Plasma Biochemical and Haematological Changes in Steers of Different Temperament during Feedlotting

Correlations between liveweight gains and temperament during feedlotting (Voisinet et al., 1997) may be an indication that cattle of different temperament suffer different degrees of stress. This paper describes the effect of grouping into feedlot pens, cattle of good, poor and mixed (some good and some poor) temperament on blood parameters that are indicators of stress (Bennett et al., 1989). Animal production for a consuming world : proceedings of 9th Congress of the Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies [AAAP] and 23rd Biennial Conference of the Australian Society of Animal Production [ASAP] and 17th Annual Symposium of the University of Sydney, Dairy Research Foundation, [DRF]. 2-7 July 2000, Sydney, Australia.

Effect of Grouping Feedlot Steers by Temperament on Performance and Carcass Traits

Cattle temperament is correlated with liveweight gains during feedlotting (Voisinet et al., 1997) ie. cattle that are nervous and flighty (poor temperament) do not perform as well as those that are quiet and docile (good temperament). This experiment investigated the effect of grouping into feedlot pens cattle of good temperament, poor temperament and mixed (some good and some poor) temperament on average daily gain (ADG), body condition score (CS), feed conversion efficiency (FCE) and various carcase traits. Animal production for a consuming world : proceedings of 9th Congress of the Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies [AAAP] and 23rd Biennial Conference of the Australian Society of Animal Production [ASAP] and 17th Annual Symposium of the University of Sydney, Dairy Research Foundation, [DRF]. 2-7 July 2000, Sydney, Australia.

Effects of Grouping Feedlot Steers with a Range of Flight Speeds on Liveweight and Temperament Changes

Poor temperament cattle that are nervous and flighty do not perform as well in feedlots as good temperament cattle that are quiet and docile (Burrow and Dillon, 1997). There are contradictory anecdotal reports from industry about the effect of mixing cattle of different temperament on subsequent performance and temperament. Supposedly the presence of a few docile cattle in a feedlot pen-group will have a ‘calming’ effect on flighty pen-mates or the presence of a few flighty animals will ‘upset’ a group of quiet cattle. These hypotheses were tested using data in the experiment described by Petherick et al. (2000) where cattle were grouped into feedlot pens of good temperament, poor temperament and mixed (some good and some poor) temperaments. Animal production for a consuming world : proceedings of 9th Congress of the Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies [AAAP] and 23rd Biennial Conference of the Australian Society of Animal Production [ASAP] and 17th Annual Symposium of the University of Sydney, Dairy Research Foundation, [DRF]. 2-7 July 2000, Sydney, Australia.

Observations on the influence of repeated sampling procedures on temperament changes of weaner cattle

Experimental cattle are often restrained for repeated blood collection and faecal sampling and may baulk at entering the crush, possibly from learning that crush entry is followed by an unpleasant experience. We asked whether repeated sampling affects temperament. One measure of temperament is flight speed, which is the time, measured electronically, for an animal to cover a set distance on release from a weighing crate (Burrow et al. 1988). 22nd Biennial Conference.

Quality of handling and holding yard environment, and beef cattle temperament: 1. Relationships with flight speed and fear of humans.

Numerous tests have been used to measure beef cattle temperament, but limited research has addressed the relationship between such tests and whether temperament can be modified. One-hundred-and-forty-four steers were given one of three human handling and yarding experiences on six occasions during a 12-month grazing period post-weaning (backgrounding): Good handling/yarding, Poor handling/yarding and Minimal handling/yarding. At the end of this phase the cattle were lot-fed for 78 days, with no handling/yarding treatments imposed, before being transported for commercial slaughter. Temperament was assessed at the start of the experiment, during backgrounding and lot-feeding by flight speed (FS) and a fear of humans test, which measured the proximity to a stimulus person (zone average; ZA), the closest approach to the person (CA) and the amount the cattle moved around the test arena (total transitions; TT). During backgrounding, FS decreased for all treatments and at the end of backgrounding there was no difference between them. The rate of decline, however, was greatest in the Good group, smallest in the Minimal group with the Poor intermediate. In contrast, ZA was affected by treatment, with a greater reduction for the Good group than the others (P = 0.012). During lot-feeding, treatment did not affect FS, but all groups showed a decrease in ZA, with the greatest change in the Poor group, the least in the Good and the Minimal intermediate (P = 0.052). CA was positively correlated with ZA (r = 0.18 to 0.66) and negatively with TT (r = -0.180 to -0.659). FS was consistently correlated with TT only (r = 0.17 to 0.49). These findings suggest that FS and TT measure a similar characteristic, as do ZA and CA, but that these characteristics are different from one another, indicating that temperament is not a unitary trait, but has different facets. FS and TT measure one facet that we suggest is general agitation, whilst ZA and CA measure fear of people. Thus, the cattle became less agitated during backgrounding, but the effect was not permanently influenced by the quantity and quality of handling/yarding. However, Good handling/yarding reduced fearfulness of people. Fear of people was also reduced during lot-feeding, probably as a consequence of frequent exposure to humans in a situation that was neutral or positive for the cattle.

Regrouping unfamiliar animals in the weeks prior to slaughter has few effects on physiology and meat quality in Bos taurus feedlot steers

The response of cattle to alterations in social groupings can lead to physiological changes that affect meat quality. Feedlot practices frequently lead to a proportion of cattle in a pen being drafted for slaughter with the balance retained for a further period until they meet market specifications. An ability to regroup such retained cattle for short periods without consequences for meat quality would facilitate efficient use of feedlot pen space. The current experiment examined the impact on physiological variables and meat quality of regrouped British breed steers 4, 2 or 1 week before dispatch for slaughter. There was little effect of regrouping cattle on physiological variables associated with stress responses. Physical assessment of meat quality indicated that regrouping steers 1 week before slaughter led to higher compression and a tendency for higher peak force values in animals from one genotype than in their respective controls (1.89 v. 1.71 ± 0.05 kg, P = 0.017); however, these assessments were not matched by changes in sensory perception of meat quality. Average daily gain during feedlot finishing was negatively related to the temperament measure and flight time. It was also associated with breed, white cell count, plasma cortisol and haemoglobin at the midpoint of the 70-day finishing period. The results confirm the impact of flight time on growth rate during feedlot finishing and that regrouping cattle less than 2 weeks before slaughter may reduce meat quality.