Predicting feed intake in confined beef cows.

Six existing equations (three for nonlactating and three for lactating; NRC, 1987, Predicting feed intake of food-producing animals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, National Academy of Science; doi: 10.17226/950; NRC, 1996, Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7th Revised Edition: Update 1996. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; doi: 10.17226/9791; Hibberd and Thrift, 1992. Supplementation of forage-based diets. J. Anim. Sci. 70:181. [Abstr]) were evaluated for predicting feed intake in beef cows. Each of the previously published equations are sensitive to cow-shrunk BW and feed energy concentration. Adjustments in feed intake prediction are provided for level of milk yield in NRC (1987. Predicting feed intake of food-producing animals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, National Academy of Science; doi: 10.17226/950) and NRC (1996 Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7th Revised Edition: Update 1996. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; doi: 10.17226/9791) equations. The equation published in 1996 used data generated between 1979 and 1993. Our objectives were to validate the accuracy of the published equations using more recent data and to propose alternative prediction models. Criteria for inclusion in the evaluation dataset included projects conducted or published since 2002, direct measurement of feed intake, adequate protein supply, and pen feeding (no metabolism crate data). After removing outliers, the dataset included 53 treatment means for nonlactating cows and 32 treatment means for lactating cows. Means for the nonlactating dataset were dry matter intake (DMI) = 13.2 ± 2.9 kg/d, shrunk body weight (SBW) = 578 ± 83.9 kg, body condition score = 5.7 ± 0.73, and Mcal net energy for maintenance (NEm)/kg of feed = 1.27 ± 0.15 Mcal/kg. Means for the lactating dataset were DMI = 14.6 ± 2.24 kg/d, SBW = 503 ± 73.4 kg, body condition score = 4.7 ± 0.58, and Mcal NE m /kg feed = 1.22 ± 0.16. Simple linear regression was used to determine slope, intercept, and bias when observed DMI ( y ) was regressed against predicted DMI ( x ). The NRC (1996. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7th Revised Edition: Update 1996. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; doi: 10.17226/9791) nonlactating equation underestimated feed intake in diets moderate to high in energy density with intercept differing from 0 and slope differing from one ( P  ≤ 0.01). Average deviation from observed values was 2.4 kg/d. Similarly, when the NRC (1996. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7th Revised Edition: Update 1996. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; doi: 10.17226/9791) equation was used to predict DMI in lactating cows, the slope differed from one ( P  < 0.01) with average deviation from observed values of 3.0 kg/d. New models were developed by pooling the two datasets and including a categorical variable for stage of production (0 = nonlactating and 1 = lactating). Continuous variables included study-average SBW 0.75 and diet NE m , Mcal/kg. The best-fit empirical model accounted for 68% of the variation in daily feed intake with standard error of the estimate Sy root mean squared error = 1.31. The proposed equation needs to be validated with independent data.