Location: Livestock Nutrient Management ResearchTitle: Effects of corn processing method and dietary inclusion of wet distiller's grain with solubles on energy metabolism and enteric methane emissions of finishing cattle Author
|Macdonald, Jim - Texas Agrilife Research|
Submitted to: Journal of Animal Science Supplement
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 2/18/2011
Publication Date: 7/10/2011
Citation: Hales, K.E., Cole, N.A., MacDonald, J.C. 2011. Effects of corn processing method and dietary inclusion of wet distiller's grain with solubles on energy metabolism and enteric methane emissions of finishing cattle [abstract]. Journal of Animal Science. 89(E-Suppl 1):196.
Technical Abstract: Few studies have used steam-flaked corn (SFC)-based diets to evaluate the effects of wet distiller's grains with solubles (WDGS) in finishing cattle diets, and a reliable estimate of the net energy value of WDGS has yet to be determined. Effects of corn processing method and WDGS on energy metabolism and enteric methane (CH4) production were evaluated in four Jersey steers using respiration calorimetry chambers. A 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments was used in a Latin square design. The factors consisted of corn processing method (SFC or dry-rolled corn [DRC]) and inclusion of corn-based WDGS (0 or 30% on a DM basis). Thus, the resulting four treatment combinations consisted of: (1) SFC-based diet with 0% WDGS (SFC-0); (2) SFC-based diet with 30% WDGS (SFC-30); (3) DRC-based diet with 0% WDGS (DRC-0); and (4) DRC-based diet with 30% WDGS (DRC-30). The diets were balanced for DIP and fat. Each Latin square period consisted of 14 d diet adaptation and 7 d of fecal, urine, and gas (oxygen consumption, and carbon dioxide and CH4 production) collections. As a proportion of gross energy (GE) intake, grain processing method did not affect (P >0.12) fecal, digestible, urinary, and metabolizable energy or heat production. In contrast, retained energy tended to be greater (P = 0.09) for cattle consuming SFC- than DRC-based diets. Inclusion of WDGS did not affect (P > 0.17) fecal, digestible, urinary, metabolizable, and retained energy, or heat production as a proportion of GE intake. Steers consuming SFC diets produced less (P < 0.04) CH4 (L/kg of DMI, % of GE intake) than steers consuming DRC diets. No differences were noted (P > 0.55) for CH4 production between inclusion levels of WDGS. Results suggest that cattle consuming SFC diets produce less CH4 and retain more energy than cattle fed DRC diets; however, dietary inclusion of WDGS at 30% seems to have little effect on CH4 production and energy metabolism when diets are balanced for DIP and fat.