Beef Cattle Leg Structure Frame of Cattle

Introduction

The height of a beef animal at a given historic period tin can be used as a measure out of its maturity type, or growth bend potential. Information technology may assist the breeder to determine where animals best fit into a breeding program—whether, for example, a bull is ameliorate suited to producing vealers or steers. Acme tin can also be used as an aid to predict the growth and fattening blueprint of a beast, too as its mature size. In this style, frame size can be a helpful offshoot to other performance records when selecting stock. Nonetheless, the all-time prediction of weight and functioning of resultant progeny from breeding stock is obtained by using weight records expressed as 'estimated breeding values' (EBVs).

The elevation of the animal has likewise been institute to be a useful indicator of beast functioning in the feedlot—every bit an indicator of maturity. Taller animals mostly grow more speedily and lay downward less fat than do shorter animals (McKiernan et al. 1998). This is especially important when selecting feeder steers to be fattened for the long-fed Japanese trade.

A user-friendly mode to talk over and evaluate height is in units of 'frame score' based on the height over the hips at a given age (refer to Table three and Table 4).

No ane frame size for an animal volition exist all-time for all feed resources, breeding system and market place specification. Overall economic render should determine the optimum frame size for individual situations.

Frame score is a convenient way of describing the skeletal size of cattle. Most animals should maintain the aforementioned frame score throughout their life, while actual acme increases with historic period. This allows one frame score value to be used regardless of when the animal was evaluated. Withal, the frame score can change for animals that mature before or after than average animals within their frame group.

Environmental factors can also change an animal's growth rate from its genetic capability, and hence can alter its eventual height. Nutrition level is a major factor. Cattle fed less than acceptable nutrition will abound more slowly and achieve a smaller size than that which the tables indicate, while cattle fed extremely high levels volition grow faster but more often than not not much taller than the meridian indicated in the tables.

Frame scores should exist used only as guides because inaccuracies tin can occur due to nutrition, every bit described above, but also due to other factors such as:

• inaccuracy of measurement (measuring the wrong spot on the back, or cattle non continuing on level basis);
• angulation of joints—straight hocks and straight through the stifle joint can add considerably to the pinnacle of the brute, but not change its maturity pattern; however, it tin considerably reduce the functionality of the animal.

How to evaluate body/frame type

The recommended point for linear superlative measurement is a bespeak straight over the hips from a level surface.

Body type (frame) scores are made on a 1–11 basis. These body type scores were adult at the University of Wisconsin in the United states and are applicable to all breeds of cattle.

The frame score charts (Table three and Tabular array iv) contained in this publication were adjusted from a fact canvass from Kansas State Academy; however, they are understood to be universal. Well-nigh British breeds will fall into the ane–7 range, and nearly continental breeds in the 4–nine range. Frames ten and 11 are extreme sizes. A score of xi is not to be interpreted as the best—it merely indicates the largest blazon of cattle.

The summit or 'frame' of cattle of a given historic period is closely related to maturity type (Table 1).

Frame type - growth and fattening relationships

Because the height or 'frame' of cattle of a given age is closely related to maturity type, the information can exist used to categorise or allocate a live animal, based on its growing and fattening pattern.

Big-framed and small-framed cattle grow at their quickest up until they reach physiological maturity (the phase of growth when fattening begins).

The smaller framed cattle reach that betoken at an earlier historic period and at a lighter weight than do large-framed cattle. As the smaller framed cattle irksome down in growth and begin to fatten, the larger framed cattle continue growing for a while before they begin to fatten.

At any given weight, large-framed cattle will be younger and a little leaner than their pocket-sized-framed counterparts. At the aforementioned age they will exist heavier but accept like fatty depth as that of the modest-framed cattle (run into Figure 1).

Therefore, y'all tin change the 'market weight to fatness' relationship of the cattle you produce by using bulls of different frame types. For example, producers who find that their sale cattle go too fat before they reach the  optimum weight can 'stretch out' and 'trim up' futurity progeny by using big-framed bulls, that is, after maturing types.

Environmental effects on frame size

Comparing between animals for any measurement is more meaningful where the animals being compared take been reared under similar ecology atmospheric condition.

The figures in Tables 3 and iv are adjusted data based on age–height relation studies at the Universities of Missouri and Wisconsin, U.s.a..

Heights of heifers are more often than not less than heights of bulls of the same historic period by i–2.5 cm at 6 months, ii–5 cm at eight months, and 5 cm at 12 months and over. Because of this, use Tabular array 4 figures for assessing female cattle.

The economical importance of frame score

Frame score has no direct relationship with reproductive performance, growth rate or carcase quality. Indirectly, it may impact all these traits.

Frame score, as a predictor of maturity, certainly predicts when an fauna is likely to reach a finished slaughter weight.

As a result, steer fatteners, backgrounders and lotfeeders are usually careful to buy cattle which have moderate maturity (e.g. frame score 4–6). Their choice will be determined by the market they are targeting.

What are the frame score requirements for different markets?

The frame score requirements for the Australian domestic markets are relatively low because the greatest demand is for light carcases in the 180–230 kg range—although currently increasing. Understandably, carcase weights of up to 400 kg, needed past a segment of the Japanese market, volition require much larger framed animals so that the animals practise non become overfat, simply not and so big that the cattle are not able to be finished.

Table two should be used as a guide for feeder steers.

Tabular array ii. Guide for feeder steer for dissimilar markets

Market	Days on feed	Optimal frame score
Domestic	seventy–100	3–5
Consign due east.m. Japan short fed	100–150	4–half dozen
Consign east.g. Nippon long fed	220–300	5–7

Frame score charts

Table 3. Male person frame scores based on height measurement at the hip (cm)

Age (months)	Bulls—hip elevation (cm)
	Frame score
	ane	two	3	4	v	half dozen	7	8	9	10	11
v	85	90	95	100	105	110	116	121	126	131	137
half-dozen	88	93	99	104	108	114	119	124	130	135	140
7	92	97	102	107	112	117	122	128	133	138	143
eight	95	100	105	110	114	120	125	131	136	141	146
9	98	102	107	113	117	123	128	133	138	144	149
10	100	105	110	115	119	125	130	135	140	146	151
11	102	107	112	117	122	128	133	138	143	148	153
12	104	109	114	119	124	130	135	140	145	150	155
thirteen	106	111	116	121	126	131	137	142	147	152	157
14	108	113	118	123	127	133	138	143	148	154	159
15	109	114	119	124	129	135	140	145	149	155	160
16	110	116	121	126	130	136	141	146	151	156	161
17	112	117	122	127	131	137	142	147	152	157	162
18	113	118	123	128	132	138	143	148	153	158	163
nineteen	114	119	124	129	133	139	144	149	154	160	165
20	115	120	125	130	134	140	145	150	155	160	165
21	116	121	126	131	135	140	146	151	156	161	166
Mature bulls
24	118	123	128	133	137	142	147	152	157	163	168
30	120	125	130	135	139	145	150	155	160	165	170
36	122	127	132	137	141	146	151	156	161	166	171
48	123	128	133	137	142	147	152	157	162	167	172

Table iv. Female frame scores based on height measurement at the hip (cm)

Age (months)	Females—hip height (cm)
	Frame score
	1	2	three	4	five	6	7	8	9	10	11
5	84	89	94	99	105	110	115	120	126	131	136
6	87	92	97	102	107	113	118	123	128	134	139
7	89	94	100	105	110	115	121	126	131	136	141
viii	92	97	102	107	112	117	122	128	133	138	144
9	94	99	104	109	114	119	124	130	135	140	145
10	96	101	106	111	116	121	126	131	136	141	147
11	98	103	108	113	118	123	128	133	138	144	149
12	99	104	109	114	119	124	130	135	140	145	150
13	101	105	110	116	121	126	131	136	141	146	151
fourteen	102	107	112	117	122	127	132	137	142	147	152
fifteen	103	108	113	118	123	128	133	138	143	148	153
sixteen	104	109	114	119	124	129	134	139	144	149	154
17	105	110	115	120	125	130	135	140	145	149	154
eighteen	106	110	116	121	126	131	135	140	145	150	155
19	107	111	116	121	126	131	136	141	146	151	156
twenty	107	112	117	122	127	132	137	141	146	151	156
21	108	113	118	123	128	132	137	142	147	152	157
Mature cows
24	109	114	119	124	129	133	138	143	148	153	157
30	111	116	121	125	130	135	140	145	150	154	159
36	112	117	122	126	132	136	141	145	150	155	160
48	113	118	122	127	132	137	142	146	151	155	160

Summary

Frame score has been abused in its use to indicate superiority of one animal over another because of its summit. Quite often people have relied on frame score to indicate weight when it would exist far more sensible just to weigh the fauna. With breeding cattle, weights can be used to produce EBVs—a much better predictor of weight.

Every bit we have discussed, frame score can be a useful tool to betoken maturity of an creature. Nonetheless, it should not be used in preference to other easily measured traits which give a better indication of marketplace suitability or fettle for purpose.

In convenance cattle specially, balanced selection for a number of productive traits which include fertility, growth and carcase quantity and quality should be practised.

Reference

McKiernan West. A., Hoffman W., Barwick Southward. A. and Johnston D. J. 1998, 'Feeder Steer Assessments that are Guides to Feedlot and Carcass Functioning', Proceedings of the Beef Products Briefing, NSW Agriculture, Armidale.

Acknowledgments

The original NSW Agriculture Agfact on frame scoring was written by Bob Freer, then of NSW Agronomics. This new edition of the Agfact has been based on that first edition, on information provided past Sandy Yeates, then of NSW Agronomics, and on fact sheets produced by Kansas Country University.

ruarkoulds1955.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/animals-and-livestock/beef-cattle/appraisal/publications/frame-scoring

Share this post