Genetic resources to increase the profitability of crossbred lamb production
N. M. Fogarty A D , V. M. Ingham A , L. McLeod A , G. M. Gaunt B and L. J. Cummins CA The Australian Sheep Industry Cooperative Research Centre, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia.
B Primary Industries Research Victoria (PIRVic), Department of Primary Industries, Rutherglen Centre, Rutherglen, Vic. 3685, Australia.
C Primary Industries Research Victoria (PIRVic), Department of Primary Industries, Hamilton Centre, Hamilton, Vic. 3300, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: neal.fogarty@dpi.nsw.gov.au
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46(7) 799-802 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05355
Submitted: 18 November 2005 Accepted: 3 May 2006 Published: 8 June 2006
Abstract
The gross margin returns of first cross ewes by different sires have been evaluated on an equivalent carrying capacity basis by taking account of the feed requirements for the ewes and lambs and their varying performance and requirements throughout the annual production cycle. The study involved 2846 crossbred ewe progeny generated by 91 maternal sires from several breeds at 3 sites over 3 years including genetic links. The ewes were joined to terminal sire rams for 3 years and 8878 of their second cross lamb carcasses were included in the evaluation. The annual gross margin (A$GM) for individual ewes included income from lamb carcasses (with fat and weight discounts), lamb skins and ewe wool production, and costs for management and marketing. Individual feed requirements were calculated for ewe maintenance, gestation, lactation and lamb growth (pre- and post-weaning) and $GM was expressed on a dry sheep equivalent (dse) basis. Sire breed was not significant with a range of $5.28 GM/dse between sire breed means. There was a considerably greater range of up to $15 GM/dse among most of the sire ewe progeny groups within breeds and overlap among all sire breeds. Lamb turnoff rate was the major profit driver with lamb growth rate and carcass fat levels also contributing. The opportunities for genetic improvement in profitability of lamb enterprises are discussed.
Additional keywords: dry sheep equivalent, feed requirement, gross margin.
Acknowledgments
The MCPT was run at Cowra, Hamilton and Struan/Rutherglen by NSW Department of Primary Industries, Primary Industries Research Victoria and SARDI, with support from Meat and Livestock Australia and The Australian Sheep Industry CRC. The support of breeders who entered sires and provided semen is appreciated.
Fogarty NM,
McLeod L, Morgan JE
(2003) Variation among crossbred ewes in lamb productivity and profit on a feed unit basis. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 15, 314–317.
Fogarty NM,
Ingham VM,
Gilmour AR,
Cummins LJ,
Gaunt GM,
Stafford J,
Edwards JEH, Banks RG
(2005a) Genetic evaluation of crossbred lamb production. 1. Breed and fixed effects for birth and weaning weight of first-cross lambs, gestation length, and reproduction of base ewes. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56, 443–453.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fogarty NM,
Ingham VM,
McLeod L,
Gaunt GM, Cummins LJ
(2005b) Variation among maternal sires for lamb and wool gross margin performance of their crossbred daughters. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 16, 60–63.
Ingham VM,
Fogarty NM,
Gilmour AR,
Brown DJ,
Cummins LJ,
Gaunt GM,
Stafford J, Hocking-Edwards J
(2005) Relationships between LAMBPLAN EBVs for rams and post weaning performance of their crossbred progeny. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 16, 227–230.
Safari E,
Fogarty NM, Gilmour AR
(2005) A review of genetic parameter estimates for wool, growth, meat and reproduction traits in sheep. Livestock Production Science 92, 271–289.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
