On the relative growth and development of various breeds and crosses of cattle

J. Hammond

doi:10.1017/S0021859600006274

On the relative growth and development of various breeds and crosses of cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 March 2009

J. Hammond

Show author details

J. Hammond: Affiliation:
(Animal Nutrition Institute, School of Agriculture, Cambridge.)

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

At the present time no exact records exist (except those given in British Breeds of Live Stock published by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries and by McConnell in his Notebook of Agricultural Facts and Figures) which show the relative qualities of the various British breeds of cattle in respect of their ability to grow, fatten and increase in weight. Also there exists no estimate as to the actual average amount of food produced by the different breeds on slaughter and the average proportion of consumable meat and offal in the dead body.

Type: Research Article
Information: The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , July 1920 , pp. 233 - 289

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600006274 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1920

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

^{page 233 note 1} British Breeds of Live Stock, Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, London, 1913.Google Scholar

^{page 233 note 2} McConnell, . Notebook of Agricultural Facts and Figures, London, 1904.Google Scholar

^{page 233 note 3} Mörkeberg. Tidsskr. Landōkonomi, Nos. 5–6, 1916 (abs. in Journal Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr., Ireland, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1916).Google Scholar

^{page 234 note 1} Mackenzie and Marshall have found that a high proportion of carcase can be foretold by certain “outside” manifestations such as the condition of the hock, aitch-bone, etc. (Jour. Bd. Agric. Vol. 25, Sept. 1918).Google Scholar

^{page 234 note 2} No account here has been taken of the amounts of meat and bone in the “carcase,” and it is possible that there is a greater percentage of bone in the “carcase” of the larger steers but no data on this point are available.

^{page 235 note 1} If other Agricultural Shows would keep such records they would do much towards accumulating data which would be invaluable when treated statistically.

^{page 236 note 1} Long, . Journ. Bd. of Agric. and Fisheries, Vol. 21, April, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 236 note 2} Otis. Kansas Sta. Bul, No. 118, 1903.

^{page 238 note 1} Tomhave and Severson. Pennsylvania Sta. Rpt., 1914–1915.Google Scholar

^{page 238 note 2} Hulse and Nevens. Illinois Agric. Sta. Circular, 1917.Google Scholar

^{page 238 note 3} Stewart, . An. Sci. Bul, Roy. Agric. College, Cirencester, Nos. 4–5, 1912–1913.Google Scholar

^{page 239 note 1} Eastern Command Order, No. 2764 of 1917.

^{page 240 note 1} Voitellier, . Ann. Sci. Agron., No. 1, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 240 note 2} Lydtin, . Arbeit, d. Dent. Landw. Gesel., Heft 90, 1904.Google Scholar

^{page 242 note 1} British Rainfall, Symonds and Wallis, London, 1893–1913.

^{page 242 note 2} Agricultural Returns for Great Britain, Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, 1893–1913.

^{page 250 note 1} Watson and Harrison. Breeders Gaz., No. 18, 1910 (quoted from Exp. Sta. Record, 23). As these authors state that the American are not so heavy as the English types of the same breed it is difficult to reconcile their statements unless the ages have been misquoted.

^{page 250 note 2} Voitellier, . Bul Mens, d. l'Off. Renseignements Agricoles, Year 12, No. 1, Jan. 1913.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 3} Pusch, . Allgemeine Tierzucht, Stuttgart, 1911.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 4} Lydtin, . Arb. Deut. Landw. Ges., Heft 90, 1904.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 6} Meek, . Veterinarian, VoL 74, 1901.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 1} Long, . Journ. Bd. of Agric. and Fisheries, Vol. 21, April, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 2} Powell, . History of the Smithfield Club, London, 1902.Google Scholar

^{page 254 note 1} Kennedy, et al. Iowa Sta. Bul, No. 81, 1905.Google Scholar

^{page 255 note 1} Knight, . Dept. Agric., Bombay, Bul. 61, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 255 note 2} Tandler, and Keller, . Arch, für Entwicklungs., Bd. 31, 1910.Google Scholar

^{page 255 note 3} Sohuppli, . Jahresb. Steiermärk. Landw. Landes-Lehranst, 1911 (abs. in Bul. Inter. Inst. Rome, No. 8, 1912).Google Scholar

^{page 256 note 1} Halnan, and Marshall, . Proc. Roy. Soc. B. Vol. 88, 1914.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 256 note 2} Hatai, . Journ. Exp. Zool, No. 1, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 256 note 3} Mackenzie, and Marshall, . Journ. Roy. Agri. Soc., Vol. 76, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 256 note 4} Hartmann, . Mitt. Ver. Deut. Schweinezucht, Nos. 22–23, 1909 (quoted from Exp. Sta Record, 23).Google Scholar

^{page 257 note 1} Pusch, . Allgemeine Tierzucht, Stuttgart, 136, 1911.Google Scholar

