Concepedia

Publication | Closed Access

Dietary energy source and density: effects of roughage source, roughage equivalent, tallow level, and steer type on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics

97

Citations

10

References

1994

Year

Abstract

The effects of roughage level (10, 20, or 30% roughage equivalent [RE]), roughage source (alfalfa vs cottonseed hulls), roughage regimen (constant RE vs 2% RE during the mid-finishing period), tallow level (1.2 vs 4.6%), and steer type (British crossbred [BRITX] vs Bos indicus crosses [BRX]) were evaluated in three experiments with a common allotment and several overlapping treatments. Steers (n = 432; initial weight = 326 +/- 26 kg) were divided into three BW blocks and allotted randomly to 72 pens and 24 treatments. Steers were fed steam-flaked, sorghum grain-based finishing diets for 124 to 166 d. Diets with 20% RE decreased gain efficiency and 30% RE diets decreased both gain (linear, P < .07) and efficiency (linear, P < .001) compared with 10% RE diets. Reducing roughage level during the mid-finishing period improved overall gain efficiency 2, 7, and 24% (P > .2, < .05, and < .001, respectively) for the 10, 20, and 30% RE diets, respectively. Steers fed cottonseed hulls consumed more feed (9.6 vs 8.8 kg/d, P < .001) but tended to gain less (1.53 vs 1.58 kg/d, P = .11) than steers fed alfalfa, were leaner, and had fewer carcasses grading Choice (62 vs 77%, P < .05). Feeding 4.6% tallow decreased DMI (P < .05) and improved gain efficiency (P < .05) compared with 1.2% tallow. The BRITX steers consumed more feed (6%, P < .001) but were somewhat less efficient (3.5%, P < .05) than BRX steers. Carcasses from BRITX steers tended to be fatter than carcasses from BRX steers and more of them graded Choice (62 vs 37%, P < .01). Commercial BRX steers did not perform as well as BRITX steers on higher-energy-density diets (4.6% tallow or variable roughage regimen). Knowledge of the genetic background of feeder cattle can be important in the selection of dietary energy density and marketing expectations.

References

YearCitations

Page 1