HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Baker, J. F. Articles by Neville, W. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Baker, J. F. Articles by Neville, W. E., Jr.

Evaluations of genotypexenvironment interactions of beef bulls performance-tested in feedlot or pasture

Coastal Plain Experiment Station, University of Georgia, Tifton 31793-0748

¹ Correspondence:
P.O. Box 748 (phone: 229-386-3367; fax 229-386-3219; E-mail:
jfbaker{at}tifton.cpes.peachnet.edu.

Purebred Angus (n = 96) and Polled Hereford (n = 96) bull calves sired by bulls of either low or high yearling weight performance lines were assigned to either creep-fed or non-creep-fed treatment before weaning for four calf crops. For each breed, after weaning in the fall, half of the calves within each of the four groups were fed a high concentrate diet for 189 d after weaning in a feedlot and the remainder were put on winter temporary pastures (rye or ryegrass) followed by summer grazing on pearl millet and bermudagrass pastures for 329 d after weaning. Dependent variables were ADG for various intervals and the complete test period, weight, height and scrotal circumference at periodic intervals, and weight per day of age at regular intervals during the test. The model included breed, performance line, sire nested within breed and line, year, age of dam, preweaning treatment, postweaning treatment, and two- and three-factor interactions. Age of calf was included as a covariate for weight, height, and scrotal circumference measurements. Line and breed differences generally were significant for weight but not for height. The interaction of primary interest (line by preweaning treatment by postweaning treatment) was not significant. The high growth performance line gained faster than low growth performance line for all intervals and were 45 kg heavier by 189 d after weaning. Preweaning treatment did not affect postweaning ADG but did affect weight per day of age. Creep-fed calves were heavier than non-creep-fed calves and maintained this advantage during the postweaning treatment periods in both the feedlot and pasture. Both preweaning treatment groups had similar ADG after weaning. Angus were 23 kg heavier at weaning than Polled Herefords; however, breed weight means were similar by 16 mo of age. In summary, bulls from different selection lines for growth were identified in feedlot and pasture when adjustments were made for prior management effects. The lack of significant interactions in these data indicates that central test station data, appropriately adjusted, are useful for ranking bulls on genetic merit for growth in feedlot and on pasture.

Key Words: Beef Bulls • Growth • Performance Testing

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. A. Brown, X. Z. Wang, F. Q. Gao, J. P. Wu, D. L. Lalman, and J. W. Holloway Postweaning Gains in Calves Sired by Six Sire Breeds Evaluated on Two Preweaning Forages and Two Postweaning Management Systems Professional Animal Scientist, June 1, 2008; 24(3): 224 - 231. [Abstract] [PDF]