Nutritional differences in gmo and non gmo corn

Help Support CattleToday:

A

Anonymous

Have there been any studies done? Any reason to believe that cattle would fare better on a patch of non gmo seeded corn vs the other?
 
Yes hook gmo corn is very deadly, just look at all of the deer dropping dead in corn fields!



Course it was just deer season.
 
Lots and lots of studies that show no nutritional differences for humans. No reason to expect any differences for cattle. GMO corn is the same as non-GMO plus one extra protein that is easily digested.
 
I was curious. People claim the Gmo seeds are horrible but I haven't been able to find any studies saying that animals don't thrive on it.
White cow...how can it be the same and you say it has extra proteins?
 
Open polinated corn has more protein than hybred, or atleast thats what the old timers said.
 
Red Bull Breeder":241mem39 said:
That would be wrong Bigfoot. The old corn had more starch.

I shoulda known they was wrong. They were the same ones that told me if I worked hard, I'd get ahead.
 
I don't know of any studies. But I can say that one year we used a 4 row planter, and had OP in one of the seed boxes. When it was time to harvest, the coons, deer and critters devoured that one row leaving the others which were convential corn. Another year, a friend and myself bought and planted OP Reids. I chopped mine, he wanted to grow it out for seed. His was also very close to the buildings. But when the corn reached that sweet spot, like the sweet corn in the garden, once again the varmits came in at night and cleaned it out. Like over night.
 
No nutritional difference that I'm aware of, from a feed analysis standpoint, but several of the genetic modifications have had the added benefit of resulting in lower levels of mold and mycotoxin contamination. For example, Bt corn will have much less borer & corn earworm damage, resulting in less damage to stalk and ear, with less opportunity for fungal infections to gain access to the developing kernels. That, and there's less need to spray with other pesticides which may harm non-target species.
Additionally, the RR gene technology helps conserve fuel, and there's much less need for additional tillage passes across any given field, and glyphosate is a much less environmentally-harmful herbicide than some of the others that have been used in the past.

Most, if not all, of the 'studies' that the anti-GMO folks trumpet as 'proof' that GMO grains are harmful to animals and humans have been thoroughly discredited as bogus, improperly-designed, unsubstantiated, or just flat-out misinterpretation of the results obtained.
For instance: if you see those folks referencing papers by Seralini or Carman... it's unadulterated BS.
 
We still take in white corn at the elevator at work, sometimes they bring it in by train car too. Always makes it looks like its snowing when they unload it, have no idea what they do with it though, never asked
 
Bigfoot":3roqv33u said:
I shoulda known they was wrong. They were the same ones that told me if I worked hard, I'd get ahead.

:lol: Well Done!
 
I grew some yellow OP corn a few years ago that had been developed by a farmer in OH. It tested 13% protein. I had it sent to a lab and tested myself. Back in the day when I mixed up a lot of feed with homegrown corn....just the regular hybrid.....you were supposed to figure about 7 or 8% protein on shell corn when you were calculating how much SB meal, etc. for say a 13% ration.
 
Banjo":2vxt5mn6 said:
I grew some yellow OP corn a few years ago that had been developed by a farmer in OH. It tested 13% protein. I had it sent to a lab and tested myself. Back in the day when I mixed up a lot of feed with homegrown corn....just the regular hybrid.....you were supposed to figure about 7 or 8% protein on shell corn when you were calculating how much SB meal, etc. for say a 13% ration.
We're you able to replicate that?
 

Latest posts

Top