This week’s featured video was published by Today Tonight to share the story of Knickers, the giant 6’4″ tall, 3,000 pound Australian steer that has become a social media sensation. Knickers is used as a “Coach” or lead steer for a stocker cattle operation in Australia. While he is not quite large enough to break the world record (6’7″), his story is pretty interesting. Check out the video!
********************************
If you enjoyed this video, you might want to check out the featured videos from previous weeks: Friday Features
If you come across an interesting or humorous video, or a new product innovation related to agriculture, please send in a link, so we can share it with our readers. Send video links to: Doug Mayo
Jose Dubeux, Erick Santos, David Jaramillo, Liza Garcia, Luana Dantas, UF/IFAS North Florida Research and Education Center, Marianna
Rhizoma perennial peanut (Arachis glabrata Benth.) is an important hay crop in Florida. Rhizoma peanut hay is locally produced within Florida, and it has important stakes in the horse and dairy industries. This warm-season perennial legume is also a valuable forage option for grazing systems (Dubeux et al., 2018). In addition to adding N via biological N2-fixation, rhizoma peanut has greater nutritive value than most warm-season perennial grasses. As a result, greater livestock performance is achieved when mixing this legume in grazing systems. Many producers using rhizoma peanut want to overseed their field with cool-season forages when the rhizoma peanut is dormant. Common questions that precede the decision to overseed rhizoma peanut fields are: 1) Will it hurt my rhizoma peanut regrowth in the following season? 2) Does it matter which cool-season forage I plant? How about annual ryegrass and clovers? Would they damage the rhizoma peanut because of their late growth in the season?
In order to address these questions, we set up a trial at the UF IFAS NFREC in Marianna, FL. We assessed different overseeding treatments on rhizoma peanut fields, including the control (no overseeding), Prine ryegrass, FL 401 rye, FL 401 rye/Prine ryegrass mix, Prine ryegrass/Crimson/Red/Ball clover mix, FL 401 rye/Crimson/Red/Ball clover mix, FL 401 rye/Prine ryegrass/Crimson/Red/Ball clover mix, and Crimson/Red/Ball clover mix. Seeding rates used are described in Table 1. These different overseeding treatments were applied on a dormant Florigraze sod using a no-till drill in 17 Nov 2015, after mowing the stand down to a 2-inches stubble height. We applied 150 lb/acre of 20-5-20 and 100 lb/acre of Kmag (22% K2O, 22% S, and 10.8% Mg) in all treatments. Plots were harvested three times: 11 Feb, 17 March, and 21 Apr 2016. After the third harvest, plots were fertilized with 300 lb/acre of Kmag. On 22 July 2016, we harvested the rhizoma peanut to assess whether or not the overseeding treatment affected the regrowth.
Overseeding treatments varied their biomass accumulation along the three harvests (Figure 1). Earlier forage types, such as FL 401 rye, produced more in the first harvest, as expected. Treatments with clovers and annual ryegrass produced more biomass later in the season, at the third harvest. The option of forage type or mixtures will depend on the objective of each operation. For hay producers, earlier forage production during the cool-season may free up the land earlier, allowing regrowth of rhizoma peanut without other forages being present. For grazing operations, mixtures would likely be a better option because they would help bridge the gap during the spring-summer transition.
Figure 1. Cool-season herbage accumulation of different overseeding treatments on Florigraze rhizoma peanut; UF IFAS NFREC Marianna; 2016.
In the summer harvest (July 2016), the rhizoma peanut from all treatments, including the control that was not overseeded, produced similar amounts of biomass across treatments (Figure 2). This result demonstrates the viability of overseeding rhizoma peanut fields with cool-season forages. The major aspect to highlight is the importance of timely harvest the cool-season forages during the springtime, allowing the rhizoma peanut to regrow.
Figure 2. Summer herbage accumulation of Florigraze rhizoma peanut after overseed during the cool-season with different forage options. UF IFAS NFREC Marianna; 2016.
We have been overseeding cool-season forages on strip-planted rhizoma peanut in a grazing trial (Figure 3A). We have been doing this for the last three years, and the rhizoma peanut is vigorous and growing (Figure 3C). The critical phase is the springtime, when rhizoma peanut (and bahiagrass) is starting to regrow (Figure 3B). During this transition, it is important to pay closer attention to the grazing management, in order to reduce the canopy density and open spaces to allow the perennial forages (rhizoma peanut and bahiagrass) to regrow.
Figure 3. Overseeding of cool-season forages on strip-planted rhizoma peanut in Marianna, FL. A. Cool-season mixture of FL401 rye-RAM oat-Dixie Crimson-Southern Belle red clover-Ball clover; B. transition period during the Spring; C. strip-planted rhizoma peanut growing during the summer. Photo Credit: Jose Dubeux, UF/IFAS
Take-Home Message
Rhizoma peanut can be overseeded during the cool-season with different forage options without reducing the warm-season regrowth. However, if the cool-season forages form a dense stand during the spring, it is important to graze it off or remove the excess forage with hay equipment. Harvest management during the spring is critical to allow regrowth of the rhizoma peanut.
The large inventory of feed cattle that have been placed in the feedyards has begun to affect the price of feeder calves. How large an impact will depend on consumer demand. Credit: Chris Prevatt, UF/IFAS
Cattle on Feed Report
On Friday, September 21st the monthly USDA-NASS Cattle on Feed Report was released. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture the number of cattle and calves on feed (Feedlots with 1,000 head or more capacity) for the slaughter market in the United States on September 1st was 11.125 million head, 5.9 percent above Sept. 1, 2017. This is the largest September inventory since the series began in 1996. The monthly cattle on feed inventory not only increased year-over-year, but month-over-month with 32,000 more cattle on feed since the August 1st inventory report. Additionally, this is the fourth month in a row where a monthly record has been set for the number of cattle and calves on feed for the slaughter market. A twelve-month moving average of monthly feedlot inventories shows that, over the last year, feedlots have had the largest average feedlot total since 2007. Placements in feedlots during August totaled 2.07 million head, which was 7 percent above August 2017. Net placements were 2.02 million head. Marketing of fed cattle during August totaled 1.98 million head, slightly above the 2017 total.
Keys for the Beef Cattle Market
The cattle on feed report did not create a positive short-term outlook, as it continues to provide bearish information for supply fundamentals. Beef production is on track to reach a record level of 27.1 billion pounds in 2018, up 3.6 percent year over year. For the year to date, beef production is up 3.0 percent year over year. However, fourth quarter beef production is expected to be about 4.0 percent larger than last year.
From the demand side of things, a strong domestic economy and robust exports have continued to support beef and cattle prices during 2018, against record large U.S. beef production and all-time highs in competing meats (pork and poultry). Packing business margins continue to be good. Therefore, packers have great incentive to keep processing as many head as possible to take advantage of margins. Good retail demand and packer margins will be needed to keep the market moving along at a good pace during the last quarter of 2018.
There are many unknowns and potential headwinds for cattle markets during the next 12-18 months. Any weakness in the domestic or global economy compared to the conditions of the last two years would dampen demand for beef and thus cattle. Therefore, two of the keys for maintaining prices moving forward will be for the U.S. economy and export markets to continue growing. These two factors will be challenged by the cycle of tariffs and retaliation. Futures markets may begin to react more aggressively to political announcements that may or may not materialize into price changes. Demand for U.S. beef is critical to the success of U.S. cattle producers. Export markets can take a very long time to materialize, but can be lost very quickly.
Just like soil sampling before purchasing fertilizer, hay should be sampled and sent to a lab for evaluation before purchasing supplemental feeds. As Dr. Jennifer Tucker from UGA often says, “Don’t guess, forage test!” Credit: Doug Mayo, UF/IFAS
The summer of 2018 has been very challenging for hay production. The combination of frequent rainfall, and heavy downpours have prevented timely harvest, and also diminished the quality of the hay produced. The days are getting shorter, grass growth has slowed, so it is time to start planning for cool-season supplementation. Because of the rainy summer, many producers will have to feed at least some lower quality hay this year. Since hay serves as the base for the winter feeding program on most operations, it will be even more critical this year to balance low quality hay with adequate supplemental feeds. This conundrum has many producers asking, “What is the best way to do that?”
In the modern area of precision agriculture, many crop farms have implemented the technique of precision fertilization. Using grid soil sampling, GPS maps can be generated with variable rate fertilization zones. Once the maps are paired with high-tech application equipment that responds to the data, crop farmers can fertilize more efficiently than ever before. While most livestock producers are familiar with high-tech genetic and breeding technologies, many farms are not utilizing the available technology for what I call “Precision Feeding.” Whether you produce your own hay, or buy it from a local farm or supply dealer, you should have your hay tested for nutritional quality. As Dr. Jennifer Tucker, UGA Beef Specialist, often says, “Don’t guess. Forage test!” Once you know how good or bad your hay is, you can precisely determine the type and amount of supplement needed to balance the nutritional needs of the animals you are feeding.
Forage Sampling
So where do you begin this process of fine-tuning your winter nutrition program? The first step is to sample each cutting or purchased lot of hay to determine the nutritional quality. Contact your local county agent to get some help with this. A number of the agents in the Florida Panhandle have forage probes at their office, or can get one to use from a nearby county. If you want to purchase your own equipment, there are a number of different companies that sell forage sampling probes. The one I use, was ordered from Nascoand fits on the end of a 1/2″ cordless drill. The combined cost of the forage probe ($130) and a heavy duty 1/2″ cordless drill is around $350.
To send in a forage sample to a lab for analysis you need a 1/2″ cordless drill, forage probe, and a submission form from the lab of choice. Credit: Doug Mayo, UF/IFAS
To submit a hay sample to a lab for testing, you will need to fill a 1-quart Ziploc bag with ground hay from probing 7-10 random hay bales from each cutting or purchased lots. Samples of hay from the exterior of a bale will not provide an adequate representation of the hay you will be feeding. You also don’t want to sample only a single bale. Just as with soil testing, you want to try to get a representative sample from each cutting by taking core samples from bales produced from different parts of the field. If you purchased the hay to be tested, just randomly sample from as many different bales as possible from each load.
Forage Testing
There are a number of both commercial and university forage laboratories that can be used to provide a summary of the nutritional quality of your hay. The main things you need to know are the moisture content or dry matter (%DM), crude protein (CP), and the energy level reported as total digestible nutrients (TDN). The University of Florida has a forage testing lab at the Range Cattle Research and Education Center in Central Florida, that provides a basic test for $7/sample: UF Forage Test Submission Form. You can also send in hay samples through the Southeast Hay Contest that are analyzed by the University of Georgia’s Forage Lab: SE Hay Contest Entry Form. For $22 you get the forage analysis, a nitrate level test, and may win recognition at the Sun Belt Ag Expo as one of the top forage producers in the region. The entry deadline is the third week in September each year. If you want to use a commercial service, you can also submit samples to Waters Ag Lab in Camilla, GA: Waters Feed Test Submission Form. No matter which lab you select, the goal is find out what level of protein and energy is provided by the hay, so you can calculate the level of supplemental feed needed to complement it.
Forage Analysis Results
Most all forage labs provide sample analysis results in two formats: as-sampled and dry-matter. The as-sampled column would be useful for actual ration formulation of a total mixed ration. In general though, you should focus on the dry-matter columns for comparisons between forages, and for basic supplementation calculations. Moisture levels of forages are rarely identical, so removing the moisture gives a more accurate comparison. For basic supplementation program development, you would use the highlighted dry-matter protein and energy values. If you want to know more about the other information provided in a forage test, Understanding Your Forage Test Report is an article that was published a while back that more completely explains what each of the reported values represent in a standard forage test lab report.
The forage analysis report above is fairly typical quality for average quality Bahia or low quality Bermudagrass hay that was more mature because of frequent summer rains. If you were going to feed this hay to lactating cows, or growing animals you would expect those animals to be deficient in both protein and energy. These numbers mean very little, however, without also knowing the nutrient requirements of the animals you are feeding.
Decision Aids for Supplement Calculations
There are a number of commercial software options for livestock ration balancing, as well as private nutrition consultants that provide very precise calculations for complete ration balancing. For feedlots and dairy operations, having very precise mixing recipes is essential. For most cow-calf operations, however, determining the right amounts of supplements to provide is not that complicated. Since you typically feed hay free-choice, all you really need to know is whether the hay is adequate or deficient in protein and energy. Once you know that, a simple spreadsheet can be used to provide a good estimate of the type and amount of supplement required to maintain body weight. Dr. Nicolas DiLorenzo, UF/IFAS Beef Specialist recently developed a very simple spread sheet called the UF HAY BALANCER that can be used to help cattle producers make decisions on supplement choices for mature cows on a free-choice hay diet. The University of Georgia also has a decision aid spreadsheet called the UGA BASIC BALANCER that is a little more complex, but it can be used to compare supplements for brood cows, bulls, heifers, and stockers, as well as providing some feedstuff cost comparisons. Both of these are Microsoft Excel spreadsheets that come with information pre-loaded for use. Commodity prices do fluctuate, so you may need to update the prices in the feed list provided.
Putting it All Together
In closing, I wanted to share an example of the end results of this process to demonstrate how the UF Hay Balancer can be used to help cattle producers become more precise with feeding supplements to compliment the hay they produce or purchase. For this example lets assume that you must purchase hay to feed 25 cows for 30 days that will be in their 2nd month, or peak lactation. This would be the time of most concern, because if you don’t supply adequate nutrition for these cows they will lose weight, reduce milk production, delay cycling and calve later for the following season. The following is a comparison of two types of hay at different prices, and a comparison of different supplement options. You can purchase 850 pound Bahia hay for $43 per bale or 1,000 pound Bermudagrass bales for $67 per bale (based on Alabama Weekly Hay Report). Which would be the best to purchase?
As you can see from this summary, this was not a simple scenario to answer. The end result of this exercise was that even though the bahiagrass hay was lower in quality, the cheaper price compensated for the lack of quality. The Bahia hay required a supplement that offered both protein and energy such as whole cottonseed, that can be purchased from local cotton gins, to balance the diet for these cows. The Bermudagrass hay provided adequate protein, so an energy supplement such as corn or molasses was all that required for a balanced diet. However, using 4 pounds/head/day of whole cottonseed, a rancher could feed his or her herd for 30 days cheaper with Bahia hay than with Bermudagrass hay, even though the supplement costs were $45 lower. If you had worked through this scenario with hay you have grown yourself, with similar production costs, the Bermudagrass hay would have been the better option.
If you would like assistance with forage testing, or balancing cattle herd supplementation, contact your local county extension agent. They can help you develop a precision feeding program for your herd.
Cattle are a little like humans: They are more productive when they are cooler. With cattle, a cooler body helps with meat and dairy production, new University of Florida research shows.
“Cows with shorter hair are cooler, and thus, more productive,” said Raluca Mateescu, an associate professor of animal sciences at the UF Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. “A calm cow is also more productive than an agitated one,” Mateescu said.
“When their bodies heat up, cattle use energy to try to lower their temperature, which usually means they eat less,” said Mateescu, who led a recent study on body temperature and cattle traits.
“These findings would have the biggest impact for beef producers in hot, humid environments, largely in the southeast U.S. and other sub-tropical and tropical regions of the world,” Mateescu said.
Florida and much of the southern U.S. are in what’s called the “sub-tropics.” Places like Brazil, central Africa and the northern half of Australia are in the “tropics.”
The U.S. livestock industry suffers an annual economic loss of $2.36 billion to heat stress, according to a 2003 study led by Ohio State University, the most recent national data available. “Scientists predict most livestock throughout the U.S. will experience extreme summer heat in the years to come, which translates to less-productive cattle,” Mateescu said.
For their research, Mateescu and other UF/IFAS colleagues studied 725 Brangus cows in south-central Florida. Brangus are a cross between Brahman and Angus cows and are the most common breed in Florida. “Because Angus and Brahman possess such different traits, Brangus cattle are ideal to research relationships between the animal’s coat and demeanor and their body temperature,” Mateescu said.
UF/IFAS researchers took cows’ temperature and temperament as they brought them through the chute. They also looked at how the cattle behaved.
“Some cattle are very agitated and move a lot in the chute, and they exit the chute by sprinting or jumping, while the calm ones will follow you and won’t kick or shake the chute,” Mateescu said. “Also, they exit the chute calmly, by just walking out.”
Normal body temperature is similar in beef cattle and humans. In humans, normal would be about 97 to 99 degrees Fahrenheit, according to health care professionals. In beef cattle, it starts at 98 and goes up to 102.
“As a rule of thumb, when cows’ body temperature rises above 102.4 degrees Fahrenheit, they start eating less and produce less meat or milk,” Mateescu said.
“Now that UF/IFAS researchers have shown that cooler, calmer cattle can produce more milk and meat, producers might consider breeding their cattle for these traits,” Mateescu said.
Typically, the weekly featured videos share an innovation or idea related to agricultural production. This week take a break from the serious videos to enjoy a humorous one that pokes fun at the idea of milking almonds, called “Nut Milking Exposed.” There has been a great deal of discussion of late about whether nut oil based drink products should be label as milk. No matter which side of this argument you sit on, this video was cleverly produced to make fun of the notion of getting milk from nuts. Check out this video that shares the humorous story of a 3rd generation nut milker.
If you enjoyed this video, you might want to check out the featured videos from previous weeks: Friday Features
If you come across an interesting or humorous video, or a new product innovation related to agriculture, please send in a link, so we can share it with our readers. Send video links to: Doug Mayo
If you enjoyed this video, you might want to check out the featured videos from previous weeks: Friday Features
