putting fat back on the ewe interesting NZ article

[andybk]

interesting article dropped in the mail box , about getting some fat back on the ewe and lamb , and feeding chicory and red clover for omega3s might be of some interest to some

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/85776915/fat-back-on-the-lamb-and-back-on-the-table

 

[glensman]

It's about time, breeding over lean sheep goes against all common sense in every part of the sheep meat cycle.

 

[andybk]

It's about time, breeding over lean sheep goes against all common sense in every part of the sheep meat cycle.

problem is , have we lost a lot of the genetics ? the push for ultra lean 10-15 years ago must have taken a toll

 

[glensman]

problem is , have we lost a lot of the genetics ? the push for ultra lean 10-15 years ago must have taken a toll

It's amazing how quickly things can be changed in breeding when focused on, we've got ours back to where we want them in two crosses. The two rams weren't even over fat just good skins with a bit of fat cover.

 

[neilo]

problem is , have we lost a lot of the genetics ? the push for ultra lean 10-15 years ago must have taken a toll

Those 'ultra lean' sheep genetics never really got much of a foothold as the lambs didn't finish without feed. A balance has always been needed, with overfat sheep meaning lambs finishing to light.

 

[Global ovine]

Don't get confused about fat content, as there is two types of fat that are required, one important for successfully farming sheep and the other for eating experience. Both are largely governed by different sets of genes which are;

1. Ewes need subcutaneous fat to buffer periods of stress. This is essential to have in ewes once they become adults and reproducing annually. However excessive amounts on lambs at slaughter weight was no longer valued as lamb became a high priced protein, whereas prior to WW2 it was considered a staple where fat was an important source of energy. Modern civilisation vilified fat as a cause of heart disease as we became more sedentary in lifestyle, as it is now doing with sugar. It has been necessary to remove subcutaneous fat off lamb for market acceptability and price. All sheep meat requires at least 2mm of fat on the outside for it to look acceptable. Breeders have done an effective job getting rid of subcutaneous fat in young slaughter lambs, probably to the detriment of adult ewes now having insufficient levels. The rise of Texels as both a terminal breed and as a component of maternal crosses and composites have accentuated the decrease of all fats. This is because Myomax (the Texel myostatin genotype variant) not only increases muscle size, but reduces fat everywhere. Other myostatin variants discovered have less effect on fat content. There is early stage research in NZ now looking at one myostatin variant that adds fat as it does muscle.
   
2. It is essential for eating experience that intramuscular fat (IMF) exists, or the meat cooks dry in texture and is subject to becoming tough. Marbling and liquid fats in muscle cells are important. The omega oils especially so if lamb is to gain its rightful place as a healthy protein option. It is now up to science to give breeders direction to ensure that this type of fat does not get below 1.5% of muscle by weight, the level guaranteeing a juicy bite. Already much of the lamb commercially produced now is under this threshold. Some outliers reach 3% (by chemical extraction) which could be used as progenators to have a huge impact on the lamb market. A large volume of research exists for IMF, but little is yet to happen anywhere in the breeding world. As the article introducing this topic suggests, feed can alter IMF content too. But will farmers take notice of all this if they only get rewarded by having sheep of the desired shape. It will be the processors that will have to take a lead by promoting certain breeders whose rams will produce progeny where a premium can be generated for their eating quality, health giving attributes to the consumer and a nice story to convince the market.....gosh isn't that what ABP are doing?

 

[Frank-the-Wool]

Don't get confused about fat content, as there is two types of fat that are required, one important for successfully farming sheep and the other for eating experience. Both are largely governed by different sets of genes which are;

1. Ewes need subcutaneous fat to buffer periods of stress. This is essential to have in ewes once they become adults and reproducing annually. However excessive amounts on lambs at slaughter weight was no longer valued as lamb became a high priced protein, whereas prior to WW2 it was considered a staple where fat was an important source of energy. Modern civilisation vilified fat as a cause of heart disease as we became more sedentary in lifestyle, as it is now doing with sugar. It has been necessary to remove subcutaneous fat off lamb for market acceptability and price. All sheep meat requires at least 2mm of fat on the outside for it to look acceptable. Breeders have done an effective job getting rid of subcutaneous fat in young slaughter lambs, probably to the detriment of adult ewes now having insufficient levels. The rise of Texels as both a terminal breed and as a component of maternal crosses and composites have accentuated the decrease of all fats. This is because Myomax (the Texel myostatin genotype variant) not only increases muscle size, but reduces fat everywhere. Other myostatin variants discovered have less effect on fat content. There is early stage research in NZ now looking at one myostatin variant that adds fat as it does muscle.
   
2. It is essential for eating experience that intramuscular fat (IMF) exists, or the meat cooks dry in texture and is subject to becoming tough. Marbling and liquid fats in muscle cells are important. The omega oils especially so if lamb is to gain its rightful place as a healthy protein option. It is now up to science to give breeders direction to ensure that this type of fat does not get below 1.5% of muscle by weight, the level guaranteeing a juicy bite. Already much of the lamb commercially produced now is under this threshold. Some outliers reach 3% (by chemical extraction) which could be used as progenators to have a huge impact on the lamb market. A large volume of research exists for IMF, but little is yet to happen anywhere in the breeding world. As the article introducing this topic suggests, feed can alter IMF content too. But will farmers take notice of all this if they only get rewarded by having sheep of the desired shape. It will be the processors that will have to take a lead by promoting certain breeders whose rams will produce progeny where a premium can be generated for their eating quality, health giving attributes to the consumer and a nice story to convince the market.....gosh isn't that what ABP are doing?

