PertanikaJ. Trop. Agric. Sci. 25(1): 19 - 26 (2002) ISSN: 1511-3701© Universiti Putra Malaysia Press

The Distribution of Muscle and Bone Weight in Swamp Buffalo(Bubalus bubalis). Bos indicus and Bos taurus Steers

E.R. JOHNSON1, D.D. CHARLES2, & DA. BAKER1 School of Veterinary Science,

The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia2 78 Cairns Street, Kangaroo Point, Queensland 4169

Keywords: Distribution, carcass components, Bubalus bubalis

ABSTRAK

Penyebaran berat otot dan tulang 15 ekor kerbau (Bubalus bubalis) jantan dibandingkan dengan 15 ekorlembu jantan masing-masingnya daripada baka Angus, Hereford dan Brahman. Penyebaran berat otot dantulang kerbau menunjukkan peralihan ke arah bahagian hadapan badan. Bahagian yang terUbat ialah servital,toraks dan tulang kaki hadapan dan "piawia tumpulais otot" 5, 7 dan 9. Brahmans menunjukkan penyebaranotot yang sama tetapi tidak setanding dengan kerbau. Skapula di bahagian belakang kerbau juga berlainan.lanya hipotrofi dibandingkan dengan baka yang lain dengan pembesaran otot supraspinatus dan ototinfraspinatus tetapi otot subscapularis yang ringan. Adalah dicadangkan bahawa perbezaan penyebaran itumencerminkan "traction" masa lampau kerbau dan Brahmans.

ABSTRACT

The muscle weight distribution and bone weight distribution of 15 buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) steers werecompared with that of 15 steers from each of three breeds of cattle, Angus, Hereford and Brahman. For both muscleweight distribution and bone weight distribution, buffaloes showed a "shift" towards the forequarter. This involvedthe cervical, thoracic and forelimb bones and standard muscle groups 5, 7 and 9. Brahmans showed a similarbut less pronounced distribution to that of the buffaloes. The scapula was an exception in the forequarter of thebuffaloes. It was lighter relative to the other breeds with clearly enlarged mm. supraspinatus and infraspinatusbut a lighter m. subscapularis. It is suggested that these distribution differences reflect the traction history ofbuffaloes and Brahmans.

INTRODUCTIONCattle were domesticated about 4000 to 6000years B.C. (Zeuner 1963) although carbon-datedJericho discoveries suggest that domesticationmay have occurred as early as 10,000 years B.C.(Boston 1963). The earliest domestication wasin Mesopotamia and North West India.

Ploughing and the haulage of two-wheeledcarts were practiced in the Mohenjodaro areaabout 3000 years B.C. and Banjaras carried mer-chandise on pack bullocks (Von Furer-Haimendorf 1963). Rouse (1972) and Porter(1991) noted that the muscular power of cattle,particularly zebus, was used for transport andploughing on most of the Indian sub-continent.Zeuner (1963) produced evidence that Bosprimigenius namadicus had been in India beforeearly Man and it showed several features in

common with the zebu. The muscle power ofcattle, particularly zebus, has been used for rais-ing water, draft, cultivation, transport and haul-age. Innumerable descendants of zebu nativestock have found their way to Africa and SouthEast Asia where they have been used as beasts ofburden (Wheaton-Smith 1963).

The Buffalo has a 5000 year history, authen-ticated on seals struck in the Indus Valley, sug-gesting that by then, it had already been domes-ticated (Anon 1981). It was in use, in China,4000 years ago where its legendary strength wasused to supply farm power. It is now used as a"living tractor" in South China, Thailand, Indo-nesia, Philippines, India and Pakistan. In Egypt,it is the most important domestic animal (Anon1981).

E.R. JOHNSON, D.D. CHARLES & DA. BAKER

In the rice fields, the swamp buffalo (Bubalusbubalis) is generally preferred to cattle (oxen) asa draft animal because of its slow, steady capacityfor work (Rouse 1972). The animal is used forploughing, harrowing and hauling loaded carts.

The yoke on the working buffalo in Asia haschanged very litde in the last 1500 years (Anon1981). This hard, wooden yoke presses on avery small area, about 200 square centimetres,on top of the animal's neck, which probably hasnot enabled it to exert its full pulling power.

In the current study, the muscle weightdistribution and bone weight distribution of thecarcass are examined in castrated male swampbuffaloes {Bubalus bubalis) and compared withthe distributions in Bos indicus and Bos Taurussteers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen swamp buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) steersand fifteen steers each of Angus, Hereford andBrahman breeds were slaughtered, dressed andchilled at 3°C. A side from each carcass wasdissected into individual muscles, bones or bonegroups, fat and connective tissue using the tech-nique described by Butterfield (1963). Individualmuscles were combined into nine "standard"muscle groups (SMG's) and the bones into 11bones or bone groups as shown in Tables 1 and2.

Some details of the carcasses are shown inTable 3.

Tests of significance were conducted for thedistribution of muscle and bone among the fourgroups of steers.

TABLE 2

Bone or bone groups Approximate proportionof total bone weight (%)*

Ossa coxaPatellaFemurTibia + tarsusLumbar vertebrae and 3 ribsScapulaHumerusRadius/ulna + carpusSternum + costal cartilagesCervical vertebraeThoracic vertebrae + 10 ribs

110.71110105.398

77

21

*Johnson, Charles and Baker, from 100 totalanatomical dissections

RESULTS

The differences in muscle weight distribution ofeach Standard Muscle Group (SMG) are shownin Table 4. Buffalo and Brahman steers had lessmuscle in the spinal (SMG 3) and abdominal(SMG4) groups than Angus and Hereford steers.Buffaloes generally, had a greater weight ofmuscle concentrated in the forequarters, par-ticularly the shoulder (SMG 5), thorax to shoul-der (SMG 7) and intrinsic muscles of the neck(SMG 9). Brahman steers generally, had moremuscle concentrated in the proximal hind limb(SMG 1), neck to shoulder (SMG 8) and intrin-sic muscles of the neck (SMG 9). Relative to theHerefords, Angus steers showed a lower propor-tion of hind leg muscles (SMG 1 and SMG 2)

TABLE 1

Standard muscle group(Butterfield 1963)

Description Approximate proportion oftotal muscle weight (%)*

123

456789

Muscles of the proximal pelvic limbMuscles of the distal pelvic limbSurrounding spinal column in thoraxand lumbar regionsAbdominal musclesMuscles of proximal forelimbMuscles of distal forelimbMuscles of thorax attaching to forelimbMuscles of neck attaching to forelimbIntrinsic muscles of neck and thorax

324.512

10112.510

( Johnson, Charles and Baker, from 100 total anatomical dissections

20 PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCL VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002

DISTRIBUTION OF MUSCLE & BONE WEIGHT IN BUBALUS BUBAUS, BOS INDICUS 8c BOS TAURUS STEERS

TABLE 3Details* of Bubalus bubalis, Bos taurus and Bos indicus carcasses

Description

Chilled carcassweight (kg)

Age (months)

Carcass CompositionMuscle

Bone

Fat

Buffalo

169 - 260208.6(27.4)24-46

29.4(5.0)

58.3 - 69.764.8(3.6)

13.3 - 18.015.3(1.4)

8.6 - 25.517.0(5.1)

Angus

176 - 390271.2(68.3)1 6 - 4 2

25.9(9.8)

51.4- 63.357.1(3.6)

10.6 - 17.112.8(1.7)

20.1 - 36.428.1(5.0)

Hereford

95 - 273163.7(49.7)15 -22

18.7(2.5)

50.2 - 65.561.5(4.5)

12.6 - 22.016.1(2.8)

9.1 - 35.319.7(7.3)

Brahman

46 - 347266.5(53.1)12 - 38

23.7(10.6)

55.3 - 65.560.8(3.1)

12.1 - 23.115.4(3.2)

13.4 - 30.321.7(5.1)

* Range and mean with standard deviation shown in parenthesis

TABLE 4Muscle weight distribution of the standard muscle groups

Standardmuscle group

123456789

Angus

31.6a

4.4b

12.5a

10.511.2b

2.5b

10.1ab

7.0b

9.5b

Muscle weight

Hereford

321a

4.8a

12.6a

9.4b

11.5a

2.7a

9.8b

6.9b

9.3b

distribution (%)

Brahman

33.34.5*12.18.7*

11.**2.6^9.17.6a

10.1-

Buffalo

31.7a

4.7ac

10.59.1ab

12.42.7a

10.1a

7.3ab

10.2a

Means with the same superscript are not significantly different (P<0.05)

and forelimb muscles (SMG 5 and SMG 6), buta greater proportion of abdominal (SMG 4) andthorax to shoulder (SMG 7) muscles.

Buffaloes showed a shift in their muscula-ture towards the shoulder, thorax and cervicalregions. Brahman steers showed a similar, butless spectacular shift, towards the neck and shoul-der region. They also showed an increase ofabout 1.5% in the muscles of the proximalpelvic limb where some of the carcass's mostexpensive cuts are located.

Table 5 shows the significantly different in-dividual muscle weight distributions among thefour steer groups, listed according to the SMG.

The lowered distribution of SMG 3 andSMG 4 in the buffaloes and Brahmans was sup-ported by the individual muscle weight distribu-tion study. Buffaloes had much less m. longis-simus thorads et lumborum (1.3% to 1.7%). psoasmuscles and mm. scalenus dorsalis, multifidus dorsiand quadratus lumborum, Brahmans had less m.bngissimus thorads et lumborum and less mm. sca-lenus dorsalis, iliocostalis and spinalis dorsL

In SMG 4, buffaloes had generally less offour major muscles (mm. obliquus internusabdominis, obliquus externus abdominis, transversusabdominis and rectus abdominis). The Brahmansteers, like the buffaloes, had less mm. obliquus

PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002 21

E.R. JOHNSON, D.D. CHARLES 8c DA. BAKER

TABLE 5Significant differences in individual muscle distribution among Bubalus bubalis,

Bos taurus and Bos indicus steer carcasses

Muscle

SMG 1Tensor fasciae lataeBiceps femorisGluteus mediusGluteus accessoriusGluteus profundusVastas lateralisRectus femorisVastus medialisVastus intermediusGracilisSartoriusSemimembranosusAdductor femorisPectineusGemellusQuadratus femorisIliacusArticularis genuSacrococcygeal

SMG 2Gastrocnemius + soleusSuperficial flexor (plantaris)Extensor groupExtensor digitorum lateralisTibialis anteriorTibialis posteriorPopliteusFlexor digitorum longusFlexor hallicus longus

SMG 3Psoas minorPsoas majorQuadratus lumborumScalenus dorsalisIliocostalisLongissimus thoracis et lumborumSpinalis dorsiMultifidus dorsi

SMG 4Retractor costaeObliquus internus abdominisObliquus externus abdominisTransversus abdominisRectus abdominisCutaneus trunci et omobrachialis

Buffalo

1.37a8.093.59a0.450.33b2.842.340.530.50L08

0.30bc4.051.40

0.50c0.07a0.06a1.05

0.05b0.09a

2.150.280.530.27a0.13a0.140.34

0.14b0.60a

0.29b1.29

0.15b0.21b0.51a5.231.84a0.79

0.03b1.67a2.15a1.001.88

1.58bc

Angus

1.29ab7.27a3.70a0.29a0.35b2.32a1.99a

0.72ab0.64aV31a

0.34ab5.02a1.71a

0.53bc0.07a0.05a0.770.06b0.13

1.85b0.42ab0.62a0.20a0.1 lbc0.10b0.24a0.20a0.60a

0.28b1.56a0.17a0.29

0.45b\6.93a1.78a0.99a

0.05a1.992.491.27

2.31a1.82a

Breed means

Hereford

1.29b7.20a3.76a0.29a0.39a2.43a2.07a0.75a0.711.30a0.35a5.06a1.80a0.59a0.090.070.87a0.08a0.10a

1.97b0.46a0,700.22b0.12ab0.1 lab0.27a0.20a0.61a

0.31ab1.58a

0.16ab0.25a0.48ab6.78ab1.82a1.02a

0.04ab1.86

2.24a1.16a2.18a1.64ab

Brahman

1.36ab7.41a4.110.28a0.39a2.572.05a0.69b0.62a1.45

0.29c5.421.92

0.55ab0.08a0.05a0.84a0.08a0.08a

1.94b0.39b0.64a0.25a0.11c0.11a0.31

0.15b0.54

0.35a1.56a0.17a0.22ab0.406.54b1.621.06a

0.03b1.67a1.881.12a2.14a1.45c

22 PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002

DISTRIBUTION OF MUSCLE 8c BONE WEIGHT IN BUBALUS BUBAUS, BOS INDICUS & BOS TAURUS STEERS

TABLE 5 cont'dSignificant differences in individual muscle weight distribution among Bubalus bubalis,

Bos taurus and Bos indicus steer carcasses

SMG5DeltoideusInfraspinatusSupraspinatusSubscapularisTriceps brachii (caput laterale)Triceps brachii (caput longum)Triceps brachii (caput mediale)Tensor fascia antibrachiiTeres minorTeres majorBiceps brachiiCoracobrachialisBrachialis

SMG6Extensor carpi radialis\Extensor digiti tertiiExtensor digitorum communisExtensor digiti quartiExtensor carpi ulnarisExtensor carpi obliquusFlexor carpi radialisFlexor carpi ulnarisFlexor digitorum profundusAnconaeus

SMG 7Serratus ventralis thoracisPectoralis profundusPectoralis superficialisLatissimus dorsiTrapezius thoracis

SMG 8Trapezius cervicalisOmotransversariusBrachiocephalicusRhomboideusSerratus ventralis cervicalis

SMG 9Serratus dorsalis cranialisCervicohyoideusSpleniusComplexusScalenus ventralisRectus capitis ventralis majorLongissimus capitis et atlantisIntertransversarius colliRectus capitis dorsalis majorObliquus capitis caudalisRectus thoracisTransversus thoracisLongus colliIntercostales

0.602.19a1.901.05

0.68ab3.750.11a0.13b0.18a0.470.67a0.13a0.55

0.780.150.100.170.320.030.10b0.100.54b0.11a

1.70a3.531.50a2.73

0.67a

0.48a0.681.881.23a

3.02ab

0.200.091.09a1.57

0.51a0.320.230.81

0.14ab0.40a0.14

0.20ab0.91a2.67b

0.49a2.17ab1.50b1.15a

0.67ab3.17a0.09b0.15a0.18a0.41a0.60c0.13a0.43

0.72a0.12b0.08a0.120.260.03a0.10b0.13b0.60a0.09

1.58ab3.81ab

1.692.24a0.79

0.52a0.57a1.56a1.37a2.94b

0.14a0.02a0.81b1.68a0.44b0.18a0.33a0.59b0.12b0.330.12a0.22a0.78b2.58a

0.522.16ab1.55ab1.13a0.69a3.15a0.10a0.15a0,200.42a

0.62bc0.13a0.46a

0.73a0.12ab0.08a0.14a0.29a0.03a0.11a

0.13ab0.63a0.11a

1.55b3.89a1.42a2.24a0.70a

0.50a0.56a1.55a1.29a3.21a

0.12a0.02a0.77b1.69a0.45b0.19a0.30a0.61ab0.13b0.36b0.13a

0.21ab0.73b2.76ab

0.47a2.06b1.58a1.16a0.65b3.330.08b0.14ab0.17a0.42a0.64ab

0.150.46a

0.73a0.13a0.08a0.13a0.30a0.03a0.1 Oab0.14a0.55b0.11a

1.253.70b1.54a2.020.59

0.290.60a1.59a2.03

3.1 Oab

0.13a0.041.05a1.69a

0.49ab0.19a0.31a0.670.16a0.38ab0.12a0.20b0.98a2.84ab

Means with the same superscript are not significantly different (P<0.05)

PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002 23

E.R. JOHNSON, D.D. CHARLES & DA BAKER

internus abdominis, obliquus externus abdominis andcutaneous trunri et omobrachialis.

The greater muscle weight distribution inthe buffalo forequarter occurred in SMGs 5, 7and 9. In the latter group, the buffaloes andBrahmans had a similar distribution. In SMG 5,eight muscles were hypertrophied (mm. deltoi-deus, infraspinatus, supraspinatus, teres major,brachialis and all three heads of the tricepsgroup). It should be noted that, concurrent withthe relatively lighter scapula, although mm, infra-spinatus and supraspinatus were enlarged, m. sub-scapularis was relatively lighter. In SMG 6, thebuffaloes showed a relative enlargement of allsix extensor muscles. In SMG 7, the enlargedmuscles were mm. serratus ventralis thoricis andlatissimus dorsL In SMG 9, the buffaloes showedan enlargement of nine muscles, particularlymm. splenius and intertransversarii cervicis. Buffa-loes and Brahmans, generally, had less of all themajor muscles in SMG 4.

The Brahman steers showed a relative en-largement of muscles in SMGs 1, 8 and 9. InSMG 1, they showed increased distribution inmm. tensor fasciae latae, glutens medius, glutensprofundus, vastus lateralis and rectus femoris. Mostof these are large muscles and clearly explainthe superior distribution of the Brahman's proxi-mal hindlimb musculature. In SMG 8, the Brah-mans showed an increased distribution in mm.rhomboideus and serratus ventralis ceruicis. In SMG9, the Brahmans were relatively hypertrophiedin six large muscles, mm. scalenus ventralis, sple-nius, compkxus, longus colli, longissimus capitis etatlantis and intercostales.

Relative to Herefords and Brahmans, Angusshowed less muscle in the large muscles of SMG1 (mm. biceps femoris, glutens medius, glutens pro-fundus, vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, semimembrano-sus and adductor femoris); SMG 2 (m. gastrocnemiusetsoleus, the extensor group, extensor digitorum latera-lis, popliteus and both tibial muscles); SMG 5 (mm.deltoideus, supraspinatus, biceps brachii, brachialisand the long and medial heads of the tricepsgroup); SMG 6 (mm. flexor carpi radialis, flexorcarpi ulnaris and a number of small extensors).Relative to the Herefords and Brahmans, theAngus steers showed a greater proportion ofmuscle in SMG 4 (mm. obliquus internus abdominis,obliquus externus abdominis, and transversusabdominis) and SMG 7 (mm. serratus ventralisthoricis, trapezius thoracis and both pectoral mus-cles) .

Table 6 shows the significant differences inbone weight distribution among the four groups.Buffaloes showed a lower proportion on bone inthe pelvic and lumber areas and a greater pro-portion of bone in the cervical and thoracicareas, as well as the humerus, radius/ulna andcarpus. Although buffaloes had about 1% moremuscle in the proximal forelimb, their scapulawas significantly lighter than those of the otherthree groups. Brahmans, like the buffaloes, hada generally lower proportion of bone in thepelvic and lumbar regions but a greater propor-tion in the limbs (femur, tibia and tarsus, hu-merus, radius/ulna and carpus). Relative toHerefords, Angus showed a higher proportionof bone in both limbs, in accofd with theirmuscle weight distribution pattern.

TABLE 6Bone weight distribution

Bone or bone group

Ossa coxaPatellaFemurTibia + tarsusLumbar Vertebrae + 3 ribsScapulaHumerusRadius/ulna + carpus

- Sternum + costal cartilagesCervical vertebraeThoracic vertebrae + 10 ribs

Angus

11.5a0.70a10.29.7b11.2b5.3a8.27.2

7.5b7.3a

21.3a

Bone weight

Hereford

11.2a0.75a11.0a10.4a10.6ab5.3a8.7a7.5b6.9ab7.0a20.5a

distribution (%)

Brahman

11.2a0.73a11.0a10.3a10.3a5.3a8.8a7.8ab6.5a7.3a20.7a

Buffalo

10.70.71a10.8a10. lab10.3a5.0

9.0a8.0a5.88.122.8

Means with the same superscript are not significantly different (P<0.05)

21 PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002

DISTRIBUTION OF MUSCLE & BONE WEIGHT IN BUBALUS BUBALJS, BOS fNDICUS 8c BOS TAURUS STEERS

DISCUSSIONThe Australian water buffalo was introducedfrom Timor in 1825 (Letts 1972). In South EastAsia, the buffalo has long been preferred tocattle as the primary beast of burden. In Aus-tralia, over the last 170 years, it has not beenused for traction.

Relative to cattle, the buffalo has concen-trated more muscle in the forequarter, particu-larly muscles of the proximal and distal fore-limb, thorax to forelimb, and muscles of theneck. This is supported by the bone weightdistribution, which shows heavier bone in thecervical and thoracic areas, humerus, radius/ulna and carpus. A notable exception was thescapula, which was lighter in the buffalo than inthe three breeds of cattle.

The individual muscle weight distributionstudy supported the findings of the SMGs, withrelatively hypertrophied muscles in the shoulder(eight in SMG 5), distal forelimb (seven in SMG6), thorax to shoulder (two large muscles inSMG 7) and the intrinsic muscles of the neck(nine in SMG 9). The buffalo showed a reduc-tion in muscle weight distribution in the spinalmuscles (four in SMG 3, including a great re-duction in m. longissimus et lumborum) andthe abdominal muscle group (five expansivemuscles in SMG 4). The Brahman steers showeda similar decrease in distribution in these twomuscle groups, but an increase in 15 muscles ofthe three groups, proximal hindlimb (SMG 1),neck to shoulder (SMG 8) and the intrinsicmuscles of the neck (SMG 9).

Relative to Herefords and Brahmans, theAngus showed a reduction in muscle weightdistribution in 21 muscles of the proximal anddistal hindlimb, shoulder and distal forelimb.This group of steers had a markedly increaseddistribution in the abdominal and thorax toshoulder groups of muscles.

In relation to the shoulder area (SMGs 5and 7), the buffaloes showed an increased weightdistribution in nine muscles including mm. su-praspinatus, infraspinatus, deltoideus, serratus ven-tralis thorids, latissimus dorsi and the two heads ofthe triceps group, however, m. subscapularis waslighter.

Relative to Angus and Hereford steers, Brah-mans showed evidence of a shift in muscle andbone weight distribution to the forequarter, al-though not as pronounced as in the buffalo.

The Brahmans had an increased weight of neckto forelimb muscles and intrinsic muscles of theneck. The limb bones of Brahman steers, femur,tibia/tarsus, humerus, radius/ulna and carpuswere generally heavier than in the other cattle,particularly the Angus. Brahmans had signifi-cantly more muscle (1.2% to 1.7%) in the proxi-mal hind limb than in the other three groups.This is the site of some relatively expensive cutsof meat, thick flank, topside and silverside whichconfers on this breed a meat production advan-tage which has been recognized from detailedanatomical studies (Priyanto 1993; Priyanto,Johnson and Taylor unpublished).

Herefords differed from Angus, showingmore muscle in the limbs (SMGs 1, 2, 5 and 6)and less in the abdominal group (SMG 4). Angushad heavier bone in the sternum and costalcartilages and in the lumbar vertebrae and lastthree ribs.

The significantly lighter scapula and m. sub-scapularis in buffaloes may be related to thewooden yoke, which has not changed for at least1500 years, and this probably prevents the ani-mal from exerting its full pulling power (Anon1981). It has been estimated that the use of apadded horse collar would allow the buffalo topull 24% heavier weights. An impeded scapulamay have become more compact and lighterwhile increasing the weight of the muscles cloth-ing the outside of it.

The higher proportion of the weight ofmuscle in the buffaloes and Brahmans relativeto that in Herefords and Angus is possibly aresult of their draft animal ancestry. The differ-ence was more pronounced in the buffalo, whichhas been the preferred beast of burden in Chinaand South East Asia for 4000 years.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTWe are indebted to Mr. Mai Fisher and Miss LynKnott for technical assistance.

REFERENCESANON. 1981. The Water Buffalo: New Prospects of an

Underutilized Animal Washington: NationalAcademy Press.

BOSTON, EJ. 1963. Cattle breeds in Europe andAfrica. In Man and Cattle ed. A.E. Mourantand F.E. Zeuner. London: Royal Anthropo-logical Institute.

PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002 25

E.R. JOHNSON, D.D. CHARLES & DA. BAKER

BUTTERFIELD, R.M. 1963. Estimation of carcase com-

position: The anatomical approach. In Sympo-sium of Carcase Composition and Appraisal of MeatAnimals, ed. D.E. Tribe, Pap. No 4 (CSIROAust: Melbourne).

LETTS, G.A. 1972. Water Buffalo in Australia. Acollection of papers related to the NorthernTerritory Buffalo Industry. In Ninth BiennialConference of the Australian Society of Animal Pro-duction, Canberra.

PRIYANTO, R. 1993. A study of the growth and distri-bution of beef carcass tissues including theirprediction, optimum beef productivity andmarketing. Ph.D. Thesis, The University ofQueensland, Brisbane.

PORTER, V. 1991. Cattle. A Handbook to the Breeds ofthe World. Facts on File. New York.

ROUSE, J.E. 1972. World Cattle IL Cattle of Africa andAsia. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

VON FURER-HAIMENDORF, C. 1963. The Social Back-ground of Cattle - Domestication in India. InMan and Cattle ed. A.E. Mourant and F.E.Zeuner. London: Royal Anthropological Insti-tute.

WHEATON-SMITH, C. 1963. Study in Progressive Hy-bridization. In Man and Cattle ed. A.E. Mourantand F.E. Zeuner. London: Royal Anthropo-logical Institute.

ZEUNER, F.E. 1963. The History of Domestication ofCattle. In Man and Cattle ed. A.E. Mourant andF.E. Zeuner. London: Royal AnthropologicalInstitute.

(Received: 3 September 1998)(Accepted: 14 January 2002)

26 PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIC. SCI. VOL. 25 NO. 1, 2002