NFE Trial Results. NFE Trial Results at Wold Farm. First 15 Trials 22/3/ /10/2016. First Trial

Similar documents
Description of Events for Multi-Sport and Cross-fit tournaments sanctioned by the World Jump Rope Federation

EBVS are LESSONS FROM THE ASBP / 2. EBVs of Bulls Entered in the ASBP have provided a reliable Prediction of the Performance of their Progeny

Analysis of Estimated Breeding Values for Marble Score, Carcase Weight and the Terminal Carcase Index

Dr. David Lalman, Professor and Extension Beef Cattle Specialist Oklahoma State University

11 Keeping. 4-H Records

ALL THE NUMBERS FROM NUMBERS. kenneth goldsmith

M. G. Keane, Teagasc, Grange Beef Research Centre, Dunsany, Co. Meath, Ireland.

138 Trop Anim Prod :2

J. K. Swann, R. H. Pritchard and M. A. Robbins Department of Animal and Range Sciences

The role genetics plays in achieving the perfect MSA Index. Tim Emery - Technical Officer (TBTS)

EVALUATION OF THE PROGENY OF BEEF SIRES DIFFERING IN GENETIC MERIT

The Economics of Finishing Bison

Stabiliser Cattle Company

The Science of Maryland Agriculture

Feeding the Broodmare

H FEEDER CALF PROJECT GUIDELINE

Calving Season & Cow Efficiency

CHARACTERIZATION OF DIFFERENT BIOLOGICAL TYPES OF STEERS (CYCLE IV): RETAIL PRODUCT YIELDS 1. T. L. Wheeler, M. E. Dikeman, L. V.

The area of San Diego is eight hundred and forty two thousand, two hundred and thirty three square kilometers. Cardinal Numbers. 51 One.

Traits of the breed Double muscle factor

Aim of breeding work

Improving carcase and beef quality in Bos indicus through crossbreeding

C5007 Another dark red son of our Black Advance bull, he is dilution free and heterozygous polled. He will sire great performance with style.

Comparison of Feedlot Performance and Carcass Traits of Charolais and Brahman Sired Three-Breed Cross Calves

R.B. THIESSEH and ST. C.S. TAYLOR, U.K.

WORLD CHAMPIONS WHO AM I?

CSA Genetic Evaluation

Bull Buyer s Guide. $3000 Purchase Price of New Bull Salvage Value of Old Bull (1900 lbs. X 1.10/lb.) $ 910 Net Cost of New Bull

Planned. Hybrid. Vigour. mated.

Welcome! Tonya Amen, Ph.D Cattle Genetics Specialist Pfizer Animal Genetics

Unit A: Introduction to Cattle Management. Lesson 2: Exploring the Dairy Industry

Writing Number Names Using Root Number Words. Write the number names. Highlight or underline any letters that recur.

CSA Genetic Evaluation

E U R O P E A N D E A F S P O R T O R G A N I Z A T I O N

AT ONE TIME, cattle were hunted for food. Then, during the Stone Age in Europe and

Project Summary. Effect of Ammonium Hydroxide and Carbon Monoxide on Palatability and Color of Beef Chuck and Round Muscles

CARCASS MERIT NON-CONFORMANCE IN THE OK STEER FEEDOUT PROGRAM. S.L. Northcuttl, H.G. Dolezal2, G.A. Highfill3, F.K. Ray4and C.W. Shearharts.

COURSE SYLLABUS AND INSTRUCTOR PLAN RACQUETBALL PHED 1108 JAMES BURROUGHS SPRING 2014 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY INSTITUTION

2018 Calf Challenge Record Book

In the past cattle were bred for three main reasons:

Kilburnie Angus. High Indexing Catalogue. A catalogue should provide you with useful information to help you make a rational decision

Technical Regulations Table Tennis (Youth)

Mix and match beef to meet market demand

CHAMPION TOC INDEX. Feeding Young Bulls for Beef Production. Mick Price. Take Home Message

Red Dairy Breeds BYELORUSSIAN RED (Krasnyi belorusskii skot)

COURSE SYLLABUS AND INSTRUCTOR PLAN

Characterization of Boxed Beef Value in Angus Sires

7 COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT WHEY PROTEIN

Pangasius Catfish Production in LVHD Cages with a Soy-Based Feed

Terms to Know.

WIAA FALL ACCLIMATIZATION

Evaluation of sire lines: G Performer and Shade Oak Duroc and dam lines: F1 SEPQ and Fertilis th and 26 th station trials

Lesson 2: Exploring the Dairy Industry

Introduction. Content:

Research Report 2007 BEEF SYSTEMS: PRODUCTION AND GENETICS

BEEFMASTER BREEDERS UNITED SPRING SIRE SUMMARY

Shaolin Chuan Fa Requirements for Yellow Belt

Simmental the most improved breed over the last 25 years!

BEEF & DAIRY BEEFCircle one or both

BEEFMASTER BREEDERS UNITED SPRING SIRE SUMMARY

BAYFIELD COUNTY 4-H MARKET ANIMAL SALE RULES (Disqualification from sale can be the penalty for rule violation) Approved Janary 28, 2018

Danish Yorkshire (Large White)

Largemouth Bass Production with a 30% Soybean Meal Inclusion Feed

Performance Data Reporting and Contemporary Grouping For Beef Cattle Genetic Evaluation

Effects of Creep Feeding on Preweaning and Postweaning Performance Of Angus x Hereford Calves

Manitoba Markets Livestock Prices

The Bonsmara. The System Behind A Superior Breed. TEL (+27) FAX (+27)

Animal Science Info Series: AS-B-226 The University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service

BELGIAN BLUE, THE CROSSBREEDING SPECIALIST BREED

CATTLE ADDITION MENU NE XT

Fiche outil anglais What s your name?

80:20 Pond Growth Performance of Hybrid Tilapia on Soybean Meal-Based Diets

Selecting Beef Bulls

Mirror Carp Fingerling to Market Production in Ponds in Harbin with Soy-Based Feeds

Value of Black Hereford Registration

Manitoba Markets Livestock Prices

Performance and carcass traits of progeny of Limousin sires differing in genetic merit

Value of Black Hereford Registration

Production of Red Sea Bream in 6.4-m 3 Cages In Coastal Waters in Quanzhou, China

Contemporary Grouping for Beef Cattle Genetic Evaluation

RULES & REGULATIONS SECTION 1: THE RINK

BEEFMASTER BREEDERS UNITED WINTER SIRE SUMMARY

BREEDS OF BEEF CATTLE

DEPARTMENT 33 4-H AND FFA BEEF SUPERINTENDENT: KODYDEE EASTERDAY CONTACT: (509)

An Analysis of Beef Cattle Conformation

First Circuit Calhoun, Dorchester, and Orangeburg Counties Website:

The term event is also often used in conjunction with sports. For example, the gymnastics event will be held at the Worthington Arena.

BC-11 (2016)Tan JONES COUNTY BUCKET/BOTTLE CALF PROJECT

Illinois 4-H Livestock (Beef, Sheep & Swine) Judging Contest

DELTA DASH. $20,000 Guaranteed * (Includes $20,000 from Slots) * (Plus $10,000 From ALBSS) PHONE (888) FAX (337)

CASS COUNTY BEEF MINI 4-H

IOWA 4-H LIVESTOCK JUDGING CONTEST

Cattle Breeds. Crystal Fincher Putnam County 4-H Agent

Value of Classification

A Subsidiary of Cooperative Resources International. Understanding the HERD REPORT CARD

ATC Agribusiness Roundtable

Effect of Postweaning Health on Feedlot Performance and Quality Grade

SA Stud Book Annual Report 2015

data, or a beneficial tool to prepare a livestock judging team for performance classes. The presentation includes over 300 slides.

Judging Cattle. 2 Different types of cattle

Transcription:

NFE Trial Results NFE Trial Results at Wold Farm First 15 Trials 22/3/2012 06/10/2016 First Trial The first batch of 82 young Stabiliser bulls finished test on 22nd March 2012. On an individual animal basis there was a difference of 25% in feed intake between the most efficient bull and the least efficient. This is equivalent to 96 difference in feed cost for the same gain over a 200 day finishing period. There was a difference of 13% between the top 1/3 most efficient bulls and the bottom 1/3 least efficient bulls. This is equivalent to 48 difference in feed costs for the same gain in favour of the top 1/3 over a 210 day finishing period. Table 1. Summary NFE and performance data:- DMI (kg/d) 12.03 12.87 13.83 DLWG (kg/d) 1.89 1.87 1.94 Mean LW (kg) 567 574 582 Fat depth (mm) 6.0 6.4 6.2 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.49 7.10 7.45 NFE (kg/d) -0.75 0.00 +0.76 from average - 11 0 + 12 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure1. NFE graph for Batch 1 bulls from Wold Farm test centre

Second Trial The second batch of 38 Stabiliser and 5 Beef Shorthorn young breeding bulls and 39 steers finished test on 28th June 2012. Bulls The trial animals ate on average 12.8 kg of dry matter per day (20 kg of mix) costing 1.98 per animal per day and grew on average at 1.84 kg per day. There was a difference of 24% in feed intake between the most efficient bull and the least efficient. This is equivalent to 72 difference in feed cost for the same gain over a 210 day finishing period. There was a difference of 12% between the top 1/3 most efficient bulls and the bottom 1/3 least efficient bulls. This is equivalent to 36 difference in feed costs for the same gain in favour of the top 1/3 over a 200 day finishing period. Table 1. Summary NFE and performance data for bulls (including 5 Beef Shorthorn bulls) DMI (kg/d) 12.10 12.80 13.45 DLWG (kg/d) 1.81 1.84 1.81 Mean LW (kg) 589 591 587 Fat depth (mm) 5.5 5.2 5.2 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.80 7.09 7.62 NFE (kg/d) -0.70 0.00 +0.70 from average - 9 0 + 9 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure1. NFE graph for Batch 2 bulls Steers There was a difference of 8% between the top 1/3 most efficient steers and the bottom 1/3 least efficient steers. This is equivalent to 28 difference in feed costs for the same gain in favour of the top 1/3 over a 210 day finishing period.

The second trial results show that the steers had a 40% greater fat depth compared with the bulls and the bulls were 20% more efficient at converting feed to gain for the same slaughter weight as the steers. Table 2. Summary NFE and performance data for Stabiliser steers DMI (kg/d) 12.40 12.81 13.46 DLWG (kg/d) 1.48 1.47 1.48 Mean LW (kg) 590 578 578 Fat depth (mm) 7.3 7.4 7.5 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 8.49 8.80 9.20 NFE (kg/d) -0.59 0.00 +0.63 from average - 5 0 + 9 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure 2. NFE graph for Batch 2 steers This comparison between bulls and steers also demonstrated that the difference in feed costs for bulls v steers over the last 200kg of gain was as follows:- Feed cost for steers: 270 Feed cost for bulls: 216 Difference: 54 per bull

Third Trial The third batch of 79 steers finished test on 29 November 2012 On average the low 1/3 NFE steers consumed 13% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 25 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high 1/3 NFE steers. Table 1. Summary NFE and performance data:- DMI (kg/d) 12.21 13.09 14.06 DLWG (kg/d) 1.42 1.46 1.47 Mean LW (kg) 611 616 620 Fat depth (mm) 7.5 7.3 7.4 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 9.18 9.34 9.88 CCW (kg) 340 348 352 KO (g/kg) 525 530 529 NFE (kg/d) -0.84-0.01 +0.86 from average - 12 0 + 13 @ feed cost of 165/t DM Figure 1. NFE graph for Batch 3 steers Meat Sampling Meat samples from 33 steers were obtained at slaughter and were tested for cooking loss and mechanical measures of tenderness by JSR Genetics using the TenderScot machine. Regression analysis relating these eating quality values to NFE values are presented below. In general, only relatively weak relationships between eating quality measures and NFE were found suggesting that selection for animals with Low NFE should have no adverse effects on eating quality parameters.

Figure 2. Relationship between cooking loss (%) and NFE values in beef from 32 Stabiliser steers Figure 3. Relationship between MIRINZ Bite Force (N) and NFE values in beef from 33 Stabiliser steers Figure 4. Relationship between Slice Shear Force (N) and NFE values in beef from 33 Stabiliser steers

Fourth Trial The fourth trial of 80 Stabiliser bulls finished test on 28th February 2013. On average the low 1/3 NFE bulls consumed 15% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 24 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high 1/3 NFE bulls. Table 1. Summary NFE and performance data:- DMI (kg/d) 9.85 10.74 11.63 DLWG (kg/d) 1.68 1.70 1.73 Mean LW (kg) 483 499 512 Fat depth (mm) 4.3 4.3 4.3 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 5.9 6.4 6.8 NFE (kg/d) -0.67 0.00 +0.69 from average - 12 0 + 12 @ feed cost of 165/t DM Figure 1 NFE graph for Batch 4 Stabiliser bulls Fifth Trial The fifth batch of 41 Stabiliser bulls and 34 Shorthorn bulls finished test on 13th June 2013 On average the low 1/3 NFE bulls consumed 13% less feed/day, were approximately 14% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 23 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high 1/3 NFE bulls.

Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the fifth batch DMI (kg/d) 11.10 11.98 12.79 DLWG (kg/d) 1.93 1.90 1.91 Mean LW (kg) 532 530 519 Fat depth (mm) 3.7 3.7 3.5 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 5.9 6.4 6.8 NFE (kg/d) -0.94 0.01 +0.98 from average - 12 0 + 11 @ feed cost of 165/t DM Figure 1 NFE graph for Batch 5 Stabiliser & Beef Shorthorn bulls

Sixth Trial NFE and production results from the sixth batch of steers are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE steers consumed 12% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 22 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE steers. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 6th batch of 80 Stabiliser steers DMI (kg/d) 12.10 13.17 13.69 DLWG (kg/d) 1.82 1.87 1.80 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 119 120 119 Fat depth (mm) 6.8 7.2 6.8 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.73 7.12 7.68 NFE (kg/d) -0.79-0.04 +0.83 Sale LW (kg) 642 650 639 CCW (kg) 341.8 344.8 341.8 KO (g/kg) 533 531 535 Fat score (1-15) 8.58 8.97 8.39 Conf score (1-15) 8.00 7.77 7.89 from average - 15 0 + 7 @ feed cost of 165/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 6 Stabiliser steers

Seventh Trial NFE results from the seventh batch of 78 bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 17% less feed, had 13% better FCR and cost 24 less to feed over the twelve week period they were in the NFE unit. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 7th batch of 78 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 9.4 10.1 11.1 DLWG (kg/d) 1.54 1.64 1.63 Mean LW0.75 (kg) 103 102 106 Fat depth (mm) 5.0 4.6 5.0 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.2 6.3 7.0 NFE (kg/d) -0.68 0.02 +0.66 from average - 10 0 + 14 @ feed cost of 165/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for 78 Stabiliser bulls from batch 7

Eighth Trial NFE results from the eighth batch of 78 bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 16% less feed, had 13% better FCR and cost 24 less to feed over the twelve week period they were in the NFE unit compared with the high NFE bulls. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 8th batch of 78 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 10.5 11.4 12.3 DLWG (kg/d) 1.69 1.68 1.73 Mean LW0.75 (kg) 113 106 113 Fat depth (mm) 5.2 5.7 5.3 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.4 7.0 7.3 NFE (kg/d) -0.77-0.10 +0.86 from average - 12 0 + 12 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for 78 Stabiliser bulls from batch 8

Ninth Trial NFE and production results from the ninth batch of steers are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE steers consumed 15% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 24 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE steers. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 9th batch of 79 Stabiliser steers DMI (kg/d) 11.13 11.87 12.97 DLWG (kg/d) 1.30 1.27 1.35 Mean LW0.75 (kg) 119 118 119 Fat depth (mm) 6.1 7.0 6.2 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 8.85 9.81 10.09 NFE (kg/d) -0.82-0.06 +0.89 Sale LW (kg) 615 607 622 CCW (kg) 326.1 327.8 326.9 KO (g/kg) 531 541 526 Fat score (1-15) 8.02 8.36 8.42 Conf score (1-15) 7.65 7.67 7.54 from average - 10 0 + 14 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 9 Stabiliser steers

Tenth Trial The tenth batch of 79 Stabiliser bulls grew at 1.55 kg per day and the trial finished on the 12th February 2015. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 13% less feed/day, were approximately 15% more efficient at converting feed into LWG and cost 18 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE bulls. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 10th batch of 79 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 9.44 9.99 10.86 DLWG (kg/d) 1.55 1.52 1.55 Mean LW0.75 (kg) 106 105 106 Fat depth (mm) 4.9 4.8 4.9 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.17 6.65 7.15 NFE (kg/d) -0.67-0.06 +0.74 from average - 7 0 + 11 @ feed cost of 155/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 10 Stabiliser bulls

Eleventh Trial NFE and production results from the eleventh batch of 74 Stabiliser bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 14% less feed/day, were approximately 16% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 22 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE bulls. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 11th batch of 74 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 10.77 11.20 12.38 DLWG (kg/d) 1.76 1.66 1.73 Mean LW0.75 (kg) 120 117 118 Fat depth (mm) 5.4 4.9 5.4 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.16 6.86 7.24 NFE (kg/d) -0.89 0.01 +0.92 from average - 6 0 + 16 @ feed cost of 160/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 11 Stabiliser bulls

Twelfth Trial NFE and production results from the twelfth batch of steers are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE steers consumed 16% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 20 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE steers. This is slightly lower than with previous groups as the prevailing feed prices have dropped recently such that the overall complete diet cost now sits at approximately 135/t DM compared to approximately 155/t DM with previous batches. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 12th batch of 80 Stabiliser steers DMI (kg/d) 10.18 11.23 11.98 DLWG (kg/d) 1.23 1.30 1.28 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 118 118 118 Fat depth (mm) 7.2 7.7 7.2 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 8.45 8.87 9.60 NFE (kg/d) -0.87 0.03 +0.83 Sale LW (kg) 617 620 620 CCW (kg) 328.8 328.5 333.7 KO (g/kg) 533 530 539 Fat score (1-15) 8.39 8.51 8.33 Conf score (1-15) 7.89 7.77 7.89 from average - 12 0 + 8 @ feed cost of 135/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for Batch 12 - Stabiliser steers

