J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J. Anim Sci. 1989. 67:40-47.
© 1989 American Society of Animal Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lamb, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Tess, M. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lamb, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Tess, M. W.

Evaluation of Crossbreeding Systems for Small Beef Herds: II. Two-Sire Systems1

M. A. Lamb2 and M. W. Tess2, 3,

North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27695-7621

Abstract

Stochastic computer models were used to evaluate nine crossbreeding systems in beef herds consisting of two bulls, 50 cows and 15 replacements. Systems examined were: 1) purebred (PB), 2) two- and three-breed rotations using natural service (2R and 3R) or artificial insemination (2RAI and 3RAI), 3) two-breed roto-terminals not exploiting complementarity using natural service (2RT) or AI (2RTAI) and 4) two-breed roto-terminals exploiting complementarity using natural service (2RTC) or AI (2RTCAI). Average heterosis estimates were taken from literature sources. Replacement females were produced within the herd; sires were purchased. Estimates of calf and dam heterosis were used to calculate performance of calf weight weaned and sold, cow and total weights sold and gross calf, cow and total incomes. All crossbred systems were superior to PB for weights sold and income. The natural-service systems (2R, 3R, 2RT and 2RTC) utilized 90 to 98% of the heterosis available in their AI counterparts (2RAI, 3RAI, 2RTAI and 2RTCAI). No differences were found between corresponding natural-service and AI systems for weights sold and incomes. Increasing the complexity of the system did not provide important improvements in traits measured.

Footnotes

1 Paper no. 11522 of the Journal Series of the North Carolina ARS, Raleigh 27695-7601.

2 Dept. of Anim. Sci.

3 Current address: Dept. of Anim. and Range Sci., Montana State Univ., Bozeman 59717.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by the American Society of Animal Science.