This article was downloaded by: [Washington State University Libraries ]On: 23 November 2014, At: 20:22Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

New Zealand Journal of ExperimentalAgriculturePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzc19

Comparison of the growth and carcasscomposition of purebred Angus and crossbredHereford—Angus and Friesian—Angus steersJ. J. Bass a , R. L. Baker a , A. H. Carter a & L. R. Ackerley aa Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre , Ministry of Agriculture andFisheries , P.B., Hamilton , New ZealandPublished online: 19 Jan 2012.

To cite this article: J. J. Bass , R. L. Baker , A. H. Carter & L. R. Ackerley (1975) Comparison of the growthand carcass composition of purebred Angus and crossbred Hereford—Angus and Friesian—Angus steers, NewZealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 3:3, 207-211, DOI: 10.1080/03015521.1975.10425804

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03015521.1975.10425804

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publicationare the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and usecan be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

INTRODUCTIONThe New Zealand beef herd is derived mainly

from breeds of British origin, particularly Angus(75%), Hereford (15%), and Beef Shorthorn(5%) (Everitt et al. 1970), and these breedshave provided approximately 30% of the beefand veal exported from New Zealand (Barton1966). The productivity of the national beef herdcould be increased by use of superior bulls fromthe existing breeds, or by crossbreeding withselected traditional and imported breeds. Alreadya number of breeds new to New Zealand havebeen imported and are included in progeny testingand crossbreeding trials to determine whether theywill improve the existing beef herd (Carter1972). It has been reported by Warwick (1968)that crossbreeds show an increase in fertility,maternal ability, and growth compared with theirpurebreeds. More recently, Cundiff (1970) hasreviewed the evidence showing that the hybridvigour achieved by the systematic crossing ofBritish breeds can increase beef production by20-25% when both crossbred cows and calvesare considered.

The present paper compares the carcasscharacteristics of the straightbred Angus (A x A)and crossbred Hereford-Angus (H x A) andFriesian-Angus (F X A) steers which are part ofthe evaluation programme described by Carter(1972) .

207

Comparison of the growth and carcasscomposition of purebred Angus and

crossbred Hereford-Angus and Friesian-Angussteers

By J. J. BASS, R. L. BAKER, A. H. CARTER, AND L. R. ACKERLEY

Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries,P.B., Hamilton, New Zealand

(Received 7 May 1975)

ABSTRACT

Growth and carcass composition of purebred Angus steers and crossbred Hereford-Angusand Friesian-Angus steers were compared. Friesian-Angus had the heaviest slaughter andcarcass weights and produced more trimmed boneless meat than the other two breeds.Hereford-Angus produced less trimmed boneless meat than Friesian-Angus, althoughdifferences were not significant. Purebred Angus produced less saleable meat than thecrossbreeds.

MATERIALS AND METHODSAnimals and management

In the first year of the long-term breed­evaluation programme (Carter 1972) at TokanuiResearch Station the herd of Angus cows pro­duced calves sired by 11 Angus, 4 Hereford, and4 Friesian sires. Calves were born in spring1971, males being castrated after identificationand recording of birth weight and birthday. Steerswere raised as single-suckled calves and weanedon the same day at an average age of 133 days.They were then grazed on pasture throughout thetrial, and hay was fed during winter. Animalswere routinely treated for lice and internalparasites. A balanced half of the 165 steers alivein May 1972 was transferred for grazing to theRukuhia Research Station.

At about 20 months of age (May 1973) thesteers grazing at Tokanui were divided into twogroups, the first to be slaughtered at the RuakuraAbattoir and the second to be slaughtered at theHorotiu Freezing Works. All steers grazed atRukuhia were slaughtered at Horotiu FreezingWorks with the group from Tokanui. Thenumber of steers per breed by grazing-slaughterlocation is shown in Table 1.Slaughter procedure

Steers were weighed off pasture, starved for24 hours, and weighed again before slaughter.For steers slaughtered at Horotiu Freezing Works

N.Z. Journal of Experimental Agriculture 3: 207-11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es ]

at 2

0:22

23

Nov

embe

r 20

14

208 N.Z. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL AGRICULTURE, VOL. 3, 1975

TABLE 1- Number of steers slaughtered by breed and grazing-slaughter location

Grazing-slaughter group

Breed Tokanui-Ruakura Tokanui-Horotiu Rukuhia-Horotiu Total

A X A (tl)t 15 25 51 91H X A (4) 16 5 21 42F X A (4) 14 13 27

t Number of sires used; first parent listed is sire.

on 29 May the hot carcass weight (exciudingkidneys and kidney fat) and carcass grade wererecorded.

