1. Ethanol byproduct use by feedlots G. Erickson, T. Klopfenstein & many students

3. DRY MILLING-WDG(+S) GRAIN GRIND, WET, COOK, ENZYMES YEAST FERMENTATION STILLALCOHOL & CO 2 STILLAGE DISTILLERS GRAINS WDG, DDG DISTILLERS SOLUBLES WDGS DDGS Abengoa Bioenergy, York, NE

4. WET MILLING-CGF CORNSTEEP GRIND SEPARATION WET CORN GLUTEN FEED STARCH, SWEETENER, ALCOHOL GLUTEN MEAL CORN OIL STEEPCORN BRAN DRY CORN GLUTEN FEED SEM, screenings, dist solubles Cargill wet milling, Blair, NE

5. Byproducts WDGS, modified (45% DM) WDGS, traditional (35% DM) DDGS (90% DM) Syrup, distillers solubles, CCDS WCGF (45% DM) WCGF-Sweet Bran (60% DM) DCGF Steep “new” distillers grains

6. Testing Protocol Six Nebraska Dry Milling Ethanol Plants (WDGS and MDGS) –4 sampling periods (one year) 10 samples*d -1 5 consecutive d July, February, April, June 1 sample = 1 truck-load leaving plant –From the truck or pile to be loaded –Mixed and sub-sampled

7. Dry Matter Variation in WDGS Overall Min.30.728.526.226.5 Max.35.237.235.835.1 Period 2 Min.32.028.526.2 1 26.5 Max.33.534.433.9 1 32.0 CV%1.24.07.10.9 Day CV%0.92.02.50.8 IIIIIIIV Ethanol Plant 1 29%.

8. Nutrient Averages (All Plants) 31.0% CP 11.9% Fat 0.83% P 0.77% S

9. Fat Results and Variation Plant ABCDEF Min Fat% -load 11.27.211.610.49.49.6 Avg Fat%12.111.013.012.211.012.0 Max Fat% -load 13.012.815.313.713.5 Fat Average by Plant within Period Range 10.2-13.3%

10. Sulfur Results and Variation Plant ABCDEF Min S% -load 0.440.580.600.610.650.71 Avg S%0.710.740.760.830.760.85 Max S% -load 1.720.840.971.260.931.04

11. Sulfur% -- Period 1

12. Sulfur% -- Period 4

13. Use Inclusion < 15% (2-3 lb): protein Inclusion > 15% (4+ lb): energy

14. UNL Studies Used

15. Linear P < 0.01 Average Daily Gain ADG, lb Quadratic P < 0.01 % WDGS (DM basis) WDGS LevelADG (lb) 03.47 103.70 203.83 30 3.87 403.81 503.66 Predicted Values

16. Feed Conversion F:G WDGS LevelF:G 06.44 106.16 205.95 305.81 405.74 50 5.73 Predicted Values Linear P < 0.01 Quadratic P = 0.09 % WDGS (DM basis)

17. Marbling Score Linear P = 0.05 Quadratic P = 0.05 % WDGS (DM basis)

18. Studies Used ExperimentYearDiet DM % DDGSHd/Tx Benson et al.20050, 15, 25, 3548 Bremer et al.20050, 3060 Buckner et al.20070, 10, 20, 30, 4040 Ham et al.19940, 4032 May et al.20070, 2596

19. Linear P < 0.01 Average Daily Gain ADG, lb Quadratic P < 0.01 % DDGS (DM basis) DDGS LevelADG (lb) 03.43 103.63 203.73 30 3.74 403.65 Predicted Values Cubic P = 0.54

20. Feed Conversion F:G DDGS LevelF:G 06.62 106.41 206.31 306.31 406.42 Predicted Values Linear P = 0.07 Quadratic P = 0.02 % DDGS (DM basis) Cubic P = 0.97

21. Marbling Score Linear P = 0.07 Quadratic P = 0.13 % DDGS (DM basis) DDGS LevelMarbling 0540 10535 20529 30524 40518 Predicted Values Cubic P = 0.79

22. Modified WDGS Huls et al., 2008 Nebraska Beef Rep. (in press)

23. Feeding Value Results Feeding Value =((DGS G:F/CON G:F)-1)/(DGS inclusion decimal))+100 01020304050 DDGS FV, % of corn 100153123107100 WDGS FV, % of corn 100145142137131126 Diet % DGS (DM basis) MDGS FV, % of corn100123127118109111

24. Corn Price with WDGS 85% WDGS Price to Corn 40 Miles Distance

25. WDGS Price to Corn 40 Miles Distance $3.50/bu Corn Price

26. UNL Studies Used

27. Average Daily Gain Diet DM % WCGF ADG (lb) Intercept cov. P = 0.05L P < 0.01 ≠ 0 P < 0.01 Q P = 0.67

28. Feed Conversion Diet DM % WCGF F:G (lb/lb) Intercept cov. P = 0.05L P = 0.03 ≠ 0 P < 0.01 Q P = 0.48

29. Feedlot Diet Issues for DGS  Roughages  Corn processing  Rumensin & Tylan  Feeding greater amounts  Sulfur  Phosphorus  Storage

30. Do we have to feed grain?

31. Sulfur/Polio  4143 finished cattle  24 “pulled” as “brainers”

32. Sulfur/Polio  NRC.40% S  < 20% byproduct, 0.1% “pulls”  < 0.47% S, 0.14% “pulls”  0.47% to 0.58% S, 0.38% “pulls”  >0.58% S, 6.06% “pulls”

33. Sulfur/Polio Recommendations  < 0.48% S – low risk  50% WDGS ≈ 0.47% suflur  Know levels in byproducts  Water S?  Maintain roughage!, increase?

34. High Levels of Wet Corn Gluten Feed DRC17.5%35.0%52.5%70.0%87.5% ItemControlWCGFWCGFWCGFWCGFWCGF ADG3.453.583.743.593.563.39 DMI22.8123.5823.8323.7122.7122.53 Feed/gain6.596.566.366.616.376.64

35. BP (50:50 Blend) (%DM) WCGF/WDGS combination Loza et al., 2003

36. BP ADG WCGF/WDGS combination Loza et al., 2003

37. Feed Conversion Q = <0.05 L = 0.32 BP (%DM) Loza et al., 2003 WCGF/WDGS combination

38. BP (%DM) (%DM) WCGF/WDGS combination Buckner et al., 2006

39. P< 0.05 WCGF/WDGS combination Buckner et al., 2006

40. P< 0.05 WCGF/WDGS combination Buckner et al., 2006

41. WCGF/WDGS combination BP (%DM) (%DM) Loza et al., 2006

42. ADG Lbs/d WDGS (%DM) Q = 0.05 L = 0.24 ab WCGF (%DM) 0 30 30 30 30 30 30 WCGF/WDGS combination Loza et al., 2006

43. Q = 0.47 L = 0.76 WDGS (%DM) F:G WCGF (%DM) 0 30 30 30 30 30 30 ab WCGF/WDGS combination Loza et al., 2006

44. Corn82.543.8--21.9- WDGS -43.865.643.832.832.8 WCGF---43.832.832.8 Soyhulls-----21.9 Grass--21.9--- Molasses5.0----- Alfalfa7.57.57.57.57.57.5 Supplement5.05.05.05.05.05.0 Higher DGS TRT:83% corn44DG:66DG:44DG:33DG:33DG: -corn-hay44GF33GF33GF -corn-hulls

45. DMI26.125.226.624.826.125.8 ADG 4.034.474.033.974.163.73 F:G6.48 bc 5.65 a 6.61 c 6.26 b 6.28 b 6.93 d PEM, n000502 Higher DGS F:G P = 0.06 for WDG-hay and soyhulls TRT:83% corn44DG:66DG:44DG:33DG:33DG: -corn-hay44GF33GF33GF -corn-hulls

46. Higher DGS-$

49. Beef Extension Page http://beef.unl.edu Beef Reports

50. CONTACT: Galen Erickson C220 Animal Science; P. O. Box 830908 Lincoln, NE 68583 geericks@unlnotes.unl.edu PH: 402 472-6402 Acknowledge: Nebraska Center for Energy Sciences Research / NPPD Abengoa Bioenergy Poet Nutrition Nebraska Corn BoardChief Ethanol Cargill Wet Milling Nebraska Beef Council UNL Foundation GARDUS BioEnergy