Physical and chemical components of the empty body during compensatory growth in beef steers.

Abstract

The composition of carcass and noncarcass tissue growth was quantified by serial slaughter of 26 Angus x Hereford crossbred steers (initial age and weight 289 +/- 4 d and 245 +/- 4 kg) during continuous growth (CON) or compensatory growth (CG) after a period of growth restriction (.4 kg/d) from 245 to 325 kg BW. All steers were fed a 70% concentrate diet at ad libitum or restricted levels. Homogenized samples of 9-10-11th rib and noncarcass tissues were analyzed for nitrogen, fat, ash, and moisture. Growth rate from 325 to 500 kg BW was 1.54 and 1.16 kg/d for CG and CON steers. The weight of gut fill in CG steers was 10.8 kg less (P less than .05) before realimentation and 8.8 kg more (P less than .10) at 500 kg BW than in CON steers. The allometric accretive rates for carcass chemical components relative to the empty body were not affected by treatment. However, the accretive rates for CG steers were greater (P less than .01) for noncarcass protein (.821 vs .265), noncarcass water (.861 vs .507), and empty-body protein (.835 vs. .601) than for CON steers. Final empty-body fat was lower (P less than .001; 24.2 vs 32.4%) and empty-body protein higher (P less than .001; 16.6 vs 14.8%) in CG steers than in CON steers. Consequently, net energy requirements for growth (NEg) were approximately 18% lower for CG steers. We conclude that reduced NEg requirements and changes in gut fill accounted for most of the compensatory growth response exhibited in these steers.

Desempenho e características de carcaça de suínos submetidos a diferentes programas de restrição alimentar na fase dos 30 aos 118 kg

“…Em todos os níveis de restrição, verificou-se rápida resposta dos órgãos do sistema gastrointestinal com a retomada do consumo à vontade, o que pode ser atribuído ao fato de que o sistema digestório tem a capacidade de rápida adaptação às mudanças impostas no consumo de ração (Ratcliffe & Fowler, 1980;Hornick et al, 2000;Carstens et al, 1991).…”

Repercussions of growth path on carcass characteristics, meat colour and shear force in Alentejana bulls

“…However, the carcasses from the latter group were lighter, which could be due to a lower dressing %. The compensatory growth in beef cattle is characterized by high growth rates (Carstens et al, 1991) due to improved efficiency in growth and fattening, as a result of an increased feed intake, an increased efficiency in the utilization of protein and energy and an adjustment in energy partitioning (Allingham et al, 1998). Depending on restriction length and intensity, the reduction in the level of energy and protein intake generally leads to a decrease in growth rate with a more pronounced effect on fat deposition (Robelin and Geay, 1984).…”

“…However, the positive effects of compensatory growth could be limited by a number of factors. These include the severity and duration of feed restriction, the age at which nutritional restriction occurred, the duration of the compensatory response and the nutritional plan on which animals are re-fed (Coleman and Evans, 1986;Carstens et al, 1991). The traditional or discontinuous production system is less expensive and contributes to the environmental sustainability and biodiversity in Mediterranean areas.…”

The roles of the insulin-like growth factor system and leptin as possible mediators of the effects of nutritional restriction on age at puberty and compensatory growth in dairy heifers

“…In particular, experiments where different planes of nutrition have been applied have given conflicting results in terms of animal performance, endocrine status and feed intake. Intake (Hornick et al, 1998), nutrient requirements (Sainz et al, 1995), composition of gain, energy utilization (Carstens et al, 1991), endocrine status (Yambayamba et al, 1996), diet digestibility (Murphy & Loerch, 1994) and nutrient partitioning (Kamalzadeh et al, 1998) may all be changed by feed restriction, and contribute to compensatory growth effects in ruminants. In this experiment, the restricted group had a lower growth rate than the control group during the first 13 weeks (restriction period).…”

“…kidney, liver and gastrointestinal tract), and this could also explain much of the differences. Changes in gut-fill and energy content of gain are considered to be the most important cause of compensatory growth (Carstens et al, 1991;Hornick et al, 1998).…”