Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:13:16.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Productivity and carcass composition of Friesian, Meuse-Rhine-Issel (MRI) × Friesian and Belgian Blue × Friesian steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. G. Keane
M. G. Keane
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Grange Research Centre, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Ireland
Get access

Abstract

One hundred and twenty spring-born steers, comprising 40 Friesians (FR), 40 Meuse-Rhine-lssel (MRI) × Friesians (MR), and 40 Belgian Blue × Friesians (BB) were reared together from 3 weeks of age to the start of their second winter. During the second winter there was a 3 (FR, MR and BB breed types) × 2 (3 kg and 6 kg supplementary concentrates per head daily with grass silage ad libitum) × 2 (96- and 220-day finishing periods) factorial arrangement of treatments (10 animals per subgroup). Carcass weights and grades were recorded after slaughter at the end of the second winter, and one side from each of 96 carcasses (eight per subgroup) was dissected into bone, muscle, intermuscular fat and subcutaneous fat. A sample of m. longissimus from the 10th rib was chemically analysed. Slaughter weights and carcass weights per day from arrival to slaughter were 796, 813 and 828 (s.e.d. 11·7) g and 419, 440 and 457 (s.e.d. 7·1) g for FR, MR and BB, respectively. Corresponding carcass weights were 314, 329 and 342 (s.e.d. 4·5) kg. BB had better conformation than both FR and MR. BB also had a lower carcass fat score, lower proportions of bone, intermuscular fat and subcutaneous fat, a higher proportion of muscle and muscle with higher proportion of moisture and a lower proportion of lipid than FR and MR. The higher level of concentrates increased side iveight by 8 kg, but the overall effects on carcass composition were small. The longer finishing period increased side weight by 25 kg and was associated with significantly reduced proportions of bone and muscle and an increased proportion of fat. Allometric regression coefficients for carcass weight on slaughter weight, and for bone, muscle and fat weights on side weight were 1·19, 0·39, 0·80 and 2·16, respectively. It is concluded that despite the better carcass conformation of MR, there was little difference in carcass and muscle composition between FR and MR. BB, in addition to having a higher growth rate and better carcass conformation than FR, also had more muscle in the carcass, more of the total muscle in the higher value joints and a lower proportion of lipid in the muscle. It was calculated that FR, MR and BB would have similar proportions of separable fat in the carcass at approximate carcass weights of 300, 320 and 400 kg, respectively.

Keywords

beef cattlecarcass compositioncattle breedsgrowth
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , October 1994 , pp. 197 - 208
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

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
Baber, P. L., Rowlinson, P., Willis, M. B. and Chalmers, A. J. 1984. A comparison of Canadian Holstein × British Friesian and British Friesian steers for beef production. 2. Carcass characteristics. Animal Production 38: 407–415.Google 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
Berg, R. T., Andersen, B. B. and Liboriussen, T. 1978c. Growth of bovine tissues. 3. Genetic influences on patterns of fat growth and distribution in young bulls. Animal Production 27: 63–70.Google Scholar
Berg, R. T. and Butterfield, R. M. 1976. New concepts of cattle growth. University of Sydney Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
Callow, E. H. 1948. Comparative studies of meat. 2. The changes in the carcass during growth and fattening, and their relation to the chemical composition of the fatty and muscular tissues. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 38: 174–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinquart, A., Eenaeme, C. van, Istasse, L., Korsak, N., Baldwin, P. and Bienfait, J. M. 1992. Effect of breed on lipid metabolism in growing-fattening bulls. 2. Fatty acid composition in the carcass. Animal Production 54: 496–497 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. 1982. European Communities (Beef Carcass Classification) Regulations. Council Regulations 1358/80, 1208/81, 1202/82. Commission Regulations 2930/81,563/82,1557/82.Google Scholar
De Boer, H., Dumont, B. L., Pomeroy, R. W. and Weniger, J. H. 1974. Manual on EAAP reference methods for the assessment of carcass characteristics in cattle. Livestock Production Science 1: 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drennan, M. J. and Keane, M. G. 1987. Responses to supplementary concentrates for finishing steers fed silage. Irish journal of Agricultural Research 26: 115–127.Google Scholar
Flynn, A. V. 1985. Beef production from Friesian calves. Veterinary Update 1: 34–36.Google 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
Istasse, L., Eenaeme, C. van, Baldwin, P., MaghuinRogister, G. and Bienfait, J. M. 1989. Animal performance, plasma hormones and metabolites in Holstein and Belgian Blue growing fattening bulls. Animal Production 48: 657 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. and Drennan, M. J. 1990. Two-year-old beef production from Friesian and Friesian cross steers. Beef scries no. 9, Tcagasc, Dublin.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. and More O'Ferrall, G. J. 1988. Effects of implantation with anabolic agents, slaughter age and feeding level on growth and carcass composition of Friesian and Holstein × (Holstein × Friesian) steers. Irish journal of Agricultural Research 27: 1–11.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G. and More O'Ferrall, G. J. 1992. Comparison of Friesian, Canadian Hereford × Friesian and Simmental × Friesian steers for growth and carcass composition. Animal Production 55: 377–387.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G., More O'Ferrall, G. J. and Connolly, J. 1989. Growth and carcass composition of Friesian, Limousin × Friesian and Blonde d'Aquitaine × Friesian steers. Animal Production 48: 353–365.Google Scholar
Keane, M. G., More O'Ferrall, G. J., Connolly, J. and Allen, P. 1990. Carcass composition of serially slaughtered Friesian, Hereford × Friesian and Charolais × Friesian steers finished on two dietary energy levels. Animal Production 50: 231–243.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Southgate, J. R. 1982. 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. 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
Mason, I. L. 1971. Comparative beef performance of the large cattle breeds of Western Europe. Animal Breeding Abstracts 39: 1–29.Google Scholar
Meij, G. J. W. van der. 1973. [Carcass composition of newborn bull calves.] Uit Let Instituut voor Zootechniek der Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht, Utrecht.Google Scholar
More O'Ferrall, G. J. and Keane, M. G. 1990. A comparison for live weight and carcass production of Charolais, Hereford and Friesian steer progeny from Friesian cows finished on two energy levels and serially slaughtered. Animal Production 50: 19–28.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
Southgate, J. R., Cook, G. L. and Kempster, A. J. 1982. 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. 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