IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nswprr/37667.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economic Effects of Early-Life Nutritional Constraints in Crossbred Cattle Bred on the NSW North Coast

Author

Listed:
  • Alford, Andrew R.
  • Cafe, Linda M.
  • Greenwood, Paul L.
  • Griffith, Garry R.

Abstract

Different patterns of nutrition during pregnancy and lactation can influence cow productivity and the performance of their offspring. An experiment was conducted on the North Coast of NSW whereby “low” and “high” pasture nutritional systems were imposed on a herd of Hereford cows during pregnancy, and then again from birth to weaning, with a crossover design also imposed to select offspring with extremes of growth to birth and/or weaning. Thus, four growth groups resulted – low-low, low-high, high-low, and high-high. Piedmontese and Wagyu bulls were used. After weaning, these offspring were grown out on the NSW Northern Tablelands and then finished to heavy market weights in a feedlot. The results of the experiment indicated that restricted early-life growth resulting in differences in weight of calves at weaning persisted until slaughter at 30 months of age. Animals that were smaller at weaning remained smaller at slaughter. Some compensation occurred following restriction of growth during lactation, but not following restriction of growth during pregnancy. However, neither carcass quality nor eating quality of the beef was adversely affected by growth restriction during early-life. An economic analysis of these data was done using the Beef-N-Omics decision support package. Two methods were used. The main results showed that for the representative cattle enterprise modelled, total gross margins ranged from $45,500 for the low-low system to $52,600 for the high-low system. Gross margin per hectare ranged from $114 for the low-low system to $132 for the high-low system, while gross margin per breeding cow ranged from $303 for the low-low system to $387 for the high-high system. In all cases, the gross margin for those groups with foetal growth based on a higher level of nutrition exceeded their peers on a lower level of nutrition. Therefore, it is more profitable for cows and calves to have access to a high standard of nutrition during pregnancy and up to weaning than for them to have access only to a poor standard of nutrition during this time period.

Suggested Citation

  • Alford, Andrew R. & Cafe, Linda M. & Greenwood, Paul L. & Griffith, Garry R., 2007. "The Economic Effects of Early-Life Nutritional Constraints in Crossbred Cattle Bred on the NSW North Coast," Research Reports 37667, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nswprr:37667
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.37667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/37667/files/err-33-crossbred-cattle.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.37667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. Pannell, 2006. "Flat Earth Economics: The Far-reaching Consequences of Flat Payoff Functions in Economic Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(4), pages 553-566.
    2. Farquharson, Robert J., 2006. "Production Response and Input Demand in Decision Making: Nitrogen Fertilizer and Wheat Growers," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 14.
    3. Davidson, Bruce Robinson & Martin, Brian Robert, 1965. "The Relationship Between Yields On Farms And In Experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Bruce Robinson Davidson & Brian Robert Martin, 1965. "The Relationship Between Yields On Farms And In Experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 129-140, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mounter, Stuart W. & Griffith, Garry R. & Piggott, Roley R. & Fleming, Euan M. & Zhao, Xueyan, 2007. "Composition of the National Sheep Flock and Specification of Equilibrium Prices and Quantities for the Australian Sheep and Wool Industries, 2002-03 to 2004-05," Research Reports 37664, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    2. Davies, Lloyd & Quinn, Helen & Della Bosca, Tony & Alford, Andrew & Griffith, Garry, 2009. "The Economic Effects of Alternate Growth Path and Breed Type Combinations to Meet Beef Market Specifications across Southern Australia," Research Reports 280782, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    3. Davies, Brian Lloyd & Bosca, T.J. Della & Griffith, Garry R., 2009. "Economic effects of alternate growth path, time of calving and breed type combinations across Southern Autralian beef cattle environments," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 17, pages 1-17.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kerry J. Stott & Brendan Christy & Malcolm McCaskill & Kurt K. Benke & Penny Riffkin & Garry J. O'Leary & Robert Norton, 2020. "Integrating crop modelling and production economics to investigate multiple nutrient deficiencies and yield gaps," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 655-676, July.
    2. Scobie, Grant M. & Franklin, David L., 1977. "The Impact Of Supervised Credit Programmes On Technological Change In Developing Agriculture," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-12, April.
    3. Mounter, Stuart W. & Griffith, Garry R. & Mullen, John D., 2008. "Jointly selecting for fibre diameter and fleece weight: A market-level assessment of the QPLU$ Merino breeding project," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6046, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Farquharson, Bob & Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Thar, So Pyay & Than, Shwe Mar & Aung, Nay Myo, 2017. "Nitrogen for smallholders and cereal crops in Myanmar: economic and social dimensions for fertility decisions," 2017 Conference (61st), February 7-10, 2017, Brisbane, Australia 256192, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Rae, Allan N. & Carman, Hoy F., 1975. "A Model Of New Zealand Apple Supply Response To Technological Change," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 19(1), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Davies, Lloyd & Quinn, Helen & Della Bosca, Tony & Alford, Andrew & Griffith, Garry, 2009. "The Economic Effects of Alternate Growth Path and Breed Type Combinations to Meet Beef Market Specifications across Southern Australia," Research Reports 280782, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    7. Davies, Brian Lloyd & Bosca, T.J. Della & Griffith, Garry R., 2009. "Economic effects of alternate growth path, time of calving and breed type combinations across Southern Autralian beef cattle environments," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 17, pages 1-17.
    8. Henty, Sam & Sinnett, Alex & Malcolm, Bill, 2022. "Economic Analysis of Ameliorating Sub-soil Constraints using Sub-soil Manure in a Cropping System," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 19(1), July.
    9. Lewis, C.D. & Malcolm, Bill & Jacobs, J.L. & Spangenberg, G. & Smith, K.F., 2013. "A method to estimate the potential net benefits of trait improvements in pasture species: Transgenic white clover for livestock grazing systems," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 10, pages 1-16.
    10. So Pyay Thar & Robert J. Farquharson & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Sam Coggins & Deli Chen, 2021. "Recommended vs. Practice: Smallholder Fertilizer Decisions in Central Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    11. Stott, Kerry J. & Christy, Brendan & McCaskill, Malcolm & Riffkin, Penny & O’Leary, Garry J. & Norton, Robert, 2020. "Integrating crop modelling and production economics to investigate multiple nutrient deficiencies and yield gaps," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), July.
    12. Asci, Serhat & Borisova, Tatiana & VanSickle, John J., 2015. "Role of economics in developing fertilizer best management practices," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 251-261.
    13. Hutchings, Timothy R., 2009. "A financial analysis of the effect of the mix of crop and sheep enterprises on the risk profile of dryland farms in south-eastern Australia – Part 1," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, October.
    14. Doole, Graeme J. & Romera, Alvaro J., 2014. "Implications of a nitrogen leaching efficiency metric for pasture-based dairy farms," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 10-18.
    15. Leen, Frederik & Van den Broeke, Alice & Aluwé, Marijke & Ludwig, Lauwers & Sam, Millet & Jef, Van Meensel, 2017. "Simulation Modelling To Provide Insights Into The Optimization Of Delivery Weights Of Finisher Pigs," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261272, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. David J. Pannell & Getu Hailu & Alfons Weersink & Amanda Burt, 2008. "More reasons why farmers have so little interest in futures markets," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 41-50, July.
    17. Sanaz Shoghi Kalkhoran & David Pannell & Maksym Polyakov & Ben White & Morteza Chalak Haghighi & Amin William Mugera & Imma Farre, 2021. "A dynamic model of optimal lime application for wheat production in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(2), pages 472-490, April.
    18. Anderson Jock R. & Birner Regina & Nagarajan Latha & Naseem Anwar & Pray Carl E., 2021. "Private Agricultural R&D: Do the Poor Benefit?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 19(1), pages 3-14, May.
    19. Graeme J. Doole, 2010. "Evaluating Input Standards for Non‐Point Pollution Control under Firm Heterogeneity," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 680-696, September.
    20. Meyer-Aurich, Andreas & Karatay, Yusuf Nadi, 2019. "Effects of uncertainty and farmers' risk aversion on optimal N fertilizer supply in wheat production in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-139.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:nswprr:37667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aenswau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.