Slide 1K-STATE
RESEARCH
and
EXTENSION
Joel DeRouchey, PhD, Mike Tokach, PhD, Steve Dritz, DVM, PhD,
Bob Goodband, PhD, and Jim Nelssen, PhD
1
K-STATE
soybean meal prices?
Feed budgets and phase feeding
Particle size evaluation
Use has dramatically reduced due to cost
AV blends vs. only vegetable or choice white grease
K-STATE
Grain screenings
K-STATE
Determining the economics of adding fat to a grain-soybean meal diet
Increased cost of the diet
F/G improvement with fat
ADG improvement with fat
2% improvement in early grower
No improvement in late finisher
K-STATE
Increasing dietary energy density with added fat: Analysis of field experiments
9 in field research facilities (total of 9,899 pigs)
Analyzed for the percent change in ADG and F/G per % added dietary fat (using Proc Mixed in SAS)
Model included:
Fat level
K-STATE
Fat analysis
Diet 1
Diet 1
Diet 2
Diet 2
Diet 3
Diet 3
Diet 4
Diet 4
Diet 5
Diet 5
-0.0052110567
0.0245670267
0.0412882679
0.1723344795
0.1130959934
0.3332067524
0.2132394807
0.5746660357
0.2378805875
0.6305078916
0.0927423368
0.2809670225
Nutrients
0.4426656104
0.8282412208
0.8405793869
1.5565987738
0.60404408
1.10428816
0.6424491745
1.162933349
0.4088807872
0.7373165744
0.4003417137
0.7228334274
2.5% fat
2.5% fat
5% fat
5% fat
5% fat
$ (0.024)
$ 0.086
$ 0.283
$ 0.454
$ 0.767
$ 0.309
$ 0.318
Increase in feed cost per pig by phase with 5% fat
5% fat
Click to print summary sheets
The appropriate level of fat to use in each grow-finish diet will depend on the importance of growth rate. When extra weight gain is needed, the fat level should be determined by the Net Return per pig. This is usually the situation in the summer or any other time when market weights are below the desired level. When extra gain is not needed, the decision should be made by the increase in feed cost per pig graph. This situation normally occurs in the winter or whenever extra space is available.
Response surface
Numbers in red are estimated values and not book values
Milo
Corn
Barley
Soy Hulls
Ingredients to right of this column are not in sheets
Wheat Bran
$ 15.00
/ton
Lysine
62%
66%
68%
73%
85%
85%
50%
91%
89%
87%
82%
100%
82%
100%
66%
69%
85%
85%
85%
75%
Isoleucine
80%
79%
75%
84%
84%
84%
59%
71%
87%
85%
85%
85%
79%
69%
84%
84%
84%
77%
Leucine
86%
88%
78%
85%
84%
84%
63%
91%
88%
84%
89%
89%
88%
71%
84%
84%
84%
78%
Methionine
81%
86%
80%
85%
86%
86%
64%
85%
88%
94%
84%
100%
84%
100%
86%
76%
86%
86%
86%
82%
100%
100%
Cystine
79%
78%
76%
84%
79%
77%
20%
81%
73%
80%
86%
100%
86%
100%
78%
70%
79%
79%
77%
82%
100%
100%
Threonine
68%
69%
66%
72%
78%
78%
51%
86%
85%
82%
79%
100%
79%
100%
69%
60%
78%
78%
78%
69%
Tryptophan
75%
64%
70%
81%
81%
80%
39%
88%
79%
92%
78%
78%
64%
65%
81%
81%
80%
77%
100%
Valine
78%
79%
73%
80%
81%
81%
55%
90%
85%
86%
81%
81%
79%
70%
81%
81%
81%
76%
Lysine
81%
78%
79%
81%
90%
89%
56%
94%
95%
87%
100%
87%
100%
78%
71%
90%
90%
89%
89%
Isoleucine
87%
87%
84%
89%
89%
88%
68%
88%
94%
83%
83%
87%
76%
89%
89%
88%
92%
Leucine
90%
92%
86%
89%
89%
88%
71%
92%
94%
87%
87%
92%
78%
89%
89%
88%
93%
Methionine
89%
90%
86%
90%
91%
91%
71%
96%
94%
81%
100%
81%
100%
90%
79%
91%
91%
91%
93%
100%
100%
Cystine
83%
86%
86%
90%
87%
84%
37%
91%
88%
85%
100%
85%
100%
86%
77%
87%
87%
84%
91%
100%
100%
Threonine
84%
82%
81%
84%
87%
85%
63%
94%
88%
79%
100%
79%
100%
82%
70%
87%
87%
85%
88%
Tryptophan
83%
84%
80%
90%
90%
87%
46%
94%
90%
79%
79%
84%
74%
90%
90%
87%
91%
100%
Valine
87%
87%
82%
86%
88%
86%
64%
91%
93%
77%
77%
87%
75%
88%
88%
86%
90%
Soy Hulls
1.45
2.83
2.80
3.61
3.62
1.92
0.81
1.59
1.58
2.05
2.06
1.09
0.87
0.79
0.70
0.65
0.62
0.61
0.87
0.79
0.70
0.65
0.62
0.61
0.87
0.79
0.70
0.65
0.62
0.61
Added Fat Summary
Remember that energy level drives ADG with high lean pigs in field conditions!
Should I have fat in my diets currently?
Long on space = No
Short on space = Yes
Evaluate net return and determine optimum level of fat by dietary phase.
2.5% for entire finishing = 3.2 lbs heavier pig
5.0% for entire finishing = 6.1 lbs heavier pig
K-STATE
Using added fat for dust control
A common practice to reduce dust in the barns is to use 1% added fat
Current feed cost increase for dust control in finishing is $1.13 / pig from 50 to 250 lbs.
Current feed cost increase for dust control in finishing is $0.75 / pig from 120 to 250 lbs.
Simply cannot afford dust control in finishing diets
K-STATE
Evaluating diet cost with low protein amino acid fortified diets
Calculator available at www.KsuSwine.org
 
 
 
 
 
$0.61
Research is inconsistent when feeding DDGS on grow-finish pig performance.
Several studies have demonstrated decreased growth performance levels above 10%
Other studies suggest feeding DDGS at levels up to 30% have no negative effect on growth performance
However - negative results on carcass yield and fat quality are clearly demonstrated
K-STATE
77.3
76.6
76.2
75.6
-0.61
73.4
72.8
72.1
71.9
-0.58
77.9
77.7
77.1
76.7
-0.33
75.7
75.4
75.1
76.9
77.1
-0.42
K-STATE
on dressing percent
JBS United, 2007
Corn-soy only
 
 
 
 
-$4.46
-$7.13
-$8.63
 
 
 
 
 
DDGS - Summary
Currently, feeding up to 20% DDGS is the generally the most economical in grow-finish diets in most situations
These levels may or may not decrease performance
How to handle yield impacts – withdraw or ignore
Feeding 20% DDGS should not by itself increase carcass IV values over 73
However, feeding this level along with an unsaturated fat source more then likely will
K-STATE
Gylcerol is the resulting product of the bio-diesel industry
Pure glycerol is a colorless, odorless, and a sweet-tasting viscous liquid (when fresh)
Much less is known about its use in livestock feeding
Currently numerous National Pork Board and state pork association funded experiments underway
Fall 2007 price = ~ $0.06 / lb
Current price = ~ $0.12 – 0.15 / lb
K-STATE
Effects of glycerol and soy oil on growth performance of growing pigs
(25 to 55 lb)
Groesbeck et al., 2008
Soy/glycerol
blend, %
Soy oil, quadratic P < 0.07, glycerol and blend linear P < 0.06
K-STATE
Effects of glycerol and DDGS on growth performance of finishing pigs
(70 to 217 lb)
Duttlinger et al., 2008
K-STATE
Effects of glycerol and fat on growth performance of finishing pigs
(170 to 220 lb)
Duttlinger et al., 2008
Dried Whey for 15 to 25 lb pigs
In recent trials at K-State with 15 to 25 lb pigs, removing the 10% dried whey from the diet lowered pig weight by 0.5 to 1 lb/pig (Bergstrom et al., 2007).
The savings achieved by lowering feed cost was greater than the value of weight that was lost by using the more simple diet without a lactose source.
Typically, dried whey must be priced at approximately $0.35 per lb to breakeven when comparing feed cost and gain.
K-STATE
Dried Whey for 15 to 25 lb pigs
Obviously, if a more economical lactose source could be found or the diets reformulated with another strategy to achieve the higher final weight without the increased feed cost, it would be beneficial.
If a lactose alternative is not found; however, the most economic recommendation would be to feed the simpler diets and accept the lower ADG resulting from the decision.
Less drastic compromise
Divide into 2 phases with the first diet containing lactose source while the second diet does not.
Still maintain fishmeal and/or blood meal in both diets
No pig over 25 lb should ever receive lactose in the diet
K-STATE
Follow budgets carefully
Over budgeting simply increases cost due to overfeeding nutrients
Under budgeting can limit growth by causing pigs to be deficient in nutrients.
Additional diet phases can reduce feed costs
K-STATE
Do we still recommend split sex feeding?
Can you fill a room/barn (feed line) with less than 7 days of age spread of one sex?
If answer is no, you should minimize age spread rather than housing by sex.
If split sex feeding, same diets can be used for both sexes with different feed budgets to account for higher F/G of barrows
K-STATE
K-STATE
< 700 86.1 82.9 85.8 1.74
700-1000 84.9 80.5 84.4 1.84
> 1000 83.7 79.1 82.6 1.92
Particle Size Digestibility, %
KSU, 1985
Based on pig performance and grinding considerations, we recommend a particle size of 700 microns with a range of 600 to 750 microns
K-STATE
~ 7 lbs of feed per finishing pig
$0.68 change in current per pig feed cost
Measure weekly on farm, monthly with lab
K-STATE
K-STATE
Baldridge et al. 2001
Chart18
1143
656
710
567
599
650
589
1127
686
864
836
422
1004
1011
680
748
428
554
944
452
488
805
906
463
775
623
792
728
613
579
740
675
667
851
617
650
704
607
677
485
735
677
847
623
Actual Partcle Sizes
Deviation from actual
Figure 2. Distance from Actual Particle Size for Each Sample: 1-Sieve with Manufacture's Instructions
66.51172
-131.06172
-179.14284
-43.890944
-246
-153.08136
-196.77652
-48.63732
-230.57148
-126.28568
-28.28568
-190.972584
-80.14284
-92.27504
6.857148
-111.89284
-193.176468
-273.85716
-82.28568
-198
-291
-43.01716
-83.85716
-184.857148
-138.319
-230.14284
21.6466
-245.985
-31.428568
-185.85716
-172.28568
-68.85716
-29.28568
-197.57148
-34.285716
-8.571432
-34.71432
-230.71432
-193.71432
-174.857148
-139.14284
-210.42852
-133.85716
-52.714284
Sheet5
50.2
Tare
.5min
1min
1.5min
2min
2.5min
12
357.2
368.5
367.6
367.1
366.9
366.7
11.3
10.4
9.9
9.7
9.5
0.08
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.9
0.5
0.2
0.2
8%
5%
2%
2%
30
368.3
390.5
390.1
389.6
389.3
389
33.3
32.9
32.4
32.1
31.8
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
1.3
1
0.5
0.5
1%
2%
1%
1%
50
355.2
367.6
365.6
363.5
363
362.8
10.4
8.4
6.3
5.8
5.6
0.19
0.25
0.08
0.03
3.3
3.1
1
0.7
19%
25%
8%
3%
Average Amount of Sample falling through sieves during each time interval
Average percent change in the amount of sample left on the Sieves during each time interval
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
minutes
grams
Table 1. The ave amount of grain passing through each screen during each time interval
Sheet6
Microns Away from Standard
Sheet7
-65.5831625305
-67.6938569859
-72.189976772
-59.0714658527
-48.9351554738
-163.7246401995
-146.0268220338
81.4748317081
-58.7424515227
-69.4241843655
-117.9749331159
-102.7720125993
94.3181682274
91.5389119309
-102.0252769821
73.3878328775
-25.5324552575
117.3359558233
-3.6947855239
97.0501114426
58.0190053143
-65.3971590575
-81.9214991463
132.9300554716
-101.7334184865
92.1034267753
-50.6163458456
-116.4947669314
-10.7867338192
-43.4963017383
16.301397606
-9.5178840516
148.823741357
85.0421794027
99.9584567464
-4.2888647036
-67.2340043193
3.3897157241
45.8133680805
47.7986468607
50.5986978105
38.683824263
83.1435217464
197.166308146
Sheet3
422
428
452
463
485
488
554
567
579
589
599
607
613
617
623
623
650
650
656
667
675
677
677
680
686
704
710
728
735
740
748
775
792
805
836
847
851
864
906
944
1004
1011
1127
1143
residual
-255.9198109418
-253.1931088043
-241.752625
-229.7621639031
-213.4261281888
-282.16658125
-253.7306281888
-110.1104967311
-181.1769719388
-186.0937505259
-223.03378125
-208.8836734694
-78.1963822704
-77.351276148
-83.3490127551
-206.0321040816
-138.0895360815
-47.8056045918
-120.0385362192
-50.3710127551
-71.0762781888
-182.9423081633
-167.5821332908
-25.0303183673
-202.0503510204
-38.7564690051
-151.5490612245
-220.3568321261
-112.6877353316
-143.8110984694
-86.9331379457
-109.8299043051
27.9879528337
-19.6114761824
-2.8220127551
-109.0136290816
-185.471622449
-102.6712877551
-60.1830210459
-64.9871020408
-78.3834853316
-97.1159321832
-85.0118709606
70.7083730954
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
residual
Actual Particle Size
Deviation from Actual
Figure 2. Distance from Actual Particle Size for Each Sample: 1-Sieve with Kit Equation Particle Size = 0.1429X² + 3.4286X+660
190.972584
193.176468
198
184.857148
174.857148
291
273.85716
43.890944
185.85716
196.77652
246
230.71432
31.428568
34.285716
230.14284
52.714284
153.08136
8.571432
131.06172
29.28568
68.85716
193.71432
210.42852
-6.857148
230.57148
34.71432
179.14284
245.985
139.14284
172.28568
111.89284
138.319
-21.6466
43.01716
28.28568
133.85716
197.57148
126.28568
83.85716
82.28568
80.14284
92.27504
48.63732
-66.51172
Sheet1
380
293
291
242
191
192
203
204
205
289
292
312
310
320
267
285
286
352
353
382
299
369
374
381
287
379
359
377
361
313
368
400
421
397
418
416
415
435
398
395
378
375
396
423
496
497
498
50.2
Tare
.5min
1min
1.5min
2min
2.5min
12
357.2
368.5
367.6
367.1
366.9
366.7
11.3
10.4
9.9
9.7
9.5
0.08
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.9
0.5
0.2
0.2
8%
5%
2%
2%
30
368.3
390.5
390.1
389.6
389.3
389
33.3
32.9
32.4
32.1
31.8
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
1.3
1
0.5
0.5
1%
2%
1%
1%
50
355.2
367.6
365.6
363.5
363
362.8
10.4
8.4
6.3
5.8
5.6
0.19
0.25
0.08
0.03
3.3
3.1
1
0.7
19%
25%
8%
3%
Average Amount of Sample falling through sieves during each time interval
Average percent change in the amount of sample left on the Sieves during each time interval
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
minutes
grams
Table 1. The ave amount of grain passing through each screen during each time interval
Sheet6
Microns Away from Standard
Sheet7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sheet3
422
428
452
463
485
488
554
567
579
589
599
607
613
617
623
623
650
650
656
667
675
677
677
680
686
704
710
728
735
740
748
775
792
805
836
847
851
864
906
944
1004
1011
1127
1143
residual
-255.9198109418
-253.1931088043
-241.752625
-229.7621639031
-213.4261281888
-282.16658125
-253.7306281888
-110.1104967311
-181.1769719388
-186.0937505259
-223.03378125
-208.8836734694
-78.1963822704
-77.351276148
-83.3490127551
-206.0321040816
-138.0895360815
-47.8056045918
-120.0385362192
-50.3710127551
-71.0762781888
-182.9423081633
-167.5821332908
-25.0303183673
-202.0503510204
-38.7564690051
-151.5490612245
-220.3568321261
-112.6877353316
-143.8110984694
-86.9331379457
-109.8299043051
27.9879528337
-19.6114761824
-2.8220127551
-109.0136290816
-185.471622449
-102.6712877551
-60.1830210459
-64.9871020408
-78.3834853316
-97.1159321832
-85.0118709606
70.7083730954
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
residual
Baldridge et al. 2001
Chart3
422
428
452
463
485
488
554
567
579
589
599
607
613
617
623
623
650
650
656
667
675
677
677
680
686
704
710
728
735
740
748
775
792
805
836
847
851
864
906
944
1004
1011
1127
1143
residual
50.2
Tare
.5min
1min
1.5min
2min
2.5min
12
357.2
368.5
367.6
367.1
366.9
366.7
11.3
10.4
9.9
9.7
9.5
0.08
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.9
0.5
0.2
0.2
8%
5%
2%
2%
30
368.3
390.5
390.1
389.6
389.3
389
33.3
32.9
32.4
32.1
31.8
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
1.3
1
0.5
0.5
1%
2%
1%
1%
50
355.2
367.6
365.6
363.5
363
362.8
10.4
8.4
6.3
5.8
5.6
0.19
0.25
0.08
0.03
3.3
3.1
1
0.7
19%
25%
8%
3%
Average Amount of Sample falling through sieves during each time interval
Average percent change in the amount of sample left on the Sieves during each time interval
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
.5-1.0min
1-1.5min
1.5-2.0min
2.0-2.5min
minutes
grams
Table 1. The ave amount of grain passing through each screen during each time interval
Sheet6
Microns Away from Standard
Sheet7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sheet3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
residual
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
residual
Increases particle surface area
Improved feed efficiency
Increased dustiness
Picture available at www.KsuSwine.org
Adjustment
K-STATE
“If your fingers don’t hurt, you’re not adjusting feeders enough.”
K-STATE
www.KsuSwine.org
Joel DeRouchey, PhD, Mike Tokach, PhD, Steve Dritz, DVM, PhD,
Bob Goodband, PhD, and Jim Nelssen, PhD
1
77.1
75.9
76.5
77.1
74
75
76
77
78
Paylean