Effect of time on feed on performance of feedlot steers, carcass characteristics, and tenderness and composition of longissimus muscles.

Koevering, M.T. Van; Gill, Duane A.; Owens, F. N.; Dolezal, H. G.; Strasia, C. A.

doi:10.2527/1995.73121x

Cited by 91 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In accordance with Cuvelier et al (2006a), meat of Ab bulls had higher lipid contents and lower protein content than that of Li bulls. These results indicate that the increase in lipid concentrations was associated with the decreased protein content, which is in accordance with the findings by Van Koevering et al (1995).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Effect of breed on production, carcass traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Limousin and Aberdeen Angus×Limousin bulls offered a grass silage-grain-based diet

Pesonen

Honkavaara

Huuskonen

2012

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the experiment was to study the performance, carcass traits and meat quality of purebred Aberdeen Angus (Ab) and Limousin (Li) bulls and Ab×Li crossbred bulls offered grass silage-grain-based rations and raised to heavy carcass weights. The experiment included eight bulls in all breed groups. The average slaughter age for all breeds was 540 days and the mean carcass weights for the Ab, Ab×Li and Li bulls were 391, 399 and 439 kg, respectively. Significant breed differences in carcass traits and meat quality were observed. The Limousin bulls tended to achieve a higher conformation score, produced less fat and had a higher percentage of valuable cuts compared with the Aberdeen Angus bulls. The crossbred Ab×Li bulls produced better conformed carcasses and a higher share of the rounds compared to the pure Ab bulls which indicate that this type of crossbreeding can enhance beef production under the studied conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Effect of breed on production, carcass traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Limousin and Aberdeen Angus×Limousin bulls offered a grass silage-grain-based diet

Pesonen

Honkavaara

Huuskonen

2012

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"Tenderness" attributes were affected (P < 0.05) by slaughter endpoint (Table 7) due to scores for cattle slaughtered at 10 mm backfat exceeding those from cattle slaughtered at 7 mm backfat. These finding are supported by endpoint differences in shear of cooked meat (Table 6) where shear values for beef from cattle fed to 4 and 7 mm backfat exceeded the 4.54 kg cm 2 threshold for toughness (Van Koevering et al 1995). With the exception of chewiness, non-significant differences for the contrast, 4 vs. 7 and 10 mm backfat, are due to similar taste panel scores for cattle slaughtered at 4 and 7 mm backfat.…”

Section: Slaughter Endpoint Effectssupporting

confidence: 70%

“…Slaughter endpoint affected ADG (Table 5) with lower (P = 0.002) ADG in cattle fed to 4 mm backfat vs. similar (P > 0.10) ADG in cattle fed to 7 and 10 mm backfat. Van Koevering et al (1995) found similar results when examining the effect of days on feed on ADG while May et al (1992) found ADG to decrease with days on feed. Since DMI is generally lower during the first 30 d on feed than thereafter (Van Koevering et al 1995), shorter (P = 0.001) times on feed for 4 mm backfat cattle may be responsible for lower (P = 0.001) DMI and corresponding lower ADG relative to cattle fed to 7 and 10 mm backfat.…”

Section: Slaughter Endpoint Effectssupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Van Koevering et al (1995) found similar results when examining the effect of days on feed on ADG while May et al (1992) found ADG to decrease with days on feed. Since DMI is generally lower during the first 30 d on feed than thereafter (Van Koevering et al 1995), shorter (P = 0.001) times on feed for 4 mm backfat cattle may be responsible for lower (P = 0.001) DMI and corresponding lower ADG relative to cattle fed to 7 and 10 mm backfat. Slaughter endpoint differences (P = 0.001) in days on feed between 4 vs. 7 and 10 mm endpoints are simply a function of backfat deposition imposed by the experimental design as Duckett et al (1993) found backfat deposition to markedly increase with days on feed.…”

Section: Slaughter Endpoint Effectssupporting

confidence: 63%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of diet and slaughter endpoint on carcass composition and beef quality in Charolais cross steers

