See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309887609

Production, carcass characteristics and valuable cuts of purebred Simmental

and Simmental × beef breed crossbred bulls in Finnish beef cattle population

Article · May 2017

DOI: 10.1515/aoas-2016-0065

CITATIONS READS

0 156

2 authors:

Arto Huuskonen Maiju Pesonen

Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke) Natural Resources Institute Finland, Ruukki
156 PUBLICATIONS   696 CITATIONS    55 PUBLICATIONS   139 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Management of traditional rural biotopes and the species dependent on these habitats View project

Animal Production for Human Food and its Impacts on Society – Future Scenarios View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Arto Huuskonen on 04 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ann. Anim. Sci., Vol. 17, No. 2 (2017) 413–422 DOI: 10.1515/aoas-2016-0065

Production, carcass characteristics and valuable cuts

of purebred Simmental and Simmental × beef breed
crossbred bulls in Finnish beef cattle population* *

Arto Huuskonen♦, Maiju Pesonen

Green Technology, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Tutkimusasemantie 15,

FI-92400 Ruukki, Finland
♦
Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract
The objective of the present research was to study the potential for improvement of growth and
carcass traits through Simmental (Si) × beef breed crossbreeding compared to purebred Si bulls
in Finnish beef cattle population. The data collected from Finnish slaughterhouses included obser-
vations of 6 224 purebred Si bulls plus Si × beef breed crosses. For estimating valuable cuttings,
a separate dataset including in total 314 bulls was also collected. The estimated average daily
carcass gain of the purebred Si bulls was 686 g/d and it improved by 3 and 6% with Si×Blonde
d’Aquitaine and Si×Charolais crossbreds, respectively. Carcass conformation improved by us-
ing Blonde d’Aquitaine, Limousin and Charolais crossbreeding compared to the pure Si bulls.
Si×British breed crossbreds (Angus and Hereford) had poorer carcass gain and produced poorer
conformed carcasses compared to purebred Si bulls. Furthermore, the yield of subcutaneous fat
was higher in the Si×Angus and Si×Hereford bulls than in the purebred Si bulls.

Key words: beef production, breeds, bulls, carcass characteristics, crossbreeding

Traditionally the majority of beef in Finland has been produced by dairy breeds
(Huuskonen, 2014). However, the decrease in the number of dairy cows has dimin-
ished the supply of calves for beef production originating from dairy herds. Because
the supply of domestic beef has been decreasing, there is nowadays a clear discrep-
ancy between the demand for and supply of domestic beef. Therefore the need for
beef-breed calves is increasing at present. In total, 12 beef breeds are currently kept
in Finland, and Aberdeen Angus (Ab), Blonde d’Aquitaine (Ba), Charolais (Ch),
Hereford (Hf), Limousin (Li) and Simmental (Si) are the six most frequently used

*This work was partially funded by the Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Envi-
ronment for Northern Ostrobothnia, Finland.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
414 A. Huuskonen and M. Pesonen

breeds. Previously, Pesonen and Huuskonen (2015) examined growth and carcass
traits of pure beef breeds in Finnish beef cattle population and concluded that the
later maturing Continental breeds (Ba, Ch, Li, Si) seem to reach higher carcass gains,
produce less fat and have more valuable cuts than the earlier maturing British beef
breeds (Ab, Hf). The later maturing beef breeds tended to have carcass traits that suit
well in the Finnish beef production system and Finnish beef markets (Pesonen and
Huuskonen, 2015).
However, the decision to opt for a breed depends not only on the growth per-
formance and carcass characteristics but also on the other aspects affecting the beef
production. Maximizing profit potential in beef production usually requires match-
ing the genetic potential of the animals with available resources. The genetic poten-
tial of milk yield differs between breeds and greatly influences several important
production traits, e.g. calf performance, dam’s nutritional needs and rebreeding rates
(Mallinckrodt et al., 1993). The maternal ability of beef cows has been shown to be
a critical component of pre-weaning growth in their calves (Fiss and Wilton, 1993;
Mallinckrodt et al., 1993). Weaning weight affects the profit potential of the beef
herd, especially when selling beef calves (Miller et al., 1999). Improving the milk
producing ability of dams could increase gain to weaning and average daily gain in
feedlot, which would have a positive impact to productivity (Fiss and Wilton, 1993;
Miller et al., 1999). The maternal breed effect of Simmental has been shown to ex-
ceed most common beef breeds in crossbred beef cattle (Kress et al., 1990; Roso et
al., 2005).
Crossbreeding is the mating of individuals from different lines, breeds, or pop-
ulations. There are two main reasons for applying crossbreeding within livestock
(Sørensen et al., 2008). The first is to utilize the different additive genetic levels
between breeds to generate offspring with better economic ability caused by new
combinations of additive genetic components. Second, crosses between pure lines/
breeds express heterosis. Crossbred animals are more robust and economically ef-
ficient compared with the parental breeds (Mäki-Tanila, 2007). It has been known for
a quite awhile that heterosis is an important and easy factor for increased productiv-
ity in beef cattle (Mason, 1966; Dillard et al., 1980).
Differences between individual beef breeds and breed groups in growth perfor-
mance and carcass traits have been extensively evaluated earlier, for example, by
Bartoň et al. (2006), Alberti et al. (2008) and Pesonen et al. (2012, 2013 a, b). How-
ever, the amount of experimental animals is often limited when growth and carcass
characteristics of different breed groups are compared. Consequently, there is a con-
cern about the representativeness of the experimental animals compared with other
animals from the same breed groups, i.e. whether they cover the whole variation in
their respective populations. In addition, breed comparisons are mainly relevant for
their specific production conditions and genetic level. Therefore, the objective of
the present research based on a dataset collected from slaughterhouses was to study
the potential for improvement of growth and carcass characteristics through Si×beef
breed crossbreeding compared to purebred Si bulls. It was hypothesized that the use
of late maturing crossbreds (Ba, Ch, Li) improves carcass production compared to
purebred Si bulls.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
 Comparison of purebred Simmental and crossbred bulls 415

Material and methods

Dataset – complete slaughter data

Dataset used in the present study was collected from four Finnish slaughterhous-
es [A-Tuottajat Ltd. (Seinäjoki, Finland), HK-Agri Ltd. (Turku, Finland), Saarioinen
Lihanjalostus Ltd. (Tampere, Finland) and Snellman Lihanjalostus Ltd. (Pietarsaari,
Finland)]. These slaughterhouses are the major meat companies in Finland, which,
as a part of their business operations, transfer calves from dairy farms, or suckler
cow herds, to co-operating farms for fattening, and slaughter the animals. A raw
slaughter data for each animal included individual animal identification number on
ear tag, date of birth, date of slaughter, sex, carcass weight, carcass conformation
score and carcass fat score. Identities of breeds (dam and sire breed) were collected
from the National Animal Identification Register for Cattle (ProAgria Agricultural
Data Processing Centre, Vantaa, Finland). Slaughtering data and identities of breeds
for individual animals were linked through individual animal identification numbers.
All purebred Si bulls as well Si×beef breed crossbred bulls aged 365–730 days old
and slaughtered by above-mentioned slaughterhouses in 2009–2011 were selected
for the study.

Table 1. Description of the experimental data

Item n Mean SD q0.05 q0.95
Dataset (complete slaughter data)
age at slaughter (d) 6 224 565 57.4 465 650
carcass gain (g/d) 6 224 685 108.5 511 862
carcass weight (kg) 6 224 401 60.7 295 495
conformation score (1 = poorest, 15 = excellent) 6 221 8.3 1.93 5 11
fat score (1 = leanest, 5 = fattest) 6 224 2.5 0.79 1 4

Dataset (commercial cutting)

age at slaughter (d) 314 570 52.4 478 651
carcass gain (g/d) 314 633 112.7 423 814
carcass weight (kg) 314 375 64.7 266 469
conformation score (1 = poorest, 15 = excellent) 314 7.6 1.71 5 11
fat score (1 = leanest, 5 = fattest) 314 2.4 0.74 1 4
From yield (g/kg)
subcutaneous fat 313 38.0 14.11 18.8 64.6
loin (M. longissimus) 299 41.1 3.44 36.0 46.4
tenderloin (M. psoas major) 294 14.7 1.18 12.8 16.7
inside round (M. semimembranosus) 303 40.7 3.99 35.0 46.4
outside round (M. semitendinosus) 301 65.1 5.26 57.0 72.0
corner round (M. quadriceps femoris) 302 36.3 2.76 31.7 40.9
roast beef (M. gluteus medius) 309 19.2 1.95 16.0 21.8
SD – standard deviation.
q0.05-quantile – approximately 5% of the data has a value less than the 0.05-quantile.
q0.95-quantile – approximately 95% of the data has a value less than the 0.95-quantile.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
416 A. Huuskonen and M. Pesonen

After slaughter the carcasses were weighed hot in all of the slaughterhouses. The
cold carcass weight was estimated as 0.98 of the hot carcass weight. The carcasses
were classified for conformation and fatness using the EUROP quality classification.
For conformation, development of carcass profiles, in particular the essential parts
(round, back, shoulder), was taken into consideration according to the EUROP clas-
sification (E: excellent, U: very good, R: good, O: fair, P: poor). Each level of the
conformation scale was subdivided into three sub-classes (e.g. O+, O, O–) to pro-
duce a transformed scale ranging from 1 to 15, with 15 being the best conformation.
For fat cover, the amount of fat on the outside of the carcass and in the thoracic cav-
ity was taken into account using a classification range from 1 to 5 (1: low, 2: slight,
3: average, 4: high, 5: very high).
Birth weight assumptions used in calculations were 46 kg live weight for pure-
bred Si and Si×late maturing breed calves and 44 kg live weight for Si×early ma-
turing breed calves (Åkerlind et al., 2011). Birth carcass weight was assumed to be
0.4 × birth weight since the same values were used by Atria Ltd. in daily extension
work (Herva et al., 2009, 2011). An estimated daily carcass gain was calculated by
subtracting birth carcass weight from the reported slaughter weight and dividing the
result by age at slaughter. The complete final slaughter data comprised 6 224 slaugh-
tered bulls; the average slaughter age was 565 days and the mean carcass weight
401 kg (Table 1). The average estimated daily carcass gain was 685 g/d, the EUROP
conformation score 8.3 and the carcass fat score 2.5.

Dataset – commercial cutting

For estimating valuable cuttings for studied breeds a separate dataset was col-
lected during 2010–2011 from Snellman Lihanjalostus Ltd. In addition to above-
mentioned variables this dataset included also information of commercial cuttings.
After classification carcasses were chilled overnight below 7°C. Day after slaughter
the carcasses were commercially cut. Each carcass was cut into valuable cuts [out-
side round (Musculus semitendinosus), inside round (Musculus semimembranosus),
corner round (Musculus quadriceps femoris), roast beef (Musculus gluteus medius),
tenderloin (Musculus psoas major) and loin (Musculus longissimus)] and tallow
(subcutaneous fat) as described by Pesonen et al. (2013 b) and Huuskonen et al.
(2014). The amount of tallow was evaluated by cutting off the visible subcutane-
ous fat on the surface of primal cuts and by weighing the yield of tallow in grams.
All these cuttings were weighed automatically in the slaughter line and their yields
were expressed as percentages of the carcass cold weight (0.98 × carcass hot weight,
50 min postmortem). This dataset comprised 314 slaughtered bulls (Table 1). The
average carcass gain, carcass weight and carcass conformation score were 8, 6 and
8% lower, respectively, in this dataset compared to the complete slaughter data
(Table 1).

Statistical methods
The results are shown as least squares means. The normality of residuals and
the homogeneity of variances were checked using graphical methods: box-plots and
scatter plots of residuals and fitted values. The data were subjected to the analysis

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
 Comparison of purebred Simmental and crossbred bulls 417

of variance using the SAS Mixed procedure (version 9.4, SAS Institute Inc., Cary,
NC).
The model used was:

yij = μ + αi + eij

where:
μ is the overall mean,
eij is the random error term,
αi is the effect of breed.

Effects of slaughterhouse location and age at slaughter were not taken into con-
sideration in the final statistical model because these effects were quantitatively min-
imal and they were considered not to have importance from a practical point of view.
Differences between the breeds were compared using Dunnett’s test so that purebred
Si was used as a control breed. P-values less than 0.05 are reported as statistically
significant.

Results

The complete slaughter data included 2 152 purebred Si bulls (Table 2). The most
popular crosses were Si×Hf (1 033 observations), Si×Li (999) and Si×Ch (980),
while Si×Ab (805) and Si×Ba (255) crosses were used less. The average slaughter
age for the purebred Si bulls was 565 days, and there were no major differences in
the average slaughter age among the breed groups. However, the Si×Ch bulls were
12 days younger (P<0.001) and Si×Hf bulls 5 days older (P<0.05) compared to the
purebred Si bulls (Table 2).
All crossbred groups differed significantly from the purebred Si bulls in both
carcass weight and carcass gain (Table 2). The estimated average daily carcass gain
of the pure Si bulls was 686 g/d, and it improved by 3 and 6% with Si×Ba and Si×Ch
crossbreds, respectively, compared to the Si bulls. Instead Si×Ab, Si×Hf and Si×Li
bulls grew 2–3% slower than the pure Si bulls. The average carcass weight of the
Si bulls was 402 kg, and it increased by 3% with Si×Ba and Si×Ch crossbreds and
decreased by 1–2% with Si×Ab, Si×Hf and Si×Li crossbreds compared to the pure Si
bulls (Table 2). The EUROP conformation score of the purebred Si bulls was 8.3, and
improved 10, 7 and 2% by using Ba, Li and Ch crosses, respectively. Si×Ab cross-
breds produced 7% and Si×Hf crossbreds 8% poorer conformed carcasses compared
to the purebred Si bulls. The carcass fat score of the Si×Ab, Si×Hf and Si×Li bulls
was 22, 22 and 4% higher than that of the pure Si bulls, respectively (Table 2). There
were no differences in carcass fat score between Si and Si×Ba bulls or between Si
and Si×Ch bulls.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
 Table 2. Carcass gain, carcass characteristics and valuable cuts of purebred Simmental (Si) and Si×beef breed crossbred bulls in Finnish slaughter dataset. Ab =
418
Aberdeen Angus, Ba = Blonde d’Aquitaine, Ch = Charolais, Hf = Hereford, Li = Limousin
Breed group Statistical significance
Item SEM P-value
Si×Si Si×Ab Si×Ba Si×Ch Si×Hf Si×Li Si×Ab Si×Ba Si×Ch Si×Hf Si×Li
Dataset (complete slaughter data)
n 2 152 805 255 980 1 033 999 - - - - - - -
age at slaughter (d) 565 566 566 553 570 569 3.6 <0.001 *** *
carcass gain (g/d) 686 675 709 725 664 669 6.7 <0.001 * ** *** *** ***
carcass weight (kg) 402 396 414 414 393 394 3.8 <0.001 * ** *** *** ***
conformation (1 = poorest, 15 = excellent) 8.3 7.7 9.1 8.9 7.6 8.5 0.12 <0.001 *** *** *** *** *
fat score (1 = leanest, 5 = fattest) 2.3 2.8 2.2 2.3 2.8 2.4 0.05 <0.001 *** *** **

Dataset (commercial cutting)

n 154 32 19 20 48 41 - - - - - - -
age at slaughter (d) 566 563 583 580 589 556 11.9 0.02 *
carcass gain (g/d) 669 602 628 601 558 627 24.3 <0.001 ** * ***
carcass weight (kg) 393 351 380 360 346 364 14.3 <0.001 ** *** *
conformation (1 = poorest, 15 = excellent) 7.9 7.0 8.1 7.8 6.6 7.8 0.38 <0.001 * ***
fat score (1 = leanest, 5 = fattest) 2.4 2.7 2.3 2.4 2.7 2.2 0.17 0.009 *
A. Huuskonen and M. Pesonen

From yield (g/kg)

subcutaneous fat 37.0 44.5 32.3 35.9 44.3 33.0 3.12 <0.001 * **
loin (M. longissimus) 41.3 39.0 41.2 41.8 40.7 41.8 0.77 0.008 **
tenderloin (M. psoas major) 14.7 14.1 14.9 14.6 14.4 15.0 0.27 0.049 o
inside round (M. semimembranosus) 41.0 38.7 41.3 42.3 38.9 42.2 0.90 <0.001 * **
outside round (M. semitendinosus) 65.4 62.9 66.9 67.3 62.5 66.8 1.19 <0.001 o **
corner round (M. quadriceps femoris) 36.0 35.3 38.0 36.8 35.8 37.7. 0.61 <0.001 * **
roast beef (M. gluteus medius) 19.4 18.0 19.1 19.8 18.2 20.0 0.43 <0.001 *** ***
SEM – standard error of mean.
Statistical significance – differences between the breed groups were compared using an a priori test (Dunnett’s test) so that purebred Si was used as a control breed.

Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM

Authenticated
Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute
*** (P<0.001), ** (P<0.01), * (P<0.05) and o (P<0.10).
 Comparison of purebred Simmental and crossbred bulls 419

Dataset from commercial cuttings included 154 purebred Si bulls but the amount
of the crossbreds was less (19–48 bulls/breed group) (Table 2). Breed group had
effects on the yield of valuable cuts, so that in particular Si×Ab and Si×Hf bulls dif-
fered from the purebred Si bulls. The yields of loin, tenderloin, inside round, outside
round and roast beef were lower with the Si×Ab bulls compared to the pure Si bulls.
With the Si×Hf crosses the yields of inside round, outside round and roast beef were
lower compared to the Si bulls. Furthermore, the yield of subcutaneous fat was sig-
nificantly higher in the Si×Ab and Si×Hf bulls than in the purebred Si bulls. There
were only few differences in the yield of valuable cuts between the pure Si bulls
and Si×late maturing crossbreds (Table 2). However, the yield of corner round was
higher in the Si×Ba and Si×Li bulls compared to the Si bulls.

Discussion

The main objective of the present study based on the dataset collected from
slaughterhouses was to study growth and carcass traits of Si crossbred bulls com-
pared to purebred Si bulls in Finnish beef cattle population. In Finland beef breed
bulls are typically housed and fed consistently in commercial finishing farms, i.e.
different methods are not used for different breed groups within a finishing farm.
Therefore, it can be assumed that the results of the present data give a good represen-
tation of the differences between the studied breed groups. Overall, it is difficult to
make direct comparisons between the present field data and earlier experiments be-
cause in a single experiment an individual factor (e.g. slaughter age, carcass weight,
intramuscular fat content) could be used as the end point of the study. In other words,
a limitation of the present field data is that the breed effects are partly confounded
with, for example, carcass weight. However, the observed carcass weights are nowa-
days the average weights for slaughtered bulls of these breed groups in Finland, and
therefore, the present results are valid from a practical point of view.
Consistent with the literature (e.g. Arango et al., 2002; Williams et al., 2010)
the carcass gain, carcass weight and conformation score were higher in the Con-
tinental crosses than in the British crosses. In the present study, especially Ch and
Ba influenced progeny had high carcass gains, carcass weights and conformation
scores compared to the purebred Si bulls. Previously, a high growth rate of Ch bulls
was observed, for example, by Bartoň et al. (2006) and Albertí et al. (2008) in pure
breeds and by Andersen et al. (1977) and Huuskonen et al. (2014) who used Ch in
a crossbreeding study. In accordance with our results, Williams et al. (2010) con-
cluded that Ch had the most positive and British breeds the most negative effect on
post-weaning growth.
Similarly to our findings, Gregory et al. (1991, 1994 a, b) reported that Si steers
had higher average daily gains than Ab and Hf steers after a constant time on feed.
On the contrary, Mandell et al. (1998) reported that medium framed Hf steers gained
more than large framed Si steers when fed to a common backfat endpoint presum-
ably due to a shorter time on feed and higher efficiency for maintenance and gain.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
420 A. Huuskonen and M. Pesonen

Hereford gained more rapidly and more efficiently while Simmental had heavier and
leaner carcasses (Mandell et al., 1998).
Consistent with the present data, Arango et al. (2002) concluded that the Conti-
nental breeds have the most positive effect on carcass weight as they are known to be
larger framed and late maturing breeds, which is associated with heavier carcasses.
On average, the carcass traits are higher in late maturing breeds than in maternal
breeds (Albertí et al., 2008). The lean yield has been higher in the Continental breeds
after constant time on feed (Gregory et al., 1994 a, b) or at common backfat end point
(Mandell et al., 1998). Generally, the later maturing breeds also produce more retail
saleable product which has been shown by Bartoň et al. (2006), Albertí et al. (2008)
and Holló et al. (2012).
Bartoň et al. (2006) reported that proportions of meat in higher priced joints
were higher in Si bulls compared to Ab and Hf bulls. Higher lean yields were also
recorded in carcasses from purebred Si compared to Hf steers (Mandell et al., 1998)
and from purebred Si compared to Red Angus steers (Laborde et al., 2001).
In general, Continental breeds tend to produce leaner carcasses than British ori-
gin breeds (Hassen et al., 1999; Arango et al., 2002; Rios-Utrera et al., 2006), and
this was also the case in the present data. Previously, Williams et al. (2010) reported
that Ab had the most pronounced effect on fat thickness whereas Continental breeds
decreased the fat thickness, and Wheeler et al. (2005) observed that Hf-sired steers
were fatter than Ch-sired steers when slaughtered at constant age. Similarly, Schen-
kel et al. (2004) reported with purebred beef bulls that Ba bulls showed the least
backfat thickness, followed by Li, Ch and Si when breed differences for growth and
body composition traits were studied in Ontario bull test stations from 1991 to 2000.
In that case, the Hf bulls had the highest level and the Ab bulls the second highest
level of backfat thickness (Schenkel et al., 2004).

Conclusions
Overall, significant breed differences were observed in growth performance, car-
cass traits and retail product yield. The daily carcass gain improved by using Ba and
Ch crossbreeding and carcass conformation improved by using Ba, Li and Ch cross-
breeding compared to the pure Si bulls. Si×British breed crossbreds had poorer car-
cass gain and produced poorer conformed carcasses compared to purebred Si bulls.
Furthermore, the yield of subcutaneous fat was higher in the Si×Ab and Si×Hf bulls
than in the purebred Si bulls.

References

Å k e r l i n d M., N i e l s e n N.I., Vo l d e n H. (2011). Animal input characteristics. In: NorFor – The

Nordic feed evaluation system, Volden H. (ed.). Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the
Netherlands. pp. 27–32.
A l b e r t í P., P a n e a B., S a ñ u d o C., O l l e t a J.L., R i p o l l G., E r t b j e r g P., C h r i s t e n s e n M.,
G i g l i S., F a i l l a S., C o n c e t t i S., H o c q u e t t e J.F., J a i l l e r R., R u d e l S., R e n e n d G.,
N u t e G.R., R i c h a r d s o n R.I., W i l l i a m s J.L. (2008). Live weight, body size and carcass
characteristics of young bulls of fifteen European breeds. Livest. Sci., 114: 19–30.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
 Comparison of purebred Simmental and crossbred bulls 421

A n d e r s e n B.B., L i b o r i u s s e n T., K o u s g a a r d K., B u c h t e r L. (1977). Crossbreeding ex-

periment with beef and dual-purpose sire breeds on Danish dairy cows. III. Daily gain, feed conver-
sion and carcass quality of intensively fed young bulls. Livest. Prod. Sci., 4: 19–29.
A r a n g o J.A., C u n d i f f L.V., Va n V l e c k L.D. (2002). Breed comparisons of Angus, Charolais,
Hereford, Jersey, Limousin, Simmental, and South Devon for weight, weight adjusted for body con-
dition score, height, and body condition score of cows. J. Anim. Sci., 80: 3123–3132.
B a r t o ň L., Ř e h á k D., T e s l í k V., B u r e š D., Z a h r á d k o v á R. (2006). Effect of breed on
growth performance and carcass composition of Aberdeen Angus, Charolais, Hereford and Sim-
mental bulls. Czech. J. Anim. Sci., 51: 47–53.
D i l l a r d E.U., R o d r i q u e z O., R o b i s o n O.W. (1980). Estimation of additive and nonadditive
direct and maternal genetic effects from crossbreeding beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 50: 653–663.
F i s s C.F., W i l t o n J.W. (1993). Contribution of breed, cow weight, and milk yield to the preweaning,
feedlot, and carcass traits of calves in three beef breeding systems. J. Anim. Sci., 71: 2874–2884.
G r e g o r y K.E., C u n d i f f L.V., K o c h R.M. (1991). Breed effects and heterosis in advanced gen-
erations of composite populations for growth traits in both sexes of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 69:
3202–3212.
G r e g o r y K.E., C u n d i f f L.V., K o c h R.M. (1994 a). Breed effects, dietary energy density effects,
and retained heterosis on different measures of gain efficiency in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 72:
1138–1154.
G r e g o r y K.E., C u n d i f f L.V., K o c h R.M., D i k e m a n M.E., K o o h m a r a i e M. (1994 b).
Breed effects and retained heterosis for growth, carcass, and meat traits in advanced generations of
composite populations of beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 72: 833–850.
H a s s e n A.D., W i l s o n D.E., R o u s e G.H. (1999). Evaluation of carcass, live, and real-time ultra-
sound measures in feedlot cattle: I. Assessment of sex and breed effects. J. Anim. Sci., 77: 273–282.
H e r v a T., V i r t a l a A.-M., H u u s k o n e n A., S a a t k a m p H.W., P e l t o n i e m i O. (2009). On-
farm welfare and estimated daily carcass gain of slaughtered bulls. Acta Agr. Scand. Sect. A Anim.
Sci., 59: 104–120.
H e r v a T., H u u s k o n e n A., V i r t a l a A.-M., P e l t o n i e m i O. (2011). On-farm welfare and car-
cass fat score of bulls at slaughter. Livest. Sci., 138: 159–166.
H o l l ó G., N u e r n b e r g K., S o m o g y í T., A n t o n I., H o l l ó I. (2012). Comparison of fattening
performance and slaughter value of local Hungarian cattle breeds to international breeds. Archiv
Tierzucht, 55: 1–12.
H u u s k o n e n A. (2014). A comparison of Nordic Red, Holstein-Friesian and Finnish native cattle
bulls for beef production and carcass traits. Agric. Food Sci., 23: 159–164.
H u u s k o n e n A., P e s o n e n M., K ä m ä r ä i n e n H., K a u p p i n e n R. (2014). Production and
carcass traits of purebred Nordic Red and Nordic Red×beef breed crossbred bulls. J. Agric. Sci.,
152: 504–517.
K r e s s D.D., D o o r n b o s D.E., A n d e r s o n D.C. (1990). Performance of crosses among Hereford,
Angus and Simmental cattle with different levels of Simmental breeding: V. Calf production, milk
production and reproduction of three- to eight-year-old dams. J. Anim. Sci., 68: 1910–1921.
L a b o r d e F.L., M a n d e l l I.B., T o s h J.J., W i l t o n J.W., B u c h a n a n - S m i t h J.G. (2001).
Breed effects on growth performance, carcass characteristics, fatty acid composition, and palatabil-
ity attributes in finishing steers. J. Anim. Sci., 79: 355–365.
M ä k i - T a n i l a A. (2007). An overview on quantitative and genomic tools for utilizing dominance
genetic variation in improving animal production. Agric. Food Sci., 16: 188–198.
M a l l i n c k r o d t C.H., B o u r d o n R.M., G o l d e n B.L., S c h a l l e s R.R., O d d e K.G. (1993).
Relationship of maternal milk expected progeny differences to actual milk yield and calf weaning
weight. J. Anim. Sci., 71: 355–362.
M a n d e l l I.B., G u l l e t t E.A., W i l t o n J.W., A l l e n O.B., K e m p R.A. (1998). Effects of breed
and dietary energy content within breed on growth performance, carcass and chemical composition
and beef quality in Hereford and Simmental steers. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 78: 533–541.
M a s o n I.L. (1966). Hybrid vigour in beef cattle. Anim. Breed. Abst., 4: 453.
M i l l e r S.P., W i l t o n J.W., P f e i f f e r W.C. (1999). Effects of milk yield on biological efficiency
and profit of beef production from birth to slaughter. J. Anim. Sci., 77: 344–352.
P e s o n e n M., H u u s k o n e n A. (2015). Production, carcass characteristics and valuable cuts of beef
breed bulls and heifers in Finnish beef cattle population. Agric. Food Sci., 24: 164–172.

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
 422 A. Huuskonen and M. Pesonen

P e s o n e n M., H o n k a v a a r a M., H u u s k o n e n A. (2012). Effect of breed on production, carcass

traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Limousin and Aberdeen Angus × Limousin bulls offered
a grass silage-grain-based diet. Agric. Food Sci., 21: 361–369.
P e s o n e n M., H o n k a v a a r a M., H u u s k o n e n A. (2013 a). Production, carcass and meat quality
traits of Hereford, Charolais and Hereford × Charolais bulls offered grass silage-grain-based rations
and slaughtered at high carcass weights. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A Anim. Sci., 63: 28–38.
P e s o n e n M., H o n k a v a a r a M., K ä m ä r ä i n e n H., T o l o n e n T., J a a k k o l a M., V i r t a -
n e n V., H u u s k o n e n A. (2013 b). Effects of concentrate level and rapeseed meal supplementa-
tion on performance, carcass characteristics, meat quality and valuable cuts of Hereford and Charo-
lais bulls offered grass silage-barley-based rations. Agric. Food Sci., 22: 151–167.
R i o s - U t r e r a A., C u n d i f f L.V., G r e g o r y K.E., K o c h R.M., D i k e m a n M.E., K o o h m a -
r a i e M., Va n V l e c k L.D. (2006). Effects of age, weight, and fat slaughter end points on esti-
mates of breed and retained heterosis effects for carcass traits. J. Anim. Sci., 84: 63–87.
R o s o V.M., S c h e n k e l F.S., M i l l e r S.P., W i l t o n J.M. (2005). Additive, dominance, and epi-
static loss effects on preweaning weight gain of crossbred beef cattle from different Bos taurus
breeds. J. Anim. Sci., 83: 1780–1787.
S c h e n k e l F.S., M i l l e r S.P., W i l t o n J.W. (2004). Genetic parameters and breed differences for
feed efficiency, growth and body composition traits of young beef bulls. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 84:
177–185.
S ø r e n s e n M.K., N o r b e r g E., P e d e r s e n J., C h r i s t e n s e n L.G. (2008). Invited review:
Crossbreeding in dairy cattle: A Danish perspective. J. Dairy Sci., 91: 4116–4128.
W h e e l e r T.L., C u n d i f f L.V., S h a c k e l f o r d S.D., K o o h m a r a i e M. (2005). Characteriza-
tion of biological types of cattle (cycle VII): Carcass, yield, and longissimus palatability traits.
J. Anim. Sci., 83: 196–207.
W i l l i a m s J.L., A g u i l a r I., R e k a y a R., B e r t r a n d J.K. (2010). Estimation of breed and het-
erosis effects for growth and carcass traits in cattle using published crossbreeding studies. J. Anim.
Sci., 88: 460–466.

Received: 29 VI 2016
Accepted: 11 X 2016

Brought to you by | Metla Finnish Forest Research Institute

Authenticated
Download Date | 5/4/17 7:48 AM
View publication stats