Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T07:04:39.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reproductive performance and growth of Shorthorn purebred and crossbred cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. H. Fahmy ,
G. Lalande  and
M. Hidiroglou
M. H. Fahmy
Affiliation:
Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Lennoxville, Québec
G. Lalande
Affiliation:
Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Lennoxville, Québec
M. Hidiroglou
Affiliation:
Animal Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada†
Get access

Summary

Data were obtained from 27 pure Shorthorn, 22 Angus × Shorthorn, 31 Charolais × Shorthorn and 27 Hereford × Shorthorn cows, during 10 years. Angus × Shorthorn cows required the least number of services per conception (1·17), had the shortest average gestation lengths (280·6 days), and had a calving percentage of 88·2% and birth weight of calf of 29·8 kg. The respective figures for Charolais × Shorthorn were 1·21 services, 281·6 days, 88·3% (the highest) and 32·9 kg (the heaviest), for Hereford × Shorthorn 1·23 services, 283·6 days, 84·4% and 31·6 kg, and for pure Shorthorn 1·20 services, 282·2 days, 82·7% and 29·6 kg. Average calf weight at birth increased with the advance in age of cow up to 5 years, then showed little change. Seventy-two per cent of the crossbred cows calved for the first time at 2 years old compared with 65% of the Shorthorns. On the other hand, Shorthorn cows had the highest twinning percentage (2·9%) and the lowest single calf mortality at birth (1·4%). The maximum body weights of Angus, Charolais, and Hereford crossbreds and Shorthorn cows were 576·8, 655·8, 6254 and 553·8 kg respectively at 7–8 years of age.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , February 1971 , pp. 7 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1971

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

Bellows, R. A. 1968. Reproduction and growth in beef heifers. A. I. Dig. 16 (1): 6–7, 17.Google Scholar
Bernard, C. and Lalande, G. 1967. The live weight of beef cows as influenced by age at first calving and wintering plane of nutrition. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 47: 23–30.Google Scholar
Brinks, J. S., Clark, R. T., Kieffer, N. M. and Quesenberry, J. R. 1962. Mature weight in Hereford range cows—heritability, repeatability and relationship to calf performance. J. Anim. Sci. 21: 501–504.Google Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold Publishing Corp., New York.Google Scholar
Burris, M. J. and Blunn, C. T. 1952. Some factors affecting gestation length and birth weight of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 11: 34–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, H. P. and Russell, W. S. 1968. Some aspects of fertility in purebred and crossbred dairy cattle. Anim. Prod. 10: 465–471.Google Scholar
Fahmy, M. H. and Hidiroglou, M. 1970. Body weights and gains of calves from purebred and crossbred Shorthorn cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. in pressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foote, W. D., Hauser, E. R. and Casida, L. E. 1960. Effect of uterine horn pregnant, parity of dam and sex of calf on birth weight and gestation length in Angus and Shorthorn cows. J. Anim. Sci. 19: 470–473.Google Scholar
Guilbert, H. R. and Gregory, P. W. 1952. Some features of growth and development of Hereford cattle. J. Anim, Sci. 11: 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, W. R. 1960. Least-squares analysis of data with unequal subclass numbers. United States Department of Agriculture, ARS-20-8.Google Scholar
Hidiroglou, M., Carman, G. M., Bernard, C., Jordan, W. A. and Charette, L. A. 1966. Comparative growth rates of Shorthorn and crossbred beef calves from birth to one year of age. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 46: 217–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joandet, G. E. and Cartwright, T. C. 1969. Estimation of efficiency of beef production. J. Anim. Sci. 29: 862–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kress, D. D., Hauser, E. R. and Chapman, A. B. 1969. Efficiency of production and cow size in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 29: 373–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindley, C. E., Easley, G. T., Whatley, J. A. Jr. and Chambers, D. 1958. A study of the reproductive performance of a purebred Hereford herd. J. Anim. Sci. 17: 336–342.Google Scholar
Mason, I. L. 1966. Hybrid vigour in beef cattle. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 34: 453–473.Google Scholar
McDowell, R. E., Fletcher, J. L. and Johnson, J. C. 1959. Gestation length, birth weight and age at first calving of crossbred cattle with varying amounts of Red Sindhi and Jersey breeding. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 1430–1437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilling, P. E. and England, N. C. 1968. Some factors affecting reproduction in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 27: 1363–1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stallcup, O. T., Horton, O. H. and Brown, C. T. 1956. The duration of gestation in dairy cattle. Bull. Ark. Agric. Exp. Stn, No. 576.Google Scholar
Touchberry, R. W. and Bereskin, B. 1966. Crossbreeding dairy cattle: I. Some effects of crossbreeding on the birth weight and gestation period of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 49: 287–300.Google Scholar
Turner, J. A., Farthing, B. R. And Robertson, G. L. 1968. Heterosis in reproductive performance of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 27: 336–338.Google Scholar
Turton, J. D. 1964. The Charolais and its use in crossbreeding. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 32: 119–130.Google Scholar
Verley, F. A. and Touchberry, R. W. 1961. Effect of crossbreeding on reproductive performance of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 14: 2058–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N., Warwick, E. J., Vernon, E. H. and Priode, B. M. 1961. Factors affecting net calf crop in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 20: 409–415.Google Scholar