Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:43:25.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Initial growth rates of Charolais cross and Hereford cross steer and heifer calves on two methods of rearing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. G. Lowman ,
N. A. Scott ,
C. E. Hinks  and
E. A. Hunter
B. G. Lowman
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
N. A. Scott
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
C. E. Hinks
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
E. A. Hunter
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JZ
Get access

Abstract

Over 3 years a total of 204 bucket-reared calves (from Holstein/Friesian dams) and 187 suckled calves (from Hereford × Friesian dams) were monitored during the first 9 or 6 months of life respectively. Within each rearing system there were approximately equal numbers of calves sired by Charolais and Hereford bulls and also about equal numbers of heifer and steer calves. All breeds and sexes within each rearing system were managed as a single group.

Differences in daily live-weight gain from arrival (January) for the bucket-reared calves and from birth (April) for the suckled calves through to the autumn were significantly different at 0·66 and 1·01 kg/day respectively (P < 0·001). By comparison, differences in growth rate between sex and breed within each rearing system were small. Hereford cross calves from both systems however carried significantly more condition in the autumn compared with Charolais crosses (P < 0·01).

The results suggest that when animals are reared on the same plane of nutrition and given similar management, differences in initial growth rate between early and late maturing breeds and sexes may be less than those perceived by commercial producers the views of whom are influenced by the fact that the types are often managed differently in practice.

Keywords

calvesgrowth raterearing techniques
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , April 1993 , pp. 201 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1993

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

Allen, D. and Kilkenny, B. 1980. Planned beef production. Granada Publishing, London.Google Scholar
Haycock, R. E. and Stewart, D. A. 1973. A comparison of the Charolais, British Friesian and Hereford breeds as sires of crossbred single-suckled calves for beef production. Animal Production 17: 267–273.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. and Drennan, M. J. 1987. Lifetime growth and carcass composition of heifers and steers non-implanted or sequentially implanted with anabolic agents. Animal Production 45: 359–369.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G., More O'Ferrall, G. J. and Connolly, J. 1989. Growth and carcass composition of Friesian, Limousin × Friesian and Blonde D'Aquitaine × Friesian steers. Animal Production 48: 353–365.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1990. Genstat 5 reference manual. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. A. and Somerville, S. H., 1976. Condition scoring of cattle. Revised edition. Bulletin, East of Scotland College of Agriculture, no. 6.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1990. MLC yearbook 1990. Meat and Livestock Commission, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1991. MLC yearbook 1991. Meat and Livestock Commission, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Milk Marketing Board. 1990. Dairy facts and figures. Federation of Milk Marketing Boards, Thames Ditton.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982a. A comparison of the progeny of British Friesian dams and different sire breeds in 16- and 24-month beef production systems. 1. Live-weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 34:155–166.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982b. A comparison of different breeds and crosses from the suckler herd. 1. Live-weight growth and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 35: 87–98.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1988. Evaluation of British Friesian, Canadian Holstein and beef breed × British Friesian steers slaughtered over a commercial range of fatness from 16-month and 24-month beef production systems. 1. Live-weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 46: 353–364.Google Scholar