Performance and Carcass Traits of Market Beef Cattle Supplemented Self-Fed Byproducts on Pasture: A Progress Report

dc.contributor.author Kiesling, Daniel
dc.contributor.author Morrical, Daniel
dc.contributor.author Strohbehn, Daryl
dc.contributor.author Honeyman, Mark
dc.contributor.author Busby, W.
dc.contributor.author Sellers, H.
dc.contributor.author Maxwell, Dallas
dc.date 2018-08-25T19:47:41.000
dc.date.accessioned 2020-06-29T23:31:55Z
dc.date.available 2020-06-29T23:31:55Z
dc.date.copyright Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2009
dc.date.issued 2009-01-01
dc.description.abstract <p>Over a two year period (2007 and 2008), 162 head of beef steers were finished with self-fed byproducts on cool season grass pastures. Yearling steers were continuously grazed at the Neely-Kinyon Farm in southwest Iowa on cool season grasses that were predominantly fescue at a stocking density of 2.25 head/acre. Half of the cattle were implanted (with Synovex®-S) or and half were not. Cattle received a diet of either soyhulls-dried distillers grain with solubles or corn-dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) that was offered as a meal through self-feeders. The rations were mixed in at 1:1 with a mineral balancer that included Rumensin®.</p> <p>Live cattle performance and carcass traits were not affected by diet. Implanted cattle outgained non-implanted over the entire finishing period (3.52 lbs/d vs. 3.17 lbs/d). This led to implanted cattle coming off test heavier (1324 lbs vs. 1277 lbs) and railing with heavier carcasses (826 lbs vs. 800 lbs). Ribeye areas were greater (13.1 in <sup>2</sup> vs. 12.7 in <sup>2</sup> ) for implanted cattle; which was probably due to the heavier carcass weights. Non-implanted cattle had superior quality grades (55% vs. 40%) of low choice or better.</p> <p>Year differences in quality grade (1023 vs. 985 in 2007 and 2008, respectively) were observed. This difference was attributed to factors that include genetic makeup of cattle, initial weights of cattle, time of year when cattle were harvested and grading technology.</p> <p>In conclusion, pasture rearing cattle, when given access to self-fed by-products, provides for excellent performance on both live performance and carcass traits. Some considerations should be made by the feeder in regards to time of year when marketing cattle and the cattle’s genetics. This system is an alternative to high-grain conventional beef finishing production in feedlots.</p>
dc.identifier archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/ans_air/vol655/iss1/44/
dc.identifier.articleid 1461
dc.identifier.contextkey 3390293
dc.identifier.doi https://doi.org/10.31274/ans_air-180814-484
dc.identifier.s3bucket isulib-bepress-aws-west
dc.identifier.submissionpath ans_air/vol655/iss1/44
dc.identifier.uri https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/handle/20.500.12876/8595
dc.language.iso en
dc.relation.ispartofseries Animal Science Research Reports
dc.relation.ispartofseries ASL R2421
dc.source.bitstream archive/lib.dr.iastate.edu/ans_air/vol655/iss1/44/R2421.pdf|||Sat Jan 15 00:16:56 UTC 2022
dc.subject.disciplines Agriculture
dc.subject.disciplines Animal Sciences
dc.subject.disciplines Beef Science
dc.subject.keywords ASL R2421
dc.title Performance and Carcass Traits of Market Beef Cattle Supplemented Self-Fed Byproducts on Pasture: A Progress Report
dc.type article
dc.type.genre beef
dspace.entity.type Publication
relation.isJournalIssueOfPublication 3d9dfb75-1750-45f7-a559-dc2c94d08a2e
relation.isSeriesOfPublication 7f3839b7-b833-4418-a6fa-adda2b23950a
File
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
R2421.pdf
Size:
58.44 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Collections