Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:17:15.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A bio-economic model for the evaluation of breeds and mating systems in beef production enterprises

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

T. Roughsedge ,
P. R. Amer  and
G. Simm
T. Roughsedge*
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
P. R. Amer
Affiliation:
Abacus Biotech Limited, PO Box 5585, Dunedin, New Zealand
G. Simm
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

A deterministic bio-economic model was developed to evaluate the effects of changes in breeds and mating systems in a beef enterprise whilst keeping management constant. The model simulates all aspects of beef production including the transition of the breed composition, the biological performance and the overall economic performance of animals within the herd, over time. Breed performance parameters are based on a synthesis of results from published beef breed comparison experiments. In order to illustrate how the model is implemented an example is given based on UK economic information. The model predicts physical and financial performance over a planning horizon of 20 years. For a hypothetical enterprise, changing from buying in surplus dairy cross heifers to a situation of self-replacing beef cows, the model demonstrated a financial advantage, due largely to a reduction in production costs.

Keywords

beef herdseconomicsmathematical models
Type
Non-ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Information
Animal Science , Volume 77 , Issue 3 , December 2003 , pp. 403 - 416
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2003

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

Amer, P. and Emmans, G. C. 1998. Predicting changes in food energy requirements due to genetic changes in growth and body composition of growing ruminants. Animal Science 66: 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, P. R., Emmans, G. C. and Simm, G. 1997. Economic values for carcase traits in UK commercial beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 51: 267–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, P. R., Kemp, R. A., Buchanan-Smith, J.G, Fox, G. C. and Smith, C. 1994. A bio-economic model for comparing beef cattle genotypes at their optimal economic slaughter end point. Journal of Animal Science 72: 38–50.Google Scholar
Amer, P. R., Roughsedge, T., Lowman, B. and Simm, G. 2003. Deterministic predictions of beef cow herd population dynamics with alternative replacement female breeding strategies. Animal Science 77: 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, P. R., Simm, G., Keane, M. G., Diskin, M. G. and Wickham, B. W. 2001. Breeding objectives for beef cattle in Ireland. Livestock Production Science 67: 223–239.Google Scholar
British Standards Institution. 1981. Design of buildings and structures for agriculture. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office 5502 (2·2).Google Scholar
Bruce, J. M., Broadbent, P. J. and Topps, J. H. 1984. A model of the energy system of lactating and pregnant cows. Animal Production 38: 351–362.Google Scholar
Davis, K. C., Tess, M. W., Kress, D. D., Doornbos, D. E. and Anderson, D. C. 1994a. Life cycle evaluation of five biological types of beef cattle in a cow-calf range production system. I. Model development. Journal of Animal Science 72: 2585–2590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, K. C., Tess, M. W., Kress, D. D., Doornbos, D. E. and Anderson, D. C. 1994b. Life cycle evaluation of five biological types of beef cattle in a cow-calf range production system. II. Biological and economic performance. Journal of Animal Science 72: 2591–2598.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1994. Effective energy: a concept of energy utilization applied across species. British Journal of Nutrition 71: 801–821.Google Scholar
Emmans, C. G. 1997. A method to predict the food intake of domestic animals from birth to maturity as a function of time. Journal of Theoretical Biology 186: 189–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geenty, K. G. and Rattray, P. V. 1987. The energy requirements of grazing sheep and cattle. In Livestock feeding on pasture (ed. Nicoll, A. M.), New Zealand Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 10, pp. 39–53.Google Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Cundiff, L. V. and Koch, R. M. 1999. Composite breeds to use heterosis and breed differences to improve efficiency of beef production. Technical bulletin no. 1875. ARS, USDA, Clay Center, NE.Google Scholar
Hirooka, H., Groen, A. F. and Hillers, J. 1998. Developing breeding objectives for beef cattle production. 1. A bio-economic simulation model. Animal Science 66: 607–621.Google Scholar
Jenkins, T. G. and Williams, C. B. 1998. DECI-Decision evaluator for the cattle industry. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, vol. 27, pp. 461–462.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Grantley Smith, M. 1986. National estimates of the body composition of British cattle, sheep and pigs with special reference to trends in fatness. A review. Meat Science 17: 107–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meijering, A. 1980. Beef crossing with Dutch Friesian cows: model calculations on expected levels of calving difficulties and their consequences for profitability. Livestock Production Science 7: 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mejis, J. A. C. 1981. Herbage intake by grazing dairy cows. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Morris, C. A. 1980. A review of relationships between aspects of reproduction in beef heifers and their lifetime production. 2. Associations with relative calving date and with dystocia. Animal Breeding Abstracts 48: 753–767.Google Scholar
Myers, S.E., Faulkner, D. B., Ireland, F. A., Berger, L. L. and Parrett, D. F. 1999. Production systems comparing early weaning to normal weaning with or without creep feeding for beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 77: 300–310.Google Scholar
Newman, S., Stewart, T. S., Goddard, M. E. and Gregory, M. 1998. A decision support aid for tropical beef crossbreeding. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, vol. 23, pp. 471–472.Google Scholar
Pang, H., Makarechian, M., Basarab, J. A. and Berg, R. T. 1999a. Structure of a dynamic simulation model for beef cattle production systems. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79: 409–417.Google Scholar
Pang, H., Makarechian, M., Basarab, J. A. and Berg, R. T. 1999b. Application of a dynamic simulation model on the effects of calving season and weaning age on bio-economic1Google Scholar
Roughsedge, T., Amer, P. R. and Simm, G. 2002. Breeds: a decision support tool for beef breed and breeding system evaluation. Proceedings of the seventh world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Montpellier, vol. 33, pp. 781–782.Google Scholar
Roughsedge, T., Thompson, R. T., Villanueva, B. and Simm, G. 2001. Synthesis of direct and maternal genetic components of economically important traits from beef breed-cross evaluations. Journal of Animal Science 79: 2307–2319.Google Scholar
Sanders, J. O. and Cartwright, T. C. 1979a. A general cattle production systems model. 1. Structure of the model. Agricultural Systems 4: 217–227.Google Scholar
Sanders, J. O. and Cartwright, T. C. 1979b. A general cattle production systems model. 2. Procedures used for simulating animal performance. Agricultural Systems 4: 289–309.Google Scholar
Scottish Agricultural College. 2001. Farm management handbook 2000/2001 (ed. Chadwick, L.). SAC, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Yildiz, S., Quintans, G. and Broadbent, P. J. 1998a.Annual energy intake and the performance of beef cows differing in body size and milk potential. Animal Science 66: 643–655.Google Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Yildiz, S., Quintans, G., Gebbie, F. E. and Broadbent, P. J. 1998b. Annual energy intake and the metabolic and reproductive performance of beef cows differing in body size and milk potential. Animal Science 66: 657–666.Google Scholar
Williams, C. B. and Bennett, G. L. 1995. Application of a computer model to predict optimum slaughter end points for different biological types of feeder cattle. Journal of Animal Science 73: 2903–2915.Google Scholar
Wright, I. A. 1987. Suckler beef production. In Efficient beef production from grass (ed. Frame, J.), British Grassland Society occasional symposium no. 22, pp. 51–64.Google Scholar