Influence of Growth Promoting Technologies on Animal Performance, Production Economics, Environmental Impacts and Carcass Characteristics of Beef

Modeling the effects of steroid implant use on the environmental and economic sustainability of Brazilian beef production

“…The improvements in environmental and economic sustainability conferred by implant use within the current study reflect results of previous analyses ( Basarab et al, 2012 ; Capper, 2012 , 2013 ; Capper and Hayes, 2012 ; Stackhouse-Lawson et al, 2012 ; White and Capper, 2014 ; Webb et al, 2017 ), and strongly support the role of these technologies in reducing resource use and improving economic returns per kg of HCW beef. However, sustainability is triumvirate in nature, therefore the third component—social acceptability—must be in place.…”

“…The GHG emissions per kg HCW beef within the current study are comparable to those published by Cederberg et al (2009) , Desjardins et al (2012) , Dick et al (2015) , Ruviaro et al (2015) , Pashaei Kamali et al (2016) , Florindo et al (2017) , and de Figueiredo et al (2017) for Brazilian beef production. Moreover, the relatively limited number of studies that have quantified the effects of implant use within beef production, either alone or in conjunction with other PET, have reported similar results, with reductions in GHG emissions per unit of beef conferred by PET use ranging from 5.8% to 40.3% ( Cooprider et al, 2011 ; Basarab et al, 2012 ; Capper, 2012; Capper and Hayes, 2012 ; Stackhouse-Lawson et al, 2012 , 2013 ; Webb, 2018 ). The positive impacts of using hormone implants, with an 9.4 percent reduction in GHG emissions conferred by implants at the lowest performance enhancing level (LI), rising to 15.8% at the highest level (HI), are shown in Table 8 .…”

“…Steroid hormone implants have been used in U.S. cattle production systems for decades, yet, to date, have not been registered in every country worldwide. The active hormones in implants (estrogens, androgens or their combination) increase muscle protein synthesis, reduce protein degradation, and improve cattle ADG ( Parr et al, 2010 ; Beck et al, 2012 , 2014 ; Strydom, 2016 ; Webb et al, 2017 ; Cleale et al, 2018 ); although these improvements are bound by the physical, metabolic and biochemical parameters that the animal is genetically programmed to achieve ( Smith et al, 2020 ). Implant use within U.S. beef production systems demonstrably reduced the GHG emissions and resource use per kg of beef produced compared to controls in both live animal experiments ( Basarab et al, 2012 ; Stackhouse-Lawson et al, 2012 ; Webb et al, 2017 ) and modeling exercises ( Capper, 2011 , 2012 , 2013 ; White and Capper, 2014 ), yet, to date, the impacts of implant use in other regional beef systems have not been investigated in any significant detail.…”

“…The active hormones in implants (estrogens, androgens or their combination) increase muscle protein synthesis, reduce protein degradation, and improve cattle ADG ( Parr et al, 2010 ; Beck et al, 2012 , 2014 ; Strydom, 2016 ; Webb et al, 2017 ; Cleale et al, 2018 ); although these improvements are bound by the physical, metabolic and biochemical parameters that the animal is genetically programmed to achieve ( Smith et al, 2020 ). Implant use within U.S. beef production systems demonstrably reduced the GHG emissions and resource use per kg of beef produced compared to controls in both live animal experiments ( Basarab et al, 2012 ; Stackhouse-Lawson et al, 2012 ; Webb et al, 2017 ) and modeling exercises ( Capper, 2011 , 2012 , 2013 ; White and Capper, 2014 ), yet, to date, the impacts of implant use in other regional beef systems have not been investigated in any significant detail. Productivity improvements conferred by implant use also improved economic returns in both feedlot and pasture-based steers according to Beck et al (2014) , and had positive economic impacts on beef production from heifers and bulls ( Al-Husseini et al, 2014 ; Smith et al, 2020 ).…”

Opportunities and Challenges in Animal Protein Industry Sustainability: The Battle Between Science and Consumer Perception

“…Such technologies include ionophores, orally active or in-feed hormones, implantable and injectable hormones, and β-adrenergic agonists, and have been used for decades within livestock production, improving efficiency, and therefore enhancing sustainability, via the “dilution of maintenance” effect ( Johnson et al, 2013 ). Although performance-enhancing technology adoption varies across the global livestock industry, these technologies have clear positive impacts on economic viability (improved producer income) and environmental sustainability (reduced resource use and GHG emissions per unit of animal protein produced) detailed across multiple studies ( Capper et al, 2008 ; Capper, 2012 ; Capper and Hayes, 2012 ; Webb et al, 2017 ). It seems obvious that these technologies should be part of the suite of tools required to improve sustainability, although regulatory barriers may exist that prevent their wholescale adoption ( Dilger et al, 2016 ).…”