Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:31:21.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterization of post-weaning traits of Simmental and Hereford bulls and heifers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

T. G. Jenkins  and
C. L. Ferrell
T. G. Jenkins
Affiliation:
Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center, US Department of Agriculture, Clay Center, Nebraska 68933, USA
C. L. Ferrell
Affiliation:
Roman L. Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center, US Department of Agriculture, Clay Center, Nebraska 68933, USA
Get access

Abstract

Post-weaning growth, dry-matter intake, carcass characteristics, chemical composition of the 9th to 11th rib section and food conversion efficiency were evaluated for Simmental bulls (15) and heifers (18) and Hereford bulls (17) and heifers (14) from approx. 240 days of age to 470 days of age. Within each breed × sex sub-class, animals were assigned to one of three energy intake levels: (1) ad libitum, (2) 795 kJ metabolizable energy (ME) per kg0·75 per day and (3) 544 kj ME per kg0·75 per day.

Simmentals tended to exhibit higher post-weaning growth rate and consumed more dry matter than Herefords. At ad libitum intakes, efficiency estimates (gain/food) were greater initially but decreased more rapidly for Herefords than for Simmentals. No differences were observed in efficiency estimates between Herefords and Simmentals fed at 795 kJ ME per kg0·75 per day and both breeds fed at this level improved in efficiency as time on test increased.

Bulls tended to have greater growth rate, and consume more dry matter than heifers. At ad libitum food intake, bulls were more efficient than heifers and the decrease in efficiency of the two sexes was parallel. Heifers fed at 795 kJ ME per kg0·75 per day had a constant efficiency throughout the test while bulls improved in efficiency.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , December 1984 , pp. 355 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1984

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Andersen, B. B. 1978. Animal size and efficiency, with special reference to growth and feed conversion in cattle. Anim. Prod. 27: 381–391.Google Scholar
Andersen, B. B. 1980. Feeding trials describing net requirements for maintenance as dependent on weight, feeding level, sex and genotype. Proc. Seminar Energy and Protein Feeding Standards Applied to the Rearing and Finishing of Beef Cattle, Theix, France, pp. 85–92. Annls Zootech. Special Number.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, B. B., Liboriussen, T., Kousgaard, K. and Butcher, L. 1977. Crossbreeding experiment with beef and dual-purpose sire breeds on Danish dairy cows. III. Daily gain, feed conversion and carcass quality of intensively fed young bulls. Livest. Prod. Sci. 4: 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, A. J., Goodnight, J. H., Sall, J. P. and Helwig, J. T. 1979. SAS User's Guide, pp. 245–255. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Byers, F. M. 1982. Patterns and energetic efficiency of tissue growth in beef cattle of four breeds. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Ekern, A. and Sundstøl, F.), pp. 92–95. Agricultural University of Norway, Aas-NLH.Google Scholar
Cundiff, L. V., Koch, R. M., Gregory, K. E. and Smith, G. M. 1981. Characterization of biological types of cattle — Cycle II. IV. Postweaning growth and feed efficiency of steers. J. Anim. Sci. 53: 332–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daenicke, R. and Rohr, K. 1978. Influence of nutrition on body composition and carcass quality of fattening bulls of different breeds (German Friesian and Simmental). In Patterns of Growth and Development in Cattle (ed. Boer, H. De and Martin, J.), pp. 423–433. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrell, C. L. and Jenkins, T. G. 1983. Energy utilization of Hereford and Simmental bulls and heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 57: Suppl. 1, p. 431 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Ferrell, C. L., Kohlmeier, R. H., Crouse, J. D. and Glimp, H. 1978. Influence of dietary energy, protein and biological type of steer upon rate of gain and carcass characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 46: 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, A., Slmpfendorfer, S., Reid, J. T., Ayala, H. J., Anrioue, R. and Kertz, A. F. 1980. Effect of level of energy intake and influence of breed and sex on chemical composition of cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 604–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrett, W. N. and Brokken, R. F. 1979. Efficiency of energy utilization by growing cattle of breeds differing in ultimate mature size. J. Anim. Sci. 49: Suppl. 1, pp. 368 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Garrett, W. N. 1970. The influence of sex on the energy requirements of cattle for maintenance and growth. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Schürch, A. and Wenk, C.), pp. 101–104. Juris Druck and Verlag, Zurich.Google Scholar
Geay, Y. and Robelin, J. 1979. Variation of meat production capacity in cattle due to genotype and level of feeding: genotype-nutrition interaction. Livest. Prod. Sci. 6: 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedrick, H. B., Thompson, G. B. and Krause, G. F. 1969. Comparison of feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of half-sib bulls, steers and heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 29: 687–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, T. J. and Ferrell, C. L. 1983. Nutrient requirements to maintain weight of mature, nonlactating, nonpregnant cows of four diverse breed types. J. Anim. Sci. 56: 761–770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, S. D. M., Price, M. A. and Berg, R. T. 1978. Effects of breed-type and slaughter weight on feedlot performance and carcass composition in bulls. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 58: 277–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Dikeman, M. E., Allen, D. M., May, M., Crouse, J. D. and Campion, D. R. 1976. Characterization of biological types of cattle. III. Carcass composition, quality and palatability. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koong, L. J., Ferrell, C. L. and Nienaber, J. A. 1982. Effects of plane of nutrition on organ size and fasting heat production in swine and sheep: In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Ekern, A. and Sundstel, F.), pp. 245–248. Agricultural University of Norway, Aas-NLH.Google Scholar
Laster, D. B., Smith, G. M. and Gregory, K. E. 1976. Characterization of biological types of cattle. IV. Postweaning growth and puberty of heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 63–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ledger, H. P. and Sayers, A. R. 1977. The utilization of dietary energy by steers during periods of restricted food intake and subsequent realimentation. 1. The effect of time on the maintenance requirements of steers held at constant live weights. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 88: 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, C. R., Stewart, T. S., Cartwright, T. C. and Baker, J. F. 1979. Characterization of cattle of a five breed diallel: II. Measures of size, condition and growth in heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 432–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, C. R., Stewart, T. S., Cartwright, T. C. and Jenkins, T. G. 1979. Characterization of cattle of a five breed diallel. I. Measures of size, condition and growth in bulls. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 418–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcallister, T. J., Wilson, L. L., Ziegler, J. H. and Sink, J. D. 1976. Growth rate, carcass quality and fat, lean and bone distribution of British- and Continental-sired crossbred steers. J. Anim. Sci. 42: 324–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pani, S. N. and Lasley, J. F. 1972. Genotype × environment interactions in animals. Res. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 992.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1967. Statistical Methods. 6th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Smith, G. M., Laster, D. B., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1976. Characterization of biological types of cattle. II. Postweaning growth and feed efficiency of steers. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, J. E., Frahm, R. R., Willham, R. L. and Whiteman, J. V. 1970. Sire × sex interactions and sex differences in growth and carcass traits of Angus bulls, steers and heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 31: 1058–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar