Grain processing

Grain Feeding

3) Corn3) Corn

1) Wheat1) Wheat

4) Grain Sorghum4) Grain Sorghum

2) Barley2) Barley

Acidosis PotentialAcidosis Potential

Grain Feeding

Stock et al., 2006

Wheat

Barley

High moisture corn (bunker storage)

Steam flaked corn, HMC ( stored whole)

Dry rolled corn, steam flaked grain sorghum

Dry whole corn

Dry rolled grain sorghum

Grains Ranked By Rate Of Ruminal Starch Digestion

Fast

Slow

Grain Feeding

Stock et al., 2006

Area of ruminal pH below 5.6 during grain adaptation period

Grain Feeding

Cooper et al., 1997

Total Intake of Diet by Hour and Concentration Level.

Grain Feeding

Fulton et al., 1979

DRC HMC SFC

DMI, lb 22.2a 21.8a 20.4b

ADG, lb 3.64 3.55 3.60

Feed / Gain 6.10a 6.10a 5.65b

Feed / Gain, % of DRC -- 100 108

Cooper et al., 2002 J. Anim. Sci.

Corn Processing-Diets without byproducts

DRC 24 HMC 28RECON 30 HMC 35RECON

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 56 112 168 224 280 336 392

Ensiling Period (d)

ISD

MD

, %Corn Processing-

HMC and Reconstitution

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 56 112 168 224 280 336 392

Ensiling Period (d)

DIP

(%

of

CP

)

DRC 24 HMC 28RECON 30 HMC 35RECON

Corn Processing-HMC and Reconstitution

Pens, n 36 36

DMI 25.7 24.9 0.64

ADG 3.95 4.02 <0.01

F:G 6.50 6.19 <0.01

2 x 6 factorial with hybrids, no process x hybrid interaction

All diets contained 20% WCGF

DRC HMC15 28 P=

Processing

Harrelson et al., 2007 ASAS Midwest Meetings

Corn Processing-HMC vs DRC

Pens, n 36 36

DMI 25.7 24.9 0.64

ADG 3.95 4.02 <0.01

F:G 6.50 6.19 <0.01

2 x 6 factorial with hybrids, no process x hybrid interaction

All diets contained 20% WCGF

DRC HMC15 28 P=

Processing

Harrelson et al., 2007 ASAS Midwest Meetings

Corn Processing-HMC vs DRC

4.8%

DMI 24.4 24.4 24.2 23.9 23.5

ADG 3.43a 3.53ab 3.57ab 3.68b 3.65b

F:G 7.14a 6.94ab 6.77b 6.49c 6.45c

All diets contained 18% corn bran (part of CGF)

DRC HMC RECON HMC RECON15 24 28 30 35

Processing

Benton et al., 2005 Nebraska Beef Report.

Corn Processing-HMC and Reconstitution

DMI 22.0 21.8 22.2 23.4 24.8

ADG 4.25 4.15 4.17 4.24 4.18

F:G 5.18a 5.26ab 5.32b 5.52c 5.92d

All diets contained 32% WCGFCalves fed 170 days, initial wt. = 667 lb

SFC HMC FGC DRC WC

Processing

Scott et al., 2003 J. Anim. Sci.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

DMI 22.0 21.8 22.2 23.4 24.8

ADG 4.25 4.15 4.17 4.24 4.18

F:G 5.18a 5.26ab 5.32b 5.52c 5.92d

Dieta 6.2 4.7 3.6 -- -7.2

Corn onlya 11.8 8.9 6.8 -- -13.7

aExpressed as % above DRC, calculated for entire diet and corn only (52.5%)All diets contained 32% WCGFCalves fed 170 days, initial wt. = 667 lb

SFC HMC FGC DRC WC

Processing

Scott et al., 2003 J. Anim. Sci.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

DMI 23.4 24.0 24.3 24.2

ADG 4.22b 4.02a 3.95a 3.98a

F:G 5.54a 5.97b 6.15c 6.09bc

All diets contained 22% WCGF, 62.5% of respective cornYearlings fed 117 days, initial weight = 845 lb

SFC HMC FRC DRC

Processing

Scott et al., 2003 J. Anim. Sci.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

DMI 23.4 24.0 24.3 24.2

ADG 4.22b 4.02a 3.95a 3.98a

F:G 5.54a 5.97b 6.15c 6.09bc

Dieta 9.0 2.0 - --

Corn onlya 14.3 3.1 - --

aExpressed as % above DRC, calculated for entire diet and corn only (62.5%)All diets contained 22% WCGF, 62.5% of respective cornYearlings fed 117 days, initial weight = 845 lb

SFC HMC FRC DRC

Processing

Scott et al., 2003 J. Anim. Sci.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

SFC GHMC RHMC FGC DRC

DMI 21.3a 21.4a 21.6a 23.0b 23.2b

ADG 4.33 4.24 4.21 4.35 4.23

F:G 4.91a 5.05b 5.13b 5.29c 5.49d

Corn only 17.6 13.4 10.9 6.1 --

All diets contained 25% WCGF, 60% of respective cornCalves fed 152 days, initial weight = 677 lb

Macken et al., 2006 Prof. Anim. Scient.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

SFC GHMC RHMC FGC DRC

F:G 4.91a 5.05b 5.13b 5.29c 5.49d

Fecal St 4.1a 8.4b 10.6bc 11.8c 19.2d

GMD 3117 484 2901 515 4730

All diets contained 25% WCGF, 60% of respective cornCalves fed 152 days, initial weight = 677 lb

Macken et al., 2006 Prof. Anim. Scient.

Corn Processing-with WCGF

DRC HMC SFC

without WCGF

F:G, diet only (80% corn) 6.34 6.27 5.76

Improved, % above DRC -- 1.4 11.4with WCGF

F:G, diet only (55-60% corn) 5.70 5.44 5.21

Improved, % above DRC -- 8.1 14.6

Note: DRC is 13.2% better than whole (1 comparison)

& FGC is 4.3% better than DRC in diets with WCGF (3 comparisons)

Corn Processing-with and without WCGF

WC DRC D/H HMC SFC FGC

DMI 23.1a 22.6a 21.5b 21.0bc 20.4c 20.4c

ADG 3.85a 4.05b 3.91ab 3.89ab 3.59c 3.38d

F:G 6.07a 5.68bc 5.61bc 5.46c 5.76b 6.15a

Corn: -11.2 -- 2.0 6.3 -2.3 -13.5

All diets contained 30% WDGS; 61.4% cornCalf-feds 168 days, initial weight = 700 lb

Vander Pol et al., 2006 Nebraska Beef Rep.

Corn Processing-with WDGS

WC DRC D/H HMC SFC FGC

DMI 23.1a 22.6a 21.5b 21.0bc 20.4c 20.4c

ADG 3.85a 4.05b 3.91ab 3.89ab 3.59c 3.38d

F:G 6.07a 5.68bc 5.61bc 5.46c 5.76b 6.15a

Corn: -11.2 -- 2.0 6.3 -2.3 -13.5

All diets contained 30% WDGS; 61.4% cornCalf-feds 168 days, initial weight = 700 lb

Vander Pol et al., 2006 Nebraska Beef Rep.

Corn Processing-with WDGS

y = 0.0071x + 3.65

R2 = 0.98

y = -0.0005x2 + 0.026x + 3.68

R2 = 0.99

y = -0.0061x + 3.74

R2 = 0.65

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

0 10 20 30 40

Level of diet DM (WDG)

Per

form

ance

DRCHMCSFC

Corrigan et al., 2007 Nebraska Beef Rep.

Corn Processing-with WDGS

y = -0.019x + 6.12

R2 = 0.96

y = -0.0085x + 5.42

R2 = 0.77

y = -0.0003x + 5.47

R2 = 0.008

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

0 10 20 30 40

Level of diet DM (WDG)

Per

form

ance

DRCHMCSFC

Corrigan et al., 2007 Nebraska Beef Rep.

Corn Processing-with WDGS

Issues

• With WCGF• more intense processing better• better acidosis control?• relatively larger improvement with HMC• not level dependent

• assuming >25% diet DM

Issues

• With WDGS• DRC and HMC look good• SFC is less positive, WDGS = SFC?• Optimum level different

• DRC: 35-40% (watch S)• HMC: 30-40% (watch S)• SFC: 15-20%