Wulfhorst J D, Ahola J K, Kane S L, Keenan L D, Hill R A
Social Science Research Unit, University of Idaho, Moscow, 83844, USA.
J Anim Sci. 2010 Nov;88(11):3749-58. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-2907. Epub 2010 Jul 9.
To establish the basis for implementation of a producer education program, a social assessment of the willingness and barriers to adoption of a measure of feed efficiency in beef cattle [residual feed intake (RFI)] was conducted. A 35-question mailed survey was sent to 1,888 producers acquired from the stratified random sample of the Idaho Cattle Association member list (n = 488), Red Angus Association of America member list (n = 2,208), and Red Angus Association of America bull buyer list (n = 5,325). The adjusted response rate for the survey was 49.9%. Of the survey respondents, 58.7% were commercial cow/calf producers and 41.3% were seedstock producers or operated a combination seedstock/commercial operation. Commercial operations had an average of 223 ± 17 cows and 13 ± 3 bulls, whereas seedstock herds (including combination herds) had slightly fewer cows (206 ± 24) and more bulls (23 ± 6). Both commercial and seedstock operators indicated that calving ease/birth weight was the most important trait used to evaluate genetic merit of breeding bulls. Only 3.8 and 4.8% of commercial and seedstock producers indicated that feed efficiency was the most important characteristic used for bull selection. Binary logistic regression models were used to predict willingness of seedstock producers to begin collecting data for the calculation of RFI on their bulls, or to predict willingness of commercial producers to begin selecting bulls based on RFI data. In response, 49.1% of commercial producers and 43.6% of seedstock producers indicated they were willing to adopt RFI as a measure of feed efficiency. These data indicate that feed efficiency was one of the traits that producers consider important; those who perceive feed efficiency as important tended to be actively involved in data collection on their herds, underpinning the notion that objective assessment was valued and used by some. Additional data collection in a future social assessment will continue to elaborate the proportion of producers who perceive feed efficiency as an increasingly important decision and management tool for beef production.
为了建立实施生产者教育计划的基础，我们对肉牛采用饲料效率指标（剩余饲料摄入量，RFI）的意愿和障碍进行了社会评估。我们向从爱达荷州养牛协会成员名单（n = 488）、美国红安格斯协会成员名单（n = 2,208）和美国红安格斯协会公牛购买者名单（n = 5,325）的分层随机样本中获取的1,888名生产者发送了一份包含35个问题的邮寄调查问卷。该调查的调整后回复率为49.9%。在调查受访者中，58.7%是商业母牛/犊牛生产者，41.3%是种畜生产者或经营种畜/商业联合业务。商业养殖场平均有223 ± 17头母牛和13 ± 3头公牛，而种畜群（包括联合畜群）的母牛数量略少（206 ± 24头），公牛数量更多（23 ± 6头）。商业和种畜经营者均表示，产犊难易度/出生体重是用于评估种公牛遗传价值的最重要性状。只有3.8%的商业生产者和4.8%的种畜生产者表示饲料效率是用于选择公牛的最重要特征。二元逻辑回归模型用于预测种畜生产者开始收集其公牛的RFI计算数据的意愿，或预测商业生产者基于RFI数据开始选择公牛的意愿。结果显示，49.1%的商业生产者和43.6%的种畜生产者表示他们愿意采用RFI作为饲料效率的指标。这些数据表明饲料效率是生产者认为重要的性状之一；那些认为饲料效率重要的人往往积极参与其畜群的数据收集，这支持了一些人重视并使用客观评估的观点。未来社会评估中的进一步数据收集将继续详细说明将饲料效率视为肉牛生产中日益重要的决策和管理工具的生产者比例。
