lallemand ruminant center of excellence texas a&m university … · 2019. 2. 15. · texas...
TRANSCRIPT
Lallemand Ruminant Center of Excellence
Texas A&M University
Beef Nutrition: Inside and Out
Amarillo and Canyon, Texas
Gordon Carstens
Department of Animal Science
Texas A&M University
Headquarters
Data-
acquisition
computer
GrowSafe
feed-intake
facility
Feed storage
and mixing
facility
McGregor
AgriLife
Research
Center
Lallemand
Nutrition
GrowSafe
facility
4 pens (23 x 76 ft)
3 GrowSafe bunks
per pen
Total capacity
(96 head)
4 pens (76 x 92 ft)
4 GrowSafe bunks
per pen
Total capacity
(128 head)
McGregor
AgriLife
Research
Center
5 Wireless communication
5
4 Weight and reader panel
4
3 RFID tag
3
2
2 Antennae
1 Load cells
1
GrowSafe SystemIndividual-animal DMI and
feeding behavior patterns
King Ranch Study
(120 steers) Repeatability P-value
ADG 0.23 0.01
F:G ratio 0.03 0.74
DM intake 0.58 0.001
Residual feed
intake0.42 0.001
Bunk-visit frequency 0.75 0.001
Meal frequency 0.77 0.001
Bunk-visit duration 0.82 0.001
Meal duration 0.79 0.001
28-day receiving phase compared with subsequent 70-day growing phase
Paddock et al. (2007)
Feeding Behavior Traits Highly repeatable
Feeding behavioral traits:
Changes in intake must be
mediated through changes
in feeding behavior
Feeding behavior can have
a direct impact on rumen
health and productivity
Moderately heritable in beef
cattle (Nkrumah et al., 2007;
Durunna et al., 2011)
Moderately correlated with
RFI and DMI (Lancaster et al.,
2009; Kelly et al., 2010)
Highly repeatable
Feeding behavior traits:
o Daily head-down duration
o Daily frequency and duration of bunk visit (BV) events
o Meal criterion: Longest non-feeding interval considered
to be part of a meal; Used to quantify frequency and
duration of meal events
o Daily frequency and duration of meal events
o Average length (min) and size (lb) of meal events
o Meal eating rate: DM intake per meal duration per day
o Time to bunk: Time from feed-truck delivery to 1st
recorded BV event each day
GrowSafe System Feeding behavior traits
2-min1-min1-min
1-min 1-min
2-min 1-min
15-min 4-min
Meal #1 = 6 min Meal #2 = 7 min
Feeding Behavior Patterns Associations with RFI
Steers (N = 502)
Low
RFI
High
RFI
Low vs
High RFI
RFI, lb/day -2.0a 1.9b --
ADG, lb/day 3.78 3.74 Not different
DM intake, lb/d 20.2a 24.2b -16%
F:G 5.35a 6.45b -17%
Parsons et el. (2018)
Bunk-visit (BV) based traits:
BV frequency, #/d 45a 53b -15%
BV duration, min/d 56a 72b -22%
Head-down, min/d 37a 55b -33%
Time to bunk, min 96a 86b +12%
Meal-based traits:
Meal frequency, #/d 5.8 6.1 Not different
Meal duration, min/d 116a 133b -13%
BV events per meal 8.3a 9.4b -12%
Low vs high RFI based on ± 0.5 SD from mean RFI.
Feeding Behavior Patterns Associations with RFI
18.1
21.4
17.1
2.5
16.0
18.7
13.1
2.3
0 5 10 15 20 25
BV frequency SD, #/d
BV duration SD, min/d
HD duration SD, min/d
DM Intake SD, kg/d
Day-to-day variation (SD)
Low RFI
High RFI
Day-to-day variances of DM intake and feeding
behavior traits for steers with divergent RFI (*P < 0.05)
*
*
*
*
Parsons et el. (2018); Proc. Herbivore Nutrition Conf.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 70
Day on trial
Feeding Behavior Patterns Associations with RFI
Day-to-Day variation for head-down duration for
steers with divergent RFI
o To evaluate the effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii I-
1079 (ProTernative®) on growth efficiency, and feeding behavior
in newly-weaned beef heifers
o Crossbred beef heifers (N = 72; Initial BW = 445 lb)
o At weaning:
Vaccinated for viral and bacterial pathogens (days 0 and 28)
Shipped 500 miles and returned to the research center
o Treatments (n = 36):
Control heifers fed receiving diet without live yeast
Treatment heifers fed same diet with Saccharomyces
cerevisiae boulardii I-1079 @ 10 billion CFU per head daily
(ProTernative®)
Heifers placed in pens (2 pens/treatment) equipped with
GrowSafeTM feed bunks for a 56-d trial
Research Objective Experimental design
o First 14 d of study (n = 17):
Sensors (iButton™) placed intra-
vaginally (CIDR) to record
temperature
Accelerometer devices (HOBO™)
attached to hind legs to record
physical activity
o Health status assessed twice daily:
Heifers pulled if clinical scores >
5, and antimicrobial therapy
administered if RT > 104º F
o Feed intake and feeding behavior
(bunk visit frequency and duration)
measured daily
Materials and Methods Experimental procedures
o Heifers removed from the trial:
3 for failure to eat from GrowSafe bunks
2 for lameness
o BRD cases (10%; days 21 to 28):
4 control heifers
3 ProTernative heifers
All responded to 1st antimicrobial therapy
o BRD clinical symptoms (27%):
8 control heifers (mean morbidity score 3.25)
10 ProTernative heifers (mean morbidity
score 3.20)
ProTernative® Effects Health status
Item Control ProTernative® SE P-Value
Performance traits
Initial BW, lb 442 449 10 0.64
BW (56 d), lb 546 554 13 0.52
ADG, lb/day 1.83 1.89 0.05 0.60
Feed efficiency traits
DM intake, lb/day 14.5 ± 0.92 14.4 ± 0.59§ 0.19 0.98
F:G ratio 8.21 ± 1.74 8.21 ± 2.54 0.54 0.99
RFI, lb/d 0.08 ± 0.73 0.00 ± 0.48§ 0.15 0.76
†Effects of CIDR and interactions with treatment non-significant (P > 0.10).
§Between-animal variance significant at P < 0.05.
ProTernative® EffectsPerformance and feed
efficiency (56 d)
Item Control ProTernative® SE
P-
Value
Time to bunk, min 27.6 31.4 3.3 0.26
Bunk visit (BV) traits
BV frequency, events/day 88.5 87.6 4.4 0.83
BV duration, min/day 105 108 7 0.77
Eating rate, g/min 62.1 61.3 2.1 0.65
Meal traits
Meal criterion, min 5.02 4.48 0.50 0.28
Meal frequency, events/day 14.6 16.8 1.1 0.04
Meal length, min/meal 14.9 12.8 1.2 0.08
Meal size, lb/meal 1.21 1.06 0.08 0.04
†Effects of CIDR and interactions with treatment non-significant (P > 0.10).
ProTernative® Effects Feeding behavior (56 d)
Item
Beef heifers
(Jenks et al., 2016)
Productivity 56-d ADG (NS)
DM intake, lb/d (NS)
Feeding behavior
Bunk visit duration, min/d (NS)
Eating rate, g/min (NS)
Meal frequency, events/d ↑ 15%*
Meal size, kg/meal ↓ 14%*
Meal length, min/meal ↓ 13%†
Rumination rate, min/d Not measured
Time rumen temperature
> 102 F, minNot measured
Effects of live-yeast
supplementationSummary of results
Lactating dairy cows
(DeVries et al., 2014)
Milk yield (NS)
(NS)
(NS)
(NS)
↑ 12%*
↓ 11%*
↓ 8%†
↑ 5%*
↓ 4%*
NS = Non-significant; *Treatments differed at P < 0.05; †Treatments differed at P < 0.10.
o Overall morbidity rates of newly-weaned ship-stressed
heifers (10%) were not affected by live-yeast
supplementation during the receiving period
o Temperature, and frequency and duration of standing
bouts were not affected by live-yeast supplementation
o Although the live-yeast supplementation tended (P =
0.09) to improve ADG during the first 28 d, overall
performance and feed efficiency was affected during
the 56-d study was not affected
o Heifers supplemented with ProTernative ate 15% fewer
meals per day that were shorter in length and smaller
in size
ProTernative® Effects Summary of results
o To evaluate the effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae
CNCM I-1077 (Levucell SC®) on growth efficiency,
physiological (rumen temperature), feeding behavior
and carcass quality responses in yearling steers
o Crossbred beef steers (N = 48):
Initial BW = 968 lb
o Treatments (n = 24):
Control steers fed finishing diet without Levucell
SC®
Treatment steers fed same diet with Levucell
SC®
Steers placed in pens (2 pens/treatment)
equipped with GrowSafeTM feed bunks for a 70-d
trial
Research Objective Experimental design
Item 1st 28-d 70-d
DM intake, lb/d ND ND
DMI day-to-day variance, lb/d ND ND
Bunk visit (BV) traits:
BV frequency, events/day ↓ 11% ↓ 9%†
BV duration, min/day ↑ 17%† ↑ 22%
BV eating rate, g/min ↓ 18% ↓ 18%
Meal traits:
Meal frequency, events/day ↓ 12%† ↓ 13%†
Meal length, min/event ND ↑ 27%
Meal size, kg/event ND ↑ 15%†
Meal eating rate, g/min ↓ 9%† ↓ 10%
Intensity traits:
Time to bunk, min ↓ 57% ↓ 41%
Head-down duration, min/day ↑ 32%† ↑ 41%
†Treatments tended to differed at P = 0.05 to 0.10.
Levucell SC Effects DMI and feeding behavior patterns
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Control
LY
Levucell SC Effects DM eating rate
DM eating rate, g per hour
Hour of the day
Levucell SC Effects Summary
o Levucell appears to favorably alter
feeding behavior patterns in beef
cattle
o Longer meal feeding times and(or)
slower eating rates may favorably
affect rumen health:
Increased salivary secretion (Beauchemin et al., 2008)
Improved digestibility (Aikman
et al., 2008)
Mitigate risk of acidosis