Historically in the cattle growing business, the paradigm has been to focus on the feedyard as the primary stage of growth. The widely accepted theory is that growing cattle too large before sending them to the yard will result in poor performance on feed. In many cases, this was true as cattle were shipping out carrying too much cover without the bone and muscle to support any more growth once they got to the feedlot.
Challenging Convention
New data from a multi-year research program conducted by Oklahoma State University is challenging those conventional practices. Using distillers grain range cubes, the research team has shown it is possible to supplement cattle on pasture, boost gains, earn a significant return on that feed investment, and improve both feedyard and carcass performance.
Sound too good to be true? On this week’s blog, we’re diving into three years of data to show exactly what happened and how you can replicate it in your own operation.
Talk with a MHM feed expert today to get your cattle ahead of the game this season. Schedule a consult now!
Trial Design & Locations
Some quick background before we tackle the data. MasterHand Milling first partnered with the OSU Cooperate Extension Service and Dr. Paul Beck in 2019 by donating feed to the research projects being conducted by graduate students studying ruminant nutrition. The trials are conducted by the student research teams including cattle care, data collection and reporting.
The primary locations for these trials are in Bessie, Fort Supply and Haskell, Oklahoma. Additional studies have also been conducted in Lenapah, Oklahoma and Batesville, Arkansas. For the sake of today’s discussion, we’ll focus on the three primary research sites.
Trial Design & Locations
Some quick background before we tackle the data. MasterHand Milling first partnered with the OSU Cooperate Extension Service and Dr. Paul Beck in 2019 by donating feed to the research projects being conducted by graduate students studying ruminant nutrition. The trials are conducted by the student research teams including cattle care, data collection and reporting.
The primary locations for these trials are in Bessie, Fort Supply and Haskell, Oklahoma. Additional studies have also been conducted in Lenapah, Oklahoma and Batesville, Arkansas. For the sake of today’s discussion, we’ll focus on the three primary research sites.
Multi-Year Studies
In 2019, the initial trails indicated it was possible to feed cattle on grass, increase daily gains and earn significant returns on feed costs. In 2020, the studies replicated those grazing results, then went a step further by tracking the cattle through the feedlot and collecting final carcass data. That data showed feeding cattle on grass not only boosted gains on pasture, but also optimized both feedyard and carcass performance. Visit the Research page to see a full breakdown of previous trial data.
Trial 1 – Bessie, Oklahoma
The 2021 grazing trial at Bessie was a new design testing supplementation rate through the summer. Three treatment groups included an unsupplemented control, a low supplement rate at 2 lbs. per head per day and a high supplement rate at 4 lbs. per head per day.
The low supplementation cattle gained 0.67 lbs. per head more on average than the control, while the higher supplementation cattle gained an additional 0.92 over the control.
After factoring in all input costs including cattle purchase, pasture rent, processing, mineral and feed, cost of gains for the control, low supplement and high supplement groups were $0.73, $0.70 and $0.82 respectively. An estimated breakeven price per pound was calculated for each group with the control group at $1.46, low supplement at $1.36 and high supplement at $1.37.
This data shows the potential value to be added for producers who invest in a distillers cube summer feed program. At 2 lbs. per head per day, the additional gain was able to reduce the breakeven price, regardless of the added feed cost per head.
Preliminary feedlot data has been collected on the Bessie cattle at time of reimplant. Fed cattle went into the feedlot weighing 100+ lbs. more than the control cattle. After 90 days on feed, the heavier fed cattle are maintaining a higher average daily gain than the lighter cattle with roughly the same feed conversion rate.
Trial 1 – Bessie, Oklahoma
The 2021 grazing trial at Bessie was a new design testing supplementation rate through the summer. Three treatment groups included an unsupplemented control, a low supplement rate at 2 lbs. per head per day and a high supplement rate at 4 lbs. per head per day.
The low supplementation cattle gained 0.67 lbs. per head more on average than the control, while the higher supplementation cattle gained an additional 0.92 over the control.
After factoring in all input costs including cattle purchase, pasture rent, processing, mineral and feed, cost of gains for the control, low supplement and high supplement groups were $0.73, $0.70 and $0.82 respectively. An estimated breakeven price per pound was calculated for each group with the control group at $1.46, low supplement at $1.36 and high supplement at $1.37.
This data shows the potential value to be added for producers who invest in a distillers cube summer feed program. At 2 lbs. per head per day, the additional gain was able to reduce the breakeven price, regardless of the added feed cost per head.
Preliminary feedlot data has been collected on the Bessie cattle at time of reimplant. Fed cattle went into the feedlot weighing 100+ lbs. more than the control cattle. After 90 days on feed, the heavier fed cattle are maintaining a higher average daily gain than the lighter cattle with roughly the same feed conversion rate.
Trial 2 – Haskell, Oklahoma
The 2021 study at Haskell was the second year of a project studying the impacts of pasture fertilization and feed supplementation on cattle gains. The cattle were broken into three treatment groups: 1) no supplement control, 2) Fertilized pasture and fed 2.75 lbs. per head per day, and 3) Unfertilized pasture and fed 5.9 lbs. per head per day.
As expected, the fed cattle outperformed unfed cattle with Group 2 gaining an average of 2.44 lbs. over the 1.89 lb. average of the control. Group 3 at the higher supplementation rate average 2.66 lbs. Both Group 2 and 3 gained over 3 lbs. for the first half of the season.
