Literature DB >> 21642495

Phenotypic and genetic relationships among feeding behavior traits, feed intake, and residual feed intake in steers fed grower and finisher diets.

O N Durunna1, Z Wang, J A Basarab, E K Okine, S S Moore.   

Abstract

Data from a 3-yr feeding trial of crossbred steers (n = 331) were used to examine the relationship between feeding behavior traits and feed efficiency in steers fed grower and finisher diets, successively. There were 2 feeding periods each year whereby the steers were fed a grower diet in the first feeding period (P1) and a finisher diet in the second feeding period (P2). Each feeding period lasted for a minimum of 10 wk, ad libitum. In addition to feed intake, records on 3 measures of feeding behavior [feeding duration (FD), head-down time (HDT), and feeding frequency (FF)] were collected using the GrowSafe feeding system. Residual feed intake (RFI) was calculated by regression, after which the steers were classified as low (<0.5 SD), medium (±0.5 SD), or high (>0.5 SD) from the mean. The steers had greater (P < 0.001) FD, HDT, and FF when the grower diet was fed but greater feeding rate (FR) when the finisher diet was fed. Including the measures of feeding behavior as covariates to the feed intake prediction model containing ADG, metabolic midweight, and ultrasound backfat accounted for more variation in DMI than models that did not contain these additional parameters. The FD and HDT were significantly different (P < 0.05) among the RFI classes regardless of the feeding period, whereas no differences (P > 0.90) were found for FR among the RFI classes. For the growing period and finishing period, respectively, FD had phenotypic correlations with HDT (0.79, 0.83), FF (0.14, 0.55), DMI (0.38, 0.34), and FR (-0.34, -0.21). Heritability estimates in P1 and P2 for FD, HDT, and FF were 0.25 ± 0.16, 0.14 ± 0.11; 0.14 ± 0.15, 0.09 ± 0.10; and 0.56 ± 0.19, 0.59 ± 0.18, respectively. Genetic correlations between P1 and P2 were 0.91 ± 0.26, 0.93 ± 0.37, and 0.94 ± 0.11 for FD, HDT, and FF, respectively. The results suggest that it may be appropriate to include feeding behavior traits as covariates to indicate measure(s) of animal activity in the calculation of RFI. Feeding behavior phenotypes were greater during the grower-fed period than the finisher-fed period. During these feeding periods, efficient steers exhibited fewer FF, shorter FD, and shorter HDT than inefficient steers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21642495     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-3867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  7 in total

Review 1.  Residual feed intake: a nutritional tool for genetic improvement.

Authors:  Leilson Rocha Bezerra; José Lindenberg Rocha Sarmento; Severino Gonzaga Neto; Ney Rômulo Oliveira de Paula; Ronaldo Lopes Oliveira; Wagner Martins Fontes do Rêgo
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 1.559

2.  Feed efficiency and carcass metrics in growing cattle1.

Authors:  David N Kelly; Craig Murphy; Roy D Sleator; Michelle M Judge; Stephen B Conroy; Donagh P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Impact of selection for residual feed intake on production traits and behavior of mule ducks.

Authors:  L Drouilhet; R Monteville; C Molette; M Lague; A Cornuez; L Canario; E Ricard; H Gilbert
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Genetic association among feeding behavior, feed efficiency, and growth traits in growing indicine cattle.

Authors:  Lorena Ferreira Benfica; Leandro Sannomiya Sakamoto; Ana Fabrícia Braga Magalhães; Matheus Henrique Vargas de Oliveira; Lúcia Galvão de Albuquerque; Roberto Cavalheiro; Renata Helena Branco; Joslaine Noely Dos Santos Goncalves Cyrillo; Maria Eugênia Zerlotti Mercadante
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Genetic parameters for residual feed intake in a random population of Pekin duck.

Authors:  Yunsheng Zhang; Zhan Bao Guo; Ming Xie; Zhiying Zhang; Shuisheng Hou
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.509

6.  Genetic variability in the feeding behavior of crossbred growing cattle and associations with performance and feed efficiency.

Authors:  David N Kelly; Roy D Sleator; Craig P Murphy; Stephen B Conroy; Donagh P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Characterization of grazing behaviour microstructure using point-of-view cameras.

Authors:  Elvira Sales-Baptista; Maria Isabel Ferraz-de-Oliveira; Marina Terra-Braga; José António Lopes de Castro; João Serrano; Manuel Cancela d'Abreu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.