Article originally appeared in “On the Wing”, a monthly e-mail newsletter by Pheasants Forever

Maybe you’ve done Field Trials & Hunt Tests before, maybe not. As a beginner you’ll make mistakes and not remember everything that you’re supposed to do. The more prepared you and your dog are before you get to the event, the better off you’ll be. To help you along the way, I’ve put together a short list of key factors in performing well in dog competitions. 

Make A Good Impression

What makes the best dog? Different judges look for different things. No matter how good your dog is, not all judges will like it. Here is a short list of things that will make a positive impression on most judges in flushing events.  

1. Strong Finds – Fast, positive finds will get a judge to overlook minor faults in other areas. The instant your dog smells a bird, preferably from far away, he should try to get to it as fast as possible. A positive find is much more important then a positive flush.
2. Effective Pattern – Using the wind to cover the course is much more effective than simply running from gun to gun. As often as possible, your dog should be running perpendicular to the wind and always smelling fresh ground.
3. Showing Control – Your dog should be able to run with only an occasional whistle. Lots of loud whistles annoy many judges. One or two reminder whistles is okay, but the quieter the run the better.  

These three points are really one main point: Working properly, under control to get fast, hard finds from a good distance is the recipe for success.

Avoid Trouble

You want your dog to have a clean run with few issues for a judge to ponder.  Never make a judge think! The following tips are the obvious things to avoid in order to stay out of trouble. 

1. Hard Mouth – Very few judges will tolerate dead birds. Injury is always a possibility with a powerful flushing dog and sometimes a wing or a rib is broken. If it happens often, though, judges will take note of it.
2. Excessive Noise – Your dog should be quiet and not whimper or whine while waiting. He should also be patient and not bark at missed birds or yip when sent on a retrieve.
3. Sloppy Delivery – You shouldn’t be wrestling with your dog to get the bird and he shouldn’t be trying to grab it from the judge’s hand. The dog should come in, give you the bird, and wait for the next command.

Most people are amazed, when they start competing with their dogs, at how many things can go wrong. You need to remember that Field Trials & Hunt Tests are just games we play with our dogs. There are rules to each game that must be followed to achieve success,  but the primary objective always is to be enjoying yourself and your dog. When you have a bad day, just take it in stride and come back the next weekend and show them how good your dog really is.

To learn more about Jason’s training methods, visit www.lighthousekennels.com.

Article originally appeared in “On the Wing”, a monthly e-mail newsletter by Pheasants Forever

It Works For People

For years, business people have used pagers to maintain effective communication while out of the office. Through sound or vibration, a pager has proven an effective way of letting them know when someone needs to communicate with them. In the dog world, many brands of electronic collars have recently begun to feature a “page”, or vibration, function that can be selectively used by the trainer. At the press of a button, the box on the collar will vibrate, rather than producing the more traditional stimulation. Why not make use of this new technology to improve communication with your dog? 

Send A Subtle Message

Most collar manufacturers suggest using this vibration as a warning signal that your dog is about to be stimulated unless it responds to your command. We’ve found that the more warnings a dog gets, the less consistently they comply with our commands. Rather than using the pager feature as a warning tone, we recommend using the pager function as a silent and easy way to bring your dog in closer. The pager function is a great way to send your dog a reminder that he needs to check in with you. 

As a team, it is important that you have a way to communicate with your dog that he is getting out of gun range. Sending a silent message through vibration is much quieter than a voice or whistle command, so you will be less likely to spook wary birds. This is particularly useful if you have a hard running dog that may have a tendency to get outside gun range. 

Pager Training

Teaching your dog to understand the message you are sending is fairly simple. Start out by just taking your dog for a walk and let him hunt, or just walk, out in front of you. When your dog starts to get out of your comfortable gun range, turn and change direction, and push the pager button. The dog will turn around and see that you are going a different way, and should start to follow you. 

If necessary, we encourage the use of voice commands or a soft whistle early on to let your dog know that you want him to stay with you. After a while, you shouldn’t need the voice or whistle, and you can use the traditional stimulation to back up the pager if necessary. Ultimately, we have found that most dogs will begin to understand pager conditioning pretty quickly and provide you with one more effective tool in communicating with your dog in the field.

To learn more about Chad and Jodi’s training methods, visit www.willowcreekkennels.net.

Article originally appeared in “On the Wing”, a monthly e-mail newsletter by Pheasants Forever

While on a radio show, I was told of young pointing dog that was taken out to hunt his first birds, the owner relying on an e-collar (electronic collar) to help keep the dog close.  The dog hit the open field and was gone.  The owner called the dog and pressed the transmitter button to no avail. Their day of “hunting” came to a close with only one find…the dog 4 hours later. Many unsuccessful e-collar stories take on a similar theme and often the collar or dog is blamed for the failure.  As owners and trainers we must understand that our equipment is only as effective as the operator and the training.   

Understanding The Tool

It is important to understand that an e-collar itself is not the answer. Knowing how to use it properly is what creates success.  Simply pressing a button does not install “Microsoft dog”.  That would be like suggesting that buying the best shotgun on the market would make a person a skilled hunter and crack shot.  The tool can be VERY effective, but the METHOD, KNOWLEDGE and SKILL of the user are what create success or failure. 

Making Your Dog Collar Literate

We start all of our dogs’ e-collar training away from the field.  With dogs as young as 6 months, we build a foundation; teaching the dog to understand the language of the “stimulation”.  Stimulation is used to get the dog’s attention and also to teach the command with which it is applied.  The dog must learn that performance of the command stops the stim, which “marks” the correct behavior or response.  

Introduction to the e-collar begins with finding the right level of intensity to get the dog’s attention. With the dog on a long line, we allow them to move away from us and tap, tap, tap on the nick button until the dog turns and begins to move toward us.  We may say nothing initially to allow the dog to focus without the interference of verbal associations, but we eventually add the command “here” or “come” to give the behavioral response a name.  As the dog learns, the number of taps should decrease while confidence and consistency increase. 

Understanding The Dog’s Response

It is important that you understand that the stim is an unknown when introduced and dogs can respond many different ways to the new sensation. Some turn and come immediately, some lie down and others may even freeze. This occurs due to confusion and to get through this you must assist the dog in performing the expected behavior while still applying the stim until the dog is correct. Remember, this can also happen with a dog that knows a command but is not e-collar “literate”. Many people make the mistake of assuming their dog should know the way to respond to the stim and instead of assisting and teaching the dog the correct response they either stop the stim (marking the incorrect behavior) or adjust the stim thinking this will motivate the dog to respond. It is important that you recognize that the e-collar is a communication tool and using it incorrectly or inconsistently is no different than speaking on a cell phone with bad reception….its confusing, annoying and the message is usually not conveyed effectively.  

Taking It To The Next Level

Understanding and applying this method to all commands with consistency will produce a top performing dog in the field and in the home. These are just a few of the basics and by no means all that goes into introducing the e-collar to your dog. The next time you pull an e-collar from your training bag, consider whether you are using it to train your dog or just control and correct him.  Making the most of that e-collar will help make your dog successful provided you use it to its potential and employ sound training methods. It is the knowledge, skill and ability in using an e-collar skillfully that creates great hunters, champions and even the best companions.

To learn more about Native Pro Staffer Sue Barnes, visit www.mytdog.org.

Article originally appeared in “On the Wing”, a monthly e-mail newsletter by Pheasants Forever

Train To Your Expectations
There are many schools of thought regarding the best methods for training a finished retriever. The extent and style of training will often depend on the activities you plan to perform with your dog. For example, your standards of acceptable training may be very different if you plan to do a lot of Hunt Tests or Field Trials versus an effective dog for recreational hunting. We tailor our training to the individual needs of the dog owner.

Most retrievers from good hunting lines will show natural tendencies to hold, carry and retrieve objects in their mouths. Some pups will retrieve directly to your hand with very little or no training. Others will drop things on the ground or just run around playing keep-away. Our goal is to develop a finished bird dog that consistently delivers birds to heel and hand. In order to achieve consistent delivery, force/hold and force-fetching a puppy is ideal around 6 months of age or whenever his adult teeth have come in.

Basics Don’t Change
Whether for hunting or competition, there are some basic “Do’s & Don’ts” for retrieve training that are fairly constant. These are essential to build the foundation for a well conditioned bird dog that consistently retrieves to your expectations.

Basic Do’s & Don’ts
1) When the pup gets to the point it is no longer returning to you with an object, put a check cord on the pup so they are forced to return to you.
2) Praise your pup when he returns to you and while he is still holding the object in his mouth. Do not remove the object immediately, let him hold it and praise him.
3) Watch the corrections you give when retrieving. Higher drive pups can be corrected more while with a lower desire retrieving pup you may need to do less correcting.
4) Start by throwing retrieves in confined areas. This helps limit distractions and encourages direct returns. A hallway works great for doing this.
5) Avoid training sessions being too long. Keep them fun and make them successful.
6) Introduce your pup to birds and feathers as young as possible. Getting a puppy into water at a young age is always a great idea as well.

Right From The Start
If possible, it is much better to avoid undesirable behavior from the start since it is much easier to learn proper behavior when you don’t have to unlearn improper behavior first. From a very early age, it is essential to consistently reinforce the behavior you want. If the pup is picking things up and carrying them, use encouragement to get him to bring it to you. When he brings it to you, praise him and let him enjoy the prize with you. The most important thing is to start your pup off right by making it fun to retrieve the right way every time.

To learn more about Todd’s training methods, visit www.arrowheadkennels.net.

Water quality is becoming a greater issue for dairy producers as they continue to grow and put additional stress on their water resources.  Water quality within a water source is not necessarily a constant over time.  Pulling additional water from a well, weather patterns and fertilizer application are all items that can influence water quality within a well.  Some producers have found that managing water quality is better left to local municipalities and have started purchasing water for their cattle rather than pulling water from a private well.  For producers using a private well, a water quality control program should be in place.

It is difficult to establish a water quality program and determine it’s effectiveness if you do not establish a way to measure water intake.  This can be done relatively easily with in-line water meters that measure only the water supplied for drinking.  Measurements should be taken for at least 7 to 10 days to account for day-to-day variation.  Once water intake is established, it should be compared with expected intake and factors limiting intake evaluated.  Keep in mind that there are many factors other than water quality that can limit intake.  Although these are not the focus of this Nutrition Note, some factors include cleanliness of water tanks, water supply (gallons delivered per minute), stray voltage and water space/accessibility.

Cows can display several signs of inadequate water intake including:

1. Sudden drop in milk production (if the factor limiting water intake occurs suddenly).  Problems that arise slowly over time do not cause this sudden drop; therefore, you do not need to see this symptom to have a water quality issue.
2. Infrequent drinking.
3. Firm manure.
4. Low urine output.
5. Drinking urine.
6. High blood packed cell volume (PCV) – over 38% average PCV in a group of cows.  This is an indicator of dehydration.

Water analysis and evaluation can become quite complex.  There are many elements that can be tested for in water (e.g., total dissolved solids (TDS), sodium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, sulfates, nitrates, iron, manganese, copper, hardness, total coliforms, arsenic, barium, cadmium, cobalt, lead, mercury, aluminum, fluorine, & pesticides).  However, an initial water analysis does not need to be this complicated and should focus on a few key components that are the most common factors causing decreased water quality. 

Many certified water testing laboratories offer a “livestock suitability” package that includes TDS, sodium, calcium, magnesium, chloride sulfate, nitrate, iron, manganese, copper and hardness.  The key components to monitor routinely will be addressed below:

1. Total Dissolved Solids (TDS):  This is a measure of the sum of all the inorganic material that is in the solution within the water.  High TDS does not always indicate the water is not suitable for livestock.  There are some solids (i.e., calcium and magnesium) that can be high in the water without detrimental effects on livestock.  Target levels for TDS are 500 – 1000 ppm.
2. Hardness:  This is a measure of the amount of calcium and magnesium dissolved in the water.  Hard water is often a problem when cleaning milking equipment, but it does not appear to impact performance in dairy cattle.
3. Sulfate:  High sulfate levels will cause decreased water intake and decreased milk production.  Also, because sulfur is an anion, high levels will reduce overall cation-anion difference.  This will have a negative impact, particularly in fresh cows, resulting in increased metabolic disease.  Target levels for sulfate are 250 – 500 ppm.  A thumb of rule for anions in the water is to keep the sulfate + chloride concentration below 1000 ppm.
4. Chloride:  See sulfate (above).  Target levels of chloride are 250 – 500 ppm.
5. Iron:  Importance is secondary only to sulfate and chloride.  It causes reduced water palatability and promotes growth of black slime in water tanks (this is the result of bacterial growth).  Iron in water is nearly 100% available to the animal (iron in feed is generally only about 10% available).  High iron can bind copper and zinc, making them unavailable to the animal.  Once absorbed, high iron levels promote free radical production, decreased immunity and increases the incidence of infection, particularly in fresh cows.  Target levels for iron are 0.3 ppm or less.
6. Manganese:  It causes off flavor and decreased water intake.  Target levels for manganese are 0.05 ppm or less.
7. Nitrate:  The most common source of nitrate in water is fertilizer run-off.  High nitrates do not appear to impact milk production, but decreased reproductive performance has been reported.  Target levels for nitrate nitrogen are 20 to 25 ppm or less.
8. Copper:  High copper levels in water can cause liver damage.  Target levels for copper are 0.3 ppm or less.

Water quality at a dairy farm is a dynamic component of the operation, much in the same way as forage quality.  To monitor and manage this, water samples should be analyzed quarterly and kept as part of the herd record.  When water quality is identified as a limiting factor, there are many options to help “clean” the water (e.g., carbon filtration, air stripping, chlorination, distillation, cation-anion exchange, filtration, reverse osmosis).  These are all generally quite expensive.  Before considering these options, a reputable supplier should be identified who will guarantee that their system will remove the unwanted components from the water (as measured by an independent laboratory).  Maintenance cost should also be considered.  Finally, the return on investment should be estimated before spending large sums of money to manipulate water quality.

Kent Kafnurs® Gold is a premium milk replacer containing milk and animal (bovine) plasma protein (16% crude protein from milk protein and 4% crude protein from bovine plasma).  The primary benefits of Kent Kafnurs Gold are better performance under stress conditions and a slight cost savings compared to an all-milk protein milk replacer.  The benefits of bovine plasma protein in calf milk replacers are most often observed in stressed calves and calves facing a greater pathogen load and include increased gains, fewer scour days, better fecal scores, less dehydration, and reduced mortality.

Bovine plasma is a concentrated source of protein obtained by removing the red and white blood cells from fresh whole blood.  The bovine plasma used in Kent Kafnurs Gold is NutraPro^TM (American Proteins Corporation).  It is a straw colored, freely flowable, soluble powder that is properly processed to retain plasma biological functions.  The proteins (e.g., tansferrin, loctoferrin, immunoglobulins and others) in plasma have been shown to inhibit bacterial growth, reduce the severity of diarrhea and improve overall animal performance.

Although the specific interactions of bovine plasma protein in calves are uncertain there are two apparent benefits.  First, some of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) in the plasma escapes gastric and intestinal degradation and remains in the digestive tract to help fight bugs such as salmonella, corona virus and E. coli.  Second, use of plasma protein in pig prestarter diets has indicated the plasma promotes intestinal growth resulting in improved digestion and overall animal growth (animal plasma protein has been used in baby pig diets for years to improve performance).

Tests with calves that are not stressed generally indicate bovine plasma protein is well utilized by the calf (similar to all-milk protein).  The responses vary from similar performance (similar gains, fecal scores, scouring, and mortality) to improved performance compared to a standard whey protein based milk replacer.  In addition to being an excellent quality protein that is highly digestible with excellent amino acid profile, bovine plasma also provides immunoglobulin and other beneficial (functional) factors.

