T-Stor
 

T-Stor >
Animal & Grassland Research & Innovation Programme >
Animal & Bioscience >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11019/359

Title: Live animal measurements, carcass composition and plasma hormone and metabolite concentrations in male progeny of sires differing in genetic merit for beef production
Authors: Clarke, A. M.
Drennan, Michael J
McGee, Mark
Kenny, David A.
Evans, Ross D
Berry, Donagh P.
Keywords: Beef Cattle
Carcass composition
Economic index
Genetic merit
Muscularity scores
Issue Date: Jul-2009
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Citation: A. M. Clarke, M. J. Drennan, M. McGee, D. A. Kenny, R. D. Evans and D. P. Berry (2009). Live animal measurements, carcass composition and plasma hormone and metabolite concentrations in male progeny of sires differing in genetic merit for beef production. animal, 3, pp 933-945. doi:10.1017/S1751731109004327.
Series/Report no.: Animal;vol 3
Abstract: In genetic improvement programmes for beef cattle, the effect of selecting for a given trait or index on other economically important traits, or their predictors, must be quantified to ensure no deleterious consequential effects go unnoticed. The objective was to compare live animal measurements, carcass composition and plasma hormone and metabolite concentrations of male progeny of sires selected on an economic index in Ireland. This beef carcass index (BCI) is expressed in euros and based on weaning weight, feed intake, carcass weight and carcass conformation and fat scores. The index is used to aid in the genetic comparison of animals for the expected profitability of their progeny at slaughter. A total of 107 progeny from beef sires of high (n = 11) or low (n = 11) genetic merit for the BCI were compared in either a bull (slaughtered at 16 months of age) or steer (slaughtered at 24 months of age) production system, following purchase after weaning (8 months of age) from commercial beef herds. Data were analysed as a 2 × 2 factorial design (two levels of genetic merit by two production systems). Progeny of high BCI sires had heavier carcasses, greater (P < 0.01) muscularity scores after weaning, greater (P < 0.05) skeletal scores and scanned muscle depth pre-slaughter, higher (P < 0.05) plasma insulin concentrations and greater (P < 0.01) animal value (obtained by multiplying carcass weight by carcass value, which was based on the weight of meat in each cut by its commercial value) than progeny of low BCI sires. Regression of progeny performance on sire genetic merit was also undertaken across the entire data set. In steers, the effect of BCI on carcass meat proportion, calculated carcass value (c/kg) and animal value was positive (P < 0.01), while a negative association was observed for scanned fat depth pre-slaughter and carcass fat proportion (P < 0.01), but there was no effect in bulls. The effect of sire expected progeny difference (EPD) for carcass weight followed the same trends as BCI. Muscularity scores, carcass meat proportion and calculated carcass value increased, whereas scanned fat depth, carcass fat and bone proportions decreased with increasing sire EPD for conformation score. The opposite association was observed for sire EPD for fat score. Results from this study show that selection using the BCI had positive effects on live animal muscularity, carcass meat proportion, proportions of high-value cuts and carcass value in steer progeny, which are desirable traits in beef production.
Description: peer-reviewed
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11019/359
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731109004327
http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S1751731109004327
ISSN: 1751-732X
Appears in Collections:Animal & Bioscience
Livestock Systems
Food Chemistry & Technology

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Clarke_etal_BCSI_additional_traits.pdf109.24 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright


View Statistics

Items in T-Stor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! Teagasc - The Agriculture and Food Development Authority  2012  - Feedback