Efficient farming systems to improve nutrient utilisation and

profitabilityConrad Ferris, Martin Mulholland, Elizabeth Ball and

Francis Lively

5th November 2015

Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR,UK

Background

Phosphorus is an essential nutrient for animals (bone, cell structure, energy transfer, milk, meat)

Evidence that water quality is beginning to deteriorate with regards P – action is required

How do we address the problem? Reduce inorganic P fertiliser use?

Lower overall stocking rates ?

Better management of manures and slurry, and ‘treatment’ options will all help address this problem?

But it would be better if we could reduce the amount of P which is excreted:

Reduced P levels in livestock diets

Feed less ‘P dense’ components of the diet

Improved management and overall efficiency

Reducing P levels in livestock diets – local research findings

pigs and poultry

beef and sheep

dairy

Reducing P surpluses by improving efficiency

Overview of presentation

Historically, overall P levels in diets for growing pigs was above 6 g/kg (fresh)

Oversupplied?

AFBI conducted a series of studies to investigate the effect of:

lowering overall dietary P level

the use of phytase in pig diets

Reducing P levels in diets for growing pigs

The effect of lowering dietary P level on growing pig performance and bone strength parameters

Control P (6g/kg)

Reduced P (5g/kg)

Sig.

Feed intake (kg/d) 1.41 1.38 NS

LWG (g/d) 793 763 NS

FCR 1.81 1.84 NS

*Bone weight (g) 25.5 25.4 NS

*Load (kg) 206 204 NS

Dietary P of 5 g/kg adequate for growing pigs

Problems formulating lower P diets for finishersBenefits of phytase inclusion also demonstrated, but need to reduce P levels before phytase additionResearch needed to demonstrate if further reductions are safe, and interactions with phytase

Reducing dietary P levels for broilers

Phytase use is widespread and has reduced the inclusion of inorganic P through increasing the bioavailability of phytate

Commercial levels of overall dietary P are 4.6, 4.4 and 3.8 g/kg (fresh) for starter, grower and finisher broilers respectively

Can dietary P levels be reduced further?

Study conducted to investigate the effect of reducing P levels on performance and bone strength

The effect of dietary P level on performance of broilers

Control P Low P (by

7.5%)Very low P (by

15%)Sig

0-35d DMI (g) 2587 2510 2611 NS

0-35d LWG (g) 1682 1627 1719 NS

0-35d FCR 1.568 1.558 1.537 NS

Bone* diameter (mm) 2.7 2.7 2.7 NS

Load (kg) 2.7 2.7 2.8 NS

• Dietary P levels can be reduced by 15%

• Lower P levels need to be commercially validated, and then adopted

• Scope to reduce levels across other poultry sectors (e.g. Layers, broiler breeders) ?

• Significant genetic improvements within the poultry sector has substantially reduced P excretions per bird – lessons for other sectors!

Beef and Sheep sector

No local research on P requirements

In general, diets are low in P due to low concentrate usage

Most farms tend to have lower stocking rates

P surpluses generally low

But a large number of farms covering a large area of land – cumulative impact

Many systems operate at a low level of efficiency

Relationship between age at slaughter and carcass weight for prime steers (2013)

Age at slaughter (months)

Carc

ass

weig

ht

(kg

)

Huge potential to improve efficiency within the beef sector, and to reduce the environmental impact of beef systems

Intensive beef finishing units?

In general, individual small beef farms tend to have little impact

But what about intensive beef finishing units

May account for >10% of cattle finished in NI

Often associated with a relatively small land areas

Large quantities of by-products are included in rations

Little information available on the P content of rations offered

These farms may pose a risk to water quality? ...insufficient information is available to assess risk!

Average P level in dairy cow concentrates in NI in 2001 was 6.2 g/kg fresh (7.1 g/kg DM)

P was over supplied – but by how much could it be reduced?

4 Year study - 100 dairy cows

Diets contained either ‘normal’ or ‘reduced’ levels of P

Reducing P levels in dairy cow diets-AFBI research

Winter period

Normal P Reduced P Reduction in P (%)

Concentrates

6.2 g/kg fr. 3.8 g/kg fr. 38%

Total Diet 4.8 g/kg DM 3.6 g/kg DM 25%

Normal P

4.8 g/kg DM

Reduced P

3.6 g/kg DMSig.

DMI (kg/cow/day) 20.3 19.8 NS

Milk (kg/cow/day) 8485 8522 NS

Bone P level (g/kg organic matter)

172 171 NS

Pregnancy rate (%) 92 83 NS

Effect of dietary P level on cow performance over lactations 1-4

How far can total dietary P levels be reduced?

