Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:49:43.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of eleven cattle breeds for crossbred beef production: carcass data from males slaughtered at two ages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. A. Morris ,
R. L. Baker ,
A. H. Carter  and
S. M. Hickey
C. A. Morris
Affiliation:
MAFTech, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Ruakura Agricultural Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand
R. L. Baker
Affiliation:
MAFTech, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Ruakura Agricultural Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand
A. H. Carter
Affiliation:
MAFTech, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Ruakura Agricultural Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand
S. M. Hickey
Affiliation:
MAFTech, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Ruakura Agricultural Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand
Get access

Abstract

An experiment was carried out to compare sire breeds for carcass traits and to estimate heritabilities and phenotypic and genetic correlations. There were 1908 male cattle from 5 birth years. The sire breeds, each evaluated over three locations, were Blonde d'Aquitaine, Charolais, Chianina, Limousin, Maine Anjou, Simmental (four strains: Austrian, French (Pie Rouge), Swiss and West German) and South Devon (i.e. seven imported breeds) and Angus, Friesian, Hereford and Jersey (four local breeds), with a total of 161 sires represented. Each location contained Angus cows and additionally one location contained Hereford cows. Proportionally 0·72 of the cattle were slaughtered at about 20 months of age, whilst random samples from each of the first 4 years were retained for slaughter at about 31 months of age.

Sire breeds ranked similarly for live weight at 13 months of age and for pre-slaughter weights at both 20 and 31 months of age. Relative to the Hereford-cross, the seven imported breeds were proportionally 0·054 to 0·072 heavier at slaughter (depending on slaughter age) and they had 0-065 to 0·077 heavier carcasses. Dressing proportions for the Blonde d'Aquitaine, Chianina and Limousin sire breeds were higher by at least 0007 units than for the Hereford-cross. The seven imported breeds were all leaner and had larger areas of m. longissimus than the Hereford-cross cattle. Friesian-crosses also had high live or carcass weights although they were intermediate for fat depth.

The interaction of sire and dam breeds were only significant for fat depth (both slaughter ages) and for pre-slaughter and hot carcass weights (31-month slaughter age only). Interactions between sire breed and location were not important.

Heritability estimates on data adjusted to a slaughter age of 595 days were: pre-slaughter weight 0·29, hot carcass weight 0·28, dressing proportion 0·14, fat depth 0·03 and m. longissimus area 0·30. Corresponding values on cattle whose records were adjusted to an age of 935 days were 0·56, 0·44, 0·39, 0·37 and 0·29. These values were from cattle grazed on pasture, and were generally lower than those from America (from cattle offered high energy rations). Phenotypic correlations among all pairs of traits were positive, whilst genetic correlations were positive for all pairs except those involving fat depth (where standard errors were large).

Keywords

beef cattlecarcass compositioncarcass weightcrossbreedingheritability
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , February 1990 , pp. 79 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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. Recommended Procedures for Use in the Measurement of Beef Cattle and Canasses. ARC, London.Google Scholar
Baker, R. L., Carter, A. H., Morris, C. A. and Johnson, D. L. 1990. Evaluation of eleven cattle breed s for crossbred beef production: performance of progfny. UP to thirteen months of age. Animal Production 50: 63–77.Google Scholar
Baker, R. L., Carter, A. H. and Muller, J. P. 1981. Performance of crossbred cows in the Ruakura beef breed evaluation trial. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society Animal Production 41: 254–266.Google Scholar
Barton, R. A. 1970. Consumer preferences and the ciassification and grading of beef carcasses. In New Zealand Beef Production, Processing and Marketing (ed. Campbell, A. G.), pp. 423–443. New Zealand oinstitute of Agricultural Science, Wellington.Google Scholar
Bass, J. J.Carter, A. H.Johnson, D. L., Baker, R. L. and Jones, K. R. 1981. Sire-breed composition of steers composition from Angus dams. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 97: 515–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cundiff, L. V., Gregory, K. E., Koch, R. M. and Dickerson, G. E. 1986. Genetic diversity among cattle breeds and its use to increase beef production efficiency in a temperate environment. Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Vol. 9, pp. 271–282.Google Scholar
Everitt, G. C., Jury, K. E., Dalton, D. C. and Langridge, M. 1980. Beef production from the dairy herd. IV. Growth and carcass composition of straight-bred and beef-cross Friesian steers in several environments. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D. L., Baker, R. L., Morris, C. A., Carter, A. H. and Hunter, J. C. 1986. Reciprocal crossbreeding of Angus and Hereford cattle. 2. Steer growth and carcass traits. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 29: 433–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Southgate, J. R. 1982a. A comparison of the progeny of British Friesian dams and different sire breeds in 16- and 24-month beef production systems. 2. Carcass characteristics, and rate and efficiency of meat gain. Animal Production 34: 167–178.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Southgate, J. R. 1982b. A comparison of different breeds and crosses from the suckler herd. 2. Carcass characteristics. Animal Production 35: 99–111.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Southgate, J. R. 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. 2. Carcass characteristics, and rate and efficiency of lean gain. Animal Production 46: 365–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1982. Heritabilities and genetic, environmental and phenotypic correlations of carcass traits in a population of diverse biological types and their implications in selection programs. Journal of Animal Science 55: 1319–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Dikeman, M. E., Allen, D. M., May, M., Crouse, J. D. and Campion, D. R. 1976. Characterization of biological types o f cattle. HI. Carcass composition, quality and palatability. Journal of Animal Science 43: 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, C. A., Baker, R. L., Wilson, J. A. and Jones, K. R. 1987. Effects of eleven dam breed-types and si × terminal sire breeds on beef carcass characteristics. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 30: 469–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
New Zealand Meat Producers' Board. 1975. Guide to the Revised Grade Symbols for New Zealand Meat. New Zealand Meat Producers' Board, Wellington.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. and Thompson, R. 1971. Recovery of inter-block information when block sizes are unequal. Biometrika 58: 545–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. M. and Barlow, R. 1981. Growth and carcass characteristics of crossbred and straightbred Hereford steers. II. Carcass measurements and composition. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 32: 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, E. G., Fowke, P. J., Bass, J. J. and Butler-hogg, B. W. 1986. New Zealand beef export carcass grading. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 46: 63–66.Google Scholar