-The DATALINE Program-This Bull Lost Money
|
|
1K.A. Ringwall and K.J. Helmuth Dickinson Research Extension Center
|
|
|
|
| Appropriate genetic and managerial decisions influence beef cattle income potential. | |
|
|
| DATALINE allows every segment of the beef industry chain to source verify the product throughout development. This electronic connection adds accountability to the CHAPS beef cattle network securing needed data for cow-calf producers. This data completes a circle of communication and gives the cow-calf producer the knowledge to make genetic and management changes which affect profitability, improve product quality and insure consumer safety. | |
|
|
| DATALINE is an outgrowth of the Cow Herd Appraisal Performance Software (CHAPS) program developed by the North Dakota Beef Cattle Improvement Association and North Dakota State University Extension Service. The CHAPS and DATALINE programs have made it possible for cow-calf producers to allow a complete throughput of information from the beginning (conception) to the end (retail harvest). The first set of cattle through the DATALINE program were three loads of cattle from the Dickinson Research Extension Center (DREC). On November 11, 1996, 76 steers and on December 3, 1996, 91 steers and 67 heifers were shipped to Decatur County Feed Yard Inc. at Oberlin Kansas. | |
|
|
| The weaning performance of DREC calves is presented in table 1 by individual Angus sire and group averages (tables 2 and 3 use the same format). The calves sent had acceptable growth rates however are smaller framed cattle (4.7 vs. 5.7) then North Dakota CHAPS cattle. The feedlot performance is shown in table 2, and serves as the initial benchmark values for overall feedlot performance for DREC. Table 3 gives the carcass characteristics of these cattle. Compared to the 1995 beef cattle quality audit, these cattle are slightly smaller and less muscled, but produce a higher quality carcass. Genetic change could be initiated from the initial years data, with caution. The performance of the different Angus sires are similar. Pre-weaning growth rate and frame were similar for all sires with the exception of 336C (table 1). Tables 2 and 3 would indicate the same trend. In general, the performance of 336C was inadequate pre-weaning, in the feedlot and on the rail. This bull lost money. Dollar wise, the question should be asked if more dollars would have been generated selling the cows than maintaining cows conceived to this bull in the herd. Early trends would indicate some differences in feed efficiency and carcass traits resulting in $25 dollar spread in market adjusted net return (table 2 and 3) among the different sires. Additional calves will be produced to build the data set and increase the confidence in the baseline data. | |
|
|
| This program demonstrates cattle can be source verified back to the cow/calf operation, resulting in beginning benchmarks for weaning, feedlot, carcass and health traits. | |
Table 1: Weaning Performance of Angus Sired Steers and Heifers Versus Drec Herd and North Dakota Averages During 1996
| Sire | N |
Birth Weight | Wean Weight | Adjusted 205 Days Weight | Average Daily Gain | Weight per Day of Age | Age | Frame Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 127 | 25 |
86 |
556 |
555 |
2.0 |
2.4 |
230 |
4.5 |
| 132 | 16 |
76 |
550 |
555 |
2.1 |
2.4 |
231 |
4.4 |
| 155 | 19 |
79 |
546 |
553 |
2.1 |
2.4 |
225 |
4.4 |
| 1445 | 30 |
80 |
557 |
564 |
2.1 |
2.5 |
224 |
4.3 |
| 336C | 11 |
71 |
417 |
502 |
1.8 |
2.2 |
195 |
3.7 |
| Herd Average | 296 |
88 |
522 |
559 |
2.1 |
2.6 |
205 |
4.7 |
| North Dakota | 18415 |
89 |
533 |
576 |
2.3 |
2.7 |
200 |
5.7 |
Table 2: Feedlot Performance of Angus Sired Steer Calves in 1996 versus Angus and DREC Herd Averages
| Sire | N |
Receiving Weight |
Final Weight |
Feedlot Average Daily Gain |
Days on Feed |
Feed Efficiency |
Age at Harvest |
Market Adjusted Net Return $a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 127 | 10 |
700 |
1126 |
2.9 |
147 |
6.62 |
417 |
33 |
| 132 | 8 |
642 |
1081 |
3.1 |
144 |
6.01 |
415 |
55 |
| 155 | 11 |
681 |
1060 |
2.9 |
131 |
6.35 |
401 |
48 |
| 1445 | 15 |
642 |
1103 |
3.2 |
146 |
5.84 |
413 |
58 |
| 336C | 4 |
532 |
984 |
2.7 |
174 |
6.33 |
421 |
-21 |
| Angus Averageb | 53 |
650 |
1078 |
3.0 |
143 |
6.16 |
408 |
42 |
| Herd Average | 159 |
623 |
1110 |
3.1 |
158 |
6.13 |
405 |
41 |
| Decatur | 10488 |
641 |
1137 |
3.1 |
160 |
6.20 |
na |
34 |
a) The standard values used in the market-adjusted profit calculations per cwt were: Commodity Hot Carcass Average Price - $106, Choice/Select Price Spread - $8, Standard Grade Discount form Select -$4, Prime Grade Premium from Choice -$4, Discount for Heavies and Lights - $10, Discount for Dark Cutters -$15, Premium for Yield Grade 1 -$6, Premium for Yield Grade 2 -$3, Premium/Discount for Yield Grade 3 -$0, Discount for Yield Grade 4 -$15, Discount for Yield Grade 5 -$25, Fixed Price for Utility Grade and Lower -$70.
b) Herd average for Angus sires used at the Dickinson Research Extension Center
Table 3: Carcass Characteristics of Angus Sired Steer Calves in 1996 Versus Angus, Drec Herd, NBQA Averages
| Sire | N |
Hot Carcass Weight |
Rib Eye Area |
Final Yield Grade |
Quality Gradea |
Market Adjusted Net Return $b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 127 | 10 |
712 |
13.1 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
33 |
| 132 | 8 |
694 |
12.1 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
55 |
| 155 | 11 |
681 |
12.2 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
48 |
| 1445 | 15 |
705 |
12.8 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
58 |
| 336C | 4 |
603 |
11.0 |
2.3 |
2.5 |
-21 |
| Angus Averagec | 53 |
686 |
12.3 |
2.4 |
2.3 |
42 |
| Herd Average | 159 |
707 |
12.5 |
2.3 |
2.5 |
41 |
| Decatur | 10488 |
724 |
na |
1.8 |
2.5 |
34 |
| NBQAd | na |
748 |
12.8 |
2.8 |
3.0 |
na |
a) Quality Grade 1=Prime 2=Choice 3=Select 4=Standard 5=Non-Conformity
b) The standard values used in the market-adjusted profit calculations per cwt were: Commodity Hot Carcass Average Price - $106, Choice/Select Price Spread - $8, Standard Grade Discount form Select -$4, Prime Grade Premium from Choice -$4, Discount for Heavies and Lights - $10, Discount for Dark Cutters -$15, Premium for Yield Grade 1 -$6, Premium for Yield Grade 2 -$3, Premium/Discount for Yield Grade 3 -$0, Discount for Yield Grade 4 -$15, Discount for Yield Grade 5 -$25, Fixed Price for Utility Grade and Lower -$70.
c) Herd average for Angus sires used at the Dickinson Research Extension Center
d) 1995 National Beef Quality Audit
1Kris Ringwall, Director, Dickinson Research Extension Center. Keith Helmuth, Research Specialist, Dickinson Research Extension Center, Dickinson, ND.