1. Developing Novel Creep Feed Rations and Implant Strategies To Improve Beef Cattle Performance
Joyce,* J.R.¹, Jeffries, B.H.², Stewart, Jr. R.L.³, Segers, J.R. 4, and Lourenco, J.M. 5
1Laurens County Extension Coordinator, UGA Cooperative Extension, Dublin, GA Wheeler County Extension Coordinator, UGA Cooperative Extension, Alamo, GA 30411
3Extension Specialist, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
4Extension Specialist, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31793
5Graduate Research Assistant, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
The predominant sector of the beef cattle industry in Georgia, and the Southeast, is cow/calf operations. This sector is made up of herds of brood cows that calve annually, and the calves are sold at weaning. Increasing calf weights at weaning has potential to increase profitability for producers. This can be accomplished through creep feeding the calves, however this must be done in an efficient manner.
Additionally, the use of implant technology can increase cattle growth, but it is dependent on the proper nutrition. Implants are small pellets that contain a growth stimulant that is slowly released over a period of time. Therefore, an experiment was conducted to investigate if an exogenous enzyme, xylanase, customarily used in rations of monogastric animals, and implants would be effective when included in a creep feed for nursing beef calves.
The beef herds at two University of Georgia Experiment Stations (Eatonton and Alapaha) were divided into three groups and assigned to one of three treatments. These included no creep (NO), creep feed without the enzyme (CRE-) and creep feed with the enzyme (CRE+).
Calves had access to the rations for approximately 100 days prior to weaning. At the Alapaha location, within each treatment group, half of the claves were implanted with a combination of progesterone and estradiol benzoate, and half were not. This allowed the observation of a creep x implant interaction.
Across locations, average daily gain was statistically similar (P = 0.25) across treatments, however, calves on the CRE+ treatment weaned with higher body weight compared to the NO and CRE- treatments (667, 630, and 632 pounds, respectively). At the Alapaha station, across creep treatments calves receiving implants gained more (P < 0.01) compared to those not receiving implants (2.72 vs 2.31 pounds/day). Additionally, within creep feed treatment, implanted calves gained more than those not receiving an implant.
At an on farm trial in Laurens County, calves were all implanted with a combination of progesterone and estradiol benzoate and creep fed. The weaning weights for the Laurens County trial were compared to historical farm weaning weights.
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Summary
Table 1. Performance of calves during the creep feeding trial at 2 experimental stations over 2 years.
Treatment1
Item
NO FEED
PLAIN FEED
ENZYME FEED
SE2
P-value
Number of animals 44 43 -
Number of pens 6
Initial Age, days
131
136
133
3.14
0.48
Initial BW, kg
182.1
176.9
178.3
4.79
0.67
Final BW, kg
290.1
292.4
298.7
6.01
0.47
ADG from beginning to middle of trial, kg
1.18b
1.24ab
1.32a
0.03
0.02
ADG from middle to end of trial, kg
0.96
1.03
1.06
0.04
0.06
ADG for the whole trial, kg
1.07b
1.14ab
1.19a
a-b Means within a row with different superscripts differ (P≤ 0.05).
1 NO FEED = conventional cow-calf system without supplementation of calves. PLAIN FEED = calves were creep fed. ENZYME FEED = calves were creep fed with an enhanced feed containing xylanase.
2 Standard error of main-effect means.
Table 2. Performance of calves during the creep feeding trial at 2 experimental stations over 2 years.
Treatment1
Item
NO FEED
PLAIN FEED
ENZYME FEED
SE2
P-value
Cow ADG from beginning to middle, kg
0.27
0.35
0.31
0.072
0.67
Cow ADG from middle to end, kg
0.00
-0.14
0.03
0.057
0.09
Cow ADG during whole trial, kg
0.14
0.12
0.17
0.043
0.65
Cow avg BCS at the beginning
5.92
5.70
5.91
0.196
0.54
Cow avg BCS at middle
5.53
5.60
0.213
0.94
Cow avg BCS at the end of the trial
6.33
6.09
6.22
0.249
BCS Change beginning to middle
-0.39
-0.10
0.192
0.32
BCS Change middle to end
0.81
0.49
0.69
0.33
BCS Change during whole trial
0.42
0.39
0.184
0.83
1NO FEED = conventional cow-calf system without supplementation of calves. PLAIN FEED = calves were creep fed. ENZYME FEED = calves were creep fed with an enhanced feed containing xylanase.
2Standard error of main-effect means.
These data suggest that the utilization of xylanase can improve calf gains when included in creep feed. Additionally, these results indicate that the combination of creep feed with xylanase, plus an implant, can increase weaning weights, and can therefore improve profitability for cattle producers.
Across locations, average daily gain was statistically similar (P = 0.25) across treatments, however, calves on the CRE+ treatment weaned with higher body weight compared to the NO and CRE- treatments (667, 630, and 632 pounds, respectively). At the Alapaha station, across creep treatments calves receiving implants gained more (P < 0.01) compared to those not receiving implants (2.72 vs 2.31 pounds per day).
Within creep feed treatment, implanted calves gained more than those not receiving an implant. These data suggest that the utilization of xylanase can improve calf gains when included in creep feed.
Additionally, these results indicate that the combination of creep feed with xylanase, plus an implant, can increase weaning weights, and can therefore improve profitability for cattle producers.
Researcher assisting a producer placing an implant just under the skin of the calf’s ear.