Title: Feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of Brahman-European crossbred and angus calves
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00066029/00001
 Material Information
Title: Feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of Brahman-European crossbred and angus calves
Series Title: NFES mimeo rpt.
Physical Description: 7 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Baker, F. S ( Frank Sloan ), 1921-
Palmer, A. Z
Carpenter, J. W ( James Woodford )
North Florida Experiment Station
Publisher: North Florida Experiment Station
Place of Publication: Quincy Fla
Publication Date: 1962
 Subjects
Subject: Beef cattle -- Feeding and feeds -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Beef cattle -- Economic aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: F.S. Baker, Jr., A.Z. Palmer, and J.W. Carpenter.
General Note: Caption title.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00066029
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 69651863

Full Text



HORTH FLORIDA EXPERIMENT STATION
Quincy, Florida
May 21, 1964


NFES Mimeo Rpt. 64-6

FEEDLOT PERFORMANCE AND CARCASS CHARACTERISTICS OF
BRAHMAN-EUROPEAN CROSSBRED AND HEREFORD CALVES

F. S. Baker, Jr., A. Z. Palmer, and J. W. Carpenter

SUMMARY

Feedlot performance of calves was not as satisfactory in this fourth study as
in preceding trials, probably because only half of the calves received stilbestrol
implants this year while all calves were implanted in previous tests. Although gains
were slower and less efficient this year, carcass grades were about the same as in
preceding trials. Calves were in the feedlot about three weeks longer this year.

Calves that received stilbestrol imDlants gained an average of 67 pounds more
per head and had carcasses that averaged 43 pounds heavier than non-implanted cattle.
Response to stilbestrol was particularly large in Charolais-Brahman crossbreds. Data
on effect of the implants on feed intake and efficiency are not available. Stilbestrol
had no effect on carcass grade, area of rib eye, fat cover, or estimated yield of closely
trimmed boneless cuts.

Hereford calves gained faster and more efficiently and showed a smaller financial
loss than any of the crossbred groups.

Negative margins between cost of calves and sale price of fat cattle resulted
in financial losses by all groups. Because of a depressed fat cattle market, a relatively
large margin between buying and selling price per hundredweight would have been needed
to insure a profit.
liver
More than half of the crossbred calves had live/flukes at slaughter. There was
no difference in performance or carcass characteristics of fluke-infested and non-infested
cattle.

Brahman-Charolais-Hereford and Brahman-Charolais-Angus calves had a slightly
higher estimated cutout, and 3/4 Brahman-1/4 Shorthorn had a slightly lower estimated
yield of closely trimmed cuts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION

In three previous trials, calves of various Brahman-European crosses approximately
1 months of age and weighing 550 to 650 pounds when started on feed made very satisfactory
gins for 160 days in dry lot.2 Comparable weight British calves made gains similar to
t se of the Brahman hybrids in the first trial, and Hereford calves gained as well as
al' crossbreds except the exceptionally fast gaining Brahman-Charolais-Herefords in the
third trial. In the second test, lighter weight Angus calves gained somewhat slower
than the various Brahman-European crosses. Carcass grades of Brahman crossbreds have

lAn mal Husbandman, North Florida Experiment Station, Quincy, Associate Meat Scientist
anc Assistant Meat Scientist, Animal Science Deoartment, Gainesville, respectively.

2NF S Mimeo. Rpts. 61-5, 1961; 62-10, 1962; and 63-8, 1963.







-2 -
in
generally been as high as those of British cattle, although/the first experiment, 3/8
Brahman-3/8 Charolais-1/4 Hereford carcasses and in both the second and third tests,
1/2 Brahman-1/2 Hereford carcasses graded slightly lower. Lowest grading carcasses had
the highest estimated cutout each year. In two of the three years, carcass grades were
not as high as expected, largely because of lack of marbling in both Brahman hybrid and
British calves. Most of the carcasses graded U. S. Good with a few U. S. Choice and U. S.
Standard. In all trials a margin of approximately $3 per 100 pounds animal weight between
the cost going on feed and the selling price of the fat cattle would have allowed a modest
profit. A majority of livers from cattle originating in South Florida had live flukes at
slaughter. When cattle with fluke-infested and clean livers were compared, it was
apparent that fluke infestation did not adversely affect feedlot performance, although
loss of the liver itself was significant economically.

The trial reported herein is a continuation of the study with finishing heavy
calves in the feedlot.

PROCEDURE

Shortly after weaning, Brahman-European hybrid calves were trucked to Quincy from
Clewiston and Cocoa, Florida. Ten head each of 1/4 Brahman-1/4 Angus-1/2 Hereford, 3/8
Brahman-3/8 Charolais-1/4 Hereford, and 3/8 Brahman-3/8 Charolais-1/4 Angus were delivered
to the North Florida Experiment Station on September 13. Groups of 3/4 Brahman-1/4
Shorthorn and 1/2 Brahman-1/2 Shorthorn arrived on September 17. Hereford calves of
approximately the same age were delivered from Tallahassee on August 30. All steer
calves were placed in dry lot on a light feed of grain and self-fed grass hay until
October 1, when they were individually tagged, weighed, and started on trial. Initial
weights were early morning weights at the feedlot with no shrink. The calves were
maintained on the short preliminary feed to overcome shipping shrink before weighing on
experiment. The Herefords weighed exactly the same going on test as previously at the
Tallahassee farm. Brahman-Shorthorn crossbreds weighed an average of 13 pounds more when
placed on trial than before shipping from Cocoa. Clewiston calves were not weighed by
experimental groups before shipping; from the foregoing weights of the remainder of the
calves and experience in preceding trials, it can be assumed that their initial weights
on trial were about the same as their sale weights were when shipped from Clewiston.

As the trial began, feed was gradually increased for approximately three weeks
when each group was consuming all the concentrates cleaned up between once-a-day feedings.
Minerals were self-fed throughout the feeding period, while hay was self-fed for the
first 70 days but restricted thereafter. Ratios of concentrates to roughages consumed
(including cob and shuck in snapped corn) ranged from 68:32 during the first month to
79:21 during the last month, with a gradually increasing proportion of concentrates
throughout the feeding period. Table 1 shows the average percentages of concentrates
and roughage consumed by each group for the entire trial. The following ration was fed:

Ground snapped corn -- full-fed according to appetite
Citrus molasses -- 2.0 pounds per head daily first 60 days and 4.0
pounds thereafter
41% cottonseed meal -- 2.5 pounds per head daily
Argentine Bahia grass hay -- self-fed the first 70 days but restricted
thereafter
Salt and steamed bonemeal -- free-choice
Vitamin A 25,000 I.U. per head daily
The corn and cottonseed meal were mixed each morning, and citrus molasses was
poued on top of the mixture in the trough. Half of the calves in each group were given
a 2 mg stilbestrol implant at the beginning of the trial. The calves were confined to
dry lot in a well-bedded steer feeding barn with 60 square feet of pen space and 2 feet
of tough space per head. Stilbestrol implanted and non-implanted calves in each group







-3-


were not penned separately.

Final live weights, taken after trucking 3 miles to Ouincy in the early morning,
were shrunk 3 percent. Final shrunk weights were used ih calculating gains, carcass yields,
and on-foot sale prices. As previously stated, starting weights were not shrunk This
procedure was used to minimize the fill factor in computing gains.

Carcass weights were hot weights less 2 1/2 percent. After a 48 hour chill,
carcasses were ribbed and graded to the nearest third of a grade by a U. S. grader and
Experiment Station personnel. Sale prices were actual prices paid by the packer for the
carcasses (Table 2).

Feed costs were based on local prices at the time cattle were in the feedlot
(Table 1). Prices are shown for various ingredients and an average for the entire ration.
Other costs (labor, pen rent, interest, and other expenses) were included in the charge
of $0.10 per head daily.

Carcass maturity, conformation, degree of marbling, and USDA quality grade data
were recorded for each carcass. Fat thickness over rib eye, amount of kidney and pelvic
fat, area of rib eye, and carcass weight data were used in estimating percentage of
closely trimmed boneless cuts from the round, rump, loin, rib, and chuck.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Gains generally were smaller and less efficient than in preceding trials
(Table 3)3, probably because only half of each group was implanted with stilbestrol. As
shown in Table 4, implanted calves gained considerably faster than those not implanted,
with the exception of steers in Lot 33 where implantation gave no benefit. Unfortunately
differences in feed intake between implanted and non-implanted calves are not available.
Implanted calves had heavier carcasses with no appreciable difference in other carcass
characteristics resulting from implantation. Differences due to implants were particularly
large in the two Charolais cross groups (Lots 34 and 35). Stilbestrol implants stimulated
gains for the first 152 days of the trial; response was negligible during the sixth month.

As shown in Table 3, Hereford calves (Lot 32) made the largest, most efficient
gain but did not have carcass yields as high as the five crossbred groups. If live
weights are adjusted to the same carcass yield, average daily gains of the crossbred lots
will be increased from 0.10 to 0.21 pound, and gains of the 3/4 Brahman-1/4 Shorthorn
calves (Lot 36) will be approximately the same as that of Lot 32. Net return based on
actual sale of carcasses was more favorable for the Hereford calves because of slightly
smaller feed intake and lighter initial weight, which was valued at a relatively high $24
per hundredweight. Because of the negative margin between cost of feeder calves and sale
of fat cattle, all groups showed an economic loss. The maximum initial value per 100 pounds
of the feeder calves going into the feedlot was calculated using the formula:

Gross sale price minus feed costs minus other feedlot costs X 100
Weight of feeder calves going into the feedlot

Using these calculations, values per 100 pounds ranged from $16.92 to $17.60 for the
various groups with the exception of Lot 35 which had an initial value of only $14.58
per hundredweight because of unusually slow, costly gains. Excluding Lot 35, there was a
difference of only $0.68 per hundredweight between the "break even" price that could
have been paid for the top and bottom performing group of calves. The margin needed to


3See footnote 2, page 1.








- 4-


break even between the initial value and actual sale price of the finished cattle ranged
from $3.66 for the Lot 32 Herefords to $6.83 per hundredweight for the Lot 35 Brahman-
Charolais-Angus crossbreds. Because of the depressed fat cattle market, an average
margin for all groups of $4.93 would have been needed to break even, as compared with
$1.91 in the 1963 trial, $1.67 in 1962, and $1.41 in 1961.4 The relatively high necessary
margin this year was partially due to relatively poor overall performance of all groups,
probably because half of each lot had no stilbestrol in this trial.

All the Brahman crossbred calves originated in liver fluke infested areas, and
28 of the 50 cattle had live flukes in their livers at slaughter. Following were the
number of livers from each group that passed veterinary inspection and the number
condemned:

Condemned
Lot Number Passed Flukes Other Parasites
32 10 -
33 4 4 2
34 4 6
35 5 5 ---
36 5 5 ---
37 2 8 ---

Totals 30 28 2

When the performance and carcasses of fluke-infested and non-infested cattle were compared,
it appeared that the flukes had not adversely affected gain, carcass weight, or carcass
grade. Loss of the liver itself was apparently the only harmful effect resulting from
the relatively light infestations.

Table 5 contains detailed carcass data. Differences in maturity, conformation,
and carcass grade were small among the six groups. Because of large rib eyes and thin
outside fat cover, the two lots of Charolais crossbreds (Lots 34 and 35) had slightly
higher estimated yields of closely trimmed, boneless round, rump, loin, rib, and chuck.
The 3/4 Brahman-1/4 Shorthorn carcasses had smaller rib eyes and slightly lower estimated
cutout. Stilbestrol did not affect any of the carcass characteristics recorded in this
study (Table 4).


e footnote 2, page
e footnote 2, page 1.












Table 1.- Feed Prices


Individual Feeds


Ground snapped corn
Citrus molasses
41% cottonseed meal + vitamin A
Argentine Bahia hay
Salt
Steamed bonemeal
Aurofac 10
24 mg stilbestrol implant


$40.00
35.00 and 37.50
85.00
22.50
36.00
90.00
0.90 pound
0.20 each


Entire Ration


Percent concentrates


Percent roughage

25
26
26
26
25
25


Cost ton feed

$43.27
42.91
42.80
42.79
42.99
43.11


Table 2.- Prices Received for Carcasses.


Price cwt.


S. Choice
S. Good
S. Standard


Per ton


Lot


Grade


$37.00
35.00
31.25






Table 3.- Feedlot Results Calf Fattening Trial, 1963-1964.


H


e


Number head
Number days
Ave. initial weight *
Ave. final weight *
Ave. gain
Ave. daily gain
Average Daily Ration:
Ground snapped corn
Citrus molasses
41% c. s. meal
Argentine Bahia hay
Feed Per 100 Pounds Gain:
Concentrates 9
Roughage **
Mineral
Cost
Carcass and Financial Data:
Ave. slaughter weight
Ave. carcass weight ***
Ave. carcass yield
Ave. carcass grade Av
Ave. price cwt. carcass
Ave. price cwt. on foot
Ave. cost cwt. feeders
Ave. cost head feeders
Ave. feed cost
Ave. cost cattle and feed
Sale price per head
Net return above costs cattle and feed
Sale price per head
Ave. feed cost
Other costs (0.10 day)
Initial value (sale price less costs)
Initial value cwt.
Initial weights at feedlot not shrunk
Numbers in parentheses are on shelled
"'" Hot weights less 2 1/2 percent.


Lot 32 Lot 33
1/4 Bra.
1/4 Ang.
!reford 1/2 Her.
10 10
180 180
528 656
924 1001
396 345
2.20 1.92


14.41
3.22
2.40
1.86

10(746)
84(248)
2.6
$ 21.59

924
561
60.73
e. good
$ 35.00
21.26
24.00
126.77
85.43
212.20
196.39
-15.81
196.39
85.43
18.00
92.96
17.60
final


15.44
3.22
2.40
2.04

1099(898)
107(308)
1.8
$ 25.92

1001
619
61.82
High good
$ 35.81
22.14
24.00
157.46
89.39
246.85
221.59
-25.26
221.59
89.39
18.00
114.20
17.41
weights at


Lot 36 Lot 37


Quincy packing plant shrunk 3 percent.


corn basis cob and shuck as roughage.


Lot 34
3/8 Bra.
3/8 Char.
1/4 Her.
10
180
653
1007
354
1.97

14.64
3.22
2.40
2.29

1030(844)
117(303)
1.9
$ 24.59

1007
622
61.72
Ave. good
$ 34.69
21.42
24.00
156.72
87.01
243.73
215.65
-28.08
215.65
87.01
18.00
110.64
16.9 4


17.52


Lot 35
3/8 Bra.
3/8 Char.
1/4 Ang.
10
180
648
933
285
1.58

14.65
3.22
2.40
2.34

1281(1050)
148(379)
3.6
$ 30.65

933
584
62.63
Low/ave. good
$ 34.19
21.41
24.00
155.57
87.32
242.89
199.82
-43.07
199.82
87.32
18.00
94.50
14.58


Lot 36


Lot 37


3/4 Bra.
1/4 Short.
10
180
552
906
353
1.96

15.38
3..22
2,40
2.03

1070(874)
103(299)
4.2
$ 25.31

906
572


63.18
Ave. good
$ 35.11
22.18
24.00
132.55
89.41
221.96
200.85
-21.11
200.85
89.41
18.00
93.44
16.92


1/2 Bra.
1/2 Short.
10
180
569
927
358
1.99

14.87
3.22
2.40
1.97

1030(843)
99(286)
4.3
$ 24.41

927
576
62.15
Ave./high good
$ 35.60
22.13
24.00
136.46
87.44
223.90
205.07
-18.83
205.07
87.44
18.00
99.63
17.52


"-~-~I-"I~----~


---








Table 4.- Stilbestrol Implants Versus No Stilbestrol


Number head
Number days
Ave. initial weight
Ave. final weight
Ave. gain
Ave. daily gain
Difference
Carcass and Financial Data:
Ave. slaughter weight
Ave. carcass weight
Difference
Ave. carcass yield
Ave. price cwt. carcass
Ave. price cwt. on foot
Ave. carcass grade
Ave. degree marbling
Ave. sq. in. rib eye
Ave. fat cover rib eye
Ave. percent kidney fat
Est. yield closely trimmed cuts
Ave. sale price
Difference within lot due to
implantation


Lot 32


24 mg.
implant
5
180
528
953
425
2.36
+ 0.33


953
583
+43
61.11
$ 35.00
21.39
Ave. good
Slight +
10.98
0.50
3.0
49.96
$203.91


Lot 33


Lot 34


+15.05


Lot 35


+ 66 7-- + 7 ,)h-on


+1 6R


+37 Q7


24oi on


Lot 32


No
implant
5
180
528
894
366
2.03


894
540

60.33
$ 35.00
21.12
Ave. good
Slight +
11.24
0.37
3.0
51.09
$188.86


24 mg.
implant
5
180
655
1005
349
1.94
+ 0.05

1005
624
+10
62.06
$ 35.40
21.97
High good
Small -
11.36
0.39
2.7
50.48
$220.76


No.
implant
5
180
657
997
340
1.89


997
614

61.82
$ 36.23
22.30
High good
Small
11.53
0.40
3.0
50.43
$222.42


24 mg.
implant
5
180
654
1077
423
2.35
+ 0.77

1077
670
+97
62.26
$ 35.00
21.79
Ave. good
Slight +
12.82
0.35
3.1
51.10
$234.64


No.
implant
5
180
652
937
285
1.58


937
573

61.15
$ 34.32
20.99
Low good
Slight
11.39
0.25
2.5
51.82
$196.67


24 mg.
implant
5
180
649
982
332
1.85
+ 0.53

982
611
+53
62.25
$ 34.73
21.62
Ave. good
Slight -
11.69
0.31
2.6
51.35
$212.22


NO
implant
5
180
647
885
237
1.32


885
558

63.06
$ 33.60
21.19
Low good
Slight
12.13
0.22
3.1
52.40
$187.42










Table 4 (continued)


Lot 36 Lot 37 Lot 37 All Lots
24 mg. No 24 mg. No 24 mg. No
implant implant implant implant implant implant


Number head
Number days
Ave. initial weight
Ave. final weight
Ave. gain
Ave. daily gain
Difference
Carcass and Financial Data:
Ave. slaughter weight
Ave. carcass weight
Difference
Ave. carcass yield
Ave. price cwt. carcass
Ave. price cwt. on foot
Ave. carcass grade
Ave. degree marbling
Ave. sq. in. rib eye
Ave. fat cover rib eye
Ave. percent kidney fat
Est. yield closely trimmed cuts
Ave. sale price
Difference within lot due to implantation


5
180
552
932
380
2.11
+ 0.30

932
584
+24
62.65
$ 35.00
21.93
Low good
Slight -
10.05
0.40
2.9
49.67
$ 204.40
+7.09


5
180
553
879
326
1.81


879
560

63.75
$ 35.22
22.45
Ave. good
Slight
10.04
0.41
3.4
49.59
$ 197.31


5
180
568
949
380
2.11
+ 0.24

949
591
+30
62.30
$ 35.44
22.08
Ave. good
Slight +
10.71
0.38
3.1
50.11
$ 209.46
+8.78


5
180
569
905
336
1.87


905
561

61.99
$ 35.77
22.17
High good
Small -
10.58
0.41
3.6
49.89
$ 200.68


30
180
601
983
382
2.12
+ 0.37

983
611
+43
62.11
$ 35.10
21.80
Ave. good
Slight
11.27
0.39
2.9
50.44
$ 214.23
+15.34


FSB
5/21/64
300 CC


30
180
601
916
315
1.75


916
568

61.95
$ 35.04
21.71
Ave. good
Slight +
11.15
0.34
3.1
50.87
$ 198.89


----











Table 5.- Carcass Study.


Lot 32 Lot 33 Lot 34 Lot 35 Lot 36 Lot 37
1/4 Brahman 3/8 Brahman 3/8 Brahman
Hereford 1/4 Angus 3/8 Charolais 3/8 Charolais 3/4 Brahman 1/2 Brahman
1/2 Hereford 1/4 Hereford 1/4 Angus 1/4 Shorthorn 1/2 Shorthorn

Carcass weight 561 619 622 584 572 576
Maturity *' A A+ A+ A+ A A+
Conformation High good High good High good High good Ave. good High good
Marbling Small Small Small Slight + Slight Small +
USDA grade High good High good Ave. good Ave. good Ave. good High good
Rib eye area (sq. in.) 11.11 11.44 12.10 11.91 10.05 10.65
Rib eye area per cwt. carcass (sq. in.) 1.98 1.85 1.95 2.04 1.76 1.85
Fat cover rib eye (in.) 0.44 0,40 0.30 0.27 0.41 0.40
Est. kidney fat (percent) 3.00 2.90 2.80 2.90 3.20 3.40
Est. kidney fat (pounds) 16.80 18.00 17.40 16.90 18.30 19.60
Est. yield closely trimmed boneless rib,
chuck, loin, rump, and round (percent) 50.53 50.45 51.46 51.87 49.63 50.00

7 Maturity Groups
A. Red, porous chine bones; soft, pearly white cartilages.
B. Intermediate maturity for Prime, Choice, or Good grades.
C. Approaching maximum maturity for Prime, Choice, or Good grades.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs