Purpose Muu Nutrition

“Those who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do” – Steve Jobs.

It is well known that the world population has had a pronounced growth in the last 200 years. Although the trend is slowing down, an increase above 9 trillion is expected by 2050 (4, 5, 7). World hunger is a current problem. According to the UN, it is estimated that 690 million people went hungry in 2019, 8.9% of the world population in the pre-pandemic year Covid-19 and insists not only promoting the zero hunger project in the world, but also sustains the importance of environmental sustainability of food production and reduction of greenhouse gases (6). Together, the consumption of meat and dairy products has grown in recent times. This is not only explained by population growth, but mainly by changes in the eating habits of the world’s middle classes, especially in emerging countries, with no prospect of a slowdown. Adding all this to the decrease in arable land, they realize that in the immediate future food production will not only have to increase, but it will have to be on the same land and even in smaller areas (7 and 8). Efficiency will be essential, not only for economic benefit but also for sustainable production, unless eating habits of animal protein consumption are reversed (9). Cattle can produce 250 to 500 liters of methane gas per day, which would contribute almost 2% of global warming in the next 50 to 100 years. The correct handling of rations can directly reduce methane gas emissions; and indirectly improving the efficiency of feed utilization (3, 13). It does not take large investments to change things. Trials indicate that the only use of urea as a protein source in poor quality forages (less than 6 % crude protein) can be used as a protein source for ruminal bacteria and improve production, even when they are not daily supplements (1). Other trials report the benefits of supplementation with low-cost industry by-products with a high impact on ruminal efficiency (2), already discounting and without mentioning the advantages of the correct balance of nutrients of any ration in terms of health and nutrition. animal production (20).

The losses and inefficiencies in global food systems are enormous and if we want to reverse this, we will inevitably have to acquire new knowledge to apply to food production and implement it on a massive scale (12).

Aversion to risk and loss is a characteristic of humanity (14,15,16), so when implementing new technologies there are two central factors to take into account: the risk involved for the primary producer to try something new and the acquisition of information during learning. While innovations induce uncertainty, access to information about the capability and profitability of this new technology plays a critical role. A new technology will be adopted if it is perceived to generate net benefits. For this, the dissemination of knowledge associated with this innovation and the ease of its use are essential, as long as the user has access to this information and the ability to learn (10, 11).

On the part of the generators and transmitters of new knowledge, not only is its creation important, but its dissemination is essential. It is useless to generate wisdom if it is not extended to the common man. Knowledge that is not shared does not exist. Additionally, people with fewer resources have fewer opportunities to access it. In this sense, digital technologies play and will play a central role in the dissemination and use of scientific knowledge. We need to break the barriers of inequality in access to information and reach places where the efficiency of production has a greater margin of action; or assume its disappearance (18, 19).

In one way or another, these topics will be the subject of discussion and the states will take charge of the matter, in fact, many avant-garde nations are already doing so (17).

The objective of this publication is not to make a romantic and critical review of current events, but to present a tool that helps the common man to start changing the world, with the sole condition of having a Smartphone and the intention to do so.

*1- Daily and alternate day supplementation of urea or biuret to ruminants consuming low-quality forage: I. Effects on cow performance and the efficiency of nitrogen use in wethers – T. A. Currier, D. W. Bohnert, S. J. Falck, and S. J. Bartle.

*2 – Biuret versus urea and cottonseed meal for wintering and finishing steers – R. R. Oltjen, W. C. Burns and C. B. Ammerman.

*3- Methane Emissions from Cattle – K. A. Johnson and D. E. Johnson.

4* Human population growth and the demographic transition John Bongaarts The Population Council, One Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, New York, NY 10017, USA.

5*- World population stabilization unlikely this century Patrick Gerland, Adrian E. Raftery, Hana Ševčíková, Nan Li, Danan Gu, Thomas Spoorenberg, Leontine Alkema, Bailey K. Fosdick, Jennifer Chunn, Nevena Lalic, Guiomar Bay, Thomas Buettner, Gerhard K. Heilig, John Wilmoth.

6* – https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/food

7* – http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#compare

8* – World meat consumption patterns: An overview of the last fifty years (1961–2011) P. Sans, P. Combris.

9* The Sustainability Challenges of Our Meat and Dairy Diets Susanne Stoll-Kleemann & Tim O’Riordan

10* Uncertainty, Learning, and Technology Adoption in Agriculture Jean-Paul Chavas, and Céline Nauges

11* Learning from Six Reasons Why Farmers Do Not Adopt Innovations Intended to Improve Sustainability of Upland Agriculture Sam Fujisaka.

12* Losses, inefficiencies and waste in the global food system Peter Alexander, Calum Brown , Almut Arneth , John Finnigan, Dominic Moran, Mark D.A. Rounsevell.

13* Nutrition Management of Dairy Cows as a Contribution to Pollution Control s. TAMMINGA.

14* Anomalies Risk Aversion Matthew Rabin and Richard H. Thaler

15* The effect of myopia and loss aversion on risk taking: an experimental test richard h. Thaler amos tversky daniel kahneman alan schwartz.

16* Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics – Richard H. Thaler.

17* The Role of Regional Governments in Climate Change Policy Ibon Galarraga, Mikel Gonzalez‐Eguino and Anil Markandya.

18* Multiplying Inequalities: The Effects of Race, Social Class, and Tracking on Opportunities to Learn Mathematics and Science. Oakes, Jeannie; And Others

19* Facilitating agricultural technology adoption among the poor: The role of service delivery through mobile phones – Heike Baumüller.

20* Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition, 2001.

Basic bibliography Muu App Nutrition

– Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition, 2001.

– Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition: Update 2000

– Using ADF and NDF in dairy cattle diet formulation-a western Canadian perspective Karen A. Beauchemin.

– Evaluation of the Importance of the Digestibility of Neutral Detergent Fiber from Forage: Effects on Dry Matter Intake and Milk Yield of Dairy Cows. M. OBA and M. S. ALLEN Department of Animal Science, Michigan State University.

– Effect of cereal grain type and corn grain harvesting and processing methods on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows through a meta-analysis L. F. Ferraretto , P. M. Crump and R. D. Shaver

– Balancing diets for physically effective fibre and ruminally degradable starch: A key to lower the risk of sub-acute rumen acidosis and improve productivity of dairy cattle. Q. Zebeli D. Mansmann a,b , H. Steingass, B.N. Ametaj

– Effects of rumen undegradable protein supplementation on productive performance and indicators of protein and energy metabolism in Holstein fresh cows. H. Amanlou, T. Amirabadi Farahani and N. Eslamian Farsuni.

– Optimizing Starch Concentrations in Dairy Rations. Rick Grant.

– Starch in ruminant diets: a review. Luis M Gómez, MVZ, MSc, Dr. Sc; Sandra L Posada, Zoot, MSc, Dr. Sc; Martha Olivera, MV, Dr. Sc.

– Creating a System for Meeting the Fiber Requirements of Dairy Cows. D. R. MERTENS US Dairy Forage Research Center, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Madison.

– Dietary Forage Concentration Affects the Feed Sorting Behavior of Lactating Dairy Cows. T. J. DeVries,K. A. Beauchemin and M. A. G. von Keyserlingk

– Rumen Acid Load from Feed and Forage Particle Size on Ruminal pH and Dry Matter Intake in the Lactating Dairy Cow. B. Rustomo, O. AlZahal, N. E. Odongo, T. F. Duffield, and B. W. McBride.

– Increasing the Physically Effective Fiber Content of Dairy Cow Diets May Lower Efficiency of Feed Use. W. Z. Yang and K. A. Beauchemin.

– Effect of cereal grain type and corn grain harvesting and processing methods on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows through a meta-analysis. L. F. Ferraretto , P. M. Crump and R. D. Shaver.

– Update on Trace Mineral Requirements for Dairy Cattle. Bill Weiss. Department of Animal Sciences Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center The Ohio State University.

– Investigations on the water intake of lactating dairy cows. Ulrich Meyer, Matthias Everinghoff, Dieter Ga¨deken, Gerhard Flachowsky.

– Methane Emissions from Cattle K. A. Johnson and D. E. Johnson. Departments of Animal Science, Washington State University.

– Methane Production in Dairy Cows. P.W. MOE and H. F. TYRRELL. US Department of Agriculture Science and Education Administration Agricultural Research Animal Science Institute.

– Animal and Dietary Factors Affecting Feed Intake During the Prefresh Transition Period in Holsteins A. Hayirli, R. R. Grummer, E. V. Nordheim, and P. M. Crump.

– Nutritional Management of Transition Dairy Cows: Strategies to Optimize Metabolic Health, T. R. Overton and M. R. Waldron.

– A herd health approach to dairy cow nutrition and production diseases of the transition cow F.J. Mulligan a, L. O’Grady a, D.A. Rice b, M.L. Doherty.

– A snapshot of management practices and nutritional recommendations used by feedlot nutritionists in Brazil D. D. Millen, R. D. L. Pacheco, M. D. B. Arrigoni, M. L. Galyean, and J. T. Vasconcelos.

– Nutritional recommendations of feedlot consulting nutritionists: The 2015 New Mexico State and Texas Tech University survey K. L. Samuelson, M. E. Hubbert, M. L. Galyean, and C. A. Löest.

– Nutritional recommendations of feedlot consulting nutritionists: The 2007 Texas Tech University survey J. T. Vasconcelos and M. L. Galyean.

– Review of Some Aspects of Growth and Development of Feedlot Cattle. Fredric N. Owens, Donald R. Gill, David S. Secrist and S. W. Coleman. – Effects of Rumen Acid Load from Feed and Forage Particle Size on Ruminal pH and Dry Matter Intake in the Lactating Dairy Cow. B. Rustomo, O. AlZahal, N. E. Odongo, T. F. Duffield and B. W. McBride.

Food energy formula

All food energy calculations are resolved at X1 consumption and in mega calories of metabolic energy per kilogram of dry matter. The discount on X maintenance and net energy are calculated and applied in the formulation process of the final total ration.

Pastures and forages: in vitro digestibility of dry matter * 3.61. => Dig in vitro = ((88.9-((FDA100)0.779)))/100

Energy concentrates: University of Pennsylvania equation for energy concentrates.

Protein concentrates, balanced and voluminous: Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition, 2001 and Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition: Update 2000

Food database

Tables of chemical composition of feeds for ruminants. INTA, Argentina.

Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle: Eighth Revised Edition 2016.

www.feedipedia.org