Implants and Additives

Galen Erickson

Implanting Defects

Partially missing implant

Improper Location

Crushed Implants

Implanting Defects

Abscess

Walled-off

Implants and Body Composition

• Implants increase protein deposition.

• Implants cause a upward shift in the growth curve.

• The shift in the growth curve influences body composition at a given weight.

Implants Change the Growth Curve

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

800 1100 1165 1230 1265

No Implant

1 Implant

2 Implants

28.6% EBFLow Choice

Relationship of empty body fat to Quality Grade(total of 1,355 animals)

21.1

26.2

28.629.9

31.031.8

32.5

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Marbling score

% EBF

Weight @ 28% FatIncrease

• Non-implanted 1145• Rev-IS 1175a +30• Component-ES• Ralgro/Rev-S 1212b +67• Revalor-S 1 x• Syn-S/Rev-S 1223c +78• Rev-IS/Rev-IS• Rev-IS/Rev-S 1237d +92• Rev-S/Rev-S

Implant impact on BW 28% EBF - Steers

Guiroy et al., 2002

Implant impacts

Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database: http://idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm

none revalor-S Diff %change

N 1040 1040DOF 135 135

ADG 3.18 3.79 0.61 19.2

F:G 6.62 5.92 -0.7 -10.6

HCW 727.6 779.2 51.6 7.1

FW 1155 1237 82 7.1

% Choice 75.0 63.7 -11.3 -15.1

Implant impacts

Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database: http://idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm

none syn-S/rev-S Diff %change

N 379 443DOF 162 158

ADG 2.94 3.52 .58 19.7

F:G 6.40 5.61 -0.8 -12.3

HCW 687.8 759.1 71.3 10.4

FW 1092 1205 113 10.4

% Choice 70.4 52.7 -17.7 -25.1

Economics for implants

none implanting assumptionN 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200

Economics for implantsnone implanting assumption

N 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200

%choice 15 hd 800 lb carcass$2/cwt spread 240 -$6/cwt spread 720 -$15/cwt spread 1800 -$22/cwt spread 2640 -Implant & work 800 -

Economics for implantsnone implanting assumption

N 100 100Sell weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more$70 - $5,600$80 - $6,400$90 - $7,200

%choice 15 hd 800 lb carcass$2/cwt spread 240 -$6/cwt spread 720 -$15/cwt spread 1800 -$22/cwt spread 2640 -Implant & work 800 -

$/made 1040-3440 5600-7200 $40.80/hdtoday: $61.60

Implant Decision MakingGender

Diet Energy

Marketing goals

Days from market!!!

0-120 one implant

120-140 weak initial or delayed

140-160 intermediate and terminal

160+ strong E, intermediate comb,

Always build on implant strength

Feed Additives

Ionophores- Rumensin, Bovatec, Cattlyst,

Gainpro, Vmax

Coccidiostats- Deccox, Amprolium,

Rumensin, Bovatec

Antibiotics- Tylan, CTC, OTC

Hormone- MGA, heifermaxx

Β-agonists- Optaflexx, Zilmax

Feed Additives

Premix-Type A

Supplements-Type B

Final diets-Type C

Compendium rules!

FDA regulated, no off-label use allowed

Law is 90% DM basis, g/ton and mg/hd

Rumensin

Large Impact on Nutritional Management

• ↓ Performance

• ↑ Intake Variation

• ↑ Acidosis

• ↑ Digestive Deads

• ↓ Coccidiosis Protection

Cooper slides, 2004

FermentableFeed

PropionateAcetate

Lactate

AcetatePropionate

Rumensin Mode of Action

Cooper slides, 2004

FermentableFeed

PropionateAcetate

Lactate

AcetatePropionate

Rumensin Mode of Action

Cooper slides, 2004

DM Intake Daily Gain Feed/Gain

Deads Out

Control 19.4 3.20 6.08

Rumensin 19.1 3.25 5.89

-1.5%* 1.6%* 3.1%*

Deads In

Control 19.4 3.13 6.21

Rumensin 19.1 3.21 5.97

-1.5%* 2.6% 3.9%*Source: Laudert, 1990

Four Trial Summary (2,904 Steers)

Rumensin Performance

Cooper slides, 2004

• Original research showed 10% improvement in feed conversion

• Recent research shows 3-4% improvement

• Difference likely due to ration energy level

• Summary– Direct effect on performance is lower in today’s rations– Greater improvement with Deads-In

Rumensin Performance

Cooper slides, 2004

• Dr. Baxter Black, 1980• Digestive deaths decreased by 2/3rds after inclusion of

Rumensin

Rumensin Digestive Deads

Cooper slides, 2004

Rumensin level, g/ton

Reference # 0 20 30 40

Laudert, 1990 2,904 1.01 0.62 0.57

Laudert, 1994 1,017 2.39 0.94

Vogel, 1996 1,172 2.62 1.62 0.25

Rumensin Digestive Deads

Cooper slides, 2004

Rumensin reduces acidosis and bloat

• Directly– ↓ lactate production

– ↑ lactate utilization

– ↓ rumen fluid viscosity

• Indirectly– ↓ day-to-day intake variation

– Improved feeding behavior

Rumensin Acidosis

Cooper slides, 2004

RumensinIntake Variation Within Pen

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-2 3-7 8-12 13-28 57-70 97-110

Days on Feed

Vari

an

ce,

lb2

ControlRumensin*

*

*

Source: Stock et al., 1995

Cooper slides, 2004

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1-2 3-7 8-12 13-28 57-70 97-110

Days on Feed

Vari

an

ce,

lb2

ControlRumensin

RumensinIntake Variation Across Days

*

* *

Source: Stock et al., 1995

Cooper slides, 2004

RumensinFeeding Behavior and Acidosis

Control RumensinDM Intake 28.4 27.9

Rate of intake 36.6 33.6

# of meals 8.8 9.3

Ave meal size 3.7 3.3

Total time 298 321

Ave ruminal pH* 5.59 5.74

Area below 5.6* 214 96Source: Cooper, 1997

Cooper slides, 2004

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

Year

RumensinCoccidiosis

Cocci Death Loss per 100,000 hd

Source: Edwards, 1984

Cooper slides, 2004

RumensinCoccidiosis

Source: Watkins et al., 1986

Rumensin Level, g/ton

0 10 20 30

E. bovis 49.9 29.1 15.9 11.2

E. zuernii 18.5 7.0 2.3 2.2

Other oocysts 19.3 9.2 8.7 4.7

Mortality 16 0 0 0

Cooper slides, 2004

Acidosis and Bloat• Feed more roughage

– Level– Type

• Limit extensively processed grains– High moisture corn– Steam-flaked corn

• Optimize byproduct level– Digestible fiber replacing starch– Corn oil increases energy content– Provides small amount of lactate

Rumensin conclusions

Cooper slides, 2004

Ionophore Economics

Rumensin improves F:G by 4%

1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00

Therefore: $10.00 to $12.00 return from performanceCost: 2 cent/hd/d: approximately $3.00

RUMENSIN SAVE: range: $7.00 to $9.00

1996 Scientific Update, Elanco Animal Health; Laudert, 1990

Liver Abscesses

Elanco Animal Health

Tylan

Elanco Animal Health Technical Bulletin; Laudert and Vogel

none Tylan%change

Trials 40 40DOF 134 134Pens 40 40

ADG 2.84 2.90 2.1

F:G 6.72 6.90 -2.6

Liver abscesses 27.9 7.5Dressing % 61.65 61.80

Tylan Economics

none Tylan %change

F:G 6.72 6.90 -2.6

1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00

Therefore: $6.50 to $7.80 return from performanceCost: 1 cent/hd/d: approximately $1.50

TYLAN SAVE: range: $5.00 to $6.30

MGA

Interaction with heifer age (Mader and Lechtenberg, 2000; Anderson, 1991)

1% change in F:G improves $2.80/hd range $2.50 to $3.00

MGA generally: 4%+ improvement with yearling heifers

Therefore: $10.00 to $12.00 return from F:Gsell more weight 10 to 15 lb.

OH

NH

OH

OH

OH

NH

OH

OH

0 100 200

Initial weight -----------1206----------

Final weight 1292.4 1300.4 1307.2

ADG 3.04 3.33 3.57

F:G 6.74 6.12 5.67

HCW 825.4 830.7 837.7

marbling 504 504 501

% choice 47.6 48.5 45.6

YG 2.87 2.85 2.84

Recent commercial studies

Current Elanco recommendation: 200 mg/hd for 28 d.

Steers

OH

NH

OH

OH

100 200 300

Increase in live wt 10 17 21

Increase in carcass wt 6 14 18

Calculated return, $/hd

Price at $80/cwt live 6.30 6.60 4.50

Price at $70/cwt live 4.20 4.90 3.50

Steers only, fed 28 days and ~$7.00 for Optaflexx fed at 200 mg/hd

Expected Response

Current Elanco recommendation: 200 mg/hd for 28 d.

Steers

Optaflexx issues

Requirements

70-430 mg/hd/d 8.2 to 24.6 g/ton (90% DM basis)9.1 to 27.3 g/ton DM

At 24 lb DMI = 16.7 g/ton DM

Fed final 28-42 days prior to marketRecommendation

200 mg/hd/d for 28 days

Optaflexx issues

Benefits

Increased weight (profitable)Improved efficiency

late in feeding period

Little to no effect on carcass traitsApproved for use with Rum/Tylan

OH

NH

OH

OH

My thoughts

• Weight• N retention late• REA• Efficiency

• YG

No effect (<200 mg)

• Marbling• Tenderness

Increases Decreases

With trained panels, > 200 mg was not as positive on carcass qualityVery positive on most traits, and is safeConcern with sorting and the 28-42 d window, may create challengesFun to test over the next few years

Zilmax• Zilpaterol hydrochloride• 22.05 lb bag (10kg)• 4.8% product

– 4.8% of the bag is active Zilpaterol– 21.77 grams of active/lb (48 g/kg)– One bag contains 480 g of Zilmax

• Corn cob grit, Zilpaterol, surfactant and binder• Manufactured in France• Store at or below 77 degrees F

Permitted Claims and LimitationsCarcass Measurements Zilmax Effects

Dressing %

Hot Carcass Wt. lbs.

REA, sq.in.

YG

12th Rib Fat Thickness, in. NC

Marbling Score NCc

b Reduction indicates improvement

c Zilmax shown to decrease marbling score @ 40 days

b

Zilmax Inclusion Rate

• Cattle Fed in Confinement for Slaughter• All feeding rates on label expressed on a 90% DM basis• 6.8 g/ton on a 90% DM basis• 7.6 g/ton on a 100% DM basis

Zilmax Feeding Directions

• Feed continuously to cattle fed in confinement for slaughter as the sole ration for the last 20 to 40 days at 7.6 g/ton (100% DM) to provide 60-90 mg/hd/d.

• Approved to be fed in combination with Rumensin, Tylan and MGA

• Approved for use in Type B supplements dry (meal or pelleted) and liquid

Zilmax Withdrawal• Category II drug• 3 day withdrawal

Beta-agonist issues

ChallengesFeeding large enough rationsMixing (50 to 90% of capacity)

mix more than 1 feedingfeed 1X per day

Sorting and maintaining 28-42 d windowInteraction with implants

SummaryImplants: $62 45-90Rumensin: $8 7-9Tylan: $5.65 5-6.30MGA(heifers): $7 5-8Sick cattle: ?Lower energy: $10

TOTAL: $75.65

Technology Offers from Birth to Slaughter

• Added value - $132.37• Added costs

– Implants $8.00– Ionophore $3.80– Parasite $6.00– Optaflexx $7.00

• Total $24.80• Profit $107.57

Would require $11.16 cwt more to go without technology

Would increase retail cost for all meat $.35/lb

Ivan Rush, PHREC; UNL

Breakeven

Purchase price + feed cost + yardage + processing + interest + death (sick)

Sale weight

Factors to watch:lower finished weightsincreased feed cost (i.e., higher F:G)purchasing higher value calvessickness