Effects of Initial Body Condition, Frame Size and Concentration of Dietary Energy on Carcass Value of Finished Steers

Yearling steers were sorted into four groups based on hip height and fat cover at the start of the finishing period. Each group of sorted steers was fed diets containing 0.59 or 0.64 Mcal NEg per pound of diet. The value of each carcass was determined by use of the Oklahoma State University Boxed Beef Calculator. Sorting to increase hip height decreased the percentage of Choice carcasses and fat cover, increased ribeye area, and had no effect on carcass weight or yield grades 1 and 2. Sorting to decrease initial fat cover decreased carcass weight, carcass fat cover, and percentage of choice carcasses and increased the proportion of yield grades 1 and 2 carcasses. Concentration of energy in the finishing diet had no effect on carcass measurements. Increasing the percentage of yield grades 1 and 2 carcasses did not result in increased economic value of the carcasses when quality grades were lower and when there was a wide spread between Choice and Select carcasses, as occurred in 1996. With less spread between Choice and Select, as in 1997, sorting the cattle to increase yield grades 1 and 2 resulted in increased value, especially for close-trim boxed beef. The results of this study emphasize the importance of knowing how carcasses will grade before selecting a valuebased market for selling cattle.

Potential Economic Returns from Selling Beef in a Specified Value-Based Market

Three groups of steers--one theoretical group and two experimental groups—were evaluated for marketing cattle live, as boxed beef, and grade and yield when the live price was $71 to $73/cwt, grade and yield price $125/cwt for Choice yield grade 3 carcasses with $20/cwt discount for Select carcasses, and in a commodity-trim or close-trim boxed beef market. The results show that the value of highyielding steers can be significantly increased if sold in a close-trim boxed beef market. The close-trim premiums ranged from $5.06 per head for Select close-trim yield grade 4 carcasses to $87.18 per head for close-trim Choice yield grade 1 carcasses. A group of experimental steers averaging 82% Choice and 60% yield grades 1 and 2 returned an additional $104 in the close-trim boxed market compared with selling live for $73/cwt. Another group of experimental steers averaging 21% Choice, 18% Standard, and 93% yield grades 1 and 2 had $29 per head greater return than if the steers had been sold live for $71/cwt. These comparisons emphasize the importance of knowing how cattle will potentially grade before selecting an alternative marketing strategy. This prior knowledge is most important when the spread in price between Choice and Select is high. Producers need to learn more about their cattle to predict how the cattle may grade for a specified value-based market.

Use of Ultrasound Backfat Estimates to Form Marketing Groups Prior to Finishing for Feedlot Steers

An experiment was conducted using 95 Continental crossbred steers. The cattle were sorted by ultrasound 160 days before slaughter into a low backfat group (Low BF) and a higher backfat group (High BF). Half of the Low BF and half of the High BF were implanted whereas the other halves were not. Data from the experiment were used in two hypothetical markets. One market was a high yield beef program (HY) that did not allow the use of implants. The second market was a commodity beef program (CM) that allowed the use of implants. The cattle were priced as an unsorted group (ALL) and two sorted groups (Low BF and High BF) within the HY (non-implanted) and CM (implanted) markets. The CM program had a base price of $1.05/lb hot carcass weight (HCW) with a $0.15/lb HCW discount for quality grade (QG) Select and a $0.20/lb HCW discount for yield grade (YG) 4. The HY program used a base price of $1.07/lb HCW with premiums ($/lb HCW) paid for YG £ .9 (.15), 1.0 - 1.4 (.10), and 1.5 - 1.9 (.03). The carcasses were discounted ($/lb HCW) for YG 2.5 - 2.9 (.03), 3.0 - 3.9 (.15), and ³ 4.0 (.35). This data set provides good evidence that the end point at which to sell a group of cattle depends on the particular market. Sorting had an economic advantage over ALL in the HY Low BF and the CM High BF groups. The HY High BF cattle should have been sold sooner due to the discounts recieved for increased YG. The increased YG was directly affected by an increase in BF. Furthermore, the CM Low BF group should have been fed longer to increase the number of carcasses grading Choice.