TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION A. B. CONNER. DIRECTOR College Station, Texas BULLETIN NO. 613 JULY 1942 DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS J. M. JONES, R. A. HALL E. H. NEAL, J. H. JONES Division of Range Animal Husbandry AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS T. O. \VALTON, President u P1P? A ~...1 ,1 f.‘ r-l p'~_.' 3 i)"; a l Ballegem H Iifilliilll iflfi" i;7{1.;§‘ FGYF; la A 1m” F71”- “If [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] When dried citrus pulp was fed to replace 25 percent of the daily al- lowance of ear corn chop with husk in fattening rations for beef steers resultant gains and finish were practically the same as for the corn alone. When it was fed to replace as much as 59 percent, the consumption of feed, gain in weight, and the finish were reduced. The ration containing 45 to 60 percent of dried citrus pulp was less palatable and had slightly greater laxative effect than the ration containing the smaller amount. The dried citrus pulp, a by-product of a grapefruit juice calmery, con- sisted almost entirely of grapefruit peel, rag, and seed. Introduction CONTENTS Page General Plan of Experiment Cattle Used Feeds Used Feed Prices Results 1 9 3 7-3 8 Results 1 9 3 8-3 9 Results 193 9-40 Discussion Summary 10 12 14 18 19 _ t. .. ,._44_4'M i a 4 DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS J. M. Jones, R. A. Hall, E. M. Neal, J. H. Jones* The use of dried citrus fruit by-products for livestock feeding was first suggested in 1916 (1). Subsequent work by the Florida (2 & 3) and California (4 & 5) Experiment Stations‘ has shown that dried grapefruit cannery refuse and dried orange peel are in the class of high carbohy- drate concentrate feeds, and furthermore that cattle will eat these products. In a digestion trial with dried grapefruit refuse with 4 steers, Neal (1) at the Florida Station found 24.8 percent of the crude protein, 71.5 percent of the crude fiber, 92.4 percent of the nitrogen free extract, and 79.4 percent of the crude fat to be digestible. The dried grapefruit used yielded 1.2 percent digestible protein and 76 percent total di- gestible nutrients and was palatable. Neal (1) also noted that dried orange peel seemed to be as palatable as" dried grapefruit refuse and that dried grapefruit and orange cannery refuses have a laxative action when fed as a large proportion of the ration. The general effects of the dried grapefruit refuse were noted as being favorable as indicated by thrifty appearance, gloss of the coat of hair, and improvement in thickness of flesh. In later work, Arnold, Becker, and Neal at the Florida Station (2) found that dried grapefruit pulp was palatable to dairy cows and that no flavor characteristic of that product occurred in the milk during the feeding trials in question. They also observed that Florida dairymen have fed a considerable quantity of fresh citrus pulp to dairy cows and heifers and that the fermenting product tended to impart a slight flavor to the milk. Grapefruit pulp ensiled with grass by a Florida cattleman produced a fair quality of silage; however, the cattle utilizing this feed showed preference for the ensiled rag and seed rather than the peel. Processors‘ in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas faced with the problem of disposing of citrus cannery refuse and with the available information in regard to the feeding value of dried citrus products, began to prepare dried citrus pulp in 1937. The estimated average tonnage produced by years since that time is as follows: 1937-38, 9400 tons; 1938-39, 10,200 tons; 1939-40, 2700 tons, and 1940-41, 8000 tons‘. When this product, which to date in Texas has consisted of approximately 85 and 15 percent, respectively, of grapefruit and orange peel and rag, ap- peared on the Texas market, questions arose as to its feeding value. The Texas Station accordingly began work to determine the feeding value of the product. Expensive to dehydrate and distribute, the manufacturers *Chief, Division of Range Animal Husbandry; Superintendent, Substation No. 1, Beeville; Animal Husbandman, Substation No. 1, Beeville; and Animal Hus- bandman, Division of Range Animal Husbandry, respectively. 6 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION wished to know whether the dried citrus pulp pad high enough feed value to offset the cost of preparation. Feeders wished to know its value in comparison to other available carbohydrate feeds such as ear corn chop with husk. General Plan of Experiment Since dried citrus pulp is known to be a feed high in carbohydrates, it was logical to compare it with a grain feed in order to determine the comparative price which the feeder can afiord to pay for the citrus pulp. Ear corn chop with husk was selected for the comparison since it was readily available in the region and since it has a content of crude fiber and nitrogen free extract quite similar to that of dried citrus pulp. Believing also that dried citrus pulp to a certain extent lacked palatabil- ity, it was fed as a replacement for ear corn chop with husk in fattening