Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:29:40.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative evaluation of beef cattle breeds of African, European and Indian origins. 1. Live weights and heterosis at birth, weaning and 18 months

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. E. Frisch  and
C. J. O'Neill
J. E. Frisch
Affiliation:
CSIRO Division of Tropical Animal Production, Tropical Beef Centre, PO Box 5545, Rockhampton Mail Centre, Queensland 4702, Australia
C. J. O'Neill
Affiliation:
CSIRO Division of Tropical Animal Production, Tropical Beef Centre, PO Box 5545, Rockhampton Mail Centre, Queensland 4702, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Cattle breeds of African, European and Indian origins are being evaluated at Rockhampton for their suitability for beef production in northern Australia. In the current study, Belmont Adaptaur (HS), Belmont Red (AX) and Belmont BX (BX) dams were mated to produce straightbreds and crossbred progeny by Brahman (B), Boran (Bo) and Tuli (Tu) sires. B dams were mated to produce straightbreds and crossbred progeny by AX, BX, Bo, Charolais (Ch), HS and Tu sires. This paper reports values for heterosis for some crosses and live weights on pasture for some straightbred and crossbred genotypes at birth, at weaning and at 18 months.

Heterosis for birth weights was greatest for taurine dam breed × indicine sire breed, generally negative for the reciprocal cross and markedly less for Tu-sired than for B- or Bo-sired progeny. Heterosis was not estimated for Bo and Tu crosses at weaning or at 18 months. At these ages, heterosis for growth includes a component related to resistance to environmental stresses. Thus, heterosis was then greater for B crossbreds derived from the less resistant HS than from the more resistant AX.

There were significant differences between genotypes in live weights at each age. Progeny by B sires from taurine dams had higher live weights than progeny by Bo or Tu sires. Evidence is presented that strongly indicates that the difference in growth rates between the B- and Bo-sired progeny arose entirely from differences in mature live weights of the B and Bo, not from differences in efficiency of growth of their crossbred progeny. Similarly, live weights of progeny by taurine sires from B dams ranked according to the mature live weights of the sire breeds. Thus, the Ch- and Tu-sired progeny had the highest and lowest live weights at all ages respectively. Comparative growth potentials of the indicine sire breeds were estimated by comparing 18-month live weights of progeny from HS dams. Relative to Bo = 100, growth potential of B = 205. Similarly, growth potentials of the taurine sire breeds were estimated from progeny from B dams. Relative to Tu = 100, the estimates were HS = 104, AX = 111 and Ch = 117. Crossbred progeny by B and Bo sires were generally significantly heavier at all ages than the corresponding straightbreds. However, Tu-sired progeny had similar birth weights too, but generally higher weaning and 18-month live weights than, the corresponding straightbreds. Relatively low birth weight and low heterosis for birth weight identify the Tu as a potentially useful sire breed when an increase in birth weight of crossbreds is undesirable.

Within each dam breed, no straightbred could match the growth rate of the best crossbred. At 18 months this advantage was proportionately 0·21, 0·09, 0·05 and 0·16 over that of the straightbred HS, AX, BX and B respectively. Live weight of every crossbred based on B dams exceeded that of the straightbred B, the most populous breed in northern Australia. Thus, increases in growth rates could be achieved by crossbreeding irrespective of the base breed. Live weights at 18 month for progeny of Bo, Tu and AX sires from B dams, all of which exceeded those of the straightbred B, suggest that the African breeds can be used to complement the B in crossbreeding programmes in northern Australia.

Keywords

birth weightbreed differencesheterosistropical cattleweaning weight
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , August 1998 , pp. 27 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Baker, J. F. 1996. Effect of Tuli, Brahman, Angus, and Polled Hereford sire breeds on birth and weaning traits of offspring. Journal of Animal Science 74: (suppl. 1) 124.Google Scholar
Cartwright, T. C. 1973. Comparison of F1 cows with purebreds and other crosses. In Crossbreeding beef cattle, series two (ed. Koger, M., Cunha, T. J. and Warnick, N. C.). University of Florida Press, Gainsville, Florida.Google Scholar
Chase, C. C, Olson, T. A., Hammond, A. C. and Menchaca, M. A. 1996. Effect of tropically adapted sire breed on preweaning calf performance. Journal of Animal Science 74: (suppl. 1) 13.Google Scholar
Cundiff, L. V., Gregory, K. E., Wheeler, T. L., Shackelford, S. D., Koohmaraie, M., Freetly, H. C. and Lunstra, D. P. 1995. Preliminary results for cycle V of the cattle germplasm evaluation program at the Roman L Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. Progress report no. 14, USDA ARS, 07 1995.Google Scholar
Frisch, J. E. 1981. Changes occurring in cattle as a consequence of selection for growth rate in a stressful environment. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96: 23–38.Google Scholar
Frisch, J. E. 1990. More meat in the northern sandwich. Agricultural Science (Special issue): International Agriculture, pp. 71–77.Google Scholar
Frisch, J. E., Drinkwater, R., Harrison, B. and Johnson, S. 1997. Classification of the southern African sanga and East African shorthorned zebu. Animal Genetics 28: 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, J. E. and O'Neill, C. J. 1998. Comparative evaluation of beef cattle breeds of African, European and Indian origins. 2. Resistance to cattle ticks and gastrointestinal nematodes. Animal Science 67: 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1989. Beef cattle breed resource utilization. Brazilian Journal of Genetics 12: (suppl. 3) 55–80.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, M. J., Meyer, K. and Hetzel, D. J. S. 1991. Genetic variation and covariation for growth, parasite resistance and heat tolerance in tropical cattle. Livestock Production Science 27: 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Neill, C. J. and Frisch, J. E. 1998. Consequences of selection in two Bos taurus breeds in the tropics. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, Australia, vol. 25, pp. 223–226.Google Scholar
Plasse, D., Fossir, H., Hoogesteyn, R., Verdo, O., Rodriguez, R., Rodriguez, C. and Bastidas, P. 1995. Growth of F1 Bos taurus × Bos indicus versus Bos indicus beef cattle in Venezuela. I. Weights at birth, weaning and 18 months. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 112: 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowan, K. J. and Josey, M. J. 1995. Birth weights and survival to weaning of calves from Hereford dams sired by Hereford, Brahman, Boran and Tuli. Proceedings of the Australian Association of Animal Breeding and Genetics 11: 698.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical methods, seventh edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1992. SAS users' guide, statistics, version 6 edition. SAS First Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar