1. Summer Supplementation: Plant, Animal and Environmental Response ─ A Nebraska Perspective Terry Klopfenstein, Will Griffin, Kelsey Rolfe Animal Science, UNL

2. Gain response to escape protein.

3. Price of DDG and Pasture

9. Effect of Supplemental Dried Distillers Grains on Average Daily Gain

10.  520 lb heifers  5 lb (DM) DDGS daily  Controls 1.0 ADG  Supplemented 2.5 ADG  MP, -145 g/day DDG Supplementation on Sandhills

11.  650 lb heifers  1, 2.1, 3.1 or 4.2 lb daily  Energy control DDG Supplementation on Brome

14. Supplementation Study

15. Objective Determine the effect of supplemental DDGS on performance of steers grazing cool season sub-irrigated meadow Evaluate whether the response is due to supplemental UIP or energy

16. Procedures 2 Experiments: –Gudmundsen Research Lab (Whitman, Ne) Experiment 1: (May 7, 2007 to August 8, 2007) –28 spring born steers (640 ± lb) –DDGS supplement = 0.6% of BW/d (based on initial BW) Experiment 2: (May 21, 2008 to August 20, 2008) –48 spring born steers (618 ± 45 lb) –DDGS supplement = 0.6 or 1.2% of BW/d (initial BW)

17. Procedures Both experiments: –3-d limit fed weights to determine initial BW and ending BW (Limit fed hay = 1.8% of BW) –Stratified by Initial BW and randomly assigned to treatment –Steers were individually penned 6 d/wk at 0700 hr and individually supplemented –Steers were penned until all DDGS was consumed

19. Experiment 1 Item Con DDGS a SEM Initial BW, lb 63864113 Ending BW, lb81883113 Grazing days9292-- Grazing ADG, lb/d1.952.060.07 a Steers supplemented DDGS 0.6% of initial BW.

20. Experiment 2 Item Con Low a High b SEM Trt c L d Q e Initial BW, lb61662361620 0.910.930.67 Ending BW, lb793 z 829 y 851 x 130.02< 0.010.79 Grazing days919191--- --- --- --- Grazing ADG, lb/d1.97 z 2.26 y 2.62 x 0.09< 0.01< 0.010.85 a Steers supplemented DDGS at 0.06% of initial BW. b Steers supplemented DDGS at 1.2% of initial BW. c P-value for protected F test. d Linear P-value. e Quadratic P-value xyz Means with differing superscripts are different.

21. Forage Intake 1996 NRC Model –Nutrient analysis from diet samples Animal Performance: –Average BW –ADG Determine MP Balance

22. NRC Results Item Exp. 1Exp. 2 Inputs Average BW, lb 728 706 ADG, lb/d 1.95 1.97 NE adjusters 100 100 Results Calc. forage intake, lb/d 17.9 20.2 MP balance, g/d - 43 - 22

23. Meta Analysis Grazing 35 treatment means 394 yearling cattle KS & NE Smooth Brome, Bermudagrass, Sandhills range 60-196 hd Pen-fed 348 calves hay, alfalfa, sorghum silage 82-95 d

24. Figure 1. Effect of DDGS supplementation on ADG for growing\cattle supplemented DDGS

25. Effect of DDGS supplementation on intake for cattle fed in pens

26. Pasture studies: Final BW, lb826860885900906903<0.010.08 ADG, lb/d1.471.731.922.062.142.16<0.010.14 Pen studies: Final BW, lb685724755779795803<0.01<0.01 ADG, lb/d1.211.651.992.252.422.49<0.01<0.01 Total intake, lb/d12.713.914.915.716.316.6<0.01<0.01 Forage intake, lb/d12.712.411.911.210.39.10.31<0.01 Forage replacement c, lb/d0.00.30.81.52.43.6------ Forage replaced/DDGS d, lb/lb0.000.200.270.330.400.48------ DDGS supplementation a :0.01.53.04.56.07.5Lin b Quad b Effect of increasing supplemental level of dried distillers grains plus solubles (DDGS) to growing cattle a Supplemented level of DDGS (DM-basis) in lb/hd daily. b Estimation equation linear and quadratic term t-statistic for variable of interest response to DDGS supplementation level. c Forage replacement calculated using forage intake at 0.0 lb/d supplementation and subtracting forage intake value for respective level of supplementation. d The amount of forage replaced per lb of DDGS supplemented.

27. Effect of DDGS supplementation on ADG for growing\cattle supplemented DDGS

28. Objectives Determine the effects of supplementing modified distillers grains with solubles (MDGS) while grazing native range.

29. Design 240 yearling steers (BW = 726 ± 35 lb). Backgrounding: Late fall to April 21 (144 d). Supplemented 5.0 lb/hd/d WCGF. Smooth brome grazing: April 22 to May 11 (21 d).

30. Design Summer grazing: Barta Bros. Ranch. May 12 to September 23 (135 d). 2 Treatment groups: No supplementation (CON). No supplementation (CON). MDGS supplementation at 0.6% BW (SUPP). MDGS supplementation at 0.6% BW (SUPP).

31. Results ItemCONSUPP P value Initial BW, lb 5065040.80 Spring BW, lb 6956930.75 Summer BW, lb 7317360.54 Feedlot entry BW, lb 9141030<0.01 ADG, lb 1.342.16<0.01

32. Results 0.74 lb grass was saved for every 1.0 lb MDGS fed!

33. Results Griffin et al., 2009, Neb. Beef Report

34. Results ADG CON = 1.36 lb ADG SUPP = 2.20 lb

35. Treatments 3 year study 3 trt and 3 reps –Fertilization (FERT) 80 lb/ac 4 AUM/ac –Supplement (SUPP) 5 lb/hd/d DDG 4 AUM/ac –Control (CONT) 69% stocking rate 2.75 AUM/ac CONT FERT

36. 1.47 726724 CONTSUPP 1.5 End BW, lb 1 FERT 726 1049 2.02 968961 Initial BW, lb ADG, lb Item 1 limit fed BW. a,b Means without a common superscript differ (P<0.01). Animal Performance Pasture Performance Treatment a a b a a b 1 160 Days No TRT x Year interaction P = 0.65

38. Effects of Varying N Fertilizer and DDGS Prices on Costs of Gain for Steers Grazing Smooth Bromegrass in Eastern Nebraska