DOCSLIB.ORG

Crossbreeding Beef Cattle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Crossbreeding Beef Cattle RESEARCH BULLETIN 703 APRIL, 1951 Crossbreeding Beef Cattle A Comparison of the· Heref.ord and Aberdeen Angus Breeds and Their Reciprocal Crosses OHIO AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION WOOSTER, OHIO \ .. ' ............. CONTENTS ') ExPEIUlVIENTAL .............. ......................... ... ... .. ...... ...................................... 0 Herd management .. ..... .. ......... .. ..................................... ...... .. .... ... .. 5 Bulls used m the test 6 Cows used 1n the test 7 ~Ianagement of the calves .......................................... ............ 8 RESULTS Gestation periods .............................................................................. 9 Birth weights .... .. ................................. .. .............. .. ............................ .. 10 Gains, birth to weaning ............................................................ 11 Gains on pasture .............. .................... ........................... .. ............... 13 Performance in the feed lot ....................... ... ....... .. ............. 13 Dressing percentage ............................ .. .. .. .... ..... .. ........ .. ............. 15 Car·cass grades ..... ............................ ......................................... .. ...... .. 16 \Veights of the cattle ........... .................................................... 16 Influence of size of bull ......... ....................................... ............ 16 C ALVES LosT Dum 'U THE TEST ....................... ....... ...... .. .... ...... 17 SUMMARY .... ..... ... ..... .. ...... ......................................... ... ... .. ............................ .. 19 Al'PKl\DlX ...... .................. ............................ .. ........ ... 21 REr u\ TED I J!TERA'l'URE .................. ................ .............................. .. ......... 33 Ox ·ruE CovEn: A group of the crossbred heifers, sired by an Angus bull. These \rcre from the seventh calf crop. [ 2 J CROSSBREEDING BEEF CATTLE A Comparison of the Hereford and Aberdeen Angus Breeds and Their Reciprocal Crosses PAUL GERLAUGH, L. E. KUNKLE, and D. C. RIFE* Crossbreeding beef cattle is not new. 1\!Iuch of the earlier crossbreed­ ing work was concerned with carcass yield and quality rather than with production problems, including feed lot performance. Experiences of many commercial hog and lamb producers, as well as experiment station investigations, indicate that crossbreeding has produced desirable feed lot_ animals. In the case of beef cattle, more information was needed relative to the results of crossbreeding. A project was started at the Ohio Station in 1939 to determine, if possible, the advantages and disadvantages of crossing the Aberdeen Angus and Hereford breeds of cattle. All cattle used in the test were purchased from Ohio breeders. The project covered the various phases of producing beef cattle, including the feed­ lot phases. Information on dressing percentage and carcass grades also was obtained. EXPERIMENTAL Twenty-eight each of purebred Aberdeen Angus heifers and pure­ bred Hereford heifers were purchased to serve as the foundation females for the project. All of the heifers were open except three of the Hereford heifers that had been pasture-bred at time of purchase. A few heifers of each breed were replaced the second season because of failure to conceive. After these replacements were made, no more females were added during the test. Eight .calf crops were raised and marketed. During this period, a few cows were lost from death or because of breeding difficulties. (These were losses that might be expected in any breeding herd.) *Graydon W. Brandt, formerly a member of the Department of Animal Husbandry at The Ohio State University, was connected with the project during its organization and early devel· ment. Clark Martin was in charge of the breeding herd and the calves until the calves went to the feedlot. Fred Graber and H all Moats were in charge of the calves during the feed· lot phases. [3] A part of the purebred Hereford heifers from the se~enth calf crop, shown nea'r the end of the feed lot period. All the animals used in the test were negative to the blood test for Brucellosis when purchased. Blood samples were drawn annually before turning the cows to pasture. The herd remained free of Brucellosis throughout the test. One-half of the Angus heifers and one-half of the Hereford heifers were put together and made up herd A. The other half of the heifers of each breed made up herd B. The herds were housed together through­ out the experiment, and because of that, the Herefords were dehorned. The first year, the heifers in herd A were bred to a purebred Angus bull and the heifers in herd B to a purebred Hereford bull. The second year, the cows in herd A were bred to the Hereford bull that was used in herd B the first year. The Angus bull used in herd A the first year was used in herd B the second year. This procedure resulted in pure­ bred Angus calves, purebred Hereford calves and crossbred calves of each cross each year and it overcame seasonal differences. At the end of each two-year period, a new bull of each breed was obtained and the breeding procedure described previously was repeated. Theoretically, this plan would have produced a purebred and a cross­ bred calf from each cow by each of the four pairs of bulls. Practically, the system did not always work because some days in the breeding season more cows were found in heat in one of the herds than could be bred that day while too few were found in the other herd. This frequently resulted in shifting breeding plans. \Vhen this occurred, an attempt was made the following year to regroup the cows to fit the original program. [4] A group of the purebred Angus steers from the seventh calf crop, shown nem· the end of the feed lot period. Herd Management The cows were bred starting in late October. This resulted in the first calves being dropped in late July and continuing through the fall months. A few December and early January calves were born during the test. It seemed desirable to have the calf crop dropped during the late summer and fall because of pasture, feed, and housing conditions and because the cow herd was in the barn at breeding time when daily observations could be maintained. Occasionally, cows came in heat out of breeding season. They were not bred in order to avoid having to use a calf that would not fit well into the test. All cows ran loose in the stables. Outside lots were available and the cows were permitted to run to these outside lots unless the weather became severe. Permanent bluegrass and white clover pastures were available during the grazing season, which usually started about May 10. When pastures became inadequate during late summer, some silage, either corn or hay, was fed. In winter quarters, the cows were usually fed 30 to 35 pounds of corn silage daily per cow, one pound of soybean oil meal and free choice of a mineral mixture and salt. Shredded corn stover was used for both feed and bedding. Mixed clover and timothy hay was used on a few occasions for the cow herd. Because both Angus and Here­ ford cows were together in the stables, no information is available on the relative amounts of feed consumed by the two breeds. [ 5 J The bulls were given a generous allowance of good quality hay and protein supplement. Some grain was fed during the breeding season, and an outside grass paddock was available during both winter and summer. Calf creeps were made available in each of the stables. A ration of silage, hay, corn-and-cob meal, and one-half pound of protein supple­ ment per calf daily was available. The cow herd was weighed before going to pasture and at the close of the grazing season. The bulls were weighed frequently. The calves were weighed at birth and at 4-week intervals, starting in early November. Bull calves were castrated at not more than 8 weeks of age. Bulls Used in the Test All the bulls used were registered. Usually bulls nearing two years of age were purchased. It was attempted to select bulls of medium size for their respective breeds. The first Hereford bull purchased grew noticeably larger than anticipated. The effect of this size factor will be discussed later. The first Angus bull met with an accident early in the second breed­ ing season. A half-brother of similar size and type was obtained as a replacement. ANGUS BULLS Registration Average Number Weight Erwin's Masquerader .. .. ..................... ........... 502,321 1,750 lb. Enchanter of Elmwood 2nd .................. 549,924 1,800 lb. Envision ........ .. ............. ............. .................... .. ........... 557,715 2,000 lb. Buckeye Lad ....................................... .. ............ .... 673,583 1,700 lb. Eerie of Elmwood ................. .......... .. ................ 729,837 1,650 lb. HEREFORD BULLS Each Hereford bull served a two-year period in connection with the test, in this order : Registration Average Number Weight Orleton Lad 16th ......... .. .... ... ......... ............... 2,529,756 2,050 lb. Orleton Lad 51st .......... ...... ................ .......... 2,864,987 1,900 lb. Orleton Lad 139th .. ... ............. .. ............ ... .... 3,590,795 1,650 lb. Orleton Lad 183rd ..... ................................. 4,118,168 1,800 lb. [ 6 ) Cows Used in the Test Twenty-seven Aberdeen Angus cows finished the test. They averaged 1,174 pounds, ranging from 858 to 1444 pounds. Twenty-eight Here­ ford cows finished the test. They averaged 1287 pounds,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Beef Showmanship Parts of a Steer
    Beef Showmanship Parts of a Steer Wholesale Cuts of a Market Steer Common Cattle Breeds Angus (English) Maine Anjou Charolaise Short Horn Hereford (English) Simmental Showmanship Terms/Questions Bull: an intact adult male Steer: a male castrated prior to development of secondary sexual characteristics Stag: a male castrated after development of secondary sexual characteristics Cow: a female that has given birth Heifer: a young female that has not yet given birth Calf: a young bovine animal Polled: a beef animal that naturally lacks horns 1. What is the feed conversion ratio for cattle? a. 7 lbs. feed/1 lb. gain 2. About what % of water will a calf drink of its body weight in cold weather? a. 8% …and in hot weather? a. 19% 2. What is the average daily weight gain of a market steer? a. 2.0 – 4 lbs./day 3. What is the approximate percent crude protein that growing cattle should be fed? a. 12 – 16% 4. What is the most common concentrate in beef rations? a. Corn 5. What are three examples of feed ingredients used as a protein source in a ration? a. Cottonseed meal, soybean meal, distillers grain brewers grain, corn gluten meal 6. Name two forage products used in a beef cattle ration: a. Alfalfa, hay, ground alfalfa, leaf meal, ground grass 7. What is the normal temperature of a cow? a. 101.0°F 8. The gestation period for a cow is…? a. 285 days (9 months, 7 days) 9. How many stomachs does a steer have? Name them. a. 4: Rumen, Omasum, Abomasum, and Reticulum 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded 17 July 2016
    THE AUSTRALIAN WATER BUFFALO MANUAL Barry Lemcke Department of Primary Industry and Resources Northern Territory Government FOREWORD The Australian Water Buffalo Manual is a technical manual for the buffalo farming industry in Australia. Its author, Barry Lemcke, is a Northern Australian livestock scientist with over 42 years of experience, including a career focus on buffalo management research. The Manual reflects the extent of Barry’s knowledge and experience gained over his long career and is written in a style that makes the information accessible for all readers. It includes findings from research undertaken at Beatrice Hill Farm, Australia’s only buffalo research and development facility as well as from Barry’s travels related to the buffalo industry in numerous countries. The success of the dual purpose NT Riverine Buffalo derived from Beatrice Hill Farm, which now have progeny Australia-wide, can be largely attributed to Barry’s knowledge, dedication and persistence. John Harvey Managing Director Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED AACo Australian Agricultural Company ABARES Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences AI Artificial Insemination AMIEU Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union BEF Bovine Ephemeral Fever BHF Beatrice Hill Farm (Northern Territory Government Buffalo Research Facility) BTEC National Brucellosis and Tuberculosis Eradication Campaign (Australia) cv Cultivar DM Dry Matter EEC European Economic Community ESCAS Exporter Supply
    [Show full text]
  • Communicating with the Calf
    12 Communicating with the calf This chapter describes how to interpret the wellbeing of a calf from its behaviour and appearance. The main points in this chapter • Calves give many signals that indicate that they are in good (or poor) health and quick observations by the rearer can help treat any disease conditions early. • It is important for rearers to form bonds with their calves so the calves will cooperate more fully, particularly following treatment for diseases. • It is important for rearers to develop their own ‘dictionary of calf language’. • Rearers should learn to closely observe and interpret changes in both calf appearance and in their normal behaviour, which might be symptomatic of stress. • Calf scours comes in many forms and colours, all of which can be used to help diagnose a cause. • It is important to understand how calves react to people so that rearers’ management practices can be changed accordingly. • Farm owners and managers should communicate with their calf rearers. • Developing a set of standard operating procedures, and writing them down, can help maintain consistency in managing and training new staff in the desired skills of calf rearing. • Contract calf rearers can provide the right motivation and skills to rear calves better than staff on the home farm. Success or failure in raising calves depends to a great extent on the rearers’ attitude to the calves and their ability to react promptly to the calves’ numerous signals (Figure 12.1). Interpreting these signals is a skill that can be easily learnt. Recent developments in calf rearing are directed towards reducing the average time spent with each calf.
