Literature DB >> 8617667

Compensatory growth and carcass quality in growth-restricted and refed beef steers.

R D Sainz1, F De la Torre, J W Oltjen.   

Abstract

Beef steers were fed in two phases 1) to determine the relative importance of changes in DMI, gastrointestinal tract fill, energy expenditures, and composition of gain in the compensatory growth phenomenon, 2) to compare the effects of growth restriction due to ad libitum consumption of a low-energy (low-concentrate) diet to those of limited intake of a high-energy (high-concentrate) feed, and 3) to examine changes in carcass composition and quality resulting from different types of growth restriction. During the growing phase (237 to 327 kg), steers were fed either a high- (C) of low- (F) concentrate diet. Diet F was available for ad libitum consumption (FA) and diet C was available either for ad libitum consumption (CA) or on a limited basis (CL) to match the live weight gains by the FA group. During the finishing phase (327 to 481 kg), all steers received diet C, either for ad libitum consumption (CA) or restricted (CL) to 70% of the intake by the corresponding CA steers. Backfat thickness was markedly reduced (P < .001) by final feed restriction (7.4 and 6.9 mm for CL-CL and FA-CL respectively), compared with CA-CA (12.6 mm). Backfat also was lower in CL-CA (11.6 mm, P < .10) and FA-CA (9.9 mm, P < .05) than in CA-CA steers. Conversely, marbling scores were similar among groups, except for the FA-CL steers, which had lower marbling scores than FA-CA and CL-CA steers (P < .05). Higher DMI following growth restriction were accompanied by increased rates of live weight (+54 and +27%) and empty body weight (EBW; +57 and +43%) gain for CL-CA and FA-CA steers, respectively, compared with CA-CA steers. Gain:feed (EBW basis) were improved in some restricted/refed groups (+30, +13, and +10%, for Cl-CA, CL-CM respectively CA-CA. Increased DMI played a major role in the compensatory gain response in both CL-CA and FA-CA groups. Maintenance requirement was reduced (-17%) in CL-CA and increased in the FA-CA group (+21%); both changes affected the magnitude of compensatory gain in those animals. In contrast, composition of gain had little or no effect on the compensatory gain response. Programmed feeding can be used to manipulate carcass quality, but low-concentrate feeding during the growing phase may impair overall feedlot performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8617667     DOI: 10.2527/1995.73102971x

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


  20 in total

1.  Enhanced mitochondrial complex gene function and reduced liver size may mediate improved feed efficiency of beef cattle during compensatory growth.

Authors:  Erin E Connor; Stanislaw Kahl; Theodore H Elsasser; Joel S Parker; Robert W Li; Curtis P Van Tassell; Ransom L Baldwin; Scott M Barao
Journal:  Funct Integr Genomics       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 3.410

2.  The nutritional interrelationship between the growing and finishing phases in crossbred cattle raised in a tropical system.

Authors:  Ricardo Linhares Sampaio; Flávio Dutra de Resende; Ricardo Andrade Reis; Ivanna Moraes de Oliveira; Letícia Custódio; Rodolfo Maciel Fernandes; Raul Dirceu Pazdiora; Gustavo Rezende Siqueira
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 1.559

3.  Progressive limit feeding to maximize profit in the feedlot1.

Authors:  Bruce M Hannon; Michael R Murphy
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Effects of feeding level on efficiency of high- and low-residual feed intake beef steers.

Authors:  Emily M Andreini; Sheyenne M Augenstein; Carrie S Fales; Roberto D Sainz; James W Oltjen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 5.  Physiological parameter values for physiologically based pharmacokinetic models in food-producing animals. Part I: Cattle and swine.

Authors:  Zhoumeng Lin; Miao Li; Yu-Shin Wang; Lisa A Tell; Ronald E Baynes; Jennifer L Davis; Thomas W Vickroy; Jim E Riviere
Journal:  J Vet Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 1.786

6.  Relationship between gain rate during the growing phase and forage allowance in the finishing phase in Nellore cattle.

Authors:  Verônica A C Mota; Rodolfo M Fernandes; Laura F Prados; João A Alves Neto; Guilherme F Berti; Flávio D Resende; Gustavo R Siqueira
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2020-01-18       Impact factor: 1.559

7.  Effects of diet type on nutrient utilization and energy balance in drylot heifers1.

Authors:  Jessica R Baber; Tryon A Wickersham; Jason E Sawyer; Harvey C Freetly; Tami M Brown-Brandl; Kristin E Hales
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Feeding strategy during growing phase on the performance and carcass traits in beef bulls finished on the pasture.

Authors:  André da Cunha Peixoto Vitor; Márcio Dos Santos Pedreira; Abias Santos Silva; Estela Pezenti; Lázaro Costa da Silva; Henrique Almeida da Silva; Jaciara Diavão; Mirton José Frota Morenz
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2022-09-15       Impact factor: 1.893

Review 9.  Fat Deposition and Fat Effects on Meat Quality-A Review.

Authors:  Madison Schumacher; Hannah DelCurto-Wyffels; Jennifer Thomson; Jane Boles
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.231

10.  The effects of energy and protein supplementation strategy and frequency on the performance of beef cattle that grazed on Tanzania grass pastures during the rainy season.

Authors:  R L Miorin; R M Saad; L D F Silva; S Galbeiro; U Cecato; F L Massaro Junior
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2016-08-20       Impact factor: 1.559

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.