IMPROVING BEEF COW/CALF ENTERPRISE WATER AND NUTRIENT UTILIZATION

• Sponsoring Institution: National Institute of Food and Agriculture
• Project Status: COMPLETE
• Funding Source: HATCH
• Reporting Frequency: Annual
• Accession No.: 1016156
• Project Start Date: Oct 1, 2018
• Project End Date: Sep 30, 2023
• Program Code: [(N/A)]- (N/A)

Recipient Organization
OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY
(N/A)
STILLWATER,OK 74078

Performing Department
Animal Science

Non Technical Summary
With a high concentration of beef cows in Oklahoma and the Southern Great Plains region, water availability and water quality are critical elements in maintaining healthy, productive livestock. In this project, we will determine water requirements and water quality standards for beef cows. Recent data are available to estimate water requirements of growing calves, feedlot cattle and dairy cattle. However, the latest data available for estimating water requirements for beef cows were published in 1956 (Winchester and Morris, 1956). Furthermore, over time, supply of brackish water (primarily through water wells) is increasing in Oklahoma. Little is known about the usefulness of brackish water in maintaining healthy livestock. Our goal will be to determine the effects of brackish water with varying levels of salinity on health and production of beef cows and growing calves. A second primary objective in this work is to investigate and characterize genetic traits that influence cow efficiency in the Southern Great Plains. In this context, cow efficiency is defined as grams of calf weaning weight produced per mega calorie of metabolizable energy consumed and per liter of water use by the cow. Data from our research program and others indicate that the Southern Great Plains environment and adopted management systems in commercial cow/calf operations may restrict the capability of modern cattle to express their genetic potential. While post-weaning performance of cattle has improved with aggressive genetic selection for growth and carcass characteristics, limited data suggests that neither weaning weight nor reproductive performance have improved in over 20 years (Lalman et al., 2016). This "restriction" of output appears to apply to forage-based, low-input and moderate-input systems such as those frequently applied in commercial cow/calf enterprises. Seedstock enterprises, on the other hand, are encouraged to continually select for traits that maximize weaning and post-weaning performance because commercial breeders generally pay more for seedstock that have the potential to increase their ranch output. In response, seedstock operations increase the use of expensive inputs so that maximum genetic potential can be expressed and the cycle continues. The problem with continually increasing genetic potential for output in less restricted or unrestricted environments is that maintenance cost of the cow herd increases over time which results in increased annual carrying cost with no more saleable product. Our goal is to provide practical guidelines for optimizing the match of genetic potential of various characteristics to grazing and water resources. Many of these characteristics, such as milk yield, forage intake per unit of production, and maintenance energy requirement cannot be measured directly on the ranch.

Animal Health Component

85%

Research Effort Categories

Basic

15%

Applied

85%

Developmental

(N/A)

Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)	Subject of Investigation (SOI)	Field of Science (FOS)	Percent
302	0210	1010	100%

Knowledge Area
302 - Nutrient Utilization in Animals;

Subject Of Investigation
0210 - Water resources;

Field Of Science
1010 - Nutrition and metabolism;

