Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:52:45.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Food efficiency in relation to estimated growth of body components in cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

L. S. Monteiro
L. S. Monteiro
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Summary

A model is proposed to establish a functional relationship between food intake, weight gain and body composition during growth, based on the differential energy requirements for fat, fat-free tissues and contents of the digestive tract. If constant specific nutrient requirements are assumed for fat and fat-free tissues, these requirements can be directly estimated from changes in food intake and body composition during growth. By introducing an allometric function relating changes in fat-free tissue to changes in body weight, the model is extended to include situations where direct measures of body composition are not available. This enabled the model to be fitted to data on food intake, body weight and growth rate up to 2 years of age in Friesians and Jerseys fed ad libitum on a complete diet. The nonlinear model is contrasted with a linear relationship where food intake i s related to body weight and weight gain. The linear model was unable to account for the changes in food intake over the whole period of growth. The non-linear model allowed a gradual decline n i maintenance requirements per unit weight and indicated an increase in the net conversion coefficient of food into gain, consistent with an increase from early to late growth in proportion of fat deposited.

For the period studied the Jerseys were less efficient in transforming food into weight gain than Friesians. On the non-linear model, about half of the difference was attributable to the higher metabolic rate per unit weight of Jerseys, the remainder to poorer utilization of nutrients for weight gain. If, as the model indicated the conversion coefficients of food into body constituents were the same in the two breeds, the difference in efficiency may be attributable to a higher proportion of fat in the overall gain of Jerseys. The pattern of estimated fat deposition also differed in the two breeds with Jerseys appearing to be less mature in fat percentage at all stages.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , June 1975 , pp. 315 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1975

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2. Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. 1968. The effect of dietary energy supply on growth. In Growth and Development of Mammals (ed. Lodge, G. A.), pp. 329–344. Butterworth, London.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Clapperton, J. L. and Wainman, F. W. 1966. Utilisation of the energy and protein of the same diet by cattle of different ages. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 67: 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. and Wainman, F. W. 1964. The utilisation of energy of different rations by sheep and cattle for maintenance and for fattening. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 63: 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breirem, K. and Homb, T. 1972. Energy requirements for growth. In Handbuck der Tierernahrung, Band II (ed. Lenkeit, W. Breirem, K. and Crasemann, E.), pp. 573–584. Paul Parey, Berlin and Hamburg.Google Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York.Google Scholar
Callow, E. H. 1961. Comparative studies of meat. VII. A comparison between Hereford, Dairy Shorthorn and Friesian steers on four levels of nutrition. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 56: 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellenberger, H. B., Newlander, J. A. and Jones, C. H. 1950. Composition of the bodies of dairy cattle. Vermont agric. Exp. Stn Bull., No. 558. 66 pp.Google Scholar
Gibson, D. 1969. The development of complete diet for cattle. Animal Breeding Research Organisation Report, Edinburgh, 1969, pp. 19–24.Google Scholar
Kennedy, G. C. 1953. The role of depot fat in the hypothalamic control of food intake in the rat. Proc. R. Soc. B 140: 578–592.Google ScholarPubMed
Kielanowski, J. 1966a. Efficiency of energy utilisation in growing pigs. Proc. 9th int. Congr. Anim. Prod., Edinb., pp. 212–224.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. 1966b. Conversion of energy and chemical composition of gain in bacon pigs. Anim. Prod. 8: 121–128.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. 1971. Energy requirements of the growing pig. In Pig Production (ed. Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 183–201. Butterworth, London.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. and Kotarbinska, M. 1970. Further studies on energy metabolism in the pig. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Schurch, A. and Wenk, C.), pp. 145–148. Juris Druck, Zurich.Google Scholar
Kotarbińska, M. 1969. Investigations on the energy metabolism of growing pigs. Wydaw. Wlasne Inst. Zootech., Wrocl., No. 238: 68 pp.Google Scholar
Lofgreen, G. P. and Garrett, W. N. 1968. A system for expressing net energy requirements and feed values for growing and finishing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 27: 793–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelder, J. A. and Mead, R. 1967. A simplex method for function minimisation. Comput. J. 7: 308–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. and McDonald, I. 1970. Utilisation of dietary energy for maintenance and for fat and protein deposition in young growing sheep. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Schurch, A. and Wenk, C.), pp. 121–124. Juris Druck, Zurich.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H. and Vergés, J. B. 1952. Effects of the plane of nutrition on growth and the development of carcass quality in lambs. I. The effects of high and low planes of nutrition at different ages. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 42: 1–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parks, J. R. 1971. Effect of ambient temperature on the thermochemical efficiency of growth. Am. J. Physiol. 220: 578–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reid, J. T., Wellington, G. H. and Dunn, H. O. 1955. Some relationship among the major chemical components of the bovine body and their application to nutritional investigations. J. Dairy Sci. 38: 1344–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St. C. S. 1969. Models of maintenance requirements in livestock. In The Use of Models in Agricultural and Biological Research (ed. Jones, J. G. W.), pp. 107–117. Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Berkshire.Google Scholar
Taylor, St. C. S. and Young, G. B. 1964. Variation in growth and efficiency in twin calves. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 62: 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St. C. S. and Young, G. B. 1966. Variation in growth and efficiency in twin cattle with live weight and food intake controlled. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 66: 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, J. 1970. Possibilities for complete diet of ruminants. 21st A. mtg Eur. Ass. Anim. Breed., Budapest, 1970.Google Scholar
Walker, D. M. and Jagusch, K. T. 1967. Utilisation of the metabolisable energy of cow's milk by the lamb. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. Blaxter, K. L. Kielan-owski, J. and Thorbek, G.), pp. 187–193. Oriel Press, Newcastle.Google Scholar