Do You Know What’s in Your Feed

Friday, October 30, 2026

Feed testing can help hit production targets more efficiently

By Emily McKinlay

The fall months are an opportunity to take inventory of the quantity and quality of feed grown and harvested throughout the year. Before forages and silages are fed, working with a nutritionist to collect and test samples can give producers a better idea of how the feeds fit into their nutrition program.

Why test feed?

Visual assessments often fall short in determining the quality of feed. By using quantitative feed testing, producers can have more certainty in the nutrients present in their stored feeds and can avoid feeding toxins or moulds.

Emily Conlin, a ruminant nutritionist with Masterfeeds, says that many factors can affect feed and forage quality.

“Maturity at harvest, forage species, storage, how well fermentation went, and soil fertility can all influence what the tests will tell you,” says Conlin.

“When we have those feed test results, we can allocate different feedstuffs to different groups throughout the year.”

Abby Redman, a ruminant nutritionist at Blue Rock Animal Nutrition, says that having data is important for nutrition management.

“You can’t manage what you don’t measure. You need feed test measurements to understand where it’s appropriate to feed that forage or silage,” says Redman.

“With those values, you can decide if you should dilute the feed with straw or add supplementation to help a cow grow a calf without losing body condition. It gives producers the ability to match their ration to their requirements.”

Testing feed before it is fed gives producers weeks or months to develop a nutrition strategy.

“Feed testing gives producers the time to make decisions, as well as to know what they need for supplementation. They may also be able to get it at a better price,” says Redman.

Conlin adds, “We also want to make sure we know our inventory or how much feed we have. If it is going to run out, they can line up purchasing feed.”

Knowing the quality and nutrient makeup of feed helps make more efficient feeding decisions.

“Feed is one of the largest costs of production, so we are always trying to bring costs down without sacrificing performance,” says Redman.

“You want to take the feed you have and make your production as efficient as possible.

“Every cow has genetic potential, and we are looking to match the feed to that genetic potential to raise as big a calf as possible, without sacrificing body condition score, for the least amount of money.”

Collecting samples

To get the most out of feed tests, samples should be collected to be representative of the feed.

“The results we get back are only as good as our sample. We want to make sure it is representative of the feed as a whole,” says Conlin.

“Being accurate and collecting a good sample goes a long way, even if it’s a bit tedious at the time.”

Redman suggests collecting these samples in the fall when the feed is hauled back to the yard. This typically would allow for time to collect the sample before feeding starts, and it is most readily accessible in one area.

“Producers can collect samples for the test themselves, or there are a lot of companies that will have someone to come out to collect samples,” says Redman.

“Sometimes, farmers will have a bit of hay in multiple fields. Testing every field individually can be high cost. If I have in my mind how I would like to feed the hay, maybe divided into good quality and poor quality, I can put the bales in two rows and put the samples together for those groups.”

This simplifies testing for producers who are just looking for a general idea of what is in their feed. Redman recommends taking samples from many bales in a group or category, rather than multiple samples from single bales. This ensures the composite sample created for the test represents feed throughout the category.

“If there is a lot of diversity in the feed, take samples from more bales. There may only be half a bag of sample in total, but it should be from a representative number of bales,” says Redman.

For silages, testing should occur after the feed has had a chance to ensile. The results of the test will vary before and after fermentation, when the microbes have had a chance to break down some sugars. Redman recommends collecting off the face a month after fermentation, which she says is easier than using a silage probe.

Farms with different goals and feeding systems will likely feed test at different frequencies.

“Feed should be tested any time production issues come up. If the animals are not eating what you think they should be, test the feed or the ration as a whole to get a good picture of what they are actually eating,” says Conlin.

“If you are feeding a TMR, it’s easier to get samples, and you might sample more often because of that. This allows us to be more accurate and make changes on the fly,” says Conlin.

“If you are feeding in a bale feeder, it can be harder to collect samples in general, and more difficult to get an idea of the total diet from a sample, so you might not test as often. Any time you switch bunks or are feeding something new, you should test that as well.”

Feedlots are likely to test more frequently than cow-calf producers because they target more rapid gains.

Applying the results

To make better nutritional decisions, the test should report the right macronutrients, minerals, and toxins to reflect the demands of the animals being fed.“

The test needs to measure macronutrients.

“It should report energy as total digestible nutrients (TDN), crude protein (CP), and the fibres — acid detergent fibre (ADF) and neutral detergent fibre (NDF),” says Redman.

“A lot of tests won’t do all the minerals, but you need to know what those minerals are doing in the feed you have and if there are any antagonists. Sulphur, iron, and molybdenum can be antagonists of some trace minerals.”

To fine-tune mineral supplementation requirements, Redman recommends that the feed test includes the macrominerals calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, sulphur, and sodium. For trace minerals, the test should include copper, zinc, manganese, iron, and molybdenum. Many regions have selenium- deficient soils, so it may be beneficial to also have selenium levels in feed tested.

Feeds should be assessed for musty, mouldy smell, ergot bodies, slimy texture, or dark colouring as indicators that toxins should be assessed. Redman says any stressed cereal crops — including drought, heat, hail or frost stress — would be candidates for nitrate testing.

Conlin recommends working with a nutritionist to sort through the results and adjust the ration, but says there are tools that can help producers better understand their feed quality.

“When the results come back, there are a lot of numbers and acronyms, and it can get confusing. If you have a nutritionist, they can help you work through those and allocate your inventory to better use the feed you have on hand,” says Conlin.

“If you don’t have access to a nutritionist, the Beef Cattle Research Council has an online calculator that allows you to plug in the test results and it will give you an idea of if it’s passable, really good, or not so good for the animal you are feeding.”

There are a few rules of thumb that cow-calf producers can use to assess their forages.

“Generally, we say the requirement for energy is 55 per cent TDN for cows in mid-gestation, 60 per cent for late gestation, and 65 per cent during lactation,” says Redman.

“For protein, we would like to see seven per cent, nine per cent, and 11 per cent CP at those same stages. Those are rules of thumb, so we don’t formulate exactly to those numbers, but they act as a quick guide for quality at a glance.”

She adds that as an indicator of digestibility and to avoid limiting feed intake, ideally, NDF should be under 60 per cent in the forages.

Higher fibre forages may cause animals to feel full before meeting their nutrient requirements, and the protein may be insufficient to break down the fibres.

Conlin says that putting time, effort, and investment into feed testing allows nutritionists to help producers hit their performance targets more efficiently.

“As nutritionists, we try to put together the most accurate rations we can, but if we don’t have factual feed samples, it can be challenging. Intake estimations are based on dry matter and digestibility, so if we have to use book values, the ration could be inaccurate, and animals could eat more or less than we are predicting,” says Conlin.

“If we have the data from feed tests, we can do a better job of hitting performance targets for your animals.” BF