Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26.

Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26

Objectives Understanding of the approaches to improving cattle performance through feeding, environment, management, genetics Knowledge of various management practices associated with cow/calf, feeder, and finishing Discuss the role of environmental management in cattle feeding Investigate the economic picture of the beef industry

Introduction >250 breeds identified Breeds distinguished by:
100’s others not identified w/ a breed name Breeds distinguished by: Color Color pattern Polled/horned Extreme differences in form or shape

Introduction Purebred cattle Major U.S. breeds
What does it mean to be purebred? Major U.S. breeds Early 1900’s Shorthorn, Hereford, and Angus were primary breeds Today >60 breeds available <20 have widespread impact on the national herd

Introduction Registration numbers Breeds
Angus, Limousin, Simmental, Hereford are the most common in regard to registrations Breeds

Improving Beef Cattle through Breeding Methods
Selected animals that are superior to herd average Selecting traits that are highly heritable

Traits and their Measurement
Economically important traits Reproductive performance Weaning Weight Postweaning Growth Feed Efficiency Carcass Merit Longevity (functional traits) Conformation Freedom from genetic defects

Reproductive Performance Goal of >85% of calves weaned Calf every 365d or less Entire herd calving season <90d Fertility is not highly heritable (~20%) High heritabilities for: Birth wt. ~40% heritable Scrotal Circumference ~40% heritable (>32cm) Increased SC produce more semen Half sisters that reach puberty earlier Best way to improve reproductive performance is to improve environment

What 2 ways can we improve environment? Select bulls that are reproductively sound Performance can also be improved by crossbreeding Weaning Wt. Measured by actual wt. Reflects milking & mothering ability of dam Preweaning growth rate ww is commonly adjusted to 205d equivalent to account for variance in age of calf/dam ww are commonly expressed as ratio to the other calves in the group

Figure 25. 1 Variation or differences in weaning weight in beef cattle
Figure Variation or differences in weaning weight in beef cattle. The variation shown by the bell-shaped curve could be representative of a breed or a large herd. The vertical line in center is the average or the mean, which is 410 lb. Note that the number of calves is greater around the average and is less at the extremely light and extremely heavyweights. Source: Colorado State University.

Figure Comparison of breed averages and the variation within each breed for weaning weight in beef cattle. The vertical lines are the breed averages. Note that some individual animals in breeds B and C can be lower in weaning weight than the average of breed A. Source: Colorado State University.

Weaning weight can be selected for (~30% h) Postweaning Growth Weaning from finished wt. Usually they are very efficient Weaning wt. and postweaning growth often combined to one trait Adjusted 365d wt. (160 * ADG) + adjusted 205d wt. = Adj. 365d wt. ADG & Ad 365d wt. highly heritable (~40%)

Feed Efficiency Lbs. feed/lb. gain Can be misleading Hard to measure Differences in production goal High heritability ~45% Carcass Merit Quality grades and yield grades Can measure by ultrasound or by visual analysis Highly heritable >30%

Longevity Important, especially for cows Bulls may be kept 3-5 yrs. Highly productive cows 4-15 yrs. Reasons for culling Skeletal unsoundness Poor udders Eye problems Lost/worn teeth Few cows highly productive >10yrs.

Conformation Form, shape, visual appearance Source of controversy Traits are medium to high heritability (30-60%) Genetic Defects Usually occur infrequently Common defects Double muscling Slow growing, poor fat deposition Syndactyly (Mule Foot)

Osteoporosis (Marble Bone Disease) Short lower jaw, protruding tongue Hydrocephalus Bulging, fluid filled head Arthrogryposis (Palate-Pastern Syndrome) Pastern tendons contracted Upper part of mouth not fused together Dwarfism Many of these result in death early

Bull Selection Bull selection accounts for 80-90% of genetic improvement over time Record accuracy is much higher due to number of offspring Most progressive seedstock producers record ( on their bulls): Birth wt. Weaning wt. Yearling wt.

Bull Selection Breeding Values
Phenotype determined by genotype + environment Genotype determined by two factors: Breeding value (what genes are present) Nonadditive value (how genes are combined) Values are collected and analyzed by computer by breed organizations EPD’s are used to express these values

Bull Selection Sire Summaries
Data that has made sire selection much more accurate & effective Published by most breed associations Measurements by EPD’s and ACC (Accuracy) EPD Birth wt. Milk Weaning-growth Maternal Yrlg. Wt.

Bull Selection Must be careful about stacking pedigrees ACC
Measures expected change in the EPD as more progeny data is available >.90 very little expected change <.70 might change dramatically Must be careful about stacking pedigrees

Selecting Replacement Heifers
Select more than needed for replacement Selection of heifers Weaning (7-10 mos.) Cull only those whose wt. is too light to show estrus at 15 mos. Cull heifers too large in frame & birth wt. Yearling (12-15 mos.) Cull those not reaching desired breeding wt. ( lbs.) After Breeding (19-21 mos.) Cull open heifers Cull those calving in latter third of calving season

Selecting Replacement Heifers
After weaning first calf (31-34 mos.) Cull to actual needed numbers based on weaning wt. performance of first calf Select for early pregnancy

Cow Selection Select based upon their performance and the performance of their offspring & additional evidence that they can be productive if bred back Measured by: Pregnancy Weaning/yearling wts EPD’s of cows

Crossbreeding programs for Commercial producers
Most producers travel w/in 150 mi to select bulls for natural AI Must have knowledge of who has good genetics Selection should be based on how each breed complements the other Why is crossbreeding advantageous for commercial producers?

Crossbreeding programs for Commercial producers
Most heterosis is expressed by weaning time Two breed rotations Ex. Two breed rotation w/ a terminal cross All terminal cross calves are sold Three breed rotation

Figure Heterosis resulting from crossbreeding for pounds of calf weaned per cow exposed to breeding. Source: USDA.

Figure 25. 7 Two-breed rotation cross
Figure Two-breed rotation cross. Females sired by breed A are mated to breed B bulls, and heifers sired by breed B are mated to breed A bulls. This will increase the pounds of calf weaned per cow bred by approximately 15%. Source: Colorado State University.

Figure 25. 8 Three-breed rotation cross
Figure Three-breed rotation cross. Females sired by a specific breed are bred to the breed of the next bull in rotation. This will increase the pounds of calf weaned per cow by approximately 20%. Source: Colorado State University.

Figure 25. 9 Two-breed rotation and terminal site crossbreeding system
Figure Two-breed rotation and terminal site crossbreeding system. Sires are used in the two-breed rotation primarily to produce replacement heifers. Terminal cross sires are mated to the less productive females. This system will increase the pounds of calf weaned per cow bred by more than 20%. Source: Colorado State University.

Cow-Calf Management Effective and profitable management of cow/calf operations is dependent upon manager’s ability to budget time to critical activities Two goals of the operation Generate profit Provide opportunities for others Finishing cattle Club calves

Cow-Calf Management Criteria for measuring cow/calf profitability
Calf crop % Number of calves/cow in breeding herd Average wt at weaning Wt at 7-9 mos. Annual cow cost Dollars required to keep a cow each yr See table 26.2 for break-even guidelines

Cow-Calf Management Costs & Returns Compute using enterprise budget
Break out each part of the operation in order to evaluate profitability more closely Typically, increasing weaning % decreases breakeven price Why might this not always be true

Figure 26. 2 Annual cow–calf returns and cattle inventory
Figure Annual cow–calf returns and cattle inventory. Source: Livestock Marketing Information Center.

Management for Optimum Calf Crop Percentages
Feed heifers adequately to reach 15 mos ( lbs) Heifers bred to calve early in season More likely to conceive early as 2 & 3 yr olds Manage postpartum interval for heifers Return to breeding time May feed separately from mature cows Monitor BCS Fat/thin cattle have more problems Observe closely at calving to prevent dystocia (especially heifers)

Manage birth weight Critical balance between size of calf and dystocia rates Heavier birth weights usually = heavier calves Can also lead to problems Evaluate bulls for soundness, fertility Bulls can have low libido and/or low sperm counts cow:bull ratio – 30:1 Crossbreeding can improve calf crop % by 8-12% More vigorous calves

Adequate energy intake Monitor energy intake closely at critical times: Puberty Calving Postpartum period Balanced diet w/ protein, min/vit Keep calf losses during gestation low – 2- 3% target Elevated levels often indicate presence of infectious diseases Keep calf mortality low – 2-3% Have a plan for severe weather & health challenges Can reduce calf crop by 10-30% if not done well

Management for Optimum Weaning Weights
Calve early in the season Each missed cycle during breeding results in lb lighter weaning Breeders typically limit breeding window to 90d Keeps calves uniform Forage/feed availability Influences calf growth rate Especially until calf consumes forages on their own @ about 3 mos

Growth stimulants Increase weaning wts 5-15% Ralgro, Synovex C, Compudose, etc. Implanted as pellets under skin Don’t use on breeding stock Communicate with buyers for appropriate implant strategy Can reduce grading and meat quality Creep feed Can greatly influence weaning wt Also adds cost Best used under drought or marginal feed quality situations

Disease management Especially of the cow – reduces milk production and intake of calf Genetic selection Select for milk production & weaning wt in replacement females Effective selection can result in a 4-6lb/calf/yr increase Crossbreeding Avg 20% increase in weaning wts Some increase due to reproductive performance, some heterosis Crossbreds tend to wean more & heavier calves

Management for Low Annual Cow Costs
Adequate income/expense records should be carefully analyzed Studies show a range of $61/hd breakeven to $117/hd breakeven Contributes to major differences in profits/cow 5 ways low cost producers reduce costs Reduce supplemental feed costs Rotational graze Genetics Reduced labor Strong herd health management

Management for Low Annual Cow Costs
Feed costs usually account for 50-70% of annual cow costs Period from weaning to last 1/3 of gestation is time to save money Labor costs compose 15-20% of annual cow costs 15-20 labor hours/cow unit/yr is normal Inefficient operations can be twice that amount Palpate cows for pregnancy ~45 after breeding season Make decisions on how to handle open cows Open cows put large financial drains on operations

Stocker-Yearling Production
Primary factors affecting stocker-yearling production: Marketing (purchasing & selling) Gaining ability of the cattle Amount of available forage Health of the cattle Be aware of shrink losses Can be 3-12% Can take 2-3 wks to recover lost wt Stocker-yearling cattle that are purchased & sold multiple times are at high risk For what?

Stocker-Yearling Production
Most common diseases: Shipping fever Other respiratory diseases Maintaining a constant supply of high-quality forages is key to profits

Types of Cattle Feeding Operations
Commercial Feedlots Typically >1000 hd Owned by individual, partnership, corporation May own cattle, or feed cattle owned by others Feeders Investors Producers Packers Farmer-Feeder Feedlots <1000 hd one-time capacity Usually owned/operation by individual or family

Advantages/disadvantages: Farmer-feeder can utilize cattle to market home- grown feeds…increasing their value Farmer-feeder can utilize high roughage feeds more effectively Farmer-feeder can spread labor distribution amongst other enterprises Farmer-feeder can be more flexible…devoting time and resources to other enterprises when cattle feeding is not profitable Commercial feedlots usually collect and utilize data more effectively & result in better management decisions

Custom feeding reduces operational costs and spreads some risk to the customer Must keep lots full of cattle to be productive…turn- over rates of 2-2.5x/yr Farmer-feeders typically feed one group/yr

Feedlot Management Facilities Investment
Varies w/ type and location of feedlots Pen capacities can range from on open dirt lots Mounded for dry areas May have feed mill on site Typical investment/hd at full capacity ~$150 for commercial/custom feeder operations, $200- $500/hd for farmer-feeder operations Due to higher facilities investments

Feedlot Management Cost of Feeder Cattle
Estimate feed cost & price the cattle will bring at market These figures dictate what price operators can afford to pay Feeder cattle priced according to: Weight Sex Fill (content of digestive tract) Skeletal size Thickness Body condition

Feedlot Management Commercial feeders may prefer to target some animals with compensatory gain potential Fed low-quality forages, thin, and will gain quickly when put on good ration Heifers usually priced a few cents cheaper due to slower gains Fill differences can account for lb fluctuations in live wts

Feedlot Management Feed Costs
Feed typically 60-75% of cost of putting additional wt on cattle Measured by feed cost/lb gain Differences can be explained by: Genetics Use of implants Use of feed additives Feed cost/lb gain gets higher w/ increased days on feed Avoid feeding cattle past ideal combinations of slaughter wt, quality & yield grades

Feedlot Management Nonfeed costs Gross receipts
A.k.a – yardage costs – cost of gain other than feed Expressed as cost/lb gain, or cost/d Examples: Death losses Veterinary costs Gross receipts 80% of cattle fed sold directly to a packer Standard shrink of 4% 58% of cattle sold on carcass basis NE, CO, IA account for 2/3 of steers marketed in U.S.

Feedlot Management TX, IA, MN, NE, WI account for 3/5 of all bulls/cows marketed Slaughter cattle w/ yield grades of 4 or 5 heavily discounted

Figure Average monthly returns to cattle feedlots in the Southern Plains. Source: Livestock Marketing Information Center.

Figure Choice steer prices compared to breakeven prices for the Southern Plains, Source: Livestock Marketing Information Center.

Production & Prices Beef production & cattle prices highly correlated
Production low…price high; producers keep more replacements & cull fewer cows Eventually, beef production increases beyond consumer demand…price declines Producers w/ breakevens below industry average have competitive advantage

Environmental Management
4 primary issues Dust Manage w/ regular pen maintenance How? Odor Regular pen maintenance Use runoff holding ponds Proper nutrition management Reduce N, P feeding rates Composting

Environmental Management
Flies Chemical control, biological control, both Water quality Main source of attention Mainly affected by waste management Incorrect handling, storage, application can greatly affect water quality Use BMP’s to minimize runoff problems Ditches Dams Grass filter strips Controlled drainage systems Lagoons

Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Unit 10: Beef Cattle Chapters 25 & 26."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback