Genetic parameters for body weight, scrotal circumference, and serving capacity in beef cattle

1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. A. Morris ◽  
R. L. Baker ◽  
N. G. Cullen ◽  
P. Boyd
2003 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. H. Crews Jr. ◽  
D. J. Porteous

The objective of the study was to estimate age of dam and age at measurement as adjustment factors for scrotal circumference in Canadian Hereford bulls (n = 9029) and to estimate genetic parameters for scrotal circumference, and birth and yearling weights. Quadratic effects of age at measurement and the interaction of age of dam with age at measurement were not important. Adjustment factors recommended for yearling bulls were 1.02, 0.33, 0.10, and 0.16 cm to adjust scrotal circumference of sons of 2-, 3-, 4-, and ≥ 10-yr-old cows to a mature dam (5 to 9 yr of age) equivalent. The linear partial regression coefficient for age at measurement was 0.036 cm d-1. Genetic parameters were estimated using a multiple trait animal model and REML. The heritability estimate for (age of dam and age at measurement) adjusted scrotal circumference was 0.40 ± 0.03, and heritability estimates were 0.43 ± 0.05, 0.21 ± 0.09, and 0.36 ± 0.03 for direct birth weight, maternal birth weight, and yearling weight, respectively. The genetic correlation of adjusted scrotal circumference with direct birth weight was low (0.15), and was moderate (0.38) with yearling weight, but was near zero (-0.01) with maternal birth weight. Environmental and phenotypic correlations of adjusted scrotal circumference were low with birth weight, and were high with yearling weight. These results indicate that there was a positive association between adjusted scrotal circumference and body weight. Genetic improvement of fertility through the use of adjusted scrotal circumference as an indicator trait would not be expected to be antagonistic to that for body weight. Key words: Beef cattle, fertility, Hereford, scrotal circumference


2008 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhuminand DEVKOTA ◽  
Tsugio KOSEKI ◽  
Motozumi MATSUI ◽  
Motoki SASAKI ◽  
Etsushi KANEKO ◽  
...  

1991 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.J. Mackinnon ◽  
N.J. Corbet ◽  
K. Meyer ◽  
H.M. Burrow ◽  
R.P. Bryan ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S.L.C. Meirelles ◽  
F.B. Mokry ◽  
A.C. Espasandín ◽  
M.A.D. Dias ◽  
M.M. Baena ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. C. Swanson ◽  
M. Ko ◽  
C. J. Mader

This experiment was conducted to evaluate the effects of corn or soybean hull incorporation into haylage-based diets on backgrounding calf performance and subsequent feedlot performance. Crossbred steers [n = 48, initial body weight (BW) = 303 ± 3.4 kg] were individually fed dietary treatments consisting of: (1) haylage [17.5% crude protein, dry matter (DM) basis; control], (2) haylage + 20% (DM basis) cracked corn, and (3) haylage + 20% (DM basis) soybean hulls during a 112-d backgrounding period. After the backgrounding period, all steers were adapted to a common high moisture corn-based finishing diet and fed until an ultrasound estimated backfat thickness of 7 mm was obtained. During the backgrounding period, steers fed cracked corn or soybean hulls had greater (P < 0.01) average daily gain, dry matter intake and gain:feed and lower (P = 0.05) plasma urea N as compared with controls. However, when finished on a common high-concentrate diet, steers previously fed cracked corn had greater (P < 0.08) average daily gain, final body weight, and longissimus muscle area than those fed soybean hulls, suggesting that source of supplemental energy during the backgrounding period may influence subsequent feedlot performance. Key words: Beef cattle, backgrounding, energy supplementation


2009 ◽  
Vol 126 (5) ◽  
pp. 387-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.A. Grossi ◽  
G.C. Venturini ◽  
C.C.P. Paz ◽  
L.A.F. Bezerra ◽  
R.B. Lôbo ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatriz do Nascimento Nunes ◽  
Salvador Boccaletti Ramos ◽  
Rodrigo Pelicioni Savegnago ◽  
Mônica Corrêa Ledur ◽  
Kátia Nones ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
V.H. Shende ◽  
S.H. Sontakke ◽  
V.V. Potdar ◽  
Tejsjree V. Shirsath ◽  
J.R. Khadse

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document