Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-22T13:31:16.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparison of Liveweight, Carcass and Lean Meat Criteria for the Feedlot Replacement Decisions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Kenneth E. Nelson  and
Wayne D. Purcell
Kenneth E. Nelson
Affiliation:
Commodity Economics Division, Economic Research Service
Wayne D. Purcell
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
Get access

Extract

In recent months, several developments have prompted increased interest in the feedlot replacement decision. Among the more important are the high prices for feeder cattle and feed grains, the narrow (and often negative) profit margins confronting the feedlot manager and the increasingly apparent need to produce lean meat with maximum efficiency.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , December 1973 , pp. 99 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1973

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.)

Footnotes

*

Oklahoma State Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Article No. 2701

References

[1]Brody, S., Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold Pub. Corp., 1945.Google Scholar
[2]Brown, C. J. and Brown, J. E., “The Influence of Mature Weight and Rate of Maturing on Individual Beef Cow Efficiency,” Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 774, April 1972.Google Scholar
[3]Chisholm, Anthony H., “Criteria for Determining the Optimum Replacement Pattern,” Journal of Farm Economics, 48: 107–112, Feb. 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Cundiff, L. V., et al., “Genetic Relationships Between Growth and Carcass Traits.” Feeding and Breeding Tests with Sheep, Swine and Beef Cattle: Progress Report 1964-65, Okla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Stillwater, 1965.Google Scholar
[5]Dinkel, C. A. and Dearborn, D. D., “Choosing Breeds and Crossbreeding Systems by Computer,” South Dakota State University Animal Science Series 72-26, 1972.Google Scholar
[6]Faris, J.E., “Analytical Techniques Used in Determining the Optimum Replacement Pattern,” Journal of Farm Economics, 42: 755–766, Nov. 1960.Google Scholar
[7]Hafez, E. S. E. and Dyer, J. A., Animal Growth and Nutrition. Lea and Febiger Pub. Co., Philadelphia, 1969.Google Scholar
[8]Hedrick, H. B., Bovine Growth and Composition. Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 928, 1968.Google Scholar
[9]Joandet, G. E., Growth Patterns and Efficiency of TON Utilization, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University, 1967.Google Scholar
[10]Laird, Anna Kane, et al., “Dynamics of Normal Growth.” Growth, 29: 233–243, 1965.Google ScholarPubMed
[11]Laird, Anna Kane, “Postnatal Growth of Birds and Mammals,” Growth, 30: 349–363, 1966.Google ScholarPubMed
[12]Lofgreen, G. P. and Garrett, W. N., “A System for Expressing Net Energy Requirements and Feed Values for Growing and. Finishing Cattle” Journal of Animal Science, 27: 793–807, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Nelson, Kenneth E. and Purcell, Wayne D., “A Quantitative Approach to the Feedlot Replacement Decision,” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 4, No. 1, July 1972, pp. 143–150.Google Scholar
[14]Nelson, Ted R., et al., “Application of the Oklahoma ‘Feedmix’ Program,” Oklahoma State University, Agricultural Economics Paper 6909, 1969.Google Scholar
[15]Paine, M. D., Mathematical Modeling of Energy Metabolism in Beef Animals, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Oklahoma State University, 1971.Google Scholar
[16]Perrin, R.K., “Asset Replacement Principles,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54: 60–67, Feb.1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Pomeroy, R. W., Live Weight Growth. Progress in the Physiology of Farm Animals. Butterworths Scientific Publications, London, 1955.Google Scholar
[18]Preston, R. L., “Effects of Nutrition on the Body Composition of Cattle and Sheep.” Paper presented at Georgia Nutrition Conference, Feb. 18, 1971.Google Scholar
[19]Totusek, Robert, “Expected Carcass Weight, Grades, and Cutability Resulting from Growing and Feeding Different Types of Calves,” 7th Annual Cattle Feeders' Seminar, Oklahoma State University, Feb. 4-5, 1971.Google Scholar
[20]Wagner, Donald G., “The Effect of Feedlot In-weight on the Costs and Efficiencies of Gain.” 7th Annual Cattle Feeders' Seminar, Oklahoma State University, Feb. 4-5, 1971.Google Scholar
[21]U.S.D.A. “Preliminary Report of Germ Plasm Evaluation Program,” U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, Nebraska, Jan. 1973.Google Scholar
[22]Witz, John A., Systems Modeling and Computer Simulation of the Beef Feedlot Animal, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Oklahoma State University, 1972.Google Scholar