Advertisement

Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 51, Issue 8, pp 2253–2261 | Cite as

Growth performance of Lowline Angus x Thai native crossbred beef under tropical condition

  • Ruangyote PilajunEmail author
  • Kangwan Thummasaeng
  • Somchai Sawasdiphan
  • Surachai Suwanlee
  • Wunchai Inthisaeng
  • Metha Wanapat
Regular Articles
  • 95 Downloads

Abstract

Thai native cattle (Bos indicus) have high fertility rates and strong mothering abilities; however, their slight size, slow growth rate and low meat quality have not proved suitable for a commercial fattening system. Their progeny from crossbreeding with exotic sire particularly the Bos Taurus could present greater production performance. Lowline Angus sires and frozen semen were used to produce Lowline Angus x Thai native crossbreds. All cattle were raised in the same condition which was mainly through a grazing system. Throughout 5 years of data collection, calves’ gender, birth weight, and weight gains were recorded until 1 year of age. There was no interaction effect between calves’ gender, breed, and birth season on weight at birth and yearling, as well as growth rate. The birth weight of male calves (14.0 kg) were greater than female calves (13.3 kg). The calves’ birth weights did not differ between levels of Lowline Angus blood, but all crossbred males were found to be significantly bigger than indigenous females. It must be noted that yearling weight did not differ between breeds. However, females 75% Lowline Angus, 25% Thai native crossbred (139.3 kg) weighed significantly higher than Thai native purebred females (115.9 kg). The calves’ birth weights had positive correlation with Lowline Angus blood levels: birth weights increased when Lowline Angus blood levels were increased. The sharpness in the growth curve of Lowline Angus crossbreds was higher than purebred Thai indigenous cattle. Moreover, the 25% Lowline Angus crossbred had the highest graph slope as opposed to the 50% or 75% Lowline Angus crossbred. The growth performance of Lowline Angus x Thai native crossbred was shown unsuccessful under low-quality grazing situation. Additive effect of the crossbred presented quite low but well adapted to tropical environment. Greater productivity performance of the crossbred possibly will be excess with a higher quality feedlot condition.

Keywords

Lowline Angus Thai native cattle Crossbreeding Growth performance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the research facilities supported by the Office of Laboratory and Farming, Faculty of Agriculture, Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand. This research did not receive any specific funding.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest, this document is their original research work done at the Faculty of Agriculture at Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand, and that no part of it has been submitted anywhere else for any conferences or publications.

References

  1. Ali, I.E., Ishag, I.A., Ibrahim, F.H., Magzoo, A. and Ahme, M.A., 2015. Impact of genetic and Non-genetic factors on birth weight of crossbred Red Angus and Simmental with local cattle. American Journal of Agricultural Science 2, 80–84.Google Scholar
  2. Arce, R.O.N., 2006. Evaluation of heterosis and heterosis retention in Bos Taurus-Bos indicus crossbred cattle for reproductive and maternal traits in cows. Master of Science thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, P.F., Makarechian, M. and Price, M.A., 1988. Incidence of dystocia and perinatal calf mortality resulting from reciprocal crossing of double-muscled and normal cattle. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 29, 163–167.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Australian Lowline Cattle Association, 2015. Standard for Australian Lowline Cattle [Online]. Available at: https://www.lowlinecattleassoc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/pdf/SABRI1604 0414090.pdf
  5. Behl, R., Behl, J. and Joshi, B.K., 2010. Heat tolerance mechanisms in cattle-status in zebu cattle: A review. The Indian journal of animal sciences, 80(9), 891–897.Google Scholar
  6. Boonyanuwat, K., Sirisom, P. and Putharatanung, A., 2015. Improvement in beef cattle genetics supported beef cattle production and protein consumption. The 61st International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, 23-28th August 2015, Clermont-Ferrand, France,Google Scholar
  7. Bunmee, T., Chaiwang, N., Kantiya, N. and Jaturasitha, S., 2017. Comparison of fattening performance, carcass and meat quality of Charolais, Black Angus, and Brahman crossbred with Thai native cattle. Journal of Agriculture, 33, 451–462.Google Scholar
  8. Bunmee, T., Chaiwang, N., Kaewkot, C. and Jaturasitha, S., 2018. Current situation and future prospects for beef production in Thailand - A review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 31, 968–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casas, E., Thallman, R.M. and Cundiff, L.V., 2012. Birth and weaning traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Norwegian Red, Swedish Red and White, Wagyu, and Friesian sires. Journal of Animal Science, 90, 2916–2920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chantalakhana, C., 1984. Beef cattle and buffalo breeding in Thailand. In: J.W. Copland, ed., Evaluation of Large Ruminants for the Tropics, ACIAR, Canberra, Australia, pp 29–36.Google Scholar
  11. Charoensook, R., Gatphayak, K., Sharifi, A.R., Chaisongkram, C., Brenig, B. and Knorr, C., 2012. Polymorphisms in the bovine HSP90AB1 gene are associated with heat tolerance in Thai indigenous cattle. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 44, 921–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Department of Livestock Development, 2017. Data of livestock population in Thailand year 2017. Information and Communication Technology Center, Department of Livestock Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand [Online]. Available at: http://www.oic.go.th/FILEWEB/CABINFOCENTER28/DRAWER090/GENERAL/DATA0000/00000061.PDF
  13. Freetly, H.C., Kuehn, L.A. and Cundiff, L.V., 2011. Growth curves of crossbred cows sired by Hereford, Angus, Belgian Blue, Brahman, Boran, and Tuli bulls, and the fraction of mature body weight and height at puberty. Journal of Animal Science, 89, 2373–2379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaughan, J.B., Mader, T.L., Holt, S.M., Josey, M.J. and Rowan, K.J., 1999. Heat tolerance of Boran and Tuli crossbred steers. Journal of Animal Science, 77, 2398–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaughan, J.B., Mader, T.L., Holt, S.M. and Lisle, A. 2008. A new heat load index for feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science, 86(1), 226–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hongji, L., 1987. A test on improving yak's productive performances by introducing wild yak blood. Journal of China Yak, 2, 8–12.Google Scholar
  17. Hwang, J.M., Choi, J.G., Kim, H.C., Choy, Y.H., Kim, S., Lee, C. and Kim, J.B., 2008. Genetic Relationship of Gestation Length with Birth and Weaning weight in Hanwoo (Bos Taurus Coreanae). Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 21, 633–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Innurak, P., Yimmomgkol, S. and Skunum, P., 2004. Kamphaeng Saen synthetic Thai beef cattle breed: Its development characteristics and prospects. Proceeding of the 11th Asian Australasian Animal Production Congress. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. pp. 51–53.Google Scholar
  19. Jasanchuen, A., Sangthong, P. and Sangthong, D., 2016. The polymorphism of heat shock protein 70.1 (hsp70.1) gene at AP2 box region in Thai native cattle. Journal of Mahanakorn Veterinary Medicine, 11, 79–90.Google Scholar
  20. Jullathum, J., Keawkumrai, C., Prachongchit, W., Pilajun, R. and Inthisaeng, W., 2017. Growth performance of weaned Lowline Angus x Thai native crossbred received concentrate replacement by fermented cassava pulp (In Thai). Agricultural Science Journal, 48, 543–551.Google Scholar
  21. Lee, W.S., Oh, W.Y., Lee, S.S., Khan, M.A., Ko, M.S., Kim, H.S. and Ha, J.K., 2007. Growth performance and carcass evaluation of Jeju native cattle and its crossbreds fed for long fattening period. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 20, 1909–1916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Longworth, J., Brown, C. and Waldrom, S. 2001. Beef in Chaina: Agri-business opportunities and challenges. University of Queensland Press, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
  23. Manzi, M., Junga, J.O., Ebong, C. and Mosi, R.O., 2012. Factors affecting pre and post-weaning growth of six cattle breed groups as Songa research station in Rwanda. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 24, Article #68.Google Scholar
  24. Meuchel, M.C., 2005. Evaluation of heterosis and heterosis retention in Bos Taurus-Bos indicus crossbred cattle for productivity traits in cows. Master of Science thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, US.Google Scholar
  25. Mostari, M.P., Khan, M.Y.A., Roy, B.K., Hossain, S.M.J. and Huque, K.S., 2018. Growth performance of yearling F1 progeny of different crossbred beef cattle. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science, 46, 82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. NOAA, 1976. Livestock hot weather stress. United State Dept. of Commerce, Natl. Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin., Natl. Weather Service Central Region. Regional Operations Manual Letter C-31-76.Google Scholar
  27. Office of Agricultural Economics, 2006. Cost and income of beef production. Livestock and Fisheries Economic Research Sector, Office of Agricultural Economics, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand (Online). Available at: http://oldweb.oae.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/oae_baer/download/article/article_20100819151301.pdf
  28. Opatpatanakit, Y. and Sethakul, J., 2010. Natural beef from Thai native cattle: From farmers to consumers. Proceeding of the 14th AAAP Animal Science Congress. Pingtung, Taiwan, ROC.Google Scholar
  29. Pakdeerat, E., 2010. A comparison of the physiology, behavior, digestibility and growth performance between lowline angus crossbred and Thai native cattle under grazing conditions. M.Sc. Thesis, Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand.Google Scholar
  30. Pakdeerat, E., Thummasaeng, K., Sawasdiphan, S., Watthanakul, W. and Suriyapat, W., 2009. A comparison of behavior of Lowline Angus crossbred and Thai native cattle under grazing condition (In Thai). Proceeding of the 3rd UBU-Research Conference. Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand. pp 180–187.Google Scholar
  31. Pakdeerat, E., Sawasdiphan, S., Thummasaeng, K., Watthanakul, W. and Suriyapat, W., 2010. A comparison of growth performance of Lowline Angus crossbred and Thai native cattle under grazing condition (In Thai). Proceeding of the 4th UBU-Research Conference. Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand. pp 1–9.Google Scholar
  32. Pilajun, R. and Inthiseang, W., 2016. Production performance of difference blood levels Thai native × Lowline Angus crossbred calve fed with rice straw and fermented-cassava starch residue (In Thai). Khon Kaen Agricultural Journal, 44, 425–431.Google Scholar
  33. Pilajun, R. and Wanapat, M., 2016. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot Thai native × Lowline Angus crossbred steer fed with fermented cassava starch residue. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 48, 719–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pilajun, R., Thadsi, C., Kaewchalam, S. and Srilakane, A., 2014. Performance of Thai native cattle compared with Thai native x Lowline Angus crossbred cattle fed with fresh grass in ad libitum (In Thai). Thai Journal of Animal Science, 1, 237–240.Google Scholar
  35. Pilajun, R., Wanapat, M. and Thummasaeng, K., 2016. Nutrient digestibility and rumen fermentation of Thai native purebred compared with Thai native x Lowline Angus crossbred beef cattle. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 44, 355–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pilajun, R., Inthiseang, W., Wanapat, M., Kaewluan, W. and Lunsin, R., Unpublished. Production performance of grazing Thai native beef cattle compared with Lowline Angus x Thai native crossbred beef cattle with fermented cassava starch residue supplementation. Research report, National Research Council of ThailandGoogle Scholar
  37. Pribadi, L.W., Maylinda, S., Nasich, M. and Suyadi, S., 2014. Prepubertal growth rate of Bali cattle and its crosses with Simmental breed at lowland and highland environment. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 7, 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ritruechai, V., Lertrattanapong, B., Phonbumrung, T. and Chansiri, C., 2012. Performance of Thai native steers under rotational grazing on guinea grass and guinea grass with Tapra Stylo Legume pastures in Mahasarakham province of Thailand (In Thai). In ‘The Annual research report’. pp. 83–98. Bureau of Animal Nutrition Development, Department of Livestock Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand.Google Scholar
  39. Saithong, S., Chatchawan, T. and Boonyanuwat, K., 2011. Thai indigenous cattle production provide a sustainable alternative for the benefit of smallscale farmers, healthy food, and the environment. BAHGI e-journal, 1, 21–26.Google Scholar
  40. SAS, 2006. Procedures Guide, Second Edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
  41. Sawasdipan, S., 2003. Research and development of Thai native x lowline Angus crossbred beef cattle. Final report for Faculty of agriculture, Ubon Ratchathani UniversityGoogle Scholar
  42. Selvan, A.S., Tantia, M.S., Kumaresan, A., Kumar, A., Ravi Kumar, D., Karuthadurai, T. and Upadhyay, A., 2018. Phenotypic and genetic parameters estimation for birth weight in Zebu and crossbred calves born under organized farm conditions in India. International Journal of Livestock Research, 8, 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Skunmun, P., 2013. Thai Leather: Quality Cattle Hides in Thailand. Thaksin University Press, Songkhla, ThailandGoogle Scholar
  44. Thai Meteorological Department, 2010. Climate variability and Climate change Projection in Thailand. Technical Document No. 551–524–01-2010. Climatological Center, Thai Meteorological Department, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, Thailand.Google Scholar
  45. Thommaree, T., Boonyanuwat, K. and Chanjula, P., 2010. Growth performance and economics return of native cattle raising of small farm holders in Yala province under sufficient economics system (In Thai). Final research report. National Research Council of Thailand.Google Scholar
  46. Thrift, F.A., Franke, D.E. and Thrift, T.A., 2002. Review: The Issue of dystocia expressed when sires varying in percent Bos indicus inheritance are mated to Bos Taurus females. The Professional Animal Scientist, 18, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Zyl, J.G.E., 1990. Studies on performance and efficiency of pure and crossbred cattle in an arid bushveld environment. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
  48. Wanapat, M., 1999. Feeding of ruminants in the tropics based on local feed resources. Khon Kaen Publishing Company Ltd., Khon Kaen, Thailand. pp 236.Google Scholar
  49. Waritthitham, A., Lambertz, C., Langholz, H-J., Wicke, M. and Gauly, M., 2010. Assessment of beef production from Brahman x Thai native and Charolais x Thai native crossbred bulls slaughtered at different weights. I: Growth performance and carcass quality. Meat Science, 85, 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Widyas, N., Prastowo, S., Widi, T.S.M. and Baliarti, E., 2018. Predicting Madura cattle growth curve using non-linear model. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 142, 012006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Animal Science, Faculty of AgricultureUbon Ratchathani UniversityUbon RatchathaniThailand
  2. 2.Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development CenterKhon Kaen UniversityKhon KaenThailand

Personalised recommendations