Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T18:43:00.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carcass traits of young bulls in dual-purpose cattle: genetic parameters and genetic correlations with veal calf, type and production traits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2016

I. Croué ,
M. N. Fouilloux ,
R. Saintilan  and
V. Ducrocq
I. Croué*
Affiliation:
Institut de l’Elevage, UMR1313 GABI, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France INRA, UMR1313 GABI, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France
M. N. Fouilloux
Affiliation:
Institut de l’Elevage, UMR1313 GABI, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France
R. Saintilan
Affiliation:
ALLICE, UMR1313 GABI, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France
V. Ducrocq
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1313 GABI, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France
*
†E-mail: iola.croue@idele.fr
Get access

Abstract

The profitability of dual-purpose breeding farms can be increased through genetic improvement of carcass traits. To develop a genetic evaluation of carcass traits of young bulls, breed-specific genetic parameters were estimated in three French dual-purpose breeds. Genetic correlations between these traits and veal calf, type and milk production traits were also estimated. Slaughter performances of 156 226 Montbeliarde, 160 361 Normande and 8691 Simmental young bulls were analyzed with a multitrait animal model. In the three breeds, heritabilities were moderate for carcass weight (0.12 to 0.19±0.01 to 0.04) and carcass conformation (0.21 to 0.26±0.01 to 0.04) and slightly lower for age at slaughter (0.08 to 0.17±0.01 to 0.03). For all three breeds, genetic correlations between carcass weight and carcass conformation were moderate and favorable (0.30 to 0.52±0.03 to 0.13). They were strong and favorable (−0.49 to −0.71±0.05 to 0.15) between carcass weight and age at slaughter. Between age at slaughter and carcass conformation, they were low and unfavorable to moderate and favorable (−0.25 to 0.10±0.06 to 0.18). Heavier young bulls tend to be better conformed and slaughtered earlier. Genetic correlations between corresponding young bulls and veal production traits were moderate and favorable (0.32 to 0.70±0.03 to 0.09), implying that selecting sires for veal calf production leads to select sires producing better young bulls. Genetic correlations between young bull carcass weight and cow size were moderately favorable (0.22 to 0.45±0.04 to 0.10). Young bull carcass conformation had moderate and favorable genetic correlations (0.11 to 0.24±0.04 to 0.10) with cow width but moderate and unfavorable genetic correlations (−0.21 to −0.36±0.03 to 0.08) with cow height. Taller cows tended to produce heavier young bulls and thinner cows to produce less conformed ones. Genetic correlations between carcass traits of young bulls and cow muscularity traits were low to moderate and favorable. Finally, genetic correlations between carcass traits of young bulls and milk production traits were low and unfavorable to moderate and favorable. These results indicate the existence for all three breeds of genetic variability for the genetic improvement of carcass traits of young bulls as well as favorable genetic correlations for their simultaneous selection and no strong unfavorable correlation with milk production traits.

Keywords

dual-purpose cattlecarcass traitsheritabilitygenetic correlations
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 6 , June 2017 , pp. 929 - 937
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2016 

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

Amelis 2015. Comment lire les index en race Normande. Retrieved on 20 January 2016 from http://www.amelis.fr/indextaureaux/commentlirelesindexnormande.pdf.Google Scholar
Association nationale INTER-professionnelle du BEtail et des Viandes 2015. Normabev. Retrieved on 12 August 2015 from http://www.interbev.fr/interbev/historique/normabev/.Google Scholar
Bittante, G, Cecchinato, A, Dal Zotto, R, De Marchi, M and Penasa, M 2011. Adjusting for age can lead to biased genetic evaluation for body weight in cattle. Livestock Science 140, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadet, A 2015. Computation of economic weights for a lifetime profitability index in the Normande cattle breed. Master report, AgroParisTech, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Cartier, P and Moevi, I 2007. Le point sur… La qualité des carcasses et des viandes de gros bovins. Retrieved on 12 October 2015 from http://www.agrireseau.qc.ca/bovinsboucherie/documents/qualite_carcasse_viande_bovin_2008%20%20p.pdf.Google Scholar
Colleau, JJ, Dupont, M, Muller, A, Daburon, P, Chambeyron, JJ and Malterre, C 1982. Young bull production as affected by divergent selection on milk yield. Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 4 to 8 October 1982, Madrid, Spain, pp. 234–241.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, J, Oldenbroek, JK, Korver, S and Van der Werf, JHJ 1990. Breeding for veal and beef production in Dutch Red and White cattle. Livestock Production Science 25, 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducrocq, V, Boichard, D, Barbat, A and Larroque, H 2001. Implementation of an approximate multitrait BLUP evaluation to combine production traits and functional traits into a total merit index. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, 26 to 29 August 2001, Budapest, Hungary, G1.o4.Google Scholar
Eriksson, S, Näsholm, A, Johansson, K and Philipsson, J 2003. Genetic analyses of field-recorded growth and carcass traits for Swedish beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 84, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gere, T, Bartosiewicz, L, Kaltenecker, J and Lippai, K 1983. Correlations between fattening characteristics of Holstein Friesian bulls and their dam’s milk yield. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 100, 380–389.Google Scholar
Harris, B and Johnson, D 1998. Approximate reliability of genetic evaluations under an animal model. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 2723–2728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickey, JM, Keane, MG, Kenny, DA, Cromie, AR and Veerkamp, RF 2007. Genetic parameters for EUROP carcass traits within different groups of cattle in Ireland. Journal of Animal Science 85, 314–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
International Agreement of Recording Practices 2014. ICAR recording guidelines. Retrieved on 20 January 2016 from http://www.icar.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Guidelines_2014.pdf.Google Scholar
Institut de l’Elevage (idele) 2014. Methods and results of the genetic evaluation IBOVAL 2014 for the beef cattle breeds. Retrieved on 12 October 2015 from http://idele.fr/no_cache/recherche/publication/idelesolr/recommends/methode-et-resultats-de-levaluation-iboval-2014-pour-les-races-bovines-a-viande.html.Google Scholar
Institut de l’Elevage (idele) 2015a. Breeding values (BV) of Montbeliard sires for dairy, functional and type traits. Retrieved on 26 August 2015 from http://idele.fr/fileadmin/medias/Documents/INTRO_MO_152_va.pdf.Google Scholar
Institut de l’Elevage (idele) 2015b. Breeding values (BV) of Normand sires for dairy, functional and type traits. Retrieved on 26 August 2015 from http://idele.fr/fileadmin/medias/Documents/INTRO_NO_152_va.pdf.Google Scholar
Institut de l’Elevage (idele) 2015c. Evaluation multiraciale sur les performances à l’abattage des veaux de boucherie. Retrieved on 26 August 2015 from http://idele.fr/no_cache/recherche/publication/idelesolr/recommends/evaluation-multiraciale-sur-les-performances-a-labattage-des-veaux-de-boucherie-en-ferme.html.Google Scholar
Institut de l’Elevage (idele) 2015d. Chiffres clés du dispositive génétique français 2015. Retrieved on 23 June 2016 from http://idele.fr/no_cache/recherche/publication/idelesolr/recommends/dispositif-genetique-chiffres-cles-ruminants-2015.html Google Scholar
Kause, A, Mikkola, L, Strandén, I and Sirkko, K 2015. Genetic parameters for carcass weight, conformation and fat in five beef cattle breeds. Animal 9, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lassen, J, Sørensen, MK, Madsen, P and Ducrocq, V 2007. An approximate multitrait model for genetic evaluation in dairy cattle with a robust estimation of genetic trends. Genetic Selection Evolution 39, 353–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liinamo, AE, Ojala, M and Van Arendonk, JAM 2001. Genetic relationship of meat and milk production in Finnish Ayrshire. Livestock Production Science 69, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liinamo, AE and Van Arendonk, JAM 1999. Combining selection for carcass quality, body weight, and milk traits in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 802–809.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, K 2007. WOMBAT – a tool for mixed model analyses in quantitative genetics by restricted maximum likelihood. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B 8, 815–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oldenbroek, JK, Laurijsen, HAJ and ten Napel, J 1987. Relationship between performance test and progeny test for veal and beef production in Black and White dairy cattle, performance testing of AI bulls for efficiency and beef production in dairy and dual-purpose breeds. Proceedings of the EAAP-seminar. Study commissions on cattle production and animal genetics, 27 to 29 April 1987, Wageningen, Netherlands, pp. 45–51.Google Scholar
Organisme de selection de la race Montbeliarde 2015. La table de pointage. Retrieved on 20 January 2016 from http://www.montbeliarde.org/assets/files/Publications/fiches-techniques/POINTAGE.pdf.Google Scholar
Parkkonen, P, Liinamo, AE and Ojala, M 2000. Estimates of genetic parameters for carcass traits in Finnish Ayrshire and Holstein-Friesian. Livestock Production Science 64, 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penasa, M, Cecchinato, A, Dal Zotto, R, Blair, H T, López-Villalobos, N and Bittante, G 2012. Direct and maternal genetic effects for body weight and price of calves sold for veal production. Journal of Animal Science 90, 3385–3391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeiffer, C, Fuerst-Waltl, B, Schwarzenbacher, H, Steininger, F and Fuerst, C 2015. A comparison of methods to calculate a total merit using stochastic simulation study. Genetic Selection Evolution 47, 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sbarra, F, Mantovani, R, Quaglia, A and Bittante, G 2013. Genetics of slaughter precocity, carcass weight, and carcass weight gain in Chianina, Marchigiana, and Romagnola young bulls under protected geographical indication. Journal of Animal Science 91, 2596–2604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmental France 2014. Le schéma de selection. Retrieved on 20 January 2016 from http://www.simmentalfrance.fr/le-schema-de-selection.html.Google Scholar
Suess, GG, Tyler, WJ and Brungardt, VH 1968. Relationship between carcass characteristics of Holstein steers and genetic level for milk production. Journal of Animal Science 27, 972–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syrstad, O 1983. Association among production and reproductive traits in cattle. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 100, 375–379.Google Scholar
Thompson, R and Meyer, K 1986. A review of theoretical aspects in the estimation of breeding values for multi-trait selection. Livestock Production Science 15, 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Werf, JHJ, Van der Waaij, LH, Groen, AF and De Jong, G 1998. An index for beef and veal characteristics in dairy cattle based on carcass traits. Livestock Production Science 54, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Veldhuizen, AE, Bekman, H, Oldenbroek, JK and Van der Werf, JHJ 1991. Genetic parameters for beef and milk production in Dutch Red and White dual-purpose cattle and their implications for a breeding program. Livestock Production Science 29, 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Croué supplementary material

Croué supplementary material 1

Download Croué supplementary material(File)
File 22.6 KB