Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T12:36:58.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of management system at lambing and flock genetics on lamb output and labour requirements on lowland sheep farms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

A. F. Carson ,
L. E. R. Dawson ,
D. Irwin  and
D. J. Kilpatrick
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down, BT26 6DR, UK Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland and The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX, UK
L. E. R. Dawson*
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down, BT26 6DR, UK
D. Irwin
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down, BT26 6DR, UK
D. J. Kilpatrick
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down, BT26 6DR, UK
*
† Corresponding author. E-mail: lynne.dawson@dardni.gov.uk
Get access

Abstract

A study was carried out on six lowland farms in Northern Ireland over 2 years to examine the effect on labour input and lamb output of adopting an outdoor (grass-based) lambing system in comparison to an indoor lambing system. Each farm had four crossbred ewe genotypes – Bluefaced Leicester ✕ Scottish Blackface (BLXB), Texel ✕ Scottish Blackface (TXB), Suffolk ✕ Cheviot (SXCH) and Texel ✕ Cheviot (TXCH) ewes. The ewes were divided into three groups balanced for live weight and condition score and mated with Texel, Suffolk or Beltex rams. Half of the ewes lambed indoors and the other half were turned out to grass three to 6 weeks before lambing and lambed outdoors. BLXB ewes were the most prolific of the four ewe genotypes producing 1·99 lambs per ewe lambed compared with 1·75 for TXB, 1·76 for SXCH and 1·64 for TXCH (P < 0.001). A greater proportion of SXCH ewes lambed without assistance (0·82) compared with BLXB (0.70), TXB (0.71) and TXCH (0.74) ewes (P < 0.01) and subsequently less time was spent lambing SXCH ewes (P < 0.01). This advantage of the SXCH was more marked in the outdoor than in the indoor system (P < 0.01) in terms of lamb output, each of the four ewe genotypes performed similarly in the indoor and outdoor lambing systems. Lambs born in the outdoor system weighed 0.2 kg more at birth compared with those born indoors (P < 0.05). Lamb mortality and lamb output were similar in both systems. Less time was spent catching and moving ewes in the outdoor system compared with the indoor system (P < 0.01). Beltex-sired lambs weighed less at birth (4.9 kg) compared with Texel- (5.1 kg) (P < 0.10) and Suffolk-(5.3 kg) (P < 0.001) sired lambs and had lower live-weight gains from birth to 6 weeks and from birth to weaning (P < 0.001) and lower output of weaned lamb (P < 0.05). The results of this study demonstrate that, compared with indoor lambing systems, similar levels of performance can be achieved through adopting outdoor, grass-based systems. The lack of a significant interaction between ewe or ram genotype and lambing system indicates that all of the genotypes are suitable for incorporating into an outdoor lambing system.

Keywords

animal welfaregenotypeslabour requirementslambing, sheep
Type
Ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Information
Animal Science , Volume 78 , Issue 3 , June 2004 , pp. 439 - 450
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Carson, A. F., Irwin, D. and Kilpatrick, D. J. 2001. A comparison of Scottish Blackface and Cheviot ewes and five sire breeds in terms of lamb output at weaning in hill sheep systems. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 137: 221–233.Google Scholar
Connolly, L. 2000. Labour on sheep farms. Proceedings of the 27th meeting of the Irish Grassland and Animal Production Association, p. 82.Google Scholar
Cushnahan, A. and Mayne, C. S. 1995. Effects of ensilage of grass on performance and nutrient utilization by dairy cattle. 1. Food intake and milk production. Animal Science 60: 337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, D. C., Knight, T. W. and Johnson, D. L. 1980. Lamb survival in sheep breeds on New Zealand hill country. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 167–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, L. E. R. and Carson, A. F. 2002. Effects of crossbred ewe genotype and ram genotype on ewe prolificacy, lamb viability and lamb output in the lowland sector. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 139: 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. 1996. An economic analysis of ewe flock performance in Northern Ireland, 1994. Studies in Agriculture and Food Economics, Department of Agriculture, Belfast.Google Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. 2000. EU farm structure survey 2000. Northern Ireland: report on the agriculture labour force, farm diversification, use of contractors. Economics and Statistics Division, DARD.Google Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. 2001. Farm incomes in Northern Ireland (1999/00). Economics and Statistics Division, DARD, March 2001.Google Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. 2003. Farm business data 2003. Economics and Statistics Division, DARD.Google Scholar
Flanagan, S. 2003. Indoor and outdoor lambing systems compared. Proceedings of the Irish Grassland and Animal Production Association, March 2003, p. 79.Google Scholar
Givens, D. I., Everington, J. M. and Adamson, A. H. 1989. The nutritive value of spring-grown herbage produced on farms throughout England and Wales over four years. 1. The effect of stage of maturity and other factors on chemical composition, apparent digestibility and energy values measured in vivo . Animal Feed Science and Technology 27: 157–172.Google Scholar
Knight, T. W., Lynch, P. R., Hall, D. R. H. and Hockey, H. U. P. 1988. Identification of factors contributing to the improved lamb survival in Marshall Romney sheep. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 31: 259–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKereth, V. 1979. How Marshall Romneys began. New Zealand Farmer 100: 24–26.Google Scholar
Maund, B. A., Duffell, S. J. and Winkler, C. E. 1980. Lamb mortality in relation to prolificacy. Experimental Husbandry 36: 99–112.Google Scholar
Notter, D. R. and McClaugherty, F. S. 1991. Effects of ewe breed and management system on efficiency of lamb production. 1. Ewe productivity. Journal of Animal Science 69: 13–21.Google Scholar
Numerical Algorithms Group. 1994. Genstat 5 release 3 reference manual. Oxford Scientific Publications, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
O’Connor, C. E. and Lawrence, A. B. 1992. Relationship between lamb vigour and ewe behaviour at parturition. Animal Production 54: 361–366.Google Scholar
O’Riordan, E. G. 2000. Relationship between sward height and herbage dry matter yields. Grazing management: the principles and practice of grazing, for profit and environmental gain, within temperate grassland systems. Proceedings of the British Grassland Society conference, Harrogate, 29 February – 2 March 2000. BBSRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Aberystwyth, UK, pp. 55–56.Google Scholar
Russel, A. J. F., Doney, J. M. and Gunn, R. G. 1969. Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72: 451–454.Google Scholar
Sidwell, G. M., Everson, D. O. and Terrill, C. E. 1962. Fertility, prolificacy and lamb viability of some pure breeds and their crosses. Journal of Animal Science 32: 1084–1089.Google Scholar
Wassmuth, R., Löer, A. and Langholz, H. -J. 2001. Vigour of lambs newly born to outdoor wintering ewes. Animal Science 72: 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar