Upload
palmer-luna
View
47
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Feed Price Update and Daily Feed Efficiency Drivers. Joel DeRouchey, Mike Tokach, Bob Goodband and Steve Dritz Kansas State University. www.KSUswine.org. Presentation Outline. Feed efficiency d rivers to reduce feed cost Feed processing advancements Ingredient and diet pricing - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Feed Price Update and Daily Feed Efficiency Drivers
Joel DeRouchey, Mike Tokach, Bob Goodband and Steve Dritz
Kansas State University
www.KSUswine.org
Presentation Outline
• Feed efficiency drivers to reduce feed cost• Feed processing advancements• Ingredient and diet pricing• Additional resources
Means to Reduce Feed Cost
• Improved F/G = more profit?– Does the best achieving F/G producers mean they
are the most profitable? – NO– Then is F/G tied to profitability? – YES, but is
complicated based on individual situations.
• Lowest cost diet = optimal return?– No, diet energy must be accounted for to assure
growth rate is not jeopardized for optimal marketing– Another complicated decision making process
Feed Efficiency
High feed disappearance
Low ADG Other factors
Genetics
Feed wastage
Temperature
Mortality
Feed delivery
Amino acid deficiency
Low Energy diets
Disease
Genetics
Feed availability
Water availability
Diet deficiency
Temperature
Particle size
Diet form
Low ADG Other factorsHigh feed disappearance
Feed Efficiency
Feeder Adjustment– Poor adjustment with pans greater than 60%
covered can increase feed wastage, especially in late finishing
– Old feeders with poor feeder design or inability to adjust will increase wastage
Meta-analysis results (15 experiments)Items Dry Wet-dry SEM P - valueInitial wt, lb 74.3 74.3 5.9 0.27Final wt, lb 228.6 235.9 13.8 <0.01
ADG, lb 1.92 2.01 0.046 <0.01ADFI, lb 5.09 5.36 0.223 <0.01F/G 2.59 2.59 0.10 0.93
Yield, % 75.8 75.6 0.26 0.57HCW, lb 201.7 208.1 2.1 <0.01BF, mm 16.7 18.1 0.23 <0.01Loin, mm 62.2 61.6 0.68 0.14Lean, % 51.4 50.8 0.85 <0.01
Water disappearance, L/pig/d 6.4 5.0 0.34 0.02
Nitikanchana et al., 2012
Same F/GSame F/G
Reduction in Lean Poor F/GPoor F/G
Reduction in lean
Dry 90.81 90.81 88.86 88.86
Wet-Dry 92.42 91.55 88.77 87.81
$/pig + 1.61 +0.74 - 0.09 -0.95
Feed cost = 306 $/ton, Carcass price = 0.88 $/lb, 1.5$/ %lean reduction
Wet-dry feeder economic analysis (IOFC, Income over feed cost)
Nitikanchana et al., 2012
Effective Temperature – If temperature is too low, pigs will increase their feed intake to
maintain body temperature. Because the feed is going towards heat needs and not growth, feed efficiency will become poorer.
0 20 40 60 80100
120140
160180
200220
240260
280300
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Upper Critical LimitLower Critical Limit
Body weight, lb
Effec
tive
tem
pera
ture
, oF
Thermoneutral Zone
Cold Stress
Heat Stress
Effective Temperature
Effect of environmental temperature on the performance of growing pigs (50 to 125 pounds)1
Item
Temperature, oF
50 72.5 95
ADG, lb 1.70 1.76 1.41
ADFI, lb 4.86 4.21 3.52
Feed/gain 2.91 2.41 2.52
1Summary of 3 experiments; Stahly and Cromwell, 1979, 1981.
Disease or Other Stress
– Disease problems that lower ADFI will greatly lower ADG. Mortality will increase F/G by about 0.015 for each 1% increase in mortality when spread across the finishing period.
– Stressors are additive• Reducing stress will improve F/G
600 micron corn 300 micron corn 300 micron diet1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.022.06
1.99
2.112.17
Meal Pellet
ADG
, lb
300 vs 600 microns P < 0.15Grind x form P < 0.001Grind P = 0.89; Form P < 0.001SEM = 0.018
Effect of particle size and diet form on finishing pig performance (d 0 to 111; BW 57 to 288 lb)
Particle size and portion ground
De Jong et al., 2012
600 micron corn 300 micron corn 300 micron diet2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
2.82
2.712.74
2.60 2.60
Meal Pellet
F/G
300 vs 600 microns P < 0.001Grind x form P = 0.37Grind P = 0.52; Form P < 0.001SEM = 0.03
Effect of particle size and diet form on finishing pig performance (d 0 to 111; BW 57 to 288 lb)
Particle size and portion ground
De Jong et al., 2012
600 micron corn 300 micron corn 300 micron diet$50
$55
$60
$65
$70
$53.27
$57.94
$53.96
$62.20$61.35
Meal Pellet
Inco
me
over
feed
cos
t, $/
pig
300 vs 600 microns P < 0.01Grind x form P = 0.15Grind P = 0.03; Form P < 0.001SEM = 1.143
Effect of particle size and diet form on finishing pig performance (d 0 to 111; BW 57 to 288 lb)
Particle size and portion ground
De Jong et al., 2012
800 600 4003.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Cabrera, 1994aCabrera, 1994bWondra, 1995
Effects of particle size on feed efficiencyF/
G
Particle size, microns
300
400
500
600
700
800 2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
Paulk, 2011
DeJong, 2012
1.2% per 100 microns 1.0% per 100 microns
Particle size, microns
Every 100 microns =
1. F/G improves by ~1.2%
2. 7 lbs less feed/finishing pig
3. Current $0.98/pig savings in feed cost
Grain Particle Size • F/G directly impacted by particle size of cereal grains• Research in high co-product diets:
– While corn in diet is decreased, finishing pigs still respond similarly to improved F/G with reduced corn particle size
– Whole diet grinding – not a benefit in meal diets– High fiber, low digestibly ingredients may be negatively affected
by particle size reduction.
• Takes more time/energy to grind cereals finer, however, less total tonnage is manufactured by the mill.
• Testing method impacts results: – Lab using a flow agent will report a value approximately 80 µ
lower then actual.
18
Pelleting on growth performance of grow-finish pigs 2005 to 2011
ReferenceMeal Pellet
ADG F/G ADG F/GGroesbeck et al. (2005) 0.83 1.25 0.90 1.22Groesbeck et al. (2005) 0.62 1.43 0.65 1.37Groesbeck et al.(2006) 0.80 1.25 0.78 1.17Potter et al. (2009) 1.95 2.12 2.05 2.07Potter et al. (2009) 1.92 2.83 2.04 2.68Myers et al. (2010) 1.81 2.76 1.94 2.82Potter et al. (2010) 1.92 2.86 2.03 2.70Frobose et al. (2011) 1.46 1.72 1.43 1.63Frobose et al. (2011) 1.29 1.51 1.38 1.40Myers et al. (2011) 1.96 2.73 1.97 2.67Paulk et al. (2011) 2.50 2.75 2.63 2.55Paulk et al. (2011) 2.31 2.50 2.44 2.40
Average 1.61 2.14 1.69 2.06
Average response = 5.0% for ADG and 4.0% for F/G
Meal Pellets Pellets with 30% fines
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.59
1.51
1.57
a
b
P < 0.05
Effects of pellet quality on F/Gin 30 to 70 lb pigs
F/G
a
Nemecheck et al. 2012
0.0% 15.0% 30.0% 45.0%1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
1.93
1.87 1.851.80
ADG
, lb
Linear P > 0.01SEM = 0.02
Effect of medium-oil DDGS on pig performance(d 0 to 67; BW 152 to 280 lb)
Medium-oil DDGS
Graham et al., 2012
7.4% fat, 28.1% CP, 10.8% ADF, 25.6% NDF
0.0% 15.0% 30.0% 45.0%2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.133.19 3.20
3.26
F/G
Linear P > 0.02SEM = 0.04
Effect of medium oil DDGS on pig performance(d 0 to 67; BW 152 to 280 lb)
Medium-oil DDGS (7.4% oil)
Graham et al., 2012
0.0% 15.0% 30.0% 45.0%70
71
72
73
74
75
74.0
73.2
72.471.8
Yiel
d, %
Linear P > 0.02SEM = 0.04
Effect of medium oil DDGS on pig performance(d 0 to 67; BW 152 to 280 lb)
Medium-oil DDGS (7.4% oil)
Graham et al., 2012
0.0% 15.0% 30.0% 45.0%65
68
71
74
77
80
70.271.1
73.7
76.3
Jow
l fat
iodi
ne v
alue
, mg/
g
Linear P > 0.02SEM = 0.04
Effect of medium oil DDGS on pig performance(d 0 to 67; BW 152 to 280 lb)
Medium-oil DDGS (7.4% oil)
Graham et al., 2012
Corn DDGS quality control• Variability in DDGS quality
– Main issue is fat level Fat, % NE, %• Low = < 5% fat 4.0 80.0%• Medium = 6 to 9% fat 7.5 87.5%• High = > 9% fat 11.0
95.0%
– Need to monitor DDGS quality or work with company that monitors DDGS quality
– Ethanol plants guarantee often underestimate the true oil content – guarantee 6% but really 9%
Predicted Digestible and Net Energy of DDGS
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 131500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
f(x) = 62.3470000000001 x + 3058.132
f(x) = 115.011 x + 1501.013
Net EnergyDigestible Energy
Oil, %
Ener
gy, K
cal/
kg
Historical Ingredient PricesJune 2009
June 2010
June 2011
June 2012
June 2013
Corn, $/bu $4.00 $3.20 $7.25 $6.00 $7.30
SBM, $/ton $395 $285 $350 $400 $474
DDGS, $/ton $150 $120 $200 $240 $220
CWG, $/cwt $27 $33 $50 $46 $42
Dical, $/cwt $23 $26 $28 $33 $27
L-lysine, $/cwt $70 $110 $120 $113 $83
~cost/finishing pig $64 $57 $90 $87 $97
Example Diets with Alternatives• Phase = 125 – 170 lb of body weight• Corn = $7.30/bu ($260/ton)• SBM, 46.5% = $474/ton• DDGS (7.5% Fat) = $220/ton• Wheat midds = $212/ton• Meat and Bone = $550/ton• Moncal P, 21% = $540/ton• L-Lysine = $0.83/lb
Higher Meat & Wheat DDGS & Ingredient Corn/soy AA bone DDGS midds midds Corn 1537 1573 1569 1121 1303 830 SBM, 46.5% 417 377 314 235 247 124 Meat & bone meal 100 DDGS, 7.5% fat 600 600 Wheat middlings 400 400 Lysine HCl 3 5.4 3.9 6.4 6.7 7.9 DL-Methionine 0.25 0.3 L-Threonine 1.2 0.6 1.5 Monocal P, 21% P 16 16 2 10 Limestone 15 15.5 23.5 20 26 VTM & Salt 12 12 12 12 12 12
SID Lys:ME, g/Mcal 2.52 2.52 2.5 2.52 2.52 2.52 SID Lys 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.81 SID Met & cys:lys 60 58 58 72 58 73 SID Thr:lys 62 62 63 66 62 63 SID Trp:lys 19.1 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 ME, kcal/lb 1,515 1,516 1,513 1,481 1,482 1,446 CP, % 16.4 15.3 16.8 18.7 14.8 18.1 Available P, % 0.23 0.23 0.28 0.23 0.23 0.27
Higher Meat & Wheat DDGS & Ingredient Corn/soy AA bone DDGS midds midds Corn 1537 1573 1569 1121 1303 830 SBM, 46.5% 417 377 314 235 247 124 Meat & bone meal 100 DDGS, 7.5% fat 600 600 Wheat middlings 400 400 Lysine HCl 3 5.4 3.9 6.4 6.7 7.9 DL-Methionine 0.25 0.3 L-Threonine 1.2 0.6 1.5 Monocal P, 21% P 16 16 2 10 Limestone 15 15.5 23.5 20 26 VTM & Salt 12 12 12 12 12 12
Diet w/ processing $322.00 $318.00 $326.28 $289.88 $297.52 $268.79
Budget, lb/pig 120.0 120.0 120.2 122.8 122.7 125.8
Feed cost, $/pig $19.32 $19.08 $19.61 $17.80 $18.25 $16.91
F/G 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.73 2.73 2.80
Effect of DDGS (0, 15, 30%) and Midds (0, 9.5, 19%) on pig performance (90 to 270 lb)
Series1189
191
193
195
197
194.3
195.8
193.7
195.5
193.5
191.4
Carc
ass
wei
ght,
lb
d 0 to 43: Low High High High High Highd 43 to 67: Low Low Med High High Highd 67 to 90: Low Low Med Low Med High
Asmus et al., 2011
Duration P > 0.38SEM 2.54
K-State Web Resourceswww.ksuswine.org
• DDGS Calculator• Synthetic Amino Acid Calculator• Fat Analysis Calculator• Feed Budget Calculator• Feeder Adjustment Cards• Particle Size Information• Marketing Calculators• Gestation Feeding Tools
32
35Newly Developed F/G Factsheets• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25a: Not Always Linked to Net Income• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25b: Genetic Impact• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25c: Particle Size Testing Methodology• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25d: Influence of Particle Size• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25e: Influence of Pelleting• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25f: Influence of Temperature• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25g: Decision Tree• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC25h: Influence of Market Weight• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25i: Effect of Dietary Energy • Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25j: Influence of Ractopamine• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25k: Feeder Design and Management• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25l: Influence of Amino Acids• Swine Feed Efficiency, IPIC 25m: Sow Feed on Whole Farm Efficiency
www.swinefeedefficiency.com