Comparison of production performance among F1 hybrids of Leiqiong yellow cattle and different beef breeds

LUO Jiazhi; LIU Qingshen; YANG Zhenwei; KONG Lingxuan; LI Bin; LIU Yuqiang; LIU Dewu; LI Yaokun

doi:10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.201904043

Journal of South China Agricultural University > 2020 > 41(2): 10-17. > DOI: 10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.201904043

LUO Jiazhi, LIU Qingshen, YANG Zhenwei, et al. Comparison of production performance among F1 hybrids of Leiqiong yellow cattle and different beef breeds[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University, 2020, 41(2): 10-17. DOI: 10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.201904043

Citation:

PDF (640 KB)

Comparison of production performance among F1 hybrids of Leiqiong yellow cattle and different beef breeds

College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China

More Information

Received Date: April 21, 2019
Available Online: May 17, 2023

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective
To analyze the current situation and existing problems of cross-breeding utilization of Leiqiong yellow cattle in Zhanjiang, promote the application of the hybrid improvement technology of Leiqiong yellow cattle, and improve the production efficiency and economic benefits of beef cattle.

Method
We selected Simmental×Leiqiong F1 generation, Limousin×Leiqiong F1 generation, Angus×Leiqiong F1 generation and Leiqiong yellow cattle as the research object. Under the same feeding conditions, 390 hybrids of F1 generation and Leiqiong yellow cattle including newborn, 3-month-old, 6-month-old and 24-month-old cattles were selected, and their body weight and body size indicators were measured. Three 24-month-old F1 hybrid cattles and three Leiqiong yellow cattles were slaughtered, and the longest back muscles were selected for meat quality analysis.

Result
Limousin cattle had obvious effects on variety improvement through hybridizing with Leiqiong yellow cattle, especially in improving the birth weight, 24-month-old weight and body size development. The meat tenderness of Limousin×Leiqiong F1 generation was better compared with other three groups, while Simmental×Leiqiong F1 generation had the worst meat tenderness. The eye muscle area of Simmental×Leiqiong F1 generation was larger than that of Leiqiong yellow cattle. The eye muscle area of Angus×Leiqiong F1 generation was larger compared with other three groups. The shortcoming of white beef in Leiqiong yellow cattle was improved in the F1 generation of three hybrid groups. The essential amino acid contents of Limousin×Leiqiong F1 generation, Angus×Leiqiong F1 generation and Leiqiong yellow cattle were not significantly different, while the essential amino acid content of Simmental×Leiqiong F1 generation was significantly lower than that of Leiqiong yellow cattle.

Conclusion
Limousin cattle has a better overall performance in improving the body shape, growth rate and meat quality of Leiqiong yellow cattle.
- Leiqiong yellow cattle,
- F1 hybrid,
- growth performance,
- meat quality

FullText(HTML)

References (17)

References

[1]	崔冰冰, 李助南. 安格斯牛改良枣北黄牛的效果分析[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2017(5): 56-57.
[2]	张明. 安格斯与西门塔尔牛杂交一代育肥性能及肉品质研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2016.
[3]	MORGAN J B, SAVELL J W, HALE D S, et al. National beef tenderness survey[J]. J Anim Sci, 1991, 69(8): 3274-3283.
[4]	MANCINI R A, SUMAN S P, MKR K, et al. Effect of carbon monoxide packaging and lactate enhancement on the color stability of beef steaks stored at 1 ℃ for 9 days[J]. Meat Sci, 2009, 81(1): 71-76. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.06.021
[5]	祝贺. 不同等级牛肉品质特点和感官分析[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2012.
[6]	程碧君, 郭波莉, 魏益民, 等. 不同地域来源牛肉中脂肪酸组成及含量特征分析[J]. 核农学报, 2012, 26(3): 517-522.
[7]	周磊, 于青云, 杜玮, 等. 不同品种牛肉品质研究[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2007, 44(4): 534-538. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4330.2007.04.033
[8]	MAUGHAN C, MARTINI S. Identification and quantification of flavor attributes present in chicken, lamb, pork, beef, and turkey[J]. J Food Sci, 2012, 77(2): S115-S121. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02574.x
[9]	刘亚娜, 郎玉苗, 包高良, 等. 甘南牦牛肉与中国西门塔尔牛肉营养特性对比分析[J]. 食品工业科技, 2016, 37(15): 360-364.
[10]	陈银基. 不同影响因素条件下牛肉脂肪酸组成变化研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2007.
[11]	李聚才, 刘自新, 王川, 等. 不同杂交肉牛背最长肌脂肪酸含量分析[J]. 肉类研究, 2012, 26(8): 30-34.
[12]	姚守秀, 付秀珍, 刘向鹏, 等. 不同杂交组合改良北塔山土种牛生长性能与肉用性能的比较[J]. 畜牧与兽医, 2018, 50(5): 10-12.
[13]	黄力刚, 石望君, 李昊帮,等. 西门塔尔与利木赞肉牛杂交效果比较分析[J]. 湖南畜牧兽医, 2013(2): 20-22.
[14]	刘远哲. 郏县红牛生长性能测定及产肉性能分析[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2015.
[15]	刘正柱, 董辉. 影响牛肉品质的因素及牛肉嫩度的改善方法[J]. 山东畜牧兽医, 2013(8): 19-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-1733.2013.08.012
[16]	罗欣, 梁荣蓉, 祝贺, 等. 我国育肥牛肉品质和感官评定分析[C]//中国畜牧业协会. 第七届中国牛业发展大会论文集. 北京: 中国畜牧业协会, 2012.
[17]	邓由飞, 代俊芳, 郭晓旭, 等. 利用体尺指标估测肉牛自然体重的准确性研究[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2015(S1): 141-143.

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(4)

1.	赵凌，张勇，魏晓东，梁文化，赵春芳，周丽慧，姚姝，王才林，张亚东. 利用高密度Bin图谱定位水稻抽穗期剑叶叶绿素含量QTL. 中国农业科学. 2022(05): 825-836 .
2.	宋博文，王朝欢，赵哲，陈淳，黄明，陈伟雄，梁克勤，肖武名. 基于高密度遗传图谱对水稻粒形QTL定位及分析. 作物学报. 2022(11): 2813-2829 .
3.	潘俊峰，崔克辉，刘彦卓，王昕钰，严博宇，梁开明. 利用高密度Bin图谱定位水稻叶绿素含量QTL. 广东农业科学. 2022(09): 132-140 .
4.	刘进，胡佳晓，马小定，陈武，勒思，Jo Sumin，崔迪，周慧颖，张立娜，Shin Dongjin，黎毛毛，韩龙植，余丽琴. 水稻RIL群体高密度遗传图谱的构建及苗期耐热性QTL定位. 中国农业科学. 2022(22): 4327-4341 .

Other cited types(11)

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (2727) PDF downloads (2651) Cited by(15)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Comparison of production performance among F1 hybrids of Leiqiong yellow cattle and different beef breeds

Abstract

References

Cited by

Periodical cited type(4)

Other cited types(11)

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content