Skip to main content
ARS Home » Plains Area » Lubbock, Texas » Cropping Systems Research Laboratory » Livestock Issues Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #278063
Title: Yeast cell wall supplementation alters the performance of beef heifers during the receiving period

Author
item YOUNG, TANNER R - Texas Tech University
item Sanchez, Nicole
item Carroll, Jeffery
item JENNINGS, MICHAEL - Texas Tech University
item CRIBBS, JOSHUA - Texas Tech University
item RATHMAN, RYAN - Texas Tech University
item CORLEY, JIMMIE - Lesaffre Yeast
item JOHNSON, BRADLEY - Texas Tech University

Submitted to: Journal of Animal Science Supplement
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 2/21/2012
Publication Date: 6/25/2012
Citation: Young, T., Sanchez, N.C., Carroll, J.A., Jennings, M.A., Cribbs, J.T., Rathman, R.J., Corley, J.R., Johnson, B.J. 2012. Yeast cell wall supplementation alters the performance of beef heifers during the receiving period [abstract]. Journal of Animal Science. 90:244(E-Suppl. 3).

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: A study was designed to determine the effect of feeding yeast cell wall (YCW) products on feedlot performance of newly-received crossbred heifers. Heifers (n=140; 225±9.4 kg) were obtained from commercial sale barns and transported to the Texas Tech University Beef Center in New Deal, Texas. Heifers were sorted by source (n=2) upon arrival and arranged in a completely randomized block design (35 pens; 7 pens/treatment; 4 heifers/pen). Heifers were separated into treatment groups receiving a Control Diet (CON; n=28), YCW A (2.5 grams/head/day; n=28), YCW AA (5.0 grams/head/day; n=28), YCW B (2.5 grams/head/day; n=28), or YCW C (2.5 grams/head/day; n=28) and were fed for 56 days. Daily DMI was recorded and individual body weight was collected every 14 days. A significant source by treatment interaction was detected, and data were analyzed accordingly. In Source 1, at d 28, YCW A (278±8.0 kg) and YCW C (285±8.1 kg) showed a greater increase in body weight compared to CON (272±8.0 kg; P=0.03). YCW C exhibited a higher body weight at day 42 compared to all other treatments (P=0.02). From day 0 to 28, YCW A (1.87±0.09 kg) and YCW C (2.10±0.10 kg) had higher avearge daily gain compared to CON (1.65±0.09 kg; P=0.03). YCW C showed improved average daily gain from day 0 to 42 compared to all other treatments (P<0.01). Dry matter intake was improved for YCW AA (7.27±0.20 kg) and YCW C (7.92±0.23 kg) compared to CON (6.75±0.20 kg; P=0.04) for day 0 to 42. YCW C had higher dry matter intake vs. CON from day 14 to 28 and day 28 to 42 (P = 0.05 and 0.02, respectively). Cumulative feed to gain was lower for YCW B compared to all other treatments (P=0.03). In Source 2, a linear effect for YCW A was detected from day 0 to 14 in body weight, average daily gain, and gain to feed (P = 0.01, 0.02, and 0.03, respectively). Collectively these data suggest that YCW supplementation can offer advantages in performance of newly received beef heifers.