TY - JOUR
AU - Cole, N. A.
AB - ABSTRACT Cattle grazing wheat pasture in the southern Great Plains are sometimes fed an energy supplement; however, the benefits of supplementation on nutrient balance, energy metabolism, and greenhouse gas emissions have not been elucidated. Therefore, we used 10 British crossbred steers (206 ± 10.7 kg initial BW) in a respiration calorimetry study to evaluate the effects of energy supplementation on energy losses, N balance, and nutrient digestibility of steers fed green-chopped wheat forage. The study design was an incomplete replicated 4 × 4 Latin square with treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement. Steers (n = 8) were assigned to 1 of 2 BW blocks (4 steers per block) with dietary factors consisting of 1) no supplementation (CON) or supplemented with a steam-flaked corn–based energy supplement (that also contained monensin sodium) at 0.5% of BW daily (SUP) and 2) NEm intakes of 1 times (1x) or 1.5 times (1.5x) maintenance. Wheat forage was harvested daily and continuously fed as green-chop to steers during the 56-d study. There were no differences (P ≥ 0.32) between CON and SUP for OM (78.3 vs. 80.7%, respectively) or NDF (68.3 vs. 64.8%, respectively) digestibility. At the 1.5x level of intake, there was no difference (P ≥ 0.16) in energy lost in feces (4.27 vs. 3.92 Mcal/d) or urine (0.58 vs. 0.55 Mcal/d), heat production (8.69 vs. 8.44 Mcal/d), or retained energy (3.10 vs. 3.46 Mcal/d) between supplementation treatments. Oxygen consumption (1,777 vs. 1,731 L/d; P = 0.67) and CO2 production (1,704 vs. 1,627 L/d; P = 0.56) of CON and SUP steers, respectively, were not different; however, SUP steers tended to have (P = 0.06) lower CH4 production (115 vs 130 L/d) than CON steers. Methane, as a proportion of GE intake, was similar for CON (6.87%) and SUP (6.07%; P = 0.18), as was the ME:DE ratio (P = 0.24; 86.3% for CON and 87.9% for SUP). Fractional N excretion in urine and feces, as a proportion of total N excreted (P ≥ 0.84) or N intake (P ≥ 0.63), was not different between treatments. Calculated NEm and NEg values for CON were 1.76 and 1.37 Mcal/kg DM, respectively, whereas the NEm and NEg values for the SUP treatment were 2.32 and 1.61 Mcal/kg DM, respectively. Calculated NE values for steers fed additional energy were approximately 17.5% greater than the expected difference in energy content. This was probably the result of the inconsistent response at the 1x DMI level. Under these circumstances, energy supplementation did appear to enhance NEm and NEg value of the supplemented wheat forage diet. INTRODUCTION In the southern Great Plains region of the United States, wheat pasture is an important grazing resource. Cattle grazing wheat pasture are sometimes supplemented with additional energy supplied from starch or fiber (Vogel et al., 1987; Horn et al., 1995, 2005) to increase ADG or stocking density. In addition, an ionophore may be fed to reduce bloat risk and improve forage utilization (Branine and Galyean, 1990; Paisley and Horn, 1998; Fieser et al., 2007). Use of a grain-based supplement containing an ionophore may potentially decrease enteric methane (CH4) production, increase N balance, increase utilization of the protein-rich wheat forage, and, overall, contribute to a lower environmental impact by the animal. Forage-based cattle production systems, relative to concentrate-based systems, present a greater opportunity to decrease enteric CH4 emissions because 1) the rate of CH4 release is inherently stoichiometrically greater in forage-based diets (Wolin, 1960; Russell, 2002); 2) consumption of fibrous diets results in lower rates of gain (NRC, 1996) and, therefore, the time the animal produces CH4 is greater (Capper and Hayes, 2012); and 3) a main proportion of the feed needed to produce beef from conception to plate is forage based. As such, measurement of nutrient and CH4 losses requires accurate quantification of intake, excretion, and gas fluxes by the animal, which is inherently difficult under grazing conditions. However, compared with perennial mixed grass pastures, animal selectivity of wheat forage is less a concern because of its monoculture nature. Therefore, wheat pasture may be harvested and fed as green chop to determine digestibility (Phillips et al., 1995) and energy losses. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of supplementing energy and an ionophore to beef steers fed green-chopped wheat pasture on energy losses, gas emissions, N balance, and diet NE content. Our hypothesis was that energy supplementation would enhance energy and N balance of steers fed green-chopped wheat forage. MATERIALS AND METHODS All procedures used for these experiments involving animal care were approved by the West Texas A&M/Cooperative Research, Education and Extension Team Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (number 05-01-14). Cattle and Experimental Design A total of 10 British crossbred steers were used in an experiment conducted with indirect respiration calorimetry chambers from October through December 2014. Of the 10 steers, 8 steers were used as part of 2 replicated incomplete 4 × 4 Latin squares (described below) and measurement of fasting heat production (FHP) and the 2 additional steers were used for only FHP measurements. Steers were weighed before feeding at the start of the experiment (206 ± 10.7 kg initial BW) and at the end of each experimental period (BW taken immediately following 5 d residence in the respiration calorimetry chamber) to monitor either the maintenance of BW or BW gain. Steers were adapted to individual respiration chambers, fecal bags, and harnesses for approximately 28 d before the experiment started. All steers used in the experiment were offered green-chop wheat forage in individual pens at 1.5 times (1.5x) maintenance for 2 wk before the start of the trial. Treatments Wheat forage was collected from a nearby dryland field that was planted in early September 2014, and amounts of standing forage suitable for mowing were established by October 2014. Wheat forage was harvested 6 to 7 times/wk using a tractor (model JD 4210; John Deere, Inc., Moline, IL) equipped with a belly mower (Commercial 60; John Deere, Inc.). Approximately 2 to 3 cm of residual wheat forage was left after mowing. Harvested wheat forage was then discharged into a chute by an auxiliary gas powered motor that created a vacuum and collected wheat forage into a 493-L plastic bin (model 600L, Hi-Lift Material Collection System; John Deere, Inc.). Collected wheat forage was transferred to 150-L plastic tubs, hauled 3.2 km to the research feedlot, and stored in a walk-in cooler at 4°C until feeding. Typically, the wheat forage was harvested in the afternoon and fed the following morning. The quantity of wheat forage harvested was managed so that, essentially, all the harvested wheat forage was fed within 15 to 20 h of harvest. Treatments were arranged as a 2 × 2 factorial, with level of intake (1 times [1x] maintenance or 1.5x maintenance) and supplementation (not supplemented or supplemented) as factors. Steers were offered green-chopped wheat forage with no supplementation (CON) or were supplemented with a steam flaked corn-based energy supplement at 0.5% of BW daily (Table 1). Periods were 14 d in length, partitioned into 9 d of adaptation followed by 5 d of collection. During the adaptation period, steers were housed outside in covered individual pens and fed once daily at 0700 h. During the study, outdoor average temperatures ranged from −8.9 to 19.4°C. The average low temperature was 0.75°C, the average high temperature was 17.8°C, and the overall average temperature was 8.4°C. Steers fed CON were also offered 90.8 g/d (as-fed basis) of a mineral supplement that contained only salt and limestone, formulated to provide at least 15 g/d of Ca and Na (NRC, 1996). The supplement was formulated to contain monensin (Rumensin 90; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN) at 156.4 mg/kg DM and, based on average supplement intake throughout the trial, steers consumed 163.3 ± 7.1 mg/steer daily of monensin, a dosage typically fed to decrease the risk of bloat (Branine and Galyean, 1990). Maintenance DMI was determined assuming a NE requirement of 0.077 Mcal/kg of metabolic BW (MBW; NRC, 1996), with no adjustments for weather or use of an ionophore. Wheat forage was estimated to contain 1.47 and 0.88 Mcal/kg DM of NEm and NEg, respectively (Fieser et al., 2007), and adjustments to as-fed intake of wheat forage were determined weekly. Tabular NE values (NRC, 1996) were used for all other ingredients to estimate maintenance DMI. Maintenance intake of the supplemented group was scaled such that the proportional DMI of supplement to wheat forage was similar to that in the 1.5x group; on a DM percentage basis, this was 76.1% wheat forage and 23.9% energy supplement. The feeding at 1x maintenance was conducted to determine the NE values, as described by Hales et al. (2012, 2013). Table 1. Ingredient and nutrient composition of the energy supplement and green-chopped wheat pasture offered to steers Item  Supplement  Wheat forage  Ingredient, % of DM      Steam-flaked corn  57.00  –      Wheat middlings  35.00  –      Mineral supplement1  8.00  –      Molasses  5.00  –  Nutrient composition      DM,2,3 %  81.53  44.20      OM,2 %  92.50  76.77      CP,2 %  11.65  27.81      Soluble protein,4 % of CP  –  27.83      Ether extract,4 %  2.20  2.33      NDF,2 %  7.61  19.27      ADL,3 %  3.23  3.96      Ash,2 %  7.50  23.23      Starch,4 %  53.47  –      Water soluble carbohydrates,4 %  –  9.33      Simple sugars,4 %  –  6.40      NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.915  1.476      NEg, Mcal/kg DM  1.195  0.886  Item  Supplement  Wheat forage  Ingredient, % of DM      Steam-flaked corn  57.00  –      Wheat middlings  35.00  –      Mineral supplement1  8.00  –      Molasses  5.00  –  Nutrient composition      DM,2,3 %  81.53  44.20      OM,2 %  92.50  76.77      CP,2 %  11.65  27.81      Soluble protein,4 % of CP  –  27.83      Ether extract,4 %  2.20  2.33      NDF,2 %  7.61  19.27      ADL,3 %  3.23  3.96      Ash,2 %  7.50  23.23      Starch,4 %  53.47  –      Water soluble carbohydrates,4 %  –  9.33      Simple sugars,4 %  –  6.40      NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.915  1.476      NEg, Mcal/kg DM  1.195  0.886  1Supplement (RU1600; Hi-Pro Feeds, Friona TX) contained monensin sodium at 1,759.9 mg/kg (as-fed basis) 2Determined by wet chemistry as described in the text. 3Determined on samples collected at feeding. 4Analyzed by Dairy One Cooperative, Inc. (Ithaca, NY). 5Calculated from tabular values (NRC, 1996). 6Estimated energy content from Fieser et al. (2007), used in formulations for estimating NEm level of intake. View Large Table 1. Ingredient and nutrient composition of the energy supplement and green-chopped wheat pasture offered to steers Item  Supplement  Wheat forage  Ingredient, % of DM      Steam-flaked corn  57.00  –      Wheat middlings  35.00  –      Mineral supplement1  8.00  –      Molasses  5.00  –  Nutrient composition      DM,2,3 %  81.53  44.20      OM,2 %  92.50  76.77      CP,2 %  11.65  27.81      Soluble protein,4 % of CP  –  27.83      Ether extract,4 %  2.20  2.33      NDF,2 %  7.61  19.27      ADL,3 %  3.23  3.96      Ash,2 %  7.50  23.23      Starch,4 %  53.47  –      Water soluble carbohydrates,4 %  –  9.33      Simple sugars,4 %  –  6.40      NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.915  1.476      NEg, Mcal/kg DM  1.195  0.886  Item  Supplement  Wheat forage  Ingredient, % of DM      Steam-flaked corn  57.00  –      Wheat middlings  35.00  –      Mineral supplement1  8.00  –      Molasses  5.00  –  Nutrient composition      DM,2,3 %  81.53  44.20      OM,2 %  92.50  76.77      CP,2 %  11.65  27.81      Soluble protein,4 % of CP  –  27.83      Ether extract,4 %  2.20  2.33      NDF,2 %  7.61  19.27      ADL,3 %  3.23  3.96      Ash,2 %  7.50  23.23      Starch,4 %  53.47  –      Water soluble carbohydrates,4 %  –  9.33      Simple sugars,4 %  –  6.40      NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.915  1.476      NEg, Mcal/kg DM  1.195  0.886  1Supplement (RU1600; Hi-Pro Feeds, Friona TX) contained monensin sodium at 1,759.9 mg/kg (as-fed basis) 2Determined by wet chemistry as described in the text. 3Determined on samples collected at feeding. 4Analyzed by Dairy One Cooperative, Inc. (Ithaca, NY). 5Calculated from tabular values (NRC, 1996). 6Estimated energy content from Fieser et al. (2007), used in formulations for estimating NEm level of intake. View Large Respiration Chambers The design of the 4 respiration chambers and gas collection equipment were described by Hales et al. (2012, 2013). Negative pressure was created in the chambers by pulling air from the chamber at a rate of 600 L/min using a mass flow system (Flowkit-2000; Sable Systems International, Las Vegas, NV). The outdoor air that was pulled into the chamber as well as air exiting the chambers was dried (ND-2 Gas Dryer; Sable Systems International) and analyzed for oxygen concentration and barometric pressure (PA-10 Oxygen Analyzer; Sable Systems International), carbon dioxide concentration (CA-10A Carbon Dioxide Analyzer; Sable Systems International), and methane concentration (MA-10 Methane Analyzer; Sable Systems International). Air temperature within the chambers was maintained at approximately 19.4°C with individually controlled air conditioners set to also remove excess moisture. Each chamber was sampled for 10 min once every hour, with baseline measurements of outside air and barn air for 10 min every hour using a programed multiplexer (RM-8 Intelligent Multiplexer; Sable Systems International). The multiplexer was programmed so that during each of the 10-min air sampling periods, a 2-min delay occurred so that gas concentrations in the sampling lines were allowed to stabilize after switching to a new chamber, and gas concentration readings were taken for the last 8 min of the sampling period. Respiration chamber doors were opened once each morning to feed the steers and to collect feces, urine, and orts. After feeding, chambers were sealed, and gas collection and recording commenced 30 min after the chambers were sealed, which resulted in 22 to 23 h of gas flux measures per day. Gas flux was extrapolated to 24 h using the average hourly reading of the 22- to 23-h gas flux measurements. Chambers were validated weekly using a mass recovery technique by combusting propane (Lighton, 2008), similar to the alcohol combustion technique (Hales et al., 2012, 2013). Briefly, mass recoveries were determined using an analytical balance (1.0 g readability; Sartorius L2200; Data Weighing Systems, Inc., Elk Grove, IL), which measured the amount of released propane (Worthington Pro Grade; Worthington Cylinders Corp., Chilton, WI) from a 465-g cylinder. Included in the calculations for mass recovery was an assumed theoretical stoichiometric combustion ratio of 0.60:40 CO2:O2. Average recoveries of O2 and CO2 were 100.71% (CV =3.07%) and 100.68% (CV = 1.79%), respectively. Gas analyzers were zeroed and spanned daily as needed with commercially prepared gas standards (Praxair, Inc., Danbury, CT). Secondary Gas Sampling System A secondary gas sampling system was used to continuously subsample to subsample air entering and exiting each chamber. This system was used in conjunction with the intermittent measurement system (Sable Systems International) as a backup in the event of equipment malfunctions. This backup system was also used to investigate if all emitted enteric CH4 was measured by the intermittent sampling system, as the 10 min/h sampling pattern may not capture all eructated CH4. Samples of outside air, air from inside the metabolism barn, and air exiting each of the 4 chambers were continuously collected while the steers were in the chambers. Six 10-L foil-lined bags (number 253-10, Flex Foil Plus; SKC, Inc., Eighty Four, PA) were housed inside a large sealed vacuum container (Vac-U-Chamber; SKC, Inc.). The vacuum was pulled using a small air pump (Air Chek Sampler, model 224-PCXR8; SKC, Inc.) set at about 6.0 mL/min. Bags were filled to approximately 80% of capacity, as recommended by the manufacturer, and were replaced each day. After the bags were removed from the air sampling system, gases inside the bag were mixed by gently massaging the outside of the bag for 30 s. A sample of air was withdrawn (using a metal adaptor equipped with a septum) and used to flush the sampling syringe 3 times before injecting a 20-mL sample into an evacuated vial. Vials were previously prepared using an evacuation-purge manifold by evacuating for 600 s, purging with helium for 30 s, and repeating the process for 3 cycles. Each 10-L bag was sampled 4 times, and the 4 replicate samples were then analyzed at the Texas A&M AgriLife Air Quality Engineering Lab (Amarillo, TX) on a gas chromatograph (Varian 450; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) equipped with a flame ionization detector and a thermal conductivity detector for analysis of CH4 and CO2, respectively. Statistical analysis indicated that CO2 production estimates were not different using both the intermittent and continuous gas sampling methods. However, CH4 production estimates were greater with the continuous gas sampling system than with the intermittent sampling system (122 vs. 78 L/d, respectively, and 6.25 vs. 4.04% of GE intake, respectively) suggesting that significant within-hour variation of CH4 emission existed in this experiment. Therefore, CH4 emissions measured using the continuous gas sampling system are reported. Fasting Heat Production Fasting heat production was measured on steers in blocks 1 and 2 at the end of the third period as well as on 2 additional steers (block 3) twice. Steers in blocks 1 and 2 were maintained on assigned treatment diets for 1 wk following digestion collections at the end of period 3, fasted for 48 h, and then returned to the chambers for an additional 48 h of feces, urine, and gas collection. The FHP of the 2 steers in block 3 was measured during the middle and end of the trial, similarly to blocks 1 and 2. Steers in block 3 were fed the CON treatment at 1x and 1.5x maintenance DMI for FHP periods 1 and 2, respectively. This resulted in a total of 12 observations for FHP, 8 for steers fed the CON and 4 for the steers fed SUP. Heat production (HP) was calculated using consumption of O2, production of CO2 and CH4, and excretion of urine N using the equation of Brouwer (1965). Previous energy intake level did not (P = 0.85) affect FHP; therefore, observations for FHP within each treatment, regardless of previous energy intake level, were included in the regression to calculate NEm and NEg of CON and SUP. Sample Collection Samples of wheat forage and supplements were obtained daily and stored at −4°C until analyzed. On d 9 of each period, steers were fitted with fecal bags and harnesses and moved to the chambers at 0700 h. Each day at 0700 h, gas collection was paused and chamber doors were opened. At this time, steers were fed and feces, orts, and urine were collected. Feces were collected using nylon fecal bags lined with plastic garbage bags. Urine excreted was collected in a preacidified pan below the grated flooring of the chamber to which 1,000 mL of a 25% HCl solution (vol/vol) was added to assure urine pH was less than 6.0. Total weight of orts (which were rarely observed and typically present in trace amounts), urine, and feces were recorded daily, and 10% aliquots were collected and stored at 4°C and then composited at the end of each period and stored at −20°C until analysis. At the end of each collection, chambers were thoroughly cleaned, with remaining urine, feces, or orts present quantified and accounted for in calculations. A 1-d lag between feed intake and fecal output was assumed in digestibility calculations (Schneider and Flatt, 1975). Laboratory Analysis Samples of wheat forage, supplement, and feces were dried and ground through a number 2 Wiley Mill (Thomas Scientific, Swedesboro, NJ) equipped with a 1-mm screen before laboratory analysis. Dry matter of feces, orts, wheat forage, and supplement samples was determined by drying for 48 h at 60°C in a forced-air oven, and OM content was determined by ashing a subsample in a muffle furnace at 600°C for 16 h. Urine N was determined using a Shimadzu Total Nitrogen Analyzer with an ASI-L autosampler (Shimadzu Corp., Kyoto, Japan). Nitrogen values for wheat forage, supplement, feces, and orts were determined (AOAC, 1990; method 990.03; Dumas method) using an Elementar VarioMax CN Analyzer (Elementar Americas Inc., Mt. Laurel, NJ). Analysis for N was conducted on as-voided feces and urine, whereas on wheat forage, supplements, and orts, N was analyzed on dried and ground samples. Gross energy of diets, feces, feed ingredients, and feed orts was determined using a bomb calorimeter (model 6400; Parr Instrument Co., Moline, IL). Gross energy content of urine was estimated from N concentration assuming all excreted N was as urea (5.4 kcal/g N; Blaxter et al., 1964; Street et al., 1964). Neutral detergent fiber content of wheat forage, supplement, orts, and feces was determined using an Ankom Semi-Automated Fiber Analyzer (model A2000; Ankom Technology Corp., Macedon, NY; Vogel et al., 1999). Wheat forage was also analyzed by wet chemistries on previously oven-dried and ground composite samples for ether extract (AOAC, 1990; method 2003.05), water soluble carbohydrates (Hall et al., 1999), simple sugars (Hall et al., 1999), ADL (AOAC, 1990; method 973.18), and soluble CP (Dairy One, 2015), and the energy supplement was analyzed for starch (YSI 2700 Biochemistry Analyzer; YSI Inc., Yellow Springs, OH), ether extract (AOAC, 1990; method 2003.05), and ADL (AOAC, 1990; method 973.18). All analyses were performed at a commercial laboratory (Dairy One Cooperative, Inc., Ithaca, NY). Statistical Analysis and Calculations Steers (n = 8) were blocked by BW into 2 blocks (heavy and light) consisting of 4 steers. The treatment sequence was randomly assigned to each animal within a block. Each block was assigned to an incomplete 4 × 4 Latin square consisting of 4 steers and 3 periods. Within each square, a BW block completed 3 periods in a crossover-type design, resulting in a total of 6 observations per treatment and intake level. Each steer was housed in the same respiration chamber during each period, to balance possible chamber effects with dietary treatment and intake level. Therefore, chamber and animal effects are confounded in this design. Data from the 1.5x maintenance level of intake pertaining to nutrient digestibility, energy losses, and N balance were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Chamber was a random effect and period was a fixed effect. A P-value ≤ 0.05 was considered a significant difference between treatment means, whereas 0.10 ≥ P ≥ 0.05 was considered a numerical trend. For determination of NEm and NEg, retained energy (RE) per kilogram of MBW was regressed against linear and quadratic terms of ME intake per kilogram MBW using the MIXED procedure of SAS with animal as a random effect and block as a fixed effect. Slopes of the regression equation below and above maintenance were used to calculate the partial efficiency of ME use for maintenance (km) and gain (kg), respectively, as described by Hales et al. (2012, 2013). Net energy for maintenance was calculated as km multiplied by the average ME content of each diet when cattle were fed at 1x maintenance, and NEg was calculated as kg multiplied by the average ME content of the diets. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The nutrient composition of the green-chop wheat forage offered is presented in Table 1. Wheat forage DM averaged 44.2% over the course of the trial but varied considerably, ranging from 24.6 to 67.9%. The DM content of wheat forage in this trial was higher than values reported by others (Phillips et al., 1995; Phillips and Horn, 2008; NASEM, 2016), whereas NDF content was lower than reported (Stewart et al., 1981; Mader et al., 1983; Phillips et al., 1995; NASEM, 2016). This may reflect the early vegetative stage of the wheat pasture fed. Wheat forage DM was determined from samples collected at feeding after storage at 4°C for 8 to 12 h, which may explain some of the relatively high DM concentrations compared with other reports where wheat forage samples were collected at harvest. Growing conditions and lack of precipitation during the course of the trial may also explain the observed variability in DM content. Wheat forage CP averaged 27.8%, which is comparable to that of Fieser et al. (2007), who reported 28.6% CP for wheat forage harvested in November, as well as to that of others who suggest a wheat pasture CP value between 25 and 30% (Horn, 1984; Reuter and Horn, 2000; Phillips and Horn, 2008). In freshly harvested wheat forage, Phillips et al. (1995) reported total N, soluble N, and NPN concentrations of 2.9, 54.8, and 31.9% (Exp. 1) and 2.2, 49.6, and 25.4% (Exp. 2), respectively. Soluble CP concentrations in this study (27.83%) were lower than those observed by Phillips et al. (1995) and may be related to DM and ash content, which were greater than reported elsewhere. Nutrient excretion and digestibility data are presented in Table 2. Intake of OM as well as amounts excreted and digested or digested as a percentage of OM intake did not differ between CON and SUP treatments (P ≥ 0.35). Organic matter digestibility values were greater than values reported by Chabot et al. (2008; 62.5 to 68%) for steers grazing late-season wheat forage during March and April. The quantity of NDF excreted, as well as the percentage of NDF digested, was not different between treatments (P ≥ 0.29). Values for NDF digestibility were similar to those reported by Phillips and Horn (2008). Phillips et al. (1995) reported that energy supplementation (based on ground corn) to lambs fed wheat forage led to lower NDF digestibility compared with supplementation with RUP sources (cottonseed meal or corn gluten meal). The authors concluded that additional starch from energy supplementation may have decreased wheat forage fiber digestibility. Table 2. Nutrient excretion and digestibility by steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance   Treatment1      Item  CON  SUP  SEM2  P-value  DM      Supplement intake, kg/d  0.10  1.04  0.03  <0.01      Forage intake, kg/d  4.69  3.46  0.49  0.01      Total intake, kg/d  4.79  4.50  0.46  0.21  OM      Intake, kg/d  3.58  3.61  0.09  0.87      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.79  0.69  0.09  0.47      Apparent digested, kg/d  2.81  2.91  0.20  0.35      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  78.25  80.66  1.88  0.36  NDF      Intake, kg/d  0.90  0.74  0.06  0.09      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.27  0.25  0.03  0.29      Apparent digested, kg/d  0.62  0.49  0.07  0.40      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  68.18  64.78  4.35  0.32  N      Intake, g/d  213.2  172.4  5.70  0.01      Fecal excretion, g/d  39.2  33.5  3.6  0.29      Urine excretion, g/d  110.1  91.4  16.2  0.16      Retained N, % of intake  30.32  26.76  5.61  0.44  N excretion, % of total N excretion      Feces  27.52  26.69  4.17  0.84      Urine  72.48  73.31  4.17  0.84  N excretion, % of total N intake      Feces  18.47  19.62  1.69  0.64      Urine  51.20  53.63  6.43  0.63    Treatment1      Item  CON  SUP  SEM2  P-value  DM      Supplement intake, kg/d  0.10  1.04  0.03  <0.01      Forage intake, kg/d  4.69  3.46  0.49  0.01      Total intake, kg/d  4.79  4.50  0.46  0.21  OM      Intake, kg/d  3.58  3.61  0.09  0.87      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.79  0.69  0.09  0.47      Apparent digested, kg/d  2.81  2.91  0.20  0.35      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  78.25  80.66  1.88  0.36  NDF      Intake, kg/d  0.90  0.74  0.06  0.09      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.27  0.25  0.03  0.29      Apparent digested, kg/d  0.62  0.49  0.07  0.40      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  68.18  64.78  4.35  0.32  N      Intake, g/d  213.2  172.4  5.70  0.01      Fecal excretion, g/d  39.2  33.5  3.6  0.29      Urine excretion, g/d  110.1  91.4  16.2  0.16      Retained N, % of intake  30.32  26.76  5.61  0.44  N excretion, % of total N excretion      Feces  27.52  26.69  4.17  0.84      Urine  72.48  73.31  4.17  0.84  N excretion, % of total N intake      Feces  18.47  19.62  1.69  0.64      Urine  51.20  53.63  6.43  0.63  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers on the SUP treatment also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. View Large Table 2. Nutrient excretion and digestibility by steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance   Treatment1      Item  CON  SUP  SEM2  P-value  DM      Supplement intake, kg/d  0.10  1.04  0.03  <0.01      Forage intake, kg/d  4.69  3.46  0.49  0.01      Total intake, kg/d  4.79  4.50  0.46  0.21  OM      Intake, kg/d  3.58  3.61  0.09  0.87      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.79  0.69  0.09  0.47      Apparent digested, kg/d  2.81  2.91  0.20  0.35      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  78.25  80.66  1.88  0.36  NDF      Intake, kg/d  0.90  0.74  0.06  0.09      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.27  0.25  0.03  0.29      Apparent digested, kg/d  0.62  0.49  0.07  0.40      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  68.18  64.78  4.35  0.32  N      Intake, g/d  213.2  172.4  5.70  0.01      Fecal excretion, g/d  39.2  33.5  3.6  0.29      Urine excretion, g/d  110.1  91.4  16.2  0.16      Retained N, % of intake  30.32  26.76  5.61  0.44  N excretion, % of total N excretion      Feces  27.52  26.69  4.17  0.84      Urine  72.48  73.31  4.17  0.84  N excretion, % of total N intake      Feces  18.47  19.62  1.69  0.64      Urine  51.20  53.63  6.43  0.63    Treatment1      Item  CON  SUP  SEM2  P-value  DM      Supplement intake, kg/d  0.10  1.04  0.03  <0.01      Forage intake, kg/d  4.69  3.46  0.49  0.01      Total intake, kg/d  4.79  4.50  0.46  0.21  OM      Intake, kg/d  3.58  3.61  0.09  0.87      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.79  0.69  0.09  0.47      Apparent digested, kg/d  2.81  2.91  0.20  0.35      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  78.25  80.66  1.88  0.36  NDF      Intake, kg/d  0.90  0.74  0.06  0.09      Fecal excretion, kg/d  0.27  0.25  0.03  0.29      Apparent digested, kg/d  0.62  0.49  0.07  0.40      Apparent digestibility, % of intake  68.18  64.78  4.35  0.32  N      Intake, g/d  213.2  172.4  5.70  0.01      Fecal excretion, g/d  39.2  33.5  3.6  0.29      Urine excretion, g/d  110.1  91.4  16.2  0.16      Retained N, % of intake  30.32  26.76  5.61  0.44  N excretion, % of total N excretion      Feces  27.52  26.69  4.17  0.84      Urine  72.48  73.31  4.17  0.84  N excretion, % of total N intake      Feces  18.47  19.62  1.69  0.64      Urine  51.20  53.63  6.43  0.63  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers on the SUP treatment also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. View Large Numerous factors influence the effect of energy supplementation on intake and digestion of forages by grazing ruminants (Horn and McCollum, 1987; Caton and Dhuyvetter, 1997). High-quality forage is typically supplemented with a goal of increasing animal performance while also decreasing forage intake as a means of conserving limited forage supply (Horn and McCollum, 1987). Of the limited work available, Branine and Galyean (1990) reported increased digestibility of early vegetative stage wheat when calves were provided 0.5 kg/d of a grain-based supplement. Others have noted no effect of grain supplementation on total tract digestibility of high-quality wheat forage (Ebert et al., 2016). Limiting DMI to 1x and 1.5x maintenance in the current experiment may have limited our ability to detect differences in nutrient digestibility. Nitrogen intake was greater for CON steers (P = 0.01) than for SUP steers, but N balance, the quantity of N excreted in urine and feces, and the quantity of N intake that was retained was not different between CON and SUP steers (P ≥ 0.16). Intuitively, energy supplementation would be expected to increase N balance by increasing energy availability and microbial CP flow to the small intestine. However, N retention was not affected by energy supplementation in this study. Branine and Galyean (1990) noted that supplementation of steam-flaked sorghum grain to cattle on high-quality pasture decreased ruminal ammonia concentrations at various intervals after supplementation, whereas grain fed in combination with monensin did not affect ruminal ammonia. Phillips et al. (1995) noted that N retention of lambs fed harvested wheat forage and supplemented with a ground corn–based energy supplement was not different from that of lambs fed harvested wheat forage and supplemented with a high protein and RUP source. Energy losses, expressed as either total megacalories per day, percentage of GE intake, or megacalories per kilogram of DMI, are presented in Table 3. On a total megacalories per day basis, energy losses in feces, urine, and HP and RE did not differ between steers fed the CON treatment and steers fed the SUP treatment (P ≥ 0.16). As a percentage of GE intake, energy lost in feces and urine, as HP, and RE were also not different between CON and SUP steers (P ≥ 0.22). Urine energy loss averaged 3.24% of GE intake across both treatments. Reynolds et al. (1991) reported that measured urine energy loss was 4.0% of GE intake by cattle fed 75% alfalfa diets offered at 1x to 2x maintenance. In Beever et al. (1988), measured urine losses ranged from 2.8 to 4.7% of GE intake in Friesian steers fed varying maturities of grass silage. In feedlot diets, calculated urine energy losses, as a proportion of GE intake, have ranged from 1.0% (Hales et al., 2012) to greater than 3% (Hales et al., 2015) when cattle consume diets based on protein-rich corn byproducts. Table 3. Energetic losses by steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance energy intake Item  CON1  SUP1  SEM2  P-value  GE intake from supplement, Mcal/d  0.00  4.26  0.05  <0.0001  GE intake from wheat forage, Mcal  17.85  13.17  0.44  <0.0001  Total GE intake, Mcal/d  17.85  17.43  0.43  0.62  Fecal energy excreted, Mcal/d  4.27  3.92  0.46  0.55  Urinary energy,3 Mcal/d  0.58  0.55  0.08  0.16  Methane energy, Mcal/d  1.20  1.06  0.13  0.06  Heat production, Mcal/d  8.69  8.46  0.34  0.63  Retained energy, Mcal/d  3.10  3.46  0.39  0.52  Fecal energy, % of GE  23.76  22.57  1.78  0.65  Urinary energy,3 % of GE  3.27  3.20  0.46  0.22  Methane energy, % of GE  6.79  6.09  0.80  0.18  Heat production, % of GE  49.41  48.69  1.99  0.84  Retained energy, % of GE  16.78  19.45  1.86  0.34  DE, Mcal/kg DM  2.85  3.00  0.12  0.31  ME, Mcal/kg DM  2.48  2.64  0.08  0.21  ME:DE ratio, %  86.82  87.93  1.41  0.24  Item  CON1  SUP1  SEM2  P-value  GE intake from supplement, Mcal/d  0.00  4.26  0.05  <0.0001  GE intake from wheat forage, Mcal  17.85  13.17  0.44  <0.0001  Total GE intake, Mcal/d  17.85  17.43  0.43  0.62  Fecal energy excreted, Mcal/d  4.27  3.92  0.46  0.55  Urinary energy,3 Mcal/d  0.58  0.55  0.08  0.16  Methane energy, Mcal/d  1.20  1.06  0.13  0.06  Heat production, Mcal/d  8.69  8.46  0.34  0.63  Retained energy, Mcal/d  3.10  3.46  0.39  0.52  Fecal energy, % of GE  23.76  22.57  1.78  0.65  Urinary energy,3 % of GE  3.27  3.20  0.46  0.22  Methane energy, % of GE  6.79  6.09  0.80  0.18  Heat production, % of GE  49.41  48.69  1.99  0.84  Retained energy, % of GE  16.78  19.45  1.86  0.34  DE, Mcal/kg DM  2.85  3.00  0.12  0.31  ME, Mcal/kg DM  2.48  2.64  0.08  0.21  ME:DE ratio, %  86.82  87.93  1.41  0.24  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers also on the SUP treatment received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3Estimated from urine N excretion, assuming all N excreted as urea (5.4 kcal/g N; Blaxter et al., 1964). View Large Table 3. Energetic losses by steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance energy intake Item  CON1  SUP1  SEM2  P-value  GE intake from supplement, Mcal/d  0.00  4.26  0.05  <0.0001  GE intake from wheat forage, Mcal  17.85  13.17  0.44  <0.0001  Total GE intake, Mcal/d  17.85  17.43  0.43  0.62  Fecal energy excreted, Mcal/d  4.27  3.92  0.46  0.55  Urinary energy,3 Mcal/d  0.58  0.55  0.08  0.16  Methane energy, Mcal/d  1.20  1.06  0.13  0.06  Heat production, Mcal/d  8.69  8.46  0.34  0.63  Retained energy, Mcal/d  3.10  3.46  0.39  0.52  Fecal energy, % of GE  23.76  22.57  1.78  0.65  Urinary energy,3 % of GE  3.27  3.20  0.46  0.22  Methane energy, % of GE  6.79  6.09  0.80  0.18  Heat production, % of GE  49.41  48.69  1.99  0.84  Retained energy, % of GE  16.78  19.45  1.86  0.34  DE, Mcal/kg DM  2.85  3.00  0.12  0.31  ME, Mcal/kg DM  2.48  2.64  0.08  0.21  ME:DE ratio, %  86.82  87.93  1.41  0.24  Item  CON1  SUP1  SEM2  P-value  GE intake from supplement, Mcal/d  0.00  4.26  0.05  <0.0001  GE intake from wheat forage, Mcal  17.85  13.17  0.44  <0.0001  Total GE intake, Mcal/d  17.85  17.43  0.43  0.62  Fecal energy excreted, Mcal/d  4.27  3.92  0.46  0.55  Urinary energy,3 Mcal/d  0.58  0.55  0.08  0.16  Methane energy, Mcal/d  1.20  1.06  0.13  0.06  Heat production, Mcal/d  8.69  8.46  0.34  0.63  Retained energy, Mcal/d  3.10  3.46  0.39  0.52  Fecal energy, % of GE  23.76  22.57  1.78  0.65  Urinary energy,3 % of GE  3.27  3.20  0.46  0.22  Methane energy, % of GE  6.79  6.09  0.80  0.18  Heat production, % of GE  49.41  48.69  1.99  0.84  Retained energy, % of GE  16.78  19.45  1.86  0.34  DE, Mcal/kg DM  2.85  3.00  0.12  0.31  ME, Mcal/kg DM  2.48  2.64  0.08  0.21  ME:DE ratio, %  86.82  87.93  1.41  0.24  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers also on the SUP treatment received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3Estimated from urine N excretion, assuming all N excreted as urea (5.4 kcal/g N; Blaxter et al., 1964). View Large Energy lost as CH4 averaged 6.28% of GE intake across both treatments and was numerically 10.3% lower (P = 0.18) for the SUP group than for the CON group. The values of CH4 loss relative to GE intake reported here are comparable to values suggested by other studies where a similar energy density was fed (Cammell et al., 1986; Beever et al., 1988; Johnson and Johnson, 1995). McGinn et al. (2004) fed diets based on barley silage and barley grain and noted that steers supplemented with 33 mg/kg DM of monensin tended to have a lower enteric CH4 production as a proportion of GE intake. Megacalories of CH4 lost tended (P = 0.06) to be lower (18.1%) for steers fed SUP than for steers fed CON. Enteric CH4 productions were relatively constant during the 4-d gas sampling periods. Therefore, the adaptation period appeared to be long enough to avoid any carryover effects of previous diet on enteric CH4 production. On a megacalories per kilogram DM basis, DE and ME were not different (P ≥ 0.20) for steers fed the SUP and CON treatments. The ratio of ME:DE was not different (P = 0.24) for steers fed SUP (86.29) and steers fed CON (87.93). These ratios are somewhat comparable to those reported by Wedegaertner and Johnson (1983) and Hales et al. (2012, 2013, 2015) using steers fed high-concentrate diets. Wedegaertner and Johnson (1983) reported that addition of monensin increased the ME:DE ratio from 0.88 to 0.90, which was driven by a reduction in CH4 production. Notably, the ME:DE ratio of both treatments was higher than the value of 0.82 used to convert DE to ME reported by the NRC (1996). Galyean et al. (2016) recently suggested that refinements should be made to the current methods of converting estimated DE to ME and that instead of applying a fixed value of 0.82 to convert DE to ME, a linear regression can be used. Dietary ME values calculated from our DE values using Eq. [1] of Galyean et al. (2016) were slightly lower than the measured ME in this study (predicted ME of 2.44 vs. observed ME of 2.48 Mcal/kg DM for CON and predicted ME of 2.58 vs. observed ME of 2.64 Mcal/kg DM for SUP). Although no statistical differences were noted in energy losses between treatments, the numerical differences suggest that the quantity of RE is roughly proportional to the expected difference in performance. In a multitrial summary evaluating the effects of energy supplementation on ADG of steers grazing wheat pasture, Horn et al. (2005) observed that steers supplemented at 0.65% of BW with various energy sources gained 0.15 kg/d more than steers that were not fed an energy supplement. Assuming that 2.80 Mcal of NEg are required for steers weighing 212 kg to gain 1.0 kg/d (NRC, 1996), the calculated difference in expected ADG between the 2 treatments in the present study would be 0.21 kg/d. Gas exchange data are presented in Table 4. Consumption of O2, CO2 produced, and respiratory quotient were not different between the treatments (P ≥ 0.45). Liters of enteric CH4 produced tended to be lower for steers fed SUP than for steers fed CON (P = 0.06). This tendency for lower CH4 production observed in the SUP group is likely a combination of supplemental energy and monensin; however, partitioning this effect into monensin or added energy supplementation is difficult. Davenport et al. (1989) observed no difference in ruminal propionate concentrations in cattle supplied a monensin bolus (designed to deliver 100 mg monensin/steer daily) while consuming early vegetative wheat pasture, whereas Horn et al. (1981) noted greater ruminal propionate concentrations in cattle supplemented with 200 mg of monensin/steer daily. In a study somewhat similar to our trial, Grainger et al. (2008) fed green-chopped ryegrass pasture supplemented with barley grain to lactating Holstein cows and observed similar CH4 production (determined using SF6) between cows administered a monensin bolus (designed to release 320 mg/cow daily) and those given no monensin. In contrast, using grazing cows, Van Vugt et al. (2005) observed a 9 to 10% lower enteric CH4 production for cows administered a controlled-release monensin bolus than for cows given no monensin. Although the effects of monensin on CH4 production have been reported to be transitory (Guan et al., 2006) and inconsistent (Hristov et al., 2013), monensin is thought to reduce CH4 production by several mechanisms: 1) by shifting ruminal fermentation to less acetate relative to propionate (Bergen and Bates, 1984), which favors less CH4 production (Wolin, 1960), and 2) by decreasing DMI (Duffield et al., 2008), perhaps in response to regulating energy intake (Allen et al., 2009). Table 4. Gas exchange of steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance energy intake Item  CON1  21  SEM2  P-value  O2, L/d3  1,777  1,731  75.3  0.67  CO2, L/d3  1,704  1,627  108.1  0.45  CH4, L/d4  130  115  14.3  0.06  RQ5  0.96  0.95  0.07  0.86  Item  CON1  21  SEM2  P-value  O2, L/d3  1,777  1,731  75.3  0.67  CO2, L/d3  1,704  1,627  108.1  0.45  CH4, L/d4  130  115  14.3  0.06  RQ5  0.96  0.95  0.07  0.86  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3Values were determined from gas samples collected in 10-min intervals (Sable Systems International, Las Vegas, NV). 4Values were determined from gas samples continuously collected, and gas concentrations were determined by gas chromatography. 5RQ = respiratory quotient. View Large Table 4. Gas exchange of steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy at 1.5× maintenance energy intake Item  CON1  21  SEM2  P-value  O2, L/d3  1,777  1,731  75.3  0.67  CO2, L/d3  1,704  1,627  108.1  0.45  CH4, L/d4  130  115  14.3  0.06  RQ5  0.96  0.95  0.07  0.86  Item  CON1  21  SEM2  P-value  O2, L/d3  1,777  1,731  75.3  0.67  CO2, L/d3  1,704  1,627  108.1  0.45  CH4, L/d4  130  115  14.3  0.06  RQ5  0.96  0.95  0.07  0.86  1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3Values were determined from gas samples collected in 10-min intervals (Sable Systems International, Las Vegas, NV). 4Values were determined from gas samples continuously collected, and gas concentrations were determined by gas chromatography. 5RQ = respiratory quotient. View Large Fasting heat production and calculated partial efficiency of ME use are presented in Table 5. As evidenced by the positive energy balance in both 1x intake level feeding treatments, the apparent energy value of the wheat forage was greater than the formulated quantity needed to have a zero energy balance. Retained energy per kilogram MBW was not different between both levels of DMI for steers fed CON but was lower for steers fed SUP at 1x maintenance than for steers fed SUP at 1.5x maintenance. Fasting heat production was not influenced by previous DMI or by dietary treatment (P = 0.85). It is unlikely that adequate statistical power existed to detect any dietary effect on FHP, given the low number of observations. In addition, the difference in the level of DMI was not large within treatments under the conditions of this study. Calculated km and kg were numerically greater for steers fed SUP (0.92 and 0.62, respectively) than for steers fed CON (0.73 and 0.57, respectively). These partial efficiencies of ME use for steers fed SUP are higher than the relationships reported by Garrett (1980) and Garrett and Johnson (1983) and used by the NRC (1996) for conversion of ME to NEm (0.67 to 0.69) and NEg (0.48). Blaxter and Wainman (1964) noted that km (approximate range: 0.70 to 0.80) and kg (approximate range: 0.30 to 0.60) varied with corn level and energy level in the diet. Using British-cross steers fed high-concentrate diets and with BW similar to those in our study (225 vs. 206 kg), Wedegaertner and Johnson (1983) observed that km was 0.65 to 0.70 and kg was 0.62 to 0.65. Using Jersey steers fed high-concentrate diets, Hales et al. (2012) noted that km was 0.70 to 0.78 and kg was 0.39. Birkelo et al. (1991) observed that km ranged from 0.60 to 0.83, depending on the season. Although relatively high, the observed values for km and kg of steers fed SUP in the current experiment are within the previously reported ranges for efficiency of ME use. Table 5. Fasting heat production (FHP) and efficiency of ME use, of steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy and calculated NEm and NEg values of diets   CON1  SUP1      Item  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  SEM2  P-value  Observations, no.  6  6  6  6  –  –  ME intake, kcal/MBW3 daily  155.7a  212.4b  136.8a  212.7b  6.60  <0.001  RE,4 kcal/MBW, daily  36.4a  56.0a  10.1b  62.7a  10.13  0.001  Fasting heat production      Observations, no.  4  4  2  2  –  –      FHP, kcal/kg MBW daily  94.9  99.2  100.0  99.4  6.3  0.85  Calculated partial efficiency of ME use      kmainteance5  0.73  0.92  –  –      kgain6  0.57  0.64  –  –      Calculated NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.76  2.32  –  –      Calculated NEg Mcal/kg DM  1.37  1.61  –  –    CON1  SUP1      Item  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  SEM2  P-value  Observations, no.  6  6  6  6  –  –  ME intake, kcal/MBW3 daily  155.7a  212.4b  136.8a  212.7b  6.60  <0.001  RE,4 kcal/MBW, daily  36.4a  56.0a  10.1b  62.7a  10.13  0.001  Fasting heat production      Observations, no.  4  4  2  2  –  –      FHP, kcal/kg MBW daily  94.9  99.2  100.0  99.4  6.3  0.85  Calculated partial efficiency of ME use      kmainteance5  0.73  0.92  –  –      kgain6  0.57  0.64  –  –      Calculated NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.76  2.32  –  –      Calculated NEg Mcal/kg DM  1.37  1.61  –  –  a,bMeans within a row with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05). 1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers on the SUP treatment also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium at 1.5x the intake and 112 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium at 1x the maintenance level of intake (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3MBW = metabolic BW. 4RE = retained energy. 5kmaintenance = the partial efficiency of ME use for maintenance. 6kgain = the partial efficiency of ME use for gain. View Large Table 5. Fasting heat production (FHP) and efficiency of ME use, of steers fed green-chop wheat forage and supplemented with additional energy and calculated NEm and NEg values of diets   CON1  SUP1      Item  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  SEM2  P-value  Observations, no.  6  6  6  6  –  –  ME intake, kcal/MBW3 daily  155.7a  212.4b  136.8a  212.7b  6.60  <0.001  RE,4 kcal/MBW, daily  36.4a  56.0a  10.1b  62.7a  10.13  0.001  Fasting heat production      Observations, no.  4  4  2  2  –  –      FHP, kcal/kg MBW daily  94.9  99.2  100.0  99.4  6.3  0.85  Calculated partial efficiency of ME use      kmainteance5  0.73  0.92  –  –      kgain6  0.57  0.64  –  –      Calculated NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.76  2.32  –  –      Calculated NEg Mcal/kg DM  1.37  1.61  –  –    CON1  SUP1      Item  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  1× NEm  1.5× NEm  SEM2  P-value  Observations, no.  6  6  6  6  –  –  ME intake, kcal/MBW3 daily  155.7a  212.4b  136.8a  212.7b  6.60  <0.001  RE,4 kcal/MBW, daily  36.4a  56.0a  10.1b  62.7a  10.13  0.001  Fasting heat production      Observations, no.  4  4  2  2  –  –      FHP, kcal/kg MBW daily  94.9  99.2  100.0  99.4  6.3  0.85  Calculated partial efficiency of ME use      kmainteance5  0.73  0.92  –  –      kgain6  0.57  0.64  –  –      Calculated NEm, Mcal/kg DM  1.76  2.32  –  –      Calculated NEg Mcal/kg DM  1.37  1.61  –  –  a,bMeans within a row with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05). 1CON = no supplementation; SUP = steam-flaked corn-based energy supplement fed at 0.5% of BW. Steers on the SUP treatment also received 163 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium at 1.5x the intake and 112 mg/animal daily of monensin sodium at 1x the maintenance level of intake (Rumensin; Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN). 2Pooled SE of the treatment means. 3MBW = metabolic BW. 4RE = retained energy. 5kmaintenance = the partial efficiency of ME use for maintenance. 6kgain = the partial efficiency of ME use for gain. View Large The observed NEg for CON was slightly greater than previous estimates for wheat pasture. Horn et al. (2005) reported that the mean ADG of cattle on unsupplemented wheat pasture was approximately 0.92 kg/d. Back-calculating the required dietary NE content using a 0.92 kg/d ADG and the standard equations published by the NRC (1996) for a 205-kg steer, the expected energy concentrations of wheat forage in the present study would be 1.41 Mcal NEm/kg DM and 0.83 Mcal NEg/kg DM. Using the equation described by Weiss et al. (1992), Fieser et al. (2007) reported that the estimated TDN of immature wheat forage clippings taken in November was 67.2%. Using standard conversions of TDN to DE and ME (NRC, 1996), we calculated that wheat pasture would contain 1.47 and 0.88 Mcal/kg DM of NEm and NEg, respectively. The NEg values for wheat pasture observed in this study were especially high and were near (CON) or greater (SUP) than the tabular value for corn grain (1.50 Mcal NEg/kg DM; NRC, 1996). These high values may reflect the low levels of DMI imposed during the study. Under a pasture situation, DMI would probably be much greater, and the reported range in estimated DMI by grazing cattle has been from less than 1% to greater than 4% (Caton and Dhuyvetter, 1997). In a companion paper to this work (Ebert et al., 2016), DMI by cattle grazing wheat pasture was estimated to be >3% of BW. Furthermore, it is unknown if chemostatic (Allen et al., 2009) or physical-fill mechanisms (Mertens, 1987; Forbes, 2003) regulate DMI in cattle consuming highly digestible forage such as the green-chopped wheat pasture offered in this study. Regardless, as DMI increases, and especially when physical space limits intake, rate of passage will generally increase. This is often at the expense of digestibility, but, intuitively, lower kg and estimated values of NEm and NEg could also occur. It is not surprising that the calculated diet NEg of supplemented steers increased, as diet energy density increased due to the steam-flaked corn–based energy supplement, which contains more energy than wheat pasture (NRC, 1996). For steers fed the SUP treatment, 76.1% of delivered DM was wheat forage and the remaining 23.9% was the steam-flaked corn–based supplement. Assuming tabular values (NRC, 1996) for ingredients in the supplement (1.91 Mcal/kg DM of NEm and 1.19 Mcal/kg DM of NEg), the expected concentration of NEg in the SUP treatment would be 1.34 Mcal/kg DM. Some of the difference between the expected and observed values between SUP and CON groups may be related to addition of monensin, associative effects on ruminal fermentation by the addition of energy to a protein-rich environment, or inherent variation and unknowns in actual energy concentration of the wheat and supplement. Additionally, ash considerations and DM of offered wheat forage may have influenced NE results. However, many of the differences in calculated energy vs. other estimates available for wheat forage can be explained by the higher-than-expected RE for both supplement treatments at 1x maintenance, as steers fed CON had greater RE at 1x level of intake (36.4 kcal/MBW) than supplemented steers (10.1 kcal/MBW). As FHP and RE at 1.5x maintenance were not different from each other, the values at 1x maintenance clearly affected the slope of the regression line and may have artificially increased the calculated NEm and NEg. Unfortunately, the interaction between dietary supplement treatment and DMI is difficult to interpret, as supplemented energy was in a proportion similar to that of wheat forage at both levels of intake. Implications Contrary to our hypothesis, supplementing additional energy to steers consuming green-chop wheat pasture at 1.5 times maintenance level of intake had minimal impact on nutrient digestibility or N balance. With the exception of CH4, losses of energy were similar between treatments. Methane, as total production or as a percentage of GE intake, tended to be lower when an energy supplement containing monensin was provided. When using the estimated energy values of wheat forage, calculated NE values for forage and supplements were greater than the expected difference in energy content due to differential response at 1 times the maintenance level of intake. Under these circumstances, energy supplementation did increase dietary NEm and NEg values. Differences (and lack thereof) in this trial between treatment groups may be representative of relatively low intakes imposed on the cattle during the study, which should be considered in future research evaluating NE content of forages. LITERATURE CITED Allen M. S. Bradford B. J. Oba M. 2009. Board-invited review: The hepatic oxidation theory of the control of feed intake and its application to ruminants. J. Anim. Sci.  87: 3317– 3334. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-1779 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  AOAC 1990. Official methods of analysis. 15th ed. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., Arlington, VA. Beever D. E. Cammell S. B. Thomas C. Spooner M. C. Hannes M. J. Gale D. L. 1988. The effect of date of cut and barley substitution on gain and on the efficiency of utilization of grass silage by growing cattle. 2. Nitrogen supply and energy partition. Br. J. Nutr.  60: 307– 319. doi: https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19880102 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Bergen W. G. Bates D. B. 1984. Ionophores: Their effect on production efficiency and mode of action. J. Anim. Sci.  58: 1465– 1483. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861465x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Birkelo C. P. Johnson D. E. Phetteplace H. P. 1991. Maintenance requirements of beef cattle as affected by season on different planes of nutrition. J. Anim. Sci.  69: 1214– 1222. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1991.6931214x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Blaxter K. L. Clapperton J. L. Martin A. K. 1964. The heat of combustion of the urine of sheep and cattle in relation to its chemical composition and to diet. Br. J. Nutr.  20: 449– 460. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Blaxter K. L. Wainman F. W. 1964. The utilization of energy of different rations by sheep and cattle for maintenance and for fattening. J. Agric. Sci. (Camb.)  63: 113– 119. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Branine M. E. Galyean M. L. 1990. Influence of grain and monensin supplementation on ruminal fermentation, intake, digesta kinetics and incidence and severity of frothy bloat in steers grazing winter wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  68: 1139– 1150. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1990.6841139x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Brouwer E. 1965. Report of sub-committee on constants and factors. In: Blaxter K. L. editor, Energy metabolism.  Academic Press, London, UK. p. 441– 443. Cammell S. B. Thomson D. J. Beever D. E. Haines M. J. Dhanoa M. S. Spooner M. C. 1986. The efficiency of energy utilization in growing cattle consuming fresh perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne cv. Melle) or white clover (Trifolium repens cv. Blanca). Br. J. Nutr.  55: 669– 680. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Capper J. L. Hayes D. J. 2012. The environmental and economic impact of removing growth-enhancing technologies from U.S. beef production. J. Anim. Sci.  90: 3527– 3537. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4870 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Caton J. S. Dhuyvetter D. V. 1997. Influence of energy supplementation on grazing ruminants: Requirements and responses. J. Anim. Sci.  75: 533– 542. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.752533x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Chabot D. A. Chabot C. D. Conway L. K. Soto-Navarro S. A. 2008. Effect of fat supplementation and wheat pasture maturity on forage intake and digestion characteristics of steers grazing wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  86: 1263– 1270. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0388 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Dairy One 2015. Analytical procedures.  http://dairyone.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Forage-Lab-Analytical-Procedures-Listing-Alphabetical-July-2015.pdf. (Accessed February 22, 2017.) Davenport R. W. Galyean M. L. Branine M. E. Hubbert M. E. 1989. Effects of a monensin ruminal delivery device on daily gain, forage intake and ruminal fermentation of steers grazing irrigated winter wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  67: 2129– 2139. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1989.6782129x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Duffield T. F. Rabiee A. R. Lean I. J. 2008. A meta-analysis of the impact of monensin in lactation dairy cattle part 2. Production effects. J. Dairy Sci.  91: 1347– 1360. doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0608 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Ebert P. E. Jennings J. S. Shreck A. L. Cole N. A. Bailey E. A. 2016. Effect of corn-based supplementation on gas emissions, performance, and energetic losses of steers grazing wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  94( E-Suppl. 5): 811– 812. (Abstr.) Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Fieser B. G. Horn G. W. Kountz J. R. 2007. Effect of energy, mineral supplementation, or both, in combination with monensin on performance of steers grazing winter wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  85: 3470– 3480. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0127 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Forbes J. 2003. The multifactorial nature of food intake control. J. Anim. Sci.  81: E139– E144. Galyean M. L. Cole N. A. Tedeschi L. O. Branine M. E. 2016. Board-invited review: Efficiency of converting digestible energy to metabolizable energy and reevaluation of the California Net Energy System maintenance requirements and equations for predicting dietary net energy values for beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci.  94: 1329– 1341. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-0223 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Garrett W. N. 1980. Energy utilization by growing cattle as determined in 72 comparative slaughter experiments. In: Proc. 8th Energy. Metab. Symp.,  Churchill College, Cambridge, UK. p. 3– 7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-408-10641-2.50006-9 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Garrett W. N. Johnson D. E. 1983. Nutritional energetics of ruminants. J. Anim. Sci.  57: 478– 497. Grainger C. Auldist M. J. Clarke T. Beauchemin K. A. McGinn S. M. Hannah M. C. Eckard R. J. Lowes L. B. 2008. Use of monensin controlled-release capsules to reduce methane emissions and improve milk production of dairy cows offered pasture supplemented with grain. J. Dairy Sci.  91: 1159– 1165. doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0319 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Guan H. Wittenberg K. M. Ominski K. H. Krause D. O. 2006. Efficacy of ionophores in cattle diets for mitigation of enteric methane. J. Anim. Sci.  84: 1896– 1906. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2005-652 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Hales K. E. Cole N. A. MacDonald J. C. 2012. Effects of corn processing method and dietary inclusion of wet distillers grains with solubles on energy metabolism, carbon-nitrogen balance, and methane emissions of cattle. J. Anim. Sci.  90: 3174– 3185. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4441 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Hales K. E. Cole N. A. MacDonald J. C. 2013. Effects of increasing concentrations of wet distillers grains with solubles on energy metabolism, carbon-nitrogen balance, and methane emissions of cattle. J. Anim. Sci.  91: 819– 828. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5418 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Hales K. E. Jaderborg J. P. Crawford G. I. DiCostanzo A. Spiehs M. J. Brown-Brandl T. M. Freetly H. C. 2015. Effects of dry-rolled or high-moisture corn with twenty-five or forty-five percent wet distillers' grains with solubles on energy metabolism, nutrient digestibility, and macromineral balance in finishing beef steers. J. Anim. Sci.  93: 4995– 5005. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-9301 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Hall M. B. Hoover W. H. Jennings J. P. Miller-Webster T. K. 1999. A method for partitioning neutral detergent soluble carbohydrates. J. Sci. Food Agric.  79: 2079– 2086. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0010(199912)79:15<2079::AID-JSFA502>3.0.CO;2-Z Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Horn F. P. 1984. Chemical composition of wheat pasture. In: Horn G. W. editor, Proc. Natl. Wheat Pasture Symp.,  Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Stn., Stillwater, OK. p. 47– 54. Horn G. W. Beck P. A. Andrae J. G. Paisley S. I. 2005. Designing supplements for stocker cattle grazing wheat pasture. J. Anim. Sci.  83( E. Suppl.): E69– E78. Horn G. W. Cravey M. D. McCollum F. T. Strasia C. A. Krenzer E. G.Jr Claypool P. L. 1995. Influence of high-starch vs. high-fiber energy supplements on performance of stocker cattle grazing wheat pasture and subsequent feedlot performance. J. Anim. Sci.  73: 45– 54. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.73145x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Horn G. W. Mader T. L. Armbruster S. L. Frahm R. R. 1981. Effect of monensin on ruminal fermentation, forage intake, and weight gains on wheat pasture stocker cattle. J. Anim. Sci.  52: 447– 454. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.523447x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Horn G. W. McCollum F. T. 1987. Energy supplementation of grazing ruminants. In: Judkins M. B. Clanton D. C. Petersen M. K. Wallace J. D. editors, Proc. Graz. Livest. Nutr.  Conf., Jackson Hole, WY. p. 125– 136. Hristov A. N. Oh J. Firkins J. L. Dijkstra J. Kebreab E. Waghorn G. Makkar H. P. S. Adesogan A. Yang W. Lee C. Gerber P. J. Henderson B. Tricarico J. M. 2013. Special topics – Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. J. Anim. Sci.  91: 5045– 5069. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6583 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Johnson K. A. Johnson D. E. 1995. Methane emissions from cattle. J. Anim. Sci.  73: 2483– 2492. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.7382483x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Lighton J. R. B 2008. Validating flow-through respirometry. In: Measuring metabolic rates: A manual for scientists.  Oxford Univ. Press, Inc., New York, NY. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195310610.003.0012 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Mader T. L. Horn G. W. Phillips W. A. McNew R. W. 1983. Low quality roughages for steers grazing wheat pasture I. Effect on weight gains and bloat. J. Anim. Sci.  56: 1021– 1028. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1983.5651021x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  McGinn S. M. Beauchemin K. A. Coates T. Colombatto D. 2004. Methane emissions from beef cattle: Effects of monensin, sunflower oil, enzymes, yeast, and fumaric acid. J. Anim. Sci.  82: 3346– 3356. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/2004.82113346x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Mertens D. R. 1987. Predicting intake and digestibility using mathematical models. J. Anim. Sci.  64: 1548– 1558. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1987.6451548x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) 2016. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 8th ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. NRC 1996. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 7th ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. Paisley S. I. Horn G. W. 1998. Effect of ionophore on rumen characteristics, gas production, and occurrence of bloat in cattle grazing winter wheat pasture. Anim. Sci. Res. Report no. P-965. Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Stn., Stillwater, OK. p. 141– 146. Phillips W. A. Horn G. W. 2008. Intake and digestion of wheat forage by stocker calves and lambs. J. Anim. Sci.  86: 2424– 2429. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-0938 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Phillips W. A. Horn G. W. Smith M. E. 1995. Effect of protein supplementation on forage intake and nitrogen balance of lambs fed freshly harvested wheat forage. J. Anim. Sci.  73: 2687– 2693. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.7392687x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Reuter R. R. Horn G. W. 2000. Changes in growth performance of steers and nutritive value of wheat pasture from fall/winter grazing to graze-out. Anim. Sci. Res. Report no. P-980. Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Stn., Stillwater, OK. p. 20– 27. Reynolds C. K. Tyrrell H. F. Reynolds P. J. 1991. Effect of diet forage-to-concentrate ratio on intake and energy metabolism in growing beef heifers: Whole body energy and nitrogen balance and visceral heat production. J. Nutr.  121: 1004– 1015. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Russell J. B. 2002. Rumen microbiology and its role in ruminant nutrition. James B. Russell Publ. Co., Ithaca, NY. Schneider B. H. Flatt W. P. 1975. The evaluation of feeds through digestibility experiments. Univ. of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. Stewart B. A. Grunes D. L. Mathers A. C. Horn F. P. 1981. Chemical composition of winter wheat forage grown where grass tetany and bloat occur. Agron. J.  73: 337– 347. doi: https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1981.00021962007300020022x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Street J. C. Butcher J. E. Harris L. E. 1964. Estimating urine energy from urine nitrogen. J. Anim. Sci.  23: 1039– 1041. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1964.2341039x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Van Vugt S. J. Waghorn G. C. Clark D. A. Woodward S. L. 2005. Impact of monensin on methane production and performance of cows fed forage diets. Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod.  65: 362– 366. Vogel G. J. Horn G. W. Phillips W. A. Ford M. J. 1987. Influence of supplemental silage on performance and economics of growing cattle on wheat pasture. Prof. Anim. Sci.  3: 50– 55. Vogel K. P. Pedersen J. F. Masterson S. D. Toy J. J. 1999. Evaluation of a filter bag system for NDF, ADF, and IVDMD forage analysis. Crop Sci.  39: 276– 281. doi: https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900010042x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Wedegaertner T. C. Johnson D. E. 1983. Monensin effects on digestibility, methanogenesis, and heat increment of a cracked corn-silage diet fed to steers. J. Anim. Sci.  57: 168– 177. doi: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1983.571168x Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Weiss W. P. Conrad H. R. St. Pierre N. R. 1992. A theoretically-based model for predicting total digestible nutrient values of forages and concentrates. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.  39: 95– 110. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(92)90034-4 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Wolin M. J. 1960. A theoretical rumen fermentation balance. J. Dairy Sci.  43: 1452– 1459. doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(60)90348-9 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Footnotes 1 Contribution from the USDA-ARS Conservation and Production Research Laboratory, Bushland, TX, 79012, in cooperation with Texas A&M AgriLife Research. 2 Mention of trade names or commercial products in this article is solely for the purpose of providing scientific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the USDA. 3 Partial funding provided by USDA to project number 2012-02355 through the National Institute for Food and Agriculture's Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, Regional Approaches for Adaptation to and Mitigation of Climate Variability and Change. American Society of Animal Science
TI - Effects of energy supplementation on energy losses and nitrogen balance of steers fed green-chopped wheat pasture I: Calorimetry
JF - Journal of Animal Science
DO - 10.2527/jas.2017.1417
DA - 2017-05-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/effects-of-energy-supplementation-on-energy-losses-and-nitrogen-xviDdcSqSS
SP - 2133
EP - 2143
VL - 95
IS - 5
DP - DeepDyve
ER -