Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T11:24:34.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and carcass composition of Friesian, Limousin × Friesian and Blonde d'Aquitaine × Friesian steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. G. Keane ,
G. J. More O'Ferrall  and
J. Connolly
M. G. Keane
Affiliation:
An Foras Talúntais, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Republic of Ireland
G. J. More O'Ferrall
Affiliation:
An Foras Talúntais, Grange, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Republic of Ireland
J. Connolly
Affiliation:
An Foras Talúntais, 19 Sandymount Avenue, Dublin 4, Republic of Ireland
Get access

Abstract

One hundred and twenty spring-born steers comprising 40 Friesians (FR), 40 Limousin × Friesians (LM), and 40 Blonde d'Aquitaine ' Friesians (BL), were reared together from shortly after birth to slaughter at a mean age of 771 days. They were at pasture in summer and were housed and offered grass silage plus concentrates in winter. All were implanted with anabolic agents. During the finishing winter, there was a 3 (breed types) ' 2 (3 or 6 kg concentrates per day) ' 2 (94 or 181 day finishing period) factorial arrangement of treatments.

Slaughter weights per day of age, carcass weights per day of age and carcass weights of FR, LM and BL were 846, 828 and 866 (s.e. 8·0) g, 464, 476 and 497 (s.e. 4·9) g and 358, 368 and 385 (s.e. 3·8) kg respectively. LM had lower carcass length, carcass depth, leg length and leg width values than FR or BL but when these measurements were expressed per kg carcass weight the values for LM and BL were similar. Both LM and BL had better carcass conformation than FR, and BL had a lower carcass fat score than either FR or LM between which there was no difference. FR, LM and BL had carcass lean, fat and higher-priced lean proportions of 634, 669 and 685 (s.e. 3·7), 185, 168 and 144 (s.e. 3·7) and 352, 361 and 361 (s.e. 1·4) g/kg respectively.

Increasing the concentrate level from 3 to 6 kg per day increased side weight by 9·6 kg (P < 0·001). This consisted of 0·6 kg bone, 3·3 kg lean and 5·7 kg fat. Extending the finishing period from 94 to 181 days increased side weight by 30·3 kg (P < 0·001). This consisted of 2·6 kg bone, 12·0 kg lean and 15·7 kg fat. Allometric regression coefficients for side lean, bone and fat weights on side weight were not significantly affected by breed type or concentrate level. The coefficients for lean, bone and fat were 0·80 (s.e. 0·04), 0·58 (s.e. 0·05) and 2·27 (s.e. 0·16) respectively. The coefficients for weights of lean in the hind-shin, fore-shin, fillet and brisket on side lean weight were 0·8 or lower. The corresponding coefficients for silverside, inside round, knuckle, rump and strip-loin were between 0·8 and 1·0 while the flank, shoulder, neck, chuck, plate, fore-rib and cube-roll had coefficients in the range 1·0 to 1·5.

Type
Papers
Information
Animal Production , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , April 1989 , pp. 353 - 365
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

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

Andersen, B. B. and Andersen, H. R. 1974. Genotype-environment interaction for beef production traits in dual purpose cattle breeds. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 24: 335–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, B. B., Liboriussen, T., Kousgaard, K. and Buchter, L. 1977. Crossbreeding experiment with beef and dual-purpose sire breeds on Danish dairy cows. III. Daily gain, feed conversion and carcass quality of intensively fed young bulls. Livestock Production Science 4: 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, H. R. 1975. The influence of slaughter weight and level of feeding on growth rate, feed conversion and carcass composition of bulls. Livestock Production Science 2: 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, R. T., Andersen, B. B. and Liboriussen, T. 1978a. Growth of bovine tissues. 1. Genetic influences on growth patterns of muscle, fat and bone in young bulls. Animal Production 26: 245–258.Google Scholar
Berg, R. T., Andersen, B. B. and Liboriussen, T. 1978b. Growth of bovine tissues. 2. Genetic influences on muscle growth and distribution in young bulls. Animal Production 27: 51–61.Google Scholar
Conway, A. 1968. Grazing management in relation to beef production. V. Effect of feeding supplements to beef cattle on pasture at two intensities of stocking. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 7: 105–120.Google Scholar
De boer, H., Dumont, B. L., Pomeroy, R. W. and Weniger, J. H. 1974. Manual on E.A.A.P. reference methods for the assessment of carcass characteristics in cattle. Livestock Production Science 1: 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FOOD. 1987. Approved A.I. Beef Bull List. Department of Agriculture and Food, Dublin.Google Scholar
Drennan, M. J. 1979. Compensatory growth in cattle. 1. Influence of feeding level during the first winter (9 to 14 months of age) on subsequent performance and carcass composition. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 18: 131–143.Google Scholar
Drennan, M. J. and Harte, F. J. 1979. Compensatory growth in cattle. 2. Influence of growth rate in the calf stage (birth to 8 months) and during the first winter (8 o t 13 months) on subsequent performance and carcass composition. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 18: 145–156.Google Scholar
Drennan, M. J. and Keane, M. G. 1987a. Responses t o supplementary concentrates for finishing steers fed silage. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 26: 115–127.Google Scholar
Drennan, M. J. and Keane, M. G. 1987b. Concentrate feeding levels for unimplanted and implanted finishing steers fed silage. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 26: 129–137.Google Scholar
Ferrell, C. L., Kohlmeier, R. H., Crouse, J. D. and Glimp, H. 1978. Influence of dietary energy, protein and biological type of steer upon rate of gain and carcass characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 46: 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flynn, A. V. 1981. Systems of beef production from dairy herd calves. In Calf to Beef. Handbook Series No. 17, pp. 1–3. An Foras Taluntais, Dublin.Google Scholar
Flynn, A. V. 1985. Beef production from Friesian calves. Veterinary Update 1: 34–36.Google Scholar
Fredeen, H. T., Martin, A. H., Weiss, G. M., Slen, S. B. and Sumption, L. J. 1972. Feedlot and carcass performance of young bulls representing several breeds and breed crosses. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 52: 241–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geay, Y. and Robelin, J. 1979. Variation of meat production capacity in cattle due to genotype and level of feeding: genotype-nutrition interaction. Livestock Production Science 6: 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keane, M. G. and Drennan, M. J. 1980. Effects of diet type and feeding level on performance, carcass composition and efficiency of Friesian steers serially slaughtered. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 19: 53–66.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G., Flynn, A. V. and Harte, F. J. 1986. Responses to sequential use of different anabolic agents n i young bull, young steer and two-year-old steer beef systems. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 25: 153–166.Google 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
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A. and SMITH. R. J. 1976. Variation in lean distribution among steer carcasses of different breeds and crosses. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 87: 533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J. and Southgate, J. R. 1984. Beef breed comparisons in the U.K. Livestock Production Science 11: 491–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lalande, G. and Fahmy, M. H. 1975. A note on performance traits of crossbred beef × dairy steers finished on fast- and slow-gaining feeding regimes. Animal Production 21: 81–84.Google Scholar
More O'Ferrall, G. J. and Keane, M. G. 1987. Beef production from the dairy herd. In Breeding Dairy Cattle Under Quota Restrictions, pp. 66–75. An Foras Taluntais, Dublin.Google Scholar
Mukhoty, H. and Berg, R. T. 1971. Influence of breed and sex on the allometric growth patterns of major bovine tissues. Animal Production 13: 219–227.Google Scholar
Mukhoty, H. and Berg, R. T. 1973. Influence of breed and sex on muscle weight distribution of cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 81: 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riordan, E. B. and Mellon, K. 1978. Beef carcass classification as an aid to prediction of carcass value. Irish Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology 7: 9–32.Google Scholar
Riordan, E. B., Schwer, S. J. and Godson, C. 1978. Beef Cuts Code: Specifications for Cutting and Trimming of Beef. An Foras Taluntais, Dublin.Google Scholar
Smith, G. M., Laster, D. B., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1976. Characterization of biological types of cattle. II. Postweaning growth and feed efficiency of steers. Journal of Animal Science 43: 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982a. A comparison of the progeny of British Friesian dams and different sire breeds in 16- and 24-month beef production systems. 1. Live-weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 34: 155–166.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982b. A comparison of different breeds and crosses from the suckler herd. 1. Live-weight growth and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 35: 87–98.Google Scholar
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 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. 1. Live-weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. Animal Production 46: 353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1986. The effect of plane of nutrition and type of diet offered to yearling Friesian steers during a winter store period on subsequent performance. Animal Production 42: 29–37.Google Scholar