Cargando…
An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security
BACKGROUND: A pelleted diet containing camelina hay (CAMH) or camelina meal (CAMM) as a supplement along with a control pellet (CONT) diet formulated with commonly available feeds during summer was used to investigate an alternative pathway for sustainable meat production. Sustainable meat productio...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7362406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40104-020-00472-z |
_version_ | 1783559486124851200 |
---|---|
author | Ponnampalam, Eric N. Knight, Matthew I. Moate, Peter J. Jacobs, Joe L. |
author_facet | Ponnampalam, Eric N. Knight, Matthew I. Moate, Peter J. Jacobs, Joe L. |
author_sort | Ponnampalam, Eric N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A pelleted diet containing camelina hay (CAMH) or camelina meal (CAMM) as a supplement along with a control pellet (CONT) diet formulated with commonly available feeds during summer was used to investigate an alternative pathway for sustainable meat production. Sustainable meat production was based on a simple estimation of income from meat produced versus feed costs if animals were fed for an extended period over summer compared to early slaughter at the beginning of summer. Eighty maternal composite wether lambs (Composite) based on Coopworth genetics and 80 pure Merino wether yearlings were divided into 10 groups within breed (n = 8) using stratified randomisation based on liveweights. Following 1 week of adaptation to experimental diets, animals were fed experimental diets for up to10 weeks. RESULTS: Animals were slaughtered after either 8, 9 or 10 weeks of full feeding when the average liveweight of diet/genetic combination reached a weight appropriate for either ‘heavy lamb’ or ‘heavy hogget’ production, which occurred between 8 and 10 weeks of full feeding. There was no diet × breed interactions except for dressing percentage (DP), where Composite lambs fed the CAMH diet had the greatest DP (48.1 ± 0.35) and the Merino yearlings fed the CAMM diet the lowest DP (45.8 ± 0.33). Composite lambs gained 17.6–20.3 kg and Merino yearlings gained 10.7–12.9 kg liveweight. Based on their DP, this resulted in the production of approximately 8.3–9.5 kg additional carcass weight in Composites and 4.9–5.7 kg in Merinos, which in turn produced greater profit per Composite lamb and a small profit per Merino yearling. CONCLUSIONS: Composite lambs fed CAMM and CAMH had 5% greater carcass weights at slaughter compared to the CONT group, but dietary treatments did not change carcass weight of Merino yearlings at slaughter. The extended feeding approach offered the producer an estimated economic gain of AUD $20.00 to $25.00 when yearly average prices were used (Method 1) and AUD $40.00 to $47.70 when pre- and post-summer average prices were used (Method 2) per Composite lambs, but extra carcass gain did not result in the same profit per Merino yearling. Among the Composites, the profit for animals fed the CAMH and CAMM were AUD $2.75 to $4.50 greater than CONT group when full year average prices were applied while AUD $3.50 to $5.50 greater than CONT group when pre- and post-summer average prices were applied. However, we acknowledge a combination approach of extended feeding for a portion of animals already on ground and selling the remaining animals pre-summer with joining of additional ewes is the most likely strategy. Considering the scenario of extended feeding for 3 weeks, based on the growth rates observed for Composite lambs, if an additional 2 kg carcass weight per animal can be gained for 50% of the 22 million lambs slaughtered in Australia (= 11 million animals), it would potentially supply an additional 22 million kg of lamb carcasses produced per annum. This is equivalent to producing an extra 1 million lamb carcasses per annum weighing 22 kg each. Feeding Composite lambs for an extended period and selling Merino yearlings pre-summer may be a good option due to faster growth rate of Composites that may help quick turn-over to market. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7362406 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73624062020-07-17 An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security Ponnampalam, Eric N. Knight, Matthew I. Moate, Peter J. Jacobs, Joe L. J Anim Sci Biotechnol Research BACKGROUND: A pelleted diet containing camelina hay (CAMH) or camelina meal (CAMM) as a supplement along with a control pellet (CONT) diet formulated with commonly available feeds during summer was used to investigate an alternative pathway for sustainable meat production. Sustainable meat production was based on a simple estimation of income from meat produced versus feed costs if animals were fed for an extended period over summer compared to early slaughter at the beginning of summer. Eighty maternal composite wether lambs (Composite) based on Coopworth genetics and 80 pure Merino wether yearlings were divided into 10 groups within breed (n = 8) using stratified randomisation based on liveweights. Following 1 week of adaptation to experimental diets, animals were fed experimental diets for up to10 weeks. RESULTS: Animals were slaughtered after either 8, 9 or 10 weeks of full feeding when the average liveweight of diet/genetic combination reached a weight appropriate for either ‘heavy lamb’ or ‘heavy hogget’ production, which occurred between 8 and 10 weeks of full feeding. There was no diet × breed interactions except for dressing percentage (DP), where Composite lambs fed the CAMH diet had the greatest DP (48.1 ± 0.35) and the Merino yearlings fed the CAMM diet the lowest DP (45.8 ± 0.33). Composite lambs gained 17.6–20.3 kg and Merino yearlings gained 10.7–12.9 kg liveweight. Based on their DP, this resulted in the production of approximately 8.3–9.5 kg additional carcass weight in Composites and 4.9–5.7 kg in Merinos, which in turn produced greater profit per Composite lamb and a small profit per Merino yearling. CONCLUSIONS: Composite lambs fed CAMM and CAMH had 5% greater carcass weights at slaughter compared to the CONT group, but dietary treatments did not change carcass weight of Merino yearlings at slaughter. The extended feeding approach offered the producer an estimated economic gain of AUD $20.00 to $25.00 when yearly average prices were used (Method 1) and AUD $40.00 to $47.70 when pre- and post-summer average prices were used (Method 2) per Composite lambs, but extra carcass gain did not result in the same profit per Merino yearling. Among the Composites, the profit for animals fed the CAMH and CAMM were AUD $2.75 to $4.50 greater than CONT group when full year average prices were applied while AUD $3.50 to $5.50 greater than CONT group when pre- and post-summer average prices were applied. However, we acknowledge a combination approach of extended feeding for a portion of animals already on ground and selling the remaining animals pre-summer with joining of additional ewes is the most likely strategy. Considering the scenario of extended feeding for 3 weeks, based on the growth rates observed for Composite lambs, if an additional 2 kg carcass weight per animal can be gained for 50% of the 22 million lambs slaughtered in Australia (= 11 million animals), it would potentially supply an additional 22 million kg of lamb carcasses produced per annum. This is equivalent to producing an extra 1 million lamb carcasses per annum weighing 22 kg each. Feeding Composite lambs for an extended period and selling Merino yearlings pre-summer may be a good option due to faster growth rate of Composites that may help quick turn-over to market. BioMed Central 2020-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7362406/ /pubmed/32685146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40104-020-00472-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Ponnampalam, Eric N. Knight, Matthew I. Moate, Peter J. Jacobs, Joe L. An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title | An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title_full | An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title_fullStr | An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title_full_unstemmed | An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title_short | An alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
title_sort | alternative approach for sustainable sheep meat production: implications for food security |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7362406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40104-020-00472-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ponnampalamericn analternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT knightmatthewi analternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT moatepeterj analternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT jacobsjoel analternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT ponnampalamericn alternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT knightmatthewi alternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT moatepeterj alternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity AT jacobsjoel alternativeapproachforsustainablesheepmeatproductionimplicationsforfoodsecurity |