Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-07T12:26:35.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Production of Young Bull Beef

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Cecil W. Davison  and
Ronald R. Miller
Cecil W. Davison
Affiliation:
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Ronald R. Miller
Affiliation:
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Get access

Extract

Numerous reports citing experiment data continue to claim advantages in gain rates and feed efficiency for bulls in comparison with steers. Although most experiment data agree about such advantages, magnitudes differ considerably among the reports for good reason. Variations in the design of bull-steer experiments are almost as copious as the number of stations reporting results. Bulls and steers used in any given experiment are generally of comparable age and have been subjected to the same feeding environment, but rations tend to differ among experiments, as do breed, age, and time on feed. Though some researchers feed to a predetermined slaughter weight which may differ for steers and bulls, others feed both on equal number of days. Likewise, because some studies have been designed for carcass comparisons of steers and bulls, they fail to provide critical feedlot performance data such as feed efficiencies. Carcass data may or may not include slaughter weights, dressing percentages, or yield of retail cuts.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , July 1978 , pp. 65 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Arthaud, V. H.et al. “Carcass Composition, Quality and Palatability Attributes of Bulls and Steers Fed Different Energy Levels and Killed at Four Ages,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 44, No. 1, 1977, pp. 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Brown, C. J., Bartee, John D., and Lewis, P. K. Jr.Relationships Among Performance Records, Carcass Cut-Out Data, and Eating Quality of Bulls and Steers, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 655, 1962.Google Scholar
[3]Champagne, J. R.et al. “Feedlot Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Young Bulls Castrated at Four Ages,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 29, December 1969, pp. 887–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Field, R. A., Nelms, G. E., and Schoonover, C. O.. “Effects of Age, Marbling, and Sex on Palatability of Beef,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 25, May 1966, pp. 360–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Field, R. A., Schoonover, C. O., and Nelms, G. E.. Performance Data, Carcass Yield, and Consumer Acceptance of Retail Cuts from Steers and Bulls, Wyoming Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 417, June 1964.Google Scholar
[6]Glimp, H. A.et al. “Effect of Sex Condition on Growth and Carcass Traits of Male Hereford and Angus Cattle,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 33, December 1971, pp. 1242–1247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Hedrick, H. B., Thompson, G. B., and Krause, G. F.. “Comparison of Feedlot Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Half-sib Bulls, Steers, and Heifers,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 29, November 1969, pp. 687–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Howes, A. D.et al. “Performance of Individually Fed Bulls and Steers,” Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science 26, 1975, pp. 10–13.Google Scholar
[9]Hurst, C. E.et al. “Carcass Composition and Quality of Bulls Versus Steers,” Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science 26, 1975, pp. 60–62.Google Scholar
[10]Johnston, J.Econometric Methods, 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972.Google Scholar
[11]Klosterman, Earle W.et al. “The Effect of Age of Castration Upon Rate and Economy of Gain and Carcass Quality of Beef Calves,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 13, November 1954, pp. 817–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Klosterman, Earle W.et al. “The Subcutaneous Implantation of Stilbestrol in Fattening Bulls and Steers,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 14, November 1955, pp. 1050–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Lewis, P. K. Jr., Brown, C. J., and Heck, M. C.. Effects of Pre-Slaughter Treatment and Castration on Certain Organoleptic and Carcass Characteristics of Beef, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 697, March 1965.Google Scholar
[14]Matsushima, J. K. and Sprague, J. I.. “Bulls Produce Leaner, Lower Grading Carcasses in CSU Feeding Study,” Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station General Series 785, 1963, pp. 6–7.Google Scholar
[15]Miller, J. C.et al. “Retail Carcass Comparisons of Bulls and Steers,” Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science 26,1975, pp. 63–66.Google Scholar
[16]Parrish, F. C.et al. “Effect of Degree of Marbling and Internal Temperature of Doneness on Beef Rib Steaks,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 37, August 1973, pp. 430–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Smith, W. H. “Hormones and Hormone-Like Compounds Approved for Growing and Finishing Beef Cattle,” Purdue Cattle Feeders Report, Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University, March 1973, pp. 11–15.Google Scholar
[18]Tanner, J. E.et al. “Sire X Sex Interactions and Sex Differences in Growth and Carcass Traits of Angus Bulls, Steers and Heifers,” Journal of Animal Science, Volume 31, December 1970, pp. 1058–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]U.S. Department of Agriculture. Official United States Standards for Grades of Slaughter, Agricultural Marketing Service reprint effective July 1, 1973.Google Scholar
[20]Wyrick, Jerry Allen. “Feedlot Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Bulls, Steers, and Heifers,” M.S. thesis, University of Florida, December 1967.Google Scholar