Economic potential of field peas as an alternative to corn distillers dried grains with solubles in beef heifer growing diets

IF 1.4 Q3 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Applied Animal Science Pub Date : 2024-09-16 DOI:10.15232/aas.2024-02548
Michael Undi , Jon T. Biermacher , Kevin Sedivec , Timothy Long
{"title":"Economic potential of field peas as an alternative to corn distillers dried grains with solubles in beef heifer growing diets","authors":"Michael Undi ,&nbsp;Jon T. Biermacher ,&nbsp;Kevin Sedivec ,&nbsp;Timothy Long","doi":"10.15232/aas.2024-02548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study was conducted to (1) determine the economic potential of field peas relative to corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) in diets of growing heifers and (2) identify price points for competitive utilization of field peas as an alternative to corn DDGS in diets of growing heifers.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><p>In a 2-yr study, 162 heifers/ yr were kept in 6 dry lot pens and fed isocaloric and isonitrogenous corn DDGS-based or field pea-based TMR in the fall and winter. Animal performance (final BW, total gain, and ADG) data analysis considered the fixed effects of diet (DDGS or peas), season (fall and winter), and diet × season interaction. Base-case ration costs were calculated using prices of $325∙t<sup>−1</sup> and $366∙t<sup>−1</sup> for corn DDGS and field peas, respectively. To understand market situations where field peas are more cost effective than DDGS, and vice versa, sensitivity analysis was conducted to calculate relative total cost of feeding peas versus DDGS for several combinations of prices of DDGS and field peas.</p></div><div><h3>Results and Discussion</h3><p>Heifer performance was not affected by dietary treatment, which was expected because diets were formulated to be isocaloric and isonitrogenous. Therefore, the relative economics of diet (DDGS vs. field peas) is based on evaluation of costs. Base-case results indicated that field pea-based rations cost $6.89∙head<sup>−1</sup> more than DDGS-based rations. Sensitivity analysis suggests that field peas only have a lower cost relative to corn DDGS in situations where the price of peas are between 30% and 50% less than the base-case price of peas at the same time that the prices of corn DDGS are at base-case prices and below. The breakeven price of field peas was $231.15∙t<sup>−1</sup> ($7.64∙bushel<sup>−1</sup>), or 71% of the base-case price of DDGS. Overall, the value of field peas was mainly driven by the amount of field peas incorporated into diets and the price of field peas relative to DDGS.</p></div><div><h3>Implications and Applications</h3><p>Results from this study offer useful economic information to the field pea processing industry about the range of prices that beef cattle producers can afford to pay for peas relative to DDGS. This information will help the industry to develop a reliable supply chain for field peas as a feed source for beef cattle.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8519,"journal":{"name":"Applied Animal Science","volume":"40 5","pages":"Pages 591-597"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590286524000910/pdf?md5=89b40c2405d2f58d6d6090ebc483529f&pid=1-s2.0-S2590286524000910-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Animal Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590286524000910","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study was conducted to (1) determine the economic potential of field peas relative to corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) in diets of growing heifers and (2) identify price points for competitive utilization of field peas as an alternative to corn DDGS in diets of growing heifers.

Materials and Methods

In a 2-yr study, 162 heifers/ yr were kept in 6 dry lot pens and fed isocaloric and isonitrogenous corn DDGS-based or field pea-based TMR in the fall and winter. Animal performance (final BW, total gain, and ADG) data analysis considered the fixed effects of diet (DDGS or peas), season (fall and winter), and diet × season interaction. Base-case ration costs were calculated using prices of $325∙t−1 and $366∙t−1 for corn DDGS and field peas, respectively. To understand market situations where field peas are more cost effective than DDGS, and vice versa, sensitivity analysis was conducted to calculate relative total cost of feeding peas versus DDGS for several combinations of prices of DDGS and field peas.

Results and Discussion

Heifer performance was not affected by dietary treatment, which was expected because diets were formulated to be isocaloric and isonitrogenous. Therefore, the relative economics of diet (DDGS vs. field peas) is based on evaluation of costs. Base-case results indicated that field pea-based rations cost $6.89∙head−1 more than DDGS-based rations. Sensitivity analysis suggests that field peas only have a lower cost relative to corn DDGS in situations where the price of peas are between 30% and 50% less than the base-case price of peas at the same time that the prices of corn DDGS are at base-case prices and below. The breakeven price of field peas was $231.15∙t−1 ($7.64∙bushel−1), or 71% of the base-case price of DDGS. Overall, the value of field peas was mainly driven by the amount of field peas incorporated into diets and the price of field peas relative to DDGS.

Implications and Applications

Results from this study offer useful economic information to the field pea processing industry about the range of prices that beef cattle producers can afford to pay for peas relative to DDGS. This information will help the industry to develop a reliable supply chain for field peas as a feed source for beef cattle.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在肉用小母牛生长日粮中用大田豌豆替代玉米蒸馏干粮(带溶解物)的经济潜力
本研究旨在:(1) 确定田间豌豆在生长母牛日粮中相对于玉米蒸馏干粒加溶质(DDGS)的经济潜力;(2) 确定在生长母牛日粮中田间豌豆作为玉米 DDGS 替代品的竞争性利用价位。动物表现(最终体重、总增重和 ADG)数据分析考虑了日粮(DDGS 或豌豆)、季节(秋季和冬季)以及日粮 × 季节交互作用的固定效应。基础日粮成本分别按玉米 DDGS 325 lt-1 美元和大田豌豆 366 lt-1 美元的价格计算。为了解在哪些市场情况下大田豌豆比 DDGS 更具成本效益,反之亦然,我们进行了敏感性分析,以计算在 DDGS 和大田豌豆的几种价格组合下饲喂豌豆和 DDGS 的相对总成本。因此,日粮(DDGS 与大田豌豆)的相对经济性基于成本评估。基本情况结果表明,以大田豌豆为基础的日粮比以 DDGS 为基础的日粮每头多花费 6.89 美元。敏感性分析表明,只有当豌豆的价格比基准豌豆价格低 30% 到 50%,同时玉米 DDGS 的价格在基准价格及以下时,大田豌豆的成本才会低于玉米 DDGS。大田豌豆的盈亏平衡价格为 231.15 美元/吨-1(7.64 美元/蒲式耳-1),即 DDGS 基准价格的 71%。总体而言,田间豌豆的价值主要受日粮中田间豌豆的添加量和田间豌豆相对于 DDGS 的价格的影响。 本研究的结果为田间豌豆加工业提供了有用的经济信息,使其了解肉牛生产者相对于 DDGS 可以承受的豌豆价格范围。这些信息将有助于该行业开发可靠的田间豌豆供应链,将其作为肉牛的饲料来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Animal Science
Applied Animal Science AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
68
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Editorial Board Call for Submissions Fabrication yields and allometric growth coefficients of carcass components of serially slaughtered implanted or non-implanted beef steers Comparison of a single extended-release implant and a re-implant strategy on performance and carcass characteristics of beef finishing heifers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1