An early research study (Morrill et al, 1995) with 40 calves per treatment indicated improved performance in calves receiving bovine plasma in milk replacer compared to a 20/20 all-milk protein milk replacer:

• 4.2 lb more body weight gains by 6 weeks of age…the difference in gains occurred after 3 weeks of age.
• 5 lb more starter intake by the end of 6 weeks.
• Fecal scores did not differ.
• Mortality was similar (2 deaths in control and 3 deaths in bovine plasma group).

A 2002 study (Quigley et al, 2002) was conducted with barn sale calves that blood IgG test indicated the majority had not received an adequate colostrial feeding.  The results indicated calves on a 20/20 milk replacer containing bovine plasma protein had:

• 4.9 lb more body weight gains by 56 days.
• Less mortality, no mortality in plasma fed calves versus 3.3% mortality on all-milk fed calves.
• A 25% reduction in number of day calves had diarrhea.

A more recent study (Quigley et al, 2003) with barn sale calves (blood test indicated that the majority had received adequate colostrum) indicated calves on a 20/20 milk replacer containing bovine plasma protein had:

• 3.0 lb more body weight gains by 42 days.
• 7.5% mortality in plasma fed calves versus 25% mortality on all-milk fed calves.
• A 30% reduction in the number of day calves had diarrhea.

Reduction in mortality has been observed in at least seven reported studies where a standard milk replacer was compared to one containing bovine plasma:

Table 1

Effect of Bovine Plasma on Mortality

A trial reported in 2000 (Quigley et al) looked at challenging calves with E. coli.  Calves were fed one of three 20/20 all-milk protein milk replacers (unmedicated; medicated with 400/800NT; or unmedicated with bovine plasma).  At 3 days of age calves were challenged with E. coli and observed for the next three weeks.  Results were as follows:

Table 2

Effect of E. Coli Challenge During 3-Week Observation

The use of bovine plasma protein has been exempt from the government ban on use of ruminant products associated with the BSE concerns.  Bovine plasma products carry little or no risk to cattle due the aseptic environment in which blood is collected from slaughter facilities (at slaughter the blood does not come in contact with the brains of the animal-thought to be the source of BSE transmissions).

Kent Kafnurs Gold looks and mixes well (very similar to Milk Formula™ 1).  Kafnurs Gold should be mixed in 110-120 degree water and fed soon after mixing to avoid possible coagulation of the bovine plasma protein.

Kent Kafnurs Gold is a premium quality milk replacer providing highly digestive sources of protein with additional nutritional factors that can assist with raising health calves.

References:

Morrill et al. 1995.  Journal of Dairy Science. 78:902-907.

Quigley et al. 2003.  Journal of Daily Science.  86:586-592.

Quigley et al. 2000.  Food and Agricultural Immunology.  12:311-318.

Quigley et al. 2002.  Journal of Dairy Science.  85:413-421.

Sulfur Toxicity in Feedlot Cattle

By John J. Wagner, Ph.D.
Professor & General Manager, Southeast Colorado Research Center
Colorado State University, Lamar, Colorado

The Need for Sulfur:

Sulfur is an important component of many functions in the body and is an essential nutrient for beef cattle.  It is an important part of the amino acids methionine, cysteine, and cystine.  The B-vitamins thiamine and biotin also contain sulfur.  Rumen microbes require sulfur for their normal growth and metabolism.  A large portion of the sulfur found in typical feedlot diets is a component of the natural protein and most practical diets are adequate in sulfur.  However, feeding diets high in non-protein nitrogen or high in rumen undegradable intake protein may reduce the amount of sulfur available for rumen microorganisms, thus increasing the need of supplemental sulfur.  The requirement for sulfur (National Research Council) is 0.15% of diet dry matter and maximum tolerable level is listed as 0.40% of diet dry matter (NRC, 1996).

Sources of Sulfur:

Total sulfur intake from all feed and water sources must be considered when evaluating nutritional programs for sulfur adequacy or excess.  Typical diet components for feedlot cattle (including corn, alfalfa hay, and corn silage) contain relatively low to moderate concentrations of sulfur.  Under most circumstances, typical combinations of these feeds generally used for cattle pose little or no danger for sulfur toxicity.  Several feeds, especially co-products from grain milling (wet or dry) industries may be high in sulfur.  As these products are included in the diet, sulfur concentration generally increases, resulting in a rise in the risk of sulfur toxicity.

