Nutritional recommendations of feedlot consulting nutritionists: The 2007 Texas Tech University survey1

TLDR

Feedlot nutritionists surveyed were primarily located in Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma, with additional representation from Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, South Dakota, Washington, Idaho, Arizona, California, and other states. The study surveyed 42 consulting feedlot nutritionists via a web‑based questionnaire comprising 74 items covering practice details, commodity use, feed sources, adaptation methods, supplements, feed mixers, and nutrient formulation. Of the 42 invited, 29 completed the survey, revealing that nutritionists generally recommend nutrient levels 1–2 times NRC (2000) values, yet frequently omit key NRC components such as degradable intake protein, providing a snapshot that can inform future NRC models.

Abstract

Forty-two consulting feedlot nutritionists were asked to participate in a survey regarding nutritional recommendations for feedlot cattle. Eleven nutritionists chose not to participate or did not reply to our request. Thirty-one nutritionists agreed to participate, and 29 completed the survey. Their practices were located in the following states: Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma (46.43%); Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, and South Dakota (31.25%); Washington and Idaho (8.93%); Arizona and California (6.25%); and other states (7.14%). The survey was conducted using a Web-based system and included 74 questions divided into sections that covered general information about the nutritionist's practice (n = 8 questions); commodity information (n = 13); use of grain coproducts (n = 5); information regarding roughage sources and levels (n = 4); methods used to adapt cattle to finishing diets (n = 3); information about supplements and micronutrients (n = 7); types of feed mixers (n = 2) and feed mills (n = 1) used by clients; feeding (n = 1) and cattle management (n = 5); liquid feeds (n = 7); recommendations for nutrient formulation (n = 15); information resources used as the basis for nutritional recommendations (n = 2); and perceived needs for additional information on items or nutrients not addressed in the survey. With respect to nutrient formulation practices, the results indicated that the recommended concentrations of major nutrients and trace minerals typically fell within a range of 1 to 2 times the NRC (2000) recommendations for beef cattle; however, some important aspects of the NRC models (e.g., formulation for degradable intake protein) were not applied by the majority of respondents. Data from this survey provide a snapshot of practices used by feedlot nutritionists and should aid in development of future National Research Council models and recommendations.