Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Effects of corn processing method anddietary inclusion of wet distillers grainwith solubles on enteric methaneemissions of...
Introduction• Wet distillers grains withsolubles (WDGS) arebyproducts of grain-basedbio-ethanol industry• The growth of th...
Introduction• The potential effects ofanimal feedingoperations on theenvironment are agrowing concern.• The potential effe...
Objectives• To determine the effects of corn processingmethod and WDGS inclusion rate onmetabolic CO2 and enteric CH4 loss...
Experimental Design: Exp. 1• 4 Jersey steers• Initial BW = 191 kg• 4 x 4 Latin square design• 2 x 2 FAT– Grain processing ...
Treatment Combinations: Exp. 1• SFC-based diet with 0% WDGS (SFC-0)• SFC-based diet with 30% WDGS (SFC-30)• DRC-based diet...
Experimental Design: Exp. 2• 4 Jersey steers• Initial BW = 322 kg• 4 x 4 Latin square design• Factors– WDGS at 4 inclusion...
Procedures• Experimental periods were 21 d in length• 16 d of diet adaptation• 5 d of total urine, fecal, & gas collection...
Statistical Analyses• Data were analyzed as a 4 x 4 Latin squaredesign using the PROC MIXED procedure ofSAS• Random effect...
Ingredient, % DM basis SFC-0 SFC-30 DRC-0 DRC-30Steam-flaked corn 73.0 56.0 - -Dry-rolled corn - - 73.0 56.0WDGS - 30.0 - ...
Nutrient Composition of Diets: Exp. 1Item (% DMB) SFC-0 SFC-30 DRC-0 DRC-30CP 13.24 17.36 13.12 17.27Starch 48.6 39.6 53.1...
Ingredient, % DM basis SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45Steam-flaked corn 73.0 69.25 56.0 41.65WDGS - 15.0 30.0 45.0Alfalfa hay 1...
Nutrient Composition of Diets: Exp. 2Item (% DMB) SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45CP 13.3 14.3 18.3 20.2Starch 60.7 58.8 42.8 39...
RESULTS
Grain processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <Gross energy, % 75.0 72.2 0.18 74.2 73.0 0.57Carbon, % 74.6 72.7 0.19 73....
Grain Processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <DMI, kg 5.09 5.31 <0.10 5.19 5.21 0.54CH4 productionL/day 58.6 74.3 0.04 ...
Grain processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <N Intake, g/d 123.6 130.5 0.01 114.1 139.9 0.01Fecal N, g/d 42.9 38.5 0.1...
Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <Gross energy, % 72.7 70.6 66.4 63.3 0.01Carbon, % 74.2 71.6 68.0 64.6 0.01Crude prote...
Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <DMI, kg 6.46 6.35 6.32 5.75 0.04CH4 productionL/steer 69.8 70.7 83.1 101.9 0.01L/kg o...
Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <N Intake, g/d 138.3 143.5 177.5 179.0 0.01Fecal N, g/d 50.5 53.2 64.2 57.5 0.05Urine ...
Assumptions Used in C-Footprint• CH4 = 21 x CO2: N2O = 298 x CO2• Manure CH4 from IPCC (2006)• Direct N2O = 2% of excreted...
Item SFC DRCNatural gas 5 to 105 0Enteric CH4 329 448Manure CH4 38 49Direct N2O 177 199Indirect N2O 25 28Crop Production 2...
Item SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45Natural gas 38 33 28 20Enteric CH4 280 281 310 370Manure CH4 21 23 25 26Direct N2O 180 196 ...
Conclusions• Cattle consuming SFC-based diets produced lessenteric CH4 and retained more energy than cattle fedDRC-based d...
Conclusions• Steam flaking corn lowered the C-footprint comparedto dry rolling corn because of its effects on enteric CH4p...
Questions??
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

0

Share

Effects of Corn Processing Method and Dietary Inclusion of Wet Distillers Grains with Solubles (WDGS) On Enteric Methane Emissions of Finishing Cattle

Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/67580

The use of wet distiller's grains with solubles (WDGS) in feedlot diets has increased as a result of the growing U.S. ethanol industry. However, few studies have evaluated the use of WDGS in finishing diets based on steam-flaked corn (SFC), the processing method used extensively in the Southern Great Plains. The effects of corn processing method and WDGS on enteric methane (CH4) production, carbon dioxide (CO2) production and energy metabolism were evaluated in two respiration calorimetry studies. In Exp. 1, the effects of corn processing method (SFC or dry rolled corn -- DRC) and WDGS inclusion (0 or 30% of diet dry matter- DM) were studied using a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments and four Jersey steers in a 4 x 4 Latin square design. In Exp. 2, the effects of WDGS inclusion rate (0, 15, 30, or 45% of diet DM) on CH4 and CO2 production were measured in a 4 x 4 Latin square design. Results indicate that cattle consuming SFC-based diets produce less enteric CH4 and retain more energy than cattle fed DRC-based diets. When dietary fat levels were held constant, dietary inclusion of WDGS at 15% of diet DM did not affect enteric CH4 production, WDGS inclusion at 45% of diet DM significantly increased enteric CH4 production and WDGS inclusion at 30% of diet DM had variable effects on enteric CH4 production.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to like this

Effects of Corn Processing Method and Dietary Inclusion of Wet Distillers Grains with Solubles (WDGS) On Enteric Methane Emissions of Finishing Cattle

  1. 1. Effects of corn processing method anddietary inclusion of wet distillers grainwith solubles on enteric methaneemissions of finishing cattleN. A. Cole*, K. E. Hales , R. W. Todd,⃰ K. Casey †, J. C. MacDonald†⃰USDA-ARS-CPRL, Bushland, TX; USDA-ARS-MARC, Clay Center, NE† Texas A&M Agrilife Research, Amarillo, TX
  2. 2. Introduction• Wet distillers grains withsolubles (WDGS) arebyproducts of grain-basedbio-ethanol industry• The growth of the bio-ethanol industry hasincreased the use of WDGSin beef cattle finishing diets• Few studies have usedsteam-flaked corn (SFC)-based diets typically used inthe Southern Great Plains
  3. 3. Introduction• The potential effects ofanimal feedingoperations on theenvironment are agrowing concern.• The potential effects offeeding WDGS on theenvironment need to beevaluated
  4. 4. Objectives• To determine the effects of corn processingmethod and WDGS inclusion rate onmetabolic CO2 and enteric CH4 losses fromcattle fed typical finishing diets
  5. 5. Experimental Design: Exp. 1• 4 Jersey steers• Initial BW = 191 kg• 4 x 4 Latin square design• 2 x 2 FAT– Grain processing method• SFC or dry-rolled corn (DRC)– Inclusion of WDGS• 0 or 30% on a DM-basis• WDGS was corn-based
  6. 6. Treatment Combinations: Exp. 1• SFC-based diet with 0% WDGS (SFC-0)• SFC-based diet with 30% WDGS (SFC-30)• DRC-based diet with 0% WDGS (DRC-0)• DRC-based diet with 30% WDGS (DRC-30)• Diets were balanced for RDP and fat– RDP = 8.0 %– Total fat = 6.0 to 6.8%
  7. 7. Experimental Design: Exp. 2• 4 Jersey steers• Initial BW = 322 kg• 4 x 4 Latin square design• Factors– WDGS at 4 inclusion rates– 0, 15, 30, 45% of DM– RDP >= 8%– Ether extract >= 6%
  8. 8. Procedures• Experimental periods were 21 d in length• 16 d of diet adaptation• 5 d of total urine, fecal, & gas collection– Air flow through chambers was controlled andmeasured using mass flow controllers -- at about300 L / min– CO2 and CH4 concentrations in the incoming andoutgoing air were determined using infrared gasanalyzers (Sable Systems, Las Vegas)
  9. 9. Statistical Analyses• Data were analyzed as a 4 x 4 Latin squaredesign using the PROC MIXED procedure ofSAS• Random effects of steer and period• Exp. 1 - Fixed effects of Grain Processing,WDGS concentration, and the GrainProcessing x WDGS interaction.• Exp. 2 – Linear and quadratic effects of WDGSconcentration were included in model
  10. 10. Ingredient, % DM basis SFC-0 SFC-30 DRC-0 DRC-30Steam-flaked corn 73.0 56.0 - -Dry-rolled corn - - 73.0 56.0WDGS - 30.0 - 30.0Alfalfa hay 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0Cottonseed meal 5.6 - 5.7 -Yellow grease 3.5 0.8 3.5 0.9Molasses 4.5 - 4.5 -Urea 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.6Supplement 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Ingredient Composition of Diets: Exp. 1
  11. 11. Nutrient Composition of Diets: Exp. 1Item (% DMB) SFC-0 SFC-30 DRC-0 DRC-30CP 13.24 17.36 13.12 17.27Starch 48.6 39.6 53.1 43.0NDF 11.48 16.39 14.63 18.80ADF 7.75 12.12 7.64 12.03Ether Extract 6.42 6.83 6.00 6.49Ca 0.98 0.89 0.90 0.83P 0.31 0.45 0.29 0.43S 0.15 0.33 0.15 0.33
  12. 12. Ingredient, % DM basis SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45Steam-flaked corn 73.0 69.25 56.0 41.65WDGS - 15.0 30.0 45.0Alfalfa hay 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0Cottonseed meal 5.6 - - -Yellow grease 3.50 2.25 0.85 0.50Molasses 4.5 - - -Urea 0.9 1.0 0.65 0.35Supplement 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Ingredient Composition of Diets: Exp. 2
  13. 13. Nutrient Composition of Diets: Exp. 2Item (% DMB) SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45CP 13.3 14.3 18.3 20.2Starch 60.7 58.8 42.8 39.1NDF 14.5 16.8 18.5 18.8ADF 7.9 8.7 12.3 16.5Ether Extract 5.9 5.8 7.4 8.3Ca 0.93 0.95 0.90 0.85P 0.30 0.32 0.40 0.45S 0.17 0.20 0.36 0.43
  14. 14. RESULTS
  15. 15. Grain processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <Gross energy, % 75.0 72.2 0.18 74.2 73.0 0.57Carbon, % 74.6 72.7 0.19 73.9 73.4 0.69Crude protein, % 64.8 70.5 0.05 64.4 70.9 0.03Starch, % 98.8 87.7 0.01 93.4 93.1 0.88NDF, % 25.9 48.4 0.01 29.7 44.7 0.02Ether extract, % 92.1 92.3 0.82 92.8 91.6 0.29Apparent Digestibility: Exp. 1
  16. 16. Grain Processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <DMI, kg 5.09 5.31 <0.10 5.19 5.21 0.54CH4 productionL/day 58.6 74.3 0.04 66.4 66.6 0.95L/kg of DMI 11.65 14.06 0.05 12.88 12.83 0.96% of GE intake 2.47 3.04 0.03 2.82 2.69 0.55% of DE intake 3.30 4.18 0.02 3.79 3.69 0.73CO2 productionL/steer 2,513 2,645 0.17 2,574 2,584 0.91CO2:CH4 ratio 44.2 37.4 0.03 41.0 40.5 0.86Daily CH4 and CO2 emissions: Exp. 1(2x maintenance)
  17. 17. Grain processing WDGS, %Item SFC DRC P < 0 30 P <N Intake, g/d 123.6 130.5 0.01 114.1 139.9 0.01Fecal N, g/d 42.9 38.5 0.19 40.5 40.9 0.89Urine N, g/d 45.7 48.0 0.46 39.8 53.9 0.01Total excreted N, g/d 88.6 86.5 0.65 80.3 94.8 0.01Urine N, % of intake 37.6 36.4 0.67 35.3 38.7 0.67Urine N, % of excreted 51.6 53.9 0.42 48.5 57.0 0.02Nitrogen Balance: Exp. 1
  18. 18. Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <Gross energy, % 72.7 70.6 66.4 63.3 0.01Carbon, % 74.2 71.6 68.0 64.6 0.01Crude protein,% 63.3 63.1 64.0 67.8 0.04Starch, % 99.4 99.3 99.1 99.0 0.07NDF, % 32.9 29.1 19.6 14.8 0.01Ether extract, % 92.7 90.5 92.5 92.6 0.50Apparent Digestibility (%): Exp. 2
  19. 19. Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <DMI, kg 6.46 6.35 6.32 5.75 0.04CH4 productionL/steer 69.8 70.7 83.1 101.9 0.01L/kg of DMI 10.94 11.24 13.24 17.92 0.01% of GE 2.44 2.46 2.85 3.73 0.01% of DE 3.35 3.47 4.29 5.91 0.01CO2 productionL/steer 2,928 2,968 2,798 2,692 0.23CO2:CH4 42.6 42.8 33.7 27.0 0.01Daily CH4 and CO2 emissions: Exp. 2(2x maintenance)
  20. 20. Item SFC-0SFC-15SFC-30SFC-45LinearP <N Intake, g/d 138.3 143.5 177.5 179.0 0.01Fecal N, g/d 50.5 53.2 64.2 57.5 0.05Urine N, g/d 44.6 68.8 68.8 81.9 0.01Total excreted, g/d 95.2 122.0 133.0 139.5 0.01Urine N, % of intake 32.0 48.8 38.9 46.8 0.28Urine N, % of excreted 44.1 55.9 51.8 58.2 0.56Nitrogen Balance: Exp. 2
  21. 21. Assumptions Used in C-Footprint• CH4 = 21 x CO2: N2O = 298 x CO2• Manure CH4 from IPCC (2006)• Direct N2O = 2% of excreted N (IPCC, 2006)• NH3 = 80% of urine N excretion• Indirect N2O = 1% of NH3 (IPCC, 2006)• C-footprint of natural gas = 1 or 21 x• Crop prod. footprint - Stackhouse et al (2013)• C-footprint of WDGS = 0 (assigned to ethanol)
  22. 22. Item SFC DRCNatural gas 5 to 105 0Enteric CH4 329 448Manure CH4 38 49Direct N2O 177 199Indirect N2O 25 28Crop Production 294 332Total CO2e (less CO2) 868 to 968 1,056C-Footprint (Kg CO2e/150 d): Exp. 1
  23. 23. Item SFC-0 SFC-15 SFC-30 SFC-45Natural gas 38 33 28 20Enteric CH4 280 281 310 370Manure CH4 21 23 25 26Direct N2O 180 196 219 242Indirect N2O 27 29 33 36Crop production 320 273 234 181Total CO2e 866 835 849 874C-footprint (Kg CO2e/150 d): Exp. 2
  24. 24. Conclusions• Cattle consuming SFC-based diets produced lessenteric CH4 and retained more energy than cattle fedDRC-based diets.• Inclusion of WDGS at 15 to 30% of dietary DM in SFC-based diets had little effect on enteric CH4 productionwhen diets were balanced for total fat.• Inclusion of WDGS at 45% of dietary DM significantlyincreased enteric CH4 production despite increaseddietary fat content.– Most likely a result of increased fiber intake
  25. 25. Conclusions• Steam flaking corn lowered the C-footprint comparedto dry rolling corn because of its effects on enteric CH4production and feed efficiency (i.e. less corn required).•• Despite greater CH4 and N2O -- inclusion of WDGS at15 to 30% of dietary DM slightly lowered the C-footprint because of reduced crop needs.• Despite decreased corn needs -- inclusion of WDGS at45% of dietary DM tended to increase the C-footprintbecause of increased enteric CH4 and manure N2O.
  26. 26. Questions??

Proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/67580 The use of wet distiller's grains with solubles (WDGS) in feedlot diets has increased as a result of the growing U.S. ethanol industry. However, few studies have evaluated the use of WDGS in finishing diets based on steam-flaked corn (SFC), the processing method used extensively in the Southern Great Plains. The effects of corn processing method and WDGS on enteric methane (CH4) production, carbon dioxide (CO2) production and energy metabolism were evaluated in two respiration calorimetry studies. In Exp. 1, the effects of corn processing method (SFC or dry rolled corn -- DRC) and WDGS inclusion (0 or 30% of diet dry matter- DM) were studied using a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments and four Jersey steers in a 4 x 4 Latin square design. In Exp. 2, the effects of WDGS inclusion rate (0, 15, 30, or 45% of diet DM) on CH4 and CO2 production were measured in a 4 x 4 Latin square design. Results indicate that cattle consuming SFC-based diets produce less enteric CH4 and retain more energy than cattle fed DRC-based diets. When dietary fat levels were held constant, dietary inclusion of WDGS at 15% of diet DM did not affect enteric CH4 production, WDGS inclusion at 45% of diet DM significantly increased enteric CH4 production and WDGS inclusion at 30% of diet DM had variable effects on enteric CH4 production.

Views

Total views

1,471

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

603

Actions

Downloads

0

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

0

×