What 6 key dairy additives should you insist on everyday in every ration?

Dr. Mike Hutjens Professor Emeritus University of Illinois

Dr. Jack Garrett ACAN Dipl.Director of Research and Tech Support QualiTech

Six Feed Additives You Want to Use

Dr. Mike HutjensUniversity of Illinois

Feed ingredient added

to a ration to function in

a non-nutrient role

Reasons For Feed Additives• Band aid to cover up poor management

• Correct a ration imbalance

• Under 10 cents per cow per day

• Enhance a productive response – Rumen environment

– Milk yield or components

– Immunity / health / SCC

– Reproduction / fertility

U.S. Feed Additive Use(Hoard’s Survey of All Herds)

2006 2010-------------- % ------------

Buffers 41 42Yeast/yeast culture 28 30Rumensin 15 21Niacin 9 11Probiotics 11 13Mycotoxin binders 11 23Methionine 6 9Anionic products 3 5 (13)Feed bunk stabilizer 2 3Don’t use 11 9

Monensin

(Rumensin)

Which Feed

Additive(s)?

Silage inoculants

Rumen Buffers

Biotin

Yeast culture/yeast products

Organic trace

minerals

Hutjens’ List of Feed Additives Recommended• Rumen buffers

• Yeast culture/yeast products

• Monensin (Rumensin)

• Silage inoculants

• Biotin

• Organic trace minerals

Survey QuestionWhich additive would you select as most important if you could only purchase one?

• Biotin

• Ionophore (Rumensin)

• Organic trace minerals

• Rumen buffer

• Yeast and yeast culture

Hutjens’ Priority1. Rumen impact

a) Rumensin

b) Yeast and yeast culture

c) Sodium bicarb/S-carb

2. Silage inoculants

3. Organic trace minerals (Zn, Se, Mn, & Cu)

4. Biotin

Hutjens’ “As Needs” List• Propylene glycol (300 to 500 ml) • Calcium propionate (150 grams)

• Niacin (3 g protected; 3 g unprotected)

• Mycotoxin binders (clay mineral or yeast cell MOS compounds)

• Protected choline (15 g per day)

• Anionic products / salts (amount varies)

• Acid-based preservatives (baled hay and high moisture corn (0.5 to 1%)

Additive

Update

Evaluating Additives

• Function

• Level

• Cost

• Benefit to cost

• Strategy

• Status

Monensin (Rumensin)• Function: Improve feed efficiency for lactating cow, reduce

ketosis and displaced abomasums in transition cows, and microbial selection. Increase 2.2 pounds milk per day. Control cocci in calves and heifers.

• Level: 11 g to 22 g per ton of total ration dry matter consumed (160 to 650 mg / cow / day)

• Cost: 1 cent per 100 mg per day

• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 5 to 1

• Feeding Strategy: Feed to dry cows (reduce metabolic disorders) and lactating cow (feed efficiency) while monitoring milk components to evaluate optimal levels of monensin.

• Status: Recommended

Yeast culture and Yeast• Function: Stimulate fiber-digesting bacteria, stabilize

rumen environment, and utilize lactic acid.

• Level: 10 to 120 g depending on yeast culture concentration

• Cost: 4 to 6 cents per cow per day

• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 4:1

• Feeding Strategy: Two weeks prepartum to ten weeks postpartum, calf starter feeds, and during off-feed conditions and stress periods

• Status: Recommended

Silage Bacterial Inoculant• Function: To stimulate silage fermentation, reduce DM

loss, decrease ensiling temp, increase feed digestibility, and improve forage surface stability

• Level: 100,000 colony forming units (CFU) per gram of wet silage (Lactobacillus plantarium, Lactobacillus acidilacti, Lactobacillus buchneri, Pediococcus cereviseai, Pediococcus

pentacoccus, and/or Streptococcus faecium)• Cost: $0.60 to $3.00 per treated ton of wet silage• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 6:1• Feeding Strategy: Apply to all silages and high moisture

corn; and under poor fermentation situations• Status: Recommended

Measurement Legume/grass Corn Silage H.M. Corn

Dry matter (%) 35 to 50 30 to 35 70 to 75

pH 4.3 to 4.7 3.8 to 4.2 4.0 to 4.5

Lactic acid (%) 4.0 to 6.0 5.0 to 10.0 1.0 to 2.0

Acetic acid (%) 0.5 to 2.5 1.0 to 3.0 <0.5

Propionic acid (%) <0.25 <0.10 <0.10

Butyric acid (%) <0.25 <0.10 <0.10

Ethanol (%DM) <1.0 <3.0 <2.0

Ammonia (%CP) <12.0 <8.0 <10.0

Lactic/Acetate >2.5 >3.0 >3.0

Lactic (% total) >70 >70 >70

Recommended Fermentation Profile for Ensiled Feeds

Organic Trace Minerals• Function: Improve immune response, harden hoof health,

fertility, and somatic cell counts.

• Level: 25 to 33% of Zn, Cu, & Mn and50 to 100% of supplemented Se levels

• Cost: 4 to 8 cents per cow per day

• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 4:1

• Feeding Strategy: Dry, transition, and early lactation cows; herds experiencing hoof, somatic cell counts, and wet environment challenges

• Status: Recommended

Trace mineral functions

Zinc Copper Manganese

Reproduction Reproduction Reproduction

Immunity Immunity Immunity

Skin integrity Skin integrity Growth

Hoof health Bone structure Skeletal formation

Nutrient metabolism Mineral absorption Energy metabolism

Bioavailability

0 50 100 150 200 250

SQM zinc

Zinc proteinate

Zinc chelate

Amino acid complex

Zinc methionine

Zinc sulfate

Zinc oxide

227

159

227

219

206

100

61

Feed Management Magazine 1996

Organic Selenium• Cleared by FDA on Sept 3, 2003

• Source will be yeast raised on high selenium enriched base (selenomethionine)

• 20-40% improvement in blood selenium levels

• May overcome low or poor absorption of inorganic selenium (selenite/selenate forms)

• Added cost will be 1 cent/mg

• Replace half of the inorganic source reducing costs in half for lactating cows / all for dry cows (add 3 to 4 mg of organic selenium)

Buffers• Function: Maintain rumen pH at 6.2, maintain

milk fat test, increase milk yield, reduce SARA

• Level: 200 to 300 g per day

• Cost: 6 to 9 cents per cow per day

• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 5:1

• Feeding Strategy: Corn silage based rations, component fed herds, high starch diets, and SARA situations

• Status: Recommended

Biotin • Function: Improve hooves by reducing heel warts, claw

lesions, white line separations, sand cracks, and sole ulcers; increase milk yield

• Level: 10 to 20 mg/cow/day for 6 months to 1 year

• Cost: 8 to 10 cents/cow/day

• Benefit to Cost Ratio: 4:1

• Feeding Strategy: Herds with chronic foot problems, may require supplementation for 6 months before evaluation, and company recommends beginning supplementation at 15 months of age

• Status: Recommended

UW Trial 1 - TreatmentsVitamin (mg/c/d)

C B BBVit1x BBVit2x

Biotin 0 20 20 40

Thiamin 0 0 150 300

Riboflavin 0 0 150 300

Pyridoxine 0 0 120 240

B12 0 0 0.5 1.0

Niacin 0 0 3000 6000

Pantothenic acid 0 0 475 950

Folic acid 0 0 100 200

U of WI Trial 1 – Results

Item C B BBVit1x BBVit2x SE

BW, lb 1456 1461 1452 1459 9

DMI, lb/d 55.0b 56.5a 55.0b 53.7b 0.9

Milk, lb/d 81.8b 85.6a 84.3ab 82.5b 1.8

a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts differ (P<0.05).

Hutjens’ “Watch” List• Essential oil compounds

(0.5 to 1.5 g)

• Direct fed microbial products (probiotics)

• Feed enzymes

What’s New With Additives• Sodium bicarbonate fed at 0.75% DMI (higher

levels as intake increases); consider free-choice (< 50 g/cow/day)

• Rumen protected niacin may be more effective (85-93 destroyed by rumen microbes)

• Higher levels of yeast culture may be needed with better responses top dressing the YC.

• Direct fed microbial DNA finger printing

• New cellulose enzymes coming

Take Home Messages• Six additives can provide economic

returns to target herds

• Rumen additives can stabilize rumen health and environment

• Organic trace minerals impact health / immunity, hoof health, and reproduction (milk production indirectly)

• Lameness continues to be an important culling factor.

Dr. Jack Garrett ACAN Dipl.Director of Research and Tech Support QualiTech

SQM Polytransport Technology

Trace mineralsWhy we need them?What limits their use?

What is SQM (Polytransport)?How does it work?When do I need it?

Poll Question

When you have used organic trace minerals, where have you seen the biggest response?

• Immunity

• Reproduction

• Hoof Health

• Milk Production

• Haven't used organic trace minerals

Trace mineral functions

Zinc Copper Manganese

Reproduction Reproduction Reproduction

Immunity Immunity Immunity

Skin integrity Skin integrity Growth

Hoof health Bone structure Skeletal formation

Nutrient metabolism Mineral absorption Energy metabolism

Mineral status of cross-bred cattle in different ovulation stages.

Ca Cu Mn I-P Zn0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

NormalDelayedAnovulation

Rel

ativ

e bl

ood

seru

m,

%

A AA

B

BB

C

C

C

A,B,C P<0.01 Das et al., 2009

A

A

B

Bioavailability of mineral sources

Zinc Copper Manganese

Feedstuffs 5-15% 1-5% <4%

Sulfate 20% 5% 1.2%

Chloride 10% 5% 1.2%

Carbonate 10% --- 0.15%

Oxide 12% 1% 0.25%

Antagonists

Minerals

Sulfates

Fiber/Lignin

Oxygen compounds

Phosphates

Proteins and amino acids

Phytate

Others

Mineral Interactions

Zinc – CopperZinc – SulfurZinc – IronZinc – CalciumZinc – PhosphorusZinc – Cadmium

Copper – ZincCopper – SulfurCopper – MolybdenumCopper – IronCopper – ManganeseCopper – PhosphorusCopper – CadmiumCopper – Silver

Manganese – CopperManganese – MagnesiumManganese – IronManganese – CalciumManganese – Phosphorus

Bioaccessibility of iron from soil is increased by silage fermentation

S. L. Hansen and J. W. Spears, JDS 2009

Bioaccessibility of iron from soil is increased by silage fermentation

S. L. Hansen and J. W. Spears, JDS 2009

Influence of supplemental iron on trace mineral bioavailability.

Mineral Liver Kidney Pancreas Average

-------------------+Iron/-Iron, %----------------------

Zinc 89.4 98.3 94.7 94.0

Copper 78.3 94.5 71.5 81.4

Manganese 84.2 NA 94.8 89.5

Unpublished data, 2010

Influence of high sulfate water on relative liver trace mineral levels.

Year Sulfate Copper Manganese Zinc

ppm ------% change from initial status------ 2001 404 104.7A 110.0 88.0(84 days) 3087 37.5B 125.9 83.2 3947 41.1B 128.4 82.8

2002 441 183.8A 101.1 67.8 (104 days) 1725 43.7B 101.0 65.5 2919 28.1B 100.0 66.3 4654 22.3B 98.0 89.4

Wright and Patterson, 2005A,B P<0.01

Calculated copper absorption across various dietary sulfur and molybdenum concentrations

Dietary Sulfur Dietary Molybdenum Cu absorption Change g/kg mg/kg % %

2.0 1 4.6 4.0 1 3.1 67.4 6.0 1 2.1 45.7 2.5 0.5 4.3 93.5 2.5 1 4.2 91.3 2.5 2 3.9 84.8 2.5 5 3.14 68.3 2.5 10 2.17 47.2 2.5 20 1.0 21.7 2.5 100 0.30 6.5

NRC, 2001

What exactly is SQM™?

• Organic Trace Mineral

• Utilizing PolyTransport™ technology

• Zn, Cu, Mn, Fe, Mg

• Sequestered trace mineral using electrostatic bonding

Polysaccharide chains surround trace mineral ions creating the PolyTransport™ technology

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn Zn

Zn

Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn

Zn Zn

Zn

Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn Zn

Dynamics in the Rumen

Rumen

Esophagus

Reticulum

Abomasum

Omasum

Phytate

Phytate

Sulfates

Sulfates

Amino Acids

Amino Acids

Amino Acids

Phosphates

Phosphates

Phosphates

Oxalates

Oxalates

Oxalates

Fiber

Fiber

Fiber

Proteins

Proteins

Proteins

Intestines

SQM

Rumen bacteria

Trace mineral

Intestinal trace mineral dynamics

Intestinal trace mineral dynamics

Hypothetical model for transcellular zinc absorption

ZnT1

Zip3

Zip1

Zip2

MT = Metallothionine

NSB = Nonspecific binding constituents

CRIP = Cysteine-rich intestinal protein

Adapted from Hempe and Cousins (1992)

Bioavailability

• Decreased antagonism

• Increased absorption

• Decreased trace mineral excretion

Bioavailability of Zn

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Control Inorganic Organic SQM

Liver

Tibia

Rela

tive b

ioavaila

bili

ty, %

Relative zinc bioavailability(Average tissue concentrations from 3 experiments)

0204060

80100

120140160180200

500 ppm ZnO 500 ppm Org-Pro Zn 500 ppm SQM Zn 3000 ppm ZnO

Exp 1 (Plasma)Exp 2 (Plasma)Exp 3 (Plasma)Exp 3 (Liver)

100%

119.5%

152.4%

58.3%

Case and Carlson, 2002; JAS

Copper Zinc Copper Zinc0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

100 100 100 100

133.2

108.8 105.2 105.5

SulfatesSQM

%

Preconditioned calves(45 days)

Brood cows(45 days)

Engle and Burns, 2004

Bioavailability of SQM™(Based on liver mineral content)

Effect of source and antagonist on mineral bioavailability in broilers

Zinc Copper Manganese0

50

100

150

200

250

100.0 100.0 100.0113.4

236.6

112.9

70.8

123.7116.6

110.1

228.4

127.1

Sulfate

SQM

Sulfate w/Anta

SQM w/Anta

% o

f con

trol

aa

a Source effect P<0.01

Sims and Garrett, 2010

Dietc Source Antagonist

Mineral Corn/Soy Purified Inorganic SQM None With SE

-----------------------------% of intake-------------------------------

Zinc 47.07 49.82 40.79a 56.10b 49.96 46.93 4.15

Copper 19.46 19.79 18.58 20.67 20.58 18.66 1.87

Manganese 37.08 46.14 41.04 42.17 41.70 41.52 2.74

a, b P<0.06c Diets formulated for 40 ppm Zn, 20 ppm Cu, 40 ppm Mn; Inorganic diet used 100% sulfate source, SQM diet used 100% organic sources; Antagonist = cottonseed hulls.

Sims and Garrett, 2010

Influence of diet, mineral source and an antagonist on net mineral retention in broilers

Reproduction

• Herd improvement

• Reduced culling

• Improved performance

Reproductive performance of cows and heifers

Item Control SQM-Mn SQM-Mn,Cu,Zn

n 34 29 30

Initial wt, kg 568 537 543

Final wt, kg 552 532 539

d to 1st estrus 734 59 4 68 4

d to conception 33 4a 19 4b 24 4b

Services/conception 1.6 1.1 1.3

Pregnant at 1st service, % 45 9c 93 5d 79 8d

Conception rate, % 85.3 93.1 93.3

a,b P<0.05c,d P<0.005

DiCostanzo et al, 1990

BCS by period

Burns and Aznarez, 2005

111 d before calving Average calving date 130 d post calving5

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

1 x ING 1.5 x ING SQM

Body

condit

ion s

core

a, b diff. P<0.04

a

b

e

d

c

c, d diff. P<0.04

c, e diff. P<0.01

SQM™ Comparative Dairy Research University of Minnesota

Days Open0

50

100

150

200

173

113136 129

Sulfates 100% SQM 33% SQM 33% SAAC

Jones et al., 2000

BB

C

A

A,B,C P<0.05

1st Service Conception Rate0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

29%

68%

32% 28%

Sulfates 100% SQM 33% SQM 33% SAAC

Jones et al., 2000

SQM™ Comparative Dairy Research University of Minnesota

A

B B B

A,B P<0.02

Culling Rate0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

44%

16%

28%31%

Sulfates 100% SQM 33% SQM 33% SAAC

Jones et al., 2000

SQM™ Comparative Dairy Research University of Minnesota

Immunity

• Herd improvement

• Reduced hoof problems

• Improved performance

% Mastitis0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%28%

4%

12%

46%

Sulfates 100% SQM 33% SQM 33% SAAC

Jones et al., 2000

SQM™ Comparative Dairy Research University of Minnesota

Effect of zinc source on OVA IgG titers

d 7 d 14 d 210

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Zn Sulfate SQM Zn

Tit

er

Salyer et al., 2004; JAS

a

d

c

b

a, b diff. P<0.02

c, d diff. P<0.06

Effect of pre-conditioning with different mineral sources on IBR titer concentration in newly received calves

d 0 d 7 d 14 d 210

1

2

3

4

5

6

Inorganic SQM

Tit

er

(log

2)

Engle and Burns, 2004

Control ZnO ZnProt SQM Zn0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Initial (d 0) Final (d 284)

Ho

of

Sta

tus

a a

b

c

a, b, c diff. P<0.05

Effect of zinc source on hoof health

Lower score indicates better hoof quality

Kessler et al., 2003; Live. Prod. Sci.

Before After

Effect of zinc source on hoof health

Summary: Why use SQM™ with Polytransport Technology™ trace minerals?

Better Bioavailability to assure Delivery

to the animal for:

•Best Reproduction

•Optimum Hoof Quality

•Immune System Response

•Superior Health

•Highest Performance

•Better Bottom Line

Questions and Answers

Dr. Mike Hutjens Professor Emeritus University of Illinois

Dr. Jack Garrett ACAN Dipl.Director of Research and Tech Support QualiTech

THANK YOU!