Literature DB >> 22585790

Effects of corn processing method and dietary inclusion of wet distillers grains with solubles on energy metabolism, carbon-nitrogen balance, and methane emissions of cattle.

K E Hales1, N A Cole, J C MacDonald.   

Abstract

The growing ethanol industry in the Southern Great Plains has increased the use of wet distillers grains with solubles (WDGS) in beef cattle (Bos taurus) finishing diets. Few studies have used steam-flaked corn (Zea mays L.; SFC)-based diets to evaluate the effects of WDGS in finishing cattle diets, and a reliable estimate of the net energy value of WDGS has yet to be determined. Effects of corn processing method and WDGS on energy metabolism, C and N balance, and enteric methane (CH(4)) production were evaluated in a short-term study using 8 Jersey steers and respiration calorimetry chambers. A 2 by 2 factorial arrangement of treatments was used in a Latin square design. The 4 treatment combinations consisted of: i) SFC-based diet with 0% WDGS (SFC-0); ii) SFC-based diet with 30% WDGS (SFC-30); iii) dry-rolled corn (DRC)-based diet with 0% WDGS (DRC-0); and iv) DRC-based diet with 30% WDGS (DRC-30). Diets were balanced for degradable intake protein (DIP) and ether extract (EE) by the addition of cottonseed (Gossypium hirsutum L.) meal and yellow grease. As a proportion of GE, grain processing method did not affect (P ≥ 0.12) fecal, digestible, urinary, and ME, or heat production. Steers consuming SFC-based diets produced less (P < 0.04) CH(4) than steers consuming DRC-based diets. Retained energy tended to be greater (P = 0.09) for cattle consuming SFC- than DRC-based diets. Inclusion of WDGS did not affect (P ≥ 0.17) fecal, digestible, urinary, metabolizable, and retained energy, or heat production as a proportion of GE. Furthermore, neither inclusion of WDGS or grain processing method affected (P ≥ 0.17) daily CO(2) production. Due in part to greater N intake, cattle consuming diets containing 30% WDGS excreted more (P = 0.01) total N and excreted a greater (P < 0.01) quantity of N in the urine. From these results, we conclude that cattle consuming SFC-based diets produce less CH(4) and retain more energy than cattle fed DRC-based diets; however, dietary inclusion of WDGS at 30% seems to have little effect on CH(4) production and energy metabolism when diets are balanced for DIP and EE. Cattle excrete a greater amount of C when fed DRC compared with SFC-based diets, and dietary inclusion of 30% WDGS increases urinary N excretion. Finally, we determined the NE(g) values for WDGS were 1.66 and 1.65 Mcal/kg in a SFC or DRC-based diet, respectively, when WDGS replaced 30% of our control (SFC-0 and DRC-0) diets.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22585790     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-4441

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  12 in total

1.  Finishing performance and diet digestibility for feedlot steers fed corn distillers grains plus solubles and distillers solubles with and without oil extraction.

Authors:  M L Jolly-Breithaupt; B L Nuttelman; C J Schneider; D B Burken; J L Gramkow; A L Shreck; J C MacDonald; T J Klopfenstein; G E Erickson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Effects of active dry yeast on ruminal pH characteristics and energy partitioning of finishing steers under thermoneutral or heat-stressed environment.

Authors:  Whitney Lynn Crossland; Aaron Bradley Norris; Luis Orlindo Tedeschi; Todd Ryan Callaway
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Effects of wet corn distiller's grains with solubles and nonprotein nitrogen on feeding efficiency, growth performance, carcass characteristics, and nutrient losses of yearling steers12.

Authors:  Christian H Ponce; N Andy Cole; Jason Sawyer; Julio C B da Silva; Douglas R Smith; Casey Maxwell; Mike S Brown
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Effects of supplemental fat concentration on feeding logistics, animal performance, and nutrient losses of heifers fed finishing diets based on steam-flaked corn and sorghum-based distiller's grains.

Authors:  Julio C B da Silva; N Andy Cole; Christian H Ponce; Doug R Smith; L Wayne Greene; Greta Schuster; Mike S Brown
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Effects of corn processing and cattle size on total tract digestion and energy and nitrogen balance.

Authors:  Emily A Petzel; Subash Acharya; Joshua M Zeltwanger; Eric A Bailey; Derek W Brake
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Energy costs of feeding excess protein from corn-based by-products to finishing cattle.

Authors:  Jenny S Jennings; Beverly E Meyer; Pablo J Guiroy; N Andy Cole
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  The effects of the forage-to-concentrate ratio on the conversion of digestible energy to metabolizable energy in growing beef steers.

Authors:  Amanda L Fuller; Tryon A Wickersham; Jason E Sawyer; Harvey C Freetly; Tami M Brown-Brandl; Kristin E Hales
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Traditional vs modern: role of breed type in determining enteric methane emissions from cattle grazing as part of contrasting grassland-based systems.

Authors:  Mariecia D Fraser; Hannah R Fleming; Jon M Moorby
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The Type of Forage Substrate Preparation Included as Substrate in a RUSITEC System Affects the Ruminal Microbiota and Fermentation Characteristics.

Authors:  Andrea C Duarte; Devin B Holman; Trevor W Alexander; Zoey Durmic; Philip E Vercoe; Alexandre V Chaves
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 5.640

10.  Development of a model to predict dietary metabolizable energy from digestible energy in beef cattle.

Authors:  Seongwon Seo; Kyewon Kang; Seoyoung Jeon; Mingyung Lee; Sinyong Jeong; Luis Tedeschi
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 3.338

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.