Thirteenth Trial 81 Stabiliser bull calves for the thirteenth trial started their NFE measurement phase on 17 th December and finished on 18 th February, 7 days later than planned due to an equipment malfunction. They were scanned for eye muscle depth, area and back fat on 11 th February. Due to a faulty tag during the trial, one bull s data had to be removed from the analysis meaning that 80 Stabiliser bulls have been evaluated to completion in batch 13 with this batch if bulls being on the unit for a total of 13 weeks rather than the usual 12. NFE and production results from the thirteenth batch of 80 Stabiliser bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 18% less feed/day, were approximately 13% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 25 less to feed over the 13 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE bulls. Growth rate from these bulls has averaged 1.61 kg/d. This is slightly lower than average, possibly as a result of the bull weight being slightly lower than average but overall performance is still well within acceptable levels. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 13th batch of 80 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 9.44 10.61 11.51 DLWG (kg/d) 1.60 1.54 1.70 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 105 108 109 Fat depth (mm) 5.4 5.9 5.7 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.03 7.09 6.94 NFE (kg/d) -0.88 0.05 +0.79 from average - 14 0 + 11 ( per 13 weeks on test centre) @ feed cost of 135/t DM

Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 13 Stabiliser bulls

Fourteenth Trial NFE and production results from the 14 th batch of 76 Stabiliser bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 13% less feed/day, were approximately 16% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 18 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE bulls. Growth rate from these bulls has averaged 1.8 kg/d. This is slightly higher than average, but overall performance is still well within acceptable levels. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 14th batch of 76 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 11.15 11.77 12.74 DLWG (kg/d) 1.84 1.74 1.80 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 121 118 117 Fat depth (mm) 6.4 6.6 5.9 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.21 6.89 7.35 NFE (kg/d) -1.01 0.07 +0.98 from average - 7 0 + 11 @ feed cost of 135/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 14 Stabiliser bulls

Fifteenth Trial NFE and production results from the 15th batch of steers are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE steers consumed 15% less feed/day, were approximately 15% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 22 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE steers. This is slightly lower than with previous groups as the prevailing feed prices have dropped during 2015-16 such that the overall complete diet cost now sits at approximately 135/t DM compared to approximately 155/t DM with previous batches. As has been seen with previous steer batches, these differences in feed intake and efficiency have been seen with no differences in steer sale parameters at slaughter confirming that NFE is an efficiency parameter completely independent of saleable product specification. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 15th batch of 80 Stabiliser steers DMI (kg/d) 10.87 11.76 12.84 DLWG (kg/d) 1.39 1.38 1.38 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 118 118 119 Fat depth (mm) 8.4 8.4 8.4 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 7.97 8.70 9.56 NFE (kg/d) -0.98 0.02 +0.95 Sale LW (kg) 631 624 630 CCW (kg) 333.7 334.9 334.6 KO (g/kg) 530 537 531 Fat score (1-15) 7.55 7.12 7.90 Conf score (1-15) 8.00 8.15 8.00 from average - 10 0 + 12 @ feed cost of 135/t DM

Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 15 Stabiliser steers

Sixteenth trial NFE and bull production results from the 16th batch of bulls are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. On average the low NFE bulls consumed 13% less feed/day, were approximately 14% more efficient in converting feed into LWG and cost 15 less to feed over the 12 weeks they were on the unit compared with high NFE steers. This is slightly lower than with previous groups as the prevailing feed prices have dropped during 2015-16 such that the overall complete diet cost now sits at approximately 135/t DM compared to approximately 155/t DM with previous batches. Table 1 Summary NFE and performance data for the 16th batch of 77 Stabiliser bulls DMI (kg/d) 9.19 9.95 10.52 DLWG (kg/d) 1.47 1.47 1.52 Mean LW 0.75 (kg) 104 105 102 Fat depth (mm) 5.5 5.2 5.2 FCR (kg DMI:LWG) 6.64 7.05 7.03 NFE (kg/d) -0.74 0.01 +0.73 from average - 9 0 + 6 @ feed cost of 135/t DM Figure 1. Individual NFE values for batch 16 Stabiliser bulls