Sulfur concentrations in water can vary tremendously.  In 1999, the National Animal Health Monitoring System conducted a study of feedlots with greater than 1,000 head capacity (NAHMS 2000).  Two–hundred and sixty-three feedlots from 10 states supplied water samples for analysis.  Approximately 77% of the samples contained less than 300 ppm sulfate, 15% of the samples contained 300 to 999 ppm sulfate, and 8% of the samples registered greater than 1,000 ppm sulfate.  If a feedlot steer consumes approximately 10 gallons of water daily, sulfate intake from water is 4, 40 and 120 g per day if the water contained 100, 1,000, or 3,000 ppm sulfate.  Sulfate is approximately one-third sulfur.  Therefore, sulfur intake from water by the steer would be 1.3, 13.0, 40 g per head daily, respectively.  If the steer was consuming 19.8 lb. of dry matter daily that contained 0.12% sulfur, total sulfur intake expressed as a percent of dietary dry matter intake would be 0.13, 0.26 or 0.56%, respectively.  It is highly likely that the steer consuming 3,000 ppm sulfate would experience some degree of sulfur toxicity.  At 100 or 1,000 ppm the likelihood of sulfur toxicity is reduced considering the base diet was assumed to contain 0.12% sulfur.  However, if the base diet contained 30% wet distillers grains on a dry matter basis, and if the distillers grains contained 0.60% sulfur, an additional 0.14% [(0.60 – 0.13) x 0.30] sulfur would be added to the diet.  In this instance, the steer consuming 1,000 ppm sulfate water is now at risk of developing sulfur toxicity.  Early in the growth of the ethanol industry, several feedlots that had successfully used marginal quality water (or about 1,000 ppm sulfate) for many years started to experience sulfur problems only after the addition of distillers grains in the diet.

Manifestation of Sulfur Toxicity:

Elemental sulfur is considered one of the least toxic minerals; however, hydrogen sulfide, a product of sulfate metabolism in the rumen, is as toxic as cyanide (NRC, 2000).  The manifestation of sulfur toxicity in feedlot cattle is often a condition called polioencephalomalacia (PEM), which is characterized by necrosis of the cerebral cortex.  Symptoms of the condition include blindness, poor coordination, lethargy, and seizures.  Very often affected cattle are observed standing in the corner of the pen like a saw horse with all four feet spread to the extreme corners of their body.  Pen riders, doctors, and other feedlot personnel often refer to cattle exhibiting these signs as “brainers.”  This colorful name is appropriate when one considers that PEM literally means softening (malacia) of the gray matter (polio) of the brain (encephalo).

A number of research findings have linked PEM outbreaks to thiamin status, including a reduction in the activity of a thiamin diphosphate dependent enzyme (transketolase) in blood and an increase in the levels of thiaminases in the gastrointestinal tract.  PEM has been induced by feeding thiamin antagonists.  Researchers have demonstrated that calves recover from early symptoms of PEM if high doses of thiamin are administered.  The large body of evidence that associates PEM with thiamin status has led to the often erroneous assumption that outbreaks of PEM are the result of altered thiamin status and intravenous thiamin administration is often automatically used to treat cattle with PEM.  The addition of 100 to 200 mg of thiamin per head daily is often added to diets of cattle perceived to be at risk of developing PEM.

The results from efforts to treat or prevent PEM with thiamin are mixed.  Much of the confusion surrounding thiamin therapy may be attributed to the fact that high sulfate intake may induce PEM through either one of, or a combination of, two distinct mechanisms.  High sulfate intake has been shown to reduce duodenal thiamin flow and sulfite, a product of sulfate reduction, can destroy thiamin in the rumen resulting in thiamin deficiency.  This form of sulfate induced PEM may respond to thiamin therapy or may be prevented by thiamin supplementation.  However, an alternative mechanism through which sulfate causes PEM may be involved particularly if sulfate intake is extremely high.

Sulfides inhibit cytochrome C, an enzyme of the electron transport chain.  It has been proposed that rumen generated sulfides escaped detoxification in the liver and were responsible for sulfate induced PEM.  High sulfate intake results in extreme concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in the rumen gas cap.  These sulfides are inhaled during eructation, absorbed into the blood stream in the lung, and transported to the brain, thus bypassing the liver.  In addition, it has also been suggested that the high amounts of sulfides absorbed through the rumen wall and transported to the liver may overwhelm the capacity of the liver to detoxify sulfide.  Thus, a portion of these sulfides may also reach the brain.  Cattle experiencing PEM caused by the inhibition of cytochrome C will not respond to thiamin therapy.

Cattle consuming high sulfate water do not necessarily need to show symptoms of PEM to experience reduced feed yard performance.  Feedlot steers were provided with water of various sulfate concentrations ranging from 136 to 2, 360 ppm.  No clinically apparent symptoms of PEM were reported and performance by all steers in the study was outstanding.  However, increasing water sulfate concentration resulted in linear decreases in daily gain, gain to feed ratio, final weight, hot carcass weight, and dressing percentage.  Sulfate concentration by period interactions were evident for dry matter intake, average daily gain, and feed efficiency.  Water sulfate concentration also influenced water intake.  The effect of water sulfate on performance was greatest during the early periods of the trial and less evident toward trial completion.  Water intake differences were greatest during the periods of the greatest performance reduction and not evident during the last period.  The trial was started during the early summer (July 16) and ambient temperatures were greatest during this time.  It appears that extreme water sulfate concentrations inhibit water intake by nearly 18%.  It is possible that performance reductions observed for cattle consuming high sulfate water in summer may actually be a function of reduced ability of the cattle to effectively combat heat stress.

Nutritional Interventions:

In addition to supplemental thiamin, several other nutritional manipulations have been proposed to help control sulfur-induced PEM.  Colorado State University scientists demonstrated up to a 37% reduction in the rate of hydrogen sulfide production from an in vitro fermentation system with the addition of nitrate.  Other researchers demonstrated a 77% reduction in hydrogen sulfide production when an in vitro system was treated with molybdenum and a 71% reduction in hydrogen sulfide production when the system was treated with 9, 10-anthraquinone.  Hydrogen sulfide production rate was reduced by over 75% when an in vitro system was exposed to clinoptilolite, a form of zeolite.  Feeding high levels of ammonium nitrate, molybdenum, or zeolite often reduced the hydrogen sulfide concentration in the rumen gas cap, but did not improve feedlot performance by steers consuming high sulfate water (> 2,000 ppm) in experiments conducted at the Southeast Colorado Research Center in the late 1990s.

