This is an excellent question, and it depends a bit on your marketing goals. For example, some grids reward quality, while others reward weight and leanness (yield grade). However, certain implant programs are better than others. To begin with, there are different categories of implants, which might be classified as weak estrogens, strong estrogens, intermediate combinations, and strong combinations. Examples of these are Synovex-C and Ralgro as weak estrogens; Synovex-S, Ralgro Magnum, and Component ES as strong estrogens; Revalor-IS and IH or Synovex Choice as intermediate combination implants; and Revalor-S, Synovex Plus, and Component TES as strong combination implants. The combination implants contain estrogen and TBA (trenbolone acetate) or a testosterone-like compound. Of course, there are different implants approved for use in slaughter heifers compared to steers. Usually you would choose an implant program with the end in mind. You also want to account for the frame of your cattle. If they are smaller-framed, implanting will markedly help here. If they are large, Continental-influence calves that are yearlings, implanting may make them even bigger, which is probably the biggest challenge with these cattle in terms of carcass discounts. However, we assume that these are the appropriate frame for your management system. The first important concept is to build on strength (the way the classes of implants were presented above). For example, you should not implant your calves with a strong combination implant at weaning. Therefore, if you stay with a four-implant program, then build as you approach market. We would almost always target a strong combination implant for the last 100 to 120 days on feed just prior to market. You do not want to go much below (90 days) or much over (125 days) this window. Therefore, you would usually target 100 days, and then you have some flexibility on when the cattle go. Very seldom do we sell cattle early, so 100 days seems to fit well, and you have three extra weeks to get the cattle sold. If you are concerned that your cattle are not grading (which probably means they need more days on feed), then one possibility is to use an intermediate combination as your terminal implant. We have some data with both Revalor IS and Synovex Choice, and they work well in terms of performance and quality grade. Now begin backing up with implants in 100-day segments prior to this last 100 to 120 days on feed. You have an option of using strong combination (last 100 days), preceded by either a strong estrogen or intermediate combination implant for this 100-day segment, preceded by the next weaker implant the next 100-day segment, etc. If you are retaining ownership, you may want to wait on implanting until you get to the feedlot. There is some evidence that delayed implanting when cattle are fed higher energy diets is acceptable in terms of performance and carcass quality. One concern is always ensuring that cattle are getting good nutrition and are in good health when implanted for you to get the best response from that implant. Waiting until a few weeks after receiving at the feedlot may be a good fit, if it is manageable. There are numerous implants and three companies with implants. Oftentimes, which equipment you use may influence the implant of your choice. You might try all the guns. Be sure that proper implant technique is used, being sure to sanitize the implant gun between animals. If conditions are dry and ears are fairly clean, we would not recommend scrubbing ears with disinfectant but just implanting the clean, dry ear. If the ears are wet and/or dirty, then scrubbing ears may be justified. You can get a good feel for this by checking for implant defects or abscesses. Defect rates of less than 3% are desirable. Also, be sure to check the implant placement in the ear and be sure that implants are intact when done implanting that specific animal. The last point to make is that implanting, when done correctly, is a safe and tremendous technology to use. The economics are quite favorable. Oftentimes, implants are blamed for poor grading cattle. From the literature, it seems quite clear that cattle that are implanted have little change in carcass quality if compared at equal fat endpoints. At most, you might expect a 5 to 10% reduction in % Choice. However, you can expect 75 to 100 lb more final live weight sold at the end. In today's market, that equates to quite an incentive. You mention implanting at three months, weaning and twice in the feedlot. That may not be necessary, but we are not familiar with the production system and days on each implant. If there are 100 days on each implant, then this current system may work well. However, it is possible that you could eliminate one of these early implants or ensure that the implant potency is correct. The final weight at slaughter may be impacted only slightly. We do not have good data on this long implant system, but there are numerous sources of information on this topic.

Browse related Faqs by tag: beef cattle, implants