Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40062418›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2025

Stochastic modeling of economic risk and net return distributions for feedlot steers marketed at alternative endpoints.

Lucas M Horton, Ted C Schroeder, Marshall N Streeter, John P Hutcheson, David G Renter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lucas M HortonCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, Department of Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Ted C SchroederDepartment of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.
Marshall N StreeterMerck Animal Health, Lenexa, KS, USA.
John P HutchesonMerck Animal Health, Lenexa, KS, USA.
David G RenterCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, Department of Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9959-0674

Funding

Center for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology at Kansas State UniversityGlobal Food Systems programMerck Animal Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feedlot cattle in the United States have been progressively fed to heavier, more extreme endpoints (EPs) in recent decades. The primary objective was to evaluate economic risk associated with extending days-on-feed (DOF) by characterizing net return distributions of feedlot steers fed to later EPs, compared to current industry standards. Stochastic simulation modeling was employed to simulate a variety of conditions, including cattle performance, health, carcass characteristics, and economic market variability at the pen-level. The model was parameterized using data from a large commercial feedlot trial and industry reports. The trial involved cattle harvested at four EPs (EP1, EP2, EP3, EP4), each separated by 14 DOF. EP1 represented the industry standard, with live and carcass weights reflective of industry averages from 2021 to mid-2024. The model's final outcome was net return difference-the difference in net returns for EP2, EP3, and EP4 compared to if pens had alternatively been marketed at EP1 under a given set of simulated conditions. Conditional random forest models were used to compute variable importance scores to determine the most influential factors on net return differences. Results indicated that as steers were fed to later EPs, net return distributions widened, reflecting increased economic risk. Steers marketed on a dressed (carcass) basis using a grid for premiums and discounts showed a higher frequency of negative net returns compared to a live marketing basis, primarily due to discounts for Yield Grade and heavyweight carcasses. Across both sale basis, negative net returns became more frequent with increasing EPs. The most influential variable was the difference in fed cattle prices received between later-fed EPs and EP1, accounting for price changes when delaying marketing. Other important economic factors included base-fed cattle prices, corn prices, and the Quality Grade grid when grid marketing. Mortality risk was the most important noneconomic variable, while other animal performance variables, such as weight and carcass traits, were of marginal to minimal importance. These findings highlight the dominant role of economic factors on net returns when feeding steers to later EPs, emphasizing the need to prioritize market conditions in EP management decisions.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimal FeedAnimalsCattleMaleModels, EconomicStochastic ProcessesUnited Statesbeefdays-on-feedeconomicsendpoint managementfeedlotnet returnsteers

Identifiers

PMID40062418
PMCPMC12124255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.