comm“ ENERGY coma SILAGE CONCEPTS
newsman m emusuou passemmou TO
CATTLE moms

Thu-is for tho 009'“ of M. S.
MICHIGAN ‘STATE UNIVERSITY
Cad G. Silvernailr
I963

 

 

ABSTRACT

COMPLETE ENERGY CORN SILAGE CONCEPTS
DEVELOPED FOR EXTENSION PRESENTATION
TO CATTLE FEEDERS

by Carl G. Silvernail

Purpose

The purpose of this presentation has been three—
fold: (l) to summarize reasons why corn silage usage in the
beef feedlot is increasing, (2) to present information
available on complete energy silage and how it can be
produced. and (3) to develop an extension presentation to
acquaint cattle feeders with this information on corn

silage feeding.

Problem

Many cattle feeders unnecessarily limit the amount
of corn silage they feed to their cattle and in so doing
often reduce their profits.

On the other hand, it has been observed that many
cattle feeders are feeding more and more corn silage.

Some cattle feeders have increased the amount of corn

Carl G. Silvernail

silage they include in the ration to the maximum possible
considering the nutritional properties of the regular corn
silage. However, the amount of silage that can be fed in
the feedlot may soon be increased because of research efforts
to raise the energy level of this feedstuff.

Furthermore. the research workers who have developed
complete energy corn silage and continue to perfect means
of producing it need to know and are interested in the farmer's
reaction to this new practice.

An extension education program should help to inform
farmers of these recent developments and to indicate what

farmer opinion is on this matter.

Procedure

Through a review of literature and interviews with
authorities on the subject a summary was made of reasons
for increased use of corn silage in the beef feedlot. The
literature review was also important in developing the sub-
ject of complete energy silage. but much information has
been gained through participation in and observation of
research projects conducted by Dr. H. W. Newland.

The script and slide ideas for a slide—tape presenta-
tion were developed by the author; reviewed by specialists

in the fields of Animal Husbandry, Extension Education.

Carl G. Silvernail

Communications, and Audio-visual Aids; and then modified

and improved with the suggestions and help given.

Summary

There are numerous, interrelated reasons for the
increased use of corn silage in the beef feedlot. For
instance. corn harvested as silage produces more TDN per
acre than any other feed commonly available to the Mid-
western cattle feeder. Also. feeding experiments have
consistently shown that profits realized from the feeding
operation increase as more corn silage is fed, up to the
maximum amounts permitted.

By using the recently developed concepts of hay and
grain equivalents in corn silage it is possible to more
correctly estimate and appreciate the true feeding value
of corn silage. The work with all-in—one silage has shown
that it is economically feasible to add shelled corn to
silage when the silo is filled. This has led to numerous
experiments seeking ways to balance the energy level of corn
silage for finishing feeder calves.

By analyzing the nutrient level of various parts of
the corn plant it has been possible to estimate what portions

of the corn plant are needed to provide a complete energy

Carl G. Silvernail

corn silage. While butt silage experiments raised the energy
level of the resulting silage only slightly, they did
indicate that the nutrient value of corn silage can be
modified at harvest time. Center-cut silage as proposed is
a means of harvesting complete energy silage in one operation.
The extension presentation on this subject matter
is developed within the frame of reference of Axinn's
analysis of the communications process. This analysis
considers four phases: audience. message. communications
channels. and treatment. The slide-tape channel of
communication chosen for this extension presentation should
prove to be an effective means of carrying this information
to cattle feeders—-being particularly helpful for the

slower adopters.

COMPLETE ENERGY CORN SILAGE CONCEPTS
DEVELOPED FOR EXTENSION PRESENTATION

TO CATTLE FEEDERS

BY

Carl G. Silvernail

A THESIS

Presented to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Institute for Extension Personnel Development

1963

PREFACE

For three and a half years I have been employed as
an agricultural missionary in the southern part of the state
of Goiaz, in Brazil, working in the area of rural community
development. Upon completion of my present studies I plan
to return to Brazil and to continue this type of program.
During the next several years it appears that the
areas in which I work will have only a slight chance of any
significantly increased industrialization other than in
agriculturally related industries. Increased family incomes
will be quite dependent upon increased agricultural production.
The economic backbone of these areas has been animal industries.
especially beef production. For these and other reasons I
believe that improvement in rural living will come about
as the result of increased efficiency in beef production
as well as in other animal industries such as dairy and
swine production.

A good share of the beef herds are managed for the

dual purpose of beef and dairy production. In Goaiz one
cannot now think of either beef or dairy separately. Since,
however. the emphasis has been on beef products. it is wise

and necessary to approach any educational or improvement

ii

program from the beef farmer's viewpoint.

From my experience I believe that improvement in
community life is dependent upon meeting a number of needs.
Two of these important needs which can more easily be met
are the needs for improved technological methods and improved
adult education. It must be emphasized that these are "easier

to meet? from my viewpoint and position. To a modest extent
some success has already been realized in these two areas.

On returning to the United States I was convinced
that I needed further formal education to both broaden my
areas of competency and to deepen my understanding in the
specific areas of animal husbandry and extension education
methods--thus the combined major degree in Animal Husbandry
and Extension Personnel Development.

Two specific problems confronting me in Brazil
involve finding methods of providing rations for cattle
during the rather extended dry season and of passing
information on to farmers who are highly intelligent but
unable to read or write much more than their own names.
Tentatively I had concluded that rations would need to be
provided in the form of silages and that extension education
would for some time be strongly dependent upon demonstration
and other audio-visual methods of teaching.

The extension educator in Goiaz and other similar

iii

situations will need to evaluate and interpret information
before he passes it on to the farmer. This is true for
almost any extension educator in any country, but in some
situations such as in Goiaz the evaluation and interpretation
of information become more important and demanding. Evalu-
ation is needed because experiment stations are not present
in these areas. Research results obtained at experiment
stations in Sao Paulo, Rio. Trinidade. Australia. or any
other place may or may not be applicable to situations in
Goiaz and other south central areas of Brazil. This
explains the need for evaluation of information coming from
outside sources. Such evaluation may often take the form
of attempting to repeat original experiments carried out

in other situations, or to perform similar experiments.
Upon having the specific information to be passed on to the
farmer. the educator must interpret and present this
information in such a way that it will be both intelligible
and interesting.

This master's thesis study has provided the oppor-
tunity to investigate and evaluate corn silage as a possible
means of providing feed for cattle. Part of this investi—
gation and evaluation process included original research

projects designed to evaluate and develop new ways of harvesting

iv

and feeding the corn crop. Furthermore, audio-visual
methods were surveyed and evaluated as potential extension
education methods. Valuable information and practices were
gained in producing for extension education purposes. a
slide-tape presentation on the subject of complete energy
silage. I

There are two men in particular whom I want to thank
for their continued help and assistance--Dr. Jack C. Ferver
for continued encouragement and timely suggestions and Dr.
H. W} Newland for the invaluable experience gained in
experimental procedures and evaluations. I would also
like to thank Mr. Mason E. Miller. Dr. Heward L. Miller.
and Dr. Robert J. Deans--the other members of my advisory
committee-~for their helpful suggestions and interest in
this project.

To Dr. Wilfred Veenendaal of the Audio-visual
Center I express my appreciation for the help he has given
in developing the slide portion of the extension presentation
included as part of this project.

To my wife. Phyllis, I express particular appreciation

for moral support and help in the preparation and editing

of this thesis.

Finally, thanks go to the leaders of the Division
of WOrld Mission of the Evangelical United Brethren Church
for their positive support during this period of helpful
and useful education. Because of their support this

experience has been most enjoyable and rewarding.

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chapter
I. REASONS FOR INCREASED POPULARITY OF CORN

SILAGE IN THE BEEF RATION . . . . . . . .

1. Increased Profits from the Feeding
Operation
2. The Shift to Higher Energy Rations
3. Increased Corn Yields
4. Minimum Tillage
5. Mechanization of the Corn Silage
Harvesting Operation
6. Continuous Corn Farming
7. Mechanization and Automation of
the Feedlot Operation
8. Increased Size of Feedlot Operations
9. Increased Moisture Problems in
Harvesting and Storing Larger
Amounts of Dry Feed
10. Increased Land Prices

II. EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION PERMITTING
NEW EVALUATIONS OF AND MEANS OF PRODUCING
C0 RN S ILAGE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

l. The Feeding Value of Corn Silage

2. Effects of Feeding Large Amounts of
Corn Silage in the Finishing Ration

3. The Development and Evaluation of'
All-in-one Silage

vii

Page
ii

ix

12
l3

l4
l5

17

18

21

Chapter

4. Loss of Energy in Undigested
Whole Kernels

5. The Corn Plant Parts Analyzed

6. Dwarf Corn Silage

7. Butt Silage

III. CENTERrCUT SILAGE--A PROPOSED MEANS OF
HARVESTING CORN AS COMPLETE ENERGY SILAGE .

1. How Center-cut Silage is Produced
2. Advantages of the Center-cut Method

IV. OTHER POSSIBLE MEANS OF PRODUCING COMPLETE
ENE RGY S ILAGE C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

1. Corn Top Silage
2. One-and-one Silage (one row ears
and butts, and one row ears)

V. SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS RESULTING FROM HIGH
ENERGY CORN SILAGE EXPERIMENTS CARRIED
OW AT MOSCUO O O O C C O O O O O O C C O O

1. Lodging Reduces the Efficiency of the
Topping Operation

2. Variation in Height and Attitude of
the Corn Ears Interferes with the
Harvesting of Center-cut Silage

3. High Energy Corn Silage Requires
Finer Chopping

4. Finer Chopping of Silage Appears to
Reduce Nutrient Loss Due to Whole
Undigested Kernels

5. Length of Corn Silage Harvest Period
May Be Critical

VI. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH WITH COMPLETE
E NE RGY S ILAGE O O O C O O O O O C O O O O O

VII. SLIDE-TAPE PRESENTATION . . . . . . . . . . .

1. Extension Communications
2. Script: ?Center-cut Silage for Beef?

BIEIOGmHY O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

viii

Page

29
30
33
34
37
37
39
43

43

44

46

46

47

47

48

48

50
53

53
64

81

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Comparable nutrient yields per acre of
common feed crops at different levels
of production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. Percent TDN of corn silage made from various

parts of the corn plant . . . . . . . . . . 32

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Portion of the corn plant harvested as
butt silage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Portion of the corn plant harvested as center-
cut silage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The harvesting of center-cut silage . . . . .

Portion of stalks and leaves needed with the
ear to produce complete energy corn
silage for beef calves (showing location
of top and bottom cuts) . . . . . . . . .

Machinery and facilities required to handle
corn as both shelled corn and silage . . .

Reduction of machinery and facilities
realized with the center-cut method . . .

Page

70

7O

75

75

77

77

INTRODUCTION

Corn silage as a beef finishing feed has increased
in popularity until now it is one of the more important feed
sources for cattle feeders in the Midwest. Yet the pros
and cons of corn silage feeding are discussed quite heatedly
by cattle feeders in Michigan. Such disagreement indicates
that even today the reasons for feeding corn silage are not
clear, and in some instances in Michigan corn silage may
not be the Fbest? feed available to the cattle feeder.

Many arguments set forth by both sides are based on in-
sufficient knowledge or incorrect information.

Corn silage feeding recommends itself in areas where
corn can be successfully grown. The purpose of this paper
is to summarize reasons for increased corn silage usage in
Midwestern feedlots. This will be followed by a presentation
of experimental evidence which indicates that the nutrient
value of corn silage may be modified so that even more of
this feed may be used in the finishing ration.

The problems of getting farmers to accept new but

sound ideas and methods will be briefly confronted and

discussed. Finally, the script of a slide-tape presentation
on the subject of corn silage usage for the modern cattle
feeder will be included. The basic purpose of all this

is to summarize corn silage usage as it relates to feeder
cattle operations and to provide a means of passing this

information on to cattle feeders in a meaningful and effective

manner .

CHAPTER I

REASONS FOR INCREASED POPULARITY OF CORN

SILAGE IN TI-E BEEF RATION

Corn silage usage in beef feeding rations has
greatly increased in recent years. In the state of Michigan
during the period from 1954 to 1961 corn silage production
has increased 41%.1 The large number of silos being
constructed on farms throughout the countryside also indi—
cates that corn silage usage is on the increase. According
to Maddex this rapid increase of corn silage usage is
taking place on both beef and dairy farms throughout
Michigan.

The cause of this increase is both interesting and
important. It is interesting because of the many inter-
related factors that have a bearing upon this development.

The question is important because an understanding of why

 

1Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan
Agricultural Statistics, A Report Prepared by the Michigan
Cooperative Crop Reporting Service (Michigan Department of
Agriculture, July, 1962), p. 22.
2R. L. Maddex and others, fEngineering Silage Equip—
ment and Operations for Dairy and Beef Cattle Feeding,?
MSU Silage Conference (Michigan State University, 1959),
p. 49.

this increase is taking place will help indicate possible
future developments in beef rations as well as indicate
under what conditions corn silage feeding may be practical
and economical.

NOt only has corn silage become a commonly used
ration in the feedlot, but it has also become a Fstandard?
ration in feeding trials run at many experiment stations
located in the Corn Belt and other corn growing areas.
Corn silage has proven in many such situations to be the
most economical ration and has become the yardstick by
which the economics of other rations are compared.

For years corn silage has been recognized as a
palatable feed having a good physiological effect upon
large ruminants such as beef and dairy cattle. The red
barns with one or two silos standing beside them have been
a most common scene throughout Michigan for several decades.
Why, however, has there been this recent large increase in
silage fed to beef cattle? A number of factors have to be
considered in attempting to give any kind of an adequate

answer to this question. Such factors include the following:

 

lRoscoe R. Snapp and A. L. Neumann, Beef Cattle
(5th ed.: New Ybrk: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960),
p. 435.

1. Increased profits from the feeding operation.
2. The shift to higher energy rations.

3. Increased corn yields.

4. Minimum tillage.

5. Mechanization of the corn silage harvesting
operation.

6. Continuous corn farming.

7. Mechanization and automation of the feedlot
operation.

8. Increased size of feedlot operations.

9. Increased moisture problems in harvesting and
storing larger amounts of dry feed.

10. Increased land prices.

1. Increased Profits from the
Feeding Operation

The most commonly stated opinion as to why the beef
feeder is increasing corn silage usage is that its use
increases his net profits. That this statement is true is
generally supported by feeding trials conducted in the
Midwest.1 It is true that no one ration is the best or
most profitable feed for all situations, but—-where corn
can be successfully grown--it is difficult to improve

upon it as an economical feed.

 

lIbido. p0 4370

There are some who would say that establishing the
fact that corn silage is an economical feed is sufficient
to explain the increased use. It is true that if a method
of feeding is economical, it will often be used. There are,
however, questions of feasibility and practicability. There
are situations in which feeds other than corn silage are
more economical and practical. If the reasons for increased
corn silage usage are to be understood at all adequately,
it is necessary to look and see the thy? of increased
profits when corn silage is fed.

2. The Shift to Higher Energy
Rations

Since the end of world war II (1946) rations fed to
farm animals have steadily increased in concentration of
energy.1 This has happened particularly in poultry and
swine but also is taking place in the cattle feeding industry.
Younger feeder stock are being finished thus requiring a
higher energy ration. Also, cattle feeders are learning
that by increasing the rate at which cattle are finished,

each feedlot will produce more beef gains per year. This

 

1The significance of this increased concentration of
energy in the beef finishing ration was presented in a
personal interview by Robert G. White, Extension Agricultural
Engineer, Michigan State University.

permits a quicker return on investments. Whatever the
reasons, higher energy feeds are being used to finish beef
cattle. Generally corn silage has fit into this trend toward

higher energy rations better than most other roughage feeds.

3. Increased Corn Yields

In the period from 1954 to 1961 yields of corn silage
have increased 31%.1 Yield increases have also been realized
in the amount of grain produced per acre. Technological
changes and refinements have made this increase possible.

No 93; change, even one as important as the development

of adapted hybrid varieties, could explain these tremendous
increases. Increased use of fertilizers and the advantageous
placement of fertilizers have been important in this progress.
Better weed control through improved cultivating practices
and increased herbicide usage has also helped to make
possible the increase of corn plant population which in

turn has increased corn yield.2 Insecticides have also added

 

l . . . .
Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan
Agricultural Statistics, p. 22.

2White reports that in one minimum tillage experiment
using different cultural practices, corn yield was more
greatly affected by plant population than by any other
factor such as difference in fertilizer application,
herbicide usage, etc.

their bit to increased yields. Corn yields have progressed
to the point that for the Midwest it is difficult to find
other crops that come close to producing as many tons of
total digestible nutrients per acre as does corn when
harvested as silage. Table 1 compares corn harvested as
silage with other crops in nutrient producing ability.

This TDN per acre advantage is a strong factor encouraging

the increased use of corn silage.

4. .Minimum Tillage

Minimum tillage has made it possible to reduce the
horsepower hours required to prepare an acre of land to be
planted to corn without reducing the corn yield. This alone
results in a saving of $5.00 to $7.00 per acre.1 It is
also thought that for a few years minimum tillage has an
accumulative effect. Thus soil that has been prepared by
minimum tillage for two or three years becomes looser and
more mellow reducing further the horsepower hours required
for seedbed preparation. While principles of minimum tillage

are applicable to other crops, they have been more widely

 

1Robert G. White, fMinimum Tillage Field Day Results,?
(Agricultural Engineering Department, Michigan State
University), p. 2. (Mimeographed.)

.msaE ma mcasaanmono

 

. 6

Q

mamaflsm mo cowuauusz

pom moaommh mmmaom mo mmamum mGHmGM£UL .szonm .m .9 com .xcmam .9 .w .cmsaaam .Qm

 

 

comm o.o «moo c.ma comm o.c~ momaam ssoouom
coo c.om cmma o.mm comm c.mm pawns
coo c.cm cama o.mm omcm o.mm smaumm
csam N.m comm m.o coco o.oa ouuw> + mpmo
comm m.m ooom o.m cocm c.ma momaam moo + mumo
coma N.m comm o.oa occm o.ma momaam umo
com. c.cc mmma c.mm coco o.cm mumo
ocma c.oc comm c.cma ocam o.oom anon “mm
coma c.mm cmmm c.mm omov o.cca anon omaamom

occmm o.» comm o.ma ocom c.o~ mmmaam cuoo
coca o.a coma o.a ooom o.m so: “mono
cccm c.m comm m.m ooom c.m so: mmammam
.mQH .SQ. .HO COB .mQH .SQ. .HO COB owns” .59 .HO COB

.z.o.e mama» .z.o.9 mama» .z.o.a mamas

 

aflom m>auosooum 304

aaom m>auoomoum

mamumnmooz

aaom wbauusooam wnm>

 

 

m.soayusooam mo mam>ma
usmammmao um mmoau comm coEEoo mo maom Mom moama» “swamps: magmammfiov

.H OHQMB

10

. l . . .
applied to corn. This results in corn haVing further
economic advantages over other crops as a feed source.

5. Mechanization of the Corn
Silage Harvesting Operation

At the close of Wbrld'War II the field forage chopper
and self-unloading wagons became available to the farmer.
This development was a major step in making it possible to
harvest as a palatable feed the total tonnage of nutrients
produced in one acre of corn. Before this, hours of hard
labor were required to produce and feed one ton of corn
silage. This high labor requirement increased the cost of
corn silage and caused it to be a less convenient feed to
use. Partly for these reasons corn silage was used
primarily as a succulent supplement to a ration consisting
mainly of dry feeds. Because of the large amount of hand
labor required to harvest corn silage, which was about 70%
water, it seemed more logical and economical to handle for

feed,dry materials that were 15%.water or less. Until the

 

1White commented that minimum tillage methods have

been used most extensively on spring row crops, particularly
corn. Teaming herbicide usage with minimum tillage makes it
possible in many situations to perform all operations required
in raising corn in one operation. The corn needs only to

be harvested after it is ploweplanted with the necessary
fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides. Minimum tillage
operations can be and are used with other crops, but for
various reasons the practice has caught on more quickly with
corn.

ll

corn silage harvesting operation was mechanized, corn silage
was not nearly the economical or convenient feed that it

now is.

6. Continuous Corn Farming

With the development and acceptance of mechanized
corn silage harvesting, the amount of corn silage that could
be produced on a given farm was often limited only by the
amount of cropland available for growing corn. Many farms,
especially those located outside of the Corn Belt proper
(which includes most of Michigan), have only a certain
percentage of land that can be used to raise row crops.
Common rotations often permit this cropland to be in row
crops for only one or two years in every four or five years.
It has been shown in recent years, however, that corn can
be grown year after year on some good cropland with no
apparent harm to the soil. In fact, the Morrow corn plots
at the University of Illinois demonstrate that such soil
characteristics as tilth and fertility can be improved under
good continuous corn cropping practices.l Continuous corn

farming has in many situations increased the number of acres

 

1Some of the plots in this experiment have been in
continuous corn since 1888; yet, soil fertility and tilth
as measured by corn yields continue to improve.

12
that can be planted to corn on a given farm. The avail-
ability of corn silage as a feed has thus been increased.

7. Mechanization and Automation
of the Feedlot Operation

Mechanization and size of the feedlot operation are
so closely related that it is difficult to speak about
either one by itself. Yet, it seems advisable to do so.
Mechanization of the feeding operation made it possible
for cattle feeders to expand the size of their feedlots
without eXpanding their labor force. Until recently there
were very few mechanized systems available for handling dry
feeds. Mechanized and automated systems of handling silage
(particularly corn silage) were developed and perfected at
an earlier date resulting in silage becoming a convenient
feed to handle and, as will be pointed out in the next
section, a cheaper feed. Mechanized feeding of corn silage
has overcome one of the serious drawbacks of feeding silage--

that of handling a feed that is more water than feed.

 

1Even on farms where actual continuous corn farming
is not practiced, farmers using rotation permitting two or
more years of row crops will often plant all the row crop
allotment to corn year after year. Several of the cultural
practices mentioned elsewhere in this section (i.e., minimum
tillage, insecticides, mechanization, etc.) have made this
more intensified use of corn in the rotation practical and
acceptable.

l3

8. Increased Size of Feedlot
Operations

With small feedlots (less than 100 head) the
economics of feeding corn silage are questionable. Smaller
amounts of corn silage are expensive to store and incon-
venient or expensive to harvest. Larger feedlots require
more total feed; thus, harvesting and storage costs per ton
of silage can be reduced. As the size of tower silos
increases from 40 feet by 12 feet to 60 feet by 30 feet,
the initial cost per ton of storage capacity is reduced
from $25 to $6.25.1 Increased tonnages of silage permit
more efficient use of harvesting equipment reducing the feed
costs even more.2 Furthermore, as feedlot size increases,
there is an opportunity to mechanize and automate the feed
handling operations further reducing feed costs.3 In
small operations mechanization and automation may increase

the convenience of feeding corn silage, but the cost of

 

1M. L. Esmay, J. S. Boyd, and C. R. Hoglund, ”Equipment,

Practices, Investments and Annual Costs Associated with Tower
and Bunker Silo Systems,9 MSU Silage Conference (Michigan
State University, 1959), pp. 60-68.

2Robert G. White and waard F. McColly, FMethods,
Equipment, Power and Investments for Harvesting and Storing
Hay and Silage,? MSU Silage Conference (Michigan State
University, 1959), pp. 22-30.

 

3Maddex and others, MSU Silage Conference, pp. 54—56.

l4

feeding may remain the same or be even higher. When larger
numbers of cattle are fed, however, this machinery does
reduce costs of feeding cattle. If properly planned, en-
larging the feedlot does reduce finishing costs.

9. Increased Moisture Problems

in Harvesting and Storing
Larger Amounts of Dry Feed

When comparatively small acreages of crops are
harvested as dry feeds, the harvest season is often long
enough to permit waiting for the drying process to take place
in the field. With increased size of operation more acres
and thus more tons of material must be harvested as feed.
Cattle feeders are no longer able to depend upon unpredict-
able field drying. Increased production usually requires
increased investments. Time lost waiting for drying becomes
increasingly costly. Often material being harvested for
feed is heavily damaged or completely lost so it is.
therefore more difficult to accurately predict the feed
supply that will be available for the following feeding
period. This situation has caused cattle feeders to seek
means of harvesting feed supplies that are not so sensitive
to adverse weather conditions. One such means of over—

coming the moisture problem has been to store feed as silage.

15

Silage usage permits the harvesting of high moisture crops
for feed.

The moisture problem is of particular concern to
cattle feeders in Michigan because of a shorter growing
season than is optimum for growing corn.l In order to
raise the highest yielding corn possible later maturing corn
varieties are used. As harvest dates are postponed, the
harvest season is shortened, and rain and other adverse
weather conditions cause the harvest situation to become
even more critical. Therefore, the storage of feeds as
silage in Michigan is not only a matter of economics, but

often one of necessity or insurance.

10. Increased Land Prices

-In the ten year period from 1946 to 1956 average
land prices increased 70% to 80%..2 It is known that as
investment costs increase, gross incomes must likewise
increase if a net profit is to be realized. It has already

been shown that corn harvested as silage yields more total

\

 

1According to White the harvesting of large acreages
of dry shelled corn is particularly problematic in much of
Michigan. More and more farmers are turning to silage as
a means of overcoming this problem.

2Raleigh Barlowe, Land Resource Economics (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1958): p. 205.

l6

digestible nutrients than any other crop commonly available
to the Mfidwestern farmer for feeding purposes.1 This
increased TDN harvested per aCre increases the beef gains
produced per acre of cropland. Harvesting more corn as
silage then is one means a cattle feeder has of intensifying

his farm program to cover ever—increasing land investments.

Conclusions

In conclusion it can be said that corn silage fed
in the beef feedlot hasincreased because its competitive
position‘with other crops has improved during the last few
years. Even though corn silage has for decades been con-
sidered a nutritious and palatable ration, it has not always
made up the basic portion of the finishing ration as it
does today in so many situations. Recent technological
advances have seemed to strengthen the position of corn
silage as.a feed. Future developments in these and other
areas may improve the relative value of some other crop as
a feed for finishing cattle. Today, however, in the Mudwest
corn silage is tough to beat as a convenient and profitable

feed that is readily available to the cattle feeder.

 

1See Table l.

CHAPTER II

EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION PERMITTING
NEW EVALUATIONS OF AND MEANS OF

PRODUCING CORN SILAGE

Because corn silage is an advantageous feed in so
many situations, many cattle feeders have increased its
use to the maximum. If possible they would feed even more,
but corn silage is not abalanced feed and must be supple-
mented with energy, proteins, minerals, and sometimes vita-
mins. Most of this supplement is required to balance the
energy level of the corn silage. It is this need for com-
paratively large amounts of high energy feed such as shelled
corn or other grains which limits to the greatest extent
the amount of corn silage that can be fed to cattle.

Recent experimental work has permitted researchers
to re—evaluate the potential of corn silage as a feed.
Until recently the true feeding value of corn silage has
not been appreciated. Learning to more adequately evaluate
this feeding value has permitted researchers to develop
means of improving it. The more pertinent experiments and

concepts growing out of these experiments are now summarized.

l7

18

l. The Feeding Value of
Corn Silage

Corn silage for years has been mistakingly thought
of as roughage. On the dry matter basis corn silage was
treated as though it were about equal with grass silage or
hay. This was true even though there were some who wondered
about the value of the grain in the corn silage.1

wa it is possible to evaluate with some degree of
accuracy the feeding value of corn silage. This is done
by using the concepts of grain and hay equivalents. In
this way corn silage is thought of as part hay (forage)
and part grain which in essence it is.2 By sampling fields
of corn for a twelve year period Huffman determined that
on the average one acre of corn produced 53.9 bushels of
grain and 1.9 tons of hay equivalent.3 When corn is
harvested as shelled corn, this 1.9 tons of Vhay? is lost.

This is a significant economic loss because it has been shown

 

1According to Carl F. Huffman, professor Emeritus
in Dairy and Animal Husbandry, as presented in a personal

interview.

2C. F. Huffman, C.‘W. Duncan, and S. T. Dexter, ?Corn
Grain and Stalks (Hay—Equivalent) in Corn Silages Obtained
from Random Samples,9 Michigan Agricultural Experiment
Stationgguarterly Bulletin, Vol. XLII (Michigan State University,
May, 1960): pp. 801-806.

31bido. p. 8030

19

that hay equivalents in corn silage are about equal to good
mixed hay in milk producing ability.l Likewise the grain
in the corn silage compares in feeding value with corn grain
that was separated from the corn stover and later added to
the ration.2 While in Huffman's work the feeding value of
corn silage was measured in its milk producing ability,
there is very little reason to question the validity of
applying these results in evaluating its beef producing
abilities.

It has further been established that corn silage
when harvested with the same moisture content will have a
similar grain to stalk ratio.3 On the average a ton of
corn silage will contain between 4.5 and 5.0 bushels of
grain. This information makes it possible to place a
monetary value on silage as well as to estimate its feeding
value. According to both Huffman and Nevens corn silage can
no longer be considered merely a roughage. It is a roughage

with grain in it.

 

lIbid., p.803.

21bid., p.801.

3W. B. Nevens and others, VThe Ear and Leaf-stalk

Contents of Corn Forage as Factors in Silage Evaluation,?
Journal of Dairy Science, VOl. XXXVII (1934): PP. 1088-1093.

20

2. Effects of Feeding Large Amounts
of Corn Silage in the Finishing
Ration

Continually questions are raised concerning the effect
of high corn silage rations on the quality of finish in
fattening cattle. This is important because quality of
finish should influence the price received by the feeder
for his cattle. Many cattle feeders are concerned that
cattle which are fed heavily on corn silage will have a
higher water content, will have a finish that is less firm,
and will shrink more in shipping. Some are concerned that
the carcass will carry less marbling as well. Snapp and
Neumann point out that many of these and other suspicions
of corn silage fed cattle are a carry-over from the time
that dry roughage was the common feed and cattle buyers were
worried that silage fed cattle would resemble cattle finished
on grass.

In an experiment conducted by Neumann, cattle fed
high amounts of corn silage graded lower than high grain
fed cattle when live grading standards were used. On
carcass evaluations, however, the high silage fed cattle

graded higher than the high grain fed group. In this

 

lShapp and Neumann, p. 434.

21

experiment cattle fed more heavily on corn silage had a
trimmer fatback, a higher degree of marbling, and a higher
yield of trimmed lean cuts.l It should be pointed out that
experiment cattle fed higher amounts of corn silage had a
lower rate of gain, thus requiring more time to reach market
weight. Under many feeding situations this would be a
distinct disadvantage. However, if carcass evaluation
becomes more important in determining the price paid for
cattle, these apparent advantages of trimmer carcasses
and more marbling will become increasingly important.

This information indicates that cattle fed a high
amount of corn silage can produce the type of carcass in
high demand.

3. The Development and Evaluation
of All-in-one Silage

A. L. Neumann of the University of Illinois has for
a number of years experimented with developing and evaluating
all-in-one silages. One method he first used to produce

the Vcomplete? silage was to add varying amounts of ground

 

IA. L. Neumann and others, FEffect of Length of

Heavy Corn Silage Feeding Period on Total Feed Requirements
and Carcass Yield and Grade in Fattening Steers,? Illinois
Cattle Feeders' Day (University of Illinois, 1962): p. 3.

22

shelled corn and other supplements to grass silage and oat
silage at silo filling time.l Later he experimented with
raising the energy level of regular corn silage in this way.
Much time and effort have been spent on this approach
to balancing rations because a considerable amount of costly
labor and machinery are required to feed both corn silage
and grain in the traditional manner. It was theorized that
if these silages could be balanced at silo filling time,
then a truly all-in-one silage would result. This, then,
could be fed directly from the silo requiring very little
time and machinery. If such a system were practical, it
would be simpler and cheaper than various methods now used
to feed silages and concentrates, including push-button
feeding systems designed to process, meter, mix, and convey
various feedstuffs in the correct proportions.2 Four of
the questions raised concerning the development and use of

these all-in—one silages shall now be considered briefly.

 

1A. L. Neumann and others, fComparison of Alfalfa
and Oat Silages Containing High-corn Additions with Corn
Silage for Fattening Beef Calves,? Illinois Cattle Feeders'
'Qay (University of Illinois, 1957), pp. 4—6.

2
Ibido. p. 4.

23
‘Will the loss of nutrients in the silo be prohibitive?

Feed losses occurring in the silo are always of
concern to cattle feeders. This becomes even more important
when one considers storing a higher energy feed in the silo
because each percent dry matter loss then represents more
actual energy loss. ‘Williamson analyzed the fermentation
action of this all-in—one silage. He concluded that while
there was from 3.6% to 10.7% loss of dry matter during the
fermentation process, this loss was not excessive. In fact,
this loss is not as high as fOr grain or forage stored as

dry feed Sunder certain conditions.f'l

Will shelled corn added to the silage at silo filling time be
as efficient in producing beef gains as corn added when the

silage is fed?

This and the preceding question are crucial in
determining whether this approach to modifying the nutrient
value of corn has any chance at all of being feasible.
Experimental evidence to date indicates that when ground

shelled corn is added to silage at silo filling time, it is

 

1J. L. Williamson and others, SChemical and Nutritive—
value Changes in Alfalfa Silage Made with High Levels of
Added Corn,? Illinois Cattle Feeders! Day (University of
Illinois, 1957), p. 2.

24

as effective in producing beef gains as the traditional
means of feeding corn grain and silage.l If high moisture
shelled corn (30% moisture) is used to balance the energy
level, the all-in—one method may even produce more beef
gains per acre than the traditional method. This increase
is realized because field losses are reduced when corn is
harvested as high moisture shelled corn compared to
harvesting corn as dry ear or shelled corn.2 Also, it has
been shown that nutrient losses of high moisture corn stored
in silos are lower than that of Fdry? corn stored in cribs or
bins.3 By comparing rate of gain produced by corn grain
added to silage at the feed bunk and at the silo, it

appears that one method is about as efficient as the other.
From these considerations it appears that high energy silage

may be feasible.

 

1A. L. Neumann, W. W. Albert, and G. E. Mitchell,

Jr., VAlfalfa, Oat, and Corn Silages Containing 40 Percent
Corn for Fattening Beef Calves,9 Illinois Cattle Feeders'
Iggy (University of Illinois, 1958): PP. 1-6.

2A. L. Neumann and others, FEffect of Moisture
Level in Field—shelled Corn on Harvesting and Storage
Losses and on Feeding Value for Beef Cattle,9 Illinois
Cattle Feeders' Day (University of Illinois, 1959),

p. 2.

3Ibido' pp. 2-30

25

Will it be possible to balance all nutrient requirements in

this manner?

In the earlier literature written on this method
of supplementing silage as a feed, reference was made to
all—in—one silage. At first it appeared that silage could
be made into a completely balanced feed in this manner.
The possibility of producing an all-in-one silage looked
particularly good when corn grain and various minerals were
added to grass silage (alfalfa or mixed silage). Initial
feeding trials indicated that nutrient requirements of
cattle were adequately met, making it appear that this was
a completely balanced all—in-one silage.l However, subse-
quent experiments have shown that in spite of having a
theoretically balanced diet, resulting gains were not
equal to those produced by traditionally balanced rations.2
It should be realized that this all-in—one silage resulted
in economical gains, but that they were not optimum. This

silage is now often referred to as the Fso-called? all-in-one

 

1Neumann, Albert, and Mitchell Jr., Illinois Cattle
Feeders' Day, p. 4.

2W.‘W. Albert and others, PEffect of Adding Soybean
Meal to a High—energy Silage Made of High-moisture Corn and
Alfalfa for Fattening Steers,? Illinois Cattle Feeders' Day
(University of Illinois, 1960), pp. 21-22.

26

silage.

These and similar feeding trials indicate that it is
not now feasible to develop a completely balanced ration as
all-in-one silage from oats or corn. It.l§ possible, however,
to balance the energy level of these silages. However,
urea or other protein supplements added to the silage at
silo filling time do not sufficiently raise the protein
level. Either protein is lost through chemical changes
taking place in the silo, or its availability is interferred
with.l Thus we see that complete energy silage appears to
be feasible but the completely balanced silage is not.

It should be remembered, however, that alfalfa or mixed
grass silage do approach the complete feed category when

shelled corn is added.

Will the all-in-one method result in significant economic

advantages for the cattle feeder?

It is too soon to give a categorical answer to this
question because there has not yet been time to adequately
evaluate this harvesting and feeding method. Since this

paper is concerned with corn silage usage, the all—in—one

 

1Neumann, Albert, and Mitchell Jr., Illinois Cattle
Feeders' Day, p. 6.

27

silage approach as related to grass and oat silage will not
be dealt with further. The question is, what advantages

can be realized by storing the corn crop as so-called all—in-
one silage?

Since it has not been possible to develop all-in-one
silage from corn, this approach is just a qualified success.
It was seen that complete energy silage can be produced.
This is an important development. However, in answer to the
stated question, it appears that in handling the corn crop
the addition of corn grain to silage at the silo has only
limited economic advantages.

On the positive side some steps of processing and
handling are saved at feeding time when the all-in-one method
is used. If high moisture shelled corn is added to the corn
silage, then all corn can be stored in the silo if careful
consideration is given to planting and maturing dates. A
certain saving in storage facilities may result.

On the other hand, there are numerous reasons to
question if the adjustment of energy level at silo filling
time is a really practical approach to harvesting the total
corn crop. Corn has to be harvested both as silage and
grain, requiring two basic harvesting machines. This is

costly. If this year's high moisture corn is to supplement

28

this year's silage, two harvesting processes have to go on
simultaneously. Both shelled corn and silage must be
harvested and hauled to the silo for mixing. This demands
a great deal of equipment and personnel. If, however, the
previous year's corn is to be added to this year's silage,
this increasesstorage and interest costs, and involves a
number of other problems. As a means of utilizing alfalfa
and oats the all-in-one approach may prove to be useful and
economical for the beef feeder. However, for handling the

corn crop there are serious drawbacks.

Conclusion

Even though the all—in-one method of producing complete
energy silage will probably not prove to be too practical or
advantageous for handling the corn crop, some results of
this research have a very significant bearing upon corn
harvesting possibilities. As already shown, this research
work indicates that the nutrient level of corn silage can
be significantly raised at silo filling time. In particular
the research shows that complete energy corn silage can be
economically stored and fed. This knowledge opens the
door to all sorts of possibilities. Knowing that it is
possible to store complete energy corn silage, we now have

the problem of finding the most economical and practical

29
means of producing it. Some of the possible means will
be presented and discussed later.

4. Loss of Energy in Undigested Whole
Kernels

AS more corn silage is fed, as more value is placed
upon the corn kernel in the silage, and as more corn grain
is put into the silage--the possible nutrient loss due to
whole, undigested kernels becomes more of a concern. When
shelled corn is added to silage at feeding time, it is
usually ground. If not ground the loss in undigested whole
kernels is so great that hogs are allowed to run in the
feedlot as scavengers. Corn kernels in silage are not now
ground or cracked to any great extent, nor is high moisture
corn usually rolled or otherwise treated to break the out-
side covering. Just how great then is this loss due to
undigested kernels?

Whole kernels of corn in the feces contain almost
all of their original nutrients. Therefore, the percentage
of whOle kernels in the feces is a good indication of feed

losses due to this cause.1 Huffman discovered that in most

 

1C. F. Huffman and C. W. Duncan, 9Corn Kernels in

Feces of Dairy Cattle Fed Corn Silage,? Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station QuarterlyBulletin, vol. XLI (Michigan
State University, February, 1959), pp. 542-543.

30

instances fewer whole kernels were in the feces than casual
observation would indicate. This is because corn bran that
is in the feces carries much of its yellow color and looks
like yellow kernels. However, most of the nutrients in this
bran have been removed by the cattle in the digestion
process. By actual count from 0.2%.to 8.3% of the original
whole kernels were recovered in the feces. The average was
2.7%.1

The above information was gained from feeding corn
silage to dairy cows. Similar experiments have been con-
ducted with beef cattle. The percent energy loss was
estimated by weight gains produced by hogs running with the
cattle. Evidence supports the view that there is some
nutrient loss through whole, undigested corn kernels, but

in most instances it is not excessive.

5. The Corn Plant Parts Analyzed

Traditional methods of harvesting and feeding the
corn crop have been to harvest the whole corn plant as a
comparatively low energy feed and to harvest the shelled

grain as a high energy feed. The two feeds are then mixed

 

1Ibid., p. 543.

2Snapp and Neumann, p. 434.

31

and fed by one of several alternative methods in such pro-
portions as to meet the energy requirements of the cattle
being fed. The all-in—one approach attempted to balance
the energy level of the feed between harvest and storage.
Some researchers asked why it would not be logical to balance
the energy level one step sooner-—at harvest time. This,
they reasoned, would result in numerous advantages.

In an effort to determine if this would be possible
Plog and Newland determined the Vrelative? energy level of
TDN values of corn silage made from different sections of
the corn plant.1 This was done by hand harvesting various
parts of the corn plant and storing them separately as
silage in silos of equal size and type. Digestibility
determinations were made by feeding the silage to lambs.
Table 2 shows the TDN level of silages made from various
parts of the corn plant.

The results of this experiment indicate the large
variation between parts of the corn plant in respect to

energy levels. By harvesting only the corn tops the silage

 

lJohn Plog, H. W. Newland, and Hugh Henderson,
FNutritive Value of Silage Made from Various Parts of the
Corn Plant,” Michigan Cattle Feeders' Day (Michigan State

University, 1960), pp. 5-7.

32

Table 2. Percent TDN of corn silage made from various
parts of the corn plant.a

 

 

%TDN

 

As Harvested Dry Matter

 

Basis Basis

1. Regular silage

(whole plant silage) 16.22 63.0
2. Ears only 40.26 83.7
3. Butts only

(leaves and stalks below

the ear) 6.37 41.8
4. Tops only

(leaves and stalks above

the ear) 5.95 32.8
5. Butts and ears 23.90 73.3

 

aJohn Plog, H. W. Newland, and Hugh Henderson,
VNutritive Value of Silage Made from Various Parts of the
Corn P1ant,? Michigan Cattle Feeders' Day (Michigan State
University, 1960), p. 6. The ras harvested? values are as

reported. Dry matter values are calculated from the Fas

harvested? values.

would have a TDN level of 32.8%. On the other hand, by
harvesting only the high moisture shelled corn, a silage of
94%.TDN would be produced.1 It appears logical to conclude
that the energy level of corn silage can be raised or

lowered between these two extremes by harvesting selected

 

lThese TDN percentages are on the dry matter basis
which will be used throughout the paper unless otherwise
indicated.

33

portions of the corn plant. Because even ear corn silage is
higher in TDN than rations presently fed to feeder cattle,
it appears that theVbalancedV energy silage will contain the
corn ear plus a certain percent of the forage portion of

the corn plant.

6. Dwarf Corn Silage

 

Dwarf corn silage was tried as a poSsible means of
increasing the energy of corn silage. It seemed logical to
think that dwarf corn had a higher grain to forage ratio.
Experimental evidence comparing dwarf silage with regular
silage indicates that the yield per acre of the two was
about equal on the dry matter basis. ‘When compared to
regular corn, dwarf corn had a smaller percentage of stalks
but a larger percentage of leaves so that the ratio of grain
to forage was about equal for the two types of corn. When
evaluated in a feeding trial dwarf and regular corn silage
resulted in similar responses further indicating that the
energy level of the two silages was about equal.

It is apparent that with present dwarf corn varieties

 

1J. E. Zimmerman and others, FDwarf Versus Regular
Corn Silage for Beef Cattle,? Illinois Cattle Feeders' Day
(University of Illinois, 1960), p. 19.

34

the corn plant is shorter and leafier than regular corn so
the resulting silages are about equal energy wise. Possibly
future dwarf corn varieties may be developed that will

have a higher grain to forage ratio or perhaps a two or three
ear variety of regular corn may also increase the amount of
grain in silage. For the present, however, there appears to
be very little possibility for significantly increasing

the energy level of corn by selecting varieties with higher

grain ratios since the variation is so small.

7. Butt Silage

With the analysis of the corn plant parts in support
of their position, Henderson and Newland attempted to produce
a higher energy silage by using butt silage. In making this
silage the corn top was cut off just above the ear and
discarded.1 Figure 1 shows the remaining ear and butt portion
of the corn plant which made up the silage. For a two
year period butt silage was compared with regular silage by
chemical analyses and feeding trials.

One feeding trial was run with the objective of

 

lHugh E. Henderson and others, rHigh Energy Corn
Silage for Fattening Beef Heifer Calves,? Michigan Cattle
Feeders' Day (Michigan State University, 1961), p. l.

35

feeding groups of cattle on regular silage and butt silage
ration in such a way as to result in the two groups gaining
at the same rate. Theoretically the same rate of gain would
require the same amount of TDN so that in measuring the
amount of ground shelled corn required to give equal gains
the energy level of the two silages could be compared. The
butt silage group required more silage per hundred weight
gain, but considerably less corn (9%.more silage and 48%
less shelled corn).l By analysis regular corn silage was
20%.TDN and butt silage was 24% TDN as fed.2

A follow—up feeding trial was run in which more care
was taken to produce both the regular silage and butt silage
from comparable corn. This was done to make certain that
differences between the two silages were due to different
harvesting methods rather than to differences in the corn
crops.3 The main objective of this trial was to determine
how much ground shelled corn has to be added to butt silage

so that the ration is equal to the energy level in a

 

lIbido. pp. 1-3.

21bido' p. 3.

3H.‘W. Newland, C. G. Silvernail, and C. M. Hansen,
FEffects of Adding Various Levels of Shelled Corn to Topped

(Butts and Ears) Corn Silage for Fattening Heifers,, Michigan
Cattle Feeders' Day (Michigan State University, 1962), AH 76.

36

ration consisting of regular corn silage and shelled corn.
The major conclusion resulting from this experiment was that
discarding the cornstalk t0p slightly raises the energy
level of the resulting butt silage.l However, before this
level can be significantly raised, a more positive means of

reducing the amount of forage harvested must be developed.

Summary

From this information it seems logical to conclude
that the energy level of corn silage can be modified.
Complete energy corn silage has been produced at silo filling
time and successfully fed. Feed conversion rates and silo
losses of the complete energy corn silage are such that
higher energy silages appear to be of practical consider-
ation. From analyses of the parts of the corn plant it
appears likely that the energy level of corn silage can be
modified at harvest time by selective harvesting methods.

In fact, the energy level of corn silage was slightly raised
by harvesting corn as Vbutt silage.? If complete energy
corn silage is to be produced at corn harvest time, a more

effective means of reducing the amount of forage harvested

‘with the ear will be needed.

 

lIbido. pp. 2-3.

CHAPTER III

CENTERrCUT SILAGE--A PROPOSED MEANS OF HARVESTING

CORN AS COMPLETE ENERGY SILAGE

Newland and Huffman have presented center-cut silage
as a means of harvesting corn as complete energy silage.
They propose that the grain to forage ratio of corn silage
will be increased by discarding the top and bottom portions
of the corn plant. Only the ear and center section are
harvested as silage. This method is similar to that of
producing butt silage except that more of the leaves and
stalks are discarded, thus further increasing the energy level.
By adequately reducing the leaves and stalks that are harvested

with the ears, a complete energy silage should result.

1. How Center—cut Silage is Produced

In producing center—cut silage only the middle section
of the corn plant, as shown in Figure 2, is harvested. The

top of the corn plant is cut off and discarded by attaching

 

1H.‘W. Newland and C. F. Huffman, F'High Energy'
Corn Silage-~A New Approach for the Cattle Feeder,? MSU
Forage Symposium (Michigan State University, 1962), pp. 70-71.

37

38

a sickle bar mower to the front of a tractor and adjusting it
to the desired height. The butt portion of the corn plant

is discarded by adjusting the forage harvester to cut higher
than usual. The tractor with the mower bar is used to power
the forage harvester so the center-cut silage is harvested in
a one step operation (Figure 3).

The size of the center portion that needs to be
harvested is determined by the energy level desired in the
ration. If center—cut silage is to be 79%»TDN, only 40%
of the stalks and leaves need to be harvested with the ear.1
It would be better if the leaves and stalks could come
entirely from below the ear.2 However, because of practical
problems of harvesting the center—cut silage, 8% is harvested
above and 32% below the ear. In practice it was observed
that these percentages were obtained by setting the topper
to cut as close to the top of the ear as possible under
field conditions, and by setting the forage harvester to
cut off the center portion midway between the ear and ground.

The locations of these cuts are shown in Figure 4.

 

lIbido' p. 70.

2As shown above in Table 2, p. 32, the portion of

stalks and leaves below the ear is higher in TDN, Using
the highest TDN portions of the corn plant Will produce the

largest quantity of high energy silage.

39

Silage with 79% TDN would be comparable in energy to
other currently used finishing rations. If a lower energy
silage is desired, it can be obtained just by lowering the
height at which the forage harvester cuts. In this way
more leaves and stalks are harvested thus lowering the TDN
in the silage. The center-cut method, therefore, is flexible
in that silages may be produced that meet varying energy
levels required by different feeding situations.

2. Advantages of the
Center-cut Method

Properly harvested center—cut silage is a complete
energy feed for finishing cattle. Only protein and minerals

need to be added to produce a completely balanced ration.

Machinery costs are reduced.

When corn is harvested as both grain and silage, two
different harvesting operations are involved requiring two
different harvesting machines. Both a forage harvester and
a corn picker (or picker-sheller) are necessary and costly.
If large acreages of shelled corn are harvested, a grain
dryer is often required. Using complete energy center—cut
silage will end the need for shelled corn, thus making it

unnecessary to have the grain harvesting and drying machinery.

40

Further savings in machinery costs are realized because the
corn crop is fed as stored. Shelled corn need not be ground,
added, or mixed with center-cut silage so metering devices,

grinders, and mixers are no longer needed.

Feed storage costs are reduced.

The traditional method of harvesting corn necessi-
tates the use of at least two types of storage. Silage is
stored in silos and grain in cribs or bins. It has been
shown earlier that as the capacity of silos increases, the
initial cost of storage decreases. By using the center-cut
method all the harvested corn is stored in silos. The size
of silos that can be used is thus increased and there is
no need for a second type of storage for corn grain.
Figures 5 and 6 summarize these machinery and storage

facility savings.

Labor costs of feeding cattle are reduced.

Harvesting corn as complete energy silage not only
reduces machinery costs, but also reduces labor costs. In
feeding the corn crop as silage and shelled corn the energy
level in the feed is balanced at feeding time. The various
methods used to balance the energy level require considerable

amounts of labor as well as machinery and, therefore, are

41

costly. The previously presented all-in-one method of
producing complete energy silage balanced the energy level
at silo filling time. This reduced labor requirements at
feeding time but mainly transferred the need for labor to
the time when the silo was filled. Some labor savings were
realized in this way, but labor was still required for
handling and mixing shelled corn and silage. The center-
cut method completely eliminates the energy balancing
operation as a separate and specific operation. The energy
level is balanced in the harvesting operation without
significantly increasing labor costs over that of harvesting
regular corn silage. In this way the center-cut method

results in a sizeable reduction in labor requirements.

Beef gains per acre of corn harvested are not decreased.

Harvesting the total corn crop as regular corn
silage produces the maximum amount of energy per acre of
corn grown. This silage is, however, too low in energy to
be the only source of energy in the beef finishing ration
for most of today's feedlot operations. Corn grain is,
therefore, harvested to fortify the silage. Thus the total
stalk, representing considerable energy, is left in the

field from which the corn is picked. In using the center-cut

’ Elsi.
. ~_ .. . . . II. 3 e. .h
.11., Nr. ..,.,.a..‘..3.£..<.._11=_.... . cantata. |

42

method of producing complete energy corn silage only certain
portions of the stalk are left in the field. This still
results in some energy loss, but no more than with the
traditional method of harvesting corn. In fact, there is
evidence which indicates that there will be as muCh as a 7%

1
increase in the amount of TDN harvested per acre of corn.

 

lNewland and Huffman, MSU Forage Symposium, pp. 68, 70.

 

Vwa l.‘ . I Ffl‘i
. .53.. . . I.

CHAPTER IV

OTHER POSSIBLE MEANS OF PRODUCING

COMPLETE ENERGY SILAGE

A number of other means of producing complete energy
corn silage have been suggested. Two of these will be

mentioned here.

1. Corn Top Silage

 

Harvesting the corn plant from the ear up has been
suggested as a possible way of producing complete energy
silage.l This at first appears to be an economical and
feasible method. Just a regular forage harvester adjusted
to cut at ear level would be required as machinery and no
topping device would be necessary.

The first drawback is that the top of the cornstalk
is harvested which is the part of the corn plant highest in
moisture and lowest in TDN. Thus more TDN would be left
in the field in the form of corn butts. Also, as will be
pointed out in more detail later, some corn ears break over

at such angles as to prohibit the cutting of the cornstalk

 

1%” p. 69.

43

44
at the necessary height. Thus this method does not appear
to be practical at the present time.

2. One—and-one Silage (one row ears
and butts, and one row ears)

This method is suggested as a means of producing
high energy silage. One-and-one silage would have about 72%
TDN which is a complete energy feed for yearling finishing
cattle but would be too low in energy for finishing calves
to choice grade at 1,000 pounds.1 A few farmers have tried
this method, or a modified form of it, in which one row
of whole corn is harvested with one row of ears. This one-
and—one method may prove useful to some farmers under some
conditions. However, there are reasons to believe this
method will never be widely accepted.

The energy level of silage harvested with this method.
is fixed. There is no way of easily increasing or decreasing
the amount of forage harvested with the ears. Also the
machinery needed for this operation is rather complicated.
Farmers have modified forage harvesters to perform the
necessary operation, but such machines are not likely to be

available commercially. The greatest disadvantage to this

 

lIbido‘ p. 69.

1n . !I 7%“
Tam-53:1» ...... .. 5....

45

method is that the resulting silage is not a truly complete
energy feed and would require energy supplementation for many

feeding situations.

CHAPTER V

SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS RESULTING FROM
HIGH ENERGY CORN SILAGE EXPERIMENTS

CARRIED OUT BY M.S.U.

As experience with producing and feeding high energy
silages increases, information is gained that permits certain
conclusions to be made. Some of these conclusions are more
definite while others are rather tentative requiring more
research for further substantiation.

1. Lodginngeduces the Efficiency
of the Topping Operation

Lodged corn is difficult to top. Often some corn-
stalks are standing straight while others are leaning over
at various angles. The topping machine cannot be lowered
any further than the highest ears will permit. Therefore,
some tops are missed because they are leaning over too far.
On badly lodged corn the topping operation may be of very
little value while with straight standing corn the forage
portion of the resulting silage may be reduced 17% by

l
topping the corn plant.

 

lIbido. p. 650

46

47

2. Variation in Height and Attitude
of the Corn Ears Interferes with
the Harvesting of Center-cut

Silage

As can be observed in almost any corn field, the
height of the corn ear on the cornstalks varies to a con-
siderable extent. Also some ears stand almost straight up,
some hang almost straight down, and others are at various
angles in between. The topping unit must be adjusted to
cut above the highest upstanding ears while the forage
chopper must cut below the lowest hanging ears. This often
means that more than the desired amount of stalks and
leaves are unavoidably harvested with the ears. The
seriousness of this problem varies from field to field.

In some, the ear and 40% of the stalks and leaves can be
harvested, but in others twice as much forage may be
harvested when adjusting to cut above the highest ears and
below the lowest.

3. High Energy Corn Silaga
Requires Finer Chopping

Cattle fed higher energy silage were seen to pick

. . 1
over their feed more than cattle fed regular corn Silage.

 

1Newland, Silvernail, and Hansen, Michigan Cattle
Feeders' Day, pp. 1, 3.

48

The larger pieces of cobs and stalks were left in the bottom
of the feed bunk. This would indicate that high energy
silage is less palatable than regular corn silage. It has
been observed that high energy silage is drier than other
silages, and these larger pieces of dry cob and stalks are
not readily eaten by the cattle. Finer chopping of the

high energy silage would increase the palatability of both
cobs and stalks.

4. Finer Chopping of Silage Appears

to Reduce Nutrient Loss Due to
‘Whole Undigested Kernels

In making high energy silage efforts have been made
to chop the corn plant as fine as possible. In doing this
it was observed that more of the kernels appeared to be
craCked than usual. If this proves to be true, then one of
the possible energy losses in harvesting and feeding complete
energy silage is reduced.

5. Length of Corn Silage Hapvest
Period May Be Critical

If all corn is harvested as silage and this silage
is to provide all the energy in the finishing ration, large
tonnages of material must be harvested and stored. The corn

silage harvesting season has already been seen as a peak

 

flag
Magi“... $61.14....uiww ...»... C
ARE r V _ V

 

49

load period for labor and machinery. In some areas the
possibility of early frosts may reduce the reliability of

corn silage as a source of high quality feed.

 

CHAPTER VI

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH WITH

COMPLETE ENERGY SILAGE

Complete energy silage is an important and creative
concept. Because the advantages of such a feed are numerous,
the production and evaluation of these silages warrant
further research. Presently the most promising method of
producing complete energy silage is the center-cut method.
Following are some areas of research which may prove to be
useful and fruitful.

(l) A reliable means of harvesting the desired
length of center portion of the corn plant must be
developed. As already mentioned the ear height and attitude
interferes with this. Perhaps a header for the forage
harvester can be developed that will lift the low-hanging
ears so they will not interfere with the cutting operation.
If the center-cut method catches on, it may be profitable
for plant breeders to develop corn varieties having more
uniformity in height and attitude of ears.

(2) More work needs to be done in harvesting and

evaluating center-cut silage with varying lengths of the

50

51

center portion of the plant. In this way guideposts could
be established for harvesting center-cut silage to meet
different energy requirements.

(3) Corn varieties and cultural practices should be
investigated in an effort to lengthen the period during which
corn silage can be harvested.

(4) It appears that finer chopping of corn silage
would increase palatability and decrease nutrient losses
as indicated earlier. Means of finely chopping or otherwise
breaking the corn plant into smaller particles need to be
developed.

(5) It has been suggested that most of the corn-
stalk tops and butts left in the field by the center-cut
operation could be harvested as a low energy silage by use
of a flail type harvester. While this silage is very low
in energy, it would provide most of the energy required by
beef cow herds during the winter. After observing the
condition of the corn stubble following the center—cut
harvest, it is quite obvious that a goodly share of the tops
and butts are so trampled into the ground that much of it
could not be salvaged.

Newland suggests an approach that would harvest

the total nutrients produced in a field of corn. The total

m.......§..i......,.- 33¢... ...... |
’ [Haul-Q pvu . ..A . .. .. ,

52

corn plant would be cut off by the harvester. Portions of
the plant could then be separated, chopped, and loaded into
two different wagons. One wagon would consist of complete
energy silage. The second would have the low energy silage
for feeding the cow herd. In this manner the total corn
crop could be harvested in one operation in forms that

can be easily utilized.

The significance of this suggestion is likely to
increase because beef cow herds are on the increase in
Michigan. These herds are capable of utilizing large amounts
of low energy roughages. A fair sized beef cow herd could
be maintained on the amount of roughage that is lost on
many farms in the form of corn stubble. In close cooperation
'with the Agricultural Engineering Department a machine
capable of simultaneously performing these operations could
probably be developed without serious difficulty.

Research in the area of producing and feeding complete
energy corn silages is yet in the infant stage. The
advantages and possibilities of harvesting the total corn
crop are great enough to make new corn feeding and harvesting

Imethods a potentially rich area of investigation.

 

CHAPTER VII
SLIDE-TAPE PRESENTATION

1. Extension Communications

The writer believes that the foregoing review and “4
summary of research concerning complete energy corn silage i
represents knowledge of practical and economic value to 5‘.
cattle feeders. The university's research function of
seeking new knowledge in this area continues. But as new
knowledge is obtained through research, a second function of the
university must come into play--that of extending this new
knowledge to those who can use it. The task of extending
useful knowledge from the university to the farm has long
fallen within the particular providence of the Cooperative
Extension Service. It is to this task that this paper is
now directed.
As has been pointed out in the introduction, the
?end product? of this paper is a slide-tape presentation
*which may be used by extension workers to communicate a
message about corn silage usage to beef feeders. This is
essentially a communications problem, and here it shall

ibe analyzed briefly in terms of the communications process

'53

54

as this process has been conceptualized by George H. Axinn
in his manuscript, The Strategy of Communications.1 Axinn
breaks the communications process into four phases:

The Audience

The Message

Communications Channels

The Treatment.

The Audience.

The audience envisioned for this presentation is the
beef cattle feeder. Axinn states that ?The more specific
your definition of the audience, the greater the chance
that you will be able to communicate with that audience._"2
Herein lies a possible limitation in the effectiveness of
the presentation developed in this paper, for the audience
to which the message is addressed is a rather diverse one-—
cattle feeders. Many different types of people are cattle
feeders. Some have much more education than others. Some
feeders have large, specialized operations while some operate

small feedlots that are just supplementalto other sources

 

1George H. Axinn, The Strategy of Communication
(unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, 1959).

2Ibid., Chapter IV, p. 3.

55

of income. Some feeders are already feeding the maximum
amount of corn silage possible while others feed very little
if any. Some are early adopters while others are late
adopters.

If the audience could be more definitely defined so
as to include particular types of cattle feeders such as
large commercial operators, then a more specialized presenta-
tion could be developed which might be more effective for
that particular group. However, in the extension situation,
tours and meetings are attended by cattle feeders in general,
not by cattle feeders of a specific category. This presenta-
tion has information that should be useful for various

classes of cattle feeders.

The Message.

As defined by Axinn the message ?is the intent of
the communicator with respect to the audience.?1 ‘What the
communicator intends to happen to his audience can be called
his message. The acceptance of a message by an audience
may be measured in terms of behavioral change of the audience.
In measuring the effectiveness of the communication process

it should be useful to break behavior down ?into thinking

 

lIbid., Chapter IV, p. 7.

56

behavior, feeling behavior, and acting behavior.?1 In
this slide—tape presentation there are three main messages
for cattle feeders. In sequential order as presented in
the slide-tape program they are the following:
1. If you farm good corn land, feed as much corn
silage as is possible and still balance the energy
level of the ration.
2. Corn silage produces good quality beef gains.
3. It may soon be possible for you to harvest all your
corn crop as complete energy silage.

This slide-tape presentation will need to be
evaluated by its influence upon all three phases of behavior
because each of the main messages is dealing with a
different phase. These phases or levels of behavior form a
continuum from the thinking phase through the feeling phase
to the acting phase. For any behavioral change to take place
in the feeling or acting levels, a certain amount of change
must already have taken place in the preceding phase.

The three messages listed above fit into this
behavior continuum in reverse order from which they are

listed. The third message will influence thinking behavior,

 

lIbid., Chapter III, p. 3.

57

the second will influence feeling behavior, and the first
message will influence acting behavior. This is to say that
it is hoped this presentation will influence some cattle
feeders to begin to develop new concepts of corn harvesting,
storing, and feeding; to believe or feel that corn silage
produces high quality beef gains: and to feed as much corn
silage as possible.

Which of these messages will be most important or
most clear should depend upon the individual farmer. If
he is a late adopter, the first message on advantages of
feeding more corn silage may be most important. For the
early adopter the concept of complete energy corn silage
may be most important. For the innovator--if there is one
present--all of this may be old hat and somewhat a waste

of his time.

Communication Channels.

The slide—tape presentation was chosen as the channel
of communication for this message for a number of reasons.

First, slide presentations are effective teaching methods.

 

1The adopter groups mentioned are according to
adopter categories as presented by Agricultural Extension
Service of Michigan and other states, Adopters of New Farm
Ideas, North Central Regional Extension Publication No. 13
(October, 1961). pp. 4-5.

58

"Evidence clearly supports the conclusion that films can

teach factual information effectively over a wide range of
subject matter content, age, ranges, abilities, and conditions
and use."1 They are effective in teaching perceptual-motor
skills;2 in modifying motivation, interest, attitudes and
opinions;3 and in teaching various concepts.4 Contrary to
often stated opinions films are at least as effective as
conventional teaching methods in helping students learn how

to think and to develop concepts and inferences.5 Research
also shows that, as teaching devices, filmstrips and slides
are as effective as films.6 Lillian Schwartz has also shown
that as an extension education method slide-tape presentations
are as effective as the more conventional lecture type of

teaching method.7

 

William H. Allen, Audio-visual Communication Research,
Prepared for the Third Edition, Encyclopedia of Educational
Research (Santa Monica, California: System Development
Corporation, 1958), p. 9.

2Ibid., p. 11.
3 .
Ibid., p. 14.
4Ibid., p. 13.
5Ibid.
6 .
Ibld-I pp. 1.6-1.7.
7Lillian M. Schwartz, "A Comparison of Traditional and
Mechanical Aid Training Methods in an Extension Home Economics

Situation" (unpublished Master's thesis, Institute for Extension
Personnel Development, Michigan State University, 1961), p. 35.

59

The slide-tape presentation is also a means of re-
inforcing other learning processes. It is an additional or
alternate means of presenting information to farmers. Emery
and Oeser have concluded that

The degree of exposure [to a new idea or practice] is
the main determinant of adoption; and the decisive
extension service operations must be designed to make
use of these pathways along which degree of exposure
can be improved.

Information about high energy corn silage is gradually
appearing in research summaries and farm periodicals. Cattle
feeders are beginning to ask more questions about this sub-
ject. Extension workers will need to present answers to
these questions in a correct, understandable manner. This
slide presentation will provide variety of treatment as well
as increase the farmer's exposure to the subject. This
should help to speed up the adoption process because
?The greater the number of channels in parallel between the
communicator and his audience, the greater the chance that
message will get through.?2

Another reason for choosing the slide-tape channel of

communication is that it is a totally recorded program that

 

1F. E. Emery and O. A. Oeser, Information, Decision
and Action (New York: Melbourne University Press, 1958),
p. 76.

 

2Axinn, Chapter VIII, p. 31.

 

60

can be reproduced by anyone having the necessary projector
and tape recorder. By using such presentations the extension
specialist can, in effect, send himself around the state
without ever leaving his office. In many situations good
slide presentation should be about as effective as having
the specialist appear in person. This then is a means of
increasing the influence and effectiveness of specialists.
Lastly, the slide—tape presentation was chosen because
this channel may more effectively reach some farmers than
might be the case if lectures and printed materials were
used. Emery and Oeser indicate that less urbanized farmers
are slower adopters.1 They use the concept of urbanization
as a measure of the ?experiences in the farmer's life history
which predisposes him to an unemotional intellectual or
instrumental attitude to knowledge as contrasted with a
personal or traditional 'craft' viewJ'2 Farmers at the bottom
of the urbanization scale have less conceptual ability and

rely more heavily upon first-hand experiences as learning

experiences.3 Visualization in the slide-tape presentation

 

1Emery and Oeser, pp. 14‘16.
2 .
Ibldo' p. 44.

3Ibid., pp. 9-10.

61

should help the later adopters to better understand ideas
and concepts which are presented.

According to Lionberger,l the earlier adopters provide
themselves with much of their exposure to new ideas, or at
least search for information that provides them with this
exposure. This information eventually filters down to farmers
who are later adopters. It has been shown that early
adopters are better readers and more skillful in conceptualiz-
ing new ideas than later adopters. The later adopters rely
more heavily oncther people to perform these functions for
them. The visualization of the message in this slide-tape
presentation should help later adopters to better see and
understand concepts which before may not have been too well
understood. To the extent that this is accomplished, the

adoption process will be speeded up.

The Treatment.

4

?Treatment,” according to Axinn, ?is not a statement

about how a message might be treated. It is the actual

content which the audience will perceive.?2 The development

 

lHerbert F. Lionberger, Adoption of New Ideas and
Practices (Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press, 1960),

pp. 36-41.

 

2Axinn, Chapter IX, p. 2.

62

of this treatment has been influenced by a basic assumption
that if cattle feeders, like farmers in general, are pre-
sented with the relevant facts and understand these fagpa
and their implications--they will modify their operations in
such a manner as to give them the most personal satisfaction.1
It is hoped that the audience will perceive this presentation
as largely a summary of research information on corn silage
usage for feeding beef cattle. An effort has been made to
(indicate what some of the implications are if the basic
information presented in the research summaries is accepted.
As the result of this treatment it is hoped that these

cattle feeders who unnecessarily limit the amount of corn
silage fed will increase corn silage usage to a maximum
because experience shows that increased feeding of corn
silage usually increases profits. It is likewise hoped

that cattle feeders will feel or believe that corn silage
produces good quality carcasses because research shows this
is true. Finally, it is hoped that cattle feeders will

begin to develop concepts of complete energy corn silage

 

1This basic assumption that farmers are willing to

learn and accept new ideas is commonly accepted by extension
workers as indicated by Christopher Sower, ?External
Development Organizations and the Locality,? Paper Prepared
for presentation to the Joint Meetings of the American
Sociology Society and the Rural Sociological Society in
Chicago (September, 1959), p. 8.

63

usage because research indicates that such silage has certain
economic advantages.
To be understood by the designated audience has been

a major goal in developing this slide-tape presentation.
Axinn states that

The extent to which an audience will perceive a

treatment as meaning what the communicator intended

it to mean depends upon the extent to which the

symbols used carry the same meaning for audience

and communicator.l
It is thought that both the pictures and words chosen will
be understood by the audience. For this audience the neces-
sity of interest for holding attention was also considered
to be important. To develop a presentation that was both
intelligible and interesting, the writer turned for help
and guidance to individuals who were knowledgeable in the
fields of program content and presentation of program
content. The development of this presentation involved
numerous steps and processes as summarized below:

1. Summary of information that is to be passed on to

the cattle feeder.

2. Checking and correcting by specialists of information

for accuracy and adequacy.

 

leinn, Chapter IX, p. 9.

64

3. Development of the script for the presentation.

4. Checking and modification of script by communication
authorities for clarity and meaning.

5. Development of visual presentation.

6. Checking and redevelopment of visual presentation
by visual-aids specialists.

7. Reworking of script and slides for compatability.

It is hoped that through this developmental process
the goal of intelligibility and interest has been approached.
It is realized that further improvements could be made through
pretesting the presentation with farmer audiences, but the

practical limitation of time does not permit this.

2. Script: ?Center—cut Silage For Beef?

(In the following script the included numbers indi-
cate the slide illustrating the point being discussed.
Included as illustrations are photos of slides used to
explain the more important points of the presentation.)

(1) Center-cut silage as a source of complete energy
feed for beef cattle offers new and exciting opportunities
for cattle feeders in corn producing areas. Silage feeding
is well accepted, but much of the information you are going

to see about center-cut silage is still in the developmental

65

stage. It is offered to you at this time to inform you of
recent research developments which may soon become important
to you—-the cattle feeder.

(2) This program has been produced by Carl Silvernail
in cooperation with the Animal Husbandry Department at
Michigan State University and the Michigan Cooperative
Extension Service. We welcome your opinions about the
possibilities of using complete energy corn silage on your
farm.

(3) Recent beef cattle research projects carried out
by Michigan State University indicate that it may soon be
possible to harvest corn in the form of complete energy
silage. Such silage will not require energy supplementation
with ground shelled corn or other high energy feed.

(4) Harvesting the total corn crop as complete energy
silage has at least three advantages. First, corn is
harvested in‘a one—step harvesting operation requiring only
one harvesting machine. Second, the cattle feeder needs only
a single type of storage facility. And third, the corn crop
can be fed in the form in which it is harvested and stored.
It needs no further grinding or mixing. All this would be
possible with no decrease in pounds of beef gains produced

per acre of corn harvested.

66

(5) The cattle feeding industry has undergone many
changes in the last few years as have many industries in
the United States. Only a few years ago most finished
cattle came from comparatively small feedlots where
feeding was done by hand. Today these small lots are being
replaced by larger feedlots which are often highly mechanized
and automated. Fewer man hours are being required to finish
more cattle.

(6) Changes have taken place not only in size and
mechanization of operation, but also in what the cattle
are being fed. Many cattle feeders in good corn growing
areas have made important changes from the conventional
hay and shelled corn finishing ration. Increasingly corn
silage is beingiused in the feedlot for finishing cattle.
There are a number of reasons for this.

(7) Corn is a good yield crop. A field of corn
harvested as corn silage yields far more energy than most
other crops. This advantage in yield continues to increase.

(8) Great strides have been made in providing
mechanical means of harvesting and handling large tonnages
of heavy, bulky materials such as corn silage. Harvesting
corn silage is now comparatively economical, practical,

and convenient.

 

67

(9) Feeding trials and carcass evaluation show
that high corn silage rations produce beef carcasses of
desirable quality.

(10) Feeding trials have repeatedly shown that
feeding corn silage to feeder cattle increases profits.
In fact, as the amount of corn silage fed to cattle
increases, profits also increase.

(11) For these and other reasons many cattle feeders
have increased corn silage usage to the maximum. How-
ever, corn silage--even when full-fed--does not provide
sufficient energy for maximum gains and finish on choice
calves. For this reason supplementation with a high energy
feed such as shelled corn is necessary. (12) If corn
silage were higher in energy, less shelled corn would be
needed and more silage could be fed. In fact, if corn silage
had sufficient energy to meet the total energy requirements of
feeder calves, no shelled corn would need to be added.
(13) Michigan State University beef specialists have had this
possibility in the back of their minds in some of their recent
research projects. The results of these trials and experiments

indicate that it may soon be possible to harvest corn as a

68

complete energy feed for use in the feedlot. (l4) Harvesting

corn as complete energy silage will have a number of ad-

vantages over harvesting corn both as silage and grain.

Let us look at the methods and processes necessary to

harvest corn for use in the finishing ration.

(15)

(16)

(17)

First, part of the corn crop is harvested as
silage using a forage harvester. After being
chopped and blown into a wagon or truck, the
corn is hauled to the silo for storage.

Next, when the remainder of the corn crop is
adequately matured, it may be harvested by a
combination picker and sheller as shelled

corn and stored in appropriate bins. There are
a number of alternate methods of harvesting
corn as silage and grain, but they are all alike
in that two or more harvesting machines are
required as are two or more types of storage
facilities.

Finally, before the silage and grain can be fed,
the grain must be further processed. If stored
as shelled corn—-it must be ground, metered,

and mixed with the silage in proper proportions
so that a feed containing the needed level of

energy is produced. Even with mechanization

69

and automation this processing and mixing is
costly and time consuming.

(18) To summarize, here is what is needed to handle
the corn crop as silage and shelled corn. To harvest the
silage a forage chopper, wagons, and silo filler are needed.
The grain harvesting requires in addition a pidker-sheller
and often a grain dryer. To store the two products silos for
silage and bins for the shelled corn are necessary. Before
the shelled corn can be fed, it must be run through a
grinder. Finally, a metering and mixing device is needed
for combining the grain and silage in the desired amounts.

(19) Contrast this with harvesting all corn as
complete energy silage. Over one-half of the equipment we
just listed is no longer needed. Because all the corn is
harvested as silage, the picker-sheller, dryer, bins, grinder,
and metering devices are not needed. This looks simple and
easy in theory. But is this approach likely to be practical
as well as profitable?

(20) Experiments being conducted at M.S.U. give us
reason to believe this approach will be both practical and
profitable. Complete energy silages have already been
produced and fed. At one research center ground shelled

corn was added to regular corn silage at silo filling time.

7O

 

Figfr- l. Portion of the corn plant harvested as butt
silage.

 

Fugilre 2. PurLi<u1 0f lIh. 00111;)Innt Ihlfvvst.wi 45 (kuiwr-
CHI; SI lat)“

EL——i, ,4

 

Sufi

“BEE

WEI

evj

si;

35

t.

71

Sufficient corn was added to provide the energy level
necessary for finishing feeder calves. (21) Feeding trials
were conducted to evaluate this feed, and the resulting
evidence is that ground shelled corn added to silage at

silo filling time is as effective in producing beef gains

as is ground shelled corn added to the silage when fed.

This indicates that it is possible and economically feasible
to produce and feed a complete energy corn silage. The
method used, however, is not exactly convenient nor does it
reduce machinery or storage facility costs.

(22) Other research workers made silage from dwarf
corn in an effort to raise the energy level of silage.
Feeding trials indicated that while this silage was slightly
higher in energy, shelled corn was still required to meet
the energy requirements of feeder calves.

(23) How much energy is needed to finish feeder
cattle? Various factors such as age of cattle being fed
and rate of gain and quality of finish desired influence
the energy requirements. However, for weaning calves to

finish as choice 1,000 pound steers, a ration containing 77%

total digestible nutrients on the dry matter basis is generally
considered sufficient. Yearling feeder stock will finish
nicely on a ration with 72%.total digestible nutrients.

(24) In utilizing the corn crop for finishing cattle,

72

the problem is to harvest and feed it in such a way as to
end up with a ration containing the level of energy required
by the feeding program. (25) What are the energy levels in
corn as we now harvest it? Remember we said that finishing
calves require a ration with 77% TDN and yearlings require
72% TDN. On the dry matter basis shelled corn is 94% TDN,
ear corn is 83.7% TDN, and regular corn silage is 69.4%
TDN. Not one of these forms of the corn plant meets the
energy requirements of calves or yearlings. (26) For years
the energy level has been adjusted to meet our feeding needs
by mixing low energy feed (corn silage) with high energy
feed (shelled corn) in such proportions as required. This,
we have seen, results in added expenses and inconveniences.

(27) Perhaps by selecting only certain parts of the
corn plant to be harvested as silage, the energy level
could then be raised. We have seen that regular corn
silage is too low in energy, and ear corn and corn grain
are too high for our purposes. Why not harvest something
more than the corn ear, but less than the whole plant?
Wouldn't this change the energy level of the silage?

(28) Research conducted at M.S.U. under the direction
of Dr. H. W. Newland established the following TDN levels

for the various parts of the corn plant:

73

Whole cornstalk (no leaves and no ears) 58.8%
Corn leaves 60.1%
Cornstalk butts (stalks and leaves) 64.4%
Whole plant silage 69.5%
Ear corn silage 83.7%

You see that the cornstalk tops are lowest in TDN and the
corn grain is highest.

(29) What possible ways are there to harvest the corn
ear plus some remaining portion of the corn plant? Among
other combinations the researchers could choose to harvest--

1. The ear plus the top of the cornstalk,

2. The ear plus the bottom portion of the cornstalk,

3. The ear only from one row of corn plus the ear
and the butt portion of the corn plant from the
next row, or

4. The ear plus a middle section of the cornstalk.

(30) Since the top of the cornstalk has the lowest
energy level, it seems reasonable that this should be the
first part of the corn plant to be discarded. By cutting off
and discarding the cornstalk tops, a lower moisture and higher
energy butt silage should result. (31) Researchers at M.S.U.
harvested butt silage by mounting a mower on the front of a
tractor. This provided a means of getting rid of the tops.

The forage harvester following behind chopped only the corn

74

ear and bottom portion of the corn plant. (32) Chemical
analyses and feeding trials indicated that this butt silage
was slightly higher in energy than regular silage, so this
silage required less supplementation with shelled corn and
permitted more silage to be fed. However, no great advantages
were realized, since corn still had to be harvested as both
silage and grain.

(33) Other researchers harvested corn by taking just
the ear from one row and mixing it with ear and butt silage
from the next row. The resulting silage was sufficiently
high for finishing yearling feeder cattle but would not do
for calves. This method also required a rather complicated
and thus expensive machine for harvesting the corn.

(34) M.S.U. researchers have proposed center—cut
silage as a means of harvesting corn as a complete energy
silage. Further research is needed before it is known just
how successful the center-cut method will prove to be.
However, early experiments have been promising and research
on this method continues. -In making center-cut silage only
the ear and a center portion of the corn plant is harvested.
(35) The machinery required to harvest center—cut silage is
quite simple. The corn is topped at the desired level by a

mower blade mounted on the front of the tractor. The ear

and center portion of the corn plant are then harvested with

75

 

Figure 3. The harvesting of center-cut silage.

 

Figure 4. Portion of stalks and leaves needed with the ear
to produce complete energy corn silage for beef
calves (showing location of top and bottom cuts).

76

a regular forage harvester adjusted to cut at the height
required.

(36) How much of the corn plant needs to be harvested
with the ear to meet the energy level required by feeder
calves? By referring to the energy levels of the various
parts of the corn plant, researchers have calculated that
the ear plus 8% of the plant above the ear and 32% of the
plant below the ear will result in silage having the
necessary energy level. These percentages of the stalks
and leaves are harvested by adjusting the topper to cut
as close to the car as possible, and by adjusting the
forage harvester to cut halfway between the ear and the
ground. (37) A further advantage of center-cut silage is
that the energy level of the harvested silage may be
raised or lowered by harvesting more or less of the corn
plant along with the ear. (38) We have seen that this
center-cut silage will permit the beef feeder to harvest
all his corn as silage. This permits single step harvesting,
requires only one type of storage facility, and the corn
crop can be fed as it is harvested and stored.

(39) The center—cut method of harvesting complete
energy corn silage will reduce investment and operating

costs of harvesting, storing, and feeding the corn crop.

77

 

Figure 5. Machinery and facilities required to handle corn
as both shelled corn and silage.

 

Figure 6. Reduction of machinery and facilities realized
with the center—cut method.

78

But, what effect will this harvesting method have on
beef production per farm? Will center-cut silage reduce
the total beef gains produced per acre of corn harvested?

(40) Let us compare the beef gains produced by corn
harvested by the conventional silage and shelled corn
method with beef gains produced by corn harvested as
center-cut silage. How many acres of corn are required by
each of these methods to feed 100 head of 400 pound calves
to finish at choice grade when they weigh 1,000 pounds?
(41) In figuring this acre requirement let us assume that
each acre of corn will produce 80 bushels of shelled corn
or, if harvested as silage, will produce 16 tons of silage.

(42) If corn is harvested as silage and shelled
corn, 64 acres will be required to finish these 100 calves.
Twenty—five acres can be harvested as silage and 39
acres as shelled corn. Corn harvested as silage and grain
in these proportions will provide the necessary level of
energy required by these calves.

(43) By harvesting corn as center—cut silage these
100 calves will be finished on 59.5 acres which is 4.5 acres
less than required by the silage and shelled corn method.
This is a 7%.reduction in land requirement. (44) It should
be pointed out, however, that the beef gains produced per

acre of corn harvested as center—cut silage are based on

 

79

the ideal situation in which just the ear and the desired
40% of stalks and leaves are harvested. Until these

figures are supported by experimental evidence, it does not
appear wise to plan on this reduced acreage requirement. It
seems clear, however, that center-cut silage will n9;

reduce beef gains produced per acre of corn harvested.

(45) As proposed, center-cut silage is a complete
energy feed which will permit the cattle feeder to harvest
all of his corn as silage. This single step harvesting
method will reduce labor, machinery, and storage costs.
These advantages will be realized with no reduction of
beef gains produced per farm.

(46) One of the results of research efforts with
center-cut silage is the development of new ideas on how to
harvest in one operation the total corn plant as two
different types of silage. The ear plus the desired portion
of stalks and leaves could be loaded into one wagon to form
complete energy silage for feeder cattle. The remaining
portion of stalks and leaves could be loaded into a second
wagon to form a low energy silage for feeding the beef cow
herd. (47) The number of beef breeding herds being raised
on high value land in the Midwest is rapidly increasing.

The cornstalks and leaves that were once discarded are now

recognized as being a good source of lower energy feed.

80

As the importance and significance of cornstalks and
leaves as a feed are increasingly appreciated, more efforts
will be made to harvest them.

(48) The center-cut method of corn harvesting and
feeding appears to be a strong possibility in the near
future. Single step harvesting of the total corn plant as
two different silages shows some promise for future cattle

feeders. What doayou think?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agricultural Extension Service of Michigan and other states.
Adopters of New Farm Ideas, North Central Regional
Extension Publication No. 13. October, 1961.

Albert, W. W. and others. ?Effect of Adding Soybean Meal to
a High-energy Silage Made of High-moisture Corn and
Alfalfa for Fattening Steers,? Illinois Cattle Feeders'
.Qay. University of Illinois, 1960, pp. 21-22.

Allen, William H. Audio-visual Communication Research,
Prepared for the Third Edition, Encyclopedia of
Educational Research. Santa Monica, California:
System Development Corporation, 1958.

Axinn, George H. The Strategy of Communication. Unpublished
manuscript. Michigan State University, 1959.

Barlowe, Raleigh. Land Resource Economics. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1958.

 

Emery, F. E. and Oeser, O. A. Information, Decision and
Action. New York: Melbourne University Press, 1958.

Esmay, M. L., Boyd, J. S., and Hoglund, C. R. ?Equipment,
Practices, Investments and Annual CostsAssociated
with Tower and Bunker Silo Systems,? MSU Silage
Conference. Michigan State University, 1959.

Henderson, Hugh E. and others. ?High Energy Corn Silage for
Fattening Beef Heifer Calves,? Muchigan Cattle Feeders'
Day. Michigan State University, 1961.

Hillman, D., Blank, G. L., and Brown, L. H. ?Changing
Styles of Forage Feeding and Nutrition of Animals,?
MSU Forage Symposium. Michigan State University,
1962.

81

82

Huffman, C. F., and Duncan, C. W. ?Corn Kernels in Feces
of Dairy Cattle Fed Corn Silage,? Michigan
Agricultural Experiment Stationpguarterly Bulletin,
vol. XLI. Michigan State University, February, 1959.

 

Huffman, C. F., Duncan, C.‘W., and Dexter, S. T. ?Corn
Grain and Stalks (Hay-Equivalent) in Corn Silages
Obtained from Random Samples,? Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station Quarterly Bulletin, vol. XLII.
Michigan State University, May, 1960.

Huffman, C. F. Interviews. Professor Emeritus in Dairy
and Animal Husbandry, Michigan State University,
1962.

Lionberger, Herbert F. Adoption of New Ideas and Practices.
Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press, 1960.

Maddex, R. L., and others. ?Engineering Silage Equipment
and Operations for Dairy and Beef Cattle Feeding,?
MSU Silage Conference. Michigan State University,
1959.

Nfichigan Department of Agriculture. Michigan Agricultural
Statistics, A Report Prepared by the Michigan
Cooperative Crop Reporting Service. Michigan
Department of Agriculture, July, 1962.

Neumann, A. L., Albert, W. W., and Mitchell, G. E., Jr.
?Alfalfa, Oat, and Corn Silages Containing 40
Percent Corn for Fattening Beef Calves,? Illinois
Cattle Feeders' Day. University of Illinois, 1958.

Neumann, A. L., and others. ?Comparison of Alfalfa and Oat
Silages Containing High-corn Addition with Corn
Silage for Fattening Beef Calves,? Illinois Cattle
Feeders' Day. University of Illinois, 1957.

Neumann, A. L., and others. ?Effect of Length of Heavy
Corn Silage Feeding Period on Total Feed Requirements
and Carcass Yield and Grade in Fattening Steers,?
Illinois Cattle Feeders' Day. University of
Illinois, 1962.

83

Neumann, A. L., and others. "Effect of Moisture Level in
Field-shelled Corn on Harvesting and Storage Losses
and on Feeding Value for Beef Cattle," Illinois
Cattle Feeders' Day. University of Illinois, 1959.

Nevens, W. B., and others. "The Ear and Leaf-stalk Contents
of Corn Forage as Factors in Silage Evaluation,"
Journal of Dairy Science, Vol. XXXVII (1954), pp. 1088-
1093.

Newland, H. W., and Huffman, C. F. "'High Energy' Corn
Silage-—A New Approach for the Cattle Feeder,"

MSU Forage Symposium. Michigan State University,
1962.

Newland, H. W., Silvernail, C. G., and Hansen, C. M.
"Effects of Adding Various Levels of Shelled Corn
to Topped (Butts and Ears) Corn Silage for Fattening
Heifers," Michigan Cattle Feeders' Day. Michigan
State University, 1962.

Plog, John, Newland, H. W., and Henderson, Hugh. "Nutritive
Value of Silage Made from Various Parts of the
Corn Plant," Cattle Feeders' Day. Michigan State
University, 1960.

Schwartz, Lillian M. "A Comparison of Traditional and
Mechanical Aid Training Methods in an Extension
Home Economics Situation." Unpublished Master's
thesis, Institute for Extension Personnel Development,
Michigan State University, 1961.

Snapp, Roscoe R., and Neumann, A. L. Beef Cattle. 5th ed.;
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960.

 

Sower, Christopher. "External Development Organizations
and the Locality," Paper Prepared for presentation
at the Joint Meetings of the American Sociology
Society and the Rural Sociological Society in
Chicago. September, 1959.

White, Robert G. “Minimum Tillage Field Day Results."
Agricultural Engineering Department, Michigan State
University. (Mimeographed.)

White, Robert G. Interview. Extension Agricultural Engineer,
Michigan State University, 1962.

 

84

White, Robert G., and MoColly, Howard F. ?Methods,
Equipment, Power and Investments for Harvesting and
Storing Hay and Silage,? MSU Silage Conference.
Michigan State University, 1959.

Williamson, J. L., and others. ?Chemical and Nutritive-
value Changes in Alfalfa Silage Made with High
Levels of Added Corn,? Illinois Cattle Feeders Day.
University of Illinois, 1957.

Zimmerman, J. E., and others. ?Dwarf versus Regular Corn
Silage for Beef Cattle,? Illinois Cattle Feeders'
Day. University of Illinois, 1960.

amour-...

in... u: n
. n. £34,.4ubuauanflunr.
'I 1 -a

 

 

 

.fl .. .... _:r..-ai&41.u.._“ ~ 1....“- r min“ ”a.“

1“

 

 

 

 

“MICHIGAN STATE IIHH'ERSITV LIBRARIES

H I! ‘; ‘iztlliiii’flfl'
IIIEIIIIIII MI I
1 74 8761

3

MI
||

293 031