Be cautious feeding barley this winter

by Katie Trottier

While grain-dense livestock diets are common in parts of Canada, Atlantic farmers are challenged by high grain prices due to our climate and location. Good-quality forages should be the main goal for feeding ruminant livestock in Atlantic Canada, but grains can fit into feeding programs for both beef and sheep production with considerations. The presence of mycotoxins is a timely one for this winter. 

Barley is a popular grain choice for livestock producers in the Atlantic region. Barley contains about 12 percent crude protein and 83 percent energy, and (at the time of writing) costs about $300/tonne. Corn, a staple in other places, contains 10 percent crude protein and 88 percent energy, and currently costs about $400/tonne. Barley is slightly lower in energy and very slightly higher in protein, but costs significantly less than corn. Even taking the economics of animal performance and feeding levels into account, barley is often a cost-effective choice to supplement forages.

This year, there’s been a significant increase in reports of mycotoxin contamination – deoxynivalenol (DON) in particular – in barley crops. Mycotoxins are toxic byproducts of certain types of fungi that can colonize in crops. DON – also called vomitoxin – can be a result of Fusarium head blight in cereal crops. Diseased crops may be visible to the human eye, but mycotoxins are not.

Mycotoxins are a real concern to our food and feed supply as they can poison animals and people. However, remember the old saying: it’s the dose that makes the poison. I encourage producers to test their barley for presence of mycotoxins this year to determine whether there is contamination and at what level. The presence of mycotoxins will be reported on a parts-per-million (PPM) or parts-per-billion (PPB) basis. Be wary of any barley sold at a reduced cost this winter.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada recommends no more than five PPM of DON for feeding beef cattle and ewes, and one PPM for lambs. Other agencies report higher safe inclusion levels and there is some debate as to what is considered safe. Talk with your veterinarian to determine the risk level for your particular group of livestock. This is another important reason to have a valid veterinarian-client-patient relationship.

Don’t forget that other parts of the diet will dilute the amount of toxins present as well. Feeding contaminated barley (let’s say, testing at five PPM) as 20 percent of the diet will, in theory, mean that the entire diet contains one PPM of DON. Ruminants in general do reasonably well neutralizing DON compared to other species. Different groups of livestock may be at a greater risk, including pregnant animals, which may abort. Symptoms of DON poisoning in livestock include reduced feed intake and a subsequent drop in condition, as well as mouth blisters, diarrhea, poor reproductive performance, and reduced growth rates. 

If you have a lot of barley to feed out this winter and have concerns about DON levels, note that many feed companies sell “binders” – feed additives that bind up toxins and make it safe to feed contaminated grain. The caveat of this is that binders are often expensive and require a high inclusion rate. Binding agents may also bind up other essential nutrients, so are not a perfect solution. But they may be better than nothing, especially in situations in which you’re feeding non-breeding stock, such as feeder lambs.

There are other types of mycotoxins to be aware of as well, and it’s not uncommon for multiple toxins to be present in the same sample. Zearalenone, T-2 toxin, and HT-2 toxin are other mycotoxins that result from Fusarium head blight and may show up on a feed test. They too can cause poisoning, even if they aren’t the dominant toxin, and should be discussed with your vet before feeding. 

Luckily, most Atlantic Canadian producers had great forage yields this year and may not have to supplement much with expensive grain. As always, you should sample your forages and submit to the lab to know exactly what you’re feeding. You don’t want to make the mistake of accidentally feeding your best forage late in the fall when your livestock aren’t doing much, and then be forced to feed them poorer forage later in winter when they’re closer to lambing or calving and lactation. If you can create a “feed budget” early in the winter, you can better your chances of feeding less supplementary grain to make up for situations like this.

Feed testing is a great strategy, every year, regardless of current considerations. I’m always happy to review results with producers and help them come up with a feeding strategy that meets their economic and performance goals.

(Katie Trottier is a ruminant livestock specialist with Nova Scotia’s Perennia Food and Agriculture Inc.)