rations (1) in moderate amount, and (2) in as large amount as would be readily consumed. The experiment involved three separate feeding trials conducted during three consecutive years, 1937-38, 1938-39, and 1939- 40. The results are presented separately by years then brought together in the form of a summary. Three lots of feeder steers were used in each of the three feeding trials. The averages of three initial and three final individual weights secured on consecutive days constituted the initial and final Weights of the lots. The lots were formed, after the third initial weighing, as equally as pos- sible, with reference to weight and type. Individual weights were taken at 28-day intervals in regular manner. Records of all feeds »fed and con- sumed were obtained; also notes in regard to the day to day appetite and condition of the steers were recorded. The plan in feeding was as follows: Lot 1, (check), ear corn chop with husk, cottonseed meal, roughage, and pulverized limestone or pulverized oyster-shell. Lot 2, same as Lot 1, except that 25 per cent of the ear corn chop with husk was replaced by dried citrus peel and pulp. Lot 3, same as Lot 1, except that as much of the ear corn chop with husk was replaced by dried citrus pulp as would, in the judgment of the feeder, be consumed. Each year the steers were fed with the idea of fattening them as quickly as practicable and the ear corn chop with husk and mixtures of dried citrus pulp were increased as rapidly as could be done without get- ting the steers off feed. The cottonseed meal was fed in a regular amount. from start to close of the feeding period. All of the feeds‘ were mixed together and were given twice daily, about 8 a. m. and 5 p. m., and in such amount as to result in only slight refusal of the less palatable por- tions. The percentage of dried citrus pulp fed to Lot 3 varied for the different years and this variation is described for each feeding trial. i .1 1 1. a DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS 7 Cattle Used Twenty-four head of good to medium grade Here-ford yearling steers produced in the Beeville area were used in the first feeding trial, a peri- od of 140 days, December 9, 1937, to April 28, 1938. These steers were in medium flesh and weighed an average of 621 pounds per head when started on feed. Thirty head of 555 pound good to choice grade Hereford steer calves purchased in Llano County were used in the second feeding trial, a ,period of 16s days, Novemb-er 16, 193s, to May s, 1939. These calves were in good flesh when started on feed. For the third trial of 154 days, December 20, 1939 to May 22, 1940, - 3O head of medium to good grade Hereford steer calves were secured in the Corpus Christi area. These calves were received October 30, and were dehorned at that time. After dehorning they were pastured and fed for 51 days before the start of the test, and in this period they gained 96 pounds per head. They entered the test at an average Weight of 536 pounds per head and were in good condition as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Representative I-ot of Feeder Steer Calves (1939-40 trial). Feeds Used The dried citrus pulp used was prepared at Weslaco. It consisted al- most entirely of grapefruit peel, rag and seed, a by-product of a grape- fruit juice cannery. It was of good quality, light brown in color, and as used in these tests was somewhat coarser than the ear corn chop with husk. Dried citrus pulp is offered on the market in different degrees of fineness; however, in this test the product was in the form of medium 8 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT‘ STATION to fine “cake” rather than finely ground. Most of the ear corn used was purchased locally and was of a White variety. It was ground with the husk and is referred to here as ear corn chop with husk. The cottonseed meal used Was purchased under a guarantee of 43 percent protein con- 7 tent. The bulk of the roughage which was fed consisted of hegari silage produced on the station. A limited amount of cottonseed hulls was fed during the first trial. Either pulverized limestone or pulverized oyster- shell was used as a calcium supplement in each trial and a good grade of granulated salt was fed free choice. Table 1 shows the values in chem- ical composition which were used in the calculations involving the pro- ductive value of the dried citrus pulp. Samples of the dried citrus pulp and of the ear corn chop with husk were analyzed in 1937-38 and 1938- 39. Sample of hegari silage, cottonseed meal, and cottonseed hulls were ' Table 1. Percentage Composition of Feeds ‘Used in Experimenirt i i i i Crude iNitrogen-§ Kind of feed Year Protein Fat i fiber free Water Ash i i extract ‘i i . . i 1937-38 0.15 3.05 i 10.43 i 01.93 1 10.18 i ~00 D“"d°‘tr“spee1andp“1p ““““ 1931039 5.00 1.83 i 11.10 i 00.95 i 11.10 8.53 i ;‘ i——— i[1937-38 8.40 3.11 i 11.00 i 04.03 i 11.54 i 1.92 Ear corn chop with husk _______ “i 1938-89 8.75 3.07 11.47 $.21 i 8.52 i 1.98 8. 3.2 . 10.0 .0 i 9.0 1 1.9 111937-38 42.00 7.32 10.28 27.18 ‘ 7.79 i—5.43 Owtonseed meal """"""""" "i1 J+ 43.2 7.5 i 10.8 20.2 0.8 5.5 . . i _ i 7 *7 *7 i i" i9 "' 1 _____________________ “@1937 38 2.55 0.90 0.0 _.1.2- . 