Management Recommendations:

1. Sample all sources of water and evaluate for sulfate concentration.  Blending water for various sources to reduce the sulfate concentration to less than 1,000 ppm may reduce the risk of sulfur induced PEM and lost performance.
2. Sample all co-product feed ingredients and analyze for sulfur.
3. Make certain total (water plus feed) dietary sulfur intake expressed as a percentage of dry matter intake is less than 0.40%.
4. Avoid stacking sulfur risk factors.  Feed yards forced to use marginal or poor quality water may simply not be able to successfully utilize grain milling co-products.  Likewise, simultaneous use of several high-sulfur grain milling co-products should be avoided.
5. Logic may suggest the elimination of high sulfur trace mineral sources such as copper or zinc sulfate from the diet.  However, the amount of sulfur contributed to the diet by trace mineral source is minimal compared with the sulfur contribution from grain milling co-products or marginal to poor quality water.
6. Thiamin supplementation or intravenous thiamin administration may provide some measure of success in managing PEM if thiamine metabolism is compromised in the rumen.  However, thiamin therapy or supplementation will likely be of limited value if exposure to hydrogen sulfide is excessive.
7. To date, despite modest successes in laboratory in vitro systems and non-research based testimonials to the contrary, no dietary modifications have been shown to effectively control PEM or improve performance in feedlot cattle exposed to high sulfur intake.  References available upon request from Dr. Wagner.

Co-Authors:
Steve Merriam, Vice President, Animal Care Brand Manager
Bruce Arentson, V.P., Regulatory Affairs, Equine & Companion Animal Nutritionist

Mold and Mycotoxins

This year (2009) continues to be an economic challenge to agriculture but fall has brought another serious obstacle for farmers; cool and wet weather for harvest.  It has been nearly impossible to get into the fields and, if one is that lucky, moisture levels in the corn are generally in the 30-33% range.  Along with these two challenges comes a third, mold and mycotoxins.  The presence of mold (fungus) does not necessarily mean that toxins are present in amounts to cause issues within livestock.  However, in today’s environment, mycotoxin screens, and if needed, mycotoxin analyses need to be conducted.

The attached series of tables and information was derived from an Ohio State University (OSU) website that is a cooperative effort of numerous land grant universities.  Table 1 summarizes the main mycotoxins that affect livestock production.  Species, mycotoxin, upper limit of safety and their effects are noted.

Also, included in this OSU document are preventative practices, pre-harvest and post-harvest, as well as treatments.

Kent Feeds offers mycotoxin adsorbent in Dynasty® and Granolene® equine products; Kent Integral™ 40 for multi-species equine, cattle, poultry, and swine; FeverGuard® MTB-100® for dairy; and several custom order products.  The effective level of mycotoxin adsorbent in the product is dependent on the feed directions (consumption) of the product. 

SS/SM/BA:sg

11-6-09 

Moldy Grains, Mycotoxins And Feeding Problems

Preventive Practices

Prevention is the best method to control mold growth and possible toxin formation.  The following practices can help minimize mold growth and subsequent toxin production in storage:

Pre-harvest:

• Clean inside and outside of grain bins and dryers.
• Prior to storage, check the condition of the bin for possible water leaks, and clean it properly by removing dust, dirt, leftover grain and other foreign material.
• Crop rotation in many regions or tillage can reduce the risk of Gibberella ear rot in corn and Fusarium head blight of wheat.  These practices have little effect on other corn ear rots.
• Some corn hybrids are more resistant to ear rots than others, but overall, resistance to ear rots is not widely available. Some Bt hybrids, those that produce BT in the kernels, have less ear rot due to insect control resulting in less toxin problems.
• Control of second generation European corn borers and other insect pests of corn ears can greatly reduce infection by Fusarium and Aspergillus.
• Few wheat varieties have high levels of resistance to Fusarium head blight (scab).  Plant moderately resistant varieties when available.  Planting several varieties that differ in maturity will reduce the risk of disease to the whole crop.
• As with any crop pest, early detection through scouting and early harvest can reduce serious losses and avoid crises.  Decisions on handling moldy grain should be made before it is harvested.  After harvest, spoilage can occur quickly if delays result from indecision.
• If extensive ear rot development is observed (10% or more of the ears with more than 10-20% mold), the field should be harvested as soon as moisture content reaches a level that can be harvested.  Even if some drying costs are incurred, this will be less expensive than loss of crop value due to mycotoxins and resulting feeding problems.

Post-harvest:

• The crops should be allowed to mature in the field to the following moisture contents: shelled corn, 23-25%; ear corn, 20-25%; small grain, 12-17%; and soybeans, 11-15%.
• Harvesting equipment should be adjusted to minimize damage to seeds or kernels and allow for maximum cleaning.  Cracked or broken seeds or kernels are more susceptible to mold invasion.
• Upon storage, dry the grain to 13-14%, if possible, within 48 hours.  Long-term storage can be achieved at a uniform moisture of 18% for ear corn; 13% for sorghum, wheat and shelled corn; and 11% for soybeans.
• After drying, store under cool temperatures (36-44° F).
• Every few weeks check the condition of the grain for temperature, wet spots and insects.

Grain Treatments:

• Antifungal treatments can be applied to grain to reduce mold growth in storage.  These products, such as proprionic acid, do not kill the mold already present nor do they reduce toxins already present in the grain.  Do not use antifungal agents on stored grain unless you are certain the grain can be marketed after treatment.
• Hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate (HSCAS) (Novasil) can reduce the effects of aflatoxins when fed to swine, cattle, or poultry. HSCAS at 10 lb./ton provides substantial protection against dietary aflatoxins.

Testing for Mycotoxins:

• The presence of a fungus known to produce toxins is not proof that the grain contains injurious levels of toxin.
• It may be a good investment to collect a representative sample and send it to a laboratory for chemical analysis.
• The first step in mycotoxin determination is sampling of the grain.  Particular attention should be given to the sampling procedure because sampling error will be the greatest source of variation in the analytical procedure.  This variation is primarily due to the uneven distribution of the mycotoxin contaminated kernels within a lot of grain or feed.  The ideal sampling procedure should assure the highest probability of detecting mycotoxins even when contamination is low.
• One method of sampling grain is to use a probe sampler.  Since mold growth usually occurs in spots in the grain lot, best sampling is done on recently blended lots of grain.
• Another method is to collect small samples from the moving stream of grain as it is moved in or out of the bins.  With both sampling methods, the collected grain is pooled into a large aggregate sample that represents the lot.
• For shelled corn, it is recommended that the aggregate sample be about 10 pounds.  The aggregate sample should be coarsely ground.  Most analytical procedures need only about 25 grams (0.9 ounces) of ground corn, so it is important that the aggregate sample be thoroughly mixed after grinding.  A one or two pound sub-sample is then taken and it is more finely ground.  From this sub-sample a final sample is taken for analysis.
• A number of commercial, university and government laboratories perform mycotoxin analyses for a fee.  Contact the lab to determine the proper way to obtain and ship the sample.  For general information see:(http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/ohiofieldcropdisease/wheat/mycotoxin%20text2.htm).
• Blending is not an approved practice by the FDA for interstate commerce.  Blending is a practice intended to reduce toxins to acceptable levels in small lots only for on farm use.
• If the mycotoxin in the contaminated feed is known, it may be a good idea to channel the feed to animals that are more tolerant.

Table 1

Mycotoxins
Reported Detrimental Feed Concentrations

 Table 1 (Continued)

FDA’s guidance level for total fumonisins in corn and corn by-products (not to exceed 20% of the diet) used for equine and rabbit feed products is 5 ppm (1 ppm in finished feed). 

Table 1 (Continued)

 FDA has set a maximum limit of 20 ppb for aflatoxins in commercial grains used in feed for immature animals, dairy animals, poultry, horses and turkeys, and for unknown use.

In today’s economic picture for commercial cow/calf producers, the measure of profitability can be tied to small changes. This segment of the market has enjoyed profitability for many recent years due to cheap feed costs and being paid a premium for their product, a live calf. With the advent of high feed costs and a softening of the feeder market, cow/calf producers must rethink their production strategies. There are numerous ways to cut costs and for the sake of this article most will pertain to feed inputs.

Use Co-Products:

With the proliferation of ethanol plants in the central U.S., gluten and distillers grains are available to producers. Both wet and dry versions are acceptable to cows and which one you use is dependent on what’s available from the closest plant, the cost delivered and the storage/usage rate. Wet products do not have the storage life of dry gluten or distillers but often are less expensive per unit of dry matter purchased. Wet products can mold and moldy co-products must not be used in pregnant heifers or cows as abortions may occur. If these co-products are less expensive per ton of dry matter than corn and their use does not cause management issues, enhanced profitability for the operation should occur.

Reduce Forage Waste:

Have you ever watched cattle eat hay from a round bale feeder?  How much waste is observed?  Many experts say 20-30% of the forage is trampled into the ground/manure thus losing feeding value. To properly store bales it requires a site that has been developed with drainage in mind. Do not have the bales touch, preferably leaving 1.5 feet of space for air circulation. Having space between the bales also allows rain and snow to go to the ground rather than being held up touching the hay. Know what your bale weighs so feeding becomes more accurate and limits wastage.

Utilize Crop Residues:

Think of the tons of corn and bean residues left on the ground after harvest!  We continue to throw this material away year after year. Corn stover contains about 5%-6% protein and almost hay-like NEg values. Not great, but if properly supplemented with co-products, corn and a co-product balancer can make a feed that’s quite adequate. It is paramount that the cow’s body condition be maintained and not allowed to slide. Crop residues should be put through a grinding process to enhance digestibility. The use of low moisture tubs like EnergiLass should be encouraged as these improve fiber digestibility by as much as 20% (Kansas State University).

Know Your Cow Herd:

You cannot afford to keep a cow for a year without having a viable calf. These cows should be culled (fed out for market) and replacements brought into the herd. Females in a herd are not all the same weight and body condition. To save feed and money, cows should be fed according to their body condition (gain or lose weight). On both ends of the body condition score index, females will not breed and maintain a calf efficiently. Dry cows require less “groceries” than a lactating cow. Develop diets for each stage of production and age and feed accordingly. Get a scale!

Mineral Supplementation:

Most feed programs for cows can be formulated to provide all protein, energy, and fiber with local inputs only requiring the purchase of a free-choice mineral. These minerals should be chosen for the geographic location and stage of production. Some locations are low in selenium and copper and other areas have surpluses of these trace minerals. Prior to and during breeding, research data have shown benefits from feeding complexed trace minerals to cows. Diets with co-products require a mineral with high calcium, no phosphorus, and fortified with thiamine to aid in preventing incidences of polio. This is an area where skimping must be avoided.

Forage Analysis:

All forages are obviously not the same. Forages taken from the same field two years apart may not be the same as fertilization with commercial products or manure can change the nutrient content. Forages should be analyzed annually for protein, moisture, calcium, and phosphorus as a bare minimum. Build your nutritional supplementation around these assays. If using various energy sources, have these assayed as well and utilize the appropriate free-choice mineral.

Management Tools:

Anything to enhance the efficiency of production should be used by the cow/calf producer if they are cost-effective and legal. Implants and the use of Rumensin or Bovatec should be employed religiously. Either option can save 5-10% on the cost of production. Together, they are at least additive. The use of implants should be the result of strategic planning based on the goals for each calf (i.e.; herd replacement, age of the calf, etc.). Calves headed toward a natural beef program cannot generally use implants or ionophores during their lifetime to qualify.

Summary:

To tighten one’s belt in the cow/calf industry in order to maximize savings means to take into account feedstuffs, proper nutrition, growth and/or production phase, and management tools. They are all interrelated and impact one another and can make the difference between profit and loss.

SS:sg

11-12-08

A good receiving plan for Holstein steers can pay big dividends of $5 to $30 or more profit per steer. This approach involves a number of practices that can greatly reduce problems while improving the bottom-line with overall better feedlot performance and health. Our transportation network for moving cattle today doesn’t think twice about moving cattle 20 plus hours on trucks to feed yards. With that length of time on the truck, cattle are exposed to a lot of stress. One of the biggest stresses can be the one we can’t control – the weather. As a result, we need to have the feed yard ready. One factor in preparation is getting some of the history of the cattle, such as how the ration was fed, what was in the ration, and what vaccinations were administered. After this information is gathered, prepare for the unexpected and start a fresh feeding and vaccination program:

1. Accessible water is the first thing to consider after unloading the truck. Cattle will have better feed intakes with good fresh water. Finding the water in a feedlot can be a challenge for newly arrived Holsteins, so make sure the waterer height is proper for the size and weight of the cattle. As an example, steers less than 300 pounds can’t reach waterers that are over 24” tall. Also, to help the cattle find water, set the float to allow the water to run over, thus creating a “running water” sound. The cattle will be attracted to the sound, smell, and wet ground. Adding extra water tanks can be beneficial to ensure proper water intake.
2. Proper nutrition is critical to the health and performance of new cattle. The use of a Kent ARRIVALmax^™ product is very important as it aids in providing the necessary nutrition. Most cattle go through a major ration change following transportation. ARRIVALmax Complete is an excellent product that transitions steers onto self feeders; one of the most common ways to feed Holsteins. Utilizing an ARRIVALmax product provides the correct protein type, BoVantage^™ technology, crude fiber, and other ingredients to ensure optimal nutrition and health. Receiving diets should be fed in bunks for 7-14 days to reach maximum intakes. The use of feed grade antibiotics may help the calves initially; consult your veterinarian. Another product or practice may include the use of EnergiLass^® Rumen Booster, a high-quality, nutrient-dense, low-moisture molasses tub, especially on 200#-400# steers as they have lower intakes initially and the tubs can stimulate dietary intakes.
3. Steer comfort is very critical in these small Holsteins. When they get wet and chilled, illness usually occurs, so adequate shelter and an abundance of dry bedding are important. Small grain bedding provides more heat-holding power than sawdust. Shelter should be large enough for all of the cattle to use comfortably or they will crowd. Crowding is worse than providing no shelter. The shelter should provide 15-25 square feet per head for 200#-500# steers, with equal amounts of square footage outside. Providing shelter is equally important in hot months as winter since overheating is also a detriment.Incoming calves need to rest comfortably for 24-48 hours after arrival to limit morbidity. However, get the steers up every 2-4 hours and move them around in order to look for any sick cattle. This will also encourage movement to the feed bunks and waterers. Research data have shown that keeping the lights on during the evening for the first 5-7 days post-arrival will also stimulate intake.
4. The vaccination schedule should be ready prior to arrival. Holstein calves should be vaccinated 24-48 hours after arrival and this should include a viral 5-way and 7-way Clostridal. A preventative broad spectrum antibiotic can also be administered at this time. Most vaccines must be boostered within the next 3-4 weeks and implants can be done at this time rather than earlier as calves have been through the disease incubation period and intakes are on the rise.

This is just a start of the things that need to be done to ensure a good transition of new, lightweight Holstein feeder steers. Ask a lot of questions and think through all the scenarios that can happen. Prepare a plan to prevent or treat sickness. Also, consult with vets and Kent Feeds representatives. Remember, a good start means a good finish on Holstein steers. Start them right and feed them the best – Kent Beef Feed!

JG:sg

4-1-09