This survey consisted of data collected from 23 beef harvest plants to document transportation procedures, management practices, and health assessments of market beef and dairy cows and bulls (about n ≅ 7,000 animals). Gooseneck/bumper-pulled trailers were used more often to transport dairy cattle than beef cattle to market whereas tractor-trailers were used more often to transport beef cattle than dairy cattle. All loads (n = 103) met the American Meat Institute Foundation guidelines for spacing. Loads where more than 3% of the cattle slipped during unloading were observed in 27.3% of beef loads and 29.0% of the dairy loads. Beef loads had numerically greater usage of electrical prods (32.4%) versus dairy loads (15.4%) during unloading and were more likely to have a variety of driving aids used more aggressively on them. Fewer cattle had horns, brands, and mud/manure contamination on hides than in the previous survey in 1999. The predominant hide color for beef cows was black (44.2%) whereas the predominant color for dairy cows was the Holstein pattern (92.9%). Fewer cattle displayed evidence of bovine ocular neoplasia (2.9%) than in previous surveys in 1994 (8.5%) and 1999 (4.3%). Knots on live cattle were found less in the round (0.5%) and more in the shoulder region (4.6%) than in 1999 (1.4% and 0.4%, respectively). Dairy cows were more frequently lame in 2007 (48.7%) than 1999 (39.2%) whereas beef cows had numerically less lameness (16.3% vs. 26.6%, respectively). Most beef cows (62.3%) and dairy cows (68.9%) received midpoint body condition scores (3, 4, and 5 for beef; 2 and 3 for dairy). Beef cows had higher numerical percentages of no defects present (72.0%) versus dairy cows (63.0%) when evaluated for a variety of reproductive, health, or management conditions. Continued improvements in several key factors related to transportation, management, and health were observed in this survey, which could result in increased value in market beef and dairy cows and bulls.
Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of including liquid lactose (LL) and molasses (M) in swine diets on pellet quality and pig performance. In experiment 1, a total of 194 nursery pigs (DNA 241 × 600, initially 6.7 ± 0.4 kg at 27 d of age) were used in a 33-d experiment evaluating the effects of LL (SweetLac 63; Westway Feed Products, Tomball, TX) or cane molasses on nursery pig performance and pellet quality. Pelleted experimental diets were fed from d 0 to 21, and a common pelleted diet fed from d 21 to 33. Dietary treatments consisted of a control diet containing 19.1% total sugars from whey powder and whey permeate and experimental diets with a percentage of whey permeate replaced by either 5% or 10% LL or 9.4% cane molasses (5 LL, 10 LL, and 9.4 M, respectively). Hot pellet temperature and production rate decreased (P < 0.05) from the control to 9.4 M treatments with 5 LL and 10 LL having intermediate effects. Pellet durability index (PDI) increased (P < 0.05) in 5 LL, 10 LL, and 9.4 M, respectively. From d 0 to 7, pigs fed the 10 LL and 9.4 M treatment had the best G:F followed by the control and 5 LL treatments. From d 0 to 21, ADFI had a marginally significant improvement (P < 0.10) in pigs fed up to 10 LL in the diet. Fecal consistency scores at d 7 were also firmer (P < 0.05) in pigs fed 9.4 M compared with pigs fed the control or 5 LL treatments with pigs fed the 10 LL treatment being intermediate. There was no evidence for differences in fecal consistency scores for d 14. In experiment 2, a total of 289 finishing pigs (DNA 241 × 600; initially 53.5 ± 0.5 kg BW) were used in a 53-d experiment evaluating the effects of LL on pellet quality and finishing pig performance. Experimental diets were fed in pelleted form from d 0 to 53 divided into three phases. Dietary treatments were a corn-soybean meal control diet with 0%, 2.5%, 5%, and 7.5% LL added in the place of corn. PDI improved (linear, P < 0.01) with increasing inclusion of LL. There were no differences in ADG, ADFI, final BW, or carcass characteristics. Pigs fed diets with increasing levels of LL tended to have improved (quadratic, P = 0.070) G:F.
Incorporation of a design thinking approach to problem-based learning in an animal science capstone maximizes intellectual growth and critical reasoning while exposing students to relevant, current industry challenges. Briefly, students working within groups formulate a complex problem statement following facilitated interaction with statewide livestock commodity group stakeholders, then develop implementable solutions via utilization of a design thinking model. This course design structure allows students to demonstrate proficiency in multiple departmental learning objectives: implementation of effective animal management strategies, utilization of animal production systems to sustain economic resources, demonstration of critical thinking, effective communication across multiple mediums, preparation to engage in lifelong learning, and evaluation of socially responsible techniques to produce animal products. Pandemic based restrictions provided students the ability to attend face-to-face classes or work remotely. The capstone was simultaneously delivered on both platforms, but all assessments and feedback were provided online. Student experiences were evaluated weekly through group feedback prompts. Principal student-reported experiences include emergent themes of effective team building and collaboration, a deeper understanding of the value of quality scientific literature, a requirement to pursue in-depth thought to generate actionable solutions, and a desire to independently reach outside of the classroom to learn from other industry professionals. Student assessments prioritized the learning and revision process, with multiple opportunities to improve the synthesis, synopsis, formatting and mechanics of their work throughout the semester. The course concludes with student presentation of their complex problem solutions to a panel of industry stakeholders and department administration, faculty and graduate students. In conclusion, a capstone course utilizing a design thinking approach to problem-based learning effectively provides real-world learning opportunities for students to apply their content knowledge while expanding their universal skills of teamwork, communication, social responsibility and lifelong learning. This course also provides increased opportunity for student-stakeholder engagement.
The consistency of instruction between various sections of introductory courses is a concern in higher education, along with properly preparing students to enter careers in industry. The study was conducted at Texas A&M University, using an introductory course, General Animal Science, within the Department of Animal Science. This course was chosen due to the utilization of specific animal science industry related terminology within the course content in support of learning outcomes. The study was a quantitative nonexperimental research method that was conducted over a single semester in 2018. General Animal Science is a large-scale course that contains multiple sections, and this study evaluated assessments created by individual faculty members who instructed different sections, Section A and Section B. These sections were selected as they were composed of both animal science majors and non-majors. Section A had a significantly higher (P < 0.001) number of majors versus non-majors than Section B. Assessment questions were collected from all examinations and quizzes distributed throughout the semester and were compiled into a single document for coding. These specific terms were chosen from literature to provide a benchmark for a potential relationship between student performance on questions containing industry related terminology as opposed to those that do not. Comparing the use of specific industry coded terminology in assessment questions yielded no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the two instructors or sections. These findings demonstrate consistent use of benchmarked industry related terminology in assessment questions across multiple sections, irrespective of individual instructor or student major. This provides a necessary foundation for future analysis of student performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.