Characterization of topcross progenies from Hereford, Limousin, and Piedmontese sires

Journal of Animal Science

Volumn 79, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 1751-1756

  MacNeil, M D ^a,b   Short, R E ^a   Grings, E E ^a  

^a AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

^b Box 2021 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Beef cattle; Breed differences; Carcass composition; Growth; Puberty

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ARTICLE; BODY COMPOSITION; BODY WEIGHT; CATTLE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HETEROSIS; MALE; SEXUAL MATURATION;

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMALS; BODY COMPOSITION; BODY WEIGHT; CATTLE; FEMALE; HYBRID VIGOR; MALE; SEXUAL MATURATION;

EID: 0035404451     PISSN: 00218812     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2527/2001.7971751x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Baker, R. L., and A. H. Carter. 1982. Implications of experimental results with beef cattle in New Zealand. In: R. A. Barton and W. C. Smith (ed.) Proc. World Congr. Sheep and Beef Cattle Breeding 1:88-99. Palmerston North, NZ.
2. Boldman, K. G., L. A. Kriese, L. D. VanVleck, C. P. VanTassel, and S. D. Kachman. 1995. A manual for use of MTDFREML. A set of programs to obtain estimates of variances and covariances (draft). USDA, ARS.
3. Cartwright, T. C., H. A. Fitzhugh, Jr., and C. R. Long. 1975. Systems analysis of sources of genetic and environmental variation in efficiency of beef production: Mating plans. J. Anim. Sci. 40:433-443.
4. Casas, E., J. W. Keele, S. C. Fahrenkrug, T. P. L. Smith, L. V. Cundiff, and R. T. Stone. 1999. Quantitative analysis of birth, weaning, and yearling weights and calving difficulty in Piedmontese cross-breds segregating an inactive myostatin allele. J. Anim. Sci. 77:1686-1692.
5. Cundiff, L. V., and K. E. Gregory. 1977. Beef Cattle Breeding. Bull. No. 286 (rev.). ARS, USDA, Washington, DC.
6. Cundiff, L. V., K. E. Gregory, and R. M. Koch. 1998. Germplasm evaluation in beef cattle - cycle IV: Birth and weaning traits: J. Anim. Sci. 76:2528-2535.
7. Cundiff, L. V., K. E. Gregory, R. M. Koch, and G. E. Dickerson. 1986. Genetic diversity among cattle breeds and its use to increase beef production efficiency in a temperate environment. In: Proc. 3rd World Cong. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Lincoln, NE. 9:271-282.
8. Cundiff, L. V., K. E. Gregory, T. L. Wheeler, S. D. Schackelford, M. Koohmaraie, H. C. Freetly, and D. D. Lunstra. 1996. Preliminary results from cycle V of the cattle Germplasm Evaluation Program at the Roman I. Hruska U. S. Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center. Germplasm Eval. Program Prog. Rep. No. 15.
9. Cundiff, L. V., F. Szabo, K. E. Gregory, R. M. Koch, M. E. Dikeman, and J. D. Crouse. 1993. Breed comparisons in the germplasm evaluation program at MARC. In: Proc. Beef Improvement Fed. Res. Symp. and Annu. Mtg., Ashville, NC. pp 124-136.
10. Dickenson, H. H. 1984. The influence of Line 1 in the Hereford breed. In: Proc. Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Station 1984 Field Day. p iii. Miles City, MT.
11. Dikeman, M. E., and J. D. Crouse. 1975. Chemical composition of carcasses from Hereford, Limousin, and Simmental crossbred cattle as related to growth and palatability. J. Anim. Sci. 40:463-467.
12. Ferrell, C. L. 1988. Contribution of visceral organs to animal energy expenditures. J. Anim. Sci. 66(Suppl. 3):23-24.
13. Graser, H.-U., S. P. Smith, and B. Tier. 1987. A derivative-free approach for estimating variance components in animal models by restricted maximum likelihood. J. Anim. Sci. 64:1362-1370.
14. Gregory, K. E., L. V. Cundiff, R. M. Koch, M. E. Dikeman, and M. Koohmaraie. 1994. Breed effects and retained heterosis for growth, carcass, and meat traits in advanced generations of composite populations of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 72:833-850.
15. Gregory, K. E., D. D. Lunstra, L. V. Cundiff, and R. M. Koch. 1991. Breed effects and heterosis in advanced generations of composite populations for puberty and scrotal traits of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 69:2795-2807.
16. 1 cattle from Hereford, Limousin, or Piedmontese sires. J. Anim. Sci. 79:317-324.
17. Grings, E. E., R. B. Staigmiller, R. E. Short, R. A. Bellows, and M. D. MacNeil. 1999. Effects of stair-step nutrition and trace mineral supplementation on attainment of puberty in beef heifers of three sire breeds. J. Anim. Sci. 77:810-815.
18. Hoving-Bolink, A. H., W. J. A. Hanekamp, and P. Walstra. 1999. Effects of sire breed and husbandry system on carcass, meat and eating quality of Piedmontese and Limousin crossbred bulls and heifers. Livest. Prod. Sci. 57:273-278.
19. Kempster, A. J., and J. R. Southgate. 1984. Beef breed comparisons in the U.K. Livest. Prod. Sci. 11:491-501.
20. 1 beef heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 78:2244-2252.
21. MacNeil, M. D., J. J. Urick, S. Newman, and B. W. Knapp. 1992. Selection for postweaning growth in inbred Hereford cattle: The Fort Keogh, Montana Line 1 example. J. Anim. Sci. 70:723-733.
22. Meyer, K. 1989. Restricted Maximum Likelihood to estimate variance components for animal models with several random effects, using a derivative-free approach. Genet. Sel. Evol. 21:317-340.
23. National Live Stock and Meat Board. 1981. Official USDA Marbling Photographs. USDA. Chicago, IL. No. 8843.
24. Taylor, St. C. S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animal growth. J. Anim. Sci. 61(Suppl. 2):118-143.