Texas Creek Farms Buster Products in Beef Animals
The use of RANGE BUSTER for beef animals will result in better digestion of feedstuffs and better gains and higher efficiencies. There are two products available for beef cattle, RANGE BUSTER 75-150 and RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX. The recommended product depends on the ration being fed.
The RANGE BUSTER 75-150 product will work on any feeding regime, however it is more cost effective when used on rations where NDF content of the total ration is less than 35%. This in general will include grazing on wheat or ryegrass pastures or when grains or grain products make up 50% or greater of the total daily intake.
The RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX product is specially designed for high forage diets, especially when the forage quality is less than desirable. This additive does not replace your other energy and protein supplements, but it increases their effectiveness. This product has been effectively fed in range meals and molasses tubs. We are currently working on mineral addition formulas and liquid feeds.
RECOMMENDED USE LEVEL OF RANGE BUSTER 75-150
Normal Daily Recommended Intake Levels:
Growing Animals on Improved Pastures:
Feedlot Animals on Full Feed:
RECOMMENDED USE LEVEL OF RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX
Normal Daily Recommended Intake Levels:
Growing Animals on Hay or Dormant Pastures:
Cows on Grass Hay; Dormant Pastures; Corn Stubble; Wheat, Sorghum or Oat Hay; or other low digestible forage:
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY STUDY
Continuous culture of Rumen Contents Measuring the Effect of Range Buster to Molasses Blocks and the Resulting Improvement on Digestion of Coastal Bermuda Grass Hay
RESULTS with some EXTRAPOLATION
Digestion coefficients are shown in Table 3. Compared to the control, Range Buster significantly (P<.02) increased digestion of dry matter (DM) and tended (P<.20) to increase digestion of organic matter, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and total g of carbohydrate digested/day. No differences were seen in digestion of protein or non-structural carbohydrate.
| TABLE 3. Digestion Coefficients for Dry and Organic Matter, Crude Protein, Fiber and Nonstructural Carbohydrates | |||||
| Item | Treatment | P= | |||
| Control | RB | ||||
| Digestion, % | |||||
| Dry Matter | 57.7 | 66.6 | 0.018 | ||
| Organic Matter | 68.4 | 74.3 | 0.140 | ||
| Crude Protein | 72.7 | 71.5 | 0.775 | ||
| NDF | 69.0 | 73.3 | 0.195 | ||
| ADF | 73.1 | 77.5 | 0.170 | ||
| NSC1 | 81.9 | 82.4 | 0.819 | ||
| Total Carbohydrate2, g/d | 11.2 | 11.8 | 0.146 | ||
| 1Nonstructural Carbohydrate, includes WSC and starch. | |||||
| 2g NDF + g Nonstructural carbohydrate digested per day. | |||||
Range Buster treated ration improved the Dry Matter Digestion 15.4% over control. There was an actual increase in the Dry Matter Digestion rate of 8.9%, 57.7% for control and 66.6% for treated ration.
The expected benefit of this would be:
8 Kg DM theoretical feed intake per day X .577 = 4.616 Kg Dry Matter Digested per day by the control animals.
8 Kg DM theoretical feed intake per day X .666 = 5.328 Kg Dry Matter Digested per day by the treated animals.
This is a difference of: 5.328 Kg – 4.616 Kg = 0.712 Kg increased Dry Matter Digested per day by the treated animals. Since the quality of forage is often the limiting factor for intake, this increase in forage digestibility would likely result in an increase of the Dry Matter intake by an equal amount. Assuming an equal digestibility of the increased intake we would expect an increase in total Dry Matter Digested per day by the treated animals to be:
0.712 Kg per day increased intake X 0.666 = 0.474 Kg extra from the increased intake + 0.712 Kg increase from the increased digestion rate = a total increase per head per day of 1.186 Kg Dry Matter Digested for the treated group. This is an expected increase of 25.7% of Dry Matter Digested by the treated group over the control group in a free choice forage situation. (1.186/4.616 = 25.7%)
CENTRAL TEXAS FEEDING TRIAL
RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the addition of RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX to molasses tubs on the digestion of fiber and the performance of the cattle in comparison to feeding an isonitrogenous molasses tub to a control group without the RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX. Body condition scores and pregnancy rates will be assessed in the trial, as well as visual and laboratory examination of the manure.
INTRODUCTION: In a previous field trial, RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX fed in molasses tubs had been shown to increase body condition of cows and increase weaning weight of calves when compared to feeding 20% range cubes three times a week. Other trials had resulted in increased body condition and apparent increased digestibility of Bermuda grass hay when RANGE BUSTER BEEF PREMIX was fed in either a range meal or a molasses tub.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 80 multiparous cows were divided into 2 groups of similar age, size and body condition. They were kept in adjoining pastures with little grazing left. The cows were supplemented with free choice molasses blocks starting November 19th, 2009 and hay on December 1, 2009. The hay being fed was Coastal Bermuda grass from one cutting of one field. The molasses tubs were isonitrogenous and the same except for the addition of the Range Buster Range Beef Premix at the rate of 66 pounds per ton. To ensure there were no batch differences, one half of the batch was poured off and then the Range Buster Beef Premix was added to the rest of the batch, mixed and poured.
On December 18th samples were taken from droppings of 11 treatment cows and 11 control cows. Pictures were taken of the manure, and 100 gram samples were weighed out and washed through a screen. The fiber remaining on the screen had the moisture expressed out of it and was reweighed. There was 30.25% less fiber remaining on the screen following the wash in the treatment group compared to the control group.
On January 4th, 2010 samples were taken from freshly dropped manure piles. Six control cows and six treatment cows were sampled. Twelve hay bales were core sampled. The moisture percent of the manure samples for the two groups was identical. This is surprising considering the much softer appearance of the manure from the treated animals.
Lignin was used as an internal marker. Using fecal lignin compared to hay lignin the proportional amount of ADF and NDF disappearing was ascertained. The treatment group had 21.4 % ADF and 9.6% more NDF disappear than the control group. This is interpreted as an improvement in digestibility of 9.6%.
RESULTS:
| CONTROL SAMPLE # | GRAMS OF FIBER REMAINING FOLLOWING WASH AND EXPRESSING OF WATER | TREATMENT SAMPLE # | GRAMS OF FIBER REMAINING FOLLOWING WASH AND EXPRESSING OF WATER |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 52 | T1 | 35 | |
| C2 | 52 | T2 | 36 | |
| C3 | 55 | T3 | 42 | |
| C4 | 40 | T4 | 35 | |
C5 |
43 | T5 | 24 | |
| C6 | 45 | T6 | 35 | |
| C7 | 40 | T7 | 31 | |
| C8 | 45 | T8 | 30 | |
| C9 | 47 | T9 | 34 | |
| C10 | 43 | T10 | 36 | |
| C11 | 48 | T11 | 39 | |
| 510 | 376 | |||
| AVERAGE | 46.36 | AVERAGE | 34.18 |
510+376=886/22=40.27
46.36-34.18=12.18
12.18/40.27=30.25 % REDUCTION OF FIBER IN MANURE AS DROPPED
FECAL RESIDUES CONSIST OF UNDIGESTED FEED AND METABOLIC MATTER
Van Soest
Laboratory Testing of Range Buster Beef Premix Trial:
| SAMPLE ID | CRUDE PROTEIN | ADF % | NDF% | LIGNIN% | MOISTURE | HEMICELLULOSE | CELLULOSE |
| HAY/FEED | 8.688 | 41.343 | 76.943 | 8.054 | 35.6 | 33.289 | |
| CONTROL MANURE |
8.62 | 48.088 | 74.183 | 14.698 | 78.548 | 26.095 | 33.39 |
| CONTROL NUTRIENT DISAPPEARANCE | 36.26 | 47.17 | 59.7 | 45.03 | |||
| TREATMENT MANURE |
8.927 | 44.69 | 71.787 | 15.555 | 78.667 | 27.097 | 29.135 |
TREATMENT NUTRIENT DISAPPEARANCE |
44.03 | 51.69 | 60.6 | 54.68 | |||
| % IMPROVEMENT | 21.4 | 9.6 | 1.51 | 21.4 |
Mean Levels of Nutrients Found in Manure
| TREATMENT | |||
| ITEM | CONTROL | F B | P = |
| CRUDE PROTEIN % | 8.62 |
8.92 |
.4112 |
| ADF % | 48.088 |
44.690 |
.0002 |
NDF % |
74.183 |
71.787 |
.0437 |
| LIGNIN % | 14.698 |
15.555 |
.2427 |
| LIGNIN % OF NDF | 19.830 |
21.713 |
.1292 |
| TDN % | 58.327 |
59.960 |
.0002 |
| NEL | 59.263 |
61.245 |
.0005 |
| MOISTURE | 78.548 |
78.667 |
.9067 |
