Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T04:26:32.032Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carcass Characteristics of Holstein and Hereford steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. D. Carroll ,
M. T. Clegg  and
Dietrich Kroger
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Two groups of steer carcasses, eight Holsteins and eight Herefords, were compared in carcass traits. Although the quality of the meat (colour, texture, firmness, marbling and maturity) was comparable for both groups, the Holstein carcasses were heavier, older in chronological age and showed less thickness, plumpness and general compactness.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , February 1964 , pp. 1 - 6
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

Branaman, G. A., Pearson, A. M., Magee, W. T., Griswold, R. M. & Brown, G. A. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, O. D. (1957). J. Anim. Sci. 16, 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callow, E. H. (1948). J. Agric. Sci. 38, 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callow, E. H. (1961). J. Agric. Sci. 56, 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, J. W., Orme, L. E. & Kincaid, C. M. (1960). J. Anim. Sci. 18, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DinsrsiNG, M. (1959. Food Tech. Lond. 13, 332, 516.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. & Mansfield, W. S. (1936). J. Minist. Agric. 42, 977.Google Scholar
Haskins, O. G., Knapp, B. Jr, & Phillips, R. W. (1943). J. Anim. Sci. 2, 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankins, O. G. & Howe, P. E. (1946). U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. no. 926.Google Scholar
Hiner, R. L. (1957). Proc. Recip. Meat. Conf. 10, 132. Published by National Livestock and Meat Board, 407 South Dearborn St, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Kidwell, J. F. & Mccormick, J. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lofgreen, G. P. & Garbett, W. N. (1954). J. Anim. Sci. 13, 496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lofgreen, G. P., Hull, J. L. & Otagaki, K. K. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, C. E., Hallett, D. K., Tyler, W. E. & Pierce, J. C. (1960). J. Anim. Sci. (Abstr.). 19, 1240.Google Scholar
Naumann, H. D. (1951). Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 4, 83. Published by National Livestock and Meat Board, 407 South Daarborn St, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. C. (1957). Proc. Recip. Meat. Conf. 10, 119. Published by National Livestock and Meat Board, 407 South Dearborn St, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. C. (1959). Nat. Acad. Sci., Nat. Res. Coun. Publication no. 751, p. 48.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. C. Jr, & Hallett, D. K. (1961). Proc. Recip. Meat. Conf. 14, 10. Published by National Livestock and Meat Board, 407 South Dearborn St, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Rumery, M. G. A. & Adams, C. H. (1956). Bull. Neb. Agric. Exp. Sta. 52.Google Scholar
Wellington, G. H. (1953). Proc. Recip. Meat.Conf. 6, 73. Published by National Livestock and Meat Board, 407 South Dearborn St, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar