 |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dry vs. Liquid Supplements Comments by Dr. James I. Sprague, Nutritionist Dry Supplements: The Standard Both dry and liquid supplementation methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Dry supplements, either pellets or meal, have been the standard method for "scientifically balancing" cattle rations for many years. In recent years the liquid feed manufacturing industry has overcome some of their disadvantage to compete with dry supplementation programs. Feed Additives: The Driving Reason for Modern Cattle Supplementing Our grandparents supplemented their cattle with oil meals as a protein source and fed choice minerals and salt in separate mangers or feeders. This method is still used in the U.S. and around the world. But feed additives were developed and became a driving reason for scientific cattle feeding. Feeding programs were developed and dry supplements were the early, convenient way to provide this growth and feed efficiency improvers along with minerals and vitamin A to the beef rations. Urea as a source of crude protein was included to make the products competitive with all natural source of protein. The dry feed manufacturing industry not only provided the additives and nutrients but also provided and suggested feeding programs to enhance the production of the cattle. The liquid supplementation method came later. The key technology that assisted the liquid manufacturing industry was the development of suspension supplements, which included urea, minerals, vitamins and additives. Feeding Program Pioneers The old feeding program for dry supplementation for finishing cattle was two pounds per day of a 32 to 40 percent protein supplement. These were fortified with calcium, phosphorous, vitamin A and a small amount of urea. These feeding programs were very efficient and were backed up by research at the colleges, testing by feed manufacturers and by field experience. Particularly, the late Professor Mac Beeson at Purdue University promoted two pounds of a 32 percent protein supplement. He was also one of the first to recommend the use of vitamin A in the rations. Certainly one must not forget the work and marketing of companies like Ralston-Purina (now Purina Mills), the Moorman people, Gooch Feeds and many others including the independent consultants in providing excellent feeding programs. These early dry feeding programs provided several basic features that are still viable today for cattle feeding enterprises. First of all, they were diluted enough to give good dispersion with the existing feeding equipment or by "top dressing" the supplement on the grain and roughage. Secondly, the size of the supplement package of two pounds per day allowed enough space to easily manufacture the supplement so it would flow from bins at the manufacturing point and the feedyard. We have seen a return to bigger supplement packages to help with material handling and dispersion in the ration. Dry Supplements: Advantages & Disadvantages The dry supplement advantages are: (1) high natural proteins can be included, (2) a variety of high quality by-product feed ingredients can be used, (3) the products can be pellets, granules or meal, and (4) the products can be very diluted or very concentrated depending on the need and desires of the feedyard. An additional advantage of pelleted supplements is the heat and friction of the pelleting process which kills most weed seeds that may be in the by-product ingredients. Dry supplements from reputable manufactures, with quality control, are very consistent. The disadvantages of dry supplements are: (1) pelleted supplements require expensive equipment for manufacturing compared to meal or liquid supplements, (2) if incorrectly formulated the products will bridge in bins, (3) meal supplements may separate in the delivery truck or load out bins unless properly manufactured with mineral oil or fat as a way of dispersing the particles, as well as (4) supplements may be dusty and contribute fines in the ration if the ration is very dry. Liquid Supplement: Advantages & Disadvantages The main disadvantage of liquid supplements is they must be suspended in the carrier material. A suspension agent is needed and usually has no nutrient value. These liquid suspension supplements need re-circulation of the material to prevent separation. The second disadvantage is the water content of liquid supplements. Approximately 30 percent moisture is needed to help the suspension agent work and for the solubility of urea, ammonium sulfate, ammonium phosphate, salt, and potassium chloride. Caution is needed in the handling of liquid supplements. Another disadvantage of a liquid supplement is that it is hard to get any natural protein in the suspension. This is overcome by feeding a source of protein as a separate ingredient. Material Handling: The Main Advantage of Liquids The main advantage of a liquid supplement is their material handling properties. The product is stored in tanks and can be added to the ration easily. For some feeding operations, it is very difficult to use a dry supplement because of lack of adequate bins for a dry supplement. Another advantage of a liquid supplement is the conditioning properties that it can add to a dry cattle ration. Caution is needed because some liquid suspensions do not have any conditioning properties if not formulated properly. Reputable liquid-feed manufactures use only high quality ingredients as the carrier ingredients. Fat and protein sources have now become possible to add by some manufacturers. Use Both a Liquid and Dry Supplement This leads to programs, which contain both a liquid supplement and a dry supplement. We have several clients who use a combined program. The combined program allows most of the urea and part of the minerals in the liquid suspension and then the dry supplement can have less urea and minerals and will handle better in the bins of the feedyard. For comments on this article, contact James I. Sprague at 625 Grandview, Newton, KS 67114. |
||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
All information is copywrited by Feed Lot magazine and cannot be printed or re-printed without the publishers express consent. Please contact Feed Lot Magazine for reprint and copy authorization. | ||||