The 2019 Brazilian Survey On Nutritional Practices Provided By Feedlot Cattle Consulting Nutritionists

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível






Curso de graduação

Título da Revista

ISSN da Revista

Título de Volume




Direito de acesso


This survey aimed to provide a current outlook of nutritional recommendations and management practices adopted by feedlot nutritionists in Brazil. The survey questionnaire consisted of 96 questions that included general information on nutritionists, animals, ingredients utilized in finishing diets, management and formulation practices, feeding management, and challenges associated with applying nutritional recommendations in practice. Thirty-six nutritionists, responsible for 4,671,062 animals in Brazil, responded our questionnaire. An increase in the percentage of nutritionists (38.9%) recommending 66% or more grain inclusion in the diets was observed. Fine grinding remained the preferred grain processing method by nutritionists (44.4%); however, more than 50% of nutritionists recommended highmoisture harvest and storage as the secondary grain processing method of choice. The average level of concentrate in the diets was 83.3%, which is higher compared with past surveys. The preferred fiber analysis method by 80.6% respondents was physically effective neutral detergent fiber (peNDF), and corn silage remained the main roughage source in finishing diets (69.4%). Improvements in diet mixing and distribution were also noted. While 79.0% of nutritionists’ clients use a truck-mounted mixer and 69.5% of them also use programmed delivery per pen, 44.4% of the nutritionists reported that their clients use clean-bunk management. Respiratory diseases and acidosis (reported by 71.4 and 27.6% of the respondents, respectively) are among the main health problems. The present survey provides an overview of nutritional practices currently adopted by feedlot nutritionists, who played an important role on the improvement of feeding management in Brazil over the last 10 years.




Como citar

Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, v. 50, p. 1-25.

Itens relacionados