Research Article| Volume 6, ISSUE 2, P26-30, September 1990

Download started.


The Effects of Wet Brewers Grain1Levels on Finishing Steer Performance

      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.


      Sixty-four mixed breed steers were blocked on weight, randomly assigned to four treatments, and placed in individual pens. Treatments included finishing diets containing on a dry matter basis: 1) 8% corn silage (CS), 2) 8% wet brewers grain (WBG),3) 16% WBG, and 4) 24% WBG. Feed intake washigher (P <.05) for steers fed 16 or 24% WBG compared to those fed 8% WBG or CS diets. Intake was not different among animals fed the dietary treatments by the end of the 111-day trial. Cattle fed 16% WBG gained faster (P <.10) than those fed the 24% WBG diet. Feed efficiency and feed cost of gain favored the 16% WBG numerically over the other treatments. Based on feed cost of gain and 171.8 kg of gain, steers fed the 8, 16, and 24% WBG fed for $2.04, 5.59 and -3.71, respectively, per head less than those fed 8% corn silage. Quality grade was significantly better for steers fed the 16% level of WBG. Wet brewers grain can besubstituted for 8% CS and urea equally in finishing diets. Wet brewers grain at 16% may be a more appropriate level in finishing diets than 8% WBG.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      Literature Cited

        • Hatch D.F.
        • Perry T.W.
        • Mohler M.T.
        • Beeson W.M.
        J. Anim.
        Sci. 1972; 34: 326
        • Johnson R.A.
        • Johnson R.D.
        • Clark J.L.
        • Thompson G.B.
        Res. Bull. No. 1001.
        Univ, Missouri, Columbia1973
        • Klopfenstein T.J.
        • Abrams S.M.
        Nebraska Beef Cattle.
        Rep. EC. 1981; 2: 81-218
        • Preston R.L.
        • Vance R.D.
        • Cahill V.R.
        Ohio Res. Dev. Ctr.
        Res. Sum. No. 63, Wooster. 1972;
        • Preston R.L.
        • Cahill V.R.
        • Kunkle W.E.
        • Parter C.F.
        Ohio Beef Day and.
        Cattlemen's Round-Up. 1975; : 24-29
      1. SAS. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. Statistical Analysis System Inst. Inc, Cary, NC1982
        • Steel R.G.D.
        • Torrie J.H.
        McGraw-Hili Book Co, New York1960
        • Strastia C.A.
        Great Plains Extension Fact Sheet. (In press), 1989