CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Animal Production Science   
Animal Production Science
  Food, Fibre and Pharmaceuticals from Animals
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Reviews
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Notes for Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 Early Alert
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

Training

Publication Workshops


 

Open Access Article << 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, H. M. Burrow A

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
 
 Full Text
 PDF (204 KB)
 Export Citation
 Print
  


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.

   
    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012