Mandell¹,

Gullett²,

Buchanan-Smith³

et al. 1997

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 1997. Effect of diet and slaughter endpoint on carcass composition and beef quality in Charolais cross steers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 77: 403-414. One hundred and eight Charolais cross steers were used to compare forage versus grain feeding as affected by slaughter endpoint on carcass composition and palatability attributes of beef. Diets included a 97% alfalfa silage ration or 68% high moisture corn, 25% alfalfa silage ration from start of test to finish or a ration of 97% alfalfa silage from start of test to day 42 of the trial followed by the 68% high moisture corn ration until slaughter. Cattle were slaughtered at either 4, 7, or 10 mm ultrasound backfat. Grain feeding increased (P = 0.01) average daily gain and decreased (P = 0.01) days to finish, while carcass weight and grade fat were similar (P > 0.10) between diets. Palatability attributes were generally unaffected by diet with the exception of slightly less (P = 0.09) beef flavour and more (P = 0.01) off flavour in forage-fed beef versus grain-fed beef. Higher (P = 0.01) concentrations of linolenic acid and lower (P = 0.09) concentrations of oleic acid in forage-fed beef may be partially responsible for diet differences in flavour. As slaughter endpoint increased from 4 to 7 mm backfat, average daily gain, days to finish, and carcass weight increased (P = 0.01). Palatability attributes assessing juiciness and flavour did not differ (P > 0.10) between slaughter endpoints. Beef from cattle slaughtered at 10 mm backfat was rated higher (P < 0.05) for softness, tenderness, and chewiness than beef from cattle slaughtered at 4 and 7 mm finish. Slaughter endpoint effects on "tenderness" attributes may partially explain why less tender beef is entering the marketplace.Key words: Beef cattle, alfalfa, grain, palatability, shear, fatty acids Mandell, I. B., Gullett, E. A., Buchanan-Smith, J. G. et Campbell, C. P. 1997. Effets du régime alimentaire selon l'état corporel final sur la composition de la carcasse et sur la qualité de la viande de bouvillons croisés Charolais. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 77: 403-414. Cent huit bouvillons Charolais croisés ont été utilisés pour comparer l'effet de l'engraissement au fourrage et de l'engraissement au grain selon l'état corporel final désiré sur la composition de la carcasse et sur la qualité de la viande. Les régimes alimentaires étaient : 1) 97 % ensilage de luzerne, 2) 68 % maïs-grain humide et 25 % ensilage de luzerne du début à la fin de l'essai et 3) 97 % ensilage de luzerne jusqu'au 42 e jour, puis 68 % maïs-grain humide jusqu'à l'abattage. Les bêtes étaient abattues quand elles avaient 4, 7 ou 10 mm de gras de couverture, mesuré aux ultrasons. L'engraissement au grain augmentait (P = 0,01) le GMQ et réduisait (P = 0,01) la durée de l'engraissement mais il n'y avait pas de différences (P > 0,10) entre les régimes alimentaires quant au poids de la carcasse ou à la teneur officielle de gras de couverture. Les paramètres d'appétibilité ne variaient dans l'ensemble pas selon le régime d'engraissement, à l'exception d'une légère ...

show abstract

“…Control steers had higher (P < 0.05) marbling scores than TRT steers. The improvement in marbling score observed in CON steers was a result of time on feed (Hancock et al, 1987;Van Koevering et al, 1995;Klopfenstein et al, 2000). The higher mar- bling score for the CON steers also implies that a higher percentage of steers would grade USDA quality grade Low Choice or greater compared with TRT steers.…”

Section: Productionmentioning

confidence: 88%

An evaluation of production and economic efficiency of two beef systems from calving to slaughter1

Anderson

Rasby

Klopfenstein

et al. 2005

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 3-yr experiment was conducted with cows and their calves to evaluate resource inputs, animal performance, and carcass characteristics of two production systems. In the control system, cows (CON; n = 99/yr) grazed pasture and were fed hay during the winter, and CON steer calves were finished in the feedlot for 211 d after weaning. In the treatment system (TRT; n = 100/yr), cows grazed pasture and crop residue during the winter and were fed hay. Treatment steer calves grazed crop residue after weaning, grazed pasture in the spring and summer, and were finished in the feedlot for 90 d. Body condition scores after TRT cows returned from crop residue grazing were greater (P < 0.01) for CON than for TRT cows. Calving rates were similar for both groups (CON = 91%; TRT = 93%). In the feedlot, CON steers had lower (P < 0.05) ADG and DMI, but were more efficient (P < 0.01) than TRT steers. Treatment steers had greater (P < 0.05) final weight, hot carcass weight and longissimus muscle area, and decreased marbling score. The cost per weaned calf and weaning breakeven were greater (P = 0.07) for the CON system than for the TRT system

show abstract

Effect of time on feed on performance of feedlot steers, carcass characteristics, and tenderness and composition of longissimus muscles.

Cited by 91 publications

References 13 publications

Effect of breed on production, carcass traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Limousin and Aberdeen Angus×Limousin bulls offered a grass silage-grain-based diet

Effect of breed on production, carcass traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Limousin and Aberdeen Angus×Limousin bulls offered a grass silage-grain-based diet

Effects of diet and slaughter endpoint on carcass composition and beef quality in Charolais cross steers

An evaluation of production and economic efficiency of two beef systems from calving to slaughter1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About