Mineral intake affects cattle health, reproduction and performance 

Twig Marston speaking at the Crops and Cattle Conference & Expo. (Journal photo by Lacey Vilhauer.)

A cattle mineral program should account for more than the mineral concentrations listed on a feed tag or setting out a mineral block, according to Twig Marston, beef nutritionist at Hubbard Feeds. Marston spoke at the Crops and Cattle Conference & Ag Expo Aug. 4 to 6 in Kansas City, Missouri. 

Mineral intake can be overlooked in some situations, but minerals are responsible for many structural, physiological, catalytic, and regulatory functions in livestock, Marston said. 

“The body needs these trace minerals,” Marston said. “A lot of times we look at a mineral tag, and we can see what the big minerals are, but don’t forget about the little things that need to be in that mineral as well. Because they’re the ones that really drive things and get things going.”  

Important macro minerals include calcium, phosphorus, sodium, chlorine, magnesium, potassium, and sulfur. Trace minerals needed in smaller amounts include copper, zinc, selenium, cobalt, iodine, manganese, and iron. 

Mineral considerations 

Mineral requirements vary with an animal’s stage of production, diet, environment, and genetic potential. Marston said forage quality, forage availability and mineral uptake interference also can influence how effectively cattle use minerals. 

Those requirements can change as cattle move through different stages of production. Marston said a cow’s needs depend on what she is doing, including whether she is producing milk or is in a lower-demand stage of gestation. 

“You need to remember that it’s dynamic by what her genetic potential is and what she’s capable of actually doing with the resources around her,” he said. 

Mineral form also matters. Marston said minerals can be supplied in inorganic forms, including oxides, sulfates and carbonates, or in organic forms involving a chelated bond and carbon. The form affects stability and bioavailability.  

Marston said organic minerals generally have greater absorption and bioavailability than inorganic forms, although they also cost more because of the processes required to produce them. 

A mineral label may call for a specific daily intake, but actual consumption can vary. Marston said producers should consider that cattle may consume less than the target on some days and considerably more on others. As calves begin consuming minerals, producers should increase available mineral to account for the increase in total herd consumption. 

Balancing minerals can save inputs 

Just like with any business, inefficiencies can mean higher costs and lower productivity. Marston compared mineral deficiencies in cattle to the short stave in a barrel of nutrition. 

“The short stave always limits what that animal can do as far as performance is concerned,” he said. “When you correct a mineral deficiency, your cost of production goes down because you’re getting more production for something that costs less than what the value of that production is.” 

Marston cautioned producers against assuming more minerals is always better. 

“It’s easy to overfeed, and any time we overfeed a nutrient, it’s going to cost us money,” he said. “It’s going to increase cost of our operation, and it’s going to cause wastage of not only what happens in the body, but what happens outside of the body because it’s going to be expelled.”  

The potential improvement, however, must be considered against the cost of achieving it. Moving from an average or deficient program to a sound program can be relatively inexpensive, Marston said, while additional improvements from an already strong program generally require greater precision and expense. 

Productivity benefits 

Potential measures of improved production include pregnancy rates, weaning weights and animal health. Marston cited research involving three ranches in which a solid inorganic mineral program resulted in a 92.6% pregnancy rate. When the program was adjusted to use more organic minerals and greater precision, the pregnancy rate was 95.3%.” 

“So, the difference between a good mineral program and an elite mineral program is about 2.5%pretty easily,” Marston said. 

Those functions extend to cattle health and reproduction. Marston cited work involving donor cows in which mineral supplementation was associated with differences in egg quality and the number of fertilized eggs harvested. He also discussed research involving bulls that showed improvements in the production of normal sperm cells after nutritional status was improved. 

Mineral nutrition also can affect calf health. Marston cited research showing balanced mineral intake can increase the quantity and quality of colostrum in lactating cows. 

“We want the thickest, most colostrum we can possibly make,” Marston said. “It’s not just the first day or what goes in their body, but what they retain in their body and the way that body reacts now for the rest of its life toward being healthy and happy.” 

Marston said research also shows animals on an elite mineral program had fewer incidences of diarrhea, or scours, compared with cattle receiving straight salt blocks. He said mineral programs also can influence weaning weights and feedlot death loss. 

Ultimately, Marston said producers should view mineral supplementation as a dynamic part of the nutrition program rather than a fixed requirement. The goal is to match the mineral program to the cattle, forage, water, environment, and production demands of the operation. 

Lacey Vilhauer can be reached at 620-227-1871 or [email protected].