05.93 -85 Hegansiage \ + 2.5 0.90 0.3 18.8 07.2 1.3 i 1 ~~— h n _________________ __l§19*37-38 3.09 0.87 i 47.43 33.74 i 1122 2.90 Cottonseed u s 1 + 4.1 0.9 1 47.0 35.3 i 94 2.7 i i *Analy.=es by Division of Chemistry, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. iAverage analyses from ‘Texas Station Bulletin 461. analyze-d only in 1937-38. The productive values for the ear corn chop with husk, hegari silage, cottonseed meal and cottonseed hulls were calcu- lated fPOm UIBSB analyses according to the digestion coefficnents and the method shown by Fraps (2). According to the analyses the dried citrus pulp used in 1937-38 was superior to that used in 1938-3 9. When the total’ digestible nutrients for the dried citrus pulp used in the two years are calculated from the digestion coefficients determined by Neal (1) it is found that the feed used in 1937-38 contained 69.1 percent T.D.N. while that used in 1938-39 contained 67.2 percent. The calculated pro- ductive values of the ear corn chop with husk in therms per 100 pounds was 70.1 therms for 1937-38 and 72.2 therms for 1938-39. Feed Prices The feed prices shown in Table 2 except for dried citrus pulp were the estimated average of the prices prevailing for the feeds during each of the three f-eeding trials. Since dried citrus pulp and the ear corn chop DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS 9 Table 2. Peed Prices Per Ton Feeds l 1937-38 19384-39 1939-40 Ear corn chop with husk _______________________________ __1; $20.00 l $13410 $2430 Dried citrus pulp--- .... _-\ 20.00 i 13.00 24,00 Cottonseed meal- _______________________________________ _—‘ 27.00 i 27.00 31,100 Silage, HegarL _________________________________________ __§ 4.00 l 3,00 3,00 Hegari stovelu- ‘ _____________ __‘ _____________ -_ 8.00 Cottonseed hulls- _______________________________________ __§ i 5.00 ________________________ __ Pulverized limestone or oyster shell .................... __i 15.00 , 17.00 1090 Granulated salt---" __ _‘ 17.00 i 15.00 12.00 with husk were compared on a replacement basis, both feeds were charged to the steers at the same price. Experimental Results Gains, finish, carcass grade, and net financial return are factors con- sidered in arriving at the comparative desirability of the ear corn chop with husk and dried citrus pulp used as fattening feeds: The produc- tive value of the dried citrus pulp in comparison to the ear corn chop with husk is calculated in each trial. The palatability of the dried citrus pulp, the condition of the droppings, and the coat of hair in all lots are likewise noted. Table 3 shows the average rations by 28-day periods fed to the respective groups in each of the three experiments‘. 10 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Table 3. Average Rations In Pounds Consumed ‘by 28-Day Feeding Perlodsl 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th? Lot Year Ration 28 28 28 28 28 Aver- days days days days days days age ' Corn! _________________ __ 7.70 11.40 11.47 14.21 16.00 _____ _- 12. 1937-39‘ Cottonseed meal ______ __ 2.50 2.61 2.93 3.00 3.00 - ---- -- 2. Hegari silage __________ -- 214.55 12.12 9.30 6.99 4.38 _____ _- 11 C0111 __________________ __ 4.98 7.8) 11.80 14.12 15.31 16.9 11 1. < 1938-39 Cottonseed meal ______ -- 2.28 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.47 2. Hegarl silage .......... _. 23.38 20.95 17.70 13.10 8.10 5.70 14 | Corn- _________________ -- 6.73 8.60 11.90 15.10 16.90 17.50 12. 1939-40 { Cottonseed meal ...... __ 2.30 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.45 2.39 2 L [ Hegari silage __________ _- 16.10 13.80 13.40 9.30 6.20 3.00 10. Corn .................. _- 5.77 8.80 8.60 10.65 12.05 ..... -_ 9. 1937-39‘ Cottonseed meal ______ -- 2.50 2.63 2.93 3.00 3.00 _ ____ _- 2 Citrus feed ____________ _- 1.92 2.90 2.87 3.55 4.02 _____ -_ 3 Hegari silage .......... __ 24.22 12.54 9.30 6.99 4.54 _____ -- 11. [ Corn- ................. --l 3.74 5.90 8.80 10.49 11.48 12.61 8 2. ~ 1938-39 Cottonseed meal ______ _- 2.28 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.60 2.48 2. Citrus teed ____________ _- 1.25 2.00 2.90 3.50 3.83 4.20 2. Hegari silage __________ -- 23.46 20.92 17.70 13.10 8.06 5.72 14. [ Corn __________________ __ 5.00 6.40 8.90 11.10 12.40 13.00 9. 1939-40 { Cottonseed meal ______ __ 2.30 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.44 2.39 2 Citrus feed; ........... -- 1.70 2.20 3.00 3.70 4.10 4.30 3. L Hegari silage __________ _- 16.10 13.80 13.20 8.90 6.20 3.10 10. _~ 1 Corn __________________ -- 5.77 1 4e 5.74 6.99 7.59 ..... -_ e 1937-38* Cottonseed meal ______ -_ 2.50 2.60 2.93 3.00 3.00 _ ____ __ 2. Citrus teed ............ -_ 1.93 4.05 5.74 7.22 2.26 ..... _- 5 Hegari sliage- .......... -- 24.89 11.98 9.30 6.99 4.55 ..... -- 11 Corn_ _________________ __ 2.49 3.90 5.00 4.97 4.90 4.96 4 3 1938-39 Cottonseed meal ...... -- 2.28 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.48 2 Citrus teed ____________ -- 2249 3.90 6.50 7.65 8.42 8.92 6. Hegari silage .......... _- 23.33 20.87 17.55 12.99 8.10 5.72 14 I l l Corn .................. -- 3.40 4.20 5.00 4.90 4.80 4.60 4 1939-40 Cottonseed meal ______ _- 2.30 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.48 2.29 2 t Citrus teed ____________ -- 3.10 4.20 6.00 7.70 9.40 9.60 6 Hegari silage .......... -. 15.20 13.70 10.90 8.20 6.20 3.00 1o *3.17 pounds cottonseed hulls fed daily in addition to feeds shown, 193038. iOnly .14 days in sixth period for 1939-40. ZEar corn chop with husk fed in each test. 1One-tenth pound pulverized limestone or oyster shell per head daily was fed. Results 1937-38 The 24 head of Hereford yearling steers used in 1937-38 were divided into three comparable groups of 8 head each and were “fed for a 140-day period on fattening rations as follows: Lot 1 (check), ear corn chop with husk, cottonseed meal, hegari sil- age, cottonseed hulls, and pulverized oyster-shell. Lot 2, same as‘ Lot 1, except that 25% o1.’ the ear corn chop with husk was replaced by dried citrus pulp. Lot 3, same as Lot 1, except that 45% of the ear corn chop with husk was replaced by dried citrus pulp. The steers were fed with the idea of fattening them as quickly as prac- _ ticable and the concentrates were held at the same level in all lots. sees sees sees see: sass sass sea see has DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF CATTLE‘ FATTENING RATIONS 11 In Lot 2 the dried citrus pulp was fed throughout to replace 25% of the daily allowance of the ear corn chop with husk. In Lot 3 the dried citrus pulp was started at 25 % and the average percentages fed by periods were in order 25%, 35%, 50%, 51% and 52% with an average of 45% for the entire 140-day feeding period. shown in Table 4. A summary of the feeding trial is Table 4. Summary first Feeding‘ Trial December 9, 1937, to April 28, 1938- ‘ 40 Days Lot number ----- -_ 2 | 3 Number of steers _____________________________________________ -- 8 8 l 8 Variables in feeding ___ -- 25% citrus 45% citrus Corn 75% corn 55% corn Averages per Steer Initial weight, lbs. __________________________________________ __ 622 620 622 Final weight at feedlot, lbs. _______________________________ -_ 899 908 905 Final weight at San Antonio market, lbs. ________________ __ 850 858 856 Gain basis feedlot weight, lbs. ....................... __ 277 2% 283 Gain basis market weight, lbs _______________________ -_ 228 _ 238 234 Daily gain basis feedlot weight, lbs. ______________________ __ 1.98 2.06 2.02 Daily gain basis market weight, lbs. ______________________ __ 1.63 1.70 1.67 Shrinkage enroute market, percent _________________________ -_ 5.45 5.51. 5.41 Slaughter data Carcass weight (hot), lbs. 520 533 536 Dressing % basis hot carcass 8a market weight ___________ -_ 61.2 62.1 62.6 Dressing % basis hot carcass 8n feedlot weight ___________ __ 57.8 58.7 59.2 Carcass grades (approximate) Strictly good to choice 5 3 3 Top medium to good ___- 2 1 5 Medium __ 1 4 0 Feed consumed Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ___________________________ __ 1762 1285 940 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ________________________________________________ -. 427 7'61 Cottonseed meal, lbs. ____ __ _ l 393 393 393 Hegari silage, lbs. ________________________________________ __ 1618 1613 1616 Cottonseed hulls, lbs. _ _ . . . _ . _ . __ 443 445 444 Salt, lbs. ___ -_ _- 4.4a 4.50 5.75 Pulverized oyster shell, lbs. 14 14 14 Average rations Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ___________________________ __ 12.16 9.18 6.72 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. 3.05 5.44 Cottonseed meal, lbs. 2.81 2.81 2.81 Hegari silage, lbs. 11.47 11.52 11.55 Cottonseed hulls, lbs. 3.16 3.18 3.17 Salt, ounces .51 .51 .66 Pulverized oyster shell, lb. .10 .10 .10 Feed consumed per cwt. gain basis feedlot weight Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ____________________________ _- 614 446 332 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ___ 148 269 Cottonseed meal, lbs. 142 137 139 Hegari silage, lbs. _- 584» 560 571 Cottonseed hulls, lbs. 160 154 157 Cost of feed per cwt. gain (feed consumed) Basis feedlot weight $ 9.68 8 9.35 8 9.47 Basis market weight“--- _- - 11.76 11.31 11.46 Financial statement Initial cost at $7.25 per cwt. ____ __ _ $45.10 $44.95 $45.10 Feed cost (feed consumed) ___ 26.82 26.92 26.81 Marketing cost at $.33 per cwt. .......................... -- 2.81 2.83 2.82 Total cost (not including labor) __________________________ -_ 74.73 74.70 74.73 Amount received at $8.80 per cwt. _______________________ -_ 74.80 75.50 75.33 Net return .07 .80 .60 12 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION The ration fed to Lot 2 in which the dried citrus pulp replaced 25 per- cent of the ear corn chop with husk was fully as palatable as the ration fed to Lot 1. The ration fed to Lot 3 was palatable also, and the steers in both Lots 2 and 3 shed earlier and were more desirable in hair coat ’ than the steers in Lot 1. Lots 2 and 3 had slight advantage in gain and dressed yield. It was not possible to distinguish any difference in the color of fat between the lots but Lot 1 carcasses were rated