title: Grazing and feedlot performance of yearling stocker cattle integrated with spring- and fall-calving beef cows in a year-round grazing system.
abstract: Effects of calving season and finishing system on forage and concentrate consumption and carcass characteristics of calves were compared. In each of 3 yr, two replicates of three growing and finishing systems were compared including 1) spring calves finished on a high-grain diet in a feedlot immediately post-weaning (WF); 2) spring calves backgrounded on a hay-corn gluten diet over winter for 179 +/- 18 d after weaning, grazed for 98 +/- 9 d in cool-season grass-legume pastures, and finished on a high-grain diet in a feedlot (SGF); and 3) fall calves backgrounded on a hay-corn gluten feed diet over winter for 69 +/- 31 d after weaning, grazed for 98 +/- 9 d in cool-season grass-legume pastures, and finished on a high-grain diet in a feedlot (FGF). During the grazing phase, calves on the SGF and FGF treatments were equally stocked with spring-calving cow-calf pairs before grazing by pregnant fall-calving cows in a first-last rotational stocking system at a rate of 1.9 standard livestock units/ha. As designed, retained calves in the FGF system spent 110 fewer days in the drylot during backgrounding than retained calves in the SGF system (P = 0.01), resulting in less feed provided during winter. A greater (P < 0.01) quantity of hay was fed to SGF calves after weaning over winter (1,305 kg of DM per calf) than the quantity fed to FGF calves (305 kg of DM per calf). Quantity of grain (including commercial starter) fed to SGF calves after weaning did not differ (P = 0.28) from that fed to FGF calves (126 vs. 55 kg of DM per calf); however, calves in the FGF system required 80 and 71 kg of DM per calf more concentrate to finish to an equivalent external fat thickness compared with SGF and WF calves, respectively (P = 0.02). Average daily gains in the feedlot were greater (P < 0.01) for SGF and FGF calves than for WF calves during all 3 yr. There were no differences (P = 0.69) in carcass quality grades among calves in all groups, but SGF calves had greater (P < 0.01) hot carcass weight and LM area measurements at slaughter than FGF or WF calves. Although calves in the FGF system were 25 kg lighter than calves in the WF system at slaughter (P = 0.03), and had a lower dressing percent (P = 0.03), other carcass characteristics did not differ between these two groups. Lower stored-feed requirements and similar carcass quality characteristics made retention of a fall calf crop advantageous over retention of a spring calf crop for use as stocker animals before finishing.
authors.affiliation: Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, 50011, USA.
authors.forename: N A Janovick
authors.initials: NA
authors.lastname: Guretzky
authors.forename: J R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Russell
authors.forename: D R
authors.initials: DR
authors.lastname: Strohbehn
authors.forename: D G
authors.initials: DG
authors.lastname: Morrical
mesh_terms: D000821:Animal Feed; D000822:Animal Husbandry / Q000379:methods*; D000818:Animals; D002417:Cattle / Q000254:growth & development*; D004032:Diet / Q000662:veterinary*; D005260:Female; D008297:Male; D012621:Seasons