The objective of this study was to determine the impact of beef production systems utilizing additive combinations of growth promotant technologies on animal and carcass performance and environmental outcomes. Crossbred steer calves (n =120) were stratified by birth date, birth weight, and dam age and assigned randomly to one of four treatments: 1) no technology (NT; control), 2) antibiotic treated (ANT; NT plus therapeutic antibiotics and monensin and tylosin), 3) implant treated (IMP; ANT plus a series of 3 implants, and 4) beta-agonist treated (BA; IMP plus ractopamine-HCl for the last 30 d prior to harvest). Weaned steers were fed in confinement (dry lot) and finished in an individual feeding system to collect performance data. At harvest, standard carcass measures were collected and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Yield Grade and Quality Grade were determined. Information from the cow-calf, growing, and finishing phases were used to simulate production systems using the USDA Integrated Farm System Model, which included a partial life cycle assessment of cattle production for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, fossil energy use, water use, and reactive N loss. Body weight in suckling, growing, and finishing phases as well as hot carcass weight was greater (P < 0.05) for steers that received implants (IMP and BA) than non-implanted steers (NT and ANT). The average daily gain was greater (P < 0.05) for steers that received implants (IMP and BA) than non-implanted steers during the suckling and finishing phases, but no difference (P = 0.232) was detected during the growing phase. Dry matter intake and gain:feed were greater (P < 0.05) for steers that received implants than non-implanted steers during the finishing phase. Steers that received implants responded (P < 0.05) with a larger loin muscle area, less kidney pelvic and heart fat, advanced carcass maturity, reduced marbling scores, and a greater percentage of carcasses in the lower third of the USDA Choice grade. This was offset by a lower percentage of USDA Prime grading carcasses compared with steers receiving no implants. Treatments did not influence (P > 0.05) USDA Yield grade. The life cycle assessment revealed that IMP and BA treatments reduced GHG emissions, energy use, water use, and reactive nitrogen loss compared to NT and ANT. These data indicate that growth promoting technologies increase carcass yield while concomitantly reducing carcass quality and environmental impacts.
Keywords: beef; beta agonist; carcass; growth promotant technology; implant; life cycle assessment.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.