Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-5jtmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-21T09:22:34.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some observations on reproduction, weight change under lactation stress and the mothering ability of British and crossbred-Zebu cattle in the tropics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

G. H. Lampkin  and
J. F. Kennedy
G. H. Lampkin
Affiliation:
East African Veterinary Research Organization, Muguga, P.O. Box 32, Kikuyu, Kenya
J. F. Kennedy
Affiliation:
National Cattle Breeding Station, G.S.I.R.O., Belmont, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Data on the performance of British, Africander cross British and Brahman cross British females were examined. Of the animals mated only 56-0% of the homebred British cows produced live calves compared with 77-3 and 73-8% from Africander and Brahman cross cows respectively. Evidence was found that the low calving percentage for the.British females was connected with breeding stress, the British females being frequently unable to maintain weight if pregnancies occurred in two successive years. Under similar stress conditions crossbred-Zebu cows could thrive and breed and crossbred Brahmans in particular would normally maintain their weight.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 64 , Issue 3 , June 1965 , pp. 407 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Ashton, G. C. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 58, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bligh, J. & Lampkin, G. H. (1965). J. Agric. Sci. 64, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, J. F. (1961). Communications to Section L of 25th Congress of A.N.Z.A.A.S., Brisbane.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. F. & Turner, H. G. (1959). C.S.I.B.O. Division Report, No. 8 (Series S.W. 3).Google Scholar
Kincaid, C. M. (1961). Bull. Tex. Agric. Exp. Sta. Southern Co-ooperative Series S-10.Google Scholar
Lampkin, G. H., Howard, D. A. & Burdin, M. L. (1961). J. Agric. Sci. 57, 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lampkin, G. H. & Lampkin, K. (1963). Unpublished Data.Google Scholar
Lampkin, G. H., Quarterman, J. & Kidner, M. (1958). J. Agric. Sci. 50, 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, G. D. (1961). Res. Vet. Sci. 2, 202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. (1956). Statistical Methods, 5th ed., p. 382.Google Scholar
Turner, H. G. & Schleger, A. V. (1958). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 2, 112.Google Scholar
Turner, H. G. (1962). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 13, 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, E. J. (1958). J. Anim. Sci. 17, 922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar