A System for Expressing Net Energy Requirements and Feed Values for Growing and Finishing Beef Cattle

G. P. Lofgreen and W. N. Garrett J Anim Sci 1968. 27:793-806.

The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is located on the World Wide Web at: http://jas.fass.org

www.asas.org

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

A SYSTEM FOR EXPRESSING NET ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND FEED VALUES FOR GROWING AND FINISHING BEEF CATTLE
G. P. LOFGREEN AND W. N. GARRETT

University of California, Davis 1

authors introduced E ARLY in 1963 the designed for use in thea net energy system growing and finishing phase of the beef cattle industry (Lofgreen, 1963a, b, c). The system separated the requirements for maintenance from that for body weight gain and expressed a net energy value of the feed for these two functions. Such a system of expression was suggested to the Nutrition Committee of the National Research Council and was included in the first printing of the N.R.C. Bulletin of suggested energy terminOlogy as an errata sheet replacing the original terminology (Harris, 1962). For the past 4 years the suggested method has been tested under various conditions at this station, in commercial feedlots, and by nutrition consultants working with the cattle feeding industry and its adaptability to practice has been demonstrated. I t is the purpose of this paper to present the proposed system in the scientific literature, describe the experimental data upon which it is based, and discuss its application. The terminology used herein is that suggested in the first revision of the N.R.C. Bulletin on energy terms (Harris, 1966). D e v e l o p m e n t of the M e t h o d The partial efficiency of energy utilization for maintenance is higher than it is for production (Kleiber, 1961). The net energy of a feed will then vary with the level of feeding, being higher at low levels of feeding and decreasing as feed intake increases. It is obvious, therefore, that a system based upon net energy must take this into consideration by listing separate net energy values for different physiological functions or incorporating efficiency of utilization values for these functions. Studies at this institution (Lofgreen et al., 1963; Garrett et al., 1964) have shown that, from maintenance to ad libitum feed consumption, the partial net energy of a feed used for
1 Department of Animal Science. Part of the data used herein was accumulated in studies which were conducted as part of Western Regional Research Project W-94, Range Livestock Nutrition.

weight gain does not deviate significantly from linearity. This means that the partial net energy of a feed when utilized for weight gain above maintenance can be considered to be constant. The partial net energy for maintenance of that quantity of feed needed to maintain energy equilibrium is equal to the heat production of the fasting animal. I t is therefore more nearly constant than total net energy because it depends to a large degree upon the relatively constant basal heat production (Kleiber, 1963). The partial net energy of feeds for maintenance (NEn~) and the partial net energy for production of weight gain (NEg), therefore, are more nearly constant then is the total net energy of a feed for both maintenance and weight gain (NEm+g), the latter being a weighted average of the NEro and NEg depending upon the level of feeding. I t seemed logical, therefore, that a net energy system based upon the separate expressions, NEro and NEg, would be more accurate than one based upon NEn,+g which is known to vary with feeding level. Determination of NE,~ Requirements. In order to measure the NEro requirement it is necessary to know the heat production of the fasting animal since this quantity of net energy must be furnished to keep the animal in energy equilibrium. Classically, the heat production of the fasting animal has been considered to be equal to basal metabolism and is often expressed as 70W ~ with heat production expressed in kcal. and W is bodyweight in kg. Measurement of basal metabolic rate on large numbers of ruminants is tedious and consequently such measurements are not normally made with large groups. I t is possible to indirectly measure heat production (HP) at zero feed intake by deducting energy balance (EB) from metabolizable energy intake (ME) thus HP~ME--EB.

Metabolizable energy is determined by deducting from the gross energy the energy of the feces, urine and methane, and energy re793

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

794

LOFGREEN

AND

GARRETT

tained is d e t e r m i n e d b y a c o m p a r a t i v e slaughter method. I n fed animals, H P is m a d e up of basal metabolism, h e a t i n c r e m e n t and h e a t p r o d u c e d b y activity. A t zero feed intake, however, h e a t i n c r e m e n t is zero and the components of H P are basal m e t a b o l i s m and h e a t of a c t i v i t y which can be considered to be e q u a l to the n e t e n e r g y r e q u i r e d for m a i n t e n a n c e or N E .... I f H P is m e a s u r e d at v a r i o u s levels of feeding it is possible to e s t i m a t e H P at zero feed i n t a k e b y extrapolation. D a t a f r o m five c o m p a r a t i v e s l a u g h t e r trials were used to obtain an e s t i m a t e of h e a t p r o d u c t i o n at zero feed i n t a k e and thus an e s t i m a t e of the NEro r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h e studies i n v o l v e d a total of 208 feeder cattle v a r y i n g in initial w e i g h t from a p p r o x i m a t e l y 230 to 300 kg. I n four of the trials, the cattle were i n d i v i d u a l l y fed their respective diets while t h e y were groupfed in the fifth trial. T h e five diets u s e d v a r i e d from 2 to 100% r o u g h a g e and were fed at two or three levels of i n t a k e from m a i n t e n a n c e to a d l i b i t u m . I n one trial a 2 % r o u g h a g e diet

was fed at three levels of intake, one approxim a t i n g m a i n t e n a n c e , one at a d l i b i t u m i n t a k e and a third at an i n t e r m e d i a t e level. A second trial i n v o l v e d a 100% r o u g h a g e diet fed at maintenance, intermediate and ad libitum levels. I n these two trials, three replicates of six animals each were fed at each of the three levels of i n t a k e ( L o f g r e e n et al., 1963). I n a t h i r d s t u d y a 2 0 % r o u g h a g e diet was fed a t m a i n t e n a n c e and a d l i b i t u m to a g r o u p of eight animals at each level of feeding (Lofgreen and O t a g a k i , 1960). A f o u r t h trial involved the feeding of a 2 5 % r o u g h a g e diet at three levels of i n t a k e w i t h three replicates of eight animals each at each level of feeding ( G a r r e t t , 1965) while in the fifth e x p e r i m e n t a 4 0 % roughage diet was fed at two levels to two replicates of six animals each ( L o f g r e e n et al., 1962). I n each case energy retention was m e a s u r e d b y the c o m p a r a t i v e slaughter m e t h o d (Lofgreen, 1964) and h e a t p r o d u c t i o n calculated b y d e d u c t i n g e n e r g y retained from m e t a b o l i z a b l e e n e r g y intake. T a b l e 1 presents

TABLE 1. RESULTS OF FIVE COMPARATIVE SLAUGHTER TRIALS Metabo]izDaily able energy Energy empty wt. intake retained gain (g) (ME) (EB) kg. --. 04 --. 04 0.07 0.24 0.25 0.23 0.65 0~ 59 0.62 --. 07 0.64 0.04 0.20 0.16 0.59 0.73 0.59 1.32 1.38 1.14 0.30 1.01 0.10 0.16 0.09 0.70 0.58 0.57 1.08 1.13 1.14 kcal./day per W~ 121 -- 1 142 -- 1 142 '0 198 17 193 16 194 15 290 44 301 42 302 38 100 --7 204 31 133 1 125 3 125 5 194 23 186 18 190 26 335 66 309 78 264 59 141 7 264 55 116 9 131 14 134 8 202 47 196 37 199 40 258 72 272 75 269 72 Heat produced (HP) 122 143 142 181 187 179 246 259 264 107 173 132 122 120 171 168 164 269 231 205 134 209 107 117 126 155 159 159 186 197 197

Kind of ration % roughage

No. of animals 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Sex Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers

Level of feeding Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Ad lib. Ad lib. Ad lib. Low Ad lib. Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Ad lib. Ad lib. Ad lib. Low Ad lib. Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Ad lib. Ad lib. Ad lib.

Mean W~ 57.9 58.0 58.8 64.0 64.2 63.2 68.9 67.8 66.8 64.1 79.0 60.1 64.1 63.6 68.3 70.9 69.7 76.3 79.5 75.8 75.7 88.8 61.2 61.6 63.7 70.3 66.6 68.9 75.3 75.3 73.1

10D

40

25

20

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYSTEM FOR N E T E N E R G Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S
300 27,5 EACH POINT IS THE MEAN OF 6 OR 8 250 225 200 180 160
--I r v.

795

/
ANIMALS. TOTAL = 208

/.

9 /o

140

LLI

--b f-~

120

./
IJJ "1"

/.
LOG HP =1.8851 + 0.00166 ME r = 0.97 8y.x = 0.0293

I00 90 / 8O /
7( /

/
/
/ /

>,

50

I00

150

200

DAILY METABOLIZABLE ENERGY INTAKE,

KCAL./wO.675

2,50

800

85Q

l~Jgure 1. Determination of {asfing heat production.

a summary of the results of the five trials and figure 1 shows the relationship between heat production and metabolizable energy intake. In describing this relationship a logarithmic equation was used since extrapolation to zero energy intake results in a more realistic estimate of fasting heat production. Over the range from maintenance to ad libitum feed consumption, however, the relationship does not differ significantly from linearity. The equation describing this relationship is Log H P = 1.8851 @0.00166ME where HP and ME are in kcal. per W~ The log of the heat produced by the fasting animal, therefore, is equal to 1.8851 The antilogs of these limits are 72 and 82, indicating that the heat production of fasting beef cattle probably lies between 72 and 82

kcal. per W~ with the mean value being 77 kcal. The average NEro requirement for these cattle, therefore, can be considered to be equal to 77 kcal. per W~ Since it is normally more convenient to express energy requirements of cattle in megcal, the NEro requirement can be expressed NEro=0.077W ~ ( 1)

where NEro is in megcal, per day and W is bodyweight in kg. In order to compare the NEro requirements of steers and heifers, data were examined from two comparative slaughter experiments in which steers and heifers were fed the same diets. In one trial, 64 steers divided into eightsteer replicates were compared to 64 heifers, with each sex being fed a 25~. roughage diet at a restricted and ad libitum feed allowance.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

796

LOFGREEN

AND

GARRETT

I n t h e s e c o n d t r i a l 54 s t e e r s were c o m p a r e d w i t h a like n u m b e r of heifers. T h r e e s i x - a n i m a l r e p l i c a t e s of e a c h sex w e r e fed a t a low, med i u m a n d a d l i b i t u m feed a l l o w a n c e ( G a r r e t t et al., 1 9 6 4 ) . T h e r e s u l t s of t h e two s t u d i e s are s h o w n in t a b l e 2. Since t h e p r o p o r t i o n of r o u g h a g e to c o n c e n t r a t e w a s n o t t h e s a m e a t all levels of f e e d i n g t h e s e d a t a do n o t p e r m i t a n a c c u r a t e e s t i m a t e of t h e t r u e h e a t p r o d u c t i o n a t zero i n t a k e as was d o n e w i t h t h e d a t a i n t a b l e 1. T h e y do, h o w e v e r , p e r m i t a d i r e c t c o m p a r i s o n of t h e two sexes t o d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e is a difference in t h e h e a t p r o d u c e d a t no feed i n t a k e a n d t h u s a difference in t h e m a i n t e n a n c e r e q u i r e m e n t . T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of h e a t p r o d u c t i o n a n d m e t a b o l i z a b l e e n e r g y int a k e for t h e s t e e r s a n d h e i f e r s is c o m p a r e d in figure 2. T h e p o i n t s of o r i g i n of t h e two re-

gression e q u a t i o n s are n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y different, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e h e a t p r o d u c e d b y f a s t ing s t e e r s a n d h e i f e r s is n o t d i f f e r e n t a n d t h u s t h e e n e r g y r e q u i r e m e n t for m a i n t e n a n c e p e r u n i t of W~ is n o t different. I t a p p e a r s , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e e n e r g y e x p e n d e d for m a i n t e n a n c e for b o t h steers a n d h e i f e r s c a n b e e s t i m a t e d b y e q u a t i o n 1 a n d is e q u a l to 0.077 megcal, p e r W~ Determination o] N E , ~ V a l u e s o] t h e R a t i o n . T h a t q u a n t i t y of feed i n t a k e p e r u n i t of W~ r e q u i r e d to m a i n t a i n t h e a n i m a l in e n e r g y e q u i l i b r i u m will h a v e a NEro e q u a l to t h e h e a t p r o d u c e d a t n o feed i n t a k e or 0.077 megcal. T h e feed i n t a k e r e q u i r e d to m a i n t a i n energy equilibrium can be measured rather s i m p l y f r o m t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of h e a t p r o d u c e d to m e t a b o l i z a b l e e n e r g y i n t a k e . I f a

TABLE 2. COMPARISON OF STEERS AND HEIFERS FED THE SAME RATION MetabolizDaily able energy Energy empty wt. intake retained gain (g) (ME) (EB) kg. 0.27 0.32 0.31 0.52 1.14 1.16 1.32 1.16 0.17 0.18 0.15 0.64 0.55 0.62 1.15 1.09 1.12 0.22 0.37 0.35 0.57 1.16 0.96 1.21 1.10 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.61 0.58 0.63 1.07 1.02 1.10 kcal./day per W~ 140 17 156 10 151 21 169 25 274 62 276 71 289 80 262 72 144 146 146 200 196 208 282 280 285 144 164 155 182 290 267 289 278 148 147 149 207 208 217 290 275 302 13 13 14 36 30 39 73 68 73 13 24 22 34 78 68 92 76 12 15 12 41 40 43 71 71 74 Heat produced (HP) 123 146 130 144 212 205 209 190 131 133 132 164 166 169 209 212 212 131 140 133 148 212 199 197 202 136 132 137 166 168 174 219 204 228

Kind of ration % roughage

No. of animals 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Sex Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Steers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers Heifers

Level of feeding Low Low Low Low Ad lib. Ad lib. A d lib. A d lib. Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Ad lib. Ad lib. Ad lib. Low Low Low Low Ad lib. A d lib. Ad lib. Ad lib. Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Ad lib. A d lib. Ad lib.

Mean W~ . 68.7 68.6 68.6 71.4 80.0 80.3 82.5 79.7 68.3 66.3 69.3 74.2 69.5 71.4 78,4 78.0 78,3 65.9 67.4 64.1 67.4 74,5 75.2 74.9 77.0 60.4 60.9 60.2 65.1 66.6 66.5 72.2 72.9 72.1

25

40

23

30

25

40

23

30

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYSTEM FOR N E T E N E R G Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S

797

aoo
2,50

EACH POINT IS THE MEAN OF b OR 8 ANIMALS. TOTAL = 118 OF EACH SEX

* *

STEERS HEIFERS

o--- ----o 200 ~,.6 180

S~'O

J
0 0 o

0"

".J

160

I.hl 0 0 0
LO

140

~2o
STEERS: LOG HP = 1.9073 + 0.00148 ME LOG HP = 1.9174 * 0.00142 ME

Jo0
HEIFERS:

8O 0

'

,SO

IO0

150

200

250

300

35~

DAILY METABOLIZABLE ENERGY INTAKE, KCAL./W 0"75 KS.

l~igure 2. Comparison of the h e a t p r o d u c t i o n of s t e e r s a n d h e i f e r s . diet is fed at an ad libitum level and the heat production determined, one may use this quantity of heat produced as one point in a regression line and the heat produced at fasting as a second point to establish a regression of heat production on metabolizable energy intake. From the equation describing this relationship, the metabolizable energy intake and quantity of feed consumed at energy equilibrium can be determined. For example, from the data in table 1 for the heifers fed 100% roughage ad libitum, it can be calculated that the mean heat production is 264 kcal. at a metabolizable energy intake of 298 kcal. Using this as one point and 77 kcal. as heat production at zero metabolizable energy intake, the regression equation describing the linear relationship between log HP and ME is Log H P ~ 1.8865 @0.00175ME. It can be determined from this equation that energy equilibrium can be achieved at an intake of 131 kcal, of metabolizable energy per W ~ 751~.. since at this intake heat production is also equal to 131 kcal. At a metabolizable energy content of 2.04 kcal. per gram of feed, it would require 64.2 gm. of feed to furnish 131 kcal. of metabolizable energy, and thus energy equilibrium could be maintained on an intake of 64.2 gm. of this feed per W~ This quantity of feed has a NEro equal to the heat production at fasting or 77 kcal. The NEro of this feed is therefore 77 kcal. in 64.2 gm. or 1.20 megcal, per kg. Determin'ation oj NE~j Requirements. The NEg requirement for weight gain is simply the energy deposited in the gain. In table 3, data are shown comparing the energy deposited by 264 steers with that deposited by an equal number of heifers at different rates of gain. In each comparison, the steers and heifers were fed the same diet. The correlation coefficients between empty weight gain and energy gain were 0.97 and 0.98 for the steers and

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

798

LOFGREEN

AND

GARRETT

TABLE 3. GAINS IN EMPTY BODYWEIGHT AND ENERGY OF STEERS AND HEIFERS FED THE SAME RATIONS Number of each sex 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 6 6 6 6 8 96 8 8 6 6 6 8 Steers Daily empty wt. gain kg. 0.15 0.17 0.18 0.23 0.27 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.62 0.64 0.64 0.70 0.78 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.90 1.09 1.09 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.16 1.18 1.20 1.22 1.32 Daily energy gain megcal, 0.970 0.888 0.862 1.055 1.168 1.441 0.686 1.426 0,199 1,058 2.320 1.902 1.785 1.605 2.085 2,653 2,785 2,514 2.671 2,648 2,969 2.730 4.144 2.819 3,790 5.304 4.689 6.160 5.718 4.960 5.723 5.701 5.738 5.357 5.675 5.581 6.600 Heifers Daily empty wt. gain kg. 0.18 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 0.35 0.37 0.36 0.37 0.22 0.69 0.66 0.57 0.59 0.58 0.67 0.63 0.60 0.61 0.65 0.67 0.74 0.79 0.71 1.05 1.02 1.05 1.18 1.10 1.16 1.07 0.96 1.10 1.04 1.18 1.01 1.21 Daily energy gain megcal. 0.722 0.725 0.914 1.437 0.857 1.410 1.618 1.392 1.645 0,640 3.208 2.680 2.292 2.236 2.664 3.300 2.860 2.300 2.669 2.430 2.519 3.537 3.981 3.801 4.495 5.176 5,780 6,815 5.335 5,811 5.126 5.114 5,852 5,198 6.018 5.778 6.891

Mean W~ 69.3 68.3 66.3 61.0 68.7 68.6 68.6 69.9 68.5 64.9 65.9 66.5 71.4 71.0 69.5 71.5 71.4 66.5 74.2 69.5 70.7 74.8 74.0 74.0 69.8 78.0 77.0 77.0 78.3 80.0 78.4 80.3 79.7 74.5 73.6 78.5 82.5

Mean W~ 60.2 60.4 60.9

62.2

65.9 64.1 67.4 62.4 76.5 61.5 65.6 67.0 67.4 79.3 66.6 66.0 66.5 66.1 65.1 67.3 65.6 80.2 66.9 80.2 70.9 72.9 83.4 70.7 72.1 74.5 72.2 75.2 77.0 71.4 71.9 82.9 74.9

heifers, r e s p e c t i v e l y . I n o r d e r to d e t e r m i n e if t h e e n e r g y c o n c e n t r a t i o n in t h e w e i g h t g a i n c h a n g e s a s t h e r a t e of g a i n i n c r e a s e s a n d to c o m p a r e t h e r a t e of c h a n g e of s t e e r s a n d heifers, a n e q u a t i o n of t h e t y p e Y=aX b was fitted to t h e d a t a . Y in t h i s e q u a t i o n is t h e e n e r g y gain, X is t h e e m p t y w e i g h t g a i n and a and b are constants determined from t h e d a t a . T h i s t y p e of e q u a t i o n w a s c h o s e n since i t p a s s e s t h r o u g h t h e origin a n d t h u s gives r e a l i s t i c v a l u e s a t low r a t e s of g a i n a n d t h e e x p o n e n t , b, r e p r e s e n t s t h e r a t i o of t h e specific r a t e s of i n c r e a s e of e n e r g y g a i n a n d w e i g h t gain. T h e n u m e r i c a l v a l u e s of b for s t e e r s a n d h e i f e r s w e r e 1.11 a n d 1.18, respec-

tively, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t w i t h b o t h sexes t h e e n e r g y c o n c e n t r a t i o n in t h e w e i g h t g a i n increases as t h e r a t e of g a i n i n c r e a s e s a n d t h a t t h e i n c r e a s e is m o r e r a p i d in heifers. T o elimin a t e t h e effect of b o d y size, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e n e r g y g a i n in kcal. p e r u n i t of W~ and empty weight gain was determ i n e d . T h e v a l u e s of t h e e x p o n e n t , b were red u c e d to 1.02 a n d 1.07 for s t e e r s a n d heifers, respectively, by expressing energy gain per u n i t of W~ indicating that bodyweight w a s a c c o u n t i n g for some, b u t n o t all, of t h e i n c r e a s e in e n e r g y c o n c e n t r a t i o n of t h e w e i g h t g a i n as r a t e of g a i n i n c r e a s e d . I n o r d e r to o b t a i n t h e b e s t e s t i m a t e of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between energy gain and weight gain, the standa r d e r r o r of t h e e s t i m a t e o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e e x p o n e n t i a l e q u a t i o n w a s c o m p a r e d to t h a t of

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYS'I'EM FOR N E T E N E R G Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S a parabola and a parabola adjusted to pass through the origin. The standard errors of the estimate were 6.6, 5.9 and 6.0 for the three curves for steers and 5.0, 4.4 and 4.5 for heifers. Since the parabola which passes through the origin has essentially the same standard error as the unadjusted parabola it was chosen because of the more realistic values obtained at low rates of gain. Figure 3 presents this relationship for steers and figure 4 for heifers. Thus for any size animal the energy stored in the weight gain or the NEg requirement can be expressed for steers N E v : (52.72g-~ 6.84g'-' ) (W "~n ) for heifers NE~---(56.03g t-12.65g-')(W ''.7:') (2) (3)

799

where NE~ is in kcal., g is daily gain in kg. and W is lmdyweight in kg.

Determination o/.YE,~ Values of the Ration.

The NEg value of a feed is equal to the energy deposited in the badyweight gain brought about by feeding the particular feed in question. This has normally been determined by feeding the experimental diet at two levels and measuring the energy deposition brought

about by the increase in feed intake between the two levels. This has classically been called the "difference trial." Table 4 illustrates a difference trial involving the data shown in table 1 for the heifers fed 100~/~. roughage. In this case the ad libitum feed intake served as one level of feeding and the intake at energy equilibrium as previously determined served as the second level. Any two levels of feeding above maintenance can be used in a difference trial but a large difference will result in a more accurate estimate of the NEg value of the ration. The NE~ value of 0.5 megcal, per kg. for the 100G roughage diet can be compared with NE,,, value of 1.20 for the same diet. The same determinations made from the data in table I for heifers fed the 2% roughage diet yield values of 1.67 and 1.22 megcal. per kg. for NE,,, and NE..., respectively. For maintenance, therefore, the 100% roughage diet is 72% as valuable as the 25;~ roughage diet (1.201.67). For production of weight gains, however, the 100c~c roughage diet was only 415~ as valuable as the 25{ roughage diet (0.5.1.22). It appears, therefore, that this system may overcome the common criticism that net energy systems do not give roughages a higher value for maintenance

,ooL ,
|
I_ , - .. ~176

STEERS

/ t

I-

.....

'"

20 f
0 0 I

9 ~ ~176
I 0.2 P~ I 0.4 | ! 0.6 I' I 0.8 I , hO K6. I I 1,2 ! 1.4

DAILY

EMPTY

WEIGHT

GAIN,

Figure 3. The relationship of weight gain and energy gain of steers.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

800

L O F G R E E N AND G A R R E T T

120 HEIFERS I00 Y = 36.03X + 12.65X z

Sy~ =.4.,5

~,

./.
"-

40

9 9

~,

20

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

hO

1.2

1.4

DALLY EMPTY. WEIGHT GAfN, KG.

Figure 4. The relationship of weight gain and energy gain of heifers. than for production in relation to concentrates. sible to quickly find the requirements for animals of a given weight and rate of gain. Tables 5 and 6 are examples of such tables expressing both NEro and NEg requirements. More detailed tables requiring less interpolation could be made by use of the appropriate equations. Although NEro and NEg values of some commonly used feeds are being determined at this station, these values are currently available on limited numbers of feeds. At present it is necessary, therefore, to estimate NEro and NEg values from existing information. Since the NEro content of a feed is directly related to the quantity of that feed required to maintain energy equilibrium and since it requires more of the poorer quality feeds to maintain energy equilibrium than it does of higher quality feeds, the relationship of the amount of feed required to maintain energy equilibrium to the metabolizable energy con-centration in the feed was investigated. Figure g presents this relationship determined on 34 diets varying in metabolizable energy content

Tables o/ Requirements and Feed Values.

In order to apply the proposed system to diet formulation and feed evaluation, statements of requirements and feed values must be available in readily usable form. Equations 1, 2 and 3 may be used to calculate the requirements at any weight and for any rate of gain. I t is, however, often advantageous to have tables of requirements available from which it is posTABLE 4. A DIFFERENCE TRIAL TO DETERMINE NEe VALUES
Level of feeding Feed intake Energy gain

Ad libitum Equilibrium

g. per W~ 146 64
82

kcal. per WO-7~k~" 41 0

41

Differences N E ~ 4 1 / 8 2 or 0.5 kcal./g.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYSTEM FOR NET ENERGY REQUIREMENTS

TABLE 5. N E T ENERGY REQUIREMENTS OF GROWING AND FINISHING STEERS

801

Daily gain kg.

0 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.48 4.84 5.22 150 175 200 225 250 275

Bodyweight, ks.
300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 NEro required, megcal,/day 5.55 5.89 6,24 6.56 6.89 7.21 7.52 7.83 8.14

NE,- required, megcal./day

0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.23 0.46 0.70 0.95 1.20 1.46 1.73 2.00 2.27 2.55 2,84 3.13 3.43 3.74 4.05 0,26 0.52 0.79 1.07 1.35 1,64 1.94 2.24 2.55 2.86 3.19 3.52 3.85 4.19 4.54 0.28 0.57 0.87 1.18 1.49 1.81 2.14 2.47 2.81 3.16 3.52 3.88 4.26 4.63 5.02 0.31 0.63 0.95 1.29 1.63 1,98 2 34 2.70 3.08 3.46 3.85 4.25 4 65 5.07 5.49 0,34 0 68 1.03 1.40 1.77 2.15 2.53 2.93 3.34 3.75 4.17 4.60 5.04 5.49 5.95 0.36 0.73 1.11 1.50 1.90 2.30 2.72 3.15 3.58 4.03 4.48 4.94 5,41 5.89 6.39 0.39 0.78 1.18 1.60 202 2.46 2.90 3.36 3.82 4.29 4.78 5,27 5.77 6.29 6.81 0.41 0.83 1.26 1.70 2.15 2.61 3.08 3.57 4.06 4.56 5.08 5.60 6,14 6.68 7.24 0.43 0.88 1.33 1.80 2.27 2.76 3.26 3.77 4.29 4.82 5.37 5.92 6.g9 7.06 7.65 0.46 0.92 1.40 1,89 2.39 2.91 3.43 3.97 4.52 5.08 5,65 6.24 6.83 7,44 8.06 0.48 0.97 1.47 1.99 2.51 3.05 3.60 4.17 4.74 5.33 5.93 6.55 7.17 7.81 8.46 0.50 1.01 1.54 2,08 2.63 3.i9 3.77 4.36 4,97 5.58 6.21 6.85 7.51 8.17 8.85 0.52 1.06 1.61 2.17 2.74 3.33 3.93 4.55 5.I8 5.82 6.47 7.14 7.82 8.52 9.23 0,.54 1.10 1,67 2.26 2,85 3.47 4.09 4.73 5,39 6,06 6.74 7.44 8,15 8.87 9.61 0.56 1.14 1.74 2.34 2.97 3.60 4.25 4.92 5.60 6.29 7.00 7.73 8.46 9.22 9.98

1 0
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

from 1.92 to 2.78 megcal, per kg. on a 90fi,. dry matter basis. It is apparent that it is possible to predict the feed required to maintain energy equilibrium with a relatively high degree of accuracy from the metabolizable energy content of the feed. The quantity of feed necessary to maintain energy equilibrium per W~ has a NEro of 0.077 megcal. It is apparent, therefore, that the NE,~ values of feeds may be estimated from their metabolizable energy content, Figure 6 presents the relationship of the NEg value of the diet to the feed intake required to maintain energy equilibrium. It appears from the relationships presented in figures 5 and 6 that it is possible to estimate the
TABLE 6. N E T ENERGY REQUIREMENTS

feed required for energy equilibrium from the metabolizable energy content of the feed and determine from this both the NEro and NE~. value. For example, using these relationships it can be determined that a feed having a metabolizable energy content of 1.9 megcal. per kg. would have NEm and NEg values of 1.12 and 0.55 megcal, per kg., respectively, while comparable values for a feed containing 2.7 megcal, of metabolizable energy per kg. would be 1.76 and 1.18 megcal, per kg. Thus, for maintenance the low energy feed is worth approximately 64~'o of the high energy feed while for production it is worth only 47%. Table 7 presents the NEro and NEg values of selected feeds. In most cases the net energy
OF GROWING AND FINISHING HEIFERS

Daily gain 150 kg.

0 3.30

Bo.tyweight, kg.
175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500

NE,n required, megeal./day

3.70 4.10 4.48 4.84 5.22 5.55 5.89 6.24 6.56 6.89 7.21 7.52 7.83 8.14 NE~ required, megcal./day

0.1 0 2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1 4 1.5

0.25 0.50 0.77 1.05 1.34 1.64 1.95 2.28 2.60 2.94 3.30 3,66 4.04 4.42 4.82

0.28 0.56 0.86 1.18 1.50 1.84 2.18 2.55 2.92 3.30 3.70 4.11 4.5,3 4.96 5.41

0.30 0.62 0.95 1.30 1,66 2.03 2.42 2.81 3.23 3.65 4.09 4.55 5.0i 5.49 5.98

0.33 0.68 1.04 1.42 1.81 2.22 2.64 3.07 3.52 3.99 4 47 4.96 5.47 6.00 6.54

0.36 0.74 1.13 1.34 1.96 2.40 2.85 3.33 3.81 4.32 4.84 5.37 5.92 6.49 7.07

0.39 0.79 1.21 1.65 2,11 2.58 3.07 3,58 4.10 4.64 5.20 5.78 6,37 6.98 7.61

0.41 0.84 1.29 1.76 2.25 2.75 3.27 3.82 4.37 4.95 5.55 6.16 6.79 7.44 8.11

0.44 0.90 1.37 1.87 2.39 2.92 3.48 4.05 4.65 5.26 5.89 6.55 7.22 7.91 8.62

0.46 0.95 1.45 1.98 2.53 3.09 3.68 4.28 4.91 5.56 6.23 6.92 7.63 8.36 9.11

0.49 1.00 1.53 2.08 2,66 3.26 3.87 4.51 5.18 5.86 6.56 7.29 8.04 8.81 9,60

0.51 1.05 1.60 2,18 2.79 3.41 4.06 4.73 5.42 6.14 6.88 7.64 8.42 9.23 10.06

0.54 1.10 1.68 2.29 2.92 3.88 4.26 4.96 5,68 6.44 7.21 8.01 8.83 9.67 10.54

0.56 1.14 1.75 2 39 3.05 3.73 4.44 5 17 5,93 6.71 7.52 8 35 9.21 10.09 11.00

0 58 1.19 1.83 2,49 3.17 3 88 4.62 5.38 6,17 6.99 7,83 8,69 9.58 t0,50 11.44

0.61 1.24 1.90 2.58 3.30 4,03 4.80 5.59 6.41 7.26 8.13 9.03 9.96 10.91 11.90

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

802 80

LOFGREEN

AND GARRETT

EACH POINT IS THE MEAN OF 6 TO 9 ANIMALS. . TOTAL = 339

7o
,,.-,

60

1,1 >.,

50

.,

2 ILl e,," 0 Ia. IJJ

LOG Y = 2 . 3 0 3 0 40 r =-0.97

-0.2455

ec
0 IJ.I

Sy. x = 2 . 0

IJJ W

1,8

2,0

2.2

2.4 KCAL./GM. I

2.6 AS FED

2.8

METABOLIZABLE ENERGY IN FEED~

Figure 5. The relationship of metabolizable energy concentration and feed Iequired to maintain energy equilibrium. values have been calculated from the metabolizable energy shown in N.R.C. (1966) b y the procedure described above. I n the case of feeds where there are no reliable values for metabolizable energy the values shown for net energy were either determined directly or calculated from T D N by assuming one gram of T D N equals 3.6 kcal. of metabolizable energy. T h e T D N values were either determined directly or taken from Morrison (1956). Similar tables could be prepared on any feeds for which there are data on metabolizable energy or T D N . A p p l i c a t i o n of t h e S y s t e m The proposed system has a number of possible applications. N e t energy systems are commonly not recommended for use under maintenance conditions because of their tendency t o underevaluate roughages in relation to concentrates for maintenance. For example, Morrison (1956) uses data from Kellner and A r m b s y to show that wheat straw is 4 2 % as valuable as ground corn as a source of metabolizable energy but only 12% as valuable as a source of net energy. Thus the net energy value underestimates the value of wheat straw for maintenance and it is commonly recommended that digestible or metabolizable energy be used under maintenance conditions. T h e proposed n e t energy system gives corn grain and wheat straw NEro values of 2.03 and 0.91 megcal, per kg., respectively, and NE~. values of 1.32 and 0.14. Thus, for maintenance, wheat straw is 45% as valuable as corn grain but for production it is worth only 11 ~ the value of corn. The proposed system, therefore, appears to be applicable to maintenance conditions as well as for production. An example of its use in diet formulation for production is shown in table 8. The N.R.C. (1963) indicates that a 350 kg. finishing calf should gain 1 kg. per d a y on 8.8 kg. of feed. I t can be determined that the feed should contain approximately 0.97 megcal, of NE~ per kg. in order to meet the energy requirements. The diet shown in table 8 was, therefore, for-

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYSTEM FOR N E T E N E R G Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S mulated to contain this quantity of NEg using the net energy wtlues shown in table 7. No attempt was made to adjust the NE,,, values. A check on the adequacy' of such a diet can be made by calculating the gain expected if a 350 kg. steer consumed 8.8 kg. of the diet. From table 5 it is determined that a 350 kg. animal requires 6.24 megcal, of NE,,, per day for maintenance. At a NE,,, concentration of 1.62 megcal, per kg. of diet, it requires 3.85 kg. of diet to meet the maintenance requirement, leaving 4.95 kg. available for weight gain. At a NE~ concentration of 0.97 megcal, per kg. there are 4.80 megcal. NE~ available for deposition in weight gain. From table 5 it can be determined that a 350 kg. steer depositing 4.80 megcal. NE~ should gain approximately 1.0 kg. per day which was the expected rate of gain for a 350 kg. animal eating 8.8 kg. of feed daily'. By, use of table 6 it can be determined that a 350 kg. heifer eating the same

803

quantity of this ration would be expected to gain 0.88 kg. per day. Another useful application of the system is in the calculation of the quantity' of feed required to produce a desired rate of gain. For example, it is possible to calculate the amount of alfalfa hay required to permit a 250 kg. calf to gain 0.5 kg. per day. From table 5 it can be determined that such an animal requires 4.84 megcal. NE,,, daily plus 1.77 megcal. NE~ to produce a gain of 0.5 kg. Table 7 indicates that 24~.; fiber alfalfa hay contains 1.12 megca]. NE,,, and 0.54 megcal. NE~, per k~. It would require, therefore, 4.32 kg. of alfalfa for maintenance and 3.28 kg. for gain making a total of 7.6 kg. per day for the desired rate of gain. This is a consumption equal to approximately 3G of bodyweight. By use of table 6 it can be' calculated that heifers of the same size would gain approximately 0,45 kg. on the same quantity of hay.

I,S
1.4 1.3 1.2 EACH POINT IS THE MEAN OF 6 TO 9 ANIMALS. TOTAL = 312

,.

I.I
9 9 9 1 49 9

0.8 0,7
Y = 2.29 - 0 . 0 2 5 4 X r : -0.96
0.$

, ~

"

~ .

$y.x :

0.07
I l l l | , | l I , l l l , I,I ml.

.~
l * l l l l l , I I I

0.4

0.3

,I,I,

40

45

,50

53

60

65

70

75

Figure 6. The relationship of feed required to maintain energy equilibrium and NE~ concentration.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

804

LOFGREEN TABLE 7. NET ENERGY VALUES OF SELECTED FEEDS

AND

GARRETT TABLE 8. COMPOSITION OF A RATION Feed Amount % 14 6 5 28 15 10 10 8 2 2 100 NE,. NE.

Feed

For For maintenance production (NE,.) (NE~)

megcal./kg. Dry roughages (90% dry matter) Alfalfa hay, 21% fiber 1.23 0.70 Alfalfa hay, 24% fiber 1.12 0.54 Alfalfa hay, 29% fiber 1.01 0.30 Barley hay 1.11 0.47 Barley straw 0.91 0.14 Corn cobs, ground 0.95 0.28 Corn fodder, well eared, dry 1.27 0.75 Corn stover 1.10 0.52 Cottonseed hulls 0.93 0.20 Oat hay 1.03 0.36 Timothy hay, before bloom 1.23 0.70 Timothy hay, late bloom 1.03 0.38 Wheat straw 0.91 0.14 Silages (30% dry matter) Alfalfa, wilted, good quality 0.39 0.21 Corn, dent, well matured, well eared 0.49 0.29 Sorghum, sweet or dual purpose 0.44 0.20 Concentrates (90% dry matter) Barley grain 1.93 1.27 Beet pulp, molasses, dried 1.83 1.21 Brewers' grains, dried 1.28 0.77 Coconut meal, solvent 1.51 1.00 Corn grain, dent, No. 2 2.03 1.32 Corn and cob meal (ground ear corn) 1.78 1.19 Cottonseed meal, 41%, solvent extr. 1.40 0.90 Fat (98% dry matter) 4.46 2.80 Hominy feed, 5% fat 2.13 1.47 Linseed meal, solvent extr. 1.61 1.08 Milo grain 1.93 1.27 Molasses, cane (71% dry matter) 1.43 0.90 Oat grain 1.66 1.12 Rice bran 1.50 1.00 Soybean meal, expeller or hydraulic extr. 1.85 1.23 Soybean meal, solvent extr. 1.72 1.15 Wheat grain 1.98 1.30 Wheat bran 1.52 1.01 Wheat mill run 1.72 0.98

Alfalfa hay, 24% fiber Oat hay Cottonseed hulls Barley grain Wheat mill run Beet pulp, molasses, dried Cottonseed meal Molasses, cane Fat Additives Totals

megcal./kg. 0.16 0.07 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.54 0.36 0.26 0.15 0.18 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.06 ........ 1.62 0.97

t h e case of b o t h t h e c r a c k e d a n d p e l l e t e d c o r n t h e o b s e r v e d g a i n w a s 5 ~ g r e a t e r t h a n t h e exp e c t e d g a i n as c o m p u t e d f r o m t h e n e t e n e r g y r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d feed values. O n t h e b a s i s of t h e g a i n s t h e o r e t i c a l l y possible, a d r o p of 0.12 kg. w o u l d b e e x p e c t e d in t h e d a i l y g a i n of t h e a n i m a l s fed t h e p e l l e t e d corn. T h e obs e r v e d d r o p w a s 0,13 kg. I t a p p e a r s , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e d r o p in feed c o n s u m p t i o n does, in fact, a c c o u n t for all t h e d e c r e a s e in p e r f o r m a n c e of t h e s e a n i m a l s since t h e o b s e r v e d d r o p was p r e d i c t e d . T h e r e a p p e a r s to b e n o d e c l i n e in efficiency of u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e energy. TABLE 9. EVALUATION OF AN E X P E R I M E N T COMPARING CRACKED AND PELLETED CORN Preparation of corn Item Number of steers Mean bodyweight, kg. Daily wt. gain, kg. Daily feed intake, kg. Corn grain Alfalfa hay Supplement Totals Cracked 36 420 1.36 7.79 2.18 0.45 10.42 Pelleted 54 411 1.23 6.89 2.38 0.45 9.72

A t h i r d a n d i m p o r t a n t a p p l i c a t i o n is in t h e e v a l u a t i o n of a feeding p r o g r a m . F o r e x a m p l e , a study reported by Clanton and Woods ( 1 9 6 6 ) s h o w e d a s i g n i f i c a n t d r o p in feed cons u m p t i o n a n d d a i l y g a i n of s t e e r s fed p e l l e t e d c o r n c o m p a r e d to t h o s e fed c r a c k e d corn. T h e c o n c l u s i o n w a s t h a t t h e d e c r e a s e in feed cons u m p t i o n p r o b a b l y a c c o u n t e d for p a r t of t h e d e c r e a s e in gain. U s i n g t h e s y s t e m r e p o r t e d h e r e i n i t is p o s s i b l e to e v a l u a t e t h e o b s e r v e d p e r f o r m a n c e of t h e s e a n i m a l s in c o m p a r i s o n to t h a t e x p e c t e d f r o m t h e i r feed c o n s u m p t i o n . S u c h a n e v a l u a t i o n is p r e s e n t e d in t a b l e 9. I n

Computed net energy content of rations: NEro, megcal./kg. 1.82 1.79 NEg, megcal./kg. 1.14 1.12 W~ 7'5~. 92.8 91.3 NEn, required, megcal./day" 7.15 7.03 Feed required for maintenance, kg./day 3.93 3.93 Feed available for gain, kg./day 6.49 5.79 NEg available for gain, megcal./day 7.40 6.48 Expected gain, kg./day ~' 1.29 1.17 Ratio of observed to expected gain 1.05 1.05 a Calculated from equation 1 or interpolated from table 5. b Calculated from equati,on 2 or interpolated from table 5.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

SYSTEM FOR N E T E N E R G Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S
T A B L E 10. ANALYSIS OF AN E X P E R I M E N T ON U R E A A N D F A T IN S T E E R R A T I O N S Ration Item No. of steers M e a n bodyweight, kg. Av. daily gain, kg. Daily feed consumption, kg. Urea 20 396 0.87 10.3 ]Fat 20 389 0.76 9.9 Urea plus fat 20 382 0.67 9.8

805

Data are needed on more of the common feeds, on the net energy requirements for physiological functions other than maintenance, growth and fattening and on the effects of environment on net energy requirements.

Summary
A proposed system is presented for expressing net energy requirements and feed values for growing and finishing beef cattle. The system uses one expression, NEro, to represent the net energy requirement and the net energy content of the feed when used for maintenance and a second expression, NE~, for the net energy used for production of weight gain. Data from comparative slaughter trials indicate the NEn~ requirement for both steers and heifers is equal to approximately 0.077 megcal, per unit of metabolic body size (W~ The energy deposited in the weight gain of steers (the NEg requirement) is represented by the equation NE~.=52.72g@6.84g 2 where NE~ is the kcal. of energy deposited per day per unit of W~ and g is the daily empty weight gain in kg. The equation for heifers is N E g z 56.03g+12.65g 2. It was shown that heifers deposit more energy per unit of weight gain than do steers and that the difference is larger at higher rates of gain. Data are presented demonstrating that the proposed system is adaptable to practice and that it overcomes the common criticisms that net energy values do not apply under maintenance conditions and vary with feed intake. L i t e r a t u r e Cited
Clanton, Donald C. and Walter Woods. 1966. Performance of steers and r u m e n fermentation as influenced by physical form of ingredients and alfalfa:corn ratio. J. Animal Sci. 25:102. Garrett, W. N. 1965. Energetic efficiency of three breeds of cattle. J. Animal Sci. 24:881. (Abstr.). Garrett, W. N., G. P. Lofgreen a n d J. H. Meyer. 1964. A net energy comparison of barley and milo for fattening cattle. J. Animal Sci. 23:470. Harris, L. E.. 1962. Glossary of Energy Terms. N a tional Acad. Sci., N.R.C. 1Sub. No. 1040. Harris, L. E. 1966. Biological Energy Interrelationships a n d Glossary of Energy Terms. National Aead. Sci., N.R.C. Pub. No. 1411. Kleiber, Max. 1961. The Fire of Life. J o h n Wiley a n d Sons, Inc., New York and London. Lofgreen, G. P. 1963a. Net energy of feedstuffs and their use in cattle feeding. Arizona Cattle Feeders Rpt., M a y 2, 1963. Lofgreen, G. P. 1963b. Net e n e r g y - - t h e new w a y to reckon rations. West. Livestock J. 41:40. Lofgreen, G. P. 1963c. Nutrition Symposium. Some aspects of energy m e a s u r e m e n t in r u m i n a n t nutrition. Proc. Semi-Annual meeting A.F.M.A. Nutr. Coun., Dec. 2-3, 1963:18.

C o m p u t e d net energy content of rations: NEro, megcal./kg. 1.63 NEg, megcal./kg. 0.96 W~ 88.8 NE,~, required, megcal./day" 6.84 Feed required for maintenance, kg./day 4.20 Feed available for gain, kg./day 6.10 NEg available for gain, megcal./day 5.86 Expected gain, k g . / d a y ~ 1.10 Expected drop in gain, % of urea ration .... Observed drop in gain, % of urea ration ....

1.57 0.84 87.6 6.75 4.30 5.60 4.70 0.91 17 13

1.48 0.77 86.4 6.65 4.49 5.31 4.09 0.81 26 23

a Calculated from equation 1 or interpolated from table 5. b Calculated from equation 2 or interpolated from table 5.

An evaluation of a trial reported by Thompson et al. (1967) is shown in table 10. The response of steers to diets containing urea, fat or urea plus fat was determined. The three diets were formulated to be isocaloric in digestible energy. A significant decrease in rate of gain was caused by the addition of fat or fat plus urea without a significant drop in feed consumption. Although the expected gains were not achieved, the comparison among the three diets is of interest. Based on the net energy requirements and consumption, the steers on the fat-containing diets were expected to gain 17% less than those fed urea. The observed decline was 13%. Those fed fat plus urea were expected to decline 26fi. and the observed decline was 23%. Even though the rations were made isocaloric in digestible energy they were not isocaloric in net energy and the resulting decline in daily gains resulting from the addition of fat and urea plus fat were predicted by computing the net energy requirements and consumption. I t is clear from the examples presented that the proposed system does lend itself to application and can be useful in diet formulation and evaluation of performance of growing and finishing cattle. Continued study and application will result in further refinement and should make the system even more useful.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

806

LOFGREEN

AND

GARRETT

Lofgreen, G. P. 1964. A comparative slaughter technique for determining net energy values with beef cattle. I n Energy Metabolism. European Assn. An. Prod. Pub. No. 11:309. Academic Press, London and New York. Lofgreen, G. P. and K. K. Otagaki. 1960. The net energy of blackstrap molasses for fattening steers as determined by a comparative slaughter technique. J. Animal Sci. 19:392. Lofgreen, G. P., D. L. Bath and H. T. Strong. 1963. Net energy of successive increments of feed above maintenance for beef cattle. J. Animal Sci. 22:598. Lofgreen, G. P., D. L. Bath and V. R. Young. 1962. Determinations of the net energy of dried beet pulp

using barley as a reference standard. J. Animal Sci. 21:766. Morrison, F. B. 1956. Feeds and Feeding. (22nd ed.). The Morrison Publishing Company, Ithaca, New York. N.R.C. 1963. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals, No. 4. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. Nat. Res, Coun., Washington, D. C. N.R.C. 1966. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals, No. 3. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. Nat. Res. Coun., Washington, D. C. Thompson, J. T., N. W, Bradley and C. O. Little. 1967. Utilization of urea and fat in meal and pelleted rations for steers. J. Animal Sci. 26:830.

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.

Citations

This article has been cited by 20 HighWire-hosted articles: http://jas.fass.org#otherarticles

Downloaded from jas.fass.org by on May 18, 2009.