Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T06:38:12.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of genotype and plane of nutrition on growth and carcass characteristics of lambs from hill sheep systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

M. H. M. Speijers ,
A. F. Carson ,
L. E. R. Dawson  and
A. W. Gordon
M. H. M. Speijers*
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
L. E. R. Dawson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
A. W. Gordon
Affiliation:
Biometrics Department, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK
*
†E-mail: m.speijers@afbini.gov.uk
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of lamb genotype and plane of nutrition on post-weaning lamb growth, and carcass characteristics in hill sheep systems. The lamb genotypes compared were as follows: purebred Scottish Blackface, Swaledale × Scottish Blackface, Cheviot × Scottish Blackface, Lleyn × Scottish Blackface and Texel × Scottish Blackface lambs. During the finishing period, lambs were allocated to a (i) low plane of nutrition (LP), based on a fixed allowance of dried grass pellets representing a grass-based system; (ii) high plane of nutrition (HP-cereal), with a diet consisting proportionately of 0.20 dried grass pellets : 0.80 cereal-based concentrate offered ad libitum; (iii) high plane of nutrition (HP-cereal/oil), with a diet consisting proportionately of 0.20 dried grass pellets : 0.80 cereal-based concentrate containing oilseed rape offered ad libitum. There were significant genotype × diet interactions for dry matter (DM) intake (P < 0.001), live weight gain (P < 0.05) and carcass gain (P < 0.05). On the LP diet, carcass gains were higher for Texel cross compared to Blackface and Swaledale cross lambs (P < 0.05). On both HP diets, carcass gains were lower in Blackface and Swaledale crosses compared with the Cheviot, Lleyn and Texel cross lambs (P < 0.01). Feed conversion efficiency, expressed in terms of carcass gain per unit of DM, was highest for Texel cross and Cheviot cross, lowest in Swaledale cross and Blackface and intermediate for Lleyn cross lambs (P < 0.001). Conformation classification was lowest for Swaledale cross (P < 0.05) and highest for Texel cross lambs (P < 0.001), whilst those of Blackface, Cheviot and Lleyn cross lambs were similar. Carcasses from Blackface and Lleyn cross lambs had higher fat classifications than Texel and Cheviot cross lambs (P < 0.01). Feed conversion efficiency was lowest with the LP diet compared with the HP diets, resulting in a 5-week longer finishing period and lower carcass weights, fat scores, dressing proportions and subcutaneous fat depth measurements. These results indicate that crossbreeding can have a major effect on lamb performance in the hill sheep sector. Feeding a HP increased lamb growth rates, particularly for high growth-potential genotypes, improved feed efficiency, shortened the finishing period but increased carcass fatness. Including oilseed rape in concentrate-based diets did not affect performance.

Keywords

hill sheep systemsfinishing lambsgenotypedietcarcass characteristics
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 9 , September 2009 , pp. 1232 - 1245
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

ADAS 2007. The environmental impact of livestock production. Review of research and literature, February 2008. Report for DEFRA FFG. DEFRA Publications, London, UK (Available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/livestock/pdf/envimpacts-livestock.pdf).Google Scholar
Agriculture and Food Research Council 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Al-Nakib, FMS, Batement, N, Findlay, RH, Smith, RH, Smith, C, Thompson, R 1997. Comparative performance of British hill sheep breeds and crosses. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 128, 199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrae, JG, Duckett, SK, Hunt, CW, Pritchard, GT, Owens, FN 2001. Effects of feeding high-oil corn to beef steers on carcass characteristics and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 79, 582–588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archer, JA, Barwick, SA, Graser, H-U 2004. Economic evaluation of beef cattle breeding schemes incorporating performance testing of young bulls for feed intake. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 393–404.Google Scholar
Black, JL 1983. Growth and development of lambs. In Sheep production (ed. W Haresign), pp. 21–58. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
British Standards Institution 1967. Methods for analysis and testing of coal and coke. Part 5. Gross caloric value of coal and coke. British Standard No. 1016.Google Scholar
Brown, AJ, Williams, DR 1979. Sheep carcass evaluation – measurement of composition using a standardised butchery method. Memorandum No. 36, Meat Research Institute, Langford, Bristol.Google Scholar
Cammack, KM, Leymaster, KA, Jenkins, TG, Nielsen, MK 2005. Estimates of genetic parameters for feed intake, feeding behaviour, and daily gain in composite ram lambs. Journal of Animal Science 83, 777–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carson, AF, Dawson, LER 2005. Effect of crossing Blackface ewes with five sire genotypes on performance of F1 and F2 offspring. In Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, p. 41.Google Scholar
Carson, AF, Moss, BW, Dawson, LER, Kilpatrick, DJ 2001. Effects of genotype and dietary forage to concentrate ratio during the finishing period on carcass characteristics and meat quality of lambs from hill sheep systems. Journal of Agricultural Science 137, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channon, AF, Rowe, JB, Herd, RM 2004. Genetic variation in starch digestion in feedlot cattle and its association with residual feed intake. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 469–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chestnutt, DMB 1992. Supplementation of silage-based diets for finishing lambs. Animal Production 55, 137–145.Google Scholar
Chestnutt, DMB 1994. Effect of lamb growth rate and growth pattern on carcass fat levels. Animal Production 58, 77–85.Google Scholar
Conington, J, Bishop, SC, Waterhouse, A, Simm, G 1998. A comparison of growth and carcass traits in Scottish Blackface lambs sired by genetically lean or fat rams. Animal Science 67, 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conington, J, Bishop, SC, Waterhouse, A, Simm, G 2004. A bioeconomic approach to derive economic values for pasture-based sheep genetic improvement programs. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1290–1304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) 2002. UK country report on farm animal genetic resources 2002. DEFRA, London, UK.Google Scholar
Dermarquilly, C, Weiss, P 1971. Relationship between the amounts of green forage dry matter ingested by the sheep and those ingested by the cattle (Liaisons entre les quantités de matière sèche de fourrages verts ingérées par les moutons et celles ingérées par les bovins). Annales Zootechniques 20, 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etheridge, MO, Stockdale, CR, Cranwell, PD 1993. Influence of method of conservation of lucerne and factors associated with voluntary intake in sheep. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 33, 417–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felton, EED, Kerley, MS 2004. Performance and carcass quality of steers fed different sources of dietary fat. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1794–1805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferrell, CL, Crouse, JD, Field, RA, Chant, JL 1979. Effects of sex, diet and stage of growth upon energy utilization by lambs. Journal of Animal Science 49, 790–801.Google Scholar
Friggens, NC, Shanks, M, Kyriazakis, I, Oldham, JD, McClelland, TH 1997. The growth and development of nine European sheep breeds. 1. British breeds: Scottish Blackface, Welsh Mountain and Shetland. Animal science 65, 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, SG, Younis, HM 2004. The effect of adding ruminally protected fat in fattening diets on nutrient intake, digestibility and growth performance of Awassi lambs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 113, 61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herd, RM, Oddy, VH, Richardson, EC 2004. Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 1. Review of potential mechanisms. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, E, Kenny, D, Hawkins, M, Malone, R, Lovett, DK, O’Mara, FP 2006. Effect of refined soy oil or whole soybeans on intake, methane output, and performance of young bulls. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2418–2425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempster, AJ, Croston, D, Jones, DW 1981. Value of conformation as an indicator of sheep carcass composition within and between breeds. Animal Production 33, 39–49.Google Scholar
Kempster, AJ, Croston, D, Jones, DW 1987. Tissue growth and development in crossbred lambs sired by ten breeds. Livestock Production Science 16, 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambe, NR, Navajas, EA, McLean, KA, Simm, G, Bunger, L 2007. Changes in carcass traits during growth in lambs of two contrasting breeds, measured using computer tomography. Livestock Science 107, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, RM, MacFarlane, JM, Simm, G, Emmans, GC 2004. Effects of food quality on growth and carcass composition in lambs of two breeds and their cross. Animal Science 78, 355–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livestock and Meat Commission (LMC) 2007. LMC yearbook 2007. Livestock and Meat Commission, Lisburn, Co. Antrim, UK.Google Scholar
Lough, DS, Solomon, MB, Rumsey, TS, Elsassaer, TH, Slyter, LL, Kahl, S, Lynch, GP 1992. Effects of dietary canola seed and soy lecithin in high-forage diets on cholesterol content and fatty acid composition of carcass tissues of growing ram lambs. Journal of Animal Science 70, 1153–1158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacFarlane, JM, Lewis, RM, Emmans, GC 2004. Effects of two dried forages, and a choice between them, on intake, growth and carcass composition in lambs of two breeds and their cross. Animal Science 78, 485–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machmüller, A, Ossowski, DA, Kreuzer, M 2000. Comparative evaluation of the effects of coconut oil, oilseeds and crystalline fat on methane release, digestion and energy balance in lambs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 85, 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollot, GE, Stone, DG 2006. The breeding structure of the British sheep industry 2003. DEFRA Publications, London, UK (Available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/bse/othertses/scrapie/nsp/publicatsrpts/pollott2003.pdf).Google Scholar
Ponnampalam, EN, Sinclair, AJ, Egan, AR, Blakeley, SJ, Li, D, Leury, BJ 2001. Effect of dietary modification of muscle long-chain n-3 fatty acid on plasma insulin and lipid metabolites, carcass traits, and fat deposition in lambs. Journal of Animal science 79, 895–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porter, MG 1992. Comparison of sample preparation methods for the determination of the gross energy concentration of fresh silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology 37, 201–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, RWJ 1986. The effect of plane of nutrition and type of diet offered to yearling Friesian steers during a winter store period on subsequent performance. Animal Production 42, 29–37.Google Scholar
Steen, RWJ 1989. Effects of soya-bean, sunflower and fish meals as protein supplements for yearling cattle offered grass silage-based diets. Animal Production 48, 81–89.Google Scholar
Steen, RWJ 1995. The effect of plane of nutrition and slaughter weight on growth and food efficiency in bulls, steers and heifers of three breed crosses. Livestock Production Science 42, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripathi, MK, Mishra, AS 2007. Glucosinolates in animal nutrition: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 132, 1–27.Google Scholar
USDA 1996. Institutional meat purchase specifications for fresh lamb and mutton. AMS, USDA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.Google Scholar