Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:18:54.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of season of birth, breed of sire and sex of calf in a single-suckled Aberdeen Angus Holstein beef herd†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

L. L. Wilson ,
E. Abdul-Jamak ,
P. J. LeVan ,
R. F. Todd ,
J. L. Watkins  and
J. H. Ziegler
L. L. Wilson
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
E. Abdul-Jamak
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
P. J. LeVan
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
R. F. Todd
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
J. L. Watkins
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
J. H. Ziegler
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Get access

Abstract

Data were obtained from 233 heifers and 246 steers born in the autumn (September) or spring (March) seasons. The calves were sired by Polled Hereford (British) and Charolais, Chianina, Limousin. Maine- Anjou and Simmental (Continental European) bulls, from Aberdeen Angus (♂ × Holstein ♀ cows. Autumn-born calves weighed more at birth than did spring-born calves ( P < 0·01 ). Season of birth did not affect 205-. 305-. 365-day or slaughter weights. Incidence of dystocia was greater for Maine-Anjousired calves than for Polled Hereford calves (P < 0·05) with the other breeds intermediate. Significant sex differences were observed in practically all live and carcass traits with the exception of Warner- Bratzler tenderness and taste panel evaluations.

There were significant breed effects in which Continental European-sired calves gained weight more rapidly than did Polled Hereford-sired calves (P < 0·01) within each 90-day period, with the exception of 180 to 270 days. Slaughter weight and carcass weight per day of age followed the same trend. At slaughter at a mean age of 416 days, mean live weight of calves from Continental European breeds of sire was 1·075 of that of the Polled Hereford-sired calves. Proportion, weight and gain per day of edible meat in the carcass were greater for calves sired by Continental European bulls (P < 0·01). Although fat thickness and marbling score means were greater for Polled Hereford-sired cattle (P < 0·01), there were no significant differences in taste panel evaluations. There were no important two-way interactions between the main effects (sex, season of birth or sire breed).

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , December 1983 , pp. 365 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1983

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

Barber, K. A., Wilson, L. L., Ziegler, J. H., Levan, P. J. and Watkins, J. L. 1981. Charolais and Angus steers slaughtered at equal percentages of mature cow weight. I. Effects of slaughter weight and diet energy density on carcass traits. J. Anim. Sci. 52: 218–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beery, K. E. and Ziegler, J. H. 1969. A simplified and rapid method to uniformly size rib steak pieces for taste panel evaluation. J. Food Sci. 34: 480–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, R. T., Andersen, B. B. and Liboriussen, T. 1978a. Growth of bovine tissues. 1. Genetic influences on growth patterns of muscle, fat and bone in young bulls. Anim. Prod. 26: 245–258.Google Scholar
Berg, R. T., Andersen, B. B. and Liboriussen, T. 1978b. Growth of bovine tissues. 3. Genetic influences on patterns of fat growth and distribution in young bulls. Anim. Prod. 27: 63–69.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1965. A Bayesian approach to multiple comparisons. Technometrics 7: 171–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, A., Slmpfendorfer, S., Reid, J. T., Ayala, H. J., Anrique, R. and Kertz, A. F. 1980. Effect of level of energy intake and influence of breed and sex on the chemical composition of cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 604–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garcia-de-siles, J. L., Wilson, L. L., Ziegler, J. H. and Watkins, J. L. 1982. The effects of slaughter age on growth and carcass traits in an intensively managed crossbred beef herd. Livest. Prod. Sci. 9: 375–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Cundiff, L. V., Smith, G. M., Laster, D. B. and Fitzhugh, H. A. Jr. 1978. Characterization of biological types of cattle—Cycle II. I. Birth and weaning traits. J. Anim. Sci. 47: 1022–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Swiger, L. A., Koch, R. M., Sumption, L. J., Rowden, W. W. and Ingalls, J. E. 1965. Heterosis in preweaning traits of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 24: 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, W. R. 1972. Program write-up for least squares and maximum likelihood general purpose program. The Ohio State Univ.. Columbus. (Mimeograph).Google Scholar
Haycock, R. E. and Stewart, D. A. 1973. A comparison of the Charolais, British Friesian and Hereford breeds as sires of crossbred single-suckled calves for beef production. Anim. Prod. 17: 267–273.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Southgate, J. R. 1982. A comparison of the progeny of British Friesian dams and different sire breeds in 16- and 24-month beef production systems. 2. Carcass characteristics, and rate and efficiency of meat gain. Anim. Prod. 34: 167–178.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A. and Harrington, G. 1976. Fat distribution in steer carcasses of different breeds and crosses. 1. Distribution between depots. Anim. Prod. 23: 25–34.Google Scholar
Kline, R. D., Sink, J. D., Beery, K. E., Ziegler, J. H. and Wilson, L. L. 1969. Studies on some physical properties of bovine skeletal muscle. J. Food Sci. 34: 557–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Dikeman, M. E., Lipsey, R. J., Allen, D. M. and Crouse, J. D. 1979. Characterization of biological types of cattle — Cycle II. III. Carcass composition, quality and palatability. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 448–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konzi, N., Gaillard, C., Leuenberger, H., Schneeberger, M. and Weber, F. 1978. Beef breed bulls versus selected dual purpose bulls in producing calves for meat production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 5: 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laster, D. B., Smith, G. M., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1979. Characterization of biological types of cattle — Cycle II. II. Postweaning growth and puberty of heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 48: 500–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loveday, H. D. and Dikeman, M. E. 1980. Diet energy and steer type effects on adipose composition, lipogenesis and carcass composition. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 78–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNally, D. H. 1970. A note on the weights and weight gains of some Charolais and contemporary calves of other breeds in Northern Ireland. Anim. Prod. 12: 539–542.Google Scholar
Murphey, C. E., Hallet, D. K., Tyler, W. E. and Pierce, J. C. Jr 1960. Estimating yields of retail cuts from beef carcasses. J. Anim. Sci. 19: 1240 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1970. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 4. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Peacock, F. M., Palmer, A. Z., Carpenter, J. W. and Koger, M. 1979. Breed and heterosis effects on carcass characteristics of Angus, Brahman, Charolais and crossbred steers. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 391–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skelley, G. C., Thompson, C. E., Cross, D. L. and Grimes, L. W. 1980. Carcass characteristics of Polled Hereford × Angus, Charolais × Angus, Simmental × Angus and Holstein × Angus steers finished on high silage diets. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 822–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. M., Laster, D. B. and Gregory, K. E. 1976. Characterization of biological types of cattle. I. Dystocia and preweaning growth. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 27–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982. 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
Tanner, J. E., Frahm, R. R., Willham, R. L. and Whiteman, J. V. 1970. Sire × sex interactions and sex differences in growth and carcass traits of Angus bulls, steers and heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 31: 1058–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, L. L. 1973. Effects of sire, calf sex and age. and age of dam on birth weight and body dimensions at one and three days of age. J. Anim. Sci. 36: 452–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, L. L., Gillooly, J. E., Rugh, M. C., Thompson, C. E. and Purdy, H. R. 1969. Effects of energy intake, cow body size and calf sex on composition and yield of milk by Angus-Holstein cows and preweaning growth rate of progeny. J. Anim. Sci. 28: 789–795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, L. L., McCurley, J. R., Ziegler, J. H. and Watkins, J. L. 1976. Genetic parameters of live and carcass characters from progeny of Polled Hereford sires and Angus-Holstein cows. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 569–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar