LUNDBRECK, Alta. — Who wants a cow that eats less feed than average, but produces the same-sized calf and rebreeds just as quickly as heavier-eating counterparts?
Every cow-calf producer, that’s who.
Finding that cow and others like it depends on residual feed intake — the difference between an animal’s actual feed intake and its expected feed requirement for maintenance of body weight, growth and changes in fatness.
The topic, also referred to as net feed efficiency, has been the subject of study for years but genetic testing now available makes it easier to find cattle that fit the bill.
Read Also
Alberta cattle loan guarantee program gets 50 per cent increase
Alberta government comes to aid of beef industry with 50 per cent increase to loan guarantee program to help producers.
John Paterson, professor emeritus at Montana State University, said it’s possible to build a selection program around net feed efficiency.
“We’ve had cows that are weighing 1,400 pounds eating less than cows that were 1,000 lb. at Montana State University and I never thought I’d see that. Some of these big cows can be quite efficient.
“Feed to gain or gain to feed, however you want to express it, is so important. We used to think 20 years ago, ‘boy if I could just get them to eat more, they’d gain more.’ It doesn’t work that way.”
DNA testing using tail hair can reveal the likelihood of good feed efficiency in animals, but Paterson cautions against selecting for any single trait, including that one. He suggests identifying a limited number of traits for which to test, such as RFI, maternal characteristics, longevity, calving ease and rate of gain.
“I think it is a real mistake to focus only on one trait, like average daily gain. That would be dangerous. I would rather have you put it into an index of balance,” said Paterson.
“I want to have three or four or five traits that tell me I’m going in the right direction. What I’ve encouraged ranchers to do is just go out there randomly and take some hair samples off your replacement heifers and just send them in and do the cheapest test possible.”
Those tests should reveal the animals that look most promising.
Paterson suggested that producers interested in genomic testing should do it for three years, “then back up and say ‘am I going in the right direction?’”
In a talk to ranchers at a Sept. 8 government-sponsored ranch tour and seminar, Paterson said opinions vary on the definition of an efficient cow.
“I’ll know her when I see her,” seems to be the most common answer to the question, he said.
However, a cow that eats less with the same production level is one measure, especially if it can do that when feed is short. Large cows can also be feed efficient but environmental conditions play a big role.
“Under limited feed, moderate-sized cows and moderate milk production tend to be better adapted and more efficient than larger, heavier milking cows,” he said. “Wouldn’t you like to have cows that you don’t have to sell because your forage is running out? In a drought you get to keep the cows because they’re eating less feed.”
For Andy Schuepbach of Lilybrook Herefords near Claresholm, Alta., the ideal cow has good feed efficiency but also calves unassisted, has good udders and feet, weans a heavy calf, re-breeds quickly and stays in the herd a long time.
Schuepbach told the group that Lilybrook collects major amounts of data on its 515 purebred Hereford cows, including residual feed intake.
He said that is one factor buyers look for when they examine all the data available.
