ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to quantify lot trait influences on calf prices at
Mississippi auction markets. From May 2014 to 2015, 21,128 calf lots at 4 auctions
were evaluated. With price differentials relative to BCS 1 to 3, premiums (P < 0.0001) were $0.2553/0.4536 kg (BCS 4), $0.3242/0.4536 kg (BCS 5), $0.3474/0.4536
kg (BCS 6), $0.3150/0.4536 kg (BCS 7), and $0.3094/0.4536 kg (BCS 8 to 9). Calves
with branded hides sold for $0.0170/0.4536 kg less (P = 0.02) than unbranded calves. Price per unit BW decreased (P < 0.0001) as BW increased. There was a $0.1652/0.4536 kg premium (P < 0.0001) for black hair coat. Horned calves were discounted $0.1464/0.4536 kg (P < 0.0001). Large- and medium-framed calves were priced comparably (P = 0.41), but small-framed calves were discounted (P < 0.0001) $0.2023/0.4536 kg. Relative to average gut fill, gaunt or shrunk calves
sold for $0.0839 more (P < 0.0001) and full calves for $0.0278/0.4536 kg less (P < 0.01). Price increased (P < 0.0001) as muscle thickness increased. Mildly lame or sound calves earned premiums
(P < 0.001) of $0.3799/0.4536 kg or $0.5113, respectively, versus moderate to extremely
lame calves. Premiums were $0.0306/0.4536 kg (P = 0.02) and $0.0402/0.4536 kg (P < 0.01) for calm and slightly alarmed calves, respectively, versus moderately alarmed,
nervous, or aggressive calves. Cost should be weighed against price differentials
to determine profitable trait levels.
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
- Quality defects in market beef and dairy cows and bulls sold through livestock auction markets in the Western United States: II. Relative effects on selling price.10.2527/jas.2010-317121239659J. Anim. Sci. 2011; 89: 1484-1495
- Market value of preconditioning feeder calves.J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 2004; 36: 173-183
- A comparison of pricing structures at video and traditional cattle auctions.West. J. Agric. Econ. 1991; 16: 392-403
- Factors affecting the selling price of feeder cattle sold at Arkansas livestock auctions in 2005.10.2527/jas.2007-034017709785J. Anim. Sci. 2007; 85: 3434-3441
- Calf and yearling prices in the western United States: Spatial, quality, and temporal factors in satellite video auctions.J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2016; 41: 458-480
- The value of third-party certification of preconditioning claims at Iowa feeder cattle auctions.J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 2007; 39: 625-640
- Changing market dynamics and value-added premiums in southeastern feeder cattle markets.10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30127-3Prof. Anim. Sci. 2014; 30: 354-361
- Feeder cattle price determinants: An hedonic system of equations approach.Rev. Agric. Econ. 1996; 18: 193-211
- Feeder calf price differentials in Arizona auction markets.West. J. Agric. Econ. 1986; 11 (10.1.1.490.8056): 156-163
- Differences in hair coat shedding, and effects on calf weaning weight and BCS among Angus dams.10.1016/j.livsci.2011.02.009Livest. Sci. 2011; 140: 68-71
- Econometric Analysis.5th ed. Macmillan Publ., New York, NY2003
- Effect of location variables on feeder calf basis at Oklahoma auctions.J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2016; 41: 393-405
- Valuing animal identification and other information in feeder cattle.American Agricultural Economics Association Meeting, Portland, OR. Agric. Appl. Econ. Assoc., Milwaukee, WI2007
- Effect of varying levels of postpartum nutrition and body condition at calving on subsequent reproductive performance in beef cattle.10.2527/jas1986.622300xJ. Anim. Sci. 1986; 62: 300-306
- Genetic parameters of three methods of temperament evaluation of Brahman calves.10.2527/jas.2013-749424821821J. Anim. Sci. 2014; 92: 3082-3087
- Factors affecting feeder cattle price differentials.West. J. Agric. Econ. 1988; 13: 71-81
- A lameness scoring system that uses posture and gait.10.1016/S0093-691X(97)00098-816728067Theriogenology. 1997; 47: 1179-1187
- Comparing the 2000 and 2005 factors affecting the selling price of feeder cattle sold at Arkansas livestock auctions.10.2527/jas.2007-033917686896J. Anim. Sci. 2007; 85: 3425-3433
- Comparing the factors affecting the selling price of beef calves sold at Arkansas livestock auctions during a declining cattle inventory.10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30297-7Prof. Anim. Sci. 2013; 29: 652-664
- Factors affecting the selling price of feeder cattle sold at Arkansas livestock auctions.10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31526-6Prof. Anim. Sci. 2002; 18: 227-236
- Feeder calf price differentials in Georgia teleauctions. So.10.1017/S0081305200018197J. Agric. Econ. 1991; 23: 75-84
- US Standards for Grades of Feeder Cattle.USDA-Agric. Market. Serv., Washington, DC2000 (Oct. 2000. AMS-586)
- Beef 2007–08. Part IV: Reference of Beef Cow-Calf Management Practices in the United States, 2007–08. USDA–Anim.Plant Health Inspect. Serv.–Vet. Serv., Cent. Epidemiol. Anim. Health, Fort Collins, CO2010
- Accounting for self-selection bias in feeder cattle premium estimates using matched sampling.J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2014; 31: 124-138
- Determinants of price differentials in Oklahoma value-added feeder cattle auctions.J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2012; 37: 114-127
- The effect of value-added management on calf prices at superior livestock auction video markets.J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2012; 37: 128-143
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
February 18,
2018
Received:
September 13,
2017
Footnotes
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
