Milo stover and sources of supplemental nitrogen for growing heifers

This report is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. Copyright 1975 Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service.

Milo Stover and Sources of Supplemental Nitrogen for Growing Heifers K. K. Bolsen, J. G. Riley, and Gary Boyett Summary Seventy-two heifer calves were used in a 98-day trial to evaluate four rations: (1) forage sorghum silage plus soybean meal, (2) milo stover pellets plus soybean meal, (3) milo stover silage plus soybean meal and (4) milo stover silage plus soybean meal-corn gluten meal-urea.Daily gain was highest (P<.05) and feed required per lb. of gain lowest (P<.05) for heifers fed the forage sorghum silage ration.Heifers fed milo stover pellets consumed more feed (P<.05) than those fed any of the other three rations and, they were less efficient than those fed rations 1 or 4. The mixture of supplemental nitrogen sources fed with milo stover silage (ration 4) gave animal performance similar to that from soybean meal with milo stover silage (ration 3).
The results indicate that milo stover's value is 53 to 57% that of forage sorghum in growing rations.On the average, heifers fed milo stover gained 57% as rapidly and 53% as efficiently as heifers fed forage sorghum.

Introduction
Milo stover is a by-product of grain production.As humans continue to compete with livestock for the world's feed grain supply, it becomes increasingly important that crop aftermaths, like milo stover, be used as energy sources for beef production.
Machine harvested or grazed milo stover can meet the energy requirement of beef cows during gestation.In a previous trial at this station (Progress Rpt. 210, Kansas Agr. Expt. Sta., 1974) growing heifers made substantial gains when fed milo stover pellet or milo stover silage rations.

Experimental Procedure
Seventy-two heifer calves of Angus, Hereford and AxH breeding averaging 460 lbs.were allotted by breed and weight to 12 pens of six heifers each.Three pens were assigned to each of these rations: (1) forage sorghum silage plus soybean meal, (2) milo stover pellets plus soybean meal, (3) milo stover silage plus soybean meal and (4) milo stover silage plus soybean meal-corn gluten meal-urea.
Compositions of the supplements are shown in table 11.1; supplement A was fed in rations 1, 2 and 3; supplement B in ration 4. Corn gluten meal and urea each provided one-third of the crude protein equivalent in supplement B. All rations were mixed twice daily and fed free-choice.Initial and final weights of the heifers were taken after heifers went 15 hours without access to feed or water.
Forage sorghum and milo stover each was obtained from a single source in October, 1973.Milo stover was harvested after a killing frost from milo that yielded 95 bushels of grain per acre.The forage harvester 1 used was equipped with a three-inch recutter screen.Approximately 50 tons of forage sorghum and 100 tons of milo stover were ensiled in upright, concrete stave silos (10 ft.x 50 ft.).Milo stover pellets (¼ inch diameter) were processed by a commercial dehydrator. 2

Results and Discussion
Chemical analyses of the forages are shown in table 11.2.
Heifer performance is shown in table 11.3.Heifers fed forage sorghum silage gained fastest (P<.05) and most efficiently (P<.05).Differences in daily gain among the three milo stover rations were not statisitically significant.Calves fed the milo stover pellet ration tended to gain faster than calves fed either of the two milo stover silage rations.Heifers fed milo stover pellets consumed the most feed and required the most feed per lb. of gain.Supplementing milo stover silage with soybean meal or with soybean meal-corn gluten meal-urea made no difference in animal performance.
Performances by heifer calves fed forage sorghum silage, milo stover pellet or milo stover silage rations supplemented with soybean meal during the past two winters (1973 and 1974) are summarized in figure 11.1.Responses of heifers fed forage sorghum were similar from the two trials; however, heifers fed milo stover in trial 1 gained faster and more efficiently than heifers fed milo stover in trial 2. Differences in performance between the two years could be attributed to several factors: stover quality (crude protein, digestibility, etc.), weather condition, length of the wintering period.
In trial 1, calves fed stover pellets gained 80% as rapidly and 67% as efficiently, and those fed stover silage gained 70% as rapidly and 82% as efficiently as calves fed forage sorghum silage.In trial 2, those relative percentages were 68 and 50 for stover pellets .and50 and 55 for stover silage compared with forage sorghum silage.
Averages of the two trials and two milo stovers (pellets and silage) show that milo stover has a value of 63 to 67% that of forage sorghum.These results indicate that milo stover should not be used as the major energy source in growing rations if performance similar to that from grain silages is desired.Calves fed pelleted milo stover gain too inefficiently and calves fed ensiled milo stover gain too slowly for either to be acceptable to most cattlemen.However, a feeder willing to accept gains of about one pound a day could use milo stover.a,b,c Means in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (P<.05).
2 Values in parenthesis are dry matter intake as percentage of body weight.

1
Provided by Field Queen Corporation (a division of Hesston Corporation), Maize, Kansas. 2 C. K. Processing Co., Manhattan, Kansas.