    [Show full text]
  • The Water Buffalo: Domestic Anima of the Future
    The Water Buffalo: Domestic Anima © CopyrightAmerican Association o fBovine Practitioners; open access distribution. of the Future W. Ross Cockrill, D.V.M., F.R.C.V.S., Consultant, Animal Production, Protection & Health, Food and Agriculture Organization Rome, Italy Summary to produce the cattalo, or beefalo, a heavy meat- The water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) is a type animal for which widely publicized claims neglected bovine animal with a notable and so far have been made. The water buffalo has never been unexploited potential, especially for meat and shown to produce offspring either fertile or sterile milk production. World buffalo stocks, which at when mated with cattle, although under suitable present total 150 million in some 40 countries, are conditions a bull will serve female buffaloes, while increasing steadily. a male buffalo will mount cows. It is important that national stocks should be There are about 150 million water buffaloes in the upgraded by selective breeding allied to improved world compared to a cattle population of around 1,- management and nutrition but, from the stand­ 165 million. This is a significant figure, especially point of increased production and the full realiza­ when it is considered that the majority of buffaloes tion of potential, it is equally important that are productive in terms of milk, work and meat, or crossbreeding should be carried out extensively any two of these outputs, whereas a high proportion of especially in association with schemes to increase the world’s cattle is economically useless. and improve buffalo meat production. In the majority of buffalo-owning countries, and in Meat from buffaloes which are reared and fed all those in which buffaloes make an important con­ for early slaughter is of excellent quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossbreeding: Considerations and Alternatives in an Evolving Market Nevil C
    ANGUS MEANS BUSINESS. Crossbreeding: Considerations and Alternatives in an Evolving Market Nevil C. Speer, PhD, MBA Western Kentucky University American Angus Association • Page 1 The marginal benefit “ of heterosis isn’t sufficient if it’s associated with the added marginal cost of purchasing genetics that might represent the risk of requiring more time and labor.” hese are good times and challenging No longer are we an industry that times for America’s cattle business. simply crossbreeds cattle to maximize T Record-high prices for cattle. pounds and receive a price based on Unprecedented demand for high-quality market averages. beef. Expanding opportunities to add value Instead, we have set higher standards. to our product both here and abroad. We have become a value-based industry, At the same time, we are faced with concerned with the composition — not uncertainty. There’s drought across much the maximization — of those pounds. of the country. Input costs for feed and Today, the Angus breed is uniquely fuel are higher than ever before. Labor positioned to address many of our costs continue to rise. The high price of industry’s challenges — and to help land makes it next to impossible for many individual producers capitalize on the to expand, let alone enable newcomers to opportunities of a value-added marketplace. enter the business. Cattlemen can leverage the Angus In the following pages, these challenges database — the most extensive and and opportunities are explored by animal comprehensive of its kind — to select for scientist Dr. Nevil Speer of Western calving ease (to reduce labor costs, death Kentucky University.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Hippopotamus
    Husbandry Guidelines for the Common Hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius Mammalia: Hippopotamidae Author: Rebecca Jones Date of Preparation: 2008 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Course Name and Number: Certificate III Captive Animals - 1068 Lecturer: Graeme Phipps 1 DISCLAIMER 2 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS WARNING This animal is classified as DANGEROUS and is capable of inflicting a potentially fatal injury. Caution should be taken when working with the Hippopotamus, Hippopotamus amphibius. Keepers are not to work in the enclosure with these animals and are to carry a working two-way radio at all times. There should be two padlocked gates between keepers and these animals when working in their enclosures. There should be appropriate signage on the outside of exhibits and nightyards identifying them as dangerous animals. Hazards to keepers when working with Hippopotamuses fall into several categories; physical, chemical, biological, manual handling, psychological and radiation. These hazards as well as preventative measures are outlined in Table 1.0. Table 1.0 – Hazards Associated with Working with Hippopotamuses and Preventative Measures to Avoid Injury. Hazard category Type of Hazard Preventative Measures Physical Large canine tusks – injury Keepers are not to work in through bite. Large size the enclosure with these and speed – injury through animals and are to maintain crush or trampling. two padlocked gates between them and the animal when working in enclosures. Thorough staff training. Chemical Exposure to chemicals used Use PPE (Personal in cleaning – Wonderclean, Protective Equipment) Bleach. Medicines for when handling chemicals treatment and diet and have Material Safety supplements. Data Sheet (MSDS) in proximity. Ensure medicines and supplements are labeled correctly and read instructions.
    [Show full text]
  • Enterprise Budget, Bison Cow-Calf
    Enterprise Budget: Thomas Foulke BISON Steven J. Torok Cow-Calf Tex Taylor Short Grass Prairie, Eastern Wyoming Edward Bradley B-1092 January 2001 Authors: Thomas Foulke, Information Specialist, University of Wyoming College of Agriculture De- partment of Agricultural and Applied Economics, P.O. Box 3354, Laramie, WY 82071 Steven J. Torok, Associate Professor, University of Wyoming College of Agriculture Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, P.O. Box 3354, Laramie, WY 82071 David Taylor, Professor, University of Wyoming College of Agriculture Department of Ag- ricultural and Applied Economics, P.O. Box 3354, Laramie, WY 82071 Ed Bradley, Professor, University of Wyoming College of Agriculture Department of Agri- cultural and Applied Economics, P.O. Box 3354, Laramie, WY 82071 Editor: Hattie Penny, College of Agriculture, Office of Communications and Technology Graphic Designer: Tana Stith, College of Agriculture, Office of Communications and Technology Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Glen Whipple, Director, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071. Persons seeking admission, employment, or access to programs of the University of Wyoming shall be considered without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, age, political belief, veteran status, sexual orientation, and marital or familial status. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication or program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact their local UW CES Office. To file a complaint, write the UW Employment Practices/Affirmative Action Office, University of Wyoming, P.O. Box 3434, Laramie, Wyoming 82071-3434.
    [Show full text]
  • Beef Cow-Calf Management Guide, EM 8827
    Archival Copy. For current information, see the OSU Extension Catalog:https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu EM 8827 • Reprinted April 2004 $3.00 Beef Cow-Calf Management Guide J.R. Jaeger, G.J. Pirelli, and D.W. Weber This management calendar provides guidelines for health, nutrition, and reproductive management procedures for the cow-calf producer. It begins with a brief discussion of production goals and general factors related to reproduction, nutrition, and health. It then presents specific recommenda- tions, organized into a yearly production cycle consisting of four periods: • Lactation, breeding, and pregnancy • Midgestation and weaning • Precalving • Calving The recommended management activities would occur at the same time in the production cycle regardless of whether you utilize spring or fall calving. Many practices are suggested in this publica- tion; we encourage you to use the ones that best fit your operation. Additional management practices might be required in certain locations. Contact • Strive for a 90 to 95 percent calf crop. Percent- university Extension professionals or a local age calf crop is based on the number of calves veterinarian for more information. weaned compared to the number of cows exposed to artificial insemination or bulls during Suggested production goals the breeding season ({calves weaned ÷ cows • Make every effort to maintain cows and replace- exposed} x 100 = % calf crop). ment heifers at the proper body condition score • The calving interval for each cow should be no for each stage of the yearly production cycle. greater than 365 days. Doing so will make it easier to attain the • In the first 21 days of the calving season, try to remaining production goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Raising Calves for Slaughter
    DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE RESEARCH & EXTENSION Agriculture and Natural Resources University of Arkansas System FSA3143 Raising Calves for Slaughter Shane Gadberry Rural landowners are often in farm tours to see where the beef Associate Professor interested in raising livestock to was produced. Buyers of locally grown slaughter for either personal beef are in part making their buying consumption or local marketing. decision based on their perception of Brian See Advantages to raising your own beef how calves should be reared. If calves Marion County Extension include having control over calf don’t have access to summer shade or quality and choice of how the calf is winter shelter, someone will eventually Agent - Agriculture finished out. Calves can be grown-out make it a point to ask. on grass only, grass plus grain or John Jennings mostly grain. There are disadvantages Water. One farm-raised beef marketer noted that questions about Professor to consider when fattening your own beef, including the need to purchase a water source and cleanliness were the calf, extra labor for feeding, sufficient most common questions received on Paul Beck land set aside for forage-finishing, their farm tour with clients. Earthen Professor purchasing expensive feedstuffs for ponds are a good source of water for grain-finishing or purchasing freezers pasture-finished beef, but buyers may to store the beef after slaughter. not like the idea of calves idling in Jason Apple Calves can also get sick and may ponds. Creating limited-access Professor require veterinary attention. Also, watering points can restrict calves keep in mind that if you are the senti­ from standing idle in ponds and also mental type or if you have children protect pond banks from eroding.
    [Show full text]
  • Twin Calf Production in Water Buffaloes Following Non-Surgical Transfer of in Vitro-Produced-Vitrified Embryos
    Philippine Journal of Science 137 (2): 99-104, December 2008 ISSN 0031 - 7683 Twin Calf Production in Water Buffaloes Following Non-Surgical Transfer of in vitro-produced-vitrified Embryos Danilda Hufana-Duran*1,3,4, Prudencio B. Pedro1,2, Apolinario L. Salazar Jr.1 Hernando V. Venturina1, Peregrino G. Duran1, Yoshiyuki Takahashi3, Yukio Kanai4, and Libertado C. Cruz1 1Philippine Carabao Center, Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, 3120 Philippines 2Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines 3Laboratory of Theriogenology, Department of Veterinary and Clinical Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 060-0818 Japan 4Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8572 Japan Twinning in buffalo cows is only about 0.01%. Effecting twin pregnancies by transferring more than one embryo of different developmental stages was tested. Cumulus-oocyte complexes collected from slaughterhouse-derived ovaries were matured and fertilized in vitro. Presumptive zygotes were cultured, on Day 6-7, developed blastocysts stage embryos were removed, frozen by vitrification, and stored in liquid nitrogen. After 2 to 5 months, 130 embryos were warmed; 72 were cultured in vitro to test for viability while 58 were non-surgically transferred in two's (n= 20 recipients) or three's (n = 6 recipients) to 26 buffalo cows. No significant difference was observed on post-warming survival rate of the embryos at different developmental stages with 85-88% hatched within 72 h of in vitro culture. Embryo transfer resulted to birth of one twin (3.8%) and five single births (19.2%) presenting 23.1% (6/26) calving rate. This demonstrates the possibility of enhancing twinning in buffaloes by embryo transfer techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Charolais X Hereford Crossbred Cattle in Eastern Oregon
    Performance of Hereford and Charolaisx HerefordCrossbred Cattle in Eastern Oregon r Station Bulletin 603 June 1966 Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University, Corvallis Contents Page Results of Trials 3 Introduction 4 Methods and Procedures 5 First Generation Cross 6 Birth to weaning 6 Post-weaning and yearling 8 Feedlot performance 9 Carcass characteristics 11 Cooking tests and flavor evaluations 11 \Veight comparisons of females 11 Second Generation Cross 13 Calf production comparisons 13 Post-weaning and yearling performance 14 AUTHORS: Joe D. Wallace is Assistant Professor of Animal Sci- ence, R. J. Raleigh is Associate Professor of Animal Nutrition, and W. H. Kennick is Assistant Professor of Animal Science, Oregon State University. The authors wish to thank Lois A. Sather, Depart- ment of Food Science and Technology, Oregon State University, for her assistance in conducting cooking and flavor tests. '2 Performance of Hereford and Charolais x Hereford Crossbred Cattle in Eastern Oregon JOE D. WALLACE, R. J. RALEIGH, and W. H. KENNICK Results of Trials When Hereford cows were mated to Crossbred carcass roasts required a Charolais bull: lesscooking time, had smaller Crossbred calves were 8 pounds cooking losses, and were essen- heavier at birth, 48 pounds heav- tially equal in flavor qualities to ier at weaning, gained .2 pound roasts from Hereford carcasses. more per day during suckling pe- Crossbred females averaged about riod, but graded slightly lower at 100 pounds heavier than Here- weaning than straightbred Here- fords from1 year through 31 ford calves. years of age. Crossbreds gained .3 pound more per day on a \Tjnter growing ra- tion as weaners and .36 pound When first-cross Charolais x Here- more per day on summer range asford heifers were bred to Hereford yearlings than Herefords.
    [Show full text]
  • Beef Cattle Production
    Beef Cattle Production Introduction odern domestic cattle evolved from a single early ancestor, the aurochs, and Mremains of domesticated cattle dating to 6,500 B.C. have been found in Turkey and other sites in the Near East. Domestication of cattle followed sheep, goats, pigs, and dogs. Early cattle were multi-purpose, providing meat, milk, and labor to their owners. Currently in the U.S., cattle are selected more for the single purpose of meat production, or in some cases, production of milk as well. The Beef Cattle Industry is not a single entity. In contrast to other intensive animal agriculture systems, very little vertical integration exists in the beef cattle industry. As a result, each phase of production is operated by different Bruce Hoar, UC Davis WIFSS individuals. Throughout the country, beef cattle are raised under a tremendous variety of different management inputs, environmental settings, and production intensities. Beef Cattle Production • Page 22 Cattle Terminology A variety of terms are commonly used in the beef industry. Having a functional knowledge of these terms is important when communicating with beef cattle producers. Backgrounder Operation (also referred to Cattle Grazing in Backgrounder Operation as a ‘stocker’ or ‘grower’operation) A type of beef cattle rearing operation in which weaned younger/lighter weight steer calves and weaned heifer calves that are not being kept as future breeding cows are raised to about 12 to 16 months of age while grazing on inexpensive feed sources such as grass or other forages. Animals develop lean muscle mass and increased body frame/size prior to entering a feedlot while on these operations.
    [Show full text]