DOCSLIB.ORG

Guidelines for Uniform Beef Improvement Programs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guidelines for Uniform Beef Improvement Programs Guidelines For Uniform Beef Improvement Programs Ninth Edition Revised March, 2018 “To develop cooperation among all segments of the beef industry in the compilation and utilization of performance records to improve efficiency, profitability and sustainability of beef production.” First Edition 1970 Second Edition 1972 Third Edition 1976 Fourth Edition 1981 Fifth Edition 1986 Sixth Edition 1990 Seventh Edition 1996 Eighth Edition 2002 Ninth Edition 2010 Guidelines is a publication of the Beef Improvement Federation, Jane Parish, Executive Director, NMREC Prairie Research Unit, PO Box 60, Prairie, MS 39756 www.beefimprovement.org REVISION LOG TO NINTH EDITION March 2018 Page: Description/Modification: 72 Corrected Accuracy Conversion September 2016 Page: Description/Modification: 21 Corrected Age of Dam Range in days 34 Bovine Respiratory Disease Complex -----------------------------BIF Guidelines i------------------------- CONTRIBUTORS Editors Larry V. Cundiff, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, ARS, USDA, L. Dale Van Vleck, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, ARS, USDA and the University of Nebraska William D. Hohenboken, Virginia Tech Chapter 1, Introduction Ronnie Silcox, University of Georgia Chapter 2, Breeding Herd Evaluation Bill Bowman, American Angus Association Bruce Golden, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Lowell Gould, Denton, Texas Robert Hough, Red Angus Association of America Kenda Ponder, Red Angus Association of America Robert E. Williams, American International Charolais Association Lauren Hyde, North American Limousin Foundation Chapter 3, Animal Evaluation Denny Crews, Colorado State University Michael Dikeman, Kansas State University Sally L. Northcutt, American Angus Association Dorian Garrick, Iowa State University Twig T. Marston, University of Nebraska Michael MacNeil, Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Lab., ARS, USDA, Larry W. Olson, Clemson University Joe C. Paschal, Texas A&M University Gene Rouse, Iowa State University Bob Weaber, University of Missouri Tommy Wheeler, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Steven Shackelford, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Robert E. Williams, American International Charolais Association Doyle E. Wilson, Iowa State University -----------------------------BIF Guidelines 1------------------------- Chapter 4, Biotechnology Sue DeNise, Pfizer Animal Genetics Bridger Feuz, MMI Genomics Ronnie D. Green, Pfizer Animal Genetics Tom Holm, MMI Genomics Stephen D. Kachman, University of Nebraska Michael Tess, Montana State University Chapter 5, National Cattle Evaluation Keith Bertrand, University of Georgia Larry Cundiff, Agricultural Research Service, USDA Bruce Golden, Colorado State University Stephen D. Kachman, University of Nebraska Richard Quaas, Cornell University Dale Van Vleck, University of Nebraska Robert E. Williams, American International Charolais Association Chapter 6, Utilization Darrh Bullock, University of Kentucky Mark Enns, Colorado State University Lowell Gould, Red Angus Association of America Mike MacNeil, Agricultural Research Service, USDA Dan Moser, Kansas State University Gary P. Rupp, University of Nebraska Glossary John Hough, EPD International Ronnie Silcox, University of Georgia ________________________________________________________________ Acknowledgments The Beef Improvement Federation acknowledges, with appreciation, the efforts of the many committee members and authors who have contributed to previous editions of Guidelines for Uniform Beef Improvement Programs. It was the work of these people over the last fifty-two years that laid the foundation for this publication. -----------------------------BIF Guidelines 2------------------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2 Breeding Herd Evaluation ................................................................ 6 Chapter 3 Animal Evaluation .......................................................................... 16 Chapter 4 Biotechnology ................................................................................ 57 Chapter 5 National Cattle Evaluation .............................................................. 66 Chapter 6 Utilization ........................................................................................ 84 Glossary Beef Performance Glossary ......................................................... 106 Appendix 1.1 BIF Member Breed Organizations ............................................... 127 Appendix 2.1 NAAB Uniform Coding System for Identifying Semen ................. 129 Appendix 2.2 International Year/Letter Designations for Animal Identification .. 134 Appendix 3.1 BIF Standard Adjustment Factors for Birth & Weaning weight .... 135 Appendix 3.2 Marbling Scores and Quality Grades in the U.S. and Canada ..... 136 Appendix 4.1 Incorporation of Marker Scores into National Genetic Evaluations .... ..................................................................................................... 138 Appendix 5.1 National Cattle Evaluation Methods ............................................. 146 Appendix 5.2 Heritabilities and Selected Genetic Correlations Used in NCE Programs for Several U.S. Breed Associations .......................... 157 Appendix 5.3 Threshold Traits ........................................................................... 158 Appendix 5.4 Genetic Evaluation of Survival Traits ........................................... 165 Appendix 5.5 Analytical Models for Across-Breed Factors ................................ 170 Appendix 6.1 Guidelines for the Bull Breeding Soundness Examination as Recommended by the Society for Theriogenology ...................... 173 Index ..................................................................................................... 177 -----------------------------BIF Guidelines 3------------------------- CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION The Beef Improvement Federation was formed on February 1, 1968 to standardize programs and methodologies and to create greater awareness, acceptance and usage of beef cattle performance concepts. The purposes of BIF as expressed in its by-laws are: Uniformity – To work for establishment of accurate and uniform procedures for measuring, recording and assessing data concerning the performance of beef cattle which may be used by participant organizations. Development – To assist member organizations and/or their affiliates in developing their individual beef improvement and quality management programs consistent with the needs of their members and the common goals of such generally accepted record keeping programs. Cooperation – To develop cooperation among all segments of the beef industry in the compilation and utilization of performance records to improve efficiency, profitability and sustainability of beef production. Education – To encourage the Federation’s member organizations to develop educational programs emphasizing the use and interpretation of performance data and quality management programs in improving the efficiency, profitability and sustainability of beef production. Confidence – To develop the increased confidence of the beef industry in the economic potential available from performance measurement and assessment. BIF is a federation comprised of member organizations that include: Provincial, state and national beef cattle improvement associations and other organizations that sponsor beef cattle improvement. Breed associations in the United States and Canada that are involved in performance programs. Other organizations involved in beef improvement such as the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Association of Animal Breeders, and artificial insemination organizations. Associate memberships are available to individuals or agencies interested in beef cattle performance. -----------------------------BIF Guidelines 4------------------------- The ninth edition of Uniform Guidelines for Beef Improvement Programs represents a legacy of work that spans over fifty years of cooperation among the various segments of the beef cattle industry. The first edition of Guidelines was published in 1970 and it was revised in 1972, 1976, 1981, 1986, 1990, 1996, 2002 and 2010. Committees established by the BIF Board of Directors develop recommendations based on scientific research results and industry experience. Through the years Guidelines has evolved as new information has become available. Contributing authors have updated, revised or added sections in this edition based on BIF committee recommendations. The Guidelines are published primarily to assist member organization in the development and operation of performance programs for their members. The objectives of this publication are to outline standard procedures for measuring, recording and using beef cattle performance data and to facilitate greater uniformity in terminology and methodology in the beef industry. BIF shows no preference for, or discrimination against, any breed of cattle or industry organization. The Guidelines contain recommended procedures. BIF does not mandate or dictate that any organization follow all or any of these recommendations. There are situations where individual organizations can develop procedures that are more suitable for their members. For example, this publication contains BIF’s weaning weight adjustment factors. Most associations, while adopting the BIF standard adjustment ages of 205 and 365, have used their extensive databases to develop
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Using Beef Cattle Genetics to Manage
