Effects of temperament at feedlot arrival and breed type on growth efficiency, feeding behavior, and carcass value in finishing heifers.

Objectives were to evaluate the effects of temperament at feedlot arrival and breed type on productivity, feed efficiency, feeding behavior, and carcass quality traits in finishing beef heifers, and to examine interactions between temperament and breed type. Heifers (Angus, Braford, Brangus, and Simbrah, N = 411, BW = 280 kg) were fed a high-grain diet (ME = 3.0 Mcal/kg DM) in pens equipped with electronic feed bunks. Quality grade (QG), yield grade (YG), and Warner-Bratzler shear (WBS) force values (day 1 and 14 postmortem) were evaluated. Relative exit velocity (REV) at feedlot arrival was used as a covariate in mixed models to assess the effects of temperament and interactions with breed type, with means compared at ±1 SD from the mean initial REV. Calm heifers (mean REV minus 1 SD) had 4% greater (P < 0.001) initial BW, 12% greater (P < 0.001) ADG, 8% greater (P < 0.001) DMI, and 4% greater (P < 0.02) G:F than heifers with excitable temperaments (mean REV plus 1 SD). A temperament × breed interaction was detected (P < 0.01) for residual feed intake (RFI). Braford heifers had a more (P < 0.05) negative REV covariate slope (-1.49 ± 0.65) than the other breeds, such that excitable Braford heifers had lower (P < 0.05) RFI than the other breeds with excitable temperaments. Temperament × breed interactions were observed (P < 0.001) for DMI per BW0.75 and bunk visit (BV) duration. Braford heifers had more (P < 0.05) negative REV covariate slopes for both traits than Angus, Brangus, and Simbrah heifers such that excitable Braford heifers consumed less (P < 0.05) DMI per BW0.75 and had less BV duration compared to excitable Angus and Brangus heifers. Calm heifers had 9% greater (P < 0.01) meal duration, and consumed meals that were 22% longer (P < 0.001) and 17% larger (P < 0.001) compared to excitable heifers. Calm heifers had 12% more (P < 0.001) BV events per meal then excitable heifers. Carcasses from calm heifers were 4% heavier (P < 0.05) and had 7% greater (P = 0.05) backfat (BF) depth and tended to have 4% greater (P = 0.07) USDA YG than carcasses from excitable heifers. Additionally, loin steaks from calm heifers had 8% lower (P < 0.05) WBS force than steaks from excitable heifers. Based on a carcass grid with discounts and premiums for HCW, QG, YG, and tenderness, calm heifers returned $62 more (P < 0.01) revenue per animal than excitable heifers. These results demonstrate that heifers with divergent phenotypes for temperament on feedlot arrival differ in their performance, feed efficiency, and feeding behavior patterns, as well as carcass quality and revenue.

[1]  W. E. Pinchak,et al.  Efficacy of statistical process control procedures to identify deviations in continuously measured physiologic and behavioral variables in beef steers experimentally challenged with Mannheimia haemolytica. , 2020, Journal of animal science.

[2]  L. Faucitano,et al.  Temperament effects on performance and adaptability of Nellore young bulls to the feedlot environment , 2018, Livestock Science.

[3]  K. McLeod,et al.  Relationships of a novel objective chute score and exit velocity with growth performance of receiving cattle. , 2016, Journal of animal science.

[4]  S. Troy,et al.  Association of Temperament and Acute Stress Responsiveness with Productivity, Feed Efficiency, and Methane Emissions in Beef Cattle: An Observational Study , 2016, Front. Vet. Sci..

[5]  R. Cooke,et al.  Impacts of temperament on Nellore cattle: physiological responses, feedlot performance, and carcass characteristics. , 2015, Journal of animal science.

[6]  R. Hill,et al.  Relationship between feed intake, feeding behaviors, performance, and ultrasound carcass measurements in growing purebred Angus and Hereford bulls. , 2013, Journal of animal science.

[7]  D. Bohnert,et al.  Effects of temperament and acclimation to handling on feedlot performance of Bos taurus feeder cattle originated from a rangeland-based cow-calf system. , 2012, Journal of animal science.

[8]  J. C. Bailey,et al.  Technical note: Evaluation of bimodal distribution models to determine meal criterion in heifers fed a high-grain diet. , 2012, Journal of animal science.

[9]  E. Navajas,et al.  Associations between response to handling and growth and meat quality in frequently handled Bos taurus beef cattle. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[10]  L O Tedeschi,et al.  Validation of a system for monitoring feeding behavior in beef cattle. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[11]  D. L. Robinson,et al.  Cattle temperament: persistence of assessments and associations with productivity, efficiency, carcass and meat quality traits. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[12]  M. McGee,et al.  Phenotypic and genetic parameters for different measures of feed efficiency in different breeds of Irish performance-tested beef bulls. , 2010, Journal of animal science.

[13]  D. Riley,et al.  Effect of breed composition on phenotypic residual feed intake and growth in Angus, Brahman, and Angus x Brahman crossbred cattle. , 2009, Journal of animal science.

[14]  W. D. Busby,et al.  Relationship of various incoming cattle traits with feedlot performance and carcass traits. , 2009, Journal of animal science.

[15]  F. M. Rouquette,et al.  Relationship of temperament, growth, carcass characteristics and tenderness in beef steers. , 2009, Meat science.

[16]  S. Moore,et al.  Genetic and phenotypic relationships of feeding behavior and temperament with performance, feed efficiency, ultrasound, and carcass merit of beef cattle. , 2007, Journal of animal science.

[17]  R. Randel,et al.  Technical note: Exit velocity as a measure of cattle temperament is repeatable and associated with serum concentration of cortisol in Brahman bulls. , 2006, Journal of animal science.

[18]  D. S. Hale,et al.  Influence of animal temperament and stress responsiveness on the carcass quality and beef tenderness of feedlot cattle. , 2006, Meat science.

[19]  J. Fox Characterization of residual feed intake and relationships with performance, carcass and temperament traits in growing calves , 2004 .

[20]  S. Moore,et al.  Different measures of energetic efficiency and their phenotypic relationships with growth, feed intake, and ultrasound and carcass merit in hybrid cattle. , 2004, Journal of animal science.

[21]  M. Hebart,et al.  Effect of missing data on the estimate of average daily feed intake in beef cattle , 2004 .

[22]  Stephen P. Miller,et al.  Genetic parameters and breed differences for feed efficiency, growth, and body composition traits of young beef bulls , 2004 .

[23]  V. J. Doogan,et al.  Productivity, carcass and meat quality of lot-fed Bos indicus cross steers grouped according to temperament , 2002 .

[24]  M. Miller,et al.  Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[25]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Bos indicus-cross feedlot cattle with excitable temperaments have tougher meat and a higher incidence of borderline dark cutters. , 1997, Meat science.

[26]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Genetic effects on beef tenderness in Bos indicus composite and Bos taurus cattle. , 1997, Journal of animal science.

[27]  H R Cross,et al.  Consumer evaluation of beef of known categories of tenderness. , 1997, Journal of animal science.

[28]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Feedlot cattle with calm temperaments have higher average daily gains than cattle with excitable temperaments. , 1997, Journal of animal science.

[29]  Robert M. Koch,et al.  Efficiency of Feed Use in Beef Cattle , 1963 .

[30]  A. H. Brown,et al.  Breed group effects for chute exit velocity as an indicator trait for temperament in weaned calves. , 2013 .

[31]  A. Reverter,et al.  Relationships between temperament, feedlot performance and beef quality , 2006 .

[32]  R. Dillon,et al.  Relationships between temperament and growth in a feedlot and commercial carcass traits of Bos indicus crossbreds , 1997 .

[33]  H. Burrow Measurements of temperament and their relationships with performance traits of beef cattle , 1997 .

[34]  G. Fordyce,et al.  Cattle temperaments in extensive beef herds in northern Queensland. 2. Effect of temperament on carcass and meat quality , 1988 .

[35]  H. Hearnshaw,et al.  Genetic and environmental effects on a temperament score in beef cattle , 1984 .

[36]  N. Tulloh Behaviour of cattle in yards. II. A study of temperament , 1961 .