Extension

The US beef sector has seen significant changes in recent years, with a surge in federal funding aimed at strengthening the food supply chain, which includes creating new local slaughter and processing facilities. This new infrastructure, combined with growing consumer demand for locally produced beef, has opened up new markets for producers interested in finishing their cattle on pasture. Forage finished beef can be produced nearly year-round in the southeastern United States and is a viable marketing option for beef producers.^{1, 2} However, inconsistencies in trying to reach a finished endpoint in grass-fed cattle have been noted.²

 

University of Arkansas researchers hypothesized that feeding a high-energy ration to cattle grazing pasture, and allowing pasture to be the roughage source, might allow producers to finish cattle to an acceptable endpoint from a quality perspective.³ However, limited research exists on how supplementing a high-energy ration to cattle grazing pasture during the finishing phase affects their overall performance and final product quality.^{4, 5} Thus, the objective of their study was to investigate the effects of feeding a high grain-based diet to pasture cattle, or a high-byproduct diet to pasture cattle, compared with feeding confined cattle a complete feedlot diet on the live performance and carcass quality of beef steers.

 

In this study, 63 crossbred beef steers (initial weight = 802 lb) were blocked by body weight (BW) and randomly assigned to one of either 7 pens or 14 pasture paddocks. Treatments consisted of a conventional feedlot finishing diet (FDLT) or 2 pasture-based diets fed at 2 to 2.25% of BW of either grain-based (STCH) or byproduct-based diets (BYPD). In addition to their diet, steers on the pasture-based treatments were able to graze warm-season perennial forages. Cattle were gradually adjusted to their diets. Cattle fed FDLT were fed a 70% concentrate receiving ration for 9 days, followed by an 80% concentrate intermediate diet for 12 days before finally receiving the 89% concentrate finishing diet for the remainder of the study. Cattle fed STCH and BYPD received increasing levels of supplementation until they were held at 2 to 2.25% of BW based on their weights at the beginning of each weigh period. The steers were weighed every 28 days and fed their respective diets once daily for 161 days and were harvested at a commercial slaughter facility in Arkansas City, KS.

 

Feedlot pens (8 yards x 20 yards) were located in an open sided barn with a concrete bunk (6.7 linear yards) positioned toward the center of the barn for feeding. Pastures predominately consisted of bermudagrass in addition to some volunteer crabgrass and remnants of ryegrass. Each pasture was 2 acres and had a concrete bunk (3.34 linear yards) for feeding supplement.

 

The effects of dietary treatment on performance are shown in Table1. Cattle fed FDLT and BYPD had greater overall carcass-adjusted BW (P = 0.04) compared with STCH. However, no differences were detected for final BW on day 161 (P = 0.16) or shrunk-adjusted BW (P = 0.16). Carcass adjusted average daily gain (ADG) tended (P = 0.09) to be greater for FDLT and BYPD compared with STCH. As expected, cattle fed FDLT had greater (P ≤ 0.01) dry matter intake (DMI) compared with STCH and BYPD for the entire study and cattle offered BYPD had greater DMI than those offered STCH. However, both STCH and BYPD had more efficient (P ≤ 0.05) non-pasture only feed conversion from days 0 to 161. This was expected, as the DMI and G:F calculations only considered the amount of supplementation the STCH and BYPD cattle received and did not account for forage intake in their DMI.

 

^{a, b}Means within a row with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05).

¹FDLT = conventional feedlot finishing diet with roughage included in ration; STCH =
Grain-based supplemental diet fed at the rate of 2 - 2.25% of BW with ad libitum access to bermudagrass pasture; BYPD = byproduct-based diet fed at the rate of 2 - 2.25% of BW with ad libitum access to bermudagrass pasture.
²Adjusted with 4% shrink.
³Calculated using average dressing percentage of each treatment. Adapted from Johnson et al., 2025.

 

 

The effects of dietary treatment on carcass data are shown in Table 2. Hot carcass weight (HCW) tended (P = 0.13) to be greater for BYPD and FDLT compared with STCH. Marbling score tended (P = 0.14) to be greater for BYPD compared with FDLT and STCH. No differences (P ≥ 0.34) were noted in other carcass characteristics.

 

¹FDLT = conventional feedlot finishing diet with roughage included in ration; STCH =
Grain-based supplemental diet fed at the rate of 2 - 2.25% of BW with ad libitum access to bermudagrass pasture; BYPD = byproduct-based diet fed at the rate of 2 - 2.25% of BW with ad libitum access to bermudagrass pasture.

²Marbling score. 200 = traces; 300 = slight; 400 = small; 500 = modest; 600 = moderate; 700 = slightly abundant; 800 = moderately abundant; 900 = abundant.

 

These researchers concluded that data from this study “suggest that alternative finishing methods using beef cattle grazing pasture could successfully be used without affecting carcass quality. Moreover, a high-byproduct finishing diet fed to cattle grazing pastures might be less likely to cause ruminal acidosis.”

---

¹ Schmidt, J. R., Miller, M. C., Andrae, J. G., Ellis, S. E., & Duckett, S. K. 2013. Effect of summer forage species grazed during finishing on animal performance, carcass quality, and meat quality. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4451-4461. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5405

 

² S. K. Duckett, C. Fernandez Rosso, G. Volpi Lagreca, M. C. Miller, J. P. S. Neel, R. M. Lewis, W. S. Swecker, J. P. Fontenot. 2014. Effect of frame size and time-on-pasture on steer performance, longissimus muscle fatty acid composition, and tenderness in a forage-finishing system. J. Anim. Sci. 92:4767-4774. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-7411

 

³ Johnson, M. L., C. E. Gruber, K. R. Vierck, S. Gadberry, K. Coffey, C. T. Shelton, R. C. Jones, G. Gourley, and J. D. Rivera. 2025. Effects of byproduct-based diets or grain-based diets on performance and carcass quality of beef steers finished on pasture. Applied Animal Science. 41:465–472. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15232/aas.2025-02684

 

⁴ Phillips, W. A., M. A. Brown, J. W. Holloway, and B. Warrington. 2004. Influence of live weight gain during the winter grazing period on subsequent grazing and feedlot performance. Prof. Anim. Sci. 20:401– 412. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31338-3

 

⁵ Guelker, L. D., B. B. Karisch, and D. Rivera. 2023. Evaluation of beef cattle performance on nontraditional beef cattle finishing system compared with traditional beef cattle finishing system. J. Anim. Sci. 101(Suppl. 3):150–151. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skad281.185