- Email: [email protected]
Modification of Virginia Computerized Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System to Increase Efficiency of Use1
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY Modification of Virginia Computerized Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System to Increase Efficiency of Use z C. C. STALLINGS and G. M. JONES Department of Dairy Science Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg 24061--6999 ABSTRACT
be formulated considering the following nutrients: crude protein, insoluble and soluble crude protein, energy, acid detergent fiber, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron. Various aspects of this program have been tested and described (4, 5,6). Initial response indicated the information on feeding was acceptable, but problems encountered in running the program prohibited extensive utilization by extension field personnel. Therefore, a modified version of the program was needed to overcome this shortcoming. The program contains feeds and their corresponding nutrient densities. Users can select from among these feeds and modify their nutrient densities. Nutrient densities, especially of forages, can be adjusted on feed analysis. The original version of the program used crude fiber in the nutrient analysis for each feed. The Forage Testing Lab at Virginia Tech, as well as other labs around the country, have changed from analyzing for crude fiber to acid detergent fiber, thus, necessitating a change in the formulation system to accommodate this switch.
The Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System was developed to formulate feeding guidelines for meeting standards for lactating dairy cows. Difficulty of data entry because of complex file creation and manipulation was the major reason this program was not adopted widely in Virginia. As a result few rations were formulated by this program by extension personnel. A modified version of the original program has been created to simplify data entry and running the program. This program is accessed on the Computerized Management Network by the names DAIR3 or DAIR3S. The DAIR3 is a prompted version that leads the user through input. The DAIR3S is a semi-prompted version that removes most of the time-consuming prompting. Both versions correspond to the format on a printed input form. A file is created with cow production data, feeds available, feed prices, and changes to feed nutrient concentrations. This file will be retained on the computer until purged or written over and can be edited for corrections or update prices and analyses. This revised program has met with success because it eliminates the tedious time-consuming manipulation required to create and edit files and allows data entry in a step-by-step straight approach.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Original Version
INTRODUCTION
The Virginia Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System is a linear program with an objective function of profit maximization subject to restrictions specified by the user. A ration will
Received February 5, 1982. 1This work supported by the John Lee Pratt Animal Nutrition Program, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg. 1983 J Dairy Sci 66:364-370
The original version of the Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System was the result of the pilot project funded by the Cooperative Extension Service, United States Departmen. t of Agriculture (2). This project was completed in 1977, and the resulting program is available to users of the Computerized Management Network (CMN, Plaza 1, Building D, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061) or through the Southern Dairy Records Processing Center. The CMN is an interactive system with users in Virginia and the southeast as well as other parts of the nation. Many county extension offices in Virginia contain computer terminals capable of using this network and the formulation program.
364
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY Use of t h e r a t i o n f o r m u l a t i o n p r o g r a m failed t o m a t e r i a l i z e a f t e r t h e p r o g r a m b e c a m e available b e c a u s e o f c o m p l e x file c r e a t i o n a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n . J o n e s e t al. (4, 5, 6) d e s c r i b e d t h e actual t e s t i n g a n d effectiveness of t h e program. T h e c e n t r a l f o r m u l a t i o n p r o g r a m is b a s e d o n a p r o f i t - m a x i m i z i n g linear p r o g r a m . T h e alg o r i t h m is designed t o o b t a i n t h e m a x i m u m d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n r e t u r n f r o m milk a n d cost o f feed. B r o w n a n d C h a n d l e r (1) d e s c r i b e d this c o n c e p t in detail. M a n y t i m e s least c o s t a n d m a x i m u m p r o f i t r a t i o n s will b e identical. D r y m a t t e r i n t a k e is p r e d i c t e d in t h e p r o g r a m based on a model described by Chandler and Walker (3). M i n i m u m a n d m a x i m u m d r y m a t t e r i n t a k e s e q u a l m i n u s or plus 5% o f t h e p r e d i c t e d i n t a k e ( T a b l e 1). A n o p t i o n allows c r u d e p r o t e i n t o b e s u p p l i e d b y a m i n i m u m o f 25% soluble (in B u r r o u g h ' s s o l u t i o n ) a n d 6 5 % i n s o l u b l e p r o t e i n . Acid d e t e r g e n t f i b e r b o u n d n i t r o g e n is a s s u m e d to b e u n a v a i l a b l e a n d is n o t i n c l u d e d in m e e t i n g i n s o l u b l e p r o t e i n r e q u i r e ments. E n e r g y c o n c e n t r a t i o n s of f e e d s t u f f s are d i s c o u n t e d as e n e r g y i n t a k e increases relative t o m a i n t e n a n c e . T h e d i s c o u n t i n g f a c t o r s cor-
365
r e s p o n d t o t h o s e p u b l i s h e d b y V a n Soest (8). T h e r e f o r e , e n e r g y in all feeds varies a c c o r d i n g to feed i n t a k e . Revised Version ( D A | R 3 or DAIR3S)
T h e revised p r o g r a m c a n b e accessed o n t h e Computerized Management Network by the n a m e s D A I R 3 or D A I R 3 S. A m a n u a l describing this p r o g r a m has b e e n d e v e l o p e d (7). T h e D A I R 3 is a p r o m p t e d version t h a t leads t h e user t h r o u g h t h e i n p u t . T h e D A I R 3 S is an u n p r o m p t e d version t h a t r e m o v e s t i m e - c o n suming prompting. Both correspond to the f o r m a t o n t h e c o m p l e t e d i n p u t f o r m pres e n t e d in Figure 1. Each line o n t h e f o r m c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e line in t h e c o m p u t e r file o n w h i c h t h a t d a t a will b e r e t a i n e d a n d c a n b e retrieved. A f t e r all d a t a are e n t e r e d , it is possible to go b a c k t o a n y line a n d c o r r e c t b y u s i n g t h e file e d i t o r associated w i t h t h e p r o g r a m . T h e first t h r e e lines t o b e e n t e r e d c o n t a i n t h e p r o d u c e r ' s n a m e a n d address. T h e n e x t f o u r lines (lines 4 t h r o u g h 7) c o n t a i n space f o r i n f o r m a t i o n for u p t o f o u r g r o u p s o f cows. Each line m u s t c o n t a i n t h e n u m b e r o f cows p e r group, average b o d y weight, average m i l k p r o d u c t i o n (lb p e r day), fat p e r c e n t , lead
TABLE 1. Ration specifications for lactating cows for the Dairy Cattle Feed Formulation System. Specification
Minimum
Maximum
Dry matter (% of predicted) Cl;ude protein (CP) Soluble CP (% of CP) Insoluble available CP (% of CP) Net energy Acid detergent fiber (% of dry matter) Effective fiber (% of dry matter) Fat (% of dry matter) Calcium (% of dry matter) Phosphorus Sodium Magnesium Sulfur Potassium Iron Molasses (% of concentrate) Wheat (% of concentrate)
95 NRC , 25 65 NRC 17.13 17.13 0 NRC + 25% NRC + 25% NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC ... ...
105 . . .2 37 ... ... 32.93 .. 6 1 115 X minimum ... ... ... " 10 20
1Crude protein, net energy, calcium, and phosphorus are calculated by a model (3) similar to the factorial procedure from the 1971 National Research Council (NRC). Sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron conform to 1978 NRC requirements. 2 No constraint exists. 3Will vary in relation to fat-corrected milk in proportion to metabolic body size. Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
366
STALLINGS AND JONES
County Input Form For DAIR3
Ol~sRYr4 /~ M ( I ) Dairyman's name ]}~R. PRO6-RESS/VE (2) Route and box ~NY P[~C E (3) Town, state, and zip code I ~ I ~ y v J I 4 E R E U.~ ~ OOOOO J Cow Input Information: I I
Example:
109,1350,55,3.5,1.31,14.50 Number Cows
(4) (5) (6) (7)
Group Group Group Group
1
]~7
2 3 - - , 4 - - ,
Body Wt (Ibs) ,
]37,.~
.
. - - ,
Milk (Ibs/day) ,
,.,~6
. .
Fat (%) ,
. .
Lead Factor*
3,~
,
],00
Milk Price ($/cwt) ,
1z./.00
. , .
,
,
.
*I group = 1.31; 2 groups, high group = 1.17, low group = 1.22; 3 groups, high group = 1.13, medium group = 1.08, low group = 1.21. I f cows are fed varying grain according to production, use a lead f a c t o r of 1.00. Feed Ingredients A v a i l a b l e : I f there are no values f o r minimum or maximum, type a - in place of the value. All feed ingredients must be i d e n t i f i e d by a number and assigned a price. Make sure there are energy, p r o t e i n , and mineral sources entered. Example:
313,20,30,60,-,-
Feed Name
Feed Number (B) I 0 ~ (9) .313 (10) I#
i(II) (12)
(13) (14)
(15)
(16) '.(17)
Feed price Minimum* (S/ton) .,(Ibs/day) I00 0 30 /SO
~37 6oq ~o6
6o~"
¢1o
Maximum* (Ibs/day) ~ - -
Minimum* (% of conc.) ~ - -
Maximum* (% of conc.) - -
3~0 ~ 7sSo ~ 70 IOO
{18) i]9) (20! '(21 ) {.22) (23)
(24)
(25) (26) (27)
(28) (29) (3o) * I f r e s t r i c t i o n s are placed on a feed i n g r e d i e n t , both minimum and maximum values must be entered, but t h i s can be only as Ibs/day or as % of concent r a t e , not both. Keep minimum and maximum r e s t r i c t i o n s to a minimum because they increase the d i f f i c u l t y of running the program. Figure 1. Input form for DAIR3.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY
367
Changes to NRC Forage Values: I f the name is to remain the same, enter - in the place o f a new name. Example: 103,90.2,15.9,58,36.7,-
Feed Number.
(31)
(32)
103
,
313
,
(33) (34) (35)
DM
Protein
TDN
(%)
(% of DM)
(% of DM)
86.,..q"
,
113~,~
~0.,,S-
,
, , ,
7, 9
ADF
(% of
,
,.,e'6
,
,
~ q
,
37.
DM) I
~
& I, ~
New Name
, H#Y
FIELD/
,
, , ,
Changes to NRC Concentrate Values. Same format as for forage values above. DM (%).
Feed Number
Protein (% of DM)
TDN (% of DM)
ADF
(% of DM)
New Name
(36) (37)
(38)
(39)
(40) (4]) (42) (43) (44) (45)
(46) (47)
(48) (49) (50) Mineral Changes to NRC Values for Forages and Concentrates: I f there are no changes to be made to certain minerals or the name, type - in the corresponding p o s i t i o n . Number
DM %
Cal.
Phosph.
Sod.
Mag. % of DM
(57) I o 3 , ~'6.S-, I.o~ , . ~ ' , , o o 7
•
(52) / / ~ 0 :
,/7
(53)
(54) (55)
3~__,
, Iq
..
--
,
.,19_, --
.o~ 0
17 ,
Sulf.
Pot.
Iron New Name
--
I.S'..~
--
I.~7~1
,01 ,Olaf
I'
(56) (57)
(58) (59) (60)
(61) Do you wish to balance for ~ ) - All minerals 2 - Calcium and phosphorus only 3 - Other
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
368
STALLINGS AND JONES
f a c t o r , a n d m i l k price (dollars p e r 100 lb milk). T h e lead f a c t o r is a n u m b e r t h a t m u l t i p l i e s t h e average m i l k p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e g r o u p so t h a t t h e t o t a l m i x e d r a t i o n will b e b a l a n c e d t o m e e t r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r 83% o f t h e cows. Lead f a c t o r s are p r e s e n t e d o n t h e i n p u t f o r m (Figure 1). If cows are f e d v a r y i n g c o n c e n t r a t e in p r o p o r t i o n to m i l k p r o d u c t i o n , a lead f a c t o r of 1.0 s h o u l d b e used, a n d a feeding c h a r t w i t h a m o u n t s of c o n c e n t r a t e to b e fed at various m i l k prod u c t i o n s (lb p e r day) will be p r e s e n t e d .
Feed i n g r e d i e n t s available m u s t b e i d e n t i f i e d b y a t h r e e digit n u m b e r o n lines 8 t h r o u g h 30 of t h e i n p u t f o r m . S y s t e m n a m e s a n d n u m b e r s are l o c a t e d in T a b l e 2. N u m b e r s n o t listed can be used f o r feeds n o t c u r r e n t l y available, b u t m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e p r o g r a m is required. A s s o c i a t e d w i t h e a c h s y s t e m n u m b e r listed in T a b l e 2 are average analyses for d r y m a t t e r , c r u d e p r o t e i n , soluble n i t r o g e n , acid d e t e r g e n t f i b e r ( A D F ) n i t r o g e n , t o t a l digestible n u t r i e n t s (TDN), ADF, calcium, phosphorus, sodium,
TABLE 2. Feeds available and corresponding system numbers. System number
Name
Hays 103 107 116 127
alfalfa hay alfalfa-orchardgrass hay dover hay orchardgrass hay
By-products L51 162 166 168
alfalfa pellets soybean hulls bagasse pellets bermudagrass pellets
Pasture and fresh plants 208 grass-clover pasture 222 grass pasture 226 sudangrass fresh 228 timothy fresh Silages 308 310 313 324 351 353 355
alfalfa orchardgrass silage barley silage corn silage grain sorghum silage alfalfa haylage alfalfa orchardgrass haylage rye silage
High energy feeds 402 409 411 412 413 420 423 437 440 447 449 453
barley grain dried citrus pulp corn grain high moisture corn corn and cob meal cane molasses oats grain rnilo grain wheat grain wheat bran wheat middlings maltlage
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
System number
Name
Protein supplements 502 wet brewers grains 503 corn distillers dried grains 507 corn gluten feed 513 41% cottonseed meal 529 peanut meal 537 soybean meal (44%) 538 soybean meal (48%) 543 urea Mineral supplements 604 dicalcium phosphate 605 defluorinated rock phosphate 606 limestone 608 magnesium oxide 610 sodium sulfate 612 trace mineral salt 613 livestock mineral 614 dyna-mate Additives 702 704
sodium bicarbonate vitamin A,D,E
Formulated concentrates 12% concentrate 912 16% concentrate 916 20% concentrate 920 24% concentrate 924 28% concentrate 928 32% concentrate 932 36% concentrate 936 40% concentrate 940 44% concentrate 944
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron. Analyses for certain forages are Virginia averages supplied courtesy of the Virginia Tech Forage Testing Lab. Associated with each feed number on lines 8 through 30 of the input form must be the price for that feed ingredient in dollars per ton of actual feed. Amounts of each feed included in the formulation can be restricted by placing minimums and maximums either as pounds per cow per day or as a percent of the concentrate. Lines 31 through 35 allow changes to dry matter, protein, TDN, acid detergent fiber, and name for any feed ingredient listed in Table 2. Analytical information entered on these lines will replace that associated with the program and will appear on the ration printout. Lines 36 through 50 allow similar changes, but this information will not appear on the printout. On lines 51 through 60, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron as well as dry matter and name can be changed. All minerals do not have to be changed, and any combination is possible. Line 61 allows the ration to be formulated for any combination of seven minerals by selection of one of three options. Option 1 will formulate for all minerals. Option 2 will formulate for only calcium and phosphorus. Option 3 allows any combination of the seven. The program ignores the particular mineral(s) that the user does not want to consider. The original program required extensive file manipulation to remove a mineral from the formulation. An example of the input process of information from Figure 1 is given below. ENTER DAIRYMANS NAME (LINE 1) >mr. progressive dairyman ROUTE AND BOX (LINE 2) >anyplace TOWN, STATE AND ZIP CODE (LINE 3) >anywhere, usa 00000 (LINE 4) > 157,1375,56,3.8,1.00,14.00 (LINE 5) >go (LINE 8) >103,100,0,2, (LINE 9) >313,30 . . . .
,
369
(LINE I0) >411,150 . . . . (LINE 11) >529,280 . . . . (LINE 12) >537,320 . . . . (LINE 13) >604,275 . . . . (LINE 14) >606,50 . . . . (LINE 15) >608,270,-, , , (LINE 16) >610,100 . . . . (LINE 17) >612,120,--, , , (LINE 18) >go (LINE 31) > 103,86.5,20.5,56,37.9,hay field 1 (LINE 32) > 313,35.8,7.9,64,31.5,(LINE 33) >go (LINE 36) >go (LINE 51) > 103,86.5,1.08, .28, .007,. 17,--, 1.55 ,.01 , (LINE 52) > 313,35.8,.14,.19,.048,.17,-,1.24,.014,(LINE 53) >610,99,-,-,O,l O,28,-,-,milkum mineral (LINE 54) >go LINE 61 -- DO YOU WISH TO BALANCE F O R 1 -- ALL MINERALS 2 -- CALCIUM AND PHOSPHORUS ONLY 3 -- OTHER >1 Once a file is created, it is stored until deleted or until written over. Information contained in a completed file can be used to formulate lactating dairy cattle rations. This new version uses A D F instead of crude fiber. The minimum and maximum concentration allowed in a ration is 17.1 and 32.9% of the predicted dry matter intake, respectively, but can vary within these limits based on fat-corrected milk production in proportion Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
] 70
STALLINGS AND JONES
to m e t a b o l i c b o d y weight. O n l y u n d e r e x t r e m e s in milk p r o d u c t i o n will the ration be f o r m u l a t e d for either of the fiber extremes. Effective fiber is used to change the absolute fiber of a feedstuff. This correction can be i m p o r t a n t for those feeds where the fiber analysis m a y n o t be indicative of actual fiber quality. Effective fiber is a certain p r o p o r t i o n of the actual A D F and is fixed for each feed. M i n i m u m ration restriction for effective fiber is always the same as for A D F (Table 1). DISCUSSION
T h e new version of the Dairy Cattle Feeding F o r m u l a t i o n System is less flexible than the original version, b u t training required to use the system efficiently is reduced considerably. R e d u c e d flexibility comes f r o m n o t allowing all ration specifications to be m a n i p u l a t e d by the user. F o r e x t e n s i o n efforts where ration form u l a t i o n is provided as a service to the dairymen, as it is in Virginia, simplicity is critical for use by field personnel. T h e original version o f this program was c o m p l e x and confusing to the semi-trained user. T h e D A I R 3 has o v e r c o m e this shortcoming. The revised version b e c a m e available on the C o m p u t e r i z e d M a n a g e m e n t N e t w o r k in December, 1980. F o r J a n u a r y through June, 1981, there were 1020 accesses of the program. A b o u t 85% o f these were f r o m users within the State o f Virginia. F e e d b a c k from users of the program indicates t h a t the program is simple y e t flexible enough for
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
general use. Currently, the m a j o r i t y of D A I R 3 rations are being f o r m u l a t e d b y extension field staff in the state. This situation is in contrast to the original program, which required Dairy Science faculty to f o r m u l a t e m a x i m u m profit rations. REFERENCES
1 Brown, C. A., and P. T. Chandler. 1978. Incorporation of predictive milk yield and dry matter intake equations into a maximum-profit ration formulation program. J. Dairy Sci. 61:1123. 2 Chandler, P. T., A. H. Rakes, and T. H. White. 1977. User's manual for dairy cattle feeding formulation system. Proc. Natl. Ext. Workshop: Computerized Dairy Feeding-Management System, Blacksburg, VA. 3 Chandler, P. T., and H. W. Walker. 1972. Generation of nutrient specifications for dairy cattle for computerized least cost ration formulation. J. Dairy Sci. 55:1741. 4 Jones, G. M., P. T. Chandler, W. R. Murley, C. A. Brown, and H. W. Walker. 1980. Implementation of a regional ration formulation program for the southeastern states. J1 Dairy Sci. 63:856. 5 Jones, G. M., W. R. Murley, and S. B. Carr. 1980. Computerized feeding management systems for economic decision-making. J. Dairy Sci. 63:495. 6 Jones, G. M., E. E. Wildman, P. Wagner, N. Lanning, P. T. Chandler, R. L. Boman, and H. F. Troutt. 1978. Effectiveness of the dairy cattle feed formulation system in developing lactating rations. J. Dairy Sci. 61:1645. 7 Stallings, C. C., and G. M. Jones. 1981. Guidelines for use and interpretation of the dairy cattle feed formulation system. Publ. 404-755, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg. 8 Van Soest, P. J. 1973. Revised estimates of the net energy values of feeds. Proc. Cornell Nutr. Conf.
be formulated considering the following nutrients: crude protein, insoluble and soluble crude protein, energy, acid detergent fiber, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron. Various aspects of this program have been tested and described (4, 5,6). Initial response indicated the information on feeding was acceptable, but problems encountered in running the program prohibited extensive utilization by extension field personnel. Therefore, a modified version of the program was needed to overcome this shortcoming. The program contains feeds and their corresponding nutrient densities. Users can select from among these feeds and modify their nutrient densities. Nutrient densities, especially of forages, can be adjusted on feed analysis. The original version of the program used crude fiber in the nutrient analysis for each feed. The Forage Testing Lab at Virginia Tech, as well as other labs around the country, have changed from analyzing for crude fiber to acid detergent fiber, thus, necessitating a change in the formulation system to accommodate this switch.
The Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System was developed to formulate feeding guidelines for meeting standards for lactating dairy cows. Difficulty of data entry because of complex file creation and manipulation was the major reason this program was not adopted widely in Virginia. As a result few rations were formulated by this program by extension personnel. A modified version of the original program has been created to simplify data entry and running the program. This program is accessed on the Computerized Management Network by the names DAIR3 or DAIR3S. The DAIR3 is a prompted version that leads the user through input. The DAIR3S is a semi-prompted version that removes most of the time-consuming prompting. Both versions correspond to the format on a printed input form. A file is created with cow production data, feeds available, feed prices, and changes to feed nutrient concentrations. This file will be retained on the computer until purged or written over and can be edited for corrections or update prices and analyses. This revised program has met with success because it eliminates the tedious time-consuming manipulation required to create and edit files and allows data entry in a step-by-step straight approach.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Original Version
INTRODUCTION
The Virginia Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System is a linear program with an objective function of profit maximization subject to restrictions specified by the user. A ration will
Received February 5, 1982. 1This work supported by the John Lee Pratt Animal Nutrition Program, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg. 1983 J Dairy Sci 66:364-370
The original version of the Dairy Cattle Feeding Formulation System was the result of the pilot project funded by the Cooperative Extension Service, United States Departmen. t of Agriculture (2). This project was completed in 1977, and the resulting program is available to users of the Computerized Management Network (CMN, Plaza 1, Building D, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061) or through the Southern Dairy Records Processing Center. The CMN is an interactive system with users in Virginia and the southeast as well as other parts of the nation. Many county extension offices in Virginia contain computer terminals capable of using this network and the formulation program.
364
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY Use of t h e r a t i o n f o r m u l a t i o n p r o g r a m failed t o m a t e r i a l i z e a f t e r t h e p r o g r a m b e c a m e available b e c a u s e o f c o m p l e x file c r e a t i o n a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n . J o n e s e t al. (4, 5, 6) d e s c r i b e d t h e actual t e s t i n g a n d effectiveness of t h e program. T h e c e n t r a l f o r m u l a t i o n p r o g r a m is b a s e d o n a p r o f i t - m a x i m i z i n g linear p r o g r a m . T h e alg o r i t h m is designed t o o b t a i n t h e m a x i m u m d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n r e t u r n f r o m milk a n d cost o f feed. B r o w n a n d C h a n d l e r (1) d e s c r i b e d this c o n c e p t in detail. M a n y t i m e s least c o s t a n d m a x i m u m p r o f i t r a t i o n s will b e identical. D r y m a t t e r i n t a k e is p r e d i c t e d in t h e p r o g r a m based on a model described by Chandler and Walker (3). M i n i m u m a n d m a x i m u m d r y m a t t e r i n t a k e s e q u a l m i n u s or plus 5% o f t h e p r e d i c t e d i n t a k e ( T a b l e 1). A n o p t i o n allows c r u d e p r o t e i n t o b e s u p p l i e d b y a m i n i m u m o f 25% soluble (in B u r r o u g h ' s s o l u t i o n ) a n d 6 5 % i n s o l u b l e p r o t e i n . Acid d e t e r g e n t f i b e r b o u n d n i t r o g e n is a s s u m e d to b e u n a v a i l a b l e a n d is n o t i n c l u d e d in m e e t i n g i n s o l u b l e p r o t e i n r e q u i r e ments. E n e r g y c o n c e n t r a t i o n s of f e e d s t u f f s are d i s c o u n t e d as e n e r g y i n t a k e increases relative t o m a i n t e n a n c e . T h e d i s c o u n t i n g f a c t o r s cor-
365
r e s p o n d t o t h o s e p u b l i s h e d b y V a n Soest (8). T h e r e f o r e , e n e r g y in all feeds varies a c c o r d i n g to feed i n t a k e . Revised Version ( D A | R 3 or DAIR3S)
T h e revised p r o g r a m c a n b e accessed o n t h e Computerized Management Network by the n a m e s D A I R 3 or D A I R 3 S. A m a n u a l describing this p r o g r a m has b e e n d e v e l o p e d (7). T h e D A I R 3 is a p r o m p t e d version t h a t leads t h e user t h r o u g h t h e i n p u t . T h e D A I R 3 S is an u n p r o m p t e d version t h a t r e m o v e s t i m e - c o n suming prompting. Both correspond to the f o r m a t o n t h e c o m p l e t e d i n p u t f o r m pres e n t e d in Figure 1. Each line o n t h e f o r m c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e line in t h e c o m p u t e r file o n w h i c h t h a t d a t a will b e r e t a i n e d a n d c a n b e retrieved. A f t e r all d a t a are e n t e r e d , it is possible to go b a c k t o a n y line a n d c o r r e c t b y u s i n g t h e file e d i t o r associated w i t h t h e p r o g r a m . T h e first t h r e e lines t o b e e n t e r e d c o n t a i n t h e p r o d u c e r ' s n a m e a n d address. T h e n e x t f o u r lines (lines 4 t h r o u g h 7) c o n t a i n space f o r i n f o r m a t i o n for u p t o f o u r g r o u p s o f cows. Each line m u s t c o n t a i n t h e n u m b e r o f cows p e r group, average b o d y weight, average m i l k p r o d u c t i o n (lb p e r day), fat p e r c e n t , lead
TABLE 1. Ration specifications for lactating cows for the Dairy Cattle Feed Formulation System. Specification
Minimum
Maximum
Dry matter (% of predicted) Cl;ude protein (CP) Soluble CP (% of CP) Insoluble available CP (% of CP) Net energy Acid detergent fiber (% of dry matter) Effective fiber (% of dry matter) Fat (% of dry matter) Calcium (% of dry matter) Phosphorus Sodium Magnesium Sulfur Potassium Iron Molasses (% of concentrate) Wheat (% of concentrate)
95 NRC , 25 65 NRC 17.13 17.13 0 NRC + 25% NRC + 25% NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC ... ...
105 . . .2 37 ... ... 32.93 .. 6 1 115 X minimum ... ... ... " 10 20
1Crude protein, net energy, calcium, and phosphorus are calculated by a model (3) similar to the factorial procedure from the 1971 National Research Council (NRC). Sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron conform to 1978 NRC requirements. 2 No constraint exists. 3Will vary in relation to fat-corrected milk in proportion to metabolic body size. Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
366
STALLINGS AND JONES
County Input Form For DAIR3
Ol~sRYr4 /~ M ( I ) Dairyman's name ]}~R. PRO6-RESS/VE (2) Route and box ~NY P[~C E (3) Town, state, and zip code I ~ I ~ y v J I 4 E R E U.~ ~ OOOOO J Cow Input Information: I I
Example:
109,1350,55,3.5,1.31,14.50 Number Cows
(4) (5) (6) (7)
Group Group Group Group
1
]~7
2 3 - - , 4 - - ,
Body Wt (Ibs) ,
]37,.~
.
. - - ,
Milk (Ibs/day) ,
,.,~6
. .
Fat (%) ,
. .
Lead Factor*
3,~
,
],00
Milk Price ($/cwt) ,
1z./.00
. , .
,
,
.
*I group = 1.31; 2 groups, high group = 1.17, low group = 1.22; 3 groups, high group = 1.13, medium group = 1.08, low group = 1.21. I f cows are fed varying grain according to production, use a lead f a c t o r of 1.00. Feed Ingredients A v a i l a b l e : I f there are no values f o r minimum or maximum, type a - in place of the value. All feed ingredients must be i d e n t i f i e d by a number and assigned a price. Make sure there are energy, p r o t e i n , and mineral sources entered. Example:
313,20,30,60,-,-
Feed Name
Feed Number (B) I 0 ~ (9) .313 (10) I#
i(II) (12)
(13) (14)
(15)
(16) '.(17)
Feed price Minimum* (S/ton) .,(Ibs/day) I00 0 30 /SO
~37 6oq ~o6
6o~"
¢1o
Maximum* (Ibs/day) ~ - -
Minimum* (% of conc.) ~ - -
Maximum* (% of conc.) - -
3~0 ~ 7sSo ~ 70 IOO
{18) i]9) (20! '(21 ) {.22) (23)
(24)
(25) (26) (27)
(28) (29) (3o) * I f r e s t r i c t i o n s are placed on a feed i n g r e d i e n t , both minimum and maximum values must be entered, but t h i s can be only as Ibs/day or as % of concent r a t e , not both. Keep minimum and maximum r e s t r i c t i o n s to a minimum because they increase the d i f f i c u l t y of running the program. Figure 1. Input form for DAIR3.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY
367
Changes to NRC Forage Values: I f the name is to remain the same, enter - in the place o f a new name. Example: 103,90.2,15.9,58,36.7,-
Feed Number.
(31)
(32)
103
,
313
,
(33) (34) (35)
DM
Protein
TDN
(%)
(% of DM)
(% of DM)
86.,..q"
,
113~,~
~0.,,S-
,
, , ,
7, 9
ADF
(% of
,
,.,e'6
,
,
~ q
,
37.
DM) I
~
& I, ~
New Name
, H#Y
FIELD/
,
, , ,
Changes to NRC Concentrate Values. Same format as for forage values above. DM (%).
Feed Number
Protein (% of DM)
TDN (% of DM)
ADF
(% of DM)
New Name
(36) (37)
(38)
(39)
(40) (4]) (42) (43) (44) (45)
(46) (47)
(48) (49) (50) Mineral Changes to NRC Values for Forages and Concentrates: I f there are no changes to be made to certain minerals or the name, type - in the corresponding p o s i t i o n . Number
DM %
Cal.
Phosph.
Sod.
Mag. % of DM
(57) I o 3 , ~'6.S-, I.o~ , . ~ ' , , o o 7
•
(52) / / ~ 0 :
,/7
(53)
(54) (55)
3~__,
, Iq
..
--
,
.,19_, --
.o~ 0
17 ,
Sulf.
Pot.
Iron New Name
--
I.S'..~
--
I.~7~1
,01 ,Olaf
I'
(56) (57)
(58) (59) (60)
(61) Do you wish to balance for ~ ) - All minerals 2 - Calcium and phosphorus only 3 - Other
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
368
STALLINGS AND JONES
f a c t o r , a n d m i l k price (dollars p e r 100 lb milk). T h e lead f a c t o r is a n u m b e r t h a t m u l t i p l i e s t h e average m i l k p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e g r o u p so t h a t t h e t o t a l m i x e d r a t i o n will b e b a l a n c e d t o m e e t r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r 83% o f t h e cows. Lead f a c t o r s are p r e s e n t e d o n t h e i n p u t f o r m (Figure 1). If cows are f e d v a r y i n g c o n c e n t r a t e in p r o p o r t i o n to m i l k p r o d u c t i o n , a lead f a c t o r of 1.0 s h o u l d b e used, a n d a feeding c h a r t w i t h a m o u n t s of c o n c e n t r a t e to b e fed at various m i l k prod u c t i o n s (lb p e r day) will be p r e s e n t e d .
Feed i n g r e d i e n t s available m u s t b e i d e n t i f i e d b y a t h r e e digit n u m b e r o n lines 8 t h r o u g h 30 of t h e i n p u t f o r m . S y s t e m n a m e s a n d n u m b e r s are l o c a t e d in T a b l e 2. N u m b e r s n o t listed can be used f o r feeds n o t c u r r e n t l y available, b u t m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e p r o g r a m is required. A s s o c i a t e d w i t h e a c h s y s t e m n u m b e r listed in T a b l e 2 are average analyses for d r y m a t t e r , c r u d e p r o t e i n , soluble n i t r o g e n , acid d e t e r g e n t f i b e r ( A D F ) n i t r o g e n , t o t a l digestible n u t r i e n t s (TDN), ADF, calcium, phosphorus, sodium,
TABLE 2. Feeds available and corresponding system numbers. System number
Name
Hays 103 107 116 127
alfalfa hay alfalfa-orchardgrass hay dover hay orchardgrass hay
By-products L51 162 166 168
alfalfa pellets soybean hulls bagasse pellets bermudagrass pellets
Pasture and fresh plants 208 grass-clover pasture 222 grass pasture 226 sudangrass fresh 228 timothy fresh Silages 308 310 313 324 351 353 355
alfalfa orchardgrass silage barley silage corn silage grain sorghum silage alfalfa haylage alfalfa orchardgrass haylage rye silage
High energy feeds 402 409 411 412 413 420 423 437 440 447 449 453
barley grain dried citrus pulp corn grain high moisture corn corn and cob meal cane molasses oats grain rnilo grain wheat grain wheat bran wheat middlings maltlage
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
System number
Name
Protein supplements 502 wet brewers grains 503 corn distillers dried grains 507 corn gluten feed 513 41% cottonseed meal 529 peanut meal 537 soybean meal (44%) 538 soybean meal (48%) 543 urea Mineral supplements 604 dicalcium phosphate 605 defluorinated rock phosphate 606 limestone 608 magnesium oxide 610 sodium sulfate 612 trace mineral salt 613 livestock mineral 614 dyna-mate Additives 702 704
sodium bicarbonate vitamin A,D,E
Formulated concentrates 12% concentrate 912 16% concentrate 916 20% concentrate 920 24% concentrate 924 28% concentrate 928 32% concentrate 932 36% concentrate 936 40% concentrate 940 44% concentrate 944
OUR INDUSTRY TODAY magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron. Analyses for certain forages are Virginia averages supplied courtesy of the Virginia Tech Forage Testing Lab. Associated with each feed number on lines 8 through 30 of the input form must be the price for that feed ingredient in dollars per ton of actual feed. Amounts of each feed included in the formulation can be restricted by placing minimums and maximums either as pounds per cow per day or as a percent of the concentrate. Lines 31 through 35 allow changes to dry matter, protein, TDN, acid detergent fiber, and name for any feed ingredient listed in Table 2. Analytical information entered on these lines will replace that associated with the program and will appear on the ration printout. Lines 36 through 50 allow similar changes, but this information will not appear on the printout. On lines 51 through 60, calcium, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, and iron as well as dry matter and name can be changed. All minerals do not have to be changed, and any combination is possible. Line 61 allows the ration to be formulated for any combination of seven minerals by selection of one of three options. Option 1 will formulate for all minerals. Option 2 will formulate for only calcium and phosphorus. Option 3 allows any combination of the seven. The program ignores the particular mineral(s) that the user does not want to consider. The original program required extensive file manipulation to remove a mineral from the formulation. An example of the input process of information from Figure 1 is given below. ENTER DAIRYMANS NAME (LINE 1) >mr. progressive dairyman ROUTE AND BOX (LINE 2) >anyplace TOWN, STATE AND ZIP CODE (LINE 3) >anywhere, usa 00000 (LINE 4) > 157,1375,56,3.8,1.00,14.00 (LINE 5) >go (LINE 8) >103,100,0,2, (LINE 9) >313,30 . . . .
,
369
(LINE I0) >411,150 . . . . (LINE 11) >529,280 . . . . (LINE 12) >537,320 . . . . (LINE 13) >604,275 . . . . (LINE 14) >606,50 . . . . (LINE 15) >608,270,-, , , (LINE 16) >610,100 . . . . (LINE 17) >612,120,--, , , (LINE 18) >go (LINE 31) > 103,86.5,20.5,56,37.9,hay field 1 (LINE 32) > 313,35.8,7.9,64,31.5,(LINE 33) >go (LINE 36) >go (LINE 51) > 103,86.5,1.08, .28, .007,. 17,--, 1.55 ,.01 , (LINE 52) > 313,35.8,.14,.19,.048,.17,-,1.24,.014,(LINE 53) >610,99,-,-,O,l O,28,-,-,milkum mineral (LINE 54) >go LINE 61 -- DO YOU WISH TO BALANCE F O R 1 -- ALL MINERALS 2 -- CALCIUM AND PHOSPHORUS ONLY 3 -- OTHER >1 Once a file is created, it is stored until deleted or until written over. Information contained in a completed file can be used to formulate lactating dairy cattle rations. This new version uses A D F instead of crude fiber. The minimum and maximum concentration allowed in a ration is 17.1 and 32.9% of the predicted dry matter intake, respectively, but can vary within these limits based on fat-corrected milk production in proportion Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
] 70
STALLINGS AND JONES
to m e t a b o l i c b o d y weight. O n l y u n d e r e x t r e m e s in milk p r o d u c t i o n will the ration be f o r m u l a t e d for either of the fiber extremes. Effective fiber is used to change the absolute fiber of a feedstuff. This correction can be i m p o r t a n t for those feeds where the fiber analysis m a y n o t be indicative of actual fiber quality. Effective fiber is a certain p r o p o r t i o n of the actual A D F and is fixed for each feed. M i n i m u m ration restriction for effective fiber is always the same as for A D F (Table 1). DISCUSSION
T h e new version of the Dairy Cattle Feeding F o r m u l a t i o n System is less flexible than the original version, b u t training required to use the system efficiently is reduced considerably. R e d u c e d flexibility comes f r o m n o t allowing all ration specifications to be m a n i p u l a t e d by the user. F o r e x t e n s i o n efforts where ration form u l a t i o n is provided as a service to the dairymen, as it is in Virginia, simplicity is critical for use by field personnel. T h e original version o f this program was c o m p l e x and confusing to the semi-trained user. T h e D A I R 3 has o v e r c o m e this shortcoming. The revised version b e c a m e available on the C o m p u t e r i z e d M a n a g e m e n t N e t w o r k in December, 1980. F o r J a n u a r y through June, 1981, there were 1020 accesses of the program. A b o u t 85% o f these were f r o m users within the State o f Virginia. F e e d b a c k from users of the program indicates t h a t the program is simple y e t flexible enough for
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 66, No. 2, 1983
general use. Currently, the m a j o r i t y of D A I R 3 rations are being f o r m u l a t e d b y extension field staff in the state. This situation is in contrast to the original program, which required Dairy Science faculty to f o r m u l a t e m a x i m u m profit rations. REFERENCES
1 Brown, C. A., and P. T. Chandler. 1978. Incorporation of predictive milk yield and dry matter intake equations into a maximum-profit ration formulation program. J. Dairy Sci. 61:1123. 2 Chandler, P. T., A. H. Rakes, and T. H. White. 1977. User's manual for dairy cattle feeding formulation system. Proc. Natl. Ext. Workshop: Computerized Dairy Feeding-Management System, Blacksburg, VA. 3 Chandler, P. T., and H. W. Walker. 1972. Generation of nutrient specifications for dairy cattle for computerized least cost ration formulation. J. Dairy Sci. 55:1741. 4 Jones, G. M., P. T. Chandler, W. R. Murley, C. A. Brown, and H. W. Walker. 1980. Implementation of a regional ration formulation program for the southeastern states. J1 Dairy Sci. 63:856. 5 Jones, G. M., W. R. Murley, and S. B. Carr. 1980. Computerized feeding management systems for economic decision-making. J. Dairy Sci. 63:495. 6 Jones, G. M., E. E. Wildman, P. Wagner, N. Lanning, P. T. Chandler, R. L. Boman, and H. F. Troutt. 1978. Effectiveness of the dairy cattle feed formulation system in developing lactating rations. J. Dairy Sci. 61:1645. 7 Stallings, C. C., and G. M. Jones. 1981. Guidelines for use and interpretation of the dairy cattle feed formulation system. Publ. 404-755, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg. 8 Van Soest, P. J. 1973. Revised estimates of the net energy values of feeds. Proc. Cornell Nutr. Conf.