| Literature DB >> 26194216 |
Ivanor Nunes do Prado1, Rodrigo Augusto Cortêz Passetti1, Dayane Cristina Rivaroli1, Mariana Garcia Ornaghi1, Kennyson Alves de Souza1, Camila Barbosa Carvalho1, Daniel Perotto2, José Luiz Moletta2.
Abstract
In this paper, weight, carcass dressing, weights of the primary cuts, weights of the physical components of the primary cuts, and weights of the main commercial cuts of 66 Purunã animals, of which 33 were bulls and 33 were steers were evaluated. These animals, with an average age of 19 months at the beginning of the experiment, were finished in a feedlot system during 116 days, and were fed with diets containing three levels of concentrate (0.8%, 1.1%, and 1.4% of body weight). The concentrate was formulated with 25% soybean meal, 73% ground corn grain, 1% of a mineral mix, and 1% of limestone. The interaction between sexual groups and the concentrate level was not significant for any of the variables. Likewise, no effect of the concentrate level was detected on the same variable traits. The bulls demonstrated higher hot carcass weights (265.1 vs 221.7 kg) and a higher proportion of forequarter (38.4% vs 36.1%) however the steers presented with higher proportions of side (19.7% vs 18.5%) and hindquarter (44.2% vs 43.1%). The bulls produced higher yields of muscle in the three primary cuts, there by resulting in higher yields of edible portions of the carcass. The bulls also produced higher weights of tenderloin, knuckle, topside, flat, eye round, rump, and rump cover. The finishing of young bulls in feedlot is to be recommended, since the animals produce carcasses with higher amounts of edible meat and higher yields of commercial cuts, thus allowing for a better price for the carcass. Low concentrate level could be used due to the lower cost of production for farmers.Entities:
Keywords: Concentrate Level; Edible Portion; Meat Production; Sexual Groups
Year: 2015 PMID: 26194216 PMCID: PMC4554872 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.15.0021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Chemical composition of ingredients in diets (% on dry matter)
| Item | Ingredients | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Soybean meal | Corn grain | Corn silage | Concentrate | |
| Organic matter | 93.62 | 96.64 | 97.87 | 95.45 |
| Ashes | 6.38 | 2.70 | 5.02 | 4.38 |
| Crude protein | 49.1 | 8.93 | 5.66 | 16.0 |
| Ether extract | 1.30 | 3.36 | 2.13 | 1.41 |
| Total carbohydrates | 43.0 | 86.8 | 89.1 | 77.1 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 6.00 | 17.9 | 43.5 | 18.2 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 13.1 | 4.40 | 26.8 | 5.92 |
| Non fibrous carbohydrates | 37.0 | 68.9 | 45.6 | 58.9 |
| Total digestible nutrients | 82.2 | 80.8 | 60.5 | 78.8 |
Data obtained from the Laboratory of Food Analysis, Instituto de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Paraná.
Figure 1Primary carcass cuts.
Nutrients intake (dry matter basis) by cattle of different sexual groups (SG) and fed on three concentrate levels (CL) in the diets
| Intake | Sexual groups | Concentrate levels (%) | p<value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Bulls | Steers | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | SG | CL | |
| Silage intake (kg) | 4.79 | 4.73 | 5.05a | 4.78b | 4.45c | 0.75 | 0.05 |
| Concentrate intake (kg) | 3.57 | 3.30 | 2.58a | 3.60b | 4.26c | 0.16 | 0.01 |
| Total dry matter intake (kg) | 8.44 | 8.12 | 7.69a | 8.41b | 8.78c | 0.25 | 0.01 |
| Silage: concentrate ratio | 57.2 | 58.6 | 65.9a | 56.9b | 50.8c | 0.19 | 0.01 |
| Organic matter (kg) | 8.20 | 7.89 | 7.45c | 8.17b | 8.54a | 0.25 | 0.01 |
| Crude protein (kg) | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.70c | 0.85b | 0.94a | 0.11 | 0.01 |
| Neutral detergent fiber (kg) | 2.78 | 2.72 | 2.71 | 2.77 | 2.77 | 0.49 | 0.84 |
| Acid detergent fiber (kg) | 1.52 | 1.49 | 1.53 | 1.51 | 1.48 | 0.60 | 0.76 |
| Ether extract (kg) | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.60 | 0.73 |
| Total carbohydrates (kg) | 7.08 | 6.83 | 6.52c | 7.06b | 7.31a | 0.28 | 0.01 |
| Total digestible nutrient (kg) | 5.76 | 5.52 | 5.11c | 5.75b | 6.09a | 0.19 | 0.01 |
Means followed by different letters in the same row are different.
Mean of the carcass characteristics according to the sexual groups (SG) and the concentrate level (CL) in the diet
| Characteristics | Sexual groups | Concentrate level (%) | p<value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Bull | Steer | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | SG | CL | |
| Initial weight (kg) | 337.71 | 310.42 | 330.53a | 329.39a | 312.28b | ||
| Weight slaughter (kg) | 493.51 | 443.01 | 449.52b | 491.01a | 464.22b | ||
| Average daily gain (kg) | 1.34 | 1.14 | 1.02b | 1.39a | 1.31a | ||
| Feed conversion | 6.30 | 7.12 | 7.54a | 6.05c | 6.70b | ||
| Carcass weight (kg) | 265.12 | 221.68 | 226.14b | 255.58a | 246.18b | ||
| Carcass dressing (%) | 53.72 | 50.04 | 50.30 | 52.05 | 53.03 | Ns | |
| Forequarter (kg) | 51.01 | 40.02 | 41.92c | 48.45a | 45.33b | ||
| Hindquarter (kg) | 56.82 | 48.91 | 49.43c | 55.41a | 53.54b | ||
| Side (kg) | 24.73 | 21.91 | 21.72 | 23.93 | 24.22 | NS | |
| Forequarter (%) | 38.42 | 36.11 | 37.10 | 37.82 | 36.82 | NS | |
| Hindquarter (%) | 43.11 | 44.21 | 43.92 | 43.52 | 43.51 | NS | |
| Side (%) | 18.51 | 19.70 | 19.11 | 18.62 | 19.63 | NS | |
NS, not significant.
kg dry matter feed intake/kg average daily gain.
Means followed by different letters in the same line are different.
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Means at constituents of the forequarter, side, and hindquarters according to the sexual groups (SG) and the concentrate level (CL) in the diet
| Parameters | Sexual groups | Concentrate level (%) | p<value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Bull | Steer | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | SG | CL | |
| Forequarter edible portion (kg) | 44.41 | 32.72 | 37.62 | 38.61 | 39.50 | NS | |
| Hindquarter edible portion (kg) | 49.73 | 41.84 | 45.3 | 46.4 | 45.7 | NS | |
| Side edible portion (kg) | 21.42 | 18.32 | 19.81 | 20.00 | 19.84 | NS | |
| Forequarter bone (kg) | 9.13 | 7.87 | 8.46 | 8.56 | 8.47 | NS | NS |
| Hindquarter bone (kg) | 8.67 | 7.56 | 7.78 | 8.36 | 8.21 | NS | NS |
| Side bone (kg) | 3.72 | 3.41 | 3.83 | 3.42 | 3.45 | NS | NS |
| Carcass edible portion (kg) | 115.56 | 92.88 | 102.73 | 105.01 | 105.04 | NS | |
| Carcass bone (kg) | 21.52 | 18.84 | 20.07 | 20.34 | 20.13 | NS | |
| Forequarter edible portion (%) | 82.61 | 80.52 | 81.53 | 81.22 | 82.00 | NS | |
| Hindquarter edible portion (%) | 85.32 | 84.72 | 85.41 | 84.84 | 84.84 | NS | NS |
| Side edible portion (%) | 85.11 | 84.21 | 83.52 | 85.52 | 85.13 | NS | NS |
| Carcass edible portion (%) | 84.34 | 83.22 | 83.53 | 83.53 | 84.31 | NS | |
| Muscle (%) | 67.33 | 62.91 | 65.04 | 65.51 | 64.80 | NS | |
| Fat (%) | 18.22 | 22.52 | 20.61 | 19.52 | 20.91 | NS | |
| Bone (%) | 15.11 | 15.44 | 15.44 | 15.44 | 15.01 | NS | NS |
NS, not significant.
Means followed by different letters in the same line are different.
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Means for the commercial cuts of the forequarter according to the sexual groups (SG) and the concentrate level (CL) in the diet
| Parameters | Sexual groups | Concentrate level (%) | p<value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Bull | Steer | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | SG | CL | |
| Shoulder (kg) | 4.06 | 3.55 | 4.18 | 3.59 | 3.64 | NS | NS |
| Chuck tender (kg) | 1.45 | 1.22 | 1.10c | 1.52a | 1.39b | ||
| Heart (kg) | 6.34 | 5.18 | 5.11c | 6.34a | 5.80b | ||
| Muscle (kg) | 6.34 | 5.98 | 5.84 | 6.26 | 6.37 | NS | NS |
| Neck (kg) | 11.77 | 7.53 | 8.68 | 9.97 | 9.64 | *** | NS |
| Chuck (kg) | 6.00 | 3.94 | 4.33 | 5.30 | 5.15 | NS | |
| Shrink (kg) | 4.92 | 3.94 | 4.17 | 4.62 | 4.50 | NS | |
| Shoulder (%) | 3.07 | 3.23 | 2.70 | 2.78 | 2.97 | NS | NS |
| Chuck tender (%) | 1.09 | 1.09 | 0.97 | 1.13 | 1.13 | NS | NS |
| Heart (%) | 4.76 | 4.68 | 4.51 | 4.94 | 4.71 | NS | NS |
| Muscle (%) | 4.87 | 5.47 | 5.25 | 5.01 | 5.26 | NS | NS |
| Neck (%) | 8.77 | 6.82 | 7.70 | 7.81 | 7.88 | *** | NS |
| Chuck (%) | 4.63 | 3.61 | 3.88 | 4.25 | 4.23 | NS | |
| Shrink (%) | 3.68 | 3.53 | 3.66 | 3.57 | 3.64 | NS | NS |
NS, not significant.
Means followed by different letters in the same line are different.
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.
Dressing means and statistical comparison for the commercial cuts of the hindquarter according to the concentrate level and sexual groups
| Cuts | Sexual groups | Concentrate level (%) | p<value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Bull | Steer | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.4 | SG | CL | |
| Tenderloin (kg) | 2.42 | 1.97 | 2.04 | 2.21 | 2.35 | NS | |
| Rump cover (kg) | 1.98 | 1.75 | 1.70 | 1.89 | 2.01 | NS | NS |
| Knuckle (kg) | 6.66 | 5.79 | 5.69 | 6.29 | 6.70 | NS | |
| Eye round (kg) | 2.72 | 2.12 | 2.25 | 2.54 | 2.47 | NS | |
| Topside (kg) | 8.89 | 7.51 | 8.06 | 8.27 | 8.27 | NS | |
| Flat (kg) | 5.06 | 4.32 | 4.67 | 4.75 | 4.65 | NS | |
| Muscle (kg) | 5.58 | 5.04 | 5.00c | 5.74a | 5.19b | NS | |
| Rump (kg) | 5.62 | 4.75 | 4.86 | 5.69 | 5.02 | NS | |
| Strip loin (kg) | 9.03 | 7.77 | 7.71 | 8.72 | 8.77 | NS | NS |
| Tenderloin (%) | 1.84 | 1.79 | 1.80 | 1.74 | 1.91 | NS | NS |
| Rump cover (%) | 1.48 | 1.58 | 1.48 | 1.48 | 1.63 | NS | NS |
| Knuckle (%) | 5.01 | 5.23 | 5.01 | 4.93 | 5.42 | NS | NS |
| Eye round (%) | 2.03 | 1.91 | 1.96 | 1.97 | 1.99 | NS | NS |
| Topside (%) | 6.72 | 6.79 | 7.13a | 6.44c | 6.71b | NS | |
| Flat (%) | 3.80 | 3.97 | 4.14a | 3.76b | 3.75b | NS | |
| Muscle (%) | 4.23 | 4.24 | 4.29 | 4.34 | 4.09 | NS | NS |
| Rump (%) | 6.74 | 6.93 | 6.73 | 6.80 | 6.98 | NS | NS |
NS, not significant.
Means followed by different letters in the same line are different.
p<0.05,
p<0.01,
p<0.001.