Keywords

water requirements

maintenance requirements

beef cows

water quality

energy requirements

Goals / Objectives
According to the USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service (2018), Oklahoma ranks 2nd among states in number of beef cows with 2.1 million head and 5th among states in total cattle with 5.1 million head contributing $3.2 billion in value of production to the state's economy. With a high concentration of beef cows in Oklahoma and the Southern Great Plains region, water availability and water quality are critical elements in maintaining healthy, productive livestock. One goal for this project is to determine water requirements and water quality standards for beef cows. Recent data are available to estimate water requirements of growing calves, feedlot cattle and dairy cattle. However, the latest data available for estimating water requirements for beef cows were published in 1956 (Winchester and Morris, 1956). Furthermore, over time, supply of brackish water (primarily through water wells) is increasing in Oklahoma. Little is known about the usefulness of brackish water in maintaining healthy livestock. Our goal will be to determine the effects of brackish water with varying levels of salinity on health and production of beef cows and growing calves. A second goal for this project is to investigate and characterize genetic traits that influence cow efficiency in the Southern Great Plains. In this context, cow efficiency is defined as grams of calf weaning weight produced per mega calorie of metabolizable energy consumed and per liter of water use by the cow. Data from our research program and others indicate that the Southern Great Plains environment and adopted management systems in commercial cow/calf operations may restrict the capability of modern cattle to express their genetic potential. While post-weaning performance of cattle has improved with aggressive genetic selection for growth and carcass characteristics, limited data suggests that neither weaning weight nor reproductive performance have improved in over 20 years (Lalman et al., 2016). This "restriction" of output appears to apply to forage-based, low-input and moderate-input systems such as those frequently applied in commercial cow/calf enterprises. Seedstock enterprises, on the other hand, are encouraged to continually select for traits that maximize weaning and post-weaning performance because commercial breeders generally pay more for seedstock that have the potential to increase their ranch output. In response, seedstock operations increase the use of expensive inputs so that maximum genetic potential can be expressed and the cycle continues. The problem with continually increasing genetic potential for output in less restricted or unrestricted environments is that maintenance cost of the cow herd increases over time which results in increased annual carrying cost with no more saleable product. Our goal is to provide practical guidelines for optimizing the match of genetic potential of various characteristics to grazing and water resources. Many of these characteristics, such as milk yield, forage intake per unit of production, and maintenance energy requirement cannot be measured directly on the ranch.

Project Methods
Experiment 1. Ten animals will be used, with five each of open, non-lactating mature cows and growing heifers from the same herd and of similar genetic makeup. Each animal type will be used in a simultaneous 5 × 5 Latin square experiment with five 3-week periods. The five drinking water treatments within each square are: 1) control (fresh water); 2) brackish water source (100-BRW treatment) with approximately 6,000 ppm TDS; 3) same TDS level as 100-BRW achieved by addition of NaCl to fresh water (100-SLW); 4) 50% brackish water and 50% fresh water to achieve approximately 3,000 ppm TDS (50-BRW); and 5) same TDS level as 50-BRW achieved by addition of NaCl to fresh water (50-SLW). Animals will be housed individually and moderate quality grass hay and drinking water will be offered at 120% of consumption of the preceding few days. Feed and water intake will be determined daily. In the last week of each period, water consumption and total output of feces will be measured. Feed, water, and feces will be sampled daily to form composite samples. Digestibility will be based on feed dry matter intake and fecal dry matter output. Digestible energy (DE) intake will be calculated as the difference between GE intake and fecal energy output. Blood samples will be collected venipuncture at 4 h post feeding on day 14 and at the end of the last day of each period. Immediately after sampling hemoglobin concentration and O2 saturation will be determinedand glucose and lactate concentrations will be measured. Packed cell volume will be determined with heparinized tubes.Data will be analyzed using a mixed effects model consisting of age, water treatment, and the interaction, with period included as a repeated measure.Experiment 2. A total of 80 weaned heifer calves will be housed in eight dirt-floor pens. A completely randomized design will be used with four water sources and two pen replications per water source. Each pen will house 10 heifers during the 12-week experiment and pen will serve as the experimental unit. Water treatments are: 1) control (fresh water); 2) brackish water source used in Experiment 1 (100-BRW treatment) with approximately 6,000 ppm TDS; 3) 50% brackish water and 50% fresh water to achieve approximately 3,000 ppm TDS (50-BRW); and 4) same TDS level as 50-BRW achieved by addition of NaCl to fresh water (50-SLW).This range of TDS is expected to cover the practical range found in most surface and well water samples that are considered safe for livestock use (Zhang and Payne, 2016).Calves will have ad libitum access to water through automatic watering tanksin the pens.A total mixed ration containing grass hay, cracked corn, dried distiller's grains, and liquid supplement will be provided for ad libitum consumption.Feed bunks will be monitored daily and amount of feed delivery adjusted to insure approximately 5% daily feed refusals. Orts will be collected, sampled and discarded on a weekly basis.Water consumption for each pen will be recorded daily and water tanks will be closely monitored and cleaned as needed throughout the experiment to insure that water tanks are clean, not leaking, running over or frozen.Pen will serve as the experimental unit. Data will be analyzed with a mixed model consisting of fixed effects of treatment, period (repeated measure), and their interaction, with the random effect of pen within treatment.Experiment 3.Approximately 32 Angus (four pens of 8 cow/calf pairs) and 32 Hereford X Angus fall-calving beef cows (four pens of 8 cow/calf pairs) and their calves will be used. During the month of January, bulls will be removed and cows and their calves will be moved to dry lot pens where daily feed intake of cows and their calves can be controlled and measured. Cows will not have access to calf feed and calves will not have access to cow feed. Calves will be provided the same diet as the cows and limit-fed to approximately 1.25% of their body weight. Cows and calves will be weighed every 7 days. The dry lot period will continue through approximately April 15. Cows' daily ration amount will be adjusted every 7 days in order to stabilize average cow weight gain or loss for the pen (Cooper-Prado, 2014). Feed energy required for maintenance will be defined as the amount of daily metabolizable energy intake (MEI) required to maintain constant body weight in the cows.Milk yield and composition will be determined monthly.Additional measurements will include cow hip height, monthly body condition score, and initial and final ultrasound back fat, rump fat and longissimus muscle area. The amount of feed energy (both cow feed and calf feed) required to achieve each pound of calf weight gain and the amount of milk required to achieve each pound of calf weight gain will be determined.Water consumption for each pen will be recorded daily and water tanks will be closely monitored throughout the experiment.Approximately 30 Angus (three pens of 10 cows) and 30 Hereford X Angus beef cows (three pens of 10 cows) will be used.During the month of October, cows will be moved to dry lot pens where daily feed and water intake of cows and their calves can be controlled and measured. The experimental period will begin in late-October and continue through January for approximately 90 days. Treatment groups will receive the same amount of feed (initial feeding rate is anticipated to be approximately 55 grams per kg of body weight.75) throughout the experiment. Consequently, if significant "feed efficiency" differences exist, body weight and body condition score should gradually diverge among the treatment groups.Pen will serve as the experimental unit. Data will be analyzed as a completely random design using ANOVA (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC) and the Satterthwaite approximation for degrees of freedom.Experiment 4.A total of 48 cow/calf pairs per year will be maintained in native forage or bermudagrass pastures. Twenty-four spring-calving and 24 fall-calving cows will be used. There will be two experimental treatments (12 cows and their calves within herd and within treatment per year), classified as easy or hard fleshing. Cows will be assigned to their treatment based on previous year's body condition score (BCS) at weaning, prior to calving and the recent year's BCS at weaning. Easy fleshing cows are cows scoring a BCS of six or greater (1-9 scale) and hard fleshing will be cows that have a BCS of 4 or less. Body composition data will also be used in the alimentation of treatments.Within each calving season, two 60-day dry matter intake studies will be performed each year using Smart Feed® individual feed intake units with large feed boxes to accommodate long-stemmed hay. Feed intake studies will be timed to coincide with early lactation and the dry period during the second trimester after calves are weaned. During the lactation intake study, supplementation will be provided on an individual animal basis and designed to complement the nutritive value of the hay. Calves will have access to creep feed in an adjacent creep feeding area. Change in body weight and BCS will be used to estimate retained energy.Milk yield and composition will be determined four times (approximately every 45 days) during lactation. Also, liver and muscle tissue will be collected to measure mitochondrial oxygen consumption and relative muscle tissue energy expenditure.Individual animal will serve as the experimental unit. Data will be analyzed using MIXED MODEL procedures of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC) and the Satterthwaite approximation for degrees of freedom.

Progress 10/01/19 to 09/30/20

Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for information generated by this project during the reporting period includes beef cattle producers, scientists working in the general areas of beef cattle production and sustainability, extension educators, allied industry professionals, and veterinarians. Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Two Masters' students and one Ph.D. student have been provided graduate training and professional development through this project in the past year. In addition, four different undergraduate students have been employed and provided substantial opportunity to gain experience managing cattle and conducting research. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Research updates have been disseminated through presentations and abstracts published through the Southern Section, American Society of Animal Science, SUNUP Television segments, invited presentations, and Ranchers' Thursday Lunchtime Series Webinars (initiated in April 2020 during the pandemic). What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Our primary goal in the next reporting period is to get the water project data submitted for publication and two of the cow efficiency papers submitted for publication. As soon as we get beyond the pandemic, we hope to host a field day at the Range Cow Research Center to provide an opportunity for clientele to view the research in progress.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Goal 1: The frequency of newwells producing water withhigh concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS; brackish water) has increased over time.In addition, the latest data published characterizing beef cow water intake was published in 1956. Thus far, through this project, we have discovered that beef cattle can effectively utilize water containing a relatively high concentration of TDS without negative effects on water intake, feed intake, feed digestibility, and animal health. Another important preliminary finding is that voluntary water consumption was nearly two times greater than published estimates. These results suggest the need for more research to better understand daily water consumption in beef cows, which could have an impact on the development and design of cattle watering systems. Goal 2: Beef cows utilize nearly 70% of the total feed energy used to produce beef. Therefore, identifying factors and genetic components that influence forage utilization efficiency has the potential to dramatically reduce the cost of production and minimize the carbon footprint in the cattle industry. We discovered that the use of a crossbreeding system, including a breed known for low feed intake (Hereford), was complementary to a system utilizing purebred Angus cows. Crossbred cows maintained greater body condition while consuming less low-quality forage. Goal 1, Objective 1: Determine the influence of brackish water on water intake, feed intake,feed digestibility, and blood metabolites related to animal health 1) Major activities completed / experiments conducted: An experiment evaluating the influence of water containing up to 6,000 ppm TDS on water and feed intake and feed utilization has been completed. 2) Data collected: Data collected include water intake, feed intake, feed digestibility, and blood chemistry parameters to evaluate animal health, including dehydration. 3) Summary statistics: This data is currently being analyzed. Preliminary results indicate neither water, feed consumption, nor feed digestibility was influenced when cows and growing heifers consumed brackish water. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Preliminary results suggest that beef cattle may have the ability to efficiently utilize brackish water without compromising production or health. Further research is necessary to determine potential long-term effects. Goal 1, Objective 2: Determine voluntary water consumption in beef cows and growing heifers 1) Major activities completed / experiments conducted: An experiment evaluating the influence of cow age (growing heifer calves and three-year-old cows) on voluntary water and feed consumption was completed. 2) Data collected: Data collected include water intake, feed intake, and feed digestibility. 3) Summary statistics: This data is currently being analyzed. Preliminary results indicate that water intake was about 30% greater than published values for growing cattle and about 80% greater than published values for mature beef cows. A portion of the high level of water intake may be related to the high-quality forage diet and the small particle size of the feed source (pelleted alfalfa cubes). 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Preliminary results suggest that published estimates for mature beef cow water intake are not accurate. Further research is required to better characterize factors influencing voluntary water intake in beef cows and growing cattle. Goal 2, Objective 1: Determine the influence of breeding system on beef cow feed/forage intake and efficiency of feed energy utilization 1) Major activities completed / experiments conducted: An experiment evaluating the influence of a crossbreeding system (Angus vs Hereford X Angus) on feed intake and feed energy utilization was completed and published. 2) Data collected: Data collected include water intake, feed intake, feed digestibility, maintenance energy requirements, calf growth, and milk yield. 3) Summary statistics: Cow frame size and body weight, maintenance energy requirements, nor calf growth differed due to the breeding system. However, crossbred cows consumed about 2 pounds per day less low-quality forage and maintained a greater body condition score compared to purebred cows. Milk yield tended to be greater in purebred Angus cows although milk energy concentration was greater in the Hereford-sired crossbred cows. When efficiency was evaluated through the weaning phase of beef production, voluntary feed intake was reduced while body composition was improved in Hereford-sired crossbred females with no concomitant decrease in production. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: These results suggest that utilizing a breed known for lower feed intake should result in improved enterprise efficiency and perhaps lower carbon footprint when evaluated through the weaning phase of beef production. Further research is necessary to determine if production efficiency through weaning is offset by reduced post-weaning performance, feed utilization efficiency, or carcass quality. Goal 2, Objective 2: Determine the influence of fleshing ability and milk yield on beef cow feed intake 1) Major activities completed / experiments conducted: An experiment evaluating the influence of body composition and milk yield on feed intake was completed. 2) Data collected: Data collected included feed intake, body condition score, milk yield, weight change, ultrasound body composition changes, and greenhouse gas emissions. 3) Summary statistics: This data currently being analyzed.

Publications

• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2020 Citation: C E Andresen, A W Wiseman, A McGee, C Goad, A P Foote, R Reuter, D L Lalman. 2020. Maintenance energy requirements and forage intake of purebred vs crossbred beef cows, Translational Animal Science, txaa008, https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa008
• Type: Websites Status: Published Year Published: 2020 Citation: Lalman, D; Beck, P. (April 2020). beef.okstate.edu. http://beef.okstate.edu/
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2020 Citation: Bruce H., Garner, Krista D., Lalman, David, and Talley, Justin L. 2020. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Ticks, Tick-Borne Pathogens, and Tick Prevention among Beef Producers in Oklahoma Noden. Southwestern Entomologist, 45(2) : 341-350. doi.org/10.3958/059.045.0202

Progress 10/01/18 to 09/30/19

Outputs
Target Audience:The target audiences included scientists, veterinarians, beef cattle producers, and beef industry professionals. Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Threedifferent graduate students and four undergraduates participated in this work. Their involvement included monitoring and treating animals for health issues, feeding cattle daily, milking, weighing and collecting feed nutritive value data. In addition, graduate students prepared abstract summaries of their work to present at the January 2019 Southern Section, American Society of Animal Science meetings. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results were presented at the Southern Section, American Society of Animal Science Annual Meeting. In addition, some of the results have been shared through our SUNUP TV program, national and regional producer meetings and through a research report publication. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Analyze data and prepare manuscripts for themaintenance of energy and water quality studies. In addition, one studywill be conducted to measurevoluntary forage intake of Hereford X Angus and Angus beef cows. In asecond experiment, we will measure the maintenance requirements of Hereford X Angus and Angus cows using an individual animal as the experimental unit (individual feeding).

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? A study was initiated to determine the effects of brackish water on water intake, feed intake, feed digestibility and dehydration in beef cows and growing heifers. This study is ongoing at the time of this report. Two pen-based experiments (pen was the experimental unit) wereconducted to determine milk production, maintenance energy requirements, efficiency of calf growth and voluntary feed intake of Hereford X Angus and Angus beef cows. Results from theseexperiments have been submitted for publication and are under review. Neither maintenance energy requirements nor efficiency of calf growth differed by breed, although voluntary feed intake of a low-quality forage diet was lower for Hereford X Angus cows. There was no difference in maintenance energy requirements nor voluntary feed intake per unit of body weight due to cow age.

Publications

• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2019 Citation: Lalman, D.L., C.E. Andresen, A.L. Holder, R. R. Reuter, and A. Foote. Application of the CNES to grazed forage: feed values and requirements. J. Translational Anim. Sci. 3: 962-968, https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txz034
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Maintenance Requirements in the U.S. Cow Herd. Cactus Beef Symposium. ASAS National Convention, Vancouver, Canada. July 10, 2018. Attendance: 150.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2019 Citation: Wiseman, A. R., M. D. Redden, C. S. Spencer, A. L. McGee, R. R. Reuter, G. W. Horn, and D. L. Lalman. 2019. Effects of timing of weaning on energy utilization in primiparous beef cows and post-weaning performance of their progeny. J. Anim. Sci. 97: 1198-1211, https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skz019
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2019 Citation: Lalman, D.L., C.E. Andresen, C.L. Goad, L. Kriese -Anderson, M.E. King, and K.G. Odde. 2019. Weaning weight trends in the U.S. beef cattle industry. J. Applied Anim. Sci. 35: 57  65, https://doi.org/10.15232/aas.2018-01797