Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:56:05.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency of food utilization in traditional and sex-controlled systems of beef production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. S. Taylor ,
A. J. Moore ,
R. B. Thiessen  and
C. M. Bailey
C. S. Taylor
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
A. J. Moore
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
R. B. Thiessen
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
C. M. Bailey
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Abstract

An empirically based equation for voluntary food intake, obtained from a multibreed cattle experiment, was used to develop formulae for evaluating the overall efficiency of food utilization of beef production n i a production unit consisting of a dam and her progeny. With these formulae the dependence of overall efficiency on degree of maturity at slaughter was studied, with reproductive rate, dam food costs, terminal sire size and number of calvings per dam allowed to vary.

The formulae were used to study efficiency of food utilization in a traditional beef production system. Maximum efficiency values ranged from 2·3 to 3·5 g of lean tissue per MJ of metabolizable energy. These maximum values were affected to a small extent when progeny were slaughtered much earlier or later than the optimal degree of maturity. In a single-sex, bred-heifer (SSBH) system, the maximum value that could be attained with high technological efficiency and a reproductive rate of unity was 5·2 g, which was 0·5 times more efficient than the highest achievable traditional value. With a reproductive rate of 0·85, the highest efficiency value in an SSBH system was 4·8 g.

Overall efficiency of food utilization was also examined in a sex-controlled system where all offspring for slaughter were male and in a modified traditional system where every surplus female was bred once. Both these systems could give higher efficiency (up to 1·08 times) than in a traditional system, but neither could compete with a well-operated SSBH system.

Formulae to deal with multiple births, partial sex control and other factors are given in the APPENDIX.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , June 1985 , pp. 401 - 440
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

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Allen, D. M. 1975. The early calving of heifers and its impact on beef production. In The Early Calving of Heifers and its Impact on Beef Production (ed. Tayler, J. C.), pp. 205–213. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.Google Scholar
Betteridge, K. J., Hare, W. C. D. and Singh, E. L. 1981. Approaches to sex selection in farm animals. In New Technologies in Animal Breeding (ed. Brackett, B. G., Seidel, G. E. Jr and Seidel, S. M.), pp. 109–125. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Boucquè, Ch. V., Fiems, L. O., Cottyn, B. G. and Buysse, F. X. 1980. Beef production with maiden and once-calved heifers. Livest. Prod. Sci. 7: 121–133.Google Scholar
Bowden, D. M. 1977. Growth, reproductive performance and feed utilization of F, crossbred beef heifers calving as 2-year-olds. J. Anim. Sci. 44: 872–882.Google Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Brown, M. A., Frahm, R. R., Morrison, R. D. and McNew, R. W. 1979. Multivariate evaluation of phenotypic relationships between early performance and subsequent productivity in Hereford and Angus cows. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 378–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byerly, T. C. 1967. Efficiency of feed conversion. Science, N.Y. 157: 890–895.Google Scholar
Crowley, J. P. 1973. The facts of once-bred heifer production. In The Maiden Female — a Means of Increasing Meat Production (ed. Owen, J. B.), pp. 8–17. Proc. Symp. Sch. Agric, Univ. Aberdeen, 1972.Google Scholar
Ferrell, C. L. and Jenkins, T. G. 1982. Efficiency of cows of different size and milk production. U.S. Dep. Agric, ARM-NC-24, pp. 12–19.Google Scholar
Fitzhugh, H. A. 1978. Animal size and efficiency, with special reference to the breeding female. Anim. Prod. 27: 393–401.Google Scholar
Foote, R. H. and Miller, P. 1971. What might sex ratio control mean in the animal world? In Sex Ratio at Birth — Prospects for Control (ed. Kiddy, C. A. and Hafs, H. D.), pp. 1–9. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci., Albany, N.Y.Google Scholar
Fyfe, M. H. D. 1973. The economic prospects for the once-bred heifer. In The Maiden Female — a Means of Increasing Meat Production (ed. Owen, J. B.), pp. 18–23. Proc. Symp. Sch. Agric, Univ. Aberdeen, 1972.Google Scholar
Harmsen, W. L. 1975. Experiments with heifers in the Netherlands. In The Early Calving of Heifers and its Impact on Beef Production (ed. Tayler, J. C.), pp. 232–237. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.Google Scholar
Harte, F. J. 1975. System of production of beef from once calved heifers. In The Early Calving of Heifers and its Impact on Beef Production (ed. Tayler, J. C.), pp. 123–127. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.Google Scholar
Kiddy, C. A. and Hafs, H. D. 1971. Sex Ratio at Birth — Prospects for Control. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci., Albany, N.Y.Google Scholar
Klosterman, E. W. and Parker, C. F. 1976. Effect of size, breed, and sex upon feed efficiency in beef cattle. Res. Bull., Ohio Agric. Res. Dev. Center, No. 1088.Google Scholar
Kress, D. D., Hauser, E. R. and Chapman, A. B. 1969. Efficiency of production and cow size in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 29: 373–383.Google Scholar
Large, R. V. 1976. The influence of reproductive rate on the efficiency of meat production in animal populations. In Meat Animals: Growth and Productivity (ed. Lister, D., Rhodes, D. N., Fowler, V. R. and Fuller, M. F.), pp. 43–55. Plenum Press, London.Google Scholar
Lesmeister, J. L., Burfening, P. J. and Blackwell, R. L. 1973. Date of first calving in beef cows and subsequent calf production. J. Anim. Sci. 36: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, C. R., Cartwright, T. C. and Fitzhugh, H. A. Jr, 1975. Systems analysis of sources of genetic and environmental variation in efficiency of beef production: cow size and herd management. J. Anim. Sci. 40: 409–420.Google Scholar
Marlowe, T. J. 1962, Weights and grades of beef cattle and their relation to performance. Bull. Va agric. Exp. Stn, No. 537.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland and Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland. 1975. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Tech. Bull. 33. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Monteiro, L. S. 1969. The relative size of calf and dam and the frequency of calving difficulties. Anim. Prod. 11: 293–306.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1976. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 4, Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 5th ed. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Nicholas, F. W. and Smith, C. 1983. Increased rates of genetic change in dairy cattle by embryo transfer and splitting. Anim. Prod. 36: 341–353.Google Scholar
Notter, D. R., Cundiff, L. V., Smith, G. M., Laster, D. B. and Gregory, K. E. 1978. Characterization of biological types of cattle. VI. Transmitted and maternal effects on birth and survival traits in progeny of young cows. J. Anim. Sci. 46: 892–907.Google Scholar
Notter, D. R., Sanders, J. O., Dickerson, G. E., Smith, G. M. and Cartwright, T. C. 1979. Simulated efficiency of beef production for a midwestern cow-calf-feedlot management system. 1. Milk production. J. Anim. Sci. 49: 70–82.Google Scholar
Shapley, Deborah. 1983. Techniques for sexing embryos now possible. Nature, Lond. 301: 101.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1977. Feeding methods and slaughter criteria. In Crossbreeding Experiments and Strategy of Breed Utilization to Increase Beef Production (ed. Mason, I. L. and Pabst, W.), pp. 377–389. Commission of the European Communities, Kirchberg, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1982. Theory of growth and feed efficiency in relation to maturity in body weight. Proc. 2nd Wld Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Madrid, Vol. V, pp. 218–230.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animal growth. J. Anim. Sci. (In press).Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S., Turner, H. G. and Young, G. B. 1981. Genetic control of equilibrium maintenance efficiency in cattle. Anim. Prod. 33: 179–194.Google Scholar
Thiessen, R. B., Hnizdo, Eva, Maxwell, D. A. G., Gibson, D. and Taylor, St C. S. 1984. Multibreed comparisons of British cattle. Variation in body weight, growth rate and food intake. Anim. Prod. 38: 323–340.Google Scholar
Van Vleck, L. D. 1981. Potential genetic impact of artificial insemination, sex selection, embryo transfer, cloning and selfing in dairy cattle. In New Technologies in Animal Breeding (ed. Brackett, B. G., Seidel, G. E. Jr, and Seidel, S. M.), pp. 221–242. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
White, K. L., Lindner, G. M., Anderson, G. B. and Bondurant, R. H. 1982. Survival after transfer of ‘sexed’ mouse embryos exposed to H-Y antisera. Theriogenology 18: 655–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar