PSLBII-29 Effects of heat stress mitigation methods on growth performance, environmental, and economic outcomes of feedlot cattle raised in a hot climate

• Published in: Journal of animal science Vol. 102; no. Supplement_3; pp. 664 - 665
• Main Authors: Turcios, Sebastian E Mejia, Rotz, Alan, McGlone, John J, Rivera, Carlos, Mitloehner, Frank M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 14.09.2024
• ISSN: 0021-8812; 1525-3163
• DOI: 10.1093/jas/skae234.754

Abstract The increase in average global temperatures presents a challenge for the beef industry, especially in the feedlot sector where heat stress is a major animal welfare and economic concern. To combat this, shade stands out as one of the most practical methods to mitigate heat stress in feedlot cattle. An experiment was conducted as a completely randomized design with Bos indicus bulls (n = 1,560) with initial body weights (BW) of 287 kg. Three shade structure types were used to investigate the effects of different heat stress mitigation methods on cattle growth performance, environmental, and economic outcomes using live animal data, and a partial lifecycle assessment (LCA) using the Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM). The live animal portion of the experiment was done once a year over a 2-yr period with three pen replications per treatment per year (n = 6 per treatment). Four shade structures used were: conventional shade (SC; steel shade 1.8 m2 of shade/animal), double conventional shade (DS; steel shade 3.6 m2 of shade/animal), dome structures without fans (DSA; 8.5 m2/animal with 98% solar radiation blocked), and domes with fans (DCA; three large sized low-speed fans). Each pen held 65 bulls in an area of 570 m2. Live animal data were analyzed as a completely randomized design using the GLM procedure of SAS (version 9.4) with shade type as fixed effect, pen as the experimental unit, and repetition (year) considered a random effect. Cattle housed under DCA had 22 kg and 20 kg heavier final body BW (P < 0.05) compared with those housed under SC and DS, respectively. Final BW of DCA and DSA cattle were similar (P > 0.10). Average daily gain, feed efficiency, and hot carcass weight (HCW) were greater (P < 0.05) for cattle housed under DCA compared with the rest of the shade types. Dry matter intake was not affected (P > 0.10). When treatment results were extrapolated to the annual feedlot turnover of 209,700 animals, cattle in DSA and DCA versus SC and DS had 3 to 8 % reductions in greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions intensities. Compared with SC, DCA increased profitability by $29.66/animal, followed by DSA and DS with profit increases of $5.79 and $8.90/animal, respectively. Overall, the implementation of advanced shade structures improved cattle performance and profitability while reducing the environmental impact of beef production.