as being more thickly and uniformly covered than the carcasses of Lots 2 and 3. Based on a productiv-e value of 70.1 therms per 100 pounds for the ear corn chop with husk the productive value for the dried citrus pulp fed to Lot 2 was 79.3 therms, while that fed to Lot 3 was 73.2 therms on basis of feedlot gains. At the same price per ton for the ear corn chop with husk and the dried citrus pulp it was profitable to include the dried citrus pulp in the ration. Results 1938-39 The 3O head of good to choice Hereford steer calves used in 1938-39 were divided into three groups of 10 each, and were fed according to the same plan as the yearling steers used in 1937-38, except that Lot 3 was fed a larger percentage of dried citrus pulp. Lot 2 was‘ again fed dried citrus pulp to replace 25 percent of the ear corn chop with husk. Lot 3 was fed a mixture of equal parts of the citrus and corn feeds dur- ing the first 56 days. During the last four 28-day periods 57 percent, 62 percent, 63 percent, and 64 percent of the ear corn chop with husk was replaced with the dried citrus pulp. For the entire 168-day feeding period an average of 59 percent of the ear corn chop with husk was re- placed with the dried citrus pulp. A larger percentage of dried citrus" pulp would have been used had the steers in Lot 3 shown an appetite for it. After 57 to 60 percent of the ear corn chop with husk had bee-n replaced with the dried citrus pulp the appetites of the steers in Lot 3 began to decline. A dry roughage supplement was not included in the rations in this trial as was the case in 1937-38. The droppings were somewhat looser in Lot 3 than in Lots 1 and 2, but there was no particular problem from scouring in Lot 3 at any time. A summary of the feeding trial is shown in Table 5. _..........ni.;l..........i ‘E.¢_~_>LJ>_"4'_E..MJJ‘LLAA. L.» < . . DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF‘ CATTLE? FATTENING RATIONS l3 Table 5. Summary Second Feeding Trial November 16, 1938 to May 3, 1939— 168 Days Lot number __________________________________________________ __ 1 2 i. 3 i Number of steers _____________________________________________ __ 10 10 i 10 Variables in feeding __________________________________________ __ 25% citrus‘ 59% citrus Corn 75% corn 41% corn Averages per Steer Initial weight, lbs. __________________________________________ -_ 555 556 5.55 Final weight at feedlot, lbs. _______________________________ -_ 948 933 918 Final weight at San Antonio market, lbs. ________________ __ 904 895 869 Gain basis feedlot weight, lbs. _____________________________ __ 393 377 363 Gain basis market weight, lbs. _____________________________ __ 349 339 314 Daily gain basis feedlot weight, lbs. _______________________ __ 2.34 2.214 2.16 Daily gain basis market weight, lbs. ______________________ __ 2.08 2.02 1.87 Shinkage enroute market, percent __________________________ __ 4.64 4.07 5.34 Slaughter data Carcass weight (hot), lbs. ________________________________ __ 568 579 553 Dressing % basis hot carcass and market weight ________ -_ 62.8 64.7 63.6 Dressing % basis hot carcass and feedlot weight ________ -- 59.9 62.1 60.2 Carcass grades (Swift) 11’s choice _________________________________________________ __ 2 2 2 12's strictly good to choice ______________________________ __ 7 8 6 13’s top medium to good ________________________________ __i 1 __________ __ 2 Feed consumed g Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ___________________________ __ 1983- 1484 734 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ________________________________________________ __ 495 1062 Cottonseed meal, lbs. _____________________________________ __1 413 413 412 Hegari silage, lbs. ________________________________________ __. 2489 2489 2479 Salt, lbs. __________________________________________________ __i 9.6 5.6 6.2 Pulverized oyster shell, lbs. ______________________________ __ 16.8 16.8 16.8 Average rations 3 ' Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ____________________________ -_f 11.8 8.83 4.37 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ____________________________________ __‘ __________ __ 2.95 6.32 Cottonseed meal, lbs. _____________________________________ __'1 2.46 2.46 2.45 Hegari silage, lbs. _____________________________________ __ 14.82 14.81 14.76 Salt, ounces _______________________________________________ __; .91 53 .59 Pulverized oyster shell, lb. _______________________________ -_|. .10 10 .10 Feed consumed per cwt. gain basis feedlot weight Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ........................... -_| 505 394 202 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ________________________________________________ __ 131 292 Cottonseed meal, lbs. _____________________________________ __ 105 110 114 Hegari silage, lbs. ________________________________________ __ 633 660 683 Cost of feed per cwt. gain (feed consumed) Basis feedlot weight _______________________________________ _-% $ 5.70 $ 5.93 $ 5.82 Basis market weight _______________________________________ -_ 6.42 6.60 6.73 Financial statement Initial cost at $8.65 per cwt. _____________________________ __ $48.01 $48.09 $48.01 Feed cost (feed consumed) ________________________________ __ 22.41 22.36 21.14 Marketing cost at $.33 per cwt. __________________________ _-* 2.98 2.95 2.87 Total cost (not including labor) _________________________ __ 73.40 73.40 72.02 Amount received at $10.25 per cwt. ______________________ __ 92.66 91.74 89.07 Net return _________________________________________________ __ 19.26 i 18.34 17.05 On the basis of both feedlot and market Weights, Lot 1 made slightly great-er gain than Lot 2 in which the dried citrus pulp replaced 25 per- cent of the ear corn chop with husk. Lots 2 and 3 in which the dried citrus pulp replaced a portion of ear corn chop as in 1937-38 again made higher dressed yields than Lot 1, check group. 14 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Financial return, with ear corn chop with husk and dried citrus pulp charg-ed at the same price, favored Lot 1, check group, because of slightly greater weight at market. The use of as much as 59 percent of dried citrus pulp as replacement for the ear corn chop with husk was less desirable than the use of only 25 percent. Lack of palatability resulting in decreased feed consumption, (Lot 3 consumed only 92 percent as much total concentrates as Lots 1 and 2), and slight laxative effect of the dried citrus pulp was apparently responsible for this result rather than a lack of productive energy in the feed. Based on a productive value of 72.2 therms per 100 pounds for the ear corn chop with husk and on feedlot gain, the average productive value for the dried citrus‘ pulp fed to Lots 2 and 3 was 67.7 therms per 100 pounds. In the 1937-38 trial it was noted that the lots fed dried citrus pulp in the ration had better appearance in regard to coat of hair. In this trial there were no appreciable differences in hair coat and all lots car- ried a desirable market finish. Results 1939-40 The thirty head of good quality Hereford steer calves used in 1939-40 were received October 30 but were not divided into groups and started on test until December 20. During this preliminary period of 51 days they made an average gain of 96 pounds per head and entered the test in good flesh. As in the previous trials Lot 1 was fed ear corn chop with husk and Lot 2 was fed dried citrus pulp to replace 25 percent of the ear corn chop with husk. Lot 3 was fed the dried citrus pulp to replace 48 percent, 50 percent, 54.5 percent, 61 percent, 66.2 percent, and 67.6 percent of the ear corn chop with husk during the five successive 28-day feeding periods and the final 14-day period. An average of 59 percent of the dried citrus pulp and 41 percent of the ear corn chop with husk was fed during the 154-day feeding period. Lot 1, fed the ear corn chop with husk had better appetite throughout the trial than Lots 2 and 3. Lot 3 was slow to take increase in concen- trates after the third 28-day period and was irregular in appetite. Con- trary to the procedure in the first trial the three lots were not held to the same level of concentrates but were fed according to appetite. As‘ a result Lot 3 consumed only 90 percent as much concentrate feed as Lot 1; but Lot 2 consumed 99 percent as much as Lot 1. Apparently, the re- placement of 25 percent of the ear corn chop with husk by dried citrus pulp had little efiect upon feed consumption while the use of higher per- centages as fed to Lot 3 reduced feed consumption. There was some difficulty from looseness in the various lots from time to time. The condition occurred more frequently in Lot 3 than in the other lots which tends to confirm previous observations of a slight laxa- tive effect of the dried citrus pulp. A summary of the feeding trial is shown in Table 6. l. _....'.\'J1A\Q'\.LL:LLA_.AQQ&AQAAt4L/X4LKI>;L_ .2 41.... _. An DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BLEEF CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS 15 Table 6. Summary Third Peeding Trial December 20, 1939 to May 22, 1940— 115:4.- Days i Lot number ______________ _- i 1 2 3 Number of steers i 10 10 1O Variables in feeding 25% citrus 59% citrus i Corn 75% corn 41% corn i Averages per Steer i Initial weight, lbs. \ 536 537 535 Final weight at feedlot, lbs. -‘ 873 861 827 Final weight at San Antonio market, lbs. ________________ --i 838 823 799 Gain basis feedlot weight, lbs. 337 324 292 Gain basis market weight, lbs. ____________________________ —&‘ 302 286 264 Daily gain basis teedlot weight, lbs. ....................... “i 2.19 2.10 1.90 Daily gain basis market weight, lbs ________________________ -1 1.96 1.86 1.71 Shrinkage enroute market, percent _________________________ __1 4.01 4.41 3.39 Slaughter data ‘ Carcass weight (hot), lbs. 522 518 502 Dressing % basis hot carcass and market weight ........ _-», 62.3 62.9 62.8 Dressing % basis hot carcass and feedlot weight ........ _-j 59.8 60.2 60.7 Carcass grades (Swift) i 11's choice __ i 3 2 __________ __ 12's strictly good to choice ___- 6 8 8 13’ top medium to good 1 __________ _- 1 14's medium--- ___- ___ _| __________ __ 1 Feed consumed Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ____________________________ __ 1902 1410 691 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ..... __ 469 990 Cottonseed meal, lbs. 376- 376 373 Hegari silage, lbs. __-__ 1689 1671 1561 Salt, lbs. 6.25 7.05 8.85 Pulverized limestone, lbs. 14.1 14.1 14.1 Average rations Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ___________________________ __ 12.35 9.16 4.4-9 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. ~ 3.05 6.43 Cottonseed meal, lbs. 2.44 2.44 2.42 Hegari silage, lbs. ....... __ 10.97 10.85 10.13 Salt, ounces ......... -_ .66 .74 .74 Pulverized limestone, lb. .09 .09 .09 Feed consumed per cwt. gain basis feedlot weight Ear corn chop with husk, lbs. ___________________________ __ 564 435 237 Dried citrus pulp, lbs. 145 339 Cottonseed meal, lbs. 112 116 128 Hegari silage, lbs. _____ -- 501 516 535 Cost oftieed per cwt. gain (feed consumed) $ $ Basis eedlot weight 9.51 80 $ 9.99 Basis market weight 10.61 11.10 11.05 Financial statement Initial cost at $8.26 per cwt. $44.27 $44.36 $44.19 Feed cost (feed consumed) ___- 32.04 31.75 29.16 Marketing cost at $.33 per cwt. __________________________ __ 2.77 2.72 2.64 Total cost (not including labor) .......................... -_ 79.08 78.83 75.99 Amount received at $10.25 per cwt ........................ -- 85.90 84.36 81.90 Net return 6.82 5.53 5.91 16 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STAJTIUN In comparing Lot 1, fed the ear corn with husk as the only carbro- hydrate concentrate, with Lot 3, fed an average of 59 percent dried cit- rus pulp, and 41 per-cent 0f the ear corn chop with husk, Lot 1 made 15 percent greater gain on basis of feedlot weights‘ and had higher finish. Lot 2, receiving 25 percent of the dried citrus pulp as a replacement for the ear corn chop With husk made 11 percent greater gain than Lot 3 and had higher finish. Lot 1 made only 4 percent greater gain on basis of feedlot weights than Lot 2 in which dried citrus pulp replaced 25% of the ear corn chop with husk and this advantage almost disappeared on basis of the final carcass weights. Carcass grades were practically equal between these two lots. These results indicate that 25 percent of the allowance of the ear corn chop with husk in the fattening ration may be replaced satisfactorily by dried citrus pulp. On the basis of financial return in this test it was more profitable to ‘feed the ear corn chop with husk than to include dried citrus pulp in the ration when both feeds were charged at the same price. It was less‘ profit- able to feed the larger amount of the citrus pulp than the smaller amount. All of the lots sold at the same price; however, had Lot 3 peen sold separately it would have brought a lower price than Lots 1 and 2 be- cause of a lack of finish which was shown by carcass grades. Figures 2, 3, and 4 show the three lots of steers at the close of the feeding period. There was as in 1938-39 little if any difference in glossiness of coats of hair. The average productive value of the dried citrus pulp fed to Lots 2 and 3 in this trial based on feedlot gain and a productive value of 72.2 therms‘ per 100 pounds for the ear corn with husk was 68.4 therms. Figure 2. Lot 1 (Check) at Close of 1939-40 trial. Fed Ear Corn, Chop With Husk, Cottonseed Meal, and Hegari Silage. .. l... .. . ,. .. . . . ._.l...-.,... DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF‘ CATTLE FATTENING RATIONS 17 Pigure 3. Lot 2 at Close of 1939-40 trial. Dried Citrus Pulp Replaced 2'5 Percent of the Ear Corn Chop With Husk]. Pigure _4. Lot 3 at Close of 1939-40 trial. Dried Citrus Pulp Replaced 59 Percent of the Ear Corn Chop With‘ Husk. 1s BULLETIN N0. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Discussion The experiments to determine the r-elative feeding values of dried cit- rus pulp and ear corn. chop with husk were started in the fall of 1937 and continued through three feeding seasons. A summary of each of the three tests‘, in which the average feed con- sumption, steer gains, and other pertinent data for each of the respec- tive- tests is included as shown in Tables 4, 5, and 6. Lot 1, the check group, was fed the ear corn chop with husk as the carbohydrate concentrate, while in Lot 2, dried citrus pulp was included to replace 25 percent of the allowance of the ear corn chop with husk during the three feeding trials conducted in 1937-38, 1938-39, and 1939- 40. Lot 3 was“ fed dried citrus pulp to replace an average of 45 percent of the allowance of the ear corn -chop with husk in the first, and 59 per- cent in the second and third trials. In the first trial with yearling steers, which extended over a 140-day period, Lots 1 and 2 were held to the same level of concentrate feed as was consumed by Lot 3, fed the larger amount of dried citrus pulp. In the two succeeding trials with steer calves, Lots 1 and 2 were not re- stricted to the same level of concentrates as were consumed by Lot 3, but Were fed according to appetite and consumed approximately 8 to 10 percent more concentrate feed. One-tenth ounce pulverized oyster-shell per head daily was fed in each of the three trials. Salt was available to the steers at all times. In the first experiment, as shown in Table 4, an average of 3.2 pounds of cottons-eed hulls was fed per head daily in addition to the silage, how- ever, a dry roughage was not included in the last two trials. Gains on basis of both feedlot and market weights favored the corn- fed group, Lot 1, over Lots 2 and 3 during the last two trials in which calves were used; but in the first trial with yearlings, Lots 2 and 3, in which the dried citrus pulp replaced a portion of the ear corn chop with husk, made greater gain than Lot 1. Lot 2, fed the smaller amount of dried citrus pulp, likewise made greater gain in each te-st than Lot 3, fed the larger amount of the dried citrus‘ pulp. Carcass grades, except for the first trial in which the ratings were only approximate, rankedin order of desirability were Lots 2, 1, 3. The dif- ferences were slight in each instance except for Lot 3 in the third trial, when this lot failed to attain desirable finish. In each of the three tests, Lots 2 and 3 in which dried citrus pulp replaced part of the corn made . slightly higher dressed yields on the basis of both feedlot and market weights than Lot 1 fed entirely ear corn chop with husk as carbohydrate concentrate. When dried citrus pulp was fed to replace 59 percent of the allowance of the ear corn chop with husk during the second and third trials, the ration was less palatable than when only 25 percent of this feed replaced the corn. Furthermore, gain and finish were reduced, and there was DRIED CITRUS PULP IN BEEF‘ ‘CATTLE FATTENING RATIOXS 19 also an indication of slight laxative effect during the second trial when the condition of the droppings was carefully observed. The average productive value of the dried citrus pulp in therms per 100 pounds fed in these tests was 70.8 as compared with a calculated productive value of 71.5 therms for the corn chop with husk. As shown in Tables 4 and 5, Lot 2, in which 25 % of the ear corn chop with husk was replaced by dried citrus pulp, produced heavier carcasses than the check group which indicates an increased value of the limited amount of dried citrus pulp over a similar allowance of ear corn chop with husk. Then, if the final live weights of the respective lots are ad- justed to a common dressing percentage each year to agree with the car- cass Weights, the gains“ calculated from the adjusted weights become more favorable to the lots fed dried citrus pulp. Lot 1, for example, had a weighted average of 340 pounds of feedlot gain for the three years, as compared with 333 pounds for Lot 2, and 315 pounds for Lot 3, fed the high percentage of dried citrus pulp, but on the adjusted basis, the respective average gains were Lot 1, 340 pounds; Lot 2, 351 pounds; and Lot 3, 327 pounds. While the differences in gain are not significant on this basis, the lots in order of desirability in gain rank 2, 1, 3, just as they do in average carcass weights, dressing percentage and carcass grade. Productive value of the dried citrus pulp, when based on the adjusted gains, feedlot basis, average 81.7 therms. Summary Dried citrus pulp, when fed to replace not more than 25 percent of the ear corn chop with husk, resulted in the production of practically equal gains but slightly higher finish than groups fed ear corn chop with husk as the carbohydrate concentrate portion of the ration. The replacement 0f as much as 60 percent of the daily allowance of earn corn chop with husk by dried citrus pulp produced a feed which was less palatable, and had slightly greater laxative effect, and re- duced feed consumption, gains and finish. In these tests a mixture of 75 parts ear corn chop with husk and 25 parts dried citrus pulp as the carbohydrate concentrate produced satisfactory results. Productive values in therms calculated from the actual feedlot gains were slightly lower for the dried citrus pulp than for the ear corn chop with husk; however, when gains were adjusted to agree with dressing percentage these values were higher for the citrus feed than for the ear corn chop with husk. There were no distinguishing differences in the color of fat between the check groups fed ear corn chop with husk and those which received the dried citrus pulp as replacement of varying amounts of ear corn chop with husk. 20 BULLETIN NO. 613, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION REFERENCES Neal, W. M., et al. (1935). Citrus By-Products. Florida Ag. Expt. Sta. Bul. 275 Arnold, P. T. Dix, Becker, R. B., and Neal, W. M. II. Dried Grave F The Feeding Value and Nutritive Properties ‘ Pulp for Milk Production. Florida Ag. Expt. Sta. Bul. 354 (1941). Mead, S. W. and Guilbert, H. R. The Digestibility of Certain Fruit =_ Products as Determined for Ruminants. Part I. and Raisin Pulp. California Ag. Expt. Sta. Bul. 409 (1926). Mead, S. W. and Guilbert, H. R. Part 2. 439 (1927). Fraps, G. S. (1932). The Composition and Utilization of Texas Fee - Stuffs. Texas Ag. Expt. Sta. Bul. 461. ‘Sfldfl-VCS ‘3931100 H ‘P V! ‘AKVHHI’! Dried Orange ' »=_ Dried Pineapple Pulp, D f Lemon Pulp, and Dried Olive Pulp. California Ag. Expt. Sta. B _v‘.'1"~1.. g .