Factors Affecting the Growth of Beef Calves during the Suckling Period

Rollins, W. C.; Guilbert, H. R.

doi:10.2527/jas1954.132517x

Cited by 17 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These differences were 68, 31 and 18, 40, and 57, 33, 22 pounds (Rollins and Guilbert, 1954;Rollins and Wagnon, 1956a;Hamann ^ al., 1960;Brown, 1960).…”

Section: Age Of Dammentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Repeatabilities, as measured by intraclass correlations, were 0.37 and 0.26 for gains during the two periods. Rollins and Guilbert (1954) observed that the daily gain for bull calves was 0.13 pounds per day greater than for heifer calves from birth to four months. The unadjusted daily gain of both bull and heifer calves from birth to four months was 1.91 + 0.31 pounds.…”

Section: Preweaning Average Daily Gainmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…This mid point varies from 112 days to 130 days (Chambers _et aj.. , 1956;Swiger et al, 1962) if only one set of preweaning perform ance measurements is obtained. However, in other studies (Rollins et al, 1952;Rollins and Guilbert, 1954;and Brown, 1960) the measurements were obtained at monthly intervals.…”

Section: Preweaning Average Daily Gainmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The corrected weaning weight would be equal to the actual weight at earlier month plus the product of monthly average daily gain and deviation of standard age minus actual age at earlier month weight. This method was used by Brown (1960) and Rollins and Guilbert (1954) in correcting the weaning weight to a standard age of 240 days.…”

Section: Personnel Associated With Federal Experiments Stations Weanmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The distribution of the degrees of freedom utilized in correcting the data in such experiments is not entirely clear. In similar analyses, the practice has varied from ignoring completely the degrees of freedom utilized for correction (Rollins and Guilbert, 1954;Swiger, 1960) to deducting all of them from the "within" classification (Sidwell and Grandstaff, 1949). The bias results from the fact that the dependent variables are distributed irregularly among the independent variables as pointed out by Henderson (1953).…”

Section: Analysis Of Maternal Abilities Repeatabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Beef calf weights at 100 days and 205 days as indicators of dams' producing ability

Drewry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These differences were 68, 31 and 18, 40, and 57, 33, 22 pounds (Rollins and Guilbert, 1954;Rollins and Wagnon, 1956a;Hamann ^ al., 1960;Brown, 1960).…”

Section: Age Of Dammentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Preweaning Average Daily Gainmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Preweaning Average Daily Gainmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Personnel Associated With Federal Experiments Stations Weanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis Of Maternal Abilities Repeatabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Beef calf weights at 100 days and 205 days as indicators of dams' producing ability

Drewry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of level of environment on sex differences in pre-weaning growth rate in beef cattle

Hopkins

1977

Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYUsing pre-weaning records of 3822 calves from 11 Victorian herds, mean male and female growth rates and corresponding sex differences were calculated for each dam age and herd-year class. From these means simple regression equations relating sex differences and growth rates were calculated. There was a close similarity between equations based on dam age means and those based on herd-year means while correlations between sex differences and male growth rates were high.These results showed that sex differences and female growth rates could be predicted reliably from the level of environment as measured by male growth rate. Sex differences predicted by these regression relationships differed markedly from those predicted by the simple multiplicative and simple additive models generally used in adjusting for sex differences in selection.The results also suggested that other differences such as breed differences may be predictable in the same way and that such differences are determined primarily by the level of environment per se rather than differences in the nature of the components contributing to that level.

show abstract

A study of the lactation and growth of hill sheep in their native environment and under lowland conditions

Owen

1957

J. Agric. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. A method is described suitable for the estimation of the milk yield of sheep under natural grazing conditions.2. The yields obtained from Welsh Mountain sheep in two environments are shown.3. A close but diminishing relationship is shown to exist between the milk yield of the ewe and the growth of the lamb. Evidence is given of the effect of milk yield at later stages.4. The estimation of the ewe's milk yield from the weight of the young lamb is discussed. These estimates are used in conjunction with actual milk records in the present study.5. The ewe's milk yield is shown to be significantly related to nutrition, body weight, udder size and the lamb's birth weight.6. The relation of milk yield to weight gain during lactation, fleece weight and fleece type were mainly non-significant.7. From the limited data available, it seems that milk yield has a fairly high repeatability and heritability.

show abstract

Factors Affecting the Growth of Beef Calves during the Suckling Period

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Beef calf weights at 100 days and 205 days as indicators of dams' producing ability

Beef calf weights at 100 days and 205 days as indicators of dams' producing ability

The effect of level of environment on sex differences in pre-weaning growth rate in beef cattle

A study of the lactation and growth of hill sheep in their native environment and under lowland conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About