Genetic and phenotypic relationships of feed intake and measures of efficiency with growth and carcass merit of beef cattle1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feed intake and efficiency of growth are economically important traits of beef cattle. This study determined the relationships of daily DMI, feed:gain ratio [F:G, which is the reciprocal of the efficiency of gain (G:F) and therefore increases as the efficiency of gain decreases and vice versa, residual feed intake (RFI), and partial efficiency of growth (efficiency of ADG, PEG) with growth and carcass merit of beef cattle. Residual feed intake was calculated from phenotypic regression (RFIp) or genetic regression (RFIg) of ADG and metabolic BW on DMI. An F1 half-sib pedigree file containing 28 sires, 321 dams, and 464 progeny produced from crosses between Alberta Hybrid cows and Angus, Charolais, or Alberta Hybrid bulls was used. Families averaged 20 progeny per sire (range = 3 to 56). Performance, ultrasound, and DMI data was available on all progeny, of which 381 had carcass data. Phenotypic and genetic parameters were obtained using SAS and ASREML software, respectively. Differences in RFIp and RFIg, respectively, between the most and least efficient steers (i.e., steers with the lowest PEG) were 5.59 and 6.84 kg of DM/d. Heritabilities for DMI, F:G, PEG, RFIp, and RFIg were 0.54 +/- 0.15, 0.41 +/- 0.15, 0.56 +/- 0.16, 0.21 +/- 0.12, and 0.42 +/- 0.15, respectively. The genetic (r = 0.92) and phenotypic (r = 0.97) correlations between RFIp and RFIg indicated that the 2 indices are very similar. Both indices of RFI were favorably correlated phenotypically (P < 0.001) and genetically with DMI, F:G, and PEG. Residual feed intake was tendentiously genetically correlated with ADG (r = 0.46 +/- 0.45) and metabolic BW (r = 0.27 +/- 0.33), albeit with high SE. Genetically, RFIg was independent of ADG and BW but showed a phenotypic correlation with ADG (r = -0.21; P < 0.05). Daily DMI was correlated genetically (r = 0.28) and phenotypically (r = 0.30) with F:G. Both DMI and F:G were strongly correlated with ADG (r > 0.50), but only DMI had strong genetic (r = 0.87 +/- 0.10) and phenotypic (r = 0.65) correlations with metabolic BW. Generally, the phenotypic and genetic correlations of RFI with carcass merit were not different from zero, except genetic correlations of RFI with ultrasound and carcass LM area and carcass lean yield and phenotypic correlations of RFI with backfat thickness (P < 0.01). Daily DMI had moderate to high phenotypic (P < 0.01) and genetic correlations with all the ultrasound and carcass traits. Depending on how RFI technology is applied, adjustment for body composition in addition to growth may be required to minimize the potential for correlated responses to selection in cattle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".