Steers slaughtered at the Ruakura Abattoirwere slaughtered in five separate groups between7 and 30 May. Each group consisted of threesteers per breed, except for one group whichconsisted of three A X A, four H X A, and twoF X A. Groups were balanced for weight withinbreeds and for age between breeds.

Hot carcass weights were recorded with kidneysand kidney fat included. Cold sides were gradedfor export and local markets by experiencedgraders, weighed, and quartered between the 10thand 11th rib. Weights of the fore- and hind­quarters from both sides were recorded, kidneysand kidney fat being retained with the hind­quarters.

Measurements A, B, C, D, and E (AgriculturalResearch Council 1965) were taken on the cutsurface between the 10th and 11th ribs.

Quarters were aged in the chiller at 4°c for48 hours and the fore- and hindquarters of theleft side were broken down into wholesale jointsby an experienced technician. Jointing wasaccording to the N.Z. Commercial System (Everitt& Jury 1964). After weighing, joints were dividedinto trimmed boneless meat, meat trimmings,excess fat, and bone which were then weighedseparately.

Statistical analysisLeast squares analyses were undertaken on all

steers slaughtered for weights from birth toslaughter and carcass weight, carcass grade, anddressing percentage. Preliminary analyses indi­cated that interactions of breed with age and

TABLE 2 - Least squares effects of breed, age of dam, grazing-slaughter location, and regression of weighton age or slaughter age (kg)

No. of Birth Wean- Year- 20 Slaughter Hot Gradet %steers wt. ing ling month weights Carcass Dressing

wt. wt. wt. Full Empty wt.(Jan) (Oct) (May)

BreedA X A 91 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0H X A 42 0.45 3.5 8.9 13.5 13.9 15.1 10.9 -0.11 0.9F x A 27 1.50 9.9 33.5 41.9 47.6 44.6 27.2 -0.02 0.9A.ge 0/ dam2-year-old 57 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.03-ycar-old 44 0.41 12.5 4.1 3.8 1.7 1.7 0.7 -0.25 -0.24-year-old 17 2.59 23.4 13.0 7.0 9.9 8.1 1.5 0.20 1.35-year-old and older 42 4.45 26.2 20.2 19.2 16.6 16.0 9.2 -0.03 0.0Grazing-slaughter groupTokanui-Ruakura 45 -0.59 4.4 22.0 39.9 42.0 33.7 36.5 -1.56 5.1Tokanui-Horotiu 30 -1.32 0.7 18.5 34.5 41.2 32.6 20.5 -0.30 -0.9Rukuhia-Horotiu 85 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0

Regression on age 160 -0.10 0.83 0.80 0.60Regression on slaughter

age 160 0.51 0.51 0.36 -0.002 0.03General mean 160 26.97 134.8 269.7 352.2 341.0 337.2 185.0 2.41 54.6Residual S.D. 135 3.63 18.5 24.2 28.4 30.5 29.7 19.1 0.45 1.91

t Grading system operating in May-June 1973; 1 = GAO, 2 = FAO, 3 = YAO

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es ]

at 2

0:22

23

Nov

embe

r 20

14

BASS et al.: CARCASS COMPOSITION OF CROSSBRED STEERS 209

with grazing-slaughter location were not signi­ficant, so these effects were deleted. The finalmodel included effects of breed, sires withinbreed, age of dam (2, 3, 4, and 5+ years),grazing-slaughter location, and regression on age.Analyses of the sample of steers (45) slaughteredat the Ruakura Abattoir, where more detailedcarcass information had been recorded, showedthat for these data no adjustment for slaughterage was necessary.

RESULTSAnalysis of all steers slaughtered

Least squares estimates of effects of breed, ageof dam, grazing-slaughter location, and regressionof weight on age or slaughter age are shownin Table 2. Effects for sires are not shown, sincein general the variation among sires within breedswas non-significant, and the small number ofsteers per sire precluded accurate progeny testassessments. However, analysis of data up to theyearling (October) weight with heifers includedhas shown that variation between sires on progenyperformance for growth is both statistically signi­ficant and important (Carter & Baker unpub­lished) . Table 2 shows clearly the significanteffects of age of dam and steer's age on liveand carcass weights. The effect of age of damdeclined as the steers became older and was notsignificant for hot carcass weight or dressingpercentage (hot carcass weight/empty weight),but was significant for carcass grade. Regressionon age was significant for all traits except carcassgrade. Regression coefficients also decreased assteers grew older. The growth performance of theRukuhia steers was substantially below that oftheir contemporaries at Tokanui. The slaughterlocation significantly affected carcass grade,dressing percentage, and hot carcass weight.Although empty slaughter weights were similar,steers slaughtered at Horotiu graded lower, hadlower dressing percentages, and thus lower hotcarcass weights than steers slaughtered atRuakura. The reduced dressing percentages andhot carcass weights can be almost entirelyaccounted for by the removal of internal fat atHorotiu but not at Ruakura. The lower gradingof the carcasses is not so easy to explain. Boththe lower carcass weights at Horotiu and thedifferent personnel carrying out the grading couldbe implicated.