Clear evidence of deficiency2.2-2.6 g/kg DM

Adequate in some studies, inadequate in others

2.7-3.2 g/kg DM

Occasional evidence of inadequacy3.3-3.5 g/kg DM

Adequate in virtually all studies3.6-3.7 g/kg DM

Over-feeding?>3.8 g/kg DM

2001 Survey of 50 farms 6.2 g /kg fresh(7.1 g/kg DM)

2002 - 2007 Hillsborough study 3.8 g/kg fresh(4.4 g/kg DM)

2005 NI Industry target 5.7 g/kg fresh(6.6 g/kg DM)

2015 Where the NI industry is at present

5.0 g/kg fresh(5.7 g/kg DM)

How far can we safely reduce the P content of concentrates?

Can P levels in dairy cow rations be reduced below 5.0 g/kg fresh?

Yes

But at a cost!

P content of silages need to be considered (extremely variable: 1.6 – 4.8 g/kg DM)

Lower P concentrates may have a role on some intensive derogated farms

Demonstrated in a recent AFBI study involving derogated systems of milk production

Year round housing

Winter housing – summer grazing

Concentrate intake (tonnes) 3.5 2.5

Energy corrected milk (kg) 9600 8700

Phosphorus balance (kg P/ha) associated with two intensive experimental systems

P balance (kg P/ha) 5.4 0.6

Cost of moving to very low P concentrates (100 cow herd) £2800 £2000

Low phosphorus balances are possible – even with intensive high input herds – but at a cost

Can P levels in dairy cow rations be reduced further?

Yes.....

But greater gains (economic and environmental) can be

made by

Making better use of forage, and

Tackling inefficiencies in concentrate feeding

Milk from forage on Benchmarked farms has fallen by 1500 litres during the last 12 years (1550 litres in 2014)

But is milk from forage still important?

Relationship between milk from forage and common margin (CAFRE Benchmarking)

Yield band (litres)

Top/Bottom 25% for milk from forage

Milk from forage (litres)

Common margin (£/cow)

5000 – 6000 Top 3090 764

Bottom 1610 280

7000 – 8000 Top 2710 962

Bottom 1405 440

>9000 Top 2750 1080

Bottom 570 619

Strong relationship between milk from forage and common margin

Relationship between milk production and concentrate intake on CAFRE Benchmarked

farms (2013-14)

Most efficient and least efficient quartile of farms within each yield bracket (6000 –

10000 l)

Calculated P balance on Benchmarked farms (kg P per Ha)

Most efficient Least efficient

6000 – 7000 litres

Effect of concentrate use efficiency on P balance within each yield band

7000 – 8000 litres

8000 – 9000 litres

9000 – 10000 litres

3.6 12.6

6.4 16.5

9.0 17.9

12.7 19.8

Huge potential to improve P use efficiency and improve profitability by improving whole farm efficiency

What are the factors that differ between the most and least efficient farms?

Getting more from forage Achieving optimum yields: Grass varieties

Soil pH and drainage Nutrient management, including N

Grazing management : Turnout datePre and post grazing targetsMeasuring and take actionConfidence in grass

High quality forages offer real potential to reduce concentrate use, to reduce P inputs and to improve farm profit

Manage concentrate feeding How important is concentrate allocation strategy?

Feed-to-yield

Complete diet

Sig.

Milk yield (kg/d) 38.0 39.3 NS

Milk fat + protein yield (kg/day)

3.0 3.1 NS

Greater spread in performance with feed-to-yield type systems

But mean performance unaffected by system – at a given stage of lactation

Key issues to consider Getting concentrate level correct is critical

Targets concentrates to cows that will respond

If TMR feeding – batching is critical

Feed-to-yield systems allow ‘precision’ to be brought to feeding

Establish M+ levels

Calibrate feeding systems

Check computer settings – 0.45 kg concentrate/litre milk

Supplement for energy corrected milk, not milk volume

Precision technologies offer opportunity for improved efficiency

Conclusions Significant progress on pig and poultry side in terms of nutrition and efficiency – potential to improve further?

Room for improvement in beef sector, especially in overall efficiency

P levels in dairy cow concentrates can be reduced further – but at a cost

Improved P efficiency possible through improved forage quality and concentrate supplementation strategies – with potential to improve profitability

The whole livestock sector must continue to reduce its P footprint