^{page 257 note 2} Watson, and Harrison, . Breeders Gaz., No. 18, 1910 (quoted from Exp. Sta. Record, 23).Google Scholar

^{page 257 note 3} Tandler, and Keller, . Zentbl. Physiol, Bd. 23, No. 26, 1909.Google Scholar

^{page 260 note 1} Watson, and Harrison, . Breeders Gaz., No. 18, 1910.Google Scholar

^{page 260 note 2} Müller, . Deutsche Landwirtschaftliche Tierzucht, Year 18, No. 1, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 260 note 3} Henseler, . Kühn-Archiv, Univ. Halle, Bd. 5, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 260 note 4} Long, . Journ. Bd. of Agric. and Fisheries, VoL 21, April, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 1} Robertson, , Bedford, and Mackey, . Canada Exp. Farms Reports, p. 292, 1905.Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 2} Grisdale, . Canada Exp. Farms Reports, p. 63, 1904.Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 3} Simpson, , Foster, and Christensen, . New Mexico Sta. Bul., No. 103, 1916.Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 4} Hatai, . Amer. Journ. Anat, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1913–1914.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 5} Ritzman, . U.S. Dept. of Agr., Bur. of Animal Industry Rpt, 1907.Google Scholar

^{page 261 note 6} Simpson, , Foster, and Christensen, . New Mexico Sta. Bul., No. 103, 1916.Google Scholar

^{page 262 note 1} Haecker, . Minnesota Sta. Rept., 1913.Google Scholar

^{page 262 note 2} Tridon, . L'Hygiène d. l. Viande et du Lait, Year 8, No. 1, Jan. 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 262 note 3} Hunziker, and Caldwell, . Indiana Sta. Bul, No. 193, 1916.Google Scholar

^{page 262 note 4} Eckles, , Reed, and Regan, . Missouri Sta. Bul, No. 131, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 262 note 5} Müller, . Deut. Landw. Tierzucht. No. 1, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 263 note 1} Auernheimer, . Ztschr. Fleisch- u. Milch-hyg., No. 12, 1910.Google Scholar

^{page 263 note 2} Lawes, and Gilbert, . Journ. Roy. Agric. Soc., Vol. 21, 1860.Google Scholar

^{page 266 note 1} Punnett, and Bailey, . Journ. Genetics, Vol. 8, No. 1, Deo. 1918.Google Scholar

^{page 266 note 2} Gowen, . Journ. Agr. Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1918.Google Scholar

^{page 275 note 1} Reimers. Jahrb. Wiss. u. Prakt. Tierzucht, 1914.

^{page 276 note 1} Robertson, . American Journ. Physiol, 41, No. 5, 1916.Google Scholar

^{page 276 note 2} King, . Anat. Rec., No. 10, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 1} Henseler, . Kühn-Archiv, Band V, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 2} Waters, . Proc. Soc. Prom. Agric. Sci., 1908.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 3} Laurer, . Deut. Landw. Tierzucht, No. 50, 1913.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 4} von Lützow, . Landw. Jahrb., No. 5, 1908.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 5} Hatai, . Anat. Rec., No. 8, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 277 note 6} Lawes, and Gilbert, . Journ. Roy. Agri. Soc., Vol. 21, 1860.Google Scholar

^{page 278 note 1} Magnan, . Ann. Sci. Nat Zool., Nos. 2–6, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 1} Lawes, and Gilbert, . Journ. Roy. Agri. Soc., No. 21, 1860.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 2} Mackenzie, and Marshall, . Journ. Bd. of Agric. and Fisheries, 25, No. 6, 1918.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 3} Müller, Max and Narabe, . Landwirtsch. Jahrb. 46, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 4} Laurer, . Deut. Landw. Tierzucht, No. 11, 1910.Google Scholar

^{page 279 note 5} Smith, . Nebraska Sta. Bul., No. 116, 1910.Google Scholar

^{page 281 note 1} Tridon, . L'Hygiène. d. l. Viande et d. Lait. Year 8, No. 1, 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 281 note 2} Tomhave, . The Country Gentleman, Vol. 80, No. 32, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 281 note 3} Hall, and Emmett, . Illinois Sta. Bul. No. 158, 1912.Google Scholar

^{page 282 note 1} Magnan, . Compt. Rend. Soc. d. Biol., Vol. 73, No. 33, 1912.Google Scholar

^{page 283 note 1} Tomhave, . The Country Gentleman, Vol. 80, No. 32, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 284 note 1} The Farmer's Magazine, London, J840, 1841 and 1842.

^{page 288 note 1} Boetticher, . Zool. Anzeiger, Vol. 41, 1913.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 2} Sumner, . Journ. Exp. Zool., No. 3, 1915.Google Scholar

^{page 288 note 3} Watson, and Hunter, . Proc. Phys. Soc., Journ. of Physiol., Nos. 4–5, 1905.Google Scholar

Article contents

On the relative growth and development of various breeds and crosses of cattle

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests