Economic performance of high-energy diets and supplementation with chromium propionate or calcium salts of palm oil in ewes’ production

Santos, Fernanda Ferreira dos; Brochine, Luciano; Nacimento, Rafael Araújo; Moreira, Flávia Mallaco; Gameiro, Augusto Hauber; Gallo, Sarita Bonagurio

doi:10.37496/rbz5120210063

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Animal Production Systems and Agribusiness • R. Bras. Zootec. 51 • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.37496/rbz5120210063 copy

Economic performance of high-energy diets and supplementation with chromium propionate or calcium salts of palm oil in ewes’ production

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The experiment aimed to analyze the economic viability of using high-energy diets and the supplementation of chromium propionate or calcium salts of palm oil in the diet of ewes from the late gestation until the end of lactation. Seventy-two ewes of Santa Ines × Dorper crossbreeds were allocated to five treatments: CTL (n = 14) with 100% of NRC recommendation for metabolizable energy per kg dry matter intake (ME/kg DMI), LOW (n = 14) with 90% ME/kg DMI, HIGH (n = 15) with 110% ME/kg DMI, Cr (n = 15) HIGH diet plus chromium propionate, and FAT (n = 14) HIGH diet plus calcium salts of palm oil. Based on the performance data, a short-term analysis was performed for a module of 1000 ewes, evaluating costs, revenues, and profitability, and long-term analysis was performed by an additional cash flow of 120 months. The CTL and FAT treatments were not viable due to higher costs and lower revenues, and they also had a negative net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR). The LOW treatment, despite lower costs and positive profitability, had a negative NPV (-$872.90) and IRR (1.85%) that was below the discount rate, making it unprofitable in the long run. The HIGH and Cr treatments were considered feasible because they had lower unit costs and higher profitability, in addition to a high NPV ($64,894.11 and 104,902.05, respectively) and a higher IRR (9.03% and 13.65%, respectively) than the discount rate. The use of high-energy diets, with added chromium propionate, promoted better performance and, consequently, better economic return.

Keywords:
economy; palm oil; profitability; reproduction; sheep

Nutrient	Corn silage	Corn grain	Soybean meal	Calcium salts of palm oil
Dry matter (%)	26	88	91	98
Crude protein (% of DM)	7.0	9.0	40
NDF (% of DM)	70	9	15
ADF (% of DM)	44	3	10
ME (Mcal/kg)	1.98	3.2	3.0	5.41
EE (% of DM)	1.3	4.3	1.6	84.5
MM (% of DM)	7	2	7	15
Calcium (% of DM)	0.35	0.02	0.38	12
Phosphorus (% of DM)	0.19	0.3	0.71

Performance	Treatment					SEM	P-value
Performance	LOW	CTL	HIGH	Cr	FAT	SEM	P-value
Birth weight (kg)	3.8^b a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	4.4^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	4.2^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	4.3^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	4.5^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	0.11	0.0022
Weaning weight (kg)	18.71^b a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	22.27^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	21.17^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	25.68^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	22.82^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	0.73	0.0191
Lamb slaughter weight (kg)	42.38	47.13	42.90	46.81	44.75	2.30	0.7891
Lamb weight at eight months (kg)	43.52^b a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	53.15^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	47.85^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	52.57^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	49.32^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	1.17	0.0105
Pregnancy rate (%)	100	100	100	100	92.85	1.98	0.3396
Prolificity	1.43	1.36	1.53	1.53	1.23	0.06	0.5729
Mortality until weaning (%)	20c	0^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	0^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	4.4^b a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	0^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	1.58	0.0069
Ewe lambs suitable for breeding (%)	66.7c	100^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	100^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	100^a a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	75^b a-b Values within a row with different letters differ significantly at P<0.05.	0.77	0.007

		Treatment
		LOW	CTL	HIGH	Cr	FAT
Expense ($)
	A - Variable costs	51,226.22	120.999.25	104,368.66	107,336.61	97,761.36
	B - Fixed costs	3,340.80	3,340.80	3,340.80	3,340.80	3,340.80
	C - Total cost (A + B)	54,567.02	124,340.05	107,709.46	110,677.41	101,102.16
	D - Average cost ($)/kg BW	1.32	2.11	1.64	1.54	1.97
Revenue ($)
	Sale of live finished lambs	26,026.62	43,615.29	54,986.90	78,109.20	45,027.82
	Sale of replacement ewes	30,813.35	60,895.36	56,812.38	45,393.77	31,069.59
	Sale of discard animals	12,305.85	5,555.55	5,555.55	5,555.55	10,733.82
	E - Total revenue	69,145.83	110,066.20	117,354.84	128,947.42	86,831.24
	F - Average revenue ($)/kg BW	1.67	1.87	1.79	1.80	1.70
	G - Total produced (kg)	7,674.34	10,908.44	12,161.12	13,266.19	9,479.39
Short-term viability (annual)
	H - Contribution margin (E − A) ($)	17,919.60	−10,933.05	12,986.17	21,610.81	−10,930.12
	I - Contribution margin per unit (H/G) ($/kg)	0.43	−0.18	0.20	0.30	0.21
	J - Profit (E − C) ($)	14,578.80	−14,273.85	9,645.38	18,270.00	−14,270.92
	Profit per unit (J/G) ($/kg)	0.36	−0.23	0.15	0.26	−0.27
Long-term viability (120 mouths)
	NPV ($)	−872.90	−217,950.42	64,894.11	104,902.05	−269,623.72
	IRR (per year) (%)	1.85%	−24.27%	9.03%	13.65%	−38.06%
	Simple payback (months)	120	-	113	101	-
	PS (months)	85	45	45	53	69

Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia Universidade Federal de Viçosa / Departamento de Zootecnia, 36570-900 Viçosa MG Brazil, Tel.: +55 31 3612-4602, +55 31 3612-4612 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: rbz@sbz.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author: saritabgallo@usp.br