Feed remains one of the largest expenses in a feedlot operation, prompting nutritionists to evaluate diets. New research suggests that crude protein may not be as necessary as beef producers once thought.
On a recent episode of Diving into Diets on Bovine Science, Dr. Brad White and Dr. Philip Lancaster discuss a 2026 study examining whether lower-protein finishing diets could maintain performance in long-fed feedlot steers.
Rethinking Protein
In a feedlot operation, feeding cattle is often the largest expense, with protein being one of the most expensive in a finishing ration. Corn byproducts and distillers grains are used as energy sources; this adds additional protein that may not be necessary.
“Optimum is what we’re shooting for, not maximum,” White says.
Breaking Down The Study
This research was published in 2026 in Translational Animal Science. The study compared two different groups of Angus and Angus-cross cattle. Livestock were fed one of two diets — one containing 13.5% crude protein or 11.5% crude protein.
“Cattle were fed about 206 days on feed, and they looked at intake, gain, feed conversion and carcass, and then they took some blood samples to look at plasma urea nitrogen levels,” Lancaster reports.
Researchers wanted to know whether reducing crude protein concentrations would affect cattle performance, carcass characteristics, and feed efficiency.
“They saw a little bit of an improvement in the dry matter intake in the 11.5% treatment. No differences in live weight gain or final body weight,” Lancaster explains. “But then the 11.5% treatment had increased in carcass weight and dressing percentage, so the carcass-adjusted gain was a little bit higher for that 11.5% treatment versus the 13.5% treatment.”
While overall growth performance remained similar between treatments, steers fed the lower-protein diet produced heavier carcasses and a higher dressing percentage.
Why Less Protein Works
Research suggests cattle getting fed a 13.5% crude protein diet consumed more protein than they fundamentally need.
“When you’re feeding excess protein and that liver has to work to synthesize that urea, there’s an energy cost to that, and it’s actually a fairly high energy cost to excrete that excess nitrogen,” Lancaster says.
He notes the additional energy usage may leave less energy available for growth, providing one possible explanation of why cattle fed the lower-protein diet produce heavier carcasses despite receiving less crude protein.
Balancing Nutrition And Expenses
Protein is one of the more expensive nutrients in a finishing ration, making it an important consideration when feed cost accounts for the largest share of production expenses. The study suggests that formulating diets closer to cattle requirements may improve efficiency without sacrificing performance.
“We pay for protein,” White says.
Lancaster adds, “It’s really easy in today’s feeding environment to get more protein than we need because of the use of corn byproducts in the diet.”
Rather than asking how much protein can be added to a finishing ration, research shifts conversations toward how much protein cattle really need. As feedlot managers continue looking for ways to improve efficiency, matching diets more closely to nutrient requirements may offer an opportunity to reduce costs while maintaining performance.
