Records on 1,180 young Angus bulls and heifers involved in performance tests were used to estimate genetic and phenotypic parameters for feed intake, feed efficiency, and other postweaning traits. The mean age was 268 d at the start of the performance test, which comprised 21-d adjustment and 70-d test periods. Traits studied included 200-d weight, 400-d weight, scrotal circumference, ultrasonic measurements of rib and rump fat depths and longissimus muscle area, ADG, metabolic weight, daily feed intake, feed conversion ratio, and residual feed intake. For all traits except the last five, additional data from the Angus Society ofAustralia pedigree and performance database were included, which increased the number of animals to 27,229. Genetic (co)variances were estimated by REML using animal models. Direct heritability estimates for 200-d weight, 400-d weight, rib fat depth, ADG, feed conversion,and residual feed intake were 0.17 +/- 0.03, 0.27 +/- 0.03, 0.35 +/- 0.04, 0.28 +/- 0.04, 0.29 +/- 0.04, and 0.39 +/- 0.03, respectively. Feed conversion ratio was genetically (r(g) = 0.66 ) and phenotypically (r(p) = 0.53) correlated with residual feed intake. Feed conversion ratio was correlated (r(g) = -0.62, r(p) = -0.74) with ADG, whereas residual feed intake was not (rg = -0.04, r(p) = -0.06). Genetically, both residual feed intake and feed conversion ratio were negatively correlated with direct effects of 200-d weight (r(g) = -0.45 and -0.21) and 400-d weight (r(g) = -0.26 and -0.09). The correlations between the remaining traits and the feed efficiency traits were near zero, except between feed intake and feed conversion ratio (r(g) = 0.31, r(p) = 0.23), feed intake and residual feed intake (r(g) = 0.69, r(p) = 0.72), and rib fat depth and residual feed intake (r(g) = 0.17, r(p) = 0.14). These results indicate that genetic improvement in feed efficiency can be achieved through selection and, in general, correlated responses in growth and the other postweaning traits will be minimal.

Genetic and phenotypic variance and covariance components for feed intake, feed efficiency, and other postweaning traits in Angus cattle

Genetic and phenotypic relationships among different measures of growth and feed efficiency in young Charolais bulls

Increasing food production for the growing human population off a constraining land base will require greater efficiency of production. Genetic improvement of feed efficiency in cattle, which is cumulative and permanent, is one likely vehicle to achieving efficiency gains. The objective of this review is to summarize genetic parameters for feed efficiency traits in dairy and beef cattle and also to address some of the misconceptions associated with feed efficiency in these sectors, as well as discuss the potential use of feed efficiency in breeding programs. A meta-analysis of up to 39 scientific publications in growing cattle clearly showed that genetic variation in feed efficiency exists with a pooled heritability for residual feed intake (RFI) and feed conversion efficiency of 0.33 ± 0.01 (range of 0.07 to 0.62) and 0.23 ± 0.01 (range of 0.06 to 0.46), respectively. Heritability estimates for feed efficiency in cows were lower; a meta-analysis of up to 11 estimates revealed heritability estimates for gross feed efficiency and RFI of 0.06 ± 0.010 and 0.04 ± 0.008, respectively. Meta-analysis of genetic correlations between feed intake, feed efficiency and other performance traits are presented, and selection index theory is used to calculate the proportion of genetic variation in feed intake that can be explained by easy to measure, and often already collected, data. A large proportion of the genetic variation in feed intake could be explained in both growing animals and lactating animals using up to 5 predictor traits, including BW, growth rate, milk yield, body composition, and linear type traits reflecting body size and muscularity. Knowledge of genetic merit for feed intake can be used, along with estimates of genetic merit for energy sinks, to calculate genetic merit for feed efficiency. Therefore, the marginal benefit of collecting actual feed intake data, using the genetic parameters used in this study, appears to be low. There is now sufficient information available to develop a road map on how best to direct research to ensure long-term food security for a growing human population. Gaps in knowledge are identified here, and possibilities to address these gaps are discussed.

Cell Biology Symposium: genetics of feed efficiency in dairy and beef cattle.

