John Kenneth Yost

Dr. John Kenneth Yost

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 December 2025 in Animals
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TYTylor J Yost
Tylor J Yost
NBNathan Blake
Nathan Blake
IHIda Holaskova
Ida Holaskova
DPDomingo Jose Mata Padrino
Domingo Jose Mata Padrino
JYJohn Kenneth Yost
John Kenneth Yost
MWMatthew E Wilson
Matthew E Wilson
Variation in individual animal feed intake is influenced by factors such as bunk management, digestive physiology, social hierarchy, and health status. While previous research has primarily examined feeding behavior in cattle offered high-concentrate diets, limited information exists regarding these relationships in high-forage systems. Residual Feed Intake (RFI), defined as the difference between an animal’s actual and expected feed intake based on metabolic mid-test body weight and average daily gain, serves as a key measure of feed efficiency. Animals with negative RFI values are classified as more efficient, whereas those with positive values are less efficient. This study investigated associations between feeding behavior and feed efficiency in yearling purebred Angus bulls (n = 232) and heifers (n = 58) consuming forage-based diets using a Vytelle feeding system. Upon arrival, bulls averaged 350.3 ± 3.6 kg and heifers averaged 287.5 ± 5.0 kg, with a subsequent 14-day acclimation followed by a 49-day ad libitum feeding period. In bulls, RFI was positively correlated with bunk visits (r = 0.34, p < 0.0001) and negatively correlated with duration (r = −0.16, p = 0.0124). In heifers, daily visits were negatively correlated with intake (r = −0.88, p < 0.0001), and RFI was negatively associated with RADG (r = −0.53, p < 0.0001).

1 February 2011 in Journal of Extension
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JYJohn Kenneth Yost
John Kenneth Yost
Educational commodity marketing clubs have been an effective tool for producers to develop their grain and livestock marketing skills. These groups are further enhanced when the participants engage in "actual trading" versus "paper trading" techniques. When a club chooses to try actual trading, it becomes more complicated than pooling monies together. Group members need to think of personal liability and state and government regulations with which they need to comply. This article attempts to assist Extension educators as they guide groups through the steps that will limit their personal liability and bring them into compliance with federal regulations.