As a result of the widespread autumn feedshortage in the Waikato in the autumn of 1973,steers lost weight over the last 4 months beforeslaughter. The H x A steers grew slightly fasterthan A X A to achieve a 4% greater 20-monthweight and a 6% greater hot carcass weight; the

F x A steers had a weight superiority of 7%at weaning, 12% at 20 months, and had 15%more hot carcass weight. There was no significantdifference between the three breed types incarcass grade, and F X A steers graded as well asA X A. Dressing percentage was higher inF x A and H X A than in A X A steers.

Analysis of the data collected at theRuakura abattoir

Table 3 compares the more important carcasscharacteristics of the three breeds.

F X A pre-slaughter and hot carcass weightswere greater than those of Ax A, and thisdifference appeared in all other measurementstaken except meat trimmings. When total trimmer'boneless meat, bone, excess fat, and mealtrimmings were expressed as a percentage of leftside carcass weight minus the weights of kidneyand kidney fat (l.s.c.w.), there were only minordifferences between the two breeds. Thus althoughthe percentage composition of the F X A andA X A were similar, the F X A produced aheavier carcass and more saleable meat.

Pre-slaughter and hot carcass weights of H X Awere slightly greater than those of Ax A, butdifferences were not significant. Although H X Ahad more excess fat and trimmed boneless meatthan the Angus, there were no significantdifferences between weights of bone and meattrimmings. When weights of meat, bone, excessfat. and trimmings were expressed as a percentageof l.s.c.w., A X A had a higher percentage of boneand H X A a higher percentage of excess fat.H X A, although only slightly heavier than theA x A, produced more saleable meat.

F X A tended to be heavier than H X A forall weights recorded and was significantly heavierfor total bone; but when results were expressedas a percentage of works carcass weight, H X Awas higher for trimmed boneless meat and fatand lower than F X A for percentage bone andmeat trimmings.

Hot carcass weight, fat depth over the m. longis­simus dorsi, and export and local meat gradesare given in Table 4. All animals were reasonablywell finished and graded either GAO or FAO forthe export market and first grade for the localmarket. There was a similar range of backfatthickness in both GAO and FAO grades, indicat­ing that fat thickness did not provide the basisfor separating the carcasses into these grades.

DISCUSSIONIn this trial F X A had the heaviest and

A X A the lightest live weights and hot carcassweights. This confirms for F X A and A x A

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es ]

at 2

0:22

23

Nov

embe

r 20

14

210 N.z. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL AGRICULTURE, VOL. 3, 1975

TABLE 3 - The least square means of the carcass data and a comparison between breeds using Duncan'sMultiple Range Test for the steers slaughtered at Ruakura

Number of animalsPreslaughter weight

Hot carcass weight

I.s.c.w.

Trimmed boneless meat (l.s.)

Bone (l.s.)

Trimmings (I.s.)

Excess fat (l.s.)

Percentage compositions:% trimmed boneless meat

% bone

% trimmings

% excess fat

A X A

15339bA

194bB

93bB

55.05bB

25.55bA

2.94aA

8.31bB

59.21aA

27.85aA

3.11aA

8.93bB

H X A

16363

abA

211abAB

101abAB

60.5aAB

25.66bA

2.59aA

10.86aA

60.22aA

25.59bA

2.56aA

10.76abAB

F X A

14378

aA

222aA

106aA

62.89aA

28.43aA

2.87aA

10.40aAB

59.65aA

26.92abA

2.69aA

9.74aA

S.D.

38.70

26.47

12.30

7.45

3.06

1.53

2.37

2.09

2.25

1.41

1.76

Sig, ofBreeds

*

*

*

*

*

N.S.

*

N.S.

t

N.S.

*

I.s. left sidel.s.c.w, left side carcass weight minus kidney and kidney fat weightst significant difference at 10% levela, b, & * significant difference at 5% levelA, B significant difference at 1% levelt. Composition of left side only

the results reported by Hight et aI. (1973), whoshowed the frozen carcass weight of F X A to be12% greater than that of Ax A. PurebredHereford and Angus have been compared in feed­lot trials, and it was found that the Hereford hada higher post-weaning daily gain than the Angus(Cundiff 1970). Barton (1968, 1972) found thatthe Hereford had a higher post-weaning daily gainthan the Angus, but the carcass weights in the1970 trial were in the reverse order to that ofdaily gain (i.e., Angus, Hereford, and Friesian)

because of the higher body weights of the Angusat the beginning of this trial.

Both crossbreeds in the present trial producedsignificantly more trimmed boneless meat than thepurebred Angus. There were no significant breeddifferences when the percentages of trimmed bone­less meat were compared, H x A having thehighest meat percentage and A X A the lowest.

In the grading of these animals there was con­siderable overlap in the backfat thicknesses of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es ]

at 2

0:22

23

Nov

embe

r 20

14

BASS et al.: CARCASS COMPOSITION OF CROSSBRED STEERS 211

TABLE 4 - Export and local carcass grades for the steers slaughtered at Ruakura

Breed Export Grade Backfat (mm) Hot carcass Localnumbers % C D E weight (kg) grade

AxAGAQ 9 60 4.1 4.9 4.05 200.0 1st gradeRangej 2.0 - 8.0 2.0 -10.0 1.0 - 7.0 165.0 - 226.0 15FAQ 6 39.9 2.5 3.7 2.6 184.0Range 1.0 - 5.0 1.0 - 5.0 1.0 - 4.0 113.0 - 230.0YAQ

HxAGAQ 12 75 5.7 6.6 5.5 211.0 1st gradeRange 3.0 -10.0 3.0 -13.0 2.0 -10.0 180.0 - 245.0 16FAQ 4 25 3.5 5.1 3.2 209.0Range 2.0 - 6.0 3.0 - 8.0 2.0 - 5.0 200.0 - 216.0YAQ 0

F X AGAQ 11 78.5 4.4 5.1 4.45 231.0 1st gradeRange 2.0 - 8.0 2.0 -10.0 2.0 - 8.0 184.0 - 286.0 14FAQ 2 14.3 3.0 4.5 4.5 190.0Range 2.0 - 4.0 3.0 - 7.0 3.0 - 6.0 176.0 - 204.0YAQ 7.14 2.5 5.0 3.0 181.0

t Range Range within the preceding breed and grade

GAQ and FAQ export grades, although animalswith the greatest fat thicknesses always gradedGAQ. The lack of a consistent relationshipbetween grade and objective carcass measure­ments agrees with the conclusions of Everitt &Evans (1970), Barton (1972), and Hight et al.(1973) .

The results presented here show that F X Aproduced the heaviest carcass and the greatestquantity of trimmed boneless meat and gradedjust as well as H X A and A X A. However,these results are from only one year's slaughterwith too few sires per breed for a fully represen­tative breed comparison. This trial will becontinued for a number of years to compre­hensivly evaluate these and other breeds.

AcknowledgmentsThe co-operation of the staff at Tokanui Research

Station, in particular Mr K. Jones, and Mr C. Bumsand the staff at the Ruakura Abattoir; Mr J. Wilsonof Ruakura Genetics Section for technical assistanceand Dr A. H. Kirton and Mr K. E. Jury for theirconstructive advice.

REFERENCESAgricultural Research Council 1965: "Recommended

Procedures for Use in the Measurement of BeefCattle and Carcasses". Agricultural ResearchCouncil, London.

Barton, R. A. 1966: Sheep/arming Annual, MasseyUniversity: 61.

---- 1968: Ibid.: 103.

1972: Ibid.: 57.

Carter, A. H. 1972: N.Z. Journal of Agriculture125(3): 56.

Cundiff, L. V. 1970: Journal of Animal Science 30:694.

Everitt, G. C.; Evans, S. T. 1970: Proceedings ofN.Z. Society of Animal Production 30: 144.

Everitt, G. C.; Evans, S. T.; Ward, J. O. B. 1970:N.Z. beef production, processing and marketing.N.Z. Agricultural Science 4: 113.

Everitt, G. C.; Jury, K. E. 1964: N.Z. Journal ofAgricultural Research 7: 158.

Hight, G. K.; Everitt, G. C.; Jury, K. E. 1973: Ibid.16: 519.

Warwick, E. J. 1968: World Review of AnimalProduction IV, 19-20: 37.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es ]

at 2

0:22

23

Nov

embe

r 20

14