nutrient reduction in manure through livestock nutritional management n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Nutrient Reduction in Manure through Livestock Nutritional Management PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Nutrient Reduction in Manure through Livestock Nutritional Management

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 49

Nutrient Reduction in Manure through Livestock Nutritional Management - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 134 Views
  • Uploaded on

Nutrient Reduction in Manure through Livestock Nutritional Management . Balancing Animal Performance and Manure Management. Manure Management. N and P are the two nutrients of greatest concern when dealing with manure. N and P can be managed and utilized as fertilizer for crop production.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Nutrient Reduction in Manure through Livestock Nutritional Management' - faith


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
manure management
Manure Management
  • N and P are the two nutrients of greatest concern when dealing with manure.
  • N and P can be managed and utilized as fertilizer for crop production.
nutrient management
Nutrient Management
  • Nitrogen
    • Protein
      • UIP
      • DIP
      • NPN
    • Amino acids
  • Phosphorus
    • grains -- high
    • forages -- low
    • dicalcium phosphate
yearly excretion estimates of various nutrients by 1400 lb holstein cows
Yearly excretion estimates of various nutrients by 1400 lb Holstein cows

Fraction Total for year

Milk 21750 lbs

DMI 14462 lbs

Raw manure (feces & urine) 47475 lbs

Total N (low NRC) 223 lbs

Total N (high NRC) 260 lbs

P (.40% P RDM) 40 lbs

P (.45% P RDM) 46 lbs

P (.60% P RDM) 69 lbs

K (.8% K RDM) 88 lbs

K (1.2% K RDM) 146 lbs

Similar trends Ca, Mg, Na, Cl

UIP and DIP minimums met NRC 1989

composition of fresh manure
Composition of Fresh Manure

N: 9.4 lb actual N/ton wet manure

P: 1.9 lb actual P/ton wet manure

K: 3.7 lb actual K/ton wet manure

Total solids 12.8%

  • Composition will change with scraping and loading moisture content and volatilization of N
mwps 18
MWPS - 18

1,000 lb Market Animal

60 lb/day manure

.34 lb/day N (154 g)

.11 lb/day P (50 g)

nitrogen losses
Nitrogen Losses
  • 100% Nitrogen Excreted
  • 50 to 60% Volatilization
  • 15 to 20% Runoff, soil
  • 20 to 30% Removed
nitrogen losses1
Nitrogen Losses

154 g N/d x .25 =

38.5g N/hd/d removed from pens

predictable equations
Predictable Equations
  • P and N excretions by cows vary
    • P or N intake
  • Factors
    • P or N intake
    • Dry Matter Intake (DMI)
    • Milk yield

Morse et al.

nrc 1996 phosphorus
NRC 1996: Phosphorus
  • Maintenance (Pm) Requirement

16 mg P/kg BW

  • Retained (Pg) Phosphorus

3.9 g/100 g protein gain

nrc 1984 phosphorus
NRC 1984: Phosphorus
  • .028 (Wkg) + .039  protein gain (g/d)
  • Maintenance Requirement Reduced
  • 43% (1984 1996)
p requirements
P Requirements

Animal (lbs)Daily P requirement (gms)

150 7.7

300 11.4

900 20.9

1400 (dry) 18.2

1400 (late dry) 25.4

1400 (35 lbs milk) 46.7

1400 (70 lbs milk) 75.3

1400 (100 lbs milk) 100

dairy nrc recommendations
Dairy NRC recommendations
  • .35% P RDM is enough for optimum performance
  • Levels of .6% or higher not uncommon
typical feedlot diets
Typical Feedlot Diets

.30 to .35% P on diet DM

practical considerations
Practical Considerations
  • Corn-based diets will run .25 to .35% P
  • The need for supplemental P is low
steer performance as influenced by p
Steer Performance as Influenced by P

%P P Intake,g/d ADG, lb/d DMI, lb/d Feed/Gain

0.14 15.9 3.87 25.0 6.49

0.19 19.7 3.57 22.8 6.37

0.24 27.6 3.77 25.2 6.71

0.29 32.1 3.85 24.4 6.33

0.34 36.4 3.38 23.6 7.04

SE .74 .20 .73

Erickson et al, 1998; Nebraska

phase feeding
Phase Feeding
  • Opportunities to lower N and P intakes during the latter stages of the finishing period. Consequently, this will lower N and P output
  • Allows nutritionists to more effectively optimize performance w/o overfeeding.
yearlings trial 1 nebraska 1998

Yearlings (Trial 1; Nebraska 1998)

CP (%) UIP (%) P (%)

CTL 13.6 4.48 .34

Fin 1 11.2 3.67 .24

Fin 2 11.9 3.67 .24

Fin 3 11.5 3.67 .22

performance yearlings

Performance : Yearlings

Item Control Balanced SE

Initial Wt. 652 660 2.8

Final Wt. 1249 1249 9.8

DMI 26.2 25.0* .2

ADG 4.06 4.01 .06

F/G 6.45 6.21

Erickson, et al; 1998

phosphorus balance lbs hd
Phosphorus Balance (lbs/hd)

Item Control Balanced

135 d/period for both yearlings and calves treatments

effect of tba e 2 on nitrogen retention of steers

Treatment LW (lb) N Retention (g/d)

Period

(days) CTL TBA + E2 CTL TBA + E2

-14 777 774 19.3 23.2

+ 7 821 834 21.6 43.6*

+28 876 906 21.0 52.1**

+49 902 972 19.6 57.0**

+70 953 1043 18.5 36.5*

Effect of TBA + E2 onNitrogen Retention of Steers

Lobley et al, 1985; Br. J. Nutr. 54:681-694.

phosphorus balance
Phosphorus Balance

Item CTL IMP

P Intake, g/d 26.14 27.19

Pm, g/d 6.89 6.99

Carcass Protein Gain, g/d 114 207

WB Protein Gain, g/d 142 259

Pg, g/d 5.54 10.10

P Excreted, g/d 20.6 17.09

P Calculated (.68) g/d 18.3 25.1

P Excess, g/d 7.8 2.09

nitrogen
Nitrogen
  • Pigs require amino acids, not protein
  • Use synthetic amino acids
synthetic lysine
Synthetic Lysine
  • Replace 100 lbs of SBM with 3 lbs synthetic lysine and 97 lbs of corn
  • Save $3.96/ton
    • Corn @$1.70/bu & SBM @ $205/ton
  • Save $1.32/pig
  • Reduce N excretion by 22%
  • Reduce odor from ammonia
split sex feeding
Split-Sex Feeding
  • Gilts eat less feed and put on more lean tissue
  • Feed gilts higher AA < 80 lbs
  • Save $1.40/pig
  • Reduce N excretion by 5%
phase feeding1
Phase Feeding
  • By feeding more diets, you decrease the amount of time you are over-and under-feeding AA.
  • By using 5 Grower-Finisher diets instead of 2, save $1.60/pig
  • Decrease N excretion by 5-8%
genotypical feeding
Genotypical Feeding
  • Pig will only perform to genetic capability.
  • Increasing protein/AA levels to a genetically average pig will NOT increase muscle.
  • Match genetics to nutrition
  • Reduce N excretion & odor
  • Save $$$$
antibiotics
Antibiotics
  • Some preliminary data shows that certain antibiotics may be nitrogen sparing.
  • Potentially less N excretion and ammonia production
balance on available amino acids
Balance on Available Amino Acids
  • When using something besides a corn-SBM diet
  • Add less N to the diet
  • Reduce N excretion and ammonia production
reducing sulfur excretion
Reducing Sulfur Excretion
  • Amino acids
    • methionine
    • cysteine
  • Minerals
    • copper sulfate
    • ferrous sulfate
dietary modifications
Dietary Modifications
  • Reduced protein from 13 to 8% and added synthetic AA to meet requirement
  • Replaced copper sulfate with copper oxide
  • Replaced ferrous sulfate with ferric chloride
results
Results
  • Reduced N in manure by 45%
  • Reduced volatile fatty acids (VFA’s) by 61%
  • Reduced sulfur compounds in air by 63%
adding 5 cellulose to diet
Adding 5% Cellulose to Diet
  • Reduced pH from 7.8 to 6.4
  • Reduced ammonia emissions by 68%
  • Reduced sulfur volatile organic compounds by 12%
slide40
While these may not all be practical at the present, it does demonstrate that we can affect nutrient excretions by how we feed the pig.
phosphorus p
Phosphorus (P)
  • Only 30% of P in grain is available
  • Rest is in phytate form and is unavailable
add phytases
Add Phytases
  • Phytases are enzymes that make phytate P more available
  • Reduce P excretion by 30%
  • Add less dicalcium phosphate
  • Economic“wash” when compare to dical price
  • Some reports of slight savings
cost of p excretion
Cost of P Excretion
  • It takes 3 times more land to spread hog manure on when you base the recommendation on P instead of N
  • Potential BIG cost in the future
low phytate corn
Low Phytate Corn
  • “Gene Jockeys” and plant breeders have developed corn varieties with very low levels of phytate P.
  • Commercially available in a year or two
distiller s dried grains from sd mn
Distiller’s Dried Grains from SD & MN
  • Research on DDG from SD & MN ethanol plants shows that P is 60% more available from their products
  • Tremendous opportunity for gestating sows and finishing pigs
  • Low in lysine
balance on available p
Balance on Available P
  • Do when using other feedstuffs than corn and soybean meal
  • Add less inorganic P (cheaper)
  • Less P excretion
improving feed efficiency
Improving Feed Efficiency
  • Anything that improves feed efficiency will decrease feed in the dust or the amount of feed ending up in the manure, thereby reducing the nutrient load in the manure and the substrate for odor production.
improving feed efficiency1
Improving Feed Efficiency
  • Fat additions (1% most economical)
  • Proper feeder adjustment
  • Pelleted diets
  • Wet/dry feeders
  • Growth promotants
  • Covers on drop-spouts
conclusions
Conclusions
  • Environmental issues will continue to be important in the livestock industry.
  • By utilizing certain nutrition schemes and management tools we can theoretically lower our inputs and outputs of N and P.
  • We all need to do our job in protecting the environment.