    Tall Fescue Endophyte Toxicosis in Beef Cattle: Clinical Mode of Action and Potential Mitigation through Cattle Genetics Richard Browning, Jr., Ph.D. Cooperative Agricultural Research Program Tennessee State University Nashville, TN 37209-1561 INTRODUCTION Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) is the most commonly used cultivated grass in the United States to feed beef cattle. Tall fescue is a cool-season perennial grass that many cattle producers ‘can’t live with, but can’t live without’ because of its hardiness and good forage yields, but adverse effects on cattle well-being and yields. The history of this forage and its effects on animal performance have been extensively reviewed (Hemken et al., 1984; Bacon et al., 1986; Stuedemann and Hoveland, 1988; Porter and Thompson, 1992; Stuedemann and Thompson, 1993; Porter, 1994; Bacon, 1995; Paterson et al., 1995). Tall fescue was unintentionally introduced from Europe sometime in the 1800s. Early university research on growing tall fescue in the U.S. began between 1907 and 1918 in Oregon and in Kentucky in 1931 (Alderson and Sharp, 1993). Tall fescue, primarily the Kentucky-31 variety, was planted across the U.S. throughout the 1940s and 1950s because of its excellent growth under various environmental stressors. Tall fescue may be found across the eastern half of the U.S. and the Pacific Northwest covering an estimated 25 to 40 million acres of pasture and hayland. It has been estimated that over 90% of tall fescue pastures in the U.S. are infected with the fungal endophyte Neotyphodium coenophialum (Bacon and Siegel, 1988; Glenn et al., 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Crossbreeding of Cattle in Africa
    Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences June 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 16-31 ISSN: 2334-2404 (Print), 2334-2412 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/jaes.v7n1a3 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jaes.v7n1a3 Crossbreeding of Cattle in Africa R Trevor Wilson1 Abstract Africa is endowed with a very wide range of mostly Bos indicus indigenous cattle breeds. A general statement with regard to their performance for meat or milk is that they are of inferior genetic value. Attempts to improve their performance have rarely relied on within-breed improvement but have concentrated on crossing to supposedly superior exotic Bos taurus types. Exotic types have not always – indeed have rarely -- been chosen on objective criteria and the imported breeds generally indicate the colonial past of individual African countries rather than on use of “the right animal in the right place”. Most attempts at increasing output have been undertaken under research station conditions. Results on station have been very variable but the limited success achieved has rarely been carried over in to the general African cattle population. This paper documents a number of attempts to alter the genetic make-up of African cattle in several countries and discusses the reasons for the failure of most of these. Keywords: Bos indicus, Bos taurus, livestock experiments, milk production, meat production 1. Introduction African countries differ greatly in climatic, ecological and agricultural conditions and in socioeconomic factors. In many countries, nonetheless, cattle are the most important livestock species.
    [Show full text]
  • Type and Breed Characteristics and Uses
    E-190 3/09 Texas Adapted Genetic Strategies for Beef Cattle V: Type and Breed Characteristics and Uses A 1700s painting of the foundation cow of one of the first cattle breeds. Courtesy of Michigan State University Animal Science Department. Stephen P. Hammack* he subject of breeds intrigues most beef cattle sphere. The Bos taurus in the United States originated in producers. However, breeds are only part of a ge- the British Isles and western continental Europe. The Bos netic strategy that should include: indicus arose in south central Asia. T• Matching applicable performance or functional There are some intermediates containing both Bos levels to environmental, management, and taurus and Bos indicus. Some intermediates created in the marketing conditions United States, particularly in Texas, are commonly re- • Choosing a breeding system, either continuous ferred to as American breeds, which will be discussed later. (in which replacement females are produced Although it has no strict definition, a breed can be within the herd) or terminal (in which replace- described as animals of common origin with certain dis- ments are introduced externally) tinguishing characteristics that are passed from parent • Selecting genetic types, breeds within types, and individuals within breeds that are compat- *Professor and Extension Beef Cattle Specialist–Emeritus, The Texas A&M System ible with the performance level needed and breeding system chosen. Genetic classifications and breeds Cattle can be divided into two basic classifications, Bos taurus (non-humped) and Bos indicus (humped, also called Zebu). Cattle are not native to the western hemi- to offspring. Breed characteristics result from To characterize milking potential accurately, both natural selection and from that imposed it should be evaluated relative to body size.
    [Show full text]
  • Postweaning Growth and Carcass Traits in Crossbred Cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano Maternal Grandsires E
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Center Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska 2010 Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires E. Casas USDA, ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] R. M. Thallman USDA-ARS Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] L. A. Kuehn USDA- ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] L. V. Cundiff US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/hruskareports Casas, E.; Thallman, R. M.; Kuehn, L. A.; and Cundiff, L. V., "Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires" (2010). Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. 374. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/hruskareports/374 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published December 4, 2014 Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires1,2 E. Casas,3 R. M. Thallman, L. A. Kuehn, and L. V. Cundiff USDA, ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, NE 68933 ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to char- est marbling scores when compared with other grand- acterize breeds representing diverse biological types for sire breeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Choice Choose the Answer That Best Completes Each Statement Or Question
    Name Date Hour 5 The Beef Cattle Industry Multiple Choice Choose the answer that best completes each statement or question. _______ 1. Early settlers primarily used cattle as ____ . A. work animals B. a source of meat C. a source of milk D. symbols of wealth _______ 2. The modern cattle industry is concentrated in the ____ . A. South and Midwest B. South and Southwest C. North and Northwest D. North and Midwest _______ 3. Cattle drives were necessary in the past because of the lack of ____ . A. retail stores B. refrigeration C. slaughterhouses D. year-round grazing _______ 4. Which beef cattle breed is known for its solid black color and excellent meat quality? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 5. Which beef cattle breed is from northern England and was often called a Durham after the county in which it originated? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina Introduction to Agriscience | Unit 5 Test CIMC 1 _______ 6. Which beef cattle breed originated in England and was originally much larger, weighing more than 3,000 pounds, than it is today? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 7. Which beef cattle breed is red with a white face and may also have white on the neck, underline, legs, and tail switch? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 8. Which beef cattle breed is one of the oldest breeds in the world and originated in Italy? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 9. Which beef cattle breed originated in central France and was developed as a dual-purpose breed and is typically white or off-white in color? A.
    [Show full text]
  • Proc1-Beginning Chapters.Pmd
    Implications of Breed Type Evaluations Larry V. Cundiff Research Leader, Genetics and Breeding Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Agricultural Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Clay Center, NE ()(,) Introduction 23.3 Quality, quantity, and cost of feed resources available for beef production vary from one region of the country to another and within regions, depending upon climatic factors and natural 23.3 resources available in specific production 14.8 situations. Diversity among breeds can be exploited by crossbreeding to optimize performance levels 8.5 and to match genetic resources with the climatic environment, feed resources, and consumer Percent preferences for lean and tender beef products. 8.5 Crossbreeding also provides for significant benefits 14.8 of heterosis on components of production efficiency. In this presentation, research results will be reviewed focusing on effects and utilization of 8.5 8.5 heterosis and breed differences, and on the importance of matching genetic potential with Straightbred Straightbred X-bred consumer preferences and the climatic cows cows cows environment. straightbred X-bred X-bred calves calves calves Heterosis Figure 1. Cumulative effects of heterosis for weight of calf weaned per cow exposed to breeding in crosses A crossbreeding experiment involving of Hereford, Angus, and Shorthorns (Cundiff et al., Herefords, Angus, and Shorthorns demonstrated 1974). that weaning weight per cow was increased by about 23% (Cundiff et al., 1974) due to beneficial was significantly greater than that of either effects of heterosis on survival and growth of straightbred Angus or Herefords (Nunez et al., crossbred calves and on reproduction rate and 1991; Cundiff et al., 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • For Immediate Release Brangus Are Not “Eared” Cattle
    For Immediate Release Contact: Doc or Patricia Spitzer FAIR PLAY, SC [email protected] or November 8, 2011 (864)972-9140 or (864)710-0257 Brangus Are Not “Eared” Cattle First and foremost we need to wrap our minds around the fact that God created cattle, he did not create breeds. And while in some cases natural barriers such as oceans and mountain ranges did affect genetic selection, for the most part it is humans who created breeds. And, if you go back far enough in history there really are no pure breeds, only our inflated misconceptions that they exist. That being said, there are two species that make up all cattle of the world; Bos Taurus cattle are primarily cattle populations that originated in the more temperate climates and Bos Indicus cattle populations developed in the more tropical regions of the world. Generally the US beef industry further subdivides Bos Taurus beef cattle into two groups. Continental Breeds of cattle are those breeds originating on the European Continent while British Breeds were originally from selections of bovine populations from the British Isle. It is also typical of US producers to wrongly lump all Bos Indicus breeds of cattle together. This is rather astounding as there are more recognized different breeds of Bos Indicus derivation scattered around the world than specific breeds of Bos Taurus derivation. Americans have also further compounded the confusion by creating new breeds by crossing a variety of specifically recognized Bos Indicus cattle to create the American Brahman and crossing cattle of Bos Indicus and Bos Taurus origin to create what some refer to as the American Breeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing SNP Panels and Statistical Methods for Estimating Genomic Breed Composition of Individual Animals in Ten Cattle Breeds
    He et al. BMC Genetics (2018) 19:56 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-018-0654-3 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Comparing SNP panels and statistical methods for estimating genomic breed composition of individual animals in ten cattle breeds Jun He1,2†,YageGuo1,3†, Jiaqi Xu1,4, Hao Li1,5,AnnaFuller1, Richard G. Tait Jr1,Xiao-LinWu1,5* and Stewart Bauck1 Abstract Background: SNPs are informative to estimate genomic breed composition (GBC) of individual animals, but selected SNPs for this purpose were not made available in the commercial bovine SNP chips prior to the present study. The primary objective of the present study was to select five common SNP panels for estimating GBC of individual animals initially involving 10 cattle breeds (two dairy breeds and eight beef breeds). The performance of the five common SNP panels was evaluated based on admixture model and linear regression model, respectively. Finally, the downstream implication of GBC on genomic prediction accuracies was investigated and discussed in a Santa Gertrudis cattle population. Results: There were 15,708 common SNPs across five currently-available commercial bovine SNP chips. From this set, four subsets (1,000, 3,000, 5,000, and 10,000 SNPs) were selected by maximizing average Euclidean distance (AED) of SNP allelic frequencies among the ten cattle breeds. For 198 animals presented as Akaushi, estimated GBC of the Akaushi breed (GBCA) based on the admixture model agreed very well among the five SNP panels, identifying 166 animals with GBCA = 1. Using the same SNP panels, the linear regression approach reported fewer animals with GBCA = 1.
    [Show full text]
  • ISAG Programme Abs Am.Indd
    30 S0001 – S0016 Invited Speaker Abstracts INVITED SPEAKERS S0001–S0016 31 S0001 The power of comparative genetics and genomics S0004 Finding the causal variant in selective sweeps Kerstin Linbald-Toh. Elinor Karlsson. Broad Institute, USA; Uppsala University, Sweden. Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA. The human genome contains hundreds of regions with patterns of genetic variation that refl ect recent, positive natural selection, yet for most the underlying gene and S0002 Using intra-species variation to understanding basic the advantageous mutation remain unknown. We have developed a method, the biology Composite of Multiple Signals (CMS), that, by combining multiple different tests for natural selection, increases our resolution by up to 100-fold. By applying CMS to the International Haplotype Map, we localize hundred signals, reducing the candidate Ewan Birney. region for each to just ~50-100kb. In many cases, we can identify the precise gene EMBL Outstation – Hinxton, European Bioinformatics Institute, Welcome Trust Genome and polymorphism targeted by selection. This includes genes involved in infectious Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, United Kingdom. disease susceptibility, skin pigment, metabolism, and hair and sweat. Nearly half Quantitative genetics based on large, outbred populations has had a long history in of the ~200 regions we localized contain no genes at all, and 13 contain long, non- both animal breeding and human disease studies. It is one of the few techniques coding RNAs, which can regulate nearby genes. In several regions we signifi cantly which one can apply to understand a complex phenotype when nothing else is known associate variants under selection with the expression of nearby genes.
    [Show full text]
  • Purebred Livestock Registry Associations
    Purebred livestock registry associations W. Dennis Lamm1 COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICE no. 1.217 Beef Devon. Devon Cattle Assn., Inc., P.O. Box 628, Uvalde, TX 78801. Mrs. Cammille Hoyt, Sec. Phone: American. American Breed Assn., Inc., 306 512-278-2201. South Ave. A, Portales, NM 88130. Mrs. Jewell Dexter. American Dexter Cattle Assn., P.O. Jones, Sec. Phone: 505-356-8019. Box 56, Decorah, IA 52l01. Mrs. Daisy Moore, Amerifax. Amerifax Cattle Assn., Box 149, Exec. Sec. Phone: 319-736-5772, Hastings, NE 68901. John Quirk, Pres. Phone Friesian. Beef Friesian Society, 213 Livestock 402-463-5289. Exchange Bldg., Denver, CO 80216. Maurice W. Angus. American Angus Assn., 3201 Freder- Boney, Adm. Dir. Phone: 303-587-2252. ick Blvd., St. Joseph, MO 64501. Richard Spader, Galloway. American Galloway Breeders Assn., Exec. Vice. Pres. Phone: 816-233-3101. 302 Livestock Exchange Bldg., Denver, CO 80216. Ankina. Ankina Breeders, Inc., 5803 Oaks Rd,. Cecil Harmon, Pres. Phone: 303-534-0853. Clayton, OH 45315. James K. Davis, Ph.D., Pres. Galloway. Galloway Cattle Society of Amer- Phone: 513-837-4128. ica, RFD 1, Springville, IA 52336. Phone: 319- Barzona. Barzona Breeders Assn. of America, 854-7062. P.O. Box 631, Prescott, AZ 86320. Karen Halford, Gelbvieh. American Gelbvieh Assn., 5001 Na- Sec. Phone: 602-445-2290. tional Western Dr., Denver, CO 80218. Daryl W. Beefalo. American Beefalo Breeders, 1661 E. Loeppke, Exec. Dir. Phone: 303-296-9257. Brown Rd., Mayville 22, MI 48744. Phone: 517-843- Hays Convertor. Canadian Hays Convertor 6811. Assn., 6707 Elbow Dr. SW, Suite 509, Calgary, Beefmaster.
    [Show full text]
  • A Compilation of Research Results Involving Tropically Adapted Beef Cattle Breeds
    A COMPILATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS INVOLVING TROPICALLY ADAPTED BEEF CATTLE BREEDS S-243 and S-277 Multistate Research Projects Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin 405 http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops_livestock/livestock/beef_cattle/breeding_genetics/trpoical+breeds.htm Contact information: Dr. David G. Morrison, Associate Director Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station P. O. Box 25055 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70894-5055 Phone: 225-578-4182 FAX: 225-578-6032 Email: [email protected] ISBN: 1-58161-405-5 State Agricultural Experiment Stations do not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, religion, national origin, age, disability, or veteran status in provision of educational opportunities or employment opportunities and benefits. - 1 - Preface The Southern region of the U.S. contains approximately 42% of the nation’s beef cows and nearly 50% of its cow-calf producers. The region’s environment generally can be characterized as subtropical, i.e. hot, humid summers with ample rainfall supporting good forage production. Efficient cow-calf production in the humid South is dependent on heat and parasite tolerance and good forage utilization ability. Brahman and Brahman-derivative breeds generally possess these characteristics and excel in maternal traits. Consequently, they have been used extensively throughout the Southern Region in crossbreeding systems with Bos taurus breeds in order to exploit both breed complementarity and heterosis effects. However, several characteristics of Brahman and Brahman crossbred cattle, such as poor feedlot performance, lower carcass quality including meat tenderness, and poor temperament, whether real or perceived can result in economic discounts of these cattle. Therefore, determining genetic variation for economically important traits among Brahman and Brahman-derivative breeds and identifying tropically adapted breeds of cattle from other countries that may excel in their performance of economically important traits in Southern U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hungarian Grey Cattle Breed
    THE HUNGARIAN GREY CATTLE BREED THE HUNGARIAN GREY CATTLE BREED A technical publication Second revised edition Subsidised by Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development FVM BU DA PEST 2004 LIMITED EDITION This book is the No. Authors: Imre BODO´ , István GERA and Gábor KOPPÁ´ NY Translation: Béla BORSOS Lector: György KOVA´ CS Puplished by: ASSOCIATION OF THE HUNGARIAN GREY CATTLE BREEDERS (A Ma gyar Szür ke Szar vas mar hát Te nyész tôk Egye sü le te) Budapest, 2004 Printing: PASSZER LTD, Budapest Book design & tipography: Katalin GYULAI The Hungarian Grey cattle breed CONTENTS Introduction 1. page 7 History of the Hungarian Grey cattle 2. page 9 2. 1. The origin of the breed..........................................................................................page 9 2. 2. The age of prosperity..............................................................................................page 10 2. 3. Turkish times...............................................................................................................page 11 2. 4. Decline.............................................................................................................................page 11 2. 5. The breed issue...........................................................................................................page 12 2. 6. Breed districts .............................................................................................................page 14 2. 7. The years after World War I.............................................................................page
    [Show full text]