Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T17:07:29.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multibreed comparisons of British cattle. Variation in relative growth rate, relative food intake and food conversion efficiency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. B. Thiessen ,
C. S. Taylor  and
J. Murray
R. B. Thiessen
Affiliation:
ARFC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
C. S. Taylor
Affiliation:
ARFC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
J. Murray
Affiliation:
ARFC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Abstract

In a multibreed experiment in which 292 heifers from 25 breeds were given a single complete pelleted diet ad libitum, body weight and food intake were recorded every 2 weeks. Relative growth rate, relative food intake and food conversion efficiency were calculated as the ratio of weight gain to body weight, food intake to body weight and weight gain to food intake respectively. The traits were measured over 12-week intervals from 12 to 72 weeks of age, and also over longer intervals of 24, 36, 48 and 60 weeks, each beginning at 12 weeks of age. Relative growth rate and food conversion efficiency declined continuously with increasing age, whereas relative food intake increased to a maximum in the 24- to 36-week period and then declined continuously.

The between-breed genetic coefficient of variation (CVb) for relative food intake was very stable at about 0·04 whether measured over 12-week or longer intervals, whereas the CVVs for relative growth rate and food conversion efficiency were usually higher when measured over 12-week intervals compared with longer intervals. For the entire period from 12 to 72 weeks, the CVb was estimated as 0·029 for relative growth rate, 0·040 for relative food intake and 0·034 for food conversion efficiency. The corresponding intraclass correlations (t2) measuring the between-breed variation as a proportion of the total variation were estimated as 0·08, 0·18 and 0·15. Within-breed variation was thus much greater than between-breed variation for all three traits. Using published estimates of within-breed heritabilities, the parameters g21 measuring the between-breed genetic variation as a proportion of the total genetic variation, and g22, measuring the between-breed genetic variation as a proportion of the immediately selectable genetic variation, were estimated as 0·28 and 0·61 for food conversion efficiency and 0·25 and 0·57 for relative growth rate. Thus, for all three traits, despite their low CVb and t2 values, between-breed selection would be useful prior to within-breed selection.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , October 1985 , pp. 193 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

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

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
Fitzhugh, H. A., JR and TAYLOR, ST C. S. 1971. Genetic analysis of degree of maturity. J. Anim. Sci. 33: 717–725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregory, K. E. and Cundiff, L. V. 1980. Crossbreeding in beef cattle: evaluation of systems. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 1224–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, W. R. 1977. Users guide for LSML76. Mixed model least squares and maximum likelihood computer program. Ohio state University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Kinghorn, B. P. 1984. A single approach to genetic improvement which exploits both selection and crossbreeding effects. Proc. 2nd Wld Congr. Sheep and Cattle Breeding, South Africa, Paper No. 43. (Mimeograph).Google Scholar
Klosterman, E. W. and Parker, C. F. 1976. Effect of size, breed, and sex upon feed efficiency in beef cattle. Res. Bull. Ohio Agric. Res. Dev. Center No. 1088.Google Scholar
Mason, I. L. 1971. Comparative beef performance of the large cattle breeds of Western Europe. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 39: 1–29.Google Scholar
Pearson, K. 1897. Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution — on a form of spurious correlation which may arise when indices are used in the measurement of organs. Proc. R. Soc. 60: 489–498.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
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982a. A comparison of the progeny of British Friesian dams and different sire breeds in 16- and 24-month beef production systems. 1. Live-weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. Anim. Prod. 34: 155–166.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982b. A comparison of different breeds and crosses from the suckler herd. 2. Live-weight growth and efficiency of food utilization. Anim. Prod. 35: 87–98.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1976. Multibreed designs. 2. Genetic variation within and between breeds. Anim. Prod. 23: 145–154.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. and Thiessen, R. B. 1984. Multibreed designs for breed testing and selection. Proc. 2nd Wld Congr. Sheep and Cattle Breeding, South Africa, Paper No. 50. (Mimeograph).Google Scholar
Thiessen, R. B. 1985. Inter-age correlations of body weight, weight gain and food intake within and between breeds of cattle. Anim. Prod. 40: 23–32.Google Scholar
Thiessen, R. B., Hnizdo, Eva, Maxwell, D. A. G., Gibson, D. and Taylor, St C. S. 1984. Multibreed comparisons of British cattle. Variation in body weight, growth rate and food intake. Anim. Prod. 38: 323–340.Google Scholar
Wainman, F. W., Smith, J. S. and Dewey, P. J. S. 1975. The nutritive value for sheep of ruminant Diet AA6, a complete cobbed diet containing 30% barley straw. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84: 109–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woldehawariat, G., Talamantes, M. A., Petty, R. P. Jr, and Cartwright, T. C. 1977. A summary of genetic and environmental statistics for growth and conformation traits of young beef cattle. Tech. Rep. Tex. A & M Univ. Dep. Anim. Sci. No. 103.Google Scholar