Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T00:43:52.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of beef breeds for rangeland weaner production in Zimbabwe 2. Productivity of crossbred cows and heterosis estimates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

H. P. R. Tawonezvi
Affiliation:
Matopos Research Station, Private Bag K 5137, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
H. K. Ward
Affiliation:
Matopos Research Station, Private Bag K 5137, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
J. C. M. Trail
Affiliation:
International Livestock Centre For Africa, Po Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
D. Light
Affiliation:
International Livestock Centre For Africa, Po Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Get access

Abstract

Crossbred cows were evaluated for reproductive performance and live weight, and for pre-weaning growth and viability of progeny sired by seven unrelated breeds. They were also evaluated on overall productivity expressed as weight of weaned calf per cow mated per year, per 100 kg of cow per year and per 100 kg metabolic weight of cow per year. The cows comprised reciprocals of Africander with Mashona, Nkone, Brahman and Sussex, one-way crosses sired by Sussex out of Mashona, Nkone and Brahman dams, and by Charolais out of Africander, Mashona, Nkone, Brahman and Sussex dams. These represented sanga × sanga, sanga × zebu, Bos taurus × sanga, Bos taurus × zebu and Bos taurus × Bos taurus crossbred types. Bos taurus × zebu crosses were superior to other breed types for all the three productivity indices and for virtually all the individual components of these. There was little difference between the other four breed types in overall productivity of components of these. Differences between reciprocals were observed in sanga × sanga and sanga × zebu, cows with Africander dams being more productive than reciprocals with Mashona, Nkone and Brahman dams. The Bos taurus × Bos taurus cross was inferior in overall productivity primarily due to large cow weight and relatively low growth rate of progeny. Progeny sired by Friesian, Simmental and Brahman had higher weaning weights than those sired by Hereford, Aberdeen Angus, Africander and Tuli. Overall, heterosis was positive for all traits and averaged 0·15 for the three measures of cow productivity. Heterosis was three times higher in the Bos taurus × Bos indicus cross than in the Bos indicus crosses.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

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

Borstlap, C. W. R. Z. 1969. A comparative study of the growth potentiality, slaughter weight, carcass measurements and economical value of ten breeds of cattle at the Omatjenne Experimental Station. Second World Conference on Animal Production, Beltsville, Maryland, USA.Google Scholar
Cartwright, T. C., Ellis, G. F., Krush, W. E. and Crouch, E. K. 1964. Hybrid vigor in Brahman-Hereford crosses.Texas Agriculture Experiment Station Technical Monograph 1.Google Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Trail, J. C. M., Marplks, H. J. S. and Kakonge, J. 1985. Heterosis and breed effects on maternal and individual traits of Bos indicus breeds of cattle. Journal of Animal Science 60: 11751180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harvey, W. R. 1977. User's guide for least-squares and maximum likelihood computer program. Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Koger, M. 1973. Summary. In Crossbreeding Beef Cattle, Series 2 (ed. Koger, M., Cunha, T. J. and Warnick, A. C.), pp. 434447. Florida University Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Koger, M., Peacock, F. M., Kirk, W. G. and Crockett, J. R. 1975. Heterosis effects on weaning performance of Brahman-Shorthorn calves. Journal of Animal Science 40: 826833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Light, D., Buck, N. G. and Lethola, L. L. 1982. The productive performance, mothering ability and productivity of crossbred and Tswana beef cows in Botswana. Animal Production 35: 421426.Google Scholar
Long, C. R. 1980. Crossbreeding for beef production: experimental results. Journal of Animal Science 51: 11971223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Botswana. 1981. Ten Years of Animal Production and Range Research in Botswana. Animal Production Research Unit, Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone, Botswana.Google Scholar
Plasse, D. 1983. Crossbreeding results from beef cattle in the Latin America tropics. Animal Breeding Abstracts 51: 779797.Google Scholar
Preston, T. R. and Willis, M. B. 1974. Intensive Beef Production. 2nd ed. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Tawonezvi, H. P. R., Ward, H. K., Trail, J. C. M. and Light, D. 1988. Evaluation of beef breeds for weaner production in Zimbabwe. 1. Productivity of purebred cows. Animal Production 47: 351359.Google Scholar
Thorpe, W. and Cruickshank, D. K. R. 1979. Productivities of cattle breeds in Zambia: results of research at Central Research Station, Mazabuka, 1965 to 1977, and at Mochipapa Regional Research Station, Choma, 1972 to 1978. Overseas Development Administration, London.Google Scholar
Thorpe, W., Cruickshank, D. K. R. and Thompson, R. 1981. Genetic and environmental influences on beef cattle production in Zambia. 4. Weaner production from purebred and reciprocally crossbred dams. Animal Production 33: 165177.Google Scholar
Trail, J. C. M., Buck, N. G., Light, D., Rennie, T. W., Rutherford, A., Miller, M., Pratchett, D. and Capper, B. S. 1977. Productivity of Africander, Tswana, Tuli and crossbred beef cattle in Botswana. Animal Production 24: 5762.Google Scholar
Venter, H. A. W., Eloff, H. P. and Ludemann, F. 1980. The efficiency of Afrikaner, Bonsmara, Simmental and Hereford cattle in a sub-tropical environment. International Journal of Biometerology 24: 149155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar