Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:33:39.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A comparison of bulls and steers implanted with various oestrogenic growth promoters in a 15-month semi-intensive system of beef production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. W. J. Steen
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down
Get access

Abstract

Two experiments, each involving 48 British Friesian cattle, were carried out to examine the performance and carcass quality of bulls and steers implanted with one of three oestrogenic growth promoters in a semi-intensive system of beef production in which the animals were slaughtered at 14 to 17 months of age. The treatments used in experiment 1 were: (1) control steers (no implant); (2) steers implanted with 45 mg oestradiol in silastic rubber at 4·5 months of age and with 300 mg trenbolone acetate at 10·5 and 13·5 months; (3) steers implanted with 20 mg oestradiol and 200 mg progesterone at 95-day intervals from 4·5 months and with 300 mg trenbolone acetate at 10·5 and 13·5 months of age; (4) bulls (no implant). For treatments 1 to 4 respectively dry-matter (DM) intakes were 6·74, 7·24, 7·50 and 7·16 (s.e. 0·092) kg/day; carcass weights were 260, 283, 298 and 290 (s.e. 5·4) kg; and fat depths over m. longissimus were 6·5, 5·3, 6·3 and 3·4 (s.e. 0·53) mm. The same treatments were used in experiment 2, except that 36 mg Zeranol® was used in treatment 3 instead of 20 mg oestradiol plus 200 mg progesterone, and the bulls in treatment 4 were implanted with 36 mg Zeranol at 7·5, 11 and 14·5 months. For treatments 1 to 4 respectively DM intakes were 7·37, 7·85, 7·76 and 7·42 (s.e. 0·092) kg/day; carcass weights were 262, 285, 284 and 296 (s.e. 7·1) kg and mean fat depths over m. longissimus were 7·1, 5·9, 7·0 and 5·2 (s.e. 0·54) mm. Implantation of steers increased food intake but also improved food conversion efficiency and did not consistently affect carcass fatness or conformation. Repeated implantation with 20 mg oestradiol plus 200 mg progesterone produced a greater response in performance than a single implantation with 45 mg oestradiol-17β in a controlled-release silastic-rubber implant, while repeated implantation with 36 mg Zeranol produced a similar response to the single silastic-rubber implant. Bulls produced leaner carcasses and converted food to carcass gain more efficiently than implanted steers.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

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

Drennan, M. J. and Roche, J. F. 1977. Influence of growth promoters on the efficiency of beef production. An Foras Táluntais, Anim. Prod. Res. Rep., pp. 1819.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, G. and Kempster, A. J. 1977. Beef carcase yields. Inst. Meat Bull. No. 95, pp. 215.Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Rompala, R. E., Wilton, J. W. and Watson, C. H. 1984. Empty body weights, carcass weights and offal proportions in bulls and steers of different mature size. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 64: 5357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, M. and Reith, T. L. 1983. Repeat implantation using growing-fattening beef cattle. Anim. Prod. 36: 528529 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Kay, M., Reith, T. L. and Hunter, E. A. 1984. A comparison of sequential implantation with Zeranol or a single implant with oestradiol-17β Anim. Prod. 38: 544 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. 1982a. Comparison of Compudose 365 and repeated Ralgro implantation of young steers. An Foras Tdluntais, Anim. Prod. Res. Rep., pp. 67.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. 1982b. Effect of Compudose 365 on the performance of steers. An Foras Táluntais, Anim. Prod. Res. Rep., p. 6.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A. and Harrington, G. 1982. Beef carcase grading and classification. In Carcase Evaluation in Livestock Breeding, Production and Marketing, pp. 163201. Granada, London.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. and Scott, N. A. 1983. Live-weight response to combined implants in finishing beef cattle. Anim. Prod. 36: 515 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Mathison, G. W. and Stobbs, L. A. 1983. Efficacy of Compudose as a growth promotant implant for growing-finishing steers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 63: 7580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, J. H. D. and Lamming, G. E. 1964. The effects of castration on meat production in cattle, sheep and pigs. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 63: 341357.Google Scholar
Robertson, I. S., Paver, H. and Wilson, J. C. 1970. Effect of castration and dietary protein level on growth and carcass composition in beef cattle. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 74: 299310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roche, J. F. 1980. The use of growth promoters in beef cattle. In The Use Residues and Toxicology of Growth Promoters. An Foras Tdluntais, Anim. Prod. Res. Rep., pp. 112.Google Scholar
Roche, J. F., Davis, W. D. and Sherington, J. 1978a. Effect of trenbolone acetate and resorcylic acid lactone alone or combined on daily liveweight and carcass weight in steers. Ir. J. agric. Res. 17: 714.Google Scholar
Roche, J. F., Davis, W. D. and Sherington, J. 1978b. Effect of time of insertion of resorcylic acid lactone and trenbolone acetate and type of diet on growth rate in steers. Ir. J. agric. Res. 17: 249254.Google Scholar
Rumsey, T. S. 1982. Effect of Synovex-S implants and kiln dust on tissue gain by feedlot beef steers. J. Anim. Sci. 54: 10301039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, B. M. 1978. The use of growth promoting implants in beef production. ADAS Q. Rev. 31: 185216.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1985. Protein supplementation of silage-based diets for calves. Anim. Prod. 41: 293300.Google Scholar
Stollard, R., Jones, D. and Appleby, G. 1982. Compudose 365 as a growth promoter for beef cattle. Anim. Prod. 34: 398 (Abstr.).Google Scholar