Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T12:24:00.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative methods of testing Hereford × Friesian progeny groups for growth and carcass characters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

P. D. P. Wood  and
John Hodges
P. D. P. Wood
Affiliation:
Milk Marketing Board, Thames Ditton, Surrey
John Hodges
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Get access

Summary

Ways of conducting a progeny test for growth of carcass characters are discussed with reference to statistical efficiency. An intensive system (375 kg slaughter weight) is compared with a semi-intensive system (475 kg slaughter weight) and the use of intermediate results as predictors of the final outcome is discussed.

The crossbred progeny of 32 Hereford bulls (1043 calves) were admitted to a Progeny Testing Centre at 2-month intervals at 2 weeks of age over a period of 2 years, and divided between the two feeding regimes. Growth and carcass characters were measured, including taste panel assessments.

The semi-intensive system was found to have a higher power of discrimination between progeny groups, and tended to rank the bulls i n a different order from the intensive system. Truncation of the test at various intervals introduced an element of risk into the formation of the final judgement and showed little advantage as a predictor.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , June 1976 , pp. 287 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1976

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

Brown, C. J. 1965. Some factors affecting gain of beef bulls. J. Anim. Sci. 24: 287 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Hazel, L. N. 1943. The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics, Princeton 28: 476–490.Google Scholar
Jobst, D. and Wood, P. D. P. 1968. A note on the seasonal effect on the growth rate of Hereford cross Friesian male calves. Anim. Prod. 10: 491–493.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M. 1970. Comparison of fattening and carcass performance of cattle in relation to intensive and commercial fattening methods. Arch. Tierz. 13: 413–424.Google Scholar
Lagos, F. and Cartwright, T. C. 1963. Sire-environmental interaction of gain in cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 22: 820 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Mason, I. L., Vial, V. E. and Thompson, R. 1972. Genetic parameters of beef characters and the genetic relationship between meat and milk production in British Friesian cattle. Anim. Prod. 14: 135–148.Google Scholar
Milk Marketing Board. 1965. Progeny testing dairy beef. Rep. Breed. Prod. Org. Milk Mktg Bd, No. 15, pp. 50–53.Google Scholar
Smith, G., O'Mary, C. C. and Ensminger, M. E. 1961. Rate of gain and feed efficiency within specific weight increments in growing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 20: 911 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Wood, P. D. P. 1970. Factors affecting accuracy in the evaluation of progeny tests of growth rate in cattle. Anim. Prod. 12: 585–590.Google Scholar