Barley Malt Feed
Variations in Diets For Growing and Finishing Beef Steers
and Nicole Wolkenhauer
NDSU Carrington Research Extension
Center
Introduction
More calves are being fed on
North Dakota farms and ranches in recent years.
Many cow/calf producers have limited facilities to feed their calves and
often rely on self-feeders for concentrates and forages. A simple, safe, palatable, and nutritious
feed is needed for use in self feeders.
Co-product feeds are typically high in fiber and low in starch with some
variation in protein content based on source and processing method. North Dakota has an abundance of these types
of feeds. Considering that processors
typically export 80-90 percent of their co-product feeds, increasing usage near
the site of production should reduce shipping costs and simplify feeding
calves. Calves can be fed with home-grown
feeds and forages, but frequently protein or other nutrients need to be
purchased. Most co-products contain
relatively high levels of protein, are moderate to high in energy and offer the
convenience of year round availability, no requirement for processing, and
store well for long periods of time.
More producers are considering finishing their backgrounded calves to
capture returns from superior genetics and carcass quality premiums. Developing finishing rations using some of
the same ingredients in the growing diets offers less chance for stress in
switching rations and reduces logistics of shipping, bin storage, and mixing
feeds.
Barley malt, the residual
feed from malting barley, offers significant potential in growing and finishing
diets. Barley malt is considered a very
palatable and safe feed, a good protein source, and is price competitive. This project was undertaken to explore
methods of improving barley malt feed by using two different formulations in
rations for growing and finishing steer calves.
Barley Malt Co-Product
Barley malt feed consists of
thin and light kernels of malting barley screened off prior to the malting
process, but are mostly spent and dried barley malt sprouts. The pelleted feed is widely used in beef
cow/calf, creep feed, heifer development, and steer feedlot diets. This feed contains high levels of fiber and
is competitively priced protein source.
Barley malt is marketed in competition with other co-products in the
Northern Plains. It is available
throughout the year, comes pelleted, can be contracted for future delivery, and
handles and stores very well in all types of bins. In a steer growing trial with corn and barley
malt vs. corn and wheat midds, barley malt fed steers gained 3.09 lbs. /day vs.
3.43 lbs. for calves fed wheat midds.
The percentage of sprouts in the barley malt feed affected steer
performance. Sprouts at 50 percent of
the barley malt formulation produced gains .62 lb. per day less than wheat
midds; 60 percent sprouts were .30 lbs. per day less; and 80 percent sprouts
were .10 lb. less than wheat midds.
Wheat midds contain the germ of the kernel and some starch. Considering the digestible fiber in midds,
oil in the germ, and starch content, the TDN value of wheat midds is estimated
at about 80-81 percent compared to 76-77 percent for barley malt.
Barley malt has been observed
to be highly palatable for young calves.
However, the energy density is less than required for small calves so a
creep feed formulation with barley malt should contain more nutrient dense
grains such as corn or peas. Some
commercial supplements are available to make a balanced and productive calf
starter or creep feed based on barley malt or other
co-products.
Methodology
Preconditioned Angus
crossbred beef steer calves (n=48) raised at the Central Grasslands Research Extension
Center and backgrounded at the Hettinger Research Extension Center were
delivered to the Carrington Research Extension Center in mid January,
2003. Calves were individually weighed
after a warm up diet of mixed barley malt pellets at the start of the trial and
allotted randomly to one of six pens with three pens per treatment. Treatments were: 1) control, conventional
barley malt feed; 2) barley malt feed supplemented with a proprietary additive
package. The additive package was a
liquid feed mix included at 7 percent of the dry malt product prior to
pelleting. Nutrients in the liquid
additive included soluble protein, fat, and minerals. Table 1 provides a comparison of nutrients in
the two barley malt products.
During a 56-day growing
period, the two different barley malt feeds were fed to appetite daily in
fenceline bunks. This free-choice
offering of a single feed was an attempt to mimic a self feeder. An ionophore-mineral supplement was fed top-dressed
on the barley malt feeds at 1 lb. per head daily. Low quality grass hay was offered in large
round bale ring feeders inside each pen.
Bales were weighed when fed and an estimate of wasted hay made when the
next bale was added. Calves were weighed
at 28-day intervals. Calves had all been
previously vaccinated and dewormed. A Synovex S implant was administered at the
start of the growing period.
The finishing period extended
for another 84 days with calves remaining in the same pens and respective
barley malt treatments as growing. A
totally mixed finishing diet was offered that contained approximately 18
percent barley malt, corn grain, silage, and chopped hay. The 63 Mcal NEg diet was fed daily in
fenceline bunks to appetite. Calves were
weighed every 28 days. Table 2 contains
the respective ingredient proportions for the two treatments for each feeding
phase.
Results and Discussion
There was very little
difference in the nutritional value of the two formulations (Table 1). A reduction in ADF from 40.06 to 32.37 percent
and an increase in fat content from 1.88 to 2.92 percent for the additive
formulation were the only apparent differences.
Calves in this study consumed 109 percent of the predicted intake during
the growing period, suggesting that this feed is highly palatable; however,
there was very little difference in intake of the two feeds (Table 2). Hay intake measurement was not precise as
wasted hay was estimated. Average weight
of steers for each period, dry matter intake, and feed efficiency are reported
in Table 3. During finishing, feed
intake did not differ (P>.05) and averaged 26.30 lbs./hd/d. However, calves on the control malt product
gained faster (P=.04) during the first weigh period but there were no
differences (P>.05) in gain after that.
Numerically, average daily gain for the control group was .25 lb./hd/d more than the additive group during growing and .14 lb.
more per day during finishing. Feed
efficiency was not different (P>.05) for the two treatments with numerical
variation observed for the first period with the advantage to the control
calves.
Discussion
This study suggests that the
control barley malt product is a very acceptable feed as no improvement was
observed during either growing or finishing for the additive. The lack of any advantage for the malt
product with the additive suggests animal nutrient requirements were being met
with the basic product. Calves at this
stage of growth require no more than a 13.5 percent crude protein diet which
was provided in both treatments. It
appears that the neutral detergent fiber and the digestible fiber component of
the control product may offer some advantages which may be compensated for by
the additives.
Implications
Barley malt can be a useful
feed when fed alone or in combinations with other grains and forages during
growing and finishing. Appropriate supplementation
is necessary as the phosphorous level needs to be balance with high calcium
supplements to avoid waterbelly in steers. Economic comparisons require
assessment of the feed cost (on a cost per nutrient basis), shipping, storage,
and mixing.
Literature Cited
Appreciation is expressed to Cargill Malt
for support of this project.