SPOILAGE OF WET DISTILLERS GRAINS PLUS SOLUBLES WHEN STORED IN A BUNKER

Authors

Jana L. Harding, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow

Date of this Version

12-2012

Document Type

Article

Citation

Harding, J. L. 2012. Spoilage of wet distillers grains plus solubles when stored in a bunker. MS Thesis. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Comments

A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science, Major: Animal Science, Under the Supervision of Professors Galen E. Erickson and Terry J. Klopfenstein. Lincoln, Nebraska: December, 2012

Copyright (c) 2012 Jana L. Harding

Abstract

Five studies evaluated the impact of spoilage of wet distillers grains plus solubles (WDGS) on nutrient composition, nutrient losses, and cattle performance. Exp. 1 and Exp. 2 utilized barrels to evaluate the ability of various cover treatments to prevent nutrient changes and losses due to spoilage. In Exp. 3, a 140-d barrel study was conducted to mimic bunker storage under ambient temperature but with no precipitation. Barrels were weighed and sampled on 28 day intervals. In Exp. 4, a 130-d finishing study utilized 60 individually-fed steers fed 3 treatments: a dry-rolled corn based diet (control) and 2 diets containing 40% WDGS replacing DRC. The WDGS was stored in either an uncovered bunker or a silo bag and stored anaerobically. An 84 day growing study utilized 60 individually fed steers in a 2x2 factorial design in Exp. 5. Treatments were bunkered vs. bagged WDGS fed at 15 or 40% of diet DM. Exp. 1 and 2 found that covering wet by-products with plastic resulted in the least nutritional losses and changes. Exp. 3 found that spoilage increased the pH and the amount of OM lost. Calculations suggest 12% of DM was lost during storage in the bunker in Exp. 4. Feeding control, non-spoiled WDGS, or spoiled WDGS did not affect DMI. No differences in ADG, final BW, or G:F were observed between non-spoiled and spoiled WDGS treatments. In Exp. 5, calculations suggest that 6.0% of DM was lost in the bunker. Feeding bunkered WDGS decreased DMI across both levels of dietary WDGS compared to bagged WDGS. The diets containing bunkered WDGS had statistically similar ADG and G:F compared to diets with bagged WDGS.

Advisors: Galen Erickson and Terry Klopfenstein