Ajinimoto Seminar Series – Dec.

2012

Net Energy Based Formulation: Are NRC 2012

Estimates Reliable and of Financial Value ?

R. Dean Boyd and Cate Zier-

Zier-Rush
Technical Director and Research Super Star
The Hanor Company, Franklin, KY
NE Perspective – A Personal View

TWO Important Decisions:

Most Useful Energy System
Most Profitable Diet Energy Spec.
NRC 2012 NE Estimates are Credible
but they are still Estimates !
Estimates must be Growth Validated
Financial Motivation
Growth Assay to Validate Estimates is
not Perfect. What’s New ?

NE System has been Implemented on Limited basis and will Expand

as more Estimates are proven Credible (MOD ME, EFF ME)
NE Perspectives – A Personal View
Why North America Lagging behind Europe –
INRA Values (Estimates never proven in practice)
Values disagreement (esp. NRC 1998)
Suitable Methods for Validation (Snyder method, Schinckel & Boyd, 2012)

What Drives NE Use in the Hanor System –

Method to achieve Lowest FCOG (Select Opportunities, esp. SBM)
Key Ingredient Valuation Tool

NE Value more recognizable as EFFective ME (EFF ME = NE/0.75).

Credible NRC NE Estimates Illustrate Where Opportunity
Lies Compared to ME ( * )

CORE Ingredients NRC ME : Corn ME NRC NE : Corn NE

Ratio Ratio Variance
Corn, 8.5 CP 700 u 1.00 1.00 -
Corn Germ Meal 24 CP 0.85 0.71 0.80 *
Corn DDGS IDEA 80 HE 1.02 0.89 0.87 *
Corn DDGS IDEA 80 ME 1.01 0.87 0.86 *
Wheat Midds Starch 22 0.87 0.83 0.95
Milo LoTAN (Plump) 1.00 0.99 0.99
Fat, CWG 2.42 2.85 1.18 *
Soy Meal 47.5 2.90 L 1.01 0.80 0.80 *
Soy Meal 46 5 2.82 L 1.01 0.80 0.80 *
CORE Ingredient NE or EFFECTIVE ME Estimates
47.5 10.5 7.5 CWG DCT IL STL ENID 17.1
NRC vs
Calibration CORN SBM DDGS DDGS FAT GERM MIDDS MIDDS HF-
HF-Rice
NRC 2012 1.00 0.80 0.89 0.88 2.67 0.71 0.79 0.75 -
* Calibrated 1.00 0.80 0.89 0.88 2.85 0.77 0.83 - -
Margin - 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0.01 - -

Appreciation to those who did the

Hard work and are not here to take
the Credit
Principle: Validation of NE Estimate using the Growth
Principle:
Assay (Scale, Phases, Gender) (Applied Quickly to SBM, FAT)

Snyder Method Step I for Growth

Validation of NE Estimates

0.370
0.365
G a in : F e e d R a tio

0.360
0.355
0.350
0.345
0.340
0.335
0.330
0.325
0.0 4.5 9.0 13.5 18.0 0.0

Diet Amount of MIDDS, %

FCR basis: 35-70% Pan Cover per Patience et al. 2006

FAT NE Estimates Flawed until NRC 2012: Un Undoing
doing a
Schism (28 d assay after 28 d acclim.):
acclim.): Exp. I

Phase: 120-150 Lbs

Corn – Soy HI Fat NPB JAS NRC 98
Item Units STD Control NE 5900 NE 5500 HI
Corn lbs/ton 1168 1075 968 981
SBM lbs/t 487 487 487 487
L-Lysine lbs/t 4 5.9 4.7 4.9
DDGS lbs/t 300 300 300 300
Fat CWG lbs/t - 90 90 90
Bentonite lbs/t 5 5 50 50
Sand Fine lbs/t - - 64 50
Expected NE Mcal/kg 2.437 2.584 2.439 2.439
SID Lysine % 1.011 1.077 1.019 1.028
SID Lysine : ME g/Mcal 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.19

Res. Memo H 2011-13 IL

NRC Fat NE Estimates were Not Credible until NRC
2012: The Hanor Contribution

Res. Memo H 2011-13 IL

2.6

2.55 2.53

2.5
2.45
2.45
2.41
2.4
2.34
2.35

2.3

2.25

2.2

2.15

2.1

2.05

2
CONTROL CONTROL 5900 5500 HI
C-SBM FAT FAT STEIN FAT NRC
Field Validation of NE Estimate of FAT CWG through
Growth Assay: 175-
175-235 lb Phase

Res. Memo H 2011-19 IL

3.20
3.15
3.10 3.09
3.06
3.05
28 d FCR

3.01
3.00
2.95
2.93
2.91
2.90
2.85
2.83
2.80
2.75
2.70
C-S Fat Fat NE Fat NE Fat NE Fat NE
Control Control 8000 7000 6000 5000
 Growth Validation of Net Energy Values for SBM and Fat
25--65 Lb Pigs: SBM and FAT NE Values Correct ?
in 25
C.E. Zier-Rush1, S. Smith1, J. Steckel1, R. Palan1, Rob Shirley2,
James L. Usry2 and R. Dean Boyd1
1The Hanor Company, 2Ajinomoto Heartland LLC

Objective
Determine if Hanor NE values for SBM and FAT adequately predict gain relative to
NE Input (FCR Audit Issue)

A total of 1153 gilts and castrates (28.1 ± .6 lbs) were allotted to one of 5 diets.
Two of the diets were milled, and three blended on farm using the Feed Logic system.
Diets involved successive removal of SBM and replacement with Corn and Crystalline
amino acids.
FAT level was adjusted to achieve a constant NE value across diets (ME progressively
declined).
SBM removal occurred in 3.0% increments (from 776 to 518 lbs/ton), while increasing
crystalline Lysine from 2.0 to 10.0 lbs/ton.
Experiment Design: 25-
25-65 lb pigs
SBM Deletion, %
ITEM 0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 9.0% 12.0%
Diet SBM Level, lbs/ton 776 712 647 583 518
Pens, (EU) 10 10 10 10 11
Pigs 227 228 225 229 244
Initial Wt, lbs 28.7 27.7 28.0 28.0 27.9
Res. Memo H 2012-10 Nurs
Diet Format for Blend Diets (1, 5)
Blend Diets 1 and 5
Item Units HI SBM - 1 LO SBM - 5
Corn lbs/ton 830 1100
SBM lbs/t 776 518
L-Lysine lbs/t 2 10
Fat CWG lbs/t 49 20
DDGS lbs/t 300 300
Met lbs/t 0.3 2.5
Thr lbs/t - 3.0
Trp lbs/t - 0.9
Diet Cost $/ton 311.3 304.6
NRC ME Mcal/kg 3.429 3.369
HANOR NE Mcal/kg 2.477 2.477
SID Lysine % 1.28 1.28
SID Lysine:ME g/Mcal 4.10 4.08
Formulation on NE and ME Basis Predicts Different
FCR Outcomes Based on Diet Energy Density

Which System is most accurate to ID Least $

per Calorie
Growth Not Affected by Diet Type
SBM Deletion, %
CRITERION 0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 9.0% 12.0% SEM Prob. < Lin Quad
Diet SBM, lbs/ton 776 712 647 583 518 - - - -
End Wt, lbs/pig 68.6 67.9 67.5 68.2 67.9 1.0 .932 .726 .551
Total Gain, lbs/pig 40.0 40.2 39.5 40.3 40.0 .5 .775 .945 .738
Commercial FCR 1.53 1.52 1.54 1.54 1.55 .01 .431 .103 .824
Biological FCR 1.53 1.52 1.54 1.54 1.55 .01 .439 .108 .681
Mortality + Morbidity, % 1.31 .42 .00 .45 .83 .49 .406 .555 .065
NE Based Formulation Gave Predictable FCR
NE Based Formulation Gave Predictable FCR:
(Modest Correction DM Equivalence)
Interim Conclusion: SBM NE (NRC 2012 v INRA)

INRA, 0.73 x Corn

NRC, 0.80 x Corn **

INRA NE value drives greater

Crystalline Amino Acid use
but suggests that energy Up-
lift by SBM replacement is
greater than it it !
Formulation Using NE or ME Values for Ingredients: Does NE Offer
a Financial Advantage for a Relatively Simple Diet
C.E. Zier-Rush1, S. Smith1, J. Steckel1, R. Palan1, Rob Shirley2, James L. Usry2
and R. Dean Boyd1
1The Hanor Company, 2Ajinomoto Heartland LLC

Objective
Determine if the NE System Offers a Financial advantage to Formulation on ME

A total of 2067 gilts and castrates (27.1 ± .5 lbs) were allotted to one of 3 diets.
A total of 95 Nursery Pens with 21-22 Pigs/pen were used
Three diets were milled and distributed as Summit blend using the Feed Logic system.
C-S Control established the NE and ME Target (800 lbs SBM, 3 lbs L-Lysine)
NE and ME Formula’s involved 500 lbs SBM and 10 lbs L-Lysine
FAT level was adjusted to achieve an NE or ME match respectively to the C-S Standard.
29 d Growth assay
Experimental Design: 25-
25-65 lb pigs
C-S Standard NE ME
No. Pens 32 32 31
No. Pigs 693 700 674
Initial Weight, lbs/pig 27.0 27.1 27.1
Total Gain, lbs/pig 40.1 39.3 38.6

Res. Memo H 2012-12 Nurs

Diet Format for NE or ME Based Formula
Comparison
Item Units C-S STD NE Basis ME Basis
Corn lbs/ton 1,084 924 916
SBM lbs/t 802 500 500
L-Lysine lbs/t 3 10.1 10.3
Fat CWG lbs/t 60 61 69
DDGS lbs/t 0 300 300
C.GERM lbs/t 0 150 150
Met lbs/t 2.8 2.4 2.5
Thr lbs/t 1.2 2.9 3
Trp lbs/t 0 1 1.1
Diet Cost $/ton 359.0 331.7 335.2
NRC ME Mcal/kg 3.451 3.432 3.451
HANOR NE Mcal/kg 2.540 2.540 2.560
SID Lysine % 1.297 1.289 1.296
SID Lysine : ME g/Mcal 4.08 4.08 4.08
Performance and Financial Result

C-S Standard NE ME
No. Pens 32 32 31
No. Pigs 693 700 674
Total Gain, lbs/p 40.1a 39.3a,b 38.6b
ADG, lbs/d 1.384a 1.354a,b 1.330b
ADFI, lbs/d 2.149 2.158 2.117
FCR, F/G 1.552a 1.592b 1.592b
FCOG, $/pig 11.14 10.56 10.67

Financial Value of NE
FCOG, $/pig - 0.00 +0.11
Gain Created, $/pig - 0.00 +0.00
Marginal DIF, $/pig - - +0.11
g Gain:Mcal NE 253.7 247.2 245.6
 Formulation Using NE or ME Values for Ingredients: What is NE
Financial Opportunity during Finish (90
(90--280 lbs)
lbs)
C.E. Zier-Rush1, J. Acosta2, M. McGrath1, R. Palan1, J. Steckel1, J. Patience2
and R.D. Boyd1
1The Hanor Company, 2Iowa State University

Objective
Determine if the NE System Offers a Financial advantage to Formulation on ME

Decision Point:
In Practice, we strive for lowest Feed Cost of Gain by formulating
to NE level (or Effective ME) for Least Cost Gain
Two Ways to do this Trial –
Kees DeLange Least Cost Calorie
Formulate NE Diet to a C-S Reference diet NE and compare to a
Formula that delivers the ME achieved by C-S Reference.
 Formulation Using NE or ME Values for Ingredients: What is NE
Financial Opportunity during Finish (90
(90--280 lbs)
lbs)
C.E. Zier-Rush1, J. Acosta2, M. McGrath1, R. Palan1, J. Steckel1, J. Patience2
and R.D. Boyd1
1The Hanor Company, 2Iowa State University

Objective
Determine if the NE System Offers a Financial advantage to Formulation on ME

A total of 2054 gilts and castrates (90.0 ± 1.0 lbs) were allotted by weight block within
sex to one of five diets (95 Pens with 21-22 Pigs/pen).
Diets were Quantitatively delivered by Computerized System (Howeema).
Diets involved a (1) C-S Control, (2) Two diets including DDGS formulated using either
2012 NRC ME or NE values, and (3) Two diets including Corn Germ and DDGS,
formulated using ME or NE values.
Diets were fed in 3 Diet phases from 90 lbs to Market (average 93.7 d)
Measures included: Whole-body ADG/FCR in 21 d intervals, Carcass ADG/FCR, Carcass
Yield and FOM Lean.
 I. SBM, Crystalline amino acids, DDGS and FAT
Collaborative Research with Iowa State U., J. Patience and J Acosta

Phase: 90-130 Lbs Phase: 130-190 Lbs Phase: 190-280 Lbs

Item Units C-S STD ME NE C-S STD ME NE C-S STD ME NE
Corn lbs/ton 1,190 953 944 1,276 987 974 1,402 1,021 995
SBM lbs/t 704 440 440 621 310 311 506 291 295
L-Lysine lbs/t 2.0 8.0 8.0 0 7.0 7.0 0 4.5 4.5
DDGS lbs/t 0 500 500 0 600 600 0 600 600
Fat CWG lbs/t 70 55 64 60 53 65 50 44 66
Met lbs/t 1.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thr lbs/t 0.3 0.7 0.7 0 0.3 0.3 0 0 0
Trp lbs/t 0 0.7 0.7 0 0.6 0.6 0 0.3 0.3
Diet Cost $/ton 391.9 373.3 376.2 379.0 357.4 361.5 363.3 342.3 350.0
NRC ME Mcal/kg 3.469 3.469 3.491 3.466 3.465 3.494 3.446 3.447 3.499
HAN NE Mcal/kg 2.571 2.544 2.565 2.591 2.555 2.583 2.600 2.548 2.600
SID Lysine % 1.15 1.15 1.15 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.83 0.85 0.85
SID Lys : ME g/Mcal 3.57 3.62 3.60 2.99 3.04 3.02 2.54 2.64 2.60

Res. Memo H 2012-07 IL, in prep.

 Carcass ADG

Global View of Results: 1.58

1.57
1.56
Carcass basis 1.55
1.54
NE Advantage Consistent 1.53
1.52
1.51
Complete Data is presented 1.5
1.49
but not provided in written 1.48
C-S Control ME DDGS NE DDGS ME DDGS NE DDGS
form until all analysis GERM GERM

completed Carcass FCR,

3.96

3.94

3.92

3.9

3.88

3.86

3.84

3.82
C-S Control ME DDGS NE DDGS ME DDGS NE DDGS
GERM GERM
Results based on Carcass Growth: DDGS
ISU C-S ISU ME ISU NE
ITEM Control DDGS DDGS SEM
Carcass Outcome
Carcass Yield, % (Farm L.W) 73.8a 73.2b 73.6a,b 0.17
Carcass Gain, lbs/p 147.1a 143.4b 146.3a,b
Carcass ADG 1.570a 1.531b 1.562a,b 0.014
Carcass FCR 3.875a 3.947b 3.893a 0.020
Carcass Price, $/lb 0.850 0.850 0.850 -
FOM Lean, % 51.8 52.0 51.9 -
FOM Lean Premium, $/CCwt - - - -
Carcass Revenue, $/p $ 125.0 $ 121.9 $ 124.4 -
Net Carcass Value, $/pig $ 17.55 $ 21.04 $ 22.13 -
NE Value over ME, $/p -$ 1.09 -

Fixed Time based Financial Analysis:

Gain is Valued
NE Value ($) Creation is Dynamic
Dynamic:: Carcass Price
Let Fat : Corn Price ratio = 3.28

Price Basis, $/lb NE Value Over ME, $/pig

Carcass Live DDGS DDGS Germ
0.75 0.57 + 0.80
0.80 0.61 + 0.95
0.85 0.65 + 1.09
0.90 0.68 + 1.24
0.95 0.72 + 1.38
1.00 0.76 + 1.53

Fixed Time: Gain valued against Feed Cost at Fixed time

Dynamic Runs Model on Ingredient Cost, VAR-FIX time
Key Ingredient Cost, $ per 100 Lbs
Fat : Corn Price
Item Cost, $ ratio, $/$
Corn 14.50
Fat CWG 47.5 3.28
SBM 47.5 25.18
Corn DDGS, 10% Fat 15.75
Corn GERM 8.52
Price on 08.22.2012, IL
II. SBM, Crystalline amino acids, DDGS + Germ and FAT
Collaborative Research with Iowa State U., J. Patience and J Acosta

Phase: 90-130 Lbs Phase: 130-190 Lbs Phase: 190-280 Lbs

Item Units C-S STD ME NE C-S STD ME NE C-S STD ME NE
Corn lbs/ton 1,190 740 735 1,276 768 759 1,402.2 817.5 799.5
SBM lbs/t 704 400 400 621 276 277 506 241 243
L-Lysine lbs/t 2.0 8.2 8.2 0 7 7 0 4.5 4.5
DDGS lbs/t 0 300 300 0 400 400 0 400 400
C.GERM lbs/t 400 400 0 400 400 0 400 400
Fat CWG lbs/t 60 104 109 60 103 111 50 94 110
Met lbs/t 1 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thr lbs/t 0.3 0.9 1 0.3 0.3 0 0 0
Trp lbs/t 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0 0.3 0.3
Diet Cost $/ton 391.9 360.7 362.5 379.0 344.9 347.7 363.3 330.0 335.5
NRC ME Mcal/kg 3.469 3.467 3.479 3.466 3.465 3.484 3.446 3.447 3.485
HAN NE Mcal/kg 2.571 2.555 2.567 2.591 2.567 2.586 2.600 2.562 2.599
SID Lysine % 1.15 1.15 1.15 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.83 0.84 0.84
SID Lys:ME g/Mcal 3.67 3.69 3.67 3.08 3.09 3.07 2.63 2.63 2.61

Res. Memo H 2012-07 IL, in prep.

Results based on Carcass Growth: DDGS + Germ
ISU C-S ISU ME ISU NE
ITEM Control DDGS Germ DDGS Germ
Carcass Outcome
Carcass Yield, % (Farm L.W) 73.9a 72.8b 73.1b
Carcass Gain, lbs/p 147.1a 141.7b 143.3b
Carcass ADG 1.570a 1.512b 1.530b
Carcass FCR 3.875a 3.915a 3.875a
Carcass Price, $/lb 0.850 0.850 0.850

FOM Lean, % 51.8 51.8 51.9

FOM Lean Premium, $/CCwt - - -
Carcass Revenue, $/p $ 125.0 $ 120.4 $ 121.8
Net Carcass Value, $/pig $ 17.55 $ 25.91 $ 25.39
NE Value over ME, $/p -$ (0.52)
NE Value ($) Creation is Dynamic: Carcass Price
Price Basis, $/lb NE Value Over ME, $/pig
Carcass Live DDGS DDGS Germ
0.75 0.57 0.80 -0.68
0.80 0.61 0.95 -0.60
0.85 0.65 1.09 -0.52
0.90 0.68 1.24 -0.44
0.95 0.72 1.38 -0.36
1.00 0.76 1.53 -0.28

Problem: Germ NE Over-Penalty:

NRC NE: Corn, 0.71
Han NE: Corn, 0.77 (Less Fat to hold NE Constant)
Practical THOTS
NRC 2012 NE Estimate adopted for Validation (No mix, match systems)
NE Margin in Practice (NE Over-Penalty is Financial Problem)
NE Value greatest in the 20–180 lb phase (sbm)
NE Value best determined on Carcass basis
and be Summed across Phases
NE Transition is mentally easier for Old Guys as EFF ME (MOD ME)
 Note:: Important Source of Variation in NE Estimate *
Note

CORE Ingredient NE Estimates

47.5 10.5 7.5 CWG DCT IL STL ENID 17.1
NRC vs
Calibration CORN SBM DDGS DDGS FAT GERM MIDDS MIDDS HF-
HF-Rice

NRC 2012 1.00 0.80 0.89 0.88 2.67 0.71 0.79 0.75 -
* Calibrated 1.00 0.80 0.89 0.88 2.85 0.77 0.83 - -
Margin - 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0.01 - -

* Growth Calibration for Germ, MIDDS are within 20% addition rate. More extreme
levels cause significant growth reduction, change in composition and probably NE Value.
.

Greatest Impact on NE value may not be Phase or Gender as compared to extreme Intake
reduction (changes Pd : Ld ratio).

NRC 2012 Corn Germ meal, 0.71 ratio (equation) appears,

based on the exp., to be Incorrect for Decatur
CORE Ingredient NE (EFFECTIVE ME) Estimates
CALIB NE :
INGREDIENT CALIB NE EFFEC ME CORN NE NE Margin
Kcal/lb Kcal/lb Ratio Ratio
Corn, 8.5 CP 700 u 1209 1523 1.00 -
Corn Germ Meal 24 CP 931 1172 0.77 +0.01
Corn DDGS, Fat, 10.5 1076 1355 0.89 -
Corn DDGS, Fat 7.5 1052 1325 0.87 -
Midds, 22-24% starch 1003 1264 0.83 +0.01
Fat, CWG 3448 3686 2.85 -
Soy Meal 47.5 967 1221 0.80 +0.01
L-Lysine 1554 2077 1.29 -
L-Threonine 1338 1789 1.11 -
DL-Methionine 1874 2505 1.55 -
L-Tryptophan 2137 2840 1.77 -
NRC 2012 Corn Germ meal, 0.71 ratio (equation) appears,
based on the exp., to be Incorrect for Decatur
Discussion