This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
Abstract
Forty-eight market beef cows were assigned to short-term production strategies for
value addition. Treatments were confinement feeding (FDL), blue grama pasture + mineral
supplement (normal control; NC); NC + 926 g/d 38% CP supplement (PRO), or NC + 1,726
g/d 20% CP supplement (ENR). Cow initial body condition score and BW were used as
co-variates and orthogonal contrasts were used to compare FDL vs. pasture treatments,
NC vs. (PRO + ENR)/2, and PRO vs. ENR. Over the 49-d period, FDL resulted in greater
BW gain than pasture treatments (P < 0.01). Supplementation tended to improve gain
(P = 0.19), with little difference among supplements (P = 0.98). Weight gains were
98, 4, 10 and 10 (SE = 3.8) kg/cow for FDL, NC, ENR and PRO, respectively. Final body
condition scores were 6.0, 4.3, 4.5 and 4.5 (SE = 0.04) for FDL, NC, ENR and PRO,
respectively. Final condition was greater for FDL than pastured cows (P < 0.01), and
for supplemented vs. NC (P < 0.01). Production responses resulted in differences in
gross revenue, with FDL generating the most revenue (P < 0.01), NC tending to receive
less than PRO and ENR (P = 0.14), and ENR tending to receive more than PRO (P = 0.12).
Net returns ($/cow) were 52, 26, 15, and 15 (SE = 7.9) for FDL, NC, ENR and PRO, respectively.
Net returns to FDL were greatest (P < 0.01); returns to NC were numerically higher
than supplemented groups (P = 0.23), and PRO and ENR were similar (P = 0.99). Productivity
and profits were maximized with intensive management of market cows. Cost management
is critical for profitability of low-input strategies.
Key words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe toAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Literature Cited
- Influence of body condition score on live and carcass value of market beef cows.J. Anim. Sci. 1999; 77: 2610
- FASS.Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching. 1st rev. ed. Fed. of Anim. Scie. Soc. Savoy, IL1999
- Effects of body composition, pre- and postpartum energy level and early weaning on reproductive performance of beef cows and preweaning calf gain.J. Anim. Sci. 1990; 68: 1438
- Range animal nutrition.In Grazing Management: An Ecological Perspective. R. K. Heitschmidt and J. W. Stuth, ed. Timber Press, Portland, OR1991
- Statistical Principles of Research Design and Analysis. Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA1994
- Cull cow management and its implications for cow-calf profitability.J. Range Manage. 2002; 55: 112
- The beef production enterprise: Gaining focus.In Proc. New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Short Course, Las Cruces, NM2002: 7
- NRC.Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th rev.ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC2000
- Forage intake by beef steers grazing winter wheat with varied herbage allowance.J. Range Manage. 1995; 48: 198
- Effects of feeding strategy and age on live animal performance, carcass characteristics, and economics of short-term feeding programs for culled beef cows.J. Anim. Sci. 2004; 82: 3646
- Performance, carcass, and palatability traits for cull cows fed high-energy concentrate diets for 0, 14, 28, 42, or 56 days.J. Anim. Sci. 1997; 75: 1195
- Realimentation of cull range cows. I. Effect of final body condition and dietary energy level on rate, efficiency and composition of gains.J. Anim. Sci. 1979; 48: 913
- Factors affecting the selling price of replacement and market cows sold at Arkansas Livestock Auctions.Prof. Anim. Sci. 2002; 18: 380
- USDA-AMS.Agricultural Marketing Service Report CV_LS152. 2003; (Accessible at)
- Range supplements—What we have learned.New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Short Course. 1992; (p. 20)
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2006 American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
