feed / Feeding for profitability

Feeding for profitability

07/29/2011 @ 9:24am

Extension beef specialist Dan Faulkner admits that when he and his colleagues from the University of Illinois and Iowa State University began collecting data from 225 commercial herds in an effort to better understand what factors had the greatest impact on profitability, few would have predicted that one factor would emerge heads above the rest. “About 56% of the variation in profitability was attributable to feed and hay costs,” he says. “It was a huge factor in determining profitability.”

For Faulkner and others who reviewed the survey results, the data was telling. “To me, if feed costs explain over 50% of the variation in profit, it is the one producers should really focus on,” he says.

One beef scientist who took notice of what the Illinois and Iowa survey revealed was Dan Buskirk, department of animal science, Michigan State University (MSU). For him, there was an obvious follow-up question: What was the specific reason for the variations in profitability in relation to feeding costs?

Buskirk then recalled one of his school's livestock educators saying that he had observed a marked difference in how effective specific types of round bale feeders were at controlling waste.

After checking the existing literature, Buskirk discovered very little had been published on the subject in recent years. But one study completed in the 1980s showed that losses of hay due to the way it was fed could reach 20% to 30% of the dry matter fed.

New research needed

With several unique designs for large bale feeders in use (with more than one claiming reduced waste potential), Buskirk was curious to see if those claims would stand up under scientific scrutiny. He was particularly interested in how cattle behaved when they were accessing the different feeders. He believed that a better understanding of the relationship between feeder design and animal behavior could provide an opportunity for more efficient feed use and also enhance animal performance and well-being.

Based on his initial findings and the encouragement of his colleagues, Buskirk formed a research team to evaluate four of the most commonly used round bale feeders: the cone feeder, the ring feeder, the trailer feeder, and the cradle feeder. The team would also monitor the feeding behavior for each feeder design and the relationship between feeding behavior, feeder design, and feed loss.

A group of 160 nonlactating, pregnant beef cows from the MSU herd were used to evaluate the quantity of hay loss and feeding behaviors from different round bale feeders.

These animals were split into eight groups of 20 and assigned by weight and body condition score to one of eight pens with the four feeder designs being evaluated. All feeder types provided approximately 37 cm linear feeder space per animal.

Prior to feeding, the round bales were weighed and sampled. During the study, the hay that fell onto the concrete surrounding the feeder was considered waste and was collected and sampled daily. After seven days, each feeder type was assigned to a different pen for seven more days.

CancelPost Comment
MORE FROM ED HAAG more +

Double-Duty Alfalfa By: 04/08/2014 @ 2:06pm Before running the ripper through that aging alfalfa, Fred Coon puts pencil to paper and does his…

Taming Tropical Invasives By: 03/21/2014 @ 3:35pm Raised on a central Florida orange and cattle ranch, Joe Walter has been battling invasive tropical…

Good stewardship = Great premiums? By: 03/07/2014 @ 3:07pm Melvin Hall makes the final adjustments on the 54-foot single-pass no-till air drill he’s using…

MEDIA CENTERmore +
This container should display a .swf file. If not, you may need to upgrade your Flash player.
Soil Health at Farm Science Review