Growth performance, carcass traits
What’s the feeder calf value of beef × Holstein and Holstein feedlot steers?
By Melanie Pimentel-Concepción, Jerad Jaborek, Jeannine Schweihofer, Andrea Garmyn, Melissa McKendree, Barry Bradford, Arnold Hentschl and Dan Buskirk
Holstein (HO) cattle represent approximately 20% of the U.S. fed beef supply from surplus heifer and bull calves. Although dairy steers produce high quality grading beef, they have less desirable feed conversions and poorer health compared with beef steers. Holsteins are often discounted when compared with beef breeds due to their lower dressing percentage and flatter muscle shape, and the decision of a major U.S. processing plant to no longer buy HO fed steers has further decreased their value.4
Since 2017, there has been a considerable increase in the use of beef sires on low milk production dairy females in the U.S. to increase calf value and overall economic return for dairy producers.1 European and dated data from the U.S. indicates that compared with their HO contemporaries, beef × Holstein (B×HO) cattle may have greater average daily gain, greater dry matter intake, improved feed efficiency, as well as greater carcass weight and dressing percentage.1 Net value of B×HO cattle is largely determined by feedlot cost of gain and resulting carcass value.
However, most available data regarding B×HO cattle originate outside of North America, are more than 40 years old, and are not aligned with current U.S. production systems and breed genetics.
We designed a study to compare a B×HO and straightbred HO steer production system and calculate feeder calf breakevens. We hypothesized that B×HO steers would outperform their HO steer contemporaries in the feedlot and have improved carcass traits, resulting in greater feeder calf value. We measured health, feedlot growth performance, dry matter intake, feed efficiency, cost of gain, carcass traits and carcass value of B×HO and HO steer contemporaries within the current U.S. supply chain.
Materials and methodsThis study used 75 B×HO and 75 HO steers (average receiving body weight = 379.0 ± 39.9 lb) that were sourced from multiple dairies through a single Michigan calf grower at approximately 4 months of age. Steers were transported to the MSU Beef Cattle Teaching and Research Center, Lansing, Michigan, and processed after feedlot arrival before being separated into pens by breed type.
Following a 21-day pre-trial acclimation period, on day 0, 120 steers were blocked by body weight and randomly allocated by breed type to 1 of 20 bedded pens (14 × 38 ft) at an initial average body weight of 433.5 ± 32.7 lb. Steers were fed a common starter diet similar to that previously received at the calf grower until day 21 and were then slowly transitioned to a common finishing diet that consisted of 43.6% high moisture shelled corn, 25.0% corn silage, 25.3% dry corn distillers grains, 5.0% pelleted supplement with monensin and 1.1% limestone on a dry matter basis.
To harvest the steers on a similar compositional basis, a common endpoint was determined by predicting empty body fat percentage with an equation that used ultrasound estimated fat thickness and ribeye area, along with estimates of quality grade and hot carcass weight.2 After harvest, carcass data were collected at a commercial processing plant 48-hours post chill (JBS, Plainwell, Michigan).
To obtain a full accounting of costs incurred by the steers, their costs in the pre-trial period were also included in the economic analysis. In the current marketplace, carcasses of B×HO cattle may be assigned different base carcass prices depending on their visual conformation (beef- or dairy-type), affecting their relative value.
To examine these differences, we developed four pricing scenarios where the B×HO steers were priced as HO (Scenario 1), midway between HO and beef (Scenario 2), or as beef (Scenario 3) with the appropriate premiums and discounts. The fourth pricing scenario (Scenario 4) assigned a beef base carcass price to those with a beef-type conformation, and an intermediate base carcass price to those with a B×HO conformation. Those in Scenario 4 with beef-type conformation, that also met all other specifications for the Certified Angus Beef program, were assigned a premium of $4.29/cwt.
The experiment was a randomized complete block design with pens serving as the experimental unit. Significance was established at P ≤ 0.05 and tendencies are discussed at 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10. Unrelated to breed type, one HO and four B×HO steers were removed from the trial due to morbidity or mortality, and one B×HO carcass was unavailable for data collection at the processing plant.
ResultsGenomic testing revealed that the beef breed genes of the B×HO steers originated from Angus (35.3%), Limousin (27.5%), LimFlex (11.8%), Simmental (7.8%) and SimAngus (17.6%). Phenotypically, the B×HO steers were either solid black (57%) or were black with small white markings on their head, legs, and(or) tail (43%).
Therefore, all the B×HO steers would have met the hide color specifications for the Certified Angus Beef branded program as they were solid black with no other color behind the shoulder, above the flanks, or breaking the midline behind the shoulders, excluding the tail.5 All the HO steers were also verified as straightbred HO.
Because of the study design, initial body weight was the same for the B×HO and HO steers (P = 0.89; Table 1). The HO steers remained on feed for an additional 21 days to reach the desired empty body fat, resulting in a tendency for them to have a greater final body weight than the B×HO steers (P = 0.06). From day 0 to harvest, average daily gain tended to be greater for the B×HO steers (P = 0.07) compared with the HO, however dry matter intake was the same between the breed types (P = 0.85). The B×HO steers were more feed efficient than the HO steers (P = 0.01).
Due to processing plant concerns regarding large frame size in dairy-type carcasses, hip height before harvest was measured, with the HO steers being 3.7 inches taller than the B×HO steers (P < 0.01). This resulted in the B×HO steers having a more moderate frame score than the HO steers, which was 1.9 units less (P < 0.01) on a 10-point scale.
Health was similar between the breed types, with no differences observed in morbidity (P > 0.75) or mortality (P = 0.57). The B×HO and HO steers remained on feed for 245 and 266 days, respectively. Liver and lung data were only available and collected for the B×HO steers. We found that 39% of livers from the B×HO steers had at least one abscess. Lung lesions were scored, with 21% having at least some apparent consolidation from respiratory disease.
Carcass characteristics can be found in Table 2. Hot carcass weight and percentage of kidney, pelvic and heart fat were similar between the B×HO and the HO carcasses (P = 0.78 and P = 0.71, respectively). Dressing percentage of B×HO carcasses (59.1%) was similar to that of HO (57.9%) carcasses (P = 0.31). Fat thickness at the 12th rib was an average of 0.16 inches greater for the B×HO compared with the HO carcasses (P < 0.01).
The B×HO carcasses had 20% larger ribeye area compared with that of the HO carcasses (P < 0.01). The larger ribeye area of the B×HO carcasses resulted in lower, more desirable calculated USDA Yield Grades compared with the HO carcasses (P = 0.02).
Marbling scores were not different between the breed types (P = 0.62), resulting in similar USDA Quality Grades for the B×HO and HO carcasses (P > 0.52). The marbling scores of the B×HO and HO carcasses were lower than what is typically expected from dairy-type cattle in U.S. production systems.3 Empty body fat, determined with carcass measures, was similar between the B×HO and HO carcasses (P = 0.11), indicating that the breed types were harvested at an equitable composition endpoint.
The B×HO feeder calves had a purchase cost that was $309/calf greater (P < 0.01; Table 3) than that of the HO feeder calves, resulting in a greater cattle interest charge for the crossbreds as well (P < 0.01). The HO steers remained on feed for 21 days longer than the B×HO steers, resulting in a $95 greater total feed cost for the HO steers (P < 0.01).
Most non-feed operating costs were the same for the breed types due to study design, resulting in these costs being similar between the breed types (P = 0.53). Due to the lower feed cost of the B×HO steers, their total cost of gain was $0.07/lb less than the HO steers (P = 0.03).
Comparisons of the four pricing scenarios, based on varying base pricing of carcasses for B×HO are shown in Table 4. Carcass value of the B×HO carcasses in scenario 1 (priced as HO) was similar (P = 0.60) to that of the HO carcasses after applying premiums and discounts. When compared with the HO carcasses, B×HO carcasses had a $5.65/cwt and $9.65/cwt greater value in scenarios 2 (when priced midway between HO and beef) and 3 (priced as beef), respectively (P < 0.05). Based on ribeye shape of the 56 B×HO carcasses, we identified 41 as having beef-type conformation, while 15 had B×HO conformation.
Of those B×HO carcasses with beef-type conformation, only five would have met Certified Angus Beef program specifications and received that brand premium in scenario 4 (priced by conformation). In scenario 4, on average, B×HO carcasses were worth $9.00/cwt more than HO carcasses (P < 0.05).
In scenarios 1 and 2, total revenue from B×HO carcasses were similar to that from HO carcasses (P > 0.05). Compared with the HO carcasses, total revenue from B×HO were $72.65/carcass greater in scenario 3 and $68.53/carcass greater in scenario 4 (P < 0.05). Breakeven feeder calf value of B×HO steers was greater in scenarios 1 ($28.10/cwt), 2 ($37.65/cwt), 3 ($46.89/cwt), and 4 ($45.83/cwt) compared with the HO feeder calves (P < 0.05). Depending on the pricing scenario and based on their feedlot receiving body weight, B×HO feeder calves purchased for this study would have been worth $102.09 to $173.02/calf more compared with the HO feeder calves.
ConclusionsOverall, B×HO steers had similar daily dry matter intakes and health outcomes, but tended to have a greater average daily gain, were more feed efficient, finished with fewer days on feed, and had a lower cost of gain when compared with the HO steers. Most carcass traits were similar with the notable differences of larger ribeye area and greater fat thickness observed in B×HO carcasses. The B×HO steers also had greater overall carcass value and breakeven feeder calf value.
These results show that breeding beef sires to dairy females can result in steers capable of attaining a beef-type conformation to qualify for branded beef programs such as Certified Angus Beef. Further research is necessary to develop optimal strategies to consistently produce B×HO carcasses with conformation and value similar to beef-type carcasses.
This research was supported by MSU Extension, MSU AgBioResearch, and was made possible through funding by the Michigan Alliance for Animal Agriculture.
Literature cited1. Bohnert, K. 2023. Beef-on-dairy continues to see major growth. (Accessed May 23, 2023).
2. Guiroy, P., D. Fox, L. Tedeschi, M. Baker, and M. Cravey. 2001. Predicting individual feed requirements of cattle fed in groups. J. Anim. Sci. 79:1983-1995. doi: 10.2527/2001.7981983x
3. Lovell, I. M., T. R. Mayer, T. E. Schwartz, S. E. Borders, J. W. Savell, K. B. Gehring, D. B. Griffin, C. R. Kerth, A. D. Belk, L.-E. Callaway, J. B. Morgan, J. B. Douglas, M. M. Pfeiffer, G. G. Mafi, K. M. Harr, T. E. Lawrence, T. C. Tennant, L. W. Lucherk, T. G. O’Quinn, P. D. Bass, L. G. Garcia, R. J. Maddock, C. C. Carr, T. D. Pringle, K. R. Underwood, B. N. Harsh, and C. M. Waters. 2022. National Beef Quality Audit 2022: Carcass characteristics surveyed by instrument grading Reciprocal Meat Conference. p (Abstr.).
4. McKendree, M. G., T. L. Saitone, and K. A. Schaefer. 2021. Oligopsonistic input substitution in a thin market. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 103:1414-1432. doi: 10.1111/ajae.12159
5. USDA. 2016. Schedule GLA-- (Revised 2016) USDA specification for characteristics of cattle eligible for approved beef programs claiming angus influence. (Accessed 17 May 2023).
Pimentel-Concepción is a graduate student, Jaborek is a beef feedlot systems educator, Schweihofer is an associate director, Garmyn is an academic and outreach specialist, McKendree is an associate professor, Bradford is a professor, and Buskirk is a professor and beef Extension specialist, all with Michigan State University. Hentschl is a staff veterinarian with Harbor Beach Veterinary Services P.C.
