Plan carefully to get best from Minerals

In the light of major increases in the prices of some minerals, dairy farmers need to assess requirements accurately and ration accordingly to provide the most cost-effective mineral supplementation for their cows.

Rupert Stafford, Commercial Manager with NWF Agriculture believes there is scope for dairy farmers to improve the effectiveness of mineral nutrition and potentially save on the cost of minerals.

“This winter dairy farmers have been faced with silages with generally lower mineral contents than usual. At the same time they are pushing animals harder to produce more milk now that prices have improved and there are no quota restrictions. Together these factors mean that care must be taken to feed the correct balance of trace elements to maximise performance and minimise the losses due to lameness, mastitis and infertility.”

Mr Stafford observes that many farmers have reduced mineral use as a response to higher general feed costs and large rises in the price of some minerals but argues this is a false economy.

“Perhaps the best example of this is phosphorus where the price of the most common source, dicalcium phosphate has doubled. Added to this there are real problems with availability. But in many cases farmers could actually reduce phosphorus feed rates, saving money and creating space within the premix for other elements.

“The latest advice on inclusion rates is that phosphorus should be included in diets at 0.4% of total DM compared to the previous recommended level of 0.5%. This means farmers can cut back total phosphorus inclusion rates in the diet by 20% with no adverse affect on performance.”

Mr Stafford urges farmers to carefully check the major and trace element levels in the diet to ensure that mineral supply is in line with animal requirements. He believes that in many cases it will be possible to switch away from traditional off the shelf high phosphorus products to a premix with lower phosphorus content.

“Feeding too much phosphorus is a real waste as the cow can not store the mineral and any excess is simply excreted in the urine. At current prices this is an expensive loss as well as an environmental problem. It will be perfectly possible for many farmers to switch from a premix with 10% phosphorus to one with just 4%.”

Reducing the inclusion rate of phosphorus would also enable feeding of other essential minerals and vitamins. The normal challenge with mineral premixes and supplements is achieving adequate intakes and Mr Stafford believes farmers should look to bespoke products that meet their requirements.

“Re-assessing the phosphorus feed levels in line with the new animal requirement recommendations could allow 20g/cow/day less phosphorus to be fed. This allows the use, for example, of vitamins such as biotin for foot health or vitamin E for udder health and immunity, to provide a better overall level of supplementation without increasing the total amount of supplement fed and potentially reducing the cost of the premix as well.”

Biotin is proven to help improve hoof health and reduce the incidence of many causes of lameness, while vitamin E can help boost the immune system to help in the battle against high somatic cell counts.

Farmers should also look carefully at the form of the minerals in the premix. Different forms are more or less available to the animal and this affects their effectiveness in the diet. For example chelated products have a higher bioavailability than non-chelates.

“The form of the chelate can also have an impact on bioavailability. Chelates based on glycerine are more available that other chelates.”

Mr Stafford is concerned that many late lactation cows and lower yielders may face mineral deficiencies this year. “In the light of poor silages and good milk prices, many farmers are feeding higher levels of compounds to fresh calved cows. As well as ensuring the high energy intakes required, this provides a good base level of trace elements.

“However some supplementation is still required and this becomes more of a problem as compound levels are reduced to cows past peak. The table shows that the amount of additional supplementation required per day is actually greater for lower yielders.

“While there will be a temptation to reduce supplement levels to reduce costs, the consequences for health and performance could be considerable. Rather than cutting supplement levels, farmers would be better advised to make sure they are feeding the minerals the cows need in the most suitable form. By so doing they will be providing the best for their cows and may be pleasantly surprised at what this does to supplement prices,” Mr Stafford concludes.