{"title":"与传统营销实践相比,预处理牛肉犊牛的好处","authors":"Frank W. Abrahamsen, N. Gurung","doi":"10.36478/javaa.2019.169.174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Preconditioning is a management practice used by beef farmers on the farm for enhancing health and nutrition of beef calves. It has the potential to bring higher economic returns for cow-calf producers from feeder calves if preconditioning is cost-effective. The objective of this study was to find out the price differences between traditional marketing and value added marketing (preconditioning or board sales) of beef calves in the state of Alabama from 2012-2016. The sales data were collected from the USDA-AMS (Agricultural Marketing Service) field office at Montgomery, Alabama, for both traditional marketing (auctions) and value added marketing (board sales). There were 21 locations for traditional marketing while board sales data were collected from 3 locations. Of the total calf sales, only 23% calves were sold through board sales. Sales data were collected from 585 lots representing 118,125 head of calves sold between January 2012 and December of 2016 at different auctions and board sales. The data consisted of auction types, gender, muscle scores and average weight (range: 250-386 kg), however, the breeds of feeder calves were not considered. Data were analyzed using the general linear model procedures of SAS (SAS Inst., Cary, NC) to determine the price difference associated with sales type including all variables listed above. However, the economic values of preconditioning were not determined. The results showed that beef calf prices differed significantly (p<0.05) between market types (auction vs. board sales), years, gender, muscle scores and average weights. The overall yearly price averages were $2.64, $3.00, $4.62, $4.51 and $2.75 kg of live weight for years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. When values for market types (auction and board sales) were combined, the average prices for Muscle Scores (MS) were $3.58, 3.67, 3.47 and 3.29 kg for MS 1, MS 1 and 2 combined, MS 2 and MS 3, respectively. The year 2014 was the best year for beef calf prices in Alabama regardless of auction types. The results of this study suggest that there are price differences between the traditional marketing and board sales (preconditioning) of calves. However, the net profits due to marketing strategies needs to be investigated further to demonstrate the economic benefits of preconditioning calves, especially to small producers.","PeriodicalId":14914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefits of Preconditioning Beef Calves Compared to the Traditional Marketing Practice\",\"authors\":\"Frank W. Abrahamsen, N. Gurung\",\"doi\":\"10.36478/javaa.2019.169.174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Preconditioning is a management practice used by beef farmers on the farm for enhancing health and nutrition of beef calves. It has the potential to bring higher economic returns for cow-calf producers from feeder calves if preconditioning is cost-effective. The objective of this study was to find out the price differences between traditional marketing and value added marketing (preconditioning or board sales) of beef calves in the state of Alabama from 2012-2016. The sales data were collected from the USDA-AMS (Agricultural Marketing Service) field office at Montgomery, Alabama, for both traditional marketing (auctions) and value added marketing (board sales). There were 21 locations for traditional marketing while board sales data were collected from 3 locations. Of the total calf sales, only 23% calves were sold through board sales. Sales data were collected from 585 lots representing 118,125 head of calves sold between January 2012 and December of 2016 at different auctions and board sales. The data consisted of auction types, gender, muscle scores and average weight (range: 250-386 kg), however, the breeds of feeder calves were not considered. Data were analyzed using the general linear model procedures of SAS (SAS Inst., Cary, NC) to determine the price difference associated with sales type including all variables listed above. However, the economic values of preconditioning were not determined. The results showed that beef calf prices differed significantly (p<0.05) between market types (auction vs. board sales), years, gender, muscle scores and average weights. The overall yearly price averages were $2.64, $3.00, $4.62, $4.51 and $2.75 kg of live weight for years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. When values for market types (auction and board sales) were combined, the average prices for Muscle Scores (MS) were $3.58, 3.67, 3.47 and 3.29 kg for MS 1, MS 1 and 2 combined, MS 2 and MS 3, respectively. The year 2014 was the best year for beef calf prices in Alabama regardless of auction types. The results of this study suggest that there are price differences between the traditional marketing and board sales (preconditioning) of calves. However, the net profits due to marketing strategies needs to be investigated further to demonstrate the economic benefits of preconditioning calves, especially to small producers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36478/javaa.2019.169.174\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36478/javaa.2019.169.174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
预处理是肉牛养殖户在农场上使用的一种管理方法,用于提高肉牛的健康和营养。如果预处理具有成本效益,则有可能为饲养小牛的小牛生产者带来更高的经济回报。本研究的目的是找出2012-2016年阿拉巴马州牛肉犊牛传统营销和增值营销(预处理或板售)之间的价格差异。销售数据来自阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利的USDA-AMS(农业营销服务)外地办事处,包括传统营销(拍卖)和增值营销(板销售)。传统营销有21个地点,board销售数据从3个地点收集。在整个犊牛销售中,只有23%的犊牛是通过董事会销售的。在2012年1月至2016年12月期间,在不同的拍卖和董事会销售中,销售数据收集了585个拍品,代表118,125头小牛。数据包括拍卖类型、性别、肌肉评分和平均体重(范围:250-386 kg),但不考虑饲养小牛的品种。使用SAS (SAS institute ., Cary, NC)的一般线性模型程序对数据进行分析,以确定包括上述所有变量在内的与销售类型相关的价格差异。然而,预处理的经济价值尚未确定。结果表明,犊牛价格在市场类型(拍卖vs板售)、年龄、性别、肌肉评分和平均体重之间存在显著差异(p<0.05)。2012年、2013年、2014年、2015年和2016年的总体年平均价格分别为2.64美元、3.00美元、4.62美元、4.51美元和2.75美元公斤活重。如果综合市场类型(拍卖和主板销售)的价格,肌肉评分(MS)的平均价格分别为3.58美元、3.67美元、3.47美元和3.29美元,分别为ms1、ms1和ms2组合、ms2和ms3。2014年是阿拉巴马州牛肉价格最好的一年,无论拍卖类型如何。本研究结果表明,犊牛的传统营销与板售(预处理)之间存在价格差异。但是,由于销售战略的纯利润需要进一步调查,以证明对小牛进行预处理的经济效益,特别是对小生产者。
Benefits of Preconditioning Beef Calves Compared to the Traditional Marketing Practice
Preconditioning is a management practice used by beef farmers on the farm for enhancing health and nutrition of beef calves. It has the potential to bring higher economic returns for cow-calf producers from feeder calves if preconditioning is cost-effective. The objective of this study was to find out the price differences between traditional marketing and value added marketing (preconditioning or board sales) of beef calves in the state of Alabama from 2012-2016. The sales data were collected from the USDA-AMS (Agricultural Marketing Service) field office at Montgomery, Alabama, for both traditional marketing (auctions) and value added marketing (board sales). There were 21 locations for traditional marketing while board sales data were collected from 3 locations. Of the total calf sales, only 23% calves were sold through board sales. Sales data were collected from 585 lots representing 118,125 head of calves sold between January 2012 and December of 2016 at different auctions and board sales. The data consisted of auction types, gender, muscle scores and average weight (range: 250-386 kg), however, the breeds of feeder calves were not considered. Data were analyzed using the general linear model procedures of SAS (SAS Inst., Cary, NC) to determine the price difference associated with sales type including all variables listed above. However, the economic values of preconditioning were not determined. The results showed that beef calf prices differed significantly (p<0.05) between market types (auction vs. board sales), years, gender, muscle scores and average weights. The overall yearly price averages were $2.64, $3.00, $4.62, $4.51 and $2.75 kg of live weight for years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. When values for market types (auction and board sales) were combined, the average prices for Muscle Scores (MS) were $3.58, 3.67, 3.47 and 3.29 kg for MS 1, MS 1 and 2 combined, MS 2 and MS 3, respectively. The year 2014 was the best year for beef calf prices in Alabama regardless of auction types. The results of this study suggest that there are price differences between the traditional marketing and board sales (preconditioning) of calves. However, the net profits due to marketing strategies needs to be investigated further to demonstrate the economic benefits of preconditioning calves, especially to small producers.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Animal Veterinary advances is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal which publishes articles related to experiments, treatment, analysis, biological elements and other methods of research connected with veterinary. JAVA started publishing activity in 2002, since that time is updated twice a month, and is available in online and print formats. The publications are reviewed by Editorial Board in accordance with the standards and novelty of the subject, while strictly following ethical guidelines. Subject areas suitable for publication include, but are not limited to the following fields :: Veterinary science :: Animal husbandry :: Animal nutrition :: Anatomy :: Biological science :: Pathology :: Infectious diseases :: Animal physiology :: Animal breeding :: Animal biotechnology :: Transgenic animal production :: Animal parasitology :: Veterinary medicine :: Animal feed and nutrition :: Equine.