After all input costs, not including pasture fertilization, cost of gain was $0.48, $0.62, and $0.83 respectively for Groups 1, 2 and 3. Breakeven prices per pound came to $1.30, $1.32 and $1.39. These values indicate a point of diminishing return when feeding at rates above 2-3 lbs. per head.
Early feedlot data from this trial are very interesting at they pertain to the widely accepted theory that feeding cattle before sending them to the feedyard negatively impacts feedyard performance. As in the Bessie trial, fed cattle weighed more going in and will take fewer days on feed to finish.
At 90 days on feed, control group cattle were gaining 3.86 lbs., while low supplement cattle were at 3.93 and high supplement cattle were gaining 4.38. Fed cattle had better dry matter conversion and a lower cost of gain than the control group.
Trial 2 – Haskell, Oklahoma
The 2021 study at Haskell was the second year of a project studying the impacts of pasture fertilization and feed supplementation on cattle gains. The cattle were broken into three treatment groups: 1) no supplement control, 2) Fertilized pasture and fed 2.75 lbs. per head per day, and 3) Unfertilized pasture and fed 5.9 lbs. per head per day.
As expected, the fed cattle outperformed unfed cattle with Group 2 gaining an average of 2.44 lbs. over the 1.89 lb. average of the control. Group 3 at the higher supplementation rate average 2.66 lbs. Both Group 2 and 3 gained over 3 lbs. for the first half of the season.
After all input costs, not including pasture fertilization, cost of gain was $0.48, $0.62, and $0.83 respectively for Groups 1, 2 and 3. Breakeven prices per pound came to $1.30, $1.32 and $1.39. These values indicate a point of diminishing return when feeding at rates above 2-3 lbs. per head.
Early feedlot data from this trial are very interesting at they pertain to the widely accepted theory that feeding cattle before sending them to the feedyard negatively impacts feedyard performance. As in the Bessie trial, fed cattle weighed more going in and will take fewer days on feed to finish.
At 90 days on feed, control group cattle were gaining 3.86 lbs., while low supplement cattle were at 3.93 and high supplement cattle were gaining 4.38. Fed cattle had better dry matter conversion and a lower cost of gain than the control group.
Trial 3 – Fort Supply, Oklahoma
Fort Supply also had a new trial design in 2021 similar to the set up at Bessie. This trial split into four groups: 1) no supplement control, 2) fed 2 lbs. per day, 3) fed 4 lbs. per day, and 4) fed 6 lbs. per day.
As in previous studies, fed cattle gained more with increased supplementation. Average daily gains for the summer were 1.51 lbs. for the control group, 2.17 for Group 2, 2.23 for Group 3 and 2.34 for Group 4. Cattle maintained a steady gain through the season.
Cost of gain values were calculated at $0.63, $0.65, $0.82 and $0.93 respectively. The lowest breakeven cost was in Group 2 at $1.26, indicating the same point of diminishing return at 2-3 lbs. as seen in other trials.
Reimplant data showed a decrease in daily gains and higher dry matter conversion on cattle fed at the higher rates on grass. This differs from findings in previous studies. The difference in performance is likely due to the types of cattle used in each trial. At Bessie and Haskell, the cattle were high quality Ultrablack (Brangus X Angus) steers purchased from a registered Brangus operation. The Fort Supply cattle consisted of plainer, sale barn type steers. It makes sense to generally expect cattle with better genetic potential to maintain higher performance than animals without that same genetic backing.
Trial 3 – Fort Supply, Oklahoma
Fort Supply also had a new trial design in 2021 similar to the set up at Bessie. This trial split into four groups: 1) no supplement control, 2) fed 2 lbs. per day, 3) fed 4 lbs. per day, and 4) fed 6 lbs. per day.
As in previous studies, fed cattle gained more with increased supplementation. Average daily gains for the summer were 1.51 lbs. for the control group, 2.17 for Group 2, 2.23 for Group 3 and 2.34 for Group 4. Cattle maintained a steady gain through the season.
Cost of gain values were calculated at $0.63, $0.65, $0.82 and $0.93 respectively. The lowest breakeven cost was in Group 2 at $1.26, indicating the same point of diminishing return at 2-3 lbs. as seen in other trials.
Reimplant data showed a decrease in daily gains and higher dry matter conversion on cattle fed at the higher rates on grass. This differs from findings in previous studies. The difference in performance is likely due to the types of cattle used in each trial. At Bessie and Haskell, the cattle were high quality Ultrablack (Brangus X Angus) steers purchased from a registered Brangus operation. The Fort Supply cattle consisted of plainer, sale barn type steers. It makes sense to generally expect cattle with better genetic potential to maintain higher performance than animals without that same genetic backing.
Dependable Data
The goal of these research programs is to provide repeatable, dependable data producers can rely on to make decisions for their own operations, and to identify best practices and recommendations to help them implement new feeding strategies.
Our feed reps have the experience, plus multiple calculators and tools, to help you evaluate your costs and potential returns before you ever buy a steer or turn your calves out. Fill out the form below to have one of our experts help you build a strategy and maximize your returns.
TALK TO A FEED EXPERT
Get Started
Our team of experienced feed experts and cattlemen are ready to help you change the way you feed. Click the link to schedule a consult!
