Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T03:46:41.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of genotype and plane of nutrition on growth and carcass characteristics of lambs from hill sheep systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

M. H. M. Speijers*
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
L. E. R. Dawson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, Northern Ireland, UK
A. W. Gordon
Affiliation:
Biometrics Department, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of lamb genotype and plane of nutrition on post-weaning lamb growth, and carcass characteristics in hill sheep systems. The lamb genotypes compared were as follows: purebred Scottish Blackface, Swaledale × Scottish Blackface, Cheviot × Scottish Blackface, Lleyn × Scottish Blackface and Texel × Scottish Blackface lambs. During the finishing period, lambs were allocated to a (i) low plane of nutrition (LP), based on a fixed allowance of dried grass pellets representing a grass-based system; (ii) high plane of nutrition (HP-cereal), with a diet consisting proportionately of 0.20 dried grass pellets : 0.80 cereal-based concentrate offered ad libitum; (iii) high plane of nutrition (HP-cereal/oil), with a diet consisting proportionately of 0.20 dried grass pellets : 0.80 cereal-based concentrate containing oilseed rape offered ad libitum. There were significant genotype × diet interactions for dry matter (DM) intake (P < 0.001), live weight gain (P < 0.05) and carcass gain (P < 0.05). On the LP diet, carcass gains were higher for Texel cross compared to Blackface and Swaledale cross lambs (P < 0.05). On both HP diets, carcass gains were lower in Blackface and Swaledale crosses compared with the Cheviot, Lleyn and Texel cross lambs (P < 0.01). Feed conversion efficiency, expressed in terms of carcass gain per unit of DM, was highest for Texel cross and Cheviot cross, lowest in Swaledale cross and Blackface and intermediate for Lleyn cross lambs (P < 0.001). Conformation classification was lowest for Swaledale cross (P < 0.05) and highest for Texel cross lambs (P < 0.001), whilst those of Blackface, Cheviot and Lleyn cross lambs were similar. Carcasses from Blackface and Lleyn cross lambs had higher fat classifications than Texel and Cheviot cross lambs (P < 0.01). Feed conversion efficiency was lowest with the LP diet compared with the HP diets, resulting in a 5-week longer finishing period and lower carcass weights, fat scores, dressing proportions and subcutaneous fat depth measurements. These results indicate that crossbreeding can have a major effect on lamb performance in the hill sheep sector. Feeding a HP increased lamb growth rates, particularly for high growth-potential genotypes, improved feed efficiency, shortened the finishing period but increased carcass fatness. Including oilseed rape in concentrate-based diets did not affect performance.

Information

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009
Figure 0

Table 1 Experimental plan; number and age of lambs (days) at start of the study allocated to each slaughter group and diet over 2 years

Figure 1

Table 2 Ingredient composition of the concentrates (kg inclusion per tonne of concentrate)

Figure 2

Table 3 Chemical analysis of treatment diets offered (all values g/kg dry matter (DM) unless stated otherwise)

Figure 3

Table 4 Apparent digestibilities and metabolisable energy concentrations of the treatment diets (9 d.f.) in year 1 of the experiment

Figure 4

Table 5 Effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on live weight and carcass gains, and age at slaughter

Figure 5

Table 6a Interactions between lamb genotype and treatment diet on live weight gains (g/day)

Figure 6

Table 6b Interactions between lamb genotype and treatment diet on carcass gains (g/day)

Figure 7

Table 6c Interactions between lamb genotype and treatment diet on dry matter (DM) intakes§ (kg/day)

Figure 8

Table 7 The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on dry matter intake and feed conversion efficiencies

Figure 9

Table 8 The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on carcass weight and characteristics

Figure 10

Table 9a The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on the proportion of lambs falling into categories of the EUROP classification system

Figure 11

Table 9b The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on the proportion of lambs falling into the carcass fat classification categories

Figure 12

Table 10 The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on carcass fat and tissue depth measurements (mm)

Figure 13

Table 11 The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on kidney weight (g)

Figure 14

Table 12 The effects of lamb genotype and treatment diet on carcass linear traits (mm)