Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T11:58:09.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative performance of calves from Bunaji (White Fulani) dams and Gharolais, three-quarter Friesian and Bunaji sires

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. O. Johnson  and
T. D. Bell
A. O. Johnson
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural Research, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
T. D. Bell
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural Research, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Comparative evaluation was made on the live weight and growth pattern of calves from Bunaji (White Fulani) cows sired by Charolais, three-quarters Friesian crossbreds (three quarters Friesian and one quarter Bunaji) and Bunaji bulls in 2 years. Twelve steers per breed were evaluated on carcass merit after 250 days postweaning feeding.

Results showed that the Charolais half-cross and the Friesian three-eighth calves were heavier by up to 7, 23, 57 and 51 kg respectively at birth, weaning, 112 and 250 days after weaning than the Bunaji calves. The carcass data indicated superior slaughter weight and loin eye area in favour of the cross - breds, but no differences were found for dressed weight, dressing percentage, carcass grade and hide weight percentage among the breed groups. Carcass retail cuts showed heavier sirloin steaks and round steaks in favour of the cross-breds also.

The results were indicative of the superior growth of the cross-breds and underlined their carcass potential which may be useful in upgrading the indigenous stock. In view of the small numbers of progeny per sire group, especially among the cross-breds, further work needs to be done to confirm the present trend.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 91 , Issue 2 , October 1978 , pp. 305 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 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

REFERENCES

Bodwell, C. E., Harrington, G. & Pomeroy, R. W. (1959). A note on the measurements of ‘eye’ muscle area in beef carcasses. Animal Production 1, 97–101.Google Scholar
Chantalakhana, C. (1973). Beef breeding in the tropics. Taiwain Food and Fertilizer Technical Newletter 18, 2–6.Google Scholar
Hansen, K. (1971). The use of crossbreeding in commerical beef production. Texas Research Centre Special Report no.44.Google Scholar
Harbers, L. H., Schalles, R. R., Okoye, B. I. C. & Zemmelink, G. (1972). Comparative study of White Fulani, Friesian and White Fulani-Friesian bulls for meat. Tropical Agriculture 49, 1–8.Google Scholar
Roberts, C. J. & Gray, A. R. (1973). Studies on trypanosome- resistant cattle. I. The breeding and growth performance of N'dama, Muturu and Zebu cattle maintained under the same conditions of husbandry. Tropical Animal Health and Production 5, 211–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, J. D., Raleigh, R. J. & Kennick, W. H. (1966). Performance of Hereford and Charolais x Hereford crossbred cattle in eastern Oregon. Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin no. 603.Google Scholar
Wheat, J. D., De Leeuw, P. N. & Koch, B. A. (1972). Bunaji cattle at the Shika research station, North Central State, Nigeria. Institute for Agricultural Research Samaru Miscellaneous paper no. 41.Google Scholar
Zemmelink, G., De Leeuw, P. N. & Harbers, L. H. (1973). Effect of plane of nutrition on comparative weight gains of White Fulani and Friesian x White Fulani crossbred bulls. Tropical Animal Health and Production 5, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar