85. Interaction Between Breed and Optaflexx Supplementation and Implant Strategy on Intake and Carcass.

Clicks: 15
ID: 330537
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #496 of 847 articles by views in italian journal of animal science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 847 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Beef cattle breeds differ by fat deposition, muscle accretion, growth rate, and nutrient partitioning, and therefore may respond differently to growth-promoting technologies. The objective was to determine whether breed-type influenced response to Optaflexx supplementation and implant strategy. Treatments were randomly applied (stratified by breed of sire) for 1,390 steers from the Germplasm Evaluation (GPE) herd at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (Clay Center, NE). The GPE herd is comprised of 18 breeds highly utilized in U.S. beef production. Steer breed composition was partitioned and classified by biological-type, including British, Continental, and Brahman. All steers received an initial Revalor-IS implant (80 mg trenbolone acetate and 16 mg estradiol) and were assigned to a moderate implant strategy using Revalor-S (120 mg trenbolone acetate and 24 mg estradiol) or an aggressive strategy using Revalor-200 (200 mg trenbolone acetate and 20 mg estradiol). Within the moderate strategy, a subset received Optaflexx (Elanco Animal Health, Indianapolis, IN, n = 361) during the last 28-34 days of finishing, whereas the remainder did not (n = 341). Similarly, within the aggressive strategy, a subset received Optaflexx (n = 330), and the remainder was unsupplemented (n = 358). Models included fixed effects of feed additive, implant strategy, growing season, expected heterosis, age at slaughter, and breed-type. Three-way interactions among breed-type, Optaflexx supplementation, and implant strategy, as well as two-way interactions among breed-type x Optaflexx and breed-type x implant strategy were evaluated using linear regression models in R. Carcass characteristics and average dry matter intake (DMI) during the Optaflexx supplementation period were evaluated. British-influenced steers fed Optaflexx had a lower USDA yield grade (-0.19; P < 0.01), reduced 12th-rib fat thickness (-0.10 cm; P = 0.01), and greater slice shear force (+0.03 kg; P = 0.01) compared to unsupplemented steers. Ribeye area and dressing percentage tended to be greater (+1.50 cm2 and +0.30 percentage units; P = 0.09 and P = 0.06, respectively) in British-influenced steers fed Optaflexx than those unsupplemented. Brahman-influenced steers fed Optaflexx had greater fat deposition than steers not fed Optaflexx (+0.44 cm; P = 0.01). Continental-influenced steers supplemented with Optaflexx had dressing percentage 0.50 percentage units less than unsupplemented steers (P = 0.03). No breed type x supplementation interactions were observed for DMI during the Optaflexx period (P ≥ 0.29). Breed-type did not interact with implant strategy (P ≥ 0.12) for carcass characteristics or DMI during the Optaflexx period. Overall, although some carcass traits exhibited breed-specific responses to Optaflexx supplementation, most traits were unaffected, suggesting similar management strategies may be appropriate across breed types.
Reference Key
openalex_W7214770081 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Emalee J Friend, L. A. Kuehn, Steven D. Shackelford, Kristin E. Hales, Tommy L. Wheeler, Andy Andy King, S. A. Gunter, Bailey N. Engle
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal italian journal of animal science
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jas/skag272.229
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skag272.229
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.