1. Corn Ethanol Co-Products For Finishing Beef Cattle Darrell R. Mark, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Galen Erickson, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Crystal Buckner, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

2. Types of Corn Co-Products 1.Corn gluten feed: wet mill –Corn bran + steep –Can be wet or dry –Moderate crude protein, CP = 16-23% 80% of CP is DIP (ruminally degradable) –Low fat, moderate fiber, TDN = 80 –101-115% of energy value of dry-rolled corn –Product variation is significant within and across plants due to amount of steep added back to the corn bran

3. Types of Corn Co-Products 2.Distillers Grains + Solubles: dry mill –Distillers Grains (65%) & Solubles (35%) (DM basis) –May be wet or dried –Higher crude protein, CP = 30% 65% UIP (undegraded, “bypass”, protein) –High fat (11%), TDN = 70-110 –Concentrates nutrients 3-fold from corn 0.8% P, 0.35-1.0% Sulfur (variable)

4. Types of Corn Co-Products 3.Condensed distillers soluables: dry mill –Also known as “syrup” –35% dry matter but in liquid form –Higher crude protein, CP = 26% –High fat, low fiber, TDN = 110-115 4.Modified DGS are available –(35-65% DM) 5.Hybrid wet & dry plant combining corn bran and distillers solubles  bran cake –Example: Dakota Bran Cake

5. Nutrient Composition of Selected Corn Milling Co-Products

6. General Corn Co-Products Cattle Finishing Comments High energy & protein Helps control acidosis (no starch in co-products) May be able to feed less (or lower quality) roughage Inclusion rate may depend on corn processing method High variation in feeding value/composition of co- products presents challenge for feeding WDGS results in better performance than DDGS

7. Energy Value of WDGS vs DDGS Fed at 40% of Diet DM

8. Energy Content of WDGS y = -0.96x + 167 R 2 = 0.32

9. Feed Efficiency & ADG Response To WDG Inclusion Rate Source: Vander Pol et al., 2006 Nebraska Beef Rep. and 2005 Midwest ASAS

10. Feed Efficiency & ADG Response To DDG Inclusion Rate Source: Buckner et al., 2007 Nebraska Beef Rep.

11. Economic Issues Associated With Feeding Ethanol Co-Products Performance improvements from feeding WDGS & WCGF at 30-40% dietary inclusion hedges against corn price increases Cattle biological response to WDGS is quadratic and response to WCGF is linear Feeding wet co-products leads to: –Increased trucking cost to feedyard –Increased feeding/handling cost within feedyard –Fewer days on feed (less yardage/interest cost)

12. Cattle Feeding Budget Model With WDGS & WCGF Inputs Dietary ingredients (DM, inclusion, price) Cattle performance (DMI, feed conversion) Trucking distance, size, cost Yardage, processing/health, interest rate Outputs ADG & DOF Total Costs –Yardage –Ration –Feeding expense –Co-product hauling Net Return Return to co-product feeding

13. Example Feeder cattle in-weight740 lbs Fed cattle out-weight1300 lbs Days on feed153 days DMI24 lbs Feed:Gain6.5 lbs/lb Yardage cost$0.35/hd/day Trucking $3.00/loaded m Corn price$2.76/bu WDGS price95% of corn price (DM basis)

14. Marginal Return to WDGS Feeding with Varying Corn Prices Distance at 60 miles -$91.67 -$143.19 -$195.41 -$247.62

15. Marginal Return to WDGS Feeding with Varying Distances to Plant Corn at $3.50/bu -$143.19

16. Marginal Return to WDGS Feeding with Varying WDGS Prices Relative to Corn Distance at 60 milesCorn at $3.50/bu -$143.19

17. Marginal Return to WCGF Feeding with Varying Corn Prices Distance at 60 miles -$91.67 -$143.19 -$195.41 -$247.62

18. Budget Model Summary Model accounts for growth biology and changing prices At 30% inclusion rate of WDGS, marginal return most impacted by corn price –Distance from plant and hauling cost not as important Can evaluate the marginal benefit to multiple co- products

19. To Feed More Co-Product More ethanol production  need to feed more co-products More than 40% WDGS may add too much fat and sulfur to the diet Possibility: Feed combinations of WDGS & WCGF

20. WCGF & WDGS Combination Feeding Trial Source: Buckner et al., 2006

21. WCGF & WDGS Combination Feeding Trial Source: Buckner et al., 2006 P< 0.05

22. Challenges DGS is most available in late summer –Seasonally cheapest then too –Seasonally fewest cattle on feed then too Storing wet DGS product –Material exposed to air spoils in 7-14 days depending on temperature –Has low pH and does not ensile but will keep in air-tight storage for long periods –Spoilage loss stored in silage bags (Walker et al) 20% loss opened and fed day 78-112 post-sealing 28% loss opened and fed day 190-257 post sealing

23. Cattle on Feed, All States, 1000+ Head Feedyards 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Month Thousand Head 2005 2006 5 Yr Ave Source: USDA Seasonal Low in Cattle on Feed…

24. When WDGS Price Is Lowest Seasonal Index of Dried Distillers Grains, Nebraska, 2003-2005 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Price Index (% of Annual Avg) Seasonal Price Index Seasonal Price Index + 1 Std Dev Seasonal Price Index - 1 Std Dev Source: AMS & University of Nebraska-Lincoln

25. Storing WDGS Storing wet DGS product –Often delivered in truck load lots –Can store wet DGS in bunker, silage bag or in pile covered with plastic to protect from air –Can mix with tub-ground forage and stored in bunker or bag –Have to have the “mix” right…

26. Minimum Levels of Roughage To Mix in WDGS For Storage Bagging a Bunker Grass hay15%30-40 Wheat straw12.525-32 Alfalfa hay22.545-55? DDGS50--- ADMCGF60--- a 300 PSI. Source: Erickson & Klopfenstein

27. Resources http://beef.unl.edu www.iowabeefcenter.org http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/