No genetic parameters for performance and feed efficiency traits are available for Irish performance-tested bulls. The objective of this study was to determine the phenotypic and genetic variation for feed intake, BW, ADG, and measures of feed efficiency including feed conversion ratio (FCR), relative growth rate, Kleiber ratio, residual BW gain (RG), and residual feed intake (RFI). Observations were available on up to 2,605 bulls for each trait from one test station across 24 yr; breeds included in the analyses were Aberdeen Angus (AN), Charolais (CH), Hereford, Limousin (LI), and Simmental. The test period was at least 70 d. Bulls were individually offered concentrates ad libitum, with a restricted forage allowance. Differences in performance and feed efficiency existed among breeds. For example, AN, on average, ate 0.04 kg of DM/d more than CH but had ADG of 0.14 kg/d less over the 70-d test period. Results showed LI and CH were the most efficient breeds when efficiency was defined as FCR or RFI. When animals were partitioned into groups based on high, medium, or low RFI, the low RFI (i.e., most efficient) group were also the more efficient as defined by RG and FCR. The low RFI group had the same ADG as the medium group and a greater ADG (P < 0.01) than the high group (1.67 vs. 1.66 and 1.63 kg/d); yet they ate 0.67 kg of DM/d less (P < 0.001) than the medium RFI group and 1.22 kg of DM/d less (P < 0.001) than the high RFI (i.e., least efficient) group. Genetic parameters for all performance and efficiency measures were estimated across breeds using linear animal mixed models; heritability estimates for feed efficiency traits ranged from 0.28 +/- 0.06 (RG) to 0.45 +/- 0.06 (RFI). An additional series of analyses included a maternal component in the model; maternal heritability estimates for feed efficiency traits ranged from 0.05 +/- 0.03 (RG) to 0.11 +/- 0.05 (relative growth rate). Genetic correlations between most of the different feed efficiency measures were strong. Results from this study indicate significant genetic differences in performance and some measures of feed efficiency among performance-tested beef bulls.

Phenotypic and genetic parameters for different measures of feed efficiency in different breeds of Irish performance-tested beef bulls.

This 3-yr study used 490 steers to determine whether feedlot steers changed their feed efficiency (FE) ranking when fed a grower diet, then a finisher diet. The steers were crossbreds and were between 5 to 7 mo of age. There were 2 feeding periods each year. Within each year, approximately 90 steers had their diet switched from a grower to a finisher diet (feed-swap group), whereas another 90 steers were fed either the grower (grower-fed group) or the finisher (finisher-fed group) diet throughout the feeding trial. Each feeding test lasted for a minimum of 10 wk, and all steers were fed ad libitum. Individual animal feed intakes were collected using the GrowSafe feeding system, and BW were measured every 2 wk. Residual feed intake (RFI), G:F, and Kleiber ratio (KR) were computed at the end of each feeding period. For each measure of efficiency, animals were classified as low, medium, or high based on 0.5 SD from the mean. The majority of steers did not maintain the previous efficiency class in the second period. Approximately 58, 51, and 51% of steers in the feed-swap group, finisher-fed group, and the grower-fed group, respectively, changed their RFI measure by 0.5 SD. A low rank correlation occurred in all test groups but was less in the feed-swap group. Spearman rank correlations between the 2 feeding periods in the feed-swap group were 0.33, 0.20, and 0.31 for RFI, G:F, and KR, respectively. Classifications based on G:F and KR showed that a greater number of steers (P 0.05) between the proportions of individuals that changed or maintained their FE class. In the groups without a feed-swap, there was no difference (P > 0.05) in the proportion of steers that changed or maintained the same FE class for all FE measures. Our results suggest that diet type and feeding period affect the FE ranking in beef steers. A feedlot diet is ideal for evaluating the FE potential of steers for feedlot profitability; however, we suggest that tests involving less dense diets should be examined in an effort to understand the relationships between FE and feeder profitability.

/pdf/feed-efficiency-differences-and-reranking-in-beef-steers-fed-14cgco8rh2.pdf

Feed efficiency differences and reranking in beef steers fed grower and finisher diets

Postweaning gain performance and individual feed intake on 271 Hereford and 263 Angus bulls were recorded during three 168-d test periods from 1984 to 1986. Each breed was composed of two lines and within each breed bulls were fed either a high-energy (HD) or a medium-energy (MD) diet. Energy intake was partitioned into energy for maintenance and growth based on predicted individual animal requirements. Estimates of heritability were obtained using Restricted Maximum Likelihood with an individual animal model including fixed effects of year, diet, and covariates of initial weight and backfat change by breed and with line effects for overall data. Bulls fed the HD grew faster and had higher metabolizable energy intake per day (MEI), residual feed consumption (RFC), and gross and net feed efficiency (FE and NFE) (P < .001) than those fed the MD. Estimates of heritability for Hereford and Angus bulls, respectively, were .46 and .16 for 200-d weaning weight (WWT), .16 and .43 for average daily gain (ADG), .19 and .31 for intake per day (MEI), .43 and .45 for yearling weight (YWT), .07 and .23 for RFC, .08 and .35 for FE, and .14 and .28 for NFE. Genetic and phenotypic correlations between MEI and ADG, MEI and YWT, ADG and YWT, ADG and FE, YWT and FE, and FE and NFE were moderately to highly positive for both breeds. Negative genetic and phenotypic correlations between NFE and ADG show partial correlations of FE with ADG after accounting for energy requirement for maintenance. Residual feed consumption was negatively associated with YWT, FE, and NFE, indicating a possible genetic improvement.

L. Q. Fan

Papers

Genetic parameter estimation of postweaning gain, feed intake, and feed efficiency for Hereford and Angus bulls fed two different diets.