Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 1

Similar documents
Crossbreeding in Beef Cattle

Crossbreeding for the Commercial Beef Producer Alison Van Eenennaam, University of California, Davis

Beef Production and the Brahman-Influenced Cow in the Southeast

Improve Reproductive Performance in Your Cow Herd Using Calf Removal 1

Using EPDs in a Commercial Herd

Relationship of Cow Size to Nutrient Requirements and Production Management Issues 1

CROSSBREEDING STRATEGIES: INCLUDING TERMINAL VS. MATERNAL CROSSES

Beef Production. in a Crisscross Breeding System Involving Angus, Brahman, and Hereford

Crossbreeding Systems for Beef Cattle

Matching Cow Type to the Nutritional Environment

Evaluation of the Brahman Breed as Straightbred and Crossbred for Beef Production in South Central Florida 1

National Beef Quality Audit

GENETIC IMPROVEMENT FOR FORAGE USE GENETIC IMPROVEMENT PRINCIPLES FOR THE COWHERD 1/2/2014. Qualifications. Matt Spangler University of Nebraska

Choices in Breeding Programs to Fit Your Environment

Crossbreeding-One of the Tools to Increase Profitability

Crossbreeding-One of the Tools to Increase Profitability

BREED AND HETEROSIS EFFECTS OF AMERICAN ZEBU CATTLE 1,2

Todd Thri(, University of Florida

Animal response or performance is determined. Genetic-Environmental Interaction. Texas Adapted Genetic Strategies for Beef Cattle II:

HETEROSIS RETENTION FOR LIVE WEIGHT IN ADVANCED GENERATIONS OF A HEREFORD AND ANGUS CROSSBREEDING EXPERIMENT

How Much Progress Can Be Made Selecting For Palatability Traits?

Breed Utilization and Production Efficiency

Pregnancy Rates. Jack C. Whittier Colorado State University. !I am not an economist and I do not. ! Biology and interactions

REVIEW: Preweaning, Postweaning, and Carcass Trait Comparisons for Progeny Sired by Subtropically Adapted Beef Sire Breeds at Various US Locations

Heterosis and Breed Effects for Beef Traits of Brahman Purebred and Crossbred Steers

CHARACTERIZATION OF HEREFORD AND TWO-BREED ROTATIONAL CROSSES OF HEREFORD W ANGUS AND SIMMENTAL CAllLE: CALF PRODUCTION THROUGH WEANING

More cattle are being marketed on carcass. Selection for Carcass Merit. Texas Adapted Genetic Strategies for Beef Cattle IX: Genetics of Carcass Merit

Understanding and Using Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs)

Beef Production of Brahman, Shorthorn, and their Crosses on Different Pasture Programs

Robert S. Wells, Ph.D., PAS Livestock Consultant

Traits and Tools for Retention and Replacement of Females

EFFICIENCY OF THE COW HERD: BULL SELECTION AND GENETICS

Growth and Feed Efficiency

Improving the Value of Cull Cows by Feeding Prior to Slaughter 1

Productive Longevity in Beef Cows. Jim Sanders, Animal Science Dept., Texas A&M University

Selecting the Right Replacement. Robert S. Wells, Ph.D., PAS Livestock Consultant

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XXI December 1, 2 and , Casper, WY. Integrating Information into Selection. Loren Berger.

Using Live Animal Carcass Ultrasound Information in Beef Cattle Selection

Managing Beef Cow Efficiency 1

Effect of Body Condition on Rebreeding 1

Incorporating Growth Performance with Youth Market Hog Shows 1

Improving Genetics in the Suckler Herd by Noirin McHugh & Mark McGee

Impacts of Crossbreeding on Profitability in Vertically Coordinated Beef Industry Marketing Systems

Selecting and Sourcing Replacement Heifers

Goal Oriented Use of Genetic Prediction

COW CALF BREEDING AND GENETICS. Dhuyvetter

EPDs and Reasonable Expectations in Commercial Crossbred Operations

Beef Cattle Management

Welcome to Igenity Brangus and the Power of Confident Selection

Overview. Initial Research. Overview. Initial Research. Initial Research. Adapting Angus Cattle to Subtropical Climates 10/28/2015

2015 Producer Survey Results

Understanding Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) Scott P. Greiner, Extension Animal Scientist, Virginia Tech

Beef - Horse - Poultry - Sheep - Swine. August 2016

Creating Premium Beef Maximizing Dairy Profit

Phase-Feeding the Beef Herd for Improved Feed Utilization 1

The Use of Composite Bulls Long Term Benefits and Challenges

Ma# Spangler Sept. 8, 2016

MCA/MSU Bull Evaluation Program 2016 Buyer Survey and Impact Report

REPLACEMENT HEIFER DEVELOPMENT & NUTRITION

HERD REPLACEMENTS: HEIFERS OR OPEN COWS?

Selecting the Right Genetics (Matching Cows to your Environment) David W. Schafer Arizona Beef Day July 29, 2009

Breeding Objectives Indicate Value of Genomics for Beef Cattle M. D. MacNeil, Delta G

B eef Cattle Management Update

Management Decisions. Management Decisions. Tradition. Legacy. ReproGene /3/2018. Jared Decker, University of Missouri 1

Mike Davis, The Ohio State University 6/19/14

Creep Grazing for Suckling Calves A Pasture Management Practice 1

Long Calving Seasons. Problems and Solutions

USING GENOMICS TO AFFECT COW HERD REPRODUCTION. Matt Spangler University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Got Milk? An Economic Look at Cow Size and Milk. July 13 th, 2015

Beef Sire Selection for Cattle Genetic Improvement Program (Updated February 19, 2014)

Estimation of Breed-Specific Heterosis Effects for Birth, Weaning and Yearling Weight in Cattle

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

1 This research was conducted under cooperative agreements between USDA, ARS, Montana Agric. Exp.

Sire Selection. Dr. Tim Marshall Retired UF Professor of Animal Science Retired Dean and Professor, Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College

Relationship of Cow Size, Cow Requirements, and Production Issues

EPD Info 1/5. Guide to the American Gelbvieh Association Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs)

Understanding EPDs and Accuracies

Appendix 6 - Economic value of crossbreeding and grain-finishing tropically adapted cattle

Keep Herd Health Simple and Make it Fit the Beef Cattle Operation 1

SIMMENTAL/FLECKVIEH AS BEEF BREED

Using Genomics to Affect Cow Herd Reproduction

Understanding and Utilizing EPDs to Select Bulls

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XXII Nov. 29, 30 and Dec. 1, 2011, Mitchell, NE. IMPLEMENTATION OF MARKER ASSISTED EPDs

IMPACT OF SEED STOCK SELECTION ON THE ECONOMICS OF A COW-CALF OPERATION

REPRODUCTION PERFORMANCE FOR COWS SIRED BY HIGH AND LOW MILK EPD ANGUS AND POLLED HEREFORD BULLS - A PRELIMINARY REPORT

TULI BULLS FOR REPRODUCTIVE AND MATERNAL PERFORMANCE TRAITS AND COW LONGEVITY

Cattle genetics. Key actions. Why is genetic improvement important? What is genetic improvement? How does this module assist you?

Unit E Segments of the Animal Industry. Lesson 1 Exploring the Cattle Industry

Florida Cow-Calf and Stocker Beef Safety and Quality Assurance Handbook: Record Keeping for Beef Quality Assurance 1

Crossbreeding Back to the Future David A. Daley California State University, Chico

Effective Use Of EPDs. Presented to: Minnesota Beef Producers Presented by: Kris A. Ringwall, Ph. D. NDSU Extension Beef Specialist

WHETHER dealing with a commercial

Value-Based Marketing for Feeder Cattle. By Tom Brink, Top Dollar Angus, Inc.

November Carcass EPD Comparisons Across Breeds. Calendar. Dan Drake, Livestock Farm Advisor

CROSSBREEDING SYSTEMS FOR ARIZONA RANGELANDS

Feed Efficiency in Cows

Relationship of Cow Size, Cow Requirements, and Production Issues

Replacement Heifers Costs and Return Calculation Decision Aids

Maternal Versus Terminal Crossbreeding Systems: A Six-Year Study at University of Nevada Gund Research and Demonstration Ranch

Performance and carcass characteristics of different cattle types A preliminary report

Transcription:

AN165 Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 1 Gary R. Hansen 2 As selection for carcass quality has taken center stage in the beef cattle industry, cattle producers have adopted strategies that have decreased the use of crossbreeding in beef cattle herds. Crossbreeding leads to increased performance without any added costs or inputs. It is one of the few management tools that increase productivity and improve the line when properly used. Despite the benefits of the practice, however, cattle producers have adopted strategies that have decreased the use of crossbreeding in beef cattle herds because selection for carcass quality has primary importance in the beef cattle industry. Crossbreeding works as a result of heterosis, also known as hybrid vigor. Hybrid vigor is the amount by which crossbred animals exceed (or differ from) the average of the purebred parents used in the cross (expressed in units or percent). This idea can best be illustrated through the example listed below for weaning weight. Brahman average 500 lbs Angus average 550 lbs Average of purebreds 525 lbs Average of crossbred progeny 575 lbs - (1/2 Brahman 1/2 Angus) Hybrid vigor = 575-525 = 50 lbs difference Percent hybrid vigor 50/525 = 9.52% Hybrid vigor is expressed in almost all beef cattle production traits, especially in reproduction and adaptability traits. Table 1 explains the relationship between heritability and heterosis regarding different categories of beef cattle traits. Since reproduction and maternal traits have low heritability, response to selection will be slow. At the same time, significant improvement in these traits can be made through programs that maximize heterosis. The inverse is true with product or carcass traits. Significant and rapid progress can be made through selection for carcass traits, while crossbreeding has little or no effect. Growth traits are moderate for both heritability and heterosis, making progress possible through selection and crossbreeding. Using this information, commercial producers can tailor a program to fit their individual needs. If a producer is concerned about carcass characteristics, then selection is the best way to improve quality. On the other hand, if reproductive rates need to be enhanced, crossbreeding is the quickest and easiest 1. This document is AN165, one of a series of the Animal Sciences Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date September, 2006. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu. 2. Hansen, G.R., Assistant Professor of Animal Sciences, North Florida Research and Education Center Marianna, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean

Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 2 way to improve. It should be realized that no one breed is best at everything. Producers should use breeds that complement each other. For example, breeds that have low marbling would need to be mated to animals with high marbling potential. Continental animals and British animals are good examples of breeds that complement each other. It also should be noted that breeds from diverse genetic backgrounds will express higher levels of hybrid vigor when crossed. For example, British breeds crossed with each other will result in hybrid vigor, but at lower levels than British breeds crossed with Continental or Bos indicus (Zebu) breeds (Table 2). It should be stressed that there needs to be a planned program if expected results are to occur. In the past, producers have thought of crossbreeding as simply replacing bulls every 2 to 3 years with whatever breed was popular at the time. This has lead to problems with uniformity of the resulting product. Quality cattle need to be selected in order for crossbred cattle to out-perform straightbred cattle and produce the type of product that is in demand by the consumer. Crossbreeding will not overcome poor genetics. Crossbreeding can be a very effective tool to improve reproductive and weaning rates in beef cattle. Table 3 shows the results of Charolais bulls naturally mated to various types of purebred and crossbred cows. All cows were managed in a single herd and data was collected over a three-year period. Cows were located in central Texas. Weaning weights were adjusted to 205 days as well as for age of dam. Records from first-calf heifers were excluded. Weaning weight per cow exposed to breeding is the best figure to sum up production efficiency. The calculation includes reproduction and gestation efficiency, calving management and survival from birth to weaning. Using the above data, the difference in the Hereford versus the Brahman X Hereford cows was 211 pounds of extra weaning weight per cow exposed. This points out the advantage of using crossbred cows, especially Bos indicus (Bi) X Bos taurus (Bt) breed types. Olson et al., 1991, compared different crossbred cattle in Nebraska and Florida. The study showed that Bos indicus X Bos taurus cows weaned calves approximately equal in weaning weight per cow exposed in Florida and Nebraska, but weaned 62 and 34 more pounds in comparison than Bos taurus X Bos taurus cows in Florida and Nebraska, respectively. The Zebu productivity advantage in Florida was up to three times greater than that experienced in Nebraska. Using various systems of crossbreeding can have a significant impact. The various systems of crossbreeding yield different results in a beef cattle operation. Table 4 summarizes some of the more popular crossbreeding programs available for commercial producers to use. The estimated herd production factor uses the straightbred herd as the baseline. Each system should be carefully analyzed before implementing the program in a commercial operation. Some systems will not work for small producers. Others require a stable source from which quality replacement females can be purchased. Each system has advantages and disadvantages. However, cattle producers should find a way to capture hybrid vigor in their herd. Estimated herd production factor is the increase in production that would be realized in each crossbreeding system. Notice that the F-1 Cow/Terminal calf system results in the highest percent of heterosis expressed in a crossbreeding system with a factor of 1.25 while the straightbred herd is 1.00. This simply means that using the F-1 Cow/ Terminal calf system will result in a 25% increase in production. However, the other factors should be considered before determining which crossbreeding system to use. In summary: Breeds from diverse environments (genetic backgrounds) express more total heterosis in the maternal and individual. Breeds should be matched to complement each other. Use animals that will work in your environment and management system. Source of replacements must be considered in order to insure that the crossbreeding program will work.

Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 3 Heterosis cannot overcome a poor quality genetic base. Use quality animals when selecting bulls to use in your herd. Use breeds that will be the most economically productive for your operation and management style. Commit to a crossbreeding system and stick to it. Do not become the bull of the month club with your bull battery. Reference Olson, T.A., K. Euclides Filho, L. V. Cundiff, M. Koger, W.T. Butts, Jr, and K.E. Gregory. 1991 Effects of breed group by location interaction on crossbred cattle in Nebraska and Florida. J. Anim. Sci 69:104-114

Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 4 Table 1. Expression of heritability and heterosis in traits of economic importance in beef cattle production Trait Heritability % Heterosis % Reproduction Low (5-12%) 20 Maternal Low to Moderate (>20%) 15 Growth Moderate (20-40) 5-12 Product High (40-50) NIL* *insignificant Table 2. Average heterosis in the economically important beef traits when crossing divergent breed types of cattle. Trait Bos taurus X Bos taurus % Bos indicus X Bos taurus % Individual Heterosis (Calf Performance) Birth weight 2.4 11.1 Weaning weight 3.9 12.6 Post-weaning gain 2.6 16.2 Maternal Heterosis (Cow Performance) Calving rate 3.7 13.4 Calf survival 1.5 5.1 Birth weight 1.8 5.8 Weaning weight 3.9 16.0 Adapted from Cundiff et al., 1994 Table 3. Cow Type % Pregnant Weaning Wt (Lbs) No of Records Hereford 82 492 52 Angus 84 498 68 Brahman 79 513 37 Angus Cross 86 523 63 Brahman X Hereford 97 619 128 Angus X Brahman 96 612 89 Hansen, unpublished data

Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 5 Table 4. Estimated Weaning Weight Performance Factors for Various Crossbreeding Systems System Breed Complementarity Potential Management Ease Calf Heterosis H i Maternal Heterosis H m Hiefer Replacements Estimated Herd Production Factor Straightbred No + 0% 0% Raised 1.00 Herd 1 F-1 Cow Yes + 100% 0% Purchased 1.10 System 2 F-1 Cow Terminal Calf 3 Yes + 100% 100% Purchased 1.25 2-Breed No - 67% 67% Raised 1.17 Rotation 4 3-Breed No - 85.7% 85.7% Raised 1.21 Rotation 5 4-Breed Composite 6 No + 75% 75% Raised 1.19 1 Straightbred Herd- Cows and bulls from the same breed are mated. 2 F-1 Cow System- Cows from one breed are mated to bulls of another breed. All calves are marketed with replacements coming from an outside source. 3 F-1 Cow/Terminal Calf- F-1 cows are mated to a breed that is different from the parent breeds of the F-1 cow. All calves are marketed and replacements are purchased. 4 2-Breed Rotation- Two breeds are mated by crisscrossing between breeds. Cows from breed A are mated to bulls of breed B and vice versa. 5 3-Breed Rotation- Three breeds are mated in rotation. Cows from breed A are mated to bulls from breed B. Daughters from this cross (1/2 A 1/2 B) are mated to bulls of breed C. Daughters from this cross (1/4 A 1/4 B 1/2 C) are mated to bulls of breed A. The rotation continues on in this fashion for as long as the system is used in the herd. 6 4-Breed Composite- Use of four breeds in the development of a composite animal that has an exact percent of each breed in its genetic make up.