Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:07:46.098Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency of food utilization and carcass characteristics of steers marketed at different weights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. Hironaka ,
B. H. Sonntag  and
G. C. Kozub
R. Hironaka
Affiliation:
Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4B1
B. H. Sonntag
Affiliation:
Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada R7A 5Z7
G. C. Kozub
Affiliation:
Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4B1
Get access

Abstract

Hereford and Charolais x Hereford steer calves were given an all-concentrate diet ad libitum. The Hereford steer calves were marketed at about 400, 440 and 475 kg live weight. The Charolais x Hereford steer calves were marketed at about 525, 570 and 610 kg. For each kg increase in slaughter weight of Hereford steers, the digestible energy required per unit live weight gain increased by 0·024 (s.e. 0·009) MJ, the killing-out proportion increased by 0·22 (s.e. 0·08) g/kg, and the backfat thickness by 0·004 (s.e. 0·002) cm. The area of m. longissimus increased by 0·245 (s.e. 0·037) cm2 and 0·139 (s.e. 0·048) cm2 for Hereford and Charolais X Hereford steers, respectively, for each kg increase in carcass weight. Among Hereford steers, mean backfat thickness as indicated by carcass grade scores (score of 1 to 4 as backfat increases) at the two lowest slaughter weights were similar and lower than scores at the high weight. Among Charolais X Hereford steers, the carcass grade was not influenced by slaughter weight. Slaughtering Hereford and Charolais x Hereford steers at light weights does not ensure that all the carcasses will be lean when the cattle are given a high concentrate diet to appetite from weaning to slaughter.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , April 1985 , pp. 251 - 258
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

REFERENCES

Andersen, H. R. 1975. The influence of slaughter weight and level of feeding on growth rate, feed conversion and carcass composition of bulls. Livesl. Prod. Sci. 2: 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous. 1972. Beef carcass grading regulations. Can. Gaz. Part II 106: 1685–1694.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1978. Regulations respecting the grading of beef carcasses. Can. Gaz. Part II 112: 2945–2954.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 12th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Dockerty, T. R., Cahill, V. R., Ockerman, H. W., Fox, D. G. and Johnson, R. R. 1973. Carcass development in beef cattle subsequent to interrupted growth. J. Anim. Sci. 36: 1057–1062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, R. and Kozub, G. C. 1973. Compensatory growth of beef cattle restricted at two energy levels for two periods. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 53: 709–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, R., Sonntag, B. H. and Kozub, G. C. 1979. Effects of feeding programs and diet energy on rate of gain, efficiency of digestible energy utilization, and carcass grades of steers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 59: 385–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, A. H., Fredeen, H. T. and Weiss, G. M. 1971. Tenderness of beef longissimus dorsi muscle from steers, heifers and bulls as influenced by source, postmortem aging and carcass characteristics. J. Food Sci. 36: 619–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meissner, H. H., Van Staden, J. H. and Pretorius, E. 1982. The description of growth in beef bulls and interpretation of genotypic differences on two dietary treatments. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 12: 331–345.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical Methods. 7th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Sonntag, B. H. and Hironaka, R. 1976. A computer model for diet formulation and selection of a feeding program for cattle. Proc. Conf. Feed Composition, Animal Nutrient Requirements and Computerization of Diets, Utah State Univ.Google Scholar
Sonntag, B. H. and Hironaka, R. 1978. Selecting feeding programs and diets to maximize profits from feedlot cattle. Research Highlights — 1977, pp. 37–39. Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Lethbridge, Alberta.Google Scholar
Whiting, F. 1957. The effect of concentrate to hay ratio and other ration factors on the feedlot performance of beef cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 37: 50–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar