1 / 19

An example of cooperation within the R&D community

An example of cooperation within the R&D community. International Beef Cattle Workers Group October 30 th 2013. Emma Sanne ( emma.sanne@idele.fr ) Bernard Sepchat ( bernard.sepchat@clermont.inra.fr ) Pascal D’Hour ( pascal.dhour@clermont.inra.fr ).

wilona
Download Presentation

An example of cooperation within the R&D community

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An example of cooperation within the R&D community International Beef Cattle Workers Group October 30th 2013 Emma Sanne (emma.sanne@idele.fr) Bernard Sepchat (bernard.sepchat@clermont.inra.fr) Pascal D’Hour (pascal.dhour@clermont.inra.fr)

  2. Part 1The two players and their research topics International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  3. Beef researches in Inra Clermont-Ferrand • Mains objectives : • Adaptative capacities of beef cows • Optimisation of beef production efficiency and meat quality • Technical and economic performances of commercial beef farms in grassland areas • Facilities : • 200 suckler cows (Charolaise, Salers) • 120 fattening young cattle (bull, steer, females) • Slaughter house International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  4. The French Livestock Institute A specialised R&D organization Knowledge for competitiveness in herbivorous livestock farming and value chains • Control of production costs • Self-sufficiency in feed • Low cost production techniques • Feed efficiency • Animal productivity • Systems reassurance • Tools for farms to adapt to unforeseen events • Compromise production / environment GENETICS HUSBANDRY & ENVIRONMENT FARM & PRODUCT QUALITY ECONOMICS FARMERS & SOCIETY LIVESTOCK INFORMATION SYSTEMS • Examples of projects: • -Feed self-sufficiency in cattle in France • CAP’ECO: tool to compute life weight production and feed and breeding costs • -BEEFALIM: feed efficiency in cattle • REPROSCOPE: benchmarking of breeding performances according to the system • -BEEF BOX: young bulls growth simulator • -Inter-annual variations in forages production • SALENPRO: trade-off production/environment, multi-criteria analysis • … FARMING SYSTEMS & NETWORKS International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  5. Part 2The Joint Technological Unit (JTU)« SAFE » International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  6. The JTU « SAFE »suckling systems, forages and environment • To strengthen partnership and collaborations in between the 2 institutes • Hub of skills and knowledge on beef, sheep and horses productions Purposes • To secure suckling systems in response to: • Volatility in inputs costs • Increase in unforeseen events • Social demand Topic International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  7. Projects The JTU « SAFE »Research topics International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  8. The JTU « SAFE » Means • Combined means : • ~14.5 FTE / 27 scientists • Databases and models • Commercial farms networks • Experimental facilities networks • 5 beef experimental farms • 3 in sheep • 1 in horses International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  9. The beef experimental facilities networkPurposesto develop a shared expertise to help in devising and handling applied research in beef International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  10. The beef experimental facilities networkFarms location and characteristics « Mauron » Bretagne 62 ha- 250 places in finishing Breeds: meat and dairy System: finisher « Thorigné d’Anjou » Maine et Loire 125ha - 68 cows- 50 LU fattening Breed: Limousine System: CCBF, organic « Jalogny » Saône et Loire 215ha -140 cows - 50 YB Breed: Charolaise System: CCBF « Etablières » Vendée 140ha- 120 cows- 200 YB Breed: Charolaise System: CCBF Inra Laqueuille Puy de Dôme 200 cows 450 ha (1000-1500 m a.s.l.) Breeds : Charolaise, Salers System : CC+ 120 BF with Inra-Theix CCBF: cow-calf and beef finishing YB: Young bulls International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  11. Example NEOBIF: innovative finishing schemes in young bullsfrom the suckling herd 2012 2014 + diffusion of results International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  12. Our perspectives, to enhance exchanges and discussions at an European scale Thankyou for your attention International Beef Cattle Workers Group

  13. Milk and concentrate intakes in Salers calves modify body composition at weaning and next feeding efficiency during finishing Sepchat, B., Garcia-Launay, F., Cirié, C., Egal, D. and Agabriel, J. INRA, UMR1213 Herbivores, Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France INRA, UE1296 Monts d’Auvergne, F-15190 Marcenat, France INRA, UE1296 Monts d’Auvergne, F-63820 Laqueuille, France A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E E N V I R O N M E N T

  14. +40% of concentrate (kg/year) on Charolais farms since 1990 Concentrate supply on suckling Salers farms Salers cow / Milk production 3000kg/lactation Veysset, Lherm et al. 2005 and pers. com. 1. How ratios milk/forage/concentrate beforeweaning modify: growth body and carcass composition feeding efficiency 2. and what are the residual impacts during fattening?

  15. Experimental design : 2 series, n1=18, n2=30 Age3 Months Control Concentrate Milk Growth under mother n=16 N=16 n=16 2 sucklings under mother / day + Hay ad libitum 1 suckling / day (more) under a dairy cow 0.5 to 5 kg/d of concentrate 9 months weaning Fattening n=9 n=9 n=9 4.5 to 6.5 kg Concentrate/animal/d Hay of permanent grassland ad libitum 16-17 months

  16. Age Milk intake (milk = +900kg) Milk Milk : 1893±125.1 a Control : 996 ±125.1 b Concentrate : 1013±125.1 b • additional suckling /dairy cow = 900 kg more milk drunk at weaning • Calves can drink more milk, only dams milk production is limiting

  17. The feeding treatments resulted in different growth trajectories Live weight (kg) Age at slaughter (months) Before weaning 1.48 kg/d a 1.45 kg/d a 1.18 kg/d c Fattening 1.38 kg/d ab 1.26 kg/d bc 1.30 kg/d b Milk: Concentrate: Control: 16.0 b 16.4 b 17.3a Different evolutions of average daily gains between weaning and fattening for the three groups

  18. Body composition Different profile in AA between milk and concentrate (Labussière et al. 2009) Viscera development / maintenance requirements

  19. Conclusions • With 2000 kg of milk ingested, calves had an ADG of 1500 g/d before weaning without concentrate supplementation. • A diet before weaning favoring milk and forage compared with concentrate provided comparable carcasses. • Higher feeding efficiency in the milk group with a residual effect during early fattening. • Animals supplemented with milk deposited more protein than animals supplemented with concentrate. • Gross margin per animal of Concentrate group was lower than Milk (-100 €) and Control (-85 €) groups. A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E E N V I R O N M E N T Garcia-Launay F., Sepchat B., Cirie C., Egal D. & Agabriel J., 2011.. 62th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production (EAAP). Stavanger, 17. p.220.

More Related