Brahman and Brahman crossbred cattle grown on pasture and in feedlots in subtropical and temperate Australia. 3. Feed efficiency and feeding behaviour of feedlot-finished animals

K. M. Schutt; P. F. Arthur; H. M. Burrow

doi:10.1071/EA08083

RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Previous Next Contents Vol 49(6)

Brahman and Brahman crossbred cattle grown on pasture and in feedlots in subtropical and temperate Australia. 3. Feed efficiency and feeding behaviour of feedlot-finished animals

K. M. Schutt ^A ^B ^D ^E , P. F. Arthur ^A ^C and H. M. Burrow ^A

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies, C.J. Hawkins Homestead, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.

^B CSIRO Livestock Industries, PO Box 5545, Rockhampton Mail Centre, Qld 4702, Australia.

^C NSW Department of Primary Industries, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia.

^D Present address: ‘Ingaby Station’, St George, Qld 4487, Australia.

^E Corresponding author. Email: sk_prewett@activ8.net.au

Animal Production Science 49(6) 452-460 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA08083
Submitted: 3 May 2008 Accepted: 18 February 2009 Published: 13 May 2009

Abstract

The objective of this experiment was to quantify differences in feed efficiency and feeding behaviour of 470 heifers and steers by Brahman, Belmont Red, Santa Gertrudis, Angus, Hereford, Shorthorn, Charolais and Limousin sires mated to Brahman dams. Animals were bred in subtropical Queensland and finished in a temperate New South Wales feedlot. Animals averaged 598 days of age and 425.8 kg at the start of the feed intake test period. Sire breeds did not differ for eating rate, feed conversion ratio or relative growth rate. Generally, higher daily feed intakes (DFI) corresponded with higher average daily gains (ADG). Straightbred Brahmans fed the most frequently (16.6 ± 0.8 sessions/day; P < 0.05) but spent the least time eating of all breeds (67.4 ± 2.7 min/day; P < 0.001). Least squares means for Brahman, Belmont Red, Santa Gertrudis, Angus, Hereford, Shorthorn, Charolais and Limousin sired progeny, respectively, for residual feed intake (RFI; P < 0.05) were 0.02 ± 0.16, 0.14 ± 0.13, –0.10 ± 0.23, 0.54 ± 0.17, –0.27 ± 0.18, 0.29 ± 0.18, –0.46 ± 0.16 and –0.21 ± 0.13 kg/day, and for ADG (P < 0.001) were 1.06 ± 0.05, 1.17 ± 0.04, 1.52 ± 0.08, 1.47 ± 0.06, 1.46 ± 0.06, 1.46 ± 0.06, 1.35 ± 0.06 and 1.38 ± 0.05 kg/day. While straightbred Brahmans did not differ from all other sire breeds for RFI, their lower appetite relative to crossbred contemporaries resulted in the lowest DFI (P < 0.001) and lowest ADG (P < 0.001) overall. Angus sired crosses were the least efficient feeders and spent the most time eating, consumed the most feed and had the highest RFI, but were not significantly different to Santa Gertrudis and Shorthorn crosses for these traits. Angus sired crosses spent 24.1 and 15.4 min/day more time eating (P < 0.001) than straightbred Brahmans and Charolais crosses, and consumed 35 and 13% more feed (P < 0.001) respectively. Charolais sired crosses were the most feed efficient with the lowest RFI and intermediate DFI, and did not differ significantly from the highest ranking sire breeds for ADG or Kleiber ratio. While Belmont Red crosses did not differ from all breeds for RFI, they had significantly lower DFI than British and Santa Gertrudis crosses resulting in lower ADG (P < 0.001) relative to these sire breeds. Therefore, selection of Charolais, Hereford, Limousin and Santa Gertrudis sire breeds would result in the most feed efficient (low RFI) crosses with Brahman without any sacrifice in ADG.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the significant efforts of all Beef CRC staff involved in breeding and managing the experimental animals, field data collection at ‘Duckponds’, ‘Goonoo’, ‘Tullimba’ and ‘McMaster’, collation of project data and maintenance of the CRC database. The following donors of Brahman breeding cows for use in the project are also gratefully acknowledged: Hillgrove Pastoral Co., Australian Agricultural Co., North Australian Pastoral Co., Stanbroke Pastoral Co., Queensland and Northern Territory Pastoral Co., Consolidated Pastoral Co., Heytesbury Pastoral Co., Peter Hughes and Acton Land and Cattle Co. Generous funding for the project was provided by Meat and Livestock Australia through Project NAP.3.104.

References

Archer JA, Arthur PF, Herd RM, Parnell PF, Pitchford WS (1997) Optimum postweaning test for measurement of growth rate, feed intake, and feed efficiency in British breed cattle. Journal of Animal Science 75, 2024–2032.
| CAS | PubMed |
[Verified 12 March 2009]

Ayres JF, Dicker RW, McPhee MJ, Turner AD, Murison RD, Kamphorst PG (2001) Post-weaning growth of cattle in northern New South Wales. 1. Grazing value of temperate perennial pasture grazed by cattle. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 959–969.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Bindon BM (2001) Genesis of the Cooperative Research Centre for the Cattle and Beef Industry: integration of resources for beef quality research (1993–2000). Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 843–853.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Bindon BM (2002) Measuring and managing traits for improved productivity – what do we know; what do we need? In ‘Proceedings of the 11th world Brahman congress, Rockhampton, Australia’. pp. 1–14.

Boyles SL (1986) Cold-stress effects on feedlot performance and heat production of Brahman-cross cattle. Dissertation Abstracts International, B (Sciences and Engineering) 46(9), 2888.

Cundiff LV, Koch RM, Gregory KE (1984) Characterisation of biological types of cattle (Cycle III). IV. Postweaning growth and feed efficiency. Journal of Animal Science 58, 312–323.
| CAS | PubMed |

Duncan DB (1955) Multiple range test and multiple F test. Biometrics 11, 1–42.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Fan LQ, Bailey DRC, Shannon NH (1995) Genetic parameter estimation of postweaning gain, feed intake, and feed efficiency for Hereford and Angus bulls fed two different diets. Journal of Animal Science 73, 365–372.
| CAS | PubMed |

Ferrell CL, Jenkins TG (1985) Cow type and the nutritional environment: nutritional aspects. Journal of Animal Science 61, 725–741.
| CAS | PubMed |

Ferrell CL, Berry ED, Freetly HC, Miller DN (2006) Influence of genotype and diet on steer performance, manure odor, and carriage of pathogenic and other fecal bacteria. I. Animal performance. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2515–2522.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |

Fitzhugh HA, Taylor St CS (1971) Genetic analysis of degree of maturity. Journal of Animal Science 33, 717–725.
| PubMed |

Frisch JE, Vercoe JE (1969) Liveweight gain, food intake, and eating rate in Brahman, Africander, and Shorthorn × Hereford cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 20, 1189–1195.

Frisch JE, Vercoe JE (1977) Food intake, eating rate, weight gains, metabolic rate and efficiency of feed utilisation in Bos taurus and Bos indicus crossbred cattle. Animal Production 25, 343–358.

Hegarty RS (2000) Genetic diversity in function and microbial metabolism of the rumen. In ‘Feed efficiency in beef cattle. Proceedings of the feed efficiency workshop’. (Eds JA Archer, RM Herd, PF Arthur) pp. 63–68. (University of New England: Armidale)

Herd RM, Oddy VH, Richardson EC (2004) Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 1. Review of potential mechanisms. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 423–430.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Huffman RD, Williams SE, Hargrove DD, Johnson DD, Marshall TT (1990) Effects of percentage Brahman and Angus breeding, age-season of feeding and slaughter end point on feedlot performance and carcass characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 68, 2243–2252.
| CAS | PubMed |

Kramer CY (1957) Extension of multiple range tests to group correlated adjusted means. Biometrics 13, 13–18.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

McDonagh MB, Herd RM, Richardson EC, Oddy VH, Archer JA, Arthur PF (2001) Meat quality and the calpain system of feedlot steers following a single generation of divergent selection for residual feed intake. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 1013–1021.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS |

Moore KL, Johnston DJ, Burrow HM (2005) Sire breed differences for net feed intake in feedlot finished beef cattle. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 16, 76–79.

Oddy VH , Herd RM (2000) Potential mechanisms for variation in efficiency of feed utilisation in ruminants. In ‘Feed efficiency in beef cattle. Proceedings of the feed efficiency workshop’. (Eds JA Archer, RM Herd, PF Arthur) pp. 30–34. (University of New England: Armidale)

Pitchford WS (2000) Improving feed efficiency of beef cattle: what lessons can be learnt from other species? In ‘Feed efficiency in beef cattle. Proceedings of the feed efficiency workshop’. (Eds JA Archer, RM Herd, PF Arthur) pp. 19–28. (University of New England: Armidale)

Richardson EC, Herd RM (2004) Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 2. Synthesis of results following divergent selection. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 431–440.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Richardson EC, Herd RM, Archer JA, Woodgate RT, Arthur PF (1998) Steers bred for improved net feed efficiency eat less for the same feedlot performance. Animal Production in Australia 22, 213–216.

Richardson EC, Herd RM, Oddy VH, Woodgate RT, Archer JA, Arthur PF (1999) Body composition explains only part of the intake difference between high and low efficiency Angus steers. Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition in Australia 12, 4A.

Richardson EC, Herd RM, Oddy VH, Thompson JM, Archer JA, Arthur PF (2001) Body composition and implications for heat production of Angus steer progeny of parents selected for and against residual feed intake. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 1065–1072.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Robinson DL (1995) Design of the CRC straightbred genetics experiments. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 11, 541–545.

Robinson DL (2000) Issues associated with predicting feed intake. In ‘Feed efficiency in beef cattle. Proceedings of the feed efficiency workshop’. (Eds JA Archer, RM Herd, PF Arthur) pp. 93–97. (University of New England: Armidale)

Robinson DL, Oddy VH (2004) Genetic parameters for feed efficiency, fatness, muscle area and feeding behaviour of feedlot finished beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 90, 255–270.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Robinson DL, Skerritt JW, Oddy VH (1997) Measurement of feed intake and feed efficiency in feedlot cattle. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 12, 287–291.

SAS (2000) ‘SAS procedures guide. Release 8.1.’ (SAS Institute: Cary, NC)

Schenkel FS, Miller SP, Wilton JW (2004) Genetic parameters and breed differences for feed efficiency, growth, and body composition traits of young beef bulls. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 177–185.

Schutt KM, Burrow HM, Thompson JM, Bindon BM (2009a) Brahman and Brahman crossbred cattle grown on pasture and in feedlots in subtropical and temperate Australia. 1. Carcass quality. Animal Production Science 49, 426–438.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Schutt KM, Burrow HM, Thompson JM, Bindon BM (2009b) Brahman and Brahman crossbred cattle grown on pasture and in feedlots in subtropical and temperate Australia. 2. Meat quality and palatability. Animal Production Science 49, 439–451.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Upton W, Burrow HM, Dundon A, Robinson DL, Farrell EB (2001) CRC breeding program design, measurements and database: methods that underpin CRC research results. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 943–952.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Vercoe JE (1967) Breed and nutritional effects on the composition of faeces, urine, and plasma from Hereford and Brahman × Hereford steers fed on high and low quality diets. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 18, 1003–1013.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Vercoe JE (1970) The fasting metabolism of Brahman, Africander and Hereford × Shorthorn cattle. The British Journal of Nutrition 24, 599–606.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |

Vercoe JE, Frisch JE, Moran JB (1972) Apparent digestibility, nitrogen utilisation, water metabolism and heat tolerance of Brahman cross, Africander cross and Shorthorn × Hereford steers. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 79, 71–74.
| Crossref |

Wang Z, Nkrumah JD, Li C, Basarab JA, Goonewardene LA, Okine EK, Crews DH, Moore SS (2006) Test duration for growth, feed intake, and feed efficiency in beef cattle using the GrowSafe System. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2289–2298.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |