Implants and Additives

1
Implants and Additives Galen Erickson
2
(No Transcript)
3
Implanting Defects
4
Implanting Defects
5
Implants and Body Composition

• Implants increase protein deposition.
• Implants cause a upward shift in the growth
  curve.
• The shift in the growth curve influences body
  composition at a given weight.

6
Implants Change the Growth Curve
28.6 EBF Low Choice
7
Relationship of empty body fat to Quality
Grade(total of 1,355 animals)
8
Implant impact on BW 28 EBF - Steers

• Weight _at_ 28 Fat Increase
• Non-implanted 1145
• Rev-IS 1175a 30
• Component-ES
• Ralgro/Rev-S 1212b 67
• Revalor-S 1 x
• Syn-S/Rev-S 1223c 78
• Rev-IS/Rev-IS
• Rev-IS/Rev-S 1237d 92
• Rev-S/Rev-S

Guiroy et al., 2002
9
Implant impacts
none revalor-S Diff change N 1040 1040 DOF 135
135 ADG 3.18 3.79 0.61 19.2 FG 6.62 5.92 -0.7 -1
0.6 HCW 727.6 779.2 51.6 7.1 FW 1155 1237 82 7.1
Choice 75.0 63.7 -11.3 -15.1
Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database
http//idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm
10
Implant impacts
none syn-S/rev-S Diff change N 379 443 DOF 162
158 ADG 2.94 3.52 .58 19.7 FG 6.40 5.61 -0.8 -12
.3 HCW 687.8 759.1 71.3 10.4 FW 1092 1205 113 10.
4 Choice 70.4 52.7 -17.7 -25.1
Intervet and Texas Tech Implant database
http//idb.afs.ttu.edu/dbhome/default.htm
11
Economics for implants
12
Economics for implants
none implanting assumption N 100 100 Sell
weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more 70 - 5,600 80 -
6,400 90 - 7,200 choice 15 hd 800 lb
carcass 2/cwt spread 240 - 6/cwt spread 720
- 15/cwt spread 1800 - 22/cwt
spread 2640 - Implant work 800 -
13
Economics for implants
none implanting assumption N 100 100 Sell
weight - 8000 lb 80lb/hd more 70 - 5,600 80 -
6,400 90 - 7,200 choice 15 hd 800 lb
carcass 2/cwt spread 240 - 6/cwt spread 720
- 15/cwt spread 1800 - 22/cwt
spread 2640 - Implant work 800 - /made 1040-34
40 5600-7200 40.80/hd today 61.60
14
Implant Decision Making
Gender Diet Energy Marketing goals Days from
market!!! 0-120 one implant 120-140 weak
initial or delayed 140-160 intermediate and
terminal 160 strong E, intermediate
comb, Always build on implant strength
15
Feed Additives
Ionophores- Rumensin, Bovatec, Cattlyst, Gainpro,
Vmax Coccidiostats- Deccox, Amprolium, Rumensin,
Bovatec Antibiotics- Tylan, CTC, OTC Hormone-
MGA, heifermaxx ?-agonists- Optaflexx, Zilmax
16
Feed Additives
Premix-Type A Supplements-Type B Final diets-Type
C Compendium rules! FDA regulated, no off-label
use allowed Law is 90 DM basis, g/ton and mg/hd
17
Rumensin

• Large Impact on Nutritional Management
• ? Performance
• ? Intake Variation
• ? Acidosis
• ? Digestive Deads
• ? Coccidiosis Protection

Cooper slides, 2004
18
Rumensin Mode of Action
Propionate Acetate
Fermentable Feed
Acetate Propionate
Lactate
Cooper slides, 2004
19
Rumensin Mode of Action
Propionate Acetate
Fermentable Feed
Acetate Propionate
Lactate
Cooper slides, 2004
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
Rumensin Performance
Four Trial Summary (2,904 Steers)
Source Laudert, 1990
Cooper slides, 2004
23
Rumensin Performance

• Original research showed 10 improvement in feed
  conversion
• Recent research shows 3-4 improvement
• Difference likely due to ration energy level
• Summary
• Direct effect on performance is lower in todays
  rations
• Greater improvement with Deads-In

Cooper slides, 2004
24
Rumensin Digestive Deads

• Dr. Baxter Black, 1980
• Digestive deaths decreased by 2/3rds after
  inclusion of Rumensin

Cooper slides, 2004
25
Rumensin Digestive Deads
Cooper slides, 2004
26
Rumensin Acidosis

• Rumensin reduces acidosis and bloat
• Directly
• ? lactate production
• ? lactate utilization
• ? rumen fluid viscosity
• Indirectly
• ? day-to-day intake variation
• Improved feeding behavior

Cooper slides, 2004
27
RumensinIntake Variation Within Pen



Source Stock et al., 1995
Cooper slides, 2004
28
RumensinIntake Variation Across Days



Source Stock et al., 1995
Cooper slides, 2004
29
RumensinFeeding Behavior and Acidosis
Source Cooper, 1997
Cooper slides, 2004
30
RumensinCoccidiosis
Cocci Death Loss per 100,000 hd
Source Edwards, 1984
Cooper slides, 2004
31
RumensinCoccidiosis
Source Watkins et al., 1986
Cooper slides, 2004
32
Rumensin conclusions

• Acidosis and Bloat
• Feed more roughage
• Level
• Type
• Limit extensively processed grains
• High moisture corn
• Steam-flaked corn
• Optimize byproduct level
• Digestible fiber replacing starch
• Corn oil increases energy content
• Provides small amount of lactate

Cooper slides, 2004
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
Ionophore Economics
Rumensin improves FG by 4 1 change in FG
improves 2.80/hd range 2.50 to
3.00 Therefore 10.00 to 12.00 return from
performance Cost 2 cent/hd/d approximately
3.00 RUMENSIN SAVE range 7.00 to 9.00
1996 Scientific Update, Elanco Animal Health
Laudert, 1990
36
Liver Abscesses
Elanco Animal Health
37
Tylan
none Tylan change Trials 40 40 DOF 134 134 Pe
ns 40 40 ADG 2.84 2.90 2.1 FG 6.72 6.90 -2.6 Liv
er abscesses 27.9 7.5 Dressing 61.65 61.80
Elanco Animal Health Technical Bulletin Laudert
and Vogel
38
Tylan Economics
none Tylan change FG 6.72 6.90 -2.6
1 change in FG improves 2.80/hd range 2.50
to 3.00 Therefore 6.50 to 7.80 return from
performance Cost 1 cent/hd/d approximately
1.50 TYLAN SAVE range 5.00 to 6.30
39
MGA
Interaction with heifer age (Mader and
Lechtenberg, 2000 Anderson, 1991)
1 change in FG improves 2.80/hd range 2.50
to 3.00 MGA generally 4 improvement with
yearling heifers Therefore 10.00 to 12.00
return from FG sell more weight 10 to 15 lb.
40
(No Transcript)
41
Recent commercial studies
Steers
0 100 200 Initial weight -----------1206--------
-- Final weight 1292.4 1300.4 1307.2 ADG 3.04 3.33
3.57 FG 6.74 6.12 5.67 HCW 825.4 830.7 837.7 mar
bling 504 504 501 choice 47.6 48.5 45.6 YG 2.87
2.85 2.84
Current Elanco recommendation 200 mg/hd for 28 d.
42
Expected Response
Steers
100 200 300 Increase in live wt 10 17 21 Increase
in carcass wt 6 14 18 Calculated return,
/hd Price at 80/cwt live 6.30 6.60 4.50 Price
at 70/cwt live 4.20 4.90 3.50 Steers only, fed
28 days and 7.00 for Optaflexx fed at 200 mg/hd
Current Elanco recommendation 200 mg/hd for 28 d.
43
Optaflexx issues
Requirements 70-430 mg/hd/d 8.2 to 24.6 g/ton
(90 DM basis) 9.1 to 27.3 g/ton DM At 24 lb
DMI 16.7 g/ton DM Fed final 28-42 days prior
to market Recommendation 200 mg/hd/d for 28 days
44
Optaflexx issues
Benefits Increased weight (profitable) Improved
efficiency late in feeding period Little to
no effect on carcass traits Approved for use
with Rum/Tylan
45
My thoughts
Increases
Decreases

• Weight
• N retention late
• REA
• Efficiency

• YG
• No effect (lt200 mg)
• Marbling
• Tenderness

With trained panels, gt 200 mg was not as positive
on carcass quality Very positive on most traits,
and is safe Concern with sorting and the 28-42 d
window, may create challenges Fun to test over
the next few years
46
(No Transcript)
47
Zilmax

• Zilpaterol hydrochloride
• 22.05 lb bag (10kg)
• 4.8 product
• 4.8 of the bag is active Zilpaterol
• 21.77 grams of active/lb (48 g/kg)
• One bag contains 480 g of Zilmax
• Corn cob grit, Zilpaterol, surfactant and binder
• Manufactured in France
• Store at or below 77 degrees F

48
Permitted Claims and Limitations
b
49
Zilmax Inclusion Rate

• Cattle Fed in Confinement for Slaughter
• All feeding rates on label expressed on a 90 DM
  basis
• 6.8 g/ton on a 90 DM basis
• 7.6 g/ton on a 100 DM basis

50
Zilmax Feeding Directions

• Feed continuously to cattle fed in confinement
  for slaughter as the sole ration for the last 20
  to 40 days at 7.6 g/ton (100 DM) to provide
  60-90 mg/hd/d.
• Approved to be fed in combination with Rumensin,
  Tylan and MGA
• Approved for use in Type B supplements dry (meal
  or pelleted) and liquid

51
Zilmax Withdrawal

• Category II drug
• 3 day withdrawal

52
(No Transcript)
53
Beta-agonist issues
Challenges Feeding large enough rations Mixing
(50 to 90 of capacity) mix more than 1
feeding feed 1X per day Sorting and
maintaining 28-42 d window Interaction with
implants
54
Summary
Implants 62 45-90 Rumensin 8 7-9 Tylan 5.65
5-6.30 MGA(heifers) 7 5-8 Sick cattle ? Lower
energy 10 TOTAL 75.65
55
Technology Offers from Birth to Slaughter

• Added value - 132.37
• Added costs
• Implants 8.00
• Ionophore 3.80
• Parasite 6.00
• Optaflexx 7.00
• Total 24.80
• Profit 107.57

Would require 11.16 cwt more to go without
technology
Would increase retail cost for all meat .35/lb
Ivan Rush, PHREC UNL
56
Breakeven
Purchase price feed cost yardage processing
interest death (sick) Sale weight Factors
to watch lower finished weights increased feed
cost (i.e., higher FG) purchasing higher value
calves sickness
57
CONTACTS Galen Erickson 402 472-6402
geericks_at_unlnotes.unl.edu http//beef.unl.edu B
eef Reports at Ag Institute
Website http//www.animalscience.unl.edu/beef/
http//ianrhome.unl.edu