Energy in the New Dairy NRC

Maurice L. Eastridge1
Department of Animal Sciences
The Ohio State University

Introduction

Energy is vital to the function of all cells, and thus physiologically, it is vital for tissue
maintenance, tissue growth, milk synthesis, and fetal development. Level of activity and
environmental stress affect the energy required for body maintenance. Providing the energy
needs of an animal necessitates the summary of a lot of research on energy needed for different
metabolic functions, the energy content of tissue and milk, and the efficiency of energy
utilization by different tissues and as affected by activity and stressors. Equally important is
determining the energy availability from different feeds. Composition of the feeds, physical and
chemical forms of the feeds, and the affects of DM intake by the animals on digestibility affect
the actual energy available from the feeds. These two components, the feeds and the animals,
have been intertwined into a dynamic model in the new NRC (2001) for dairy cattle.

Terminology

Energy is broadly defined as “the capacity for performing work”. Cells can perform work
by using the chemical energy stored in food. All forms of energy can be converted quantitatively
to heat, and the basic unit of heat energy is called a calorie. The amount of heat energy in a
feedstuff can be measured using a bomb calorimeter. This measurement will provide the gross
energy (GE) in a diet. The digestible energy (DE) can be determined by subtracting the amount
of energy excreted in feces from the GE. Fecal DM output can be measured by total collection of
the feces or using a digestibility marker (e.g. chromic oxide). The fecal DM can be sampled and
bomb calorimetry used to determine fecal energy. However, if we are interested in the energy
value of a single feedstuff, we have sampled feces that have resulted from the entire ration.
Because dairy animals are seldom fed diets consisting of a single ingredient and the type and
amounts of feeds in the diet can affect digestibility, especially ruminal fermentation patterns and
rate of passage, it really is not very practical to think of the energy value of individual feeds but
to think of energy contributed by the diet consumed by the animal. Digestibility of a diet
decreases with increased DM (energy) intake, thus the NRC (2001) discounts (decreases)
digestibility based on the energy intake above maintenance, thus referred to as discount factors
based on multiples of maintenance. For example, if a lactating cow is consuming 40 Mcal/day of
NEL and 10 Mcal/day of NEL are needed for maintenance, then energy intake is at 4X
maintenance.

Energy lost from the animal by gas and through the urine is not available for cell
function, thus this energy subtracted from DE provides the amount of metabolizable energy
(ME). Urinary energy can be determined in total collection digestibility trials, but energy lost
from gas is much more difficult to measure (requires energy chambers so that the gas output can

1
For more information, contact at: 2029 Fyffe Road, 221B Animal Science Building, Columbus, OH 43210-1095,
(614) 688-3059, FAX (614) 292-1515, Email: eastridge.1@[Link]. Published in Feedstuffs, July 8, 2002, pg 11.
be measured). The heat loss from fermentation of feed in the digestive tract (primarily in the
rumen) and from metabolism of cells is referred to as heat increment (HE). The ME minus HE
provides the amount of energy actually available for cell function, thus referred to as net energy
(NE). In the total digestible nutrient (TDN) system as a measure of energy, fecal energy and
some of the urinary energy were accounted for in the measurements, thus it falls short in
accounting for the gaseous and heat energy. Forages cause more heat of fermentation and
methane production than grains, and thus the TDN system underestimates the energy of grain
relative to the energy of forages.

The NE unit is subdivided into the energy needed for maintenance, growth, and lactation.
The reason for this is that energy used for different processes is used with different efficiencies.
For mature dairy cattle, only NEL is used because the efficiency of energy utilization for
maintenance (0.62) is similar to that for lactation (0.64) (Moe and Tyrell, 1972). Therefore, the
NEL for dry cows includes the energy needed for maintenance and fetal growth, and the NEL for
lactating cows includes the energy needed for maintenance and lactation. Because energy use for
growth is only 50 to 70% as efficient as the energy for maintenance, NEm and NEg are used for
growing dairy animals.

Energy Values for Feeds

Energy values for feeds used in the previous version of NRC (1989) were TDN values
assigned to feedstuffs that were determined experimentally using similar feeds. The
concentrations of DE, ME, and NE were then calculated from TDN using published equations.
The equations used for converting TDN to DE and ME assumed intake at 1X maintenance, and
the equation used to convert TDN to NEL was derived from cows fed at 3X maintenance. The
conversion of TDN to NE assumed an 8% reduction in digestibility for cows fed at 3X
maintenance.

Problems with the approaches used in the 1989 NRC are: 1) TDN values are from
experiments conducted several years ago and new feed compositional data are available, 2) the
TDN value for a feed is appropriate only when the nutrient composition is similar to that of the
feedstuff being fed, 3) TDN values for many feeds are inaccurate because the feeds were fed in
mixed diets and associative effects of feeds occur, 4) the ME and NE values actually available
are for mixed diets and not individual feedstuffs, and 5) all cows do not have intake at 3X
maintenance, with the average intake for a herd possibly ranging from 2 to 4X maintenance.
Because of these problems, the following tabular values for energy in feeds are provided in the
published copy of the NRC (2001): TDN at 1X maintenance, DE at 1X maintenance, ME at 3X
maintenance, NEL at 3 and 4X maintenance, and NEm and NEg at 3X maintenance. The tabular
NEL values at 3 and 4X maintenance are based on a dietary TDN value of 74% at 1X
maintenance. In the computer model, only TDN and DE are provided for individual feeds.

The TDN values at 1X maintenance were not taken from digestibility experiments but
were calculated from nutrient compositional data. The compositional components included
digestible nonfiber carbohydrates (NFC), crude protein (CP), fatty acids (FA) [ether extract
(EE)-1], and NDF (Weiss et al., 1992). A processing adjustment factor (PAF) is used in the
NRC (2001) to account for the effect that particle size, heat, and steam have on the digestibility
of NFC. True digestibility of NFC was assumed to be 0.98 and 0.90 at 1 and 3X maintenance,
respectively. Thus, the PAF factors published in the NRC and the default values in the computer
model were based on 3X maintenance and determined by dividing in vivo starch digestibility by
0.90. Thus, the PAF adjustment will overestimate NEL values of feeds fed at 1X maintenance.

Because animal products do not contain actual fiber (measured as NDF), the TDN values
at 1X maintenance were determined using digestible CP, FA x 2.25, 0.98 x (100-CP-ash-EE),
and adjustment for metabolic fecal TDN (-7). The TDN at 1X maintenance for fat supplements
was determined by published studies with the fat supplements, with indirect calculation of the
partial digestion coefficient for FA by difference. For fat sources with glycerol, the FA
composition was assumed to be 90%. For fat sources without glycerol, the TDN equation was:
EE x FA digestibility x 2.25. Since most of the studies were conducted with cows consuming
energy at 3X maintenance, the digestibility coefficient for TDN at 1X maintenance was
calculated using the FA digestibility from cows fed at 3X maintenance divided by 0.92.

The estimated DE of individual feeds is calculated using the digestible nutrient

concentrations (NFC, NDF, CP, FA, or EE), times the heats of combustion (4.2 Mcal/kg for
carbohydrates, 5.6 Mcal/kg for protein, 9.4 Mcal/kg for FA, and 4.3 Mcal/kg for glycerol), and
subtracting the metabolic fecal DE of 0.3 Mcal/kg for all feeds except fat supplements. The DE
at 1X maintenance is then discounted for each multiple of energy intake above maintenance
using the following equation:

Discount = [(TDN1X – [(0.18 x TDN1X) – 10.3]) x incremental energy intake

above maintenance)]/TDN1X

For example, a dairy cow with a consumption at 3X maintenance of a diet with 74% TDN at 1X
maintenance would result in the following discount factor:

[(74 – [(0.18 x 74) – 10.3]) x (3X-1X))]/74 = 0.918 or an 8% discount.

For diets with < 60% TDN, no discount occurs (discount factor = 1.0), and the maximum
discount is set so that the lower limit for dietary discounted TDN is no less than 60%. The
discounts do not apply to the DE contributed from supplemental fat provided in excess of 3% of
the dietary DM. The DE at production intake is calculated by multiplying DE at 1X maintenance
times the appropriate discount factor.

The ME values for all feeds except fat supplements was calculated from DE using the
following equation:

ME (Mcal/kg) = (((1.01 x DE) – 0.45) + 0.0046) x (EE – 3). For fat supplements, ME was
assumed to equal DE.

The NEL content of feeds in the published NRC (2001) were calculated from ME and
adjusted for the amount of fat over 3% of dietary DM. For fat supplements, NEL = 0.8 x ME. The
equations for NEm and NEg were taken from the NRC (1996), assuming intake at 3X
maintenance, ME = DE x 0.82, and then estimating NE from ME. The NEm and NEg of fat
supplements was calculated, assuming DE = ME and with ME x 0.80 and ME x 0.55,
respectively.

In the computer model, the focus is on the energy concentration of the diet instead of the
individual feeds. The variables that can affect NE of the diet in the computer model are
summarized in Table 1. It must be kept in mind that even the dietary energy values generated by
the computer model are based primarily on the chemical composition of feeds and assume that
feed characteristics limit energy availability. However, the associative effects of the individual
ingredients in the diet, ruminal conditions, and health of animals will affect the actual energy
gained from a diet.

Energy Requirements

The NE requirement for maintenance of mature dairy cattle is assumed to be 0.08

Mcal/kg BW0.75. This value was taken from a requirement determined at 0.073 Mcal/kg BW0.75,
but because this was determined with animals in tie stalls, a 10% activity allowance was added to
account for normal voluntary activity.

The NE required for lactation is defined as the energy contained in the milk, contributed
by the fat, protein, and lactose. The heat of combustion for milk fat, true protein, and lactose are
9.29, 5.71, and 3.95 Mcal/kg, respectively. The equation used for calculating NEL for milk yield
is:

NEL (Mcal/kg) = (0.0929 x % fat) + (0.0563 x % true protein) + (0.0395 x % lactose)

If lactose is not available, 4.85% should be assumed. Milk CP is determined by N x 6.38, and
milk CP contains about 7% non-protein nitrogen. The coefficient in the above equation for milk
CP would be 0.0547.

The energy requirements for maintenance and growth of growing dairy animals were
calculated using many equations to account for body size, fat and protein content of tissue at
different body sizes (affected by BW relative to mature weight), the average daily gain, and the
fat and protein content of tissue occurring at different rates of growth.

Adjustments to Energy Requirements

Activity. The energy required for maintenance increases as the activity exceeds the 10% increase
in maintenance requirements to account for normal activity. The NRC (2001) computer model
increases energy for maintenance for grazing animals. The increased activity during grazing is
attributed primarily to: 1) distance between the parlor and pasture, 2) grazing cattle spend more
time eating, and 3) grazing cattle walk in areas of varied elevation. The NEL is increased 0.00045
Mcal/kg BW per kilometer walked from the parlor to the pasture (this distance will depend on
number of milkings per day). Previous research indicated that increased eating activity
associated with grazing compared to stall-fed cattle required an additional 0.002 Mcal/kg BW,
but the diet consisted of only pasture for these animals. Thus, it was assumed that pasture
provided 60% of the diet for grazing lactating cows, and the activity allowance for eating was set
at 0.0012/kg BW. The options exist in the computer model to select whether the terrain is flat or
hilly. If a hilly terrain is selected, an additional amount of energy for maintenance is determined:
0.006 Mcal/kg BW. It was assumed that heifers would walk twice as much than when confined:
(0.00045 x 2)/kg BW. For growing dairy animals, it was assumed that pasture consisted of 80%
of the diet for calculation of energy for eating activity. The same adjustment for hilly terrain was
used for both mature and growing dairy animals.
Environment. Heat and cold stress can affect the energy requirements of animals; however,
because of limited data, no environmental adjustments were made in the computer model for
energy requirements of dry or lactating cattle (even though temperature is allowed as an input
variable). However, environmental adjustments are made for growing dairy animals. Input
variables include: current and previous temperature, wind speed (mph), coat condition
(clean/dry, wet/matted, some mud, or covered with snow and mud), heat stress (none,
rapid/shallow, or open mouth), hair coat (inches), and night cooling (yes, no). These adjustments
are primarily taken from NRC (1996). For the young milk-fed calf, adjustments are made for
cold stress only. Once temperature drops to 10oC, the NEm will be increased 1.13 to 2.34 times
depending on the age of the calf (less than or greater than 2 months of age) and the temperature.

Pregnancy. Additional energy for the growing fetus is included for the last 100 days of
pregnancy and is based on the expected birth weight of the calf.

Tissue Mobilization and Repletion. Changes in BW of animals may not really reflect true
changes in stores of tissue energy. Cows lose BW during early lactation, but DM intake is
increasing, and as DM intake increases, gastrointestinal contents (gut fill) increase. After a few
weeks beyond peak lactation, DM intake and gut fill decrease, and changes in BW may
underestimate actual changes in body tissue weight. The energy in a unit of body tissue gain or
loss depends on the amount of fat and protein in the tissue. The NRC (2001) calculates empty
body fat and protein based on body condition score (BCS). Energy reserves are then calculated
from empty body fat and protein. The NEL from BW loss is calculated using the body reserve
energy and an efficiency of 0.82. The NEL needed for BW gain is calculated from body reserve
energy times 0.85 and 1.07 for lactating and dry cows, respectively. The amount of energy
available in a one-unit change in BCS is determined by the change in BW relative to the change
in BCS and the composition of the BW at different BCS.

Conclusions

Many improvements were made in the 2001 versus the 1989 versions of NRC for dairy
cattle relative to the energy available from feeds and the energy requirements of animals. A new
database on composition of feeds was provided, and TDN is determined based on actual
composition of the feeds. The NE content of feeds is adjusted based on the source (feeds) of the
nutrients and the affects of intake by the animals on digestibility. Overall, the NEL values at 3X
maintenance for all feeds were 2% lower in the 2001 versus the 1989 versions, but major
differences in NEL values occurred for some specific feeds.

The computer model provides for a more accurate assessment of energy availability
because it accounts for factors affecting the energy from the entire diet and not just summing the
energy from individual feeds. The computer model also provides for more accurate
determination of energy requirements under given conditions based on the additional input
variables allowed. Even with these advancements, some critical points to remember are that
energy values on lab reports are estimated and may not be the values to use in ration formulation,
the program neither fully accounts for associative affects of feeds in mixed diets (almost all
animals are fed mixed diets) nor has the method of accounting for associative effects been
validated, and animal management and health variables are not included in the model. Additional
efforts are needed in relating environmental factors to energy needs. Our responsibilities as users
of the NRC are to recognize the strengths and limitations of the new NRC program and to always
compare animal appearance (e.g. BCS) and performance to expectations.

References

Moe, P.W., and H.F. Tyrrell. 1972. The net energy value of feeds for lactation. J. Dairy Sci.
55:945-958.

National Research Council. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th rev. ed. Natl. Acad.
Sci., Washington, DC.

National Research Council.1989. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 6th rev. ed. Natl. Acad.
Sci., Washington, DC.

National Research Council.1996. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 7th rev. ed. Natl. Acad.
Sci., Washington, DC.

Weiss, W.P, H.R. Conrad, and N.R. St-Pierre. 1992. A theoretically-based model for predicting
total digestible nutrient values of forages and concentrates. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 39:95-110.
 Table 1. Variables in the NRC (2001) computer model that affect the energy concentration of a
feed or diet.1

Options Effect on Energy

Item (Example) Concentration2
Energy equation class Forage Determines which equations
Concentrate are used for TDN, DE, ME,
Animal and NE
Fat3
Fatty acids3
Processing factor (PAF) Input actual value Increase/ decrease
(increase/decrease) (digestibility of NFC) based
on particle size and heat or
steam processing
TDN, % of DM Can not be edited …
DE, Mcal/kg Can not be edited …
NDF, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Decrease
Lignin, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Decrease
CP, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Increase
NDFIP, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Increase (increases NFC)
ADFIP, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Decrease (Decrease CP
digestibility in feeds not of
animal origin)
Fat, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Increase
Ash, % of DM Input actual value (increase) Decrease
Protein digestibility, %4 Input actual value (increase) Increase
NDF digestibility, %5 Calculated or input actual Increase
value (increase)
Fat digestibility, %6 Input actual value (increase) Increase
7
DM intake, kg/day Estimated or actual input Decrease
(increase)
1
TDN = total digestible nutrients, DE = digestible energy, ME = metabolizable energy, NE = net
energy, NFC = nonfiber carbohydrates, CP = crude protein, NDF = neutral detergent fiber,
NDFIP = neutral detergent fiber insoluble nitrogen, and ADFIP = acid detergent insoluble
nitrogen.
2
This represents the most likely effect on the energy concentration if no other variable is
changed. Also, a change in the energy concentration in a feed may not change the energy
concentration in the diet because of the discounts used in computing the concentration of dietary
energy.
3
Option only for fat supplements
4
Value can only be changed for animal protein feeds.
5
Default value is calculated from NDF, NDFIP, and lignin.
6
Value should only be changed for fat supplements.
7
Adjusts DE and thus NE of diets for multiples above maintenance intake.