Excellent information as always from our friend down under.

I have been amazed by how quickly we reduced the fat level in our lambs by using lean index Romney's both of the Waiere and by a local Romney breeder. In fact we were in danger of going too far down the leanness route and have now switched back to using rams with a higher fat index. What surprised me the most was how the decrease of fat changed rapidly through the maternal side as even cross bred Down lambs have become leaner and heavier.
Those little fat dumpy lambs are becoming rare fortunately!

The intramuscular fat is extremely important and I believe that while the breed type has an effect on this, the diet is also important. Lambs that come off an all grass finishing system seem to have more IMF than those that are finished off roots.
Those that are finished on a grain system seem to have an increase in the subcutaneous fat, that does not always increase the eating quality, it does however make the fat whiter and arguably more pleasing on the eye.

I thought ABP were looking at making a more standard lamb in shape and weight, they will struggle with the Advertising Standards Authority if they try to use healthy eating as a promotional tool without a lot of facts. Our friends in the Vegan lobby would not like that!
I also have a gut feeling that the maternal side has a greater effect on the fat levels than the terminal initially but I am sure I will be corrected.

 

[Ysgythan]

The omega 3 omega 6 balance is best from grass. You only need to worry about it if on ad lib cereals indoors, and then you can feed linseed to balance it.

Ironically nothing has done more to take off fat than EBVs. They are the way of identifying the natural doers that are needed. Yet will people take their eye of index and huge 21 week weights and use the figures properly?

I also think a lot of work needs to be done before a 1:2 ratio of fat to meat on a chop is acceptable to the end customer.

Other than that, interesting stuff.

 

[scholland]

Good few years since the aacs changed the fat ebv so now a higher fat figure is good and gives a higher index , so now selecting for fatter animals.
Not so important in the terminal breeds surely though as with our stratified system a fat easy to keep maternal ewe going into a fast growing leaner terminal should work well.

 

[Ysgythan]

The terminal doesn't need to be leaner to be fast growing. This year's trade on heavy lambs is not the norm. Also we're old fashioned enough to want a long lasting ewe producing the terminal tups.

 

[neilo]

The terminal doesn't need to be leaner to be fast growing. This year's trade on heavy lambs is not the norm. Also we're old fashioned enough to want a long lasting ewe producing the terminal tups.

Recipients?

Most pure terminal sire ewes in the UK aren't kept in conditions where they are likely to get lean. I know of many kept at stocking rates of 1 or 2 to the acre, on lowland farms with good pastures. Plenty of those have feed buckets and/or troughs out for a lot of the year. But still, the owners thinking they are running them hard.

 

[scholland]

The terminal doesn't need to be leaner to be fast growing. This year's trade on heavy lambs is not the norm. Also we're old fashioned enough to want a long lasting ewe producing the terminal tups.

Sorry i perhaps wasn't clear my point was this isn't that new an idea and that beef breeds had made this switch a few years ago.
When i think about it they're aren't that many purely terminal breeds as most are used for breeding by some farmers.
I personally don't like eating very fatty lamb, anything we eat has some Shetland breeding in it and they have to handle quite lean as they can carry a lot of internal fat. On the plus side the Shetland breed was found to have lots of the "healthy ' fat in the meat so maybe everyone should just buy a Shetland tup [emoji1]

 

[Ysgythan]

Recipients?

Most pure terminal sire ewes in the UK aren't kept in conditions where they are likely to get lean. I know of many kept at stocking rates of 1 or 2 to the acre, on lowland farms with good pastures. Plenty of those have feed buckets and/or troughs out for a lot of the year. But still, the owners thinking they are running them hard.

Quick, call Autoglass, we've got a serious chip...

 

[neilo]

Quick, call Autoglass, we've got a serious chip...

My point is that there are plenty of genetically lean terminal sire ewes in the UK, that are fat as f**k all year round.

 

[Jackson4]

The omega 3 omega 6 balance is best from grass. You only need to worry about it if on ad lib cereals indoors, and then you can feed linseed to balance it.

Ironically nothing has done more to take off fat than EBVs. They are the way of identifying the natural doers that are needed. Yet will people take their eye of index and huge 21 week weights and use the figures properly?

I also think a lot of work needs to be done before a 1:2 ratio of fat to meat on a chop is acceptable to the end customer.

Other than that, interesting stuff.

They dont want to put fat back on per se, more a little more fat on the ewe to handle more stressful environments, and more intramuscular fat if any and produce lower saturated fat and more poly unsaturated and omega 3 oils through breeding? and diet.
This is a bit different from saying recording animals has taken the fat off, which i disagree with.. the point of recording animals is so you know what has got fat on, the customer can then decide if thats what he wants.

I have one of the fattest meatlincs of its year here.. think it was 3.4mm fat, which knocked its index down but one of the very best growth rates and muscle depth. Originally the ewes were early lambed and lambs sold off milk and grass which could go short for a few weeks.. they handled leaner than i'd sell them now but didnt matter much in April/May then and no doubt more likely to be graded R2/3's.

Lambs off the same tup lambed nearer April and sold older are hitting R's and U's but up to 4l's and h's if i'm not careful. The Dorset X mothers carry a bit of fat and really i would pick a leaner Terminal now than before.. horses for courses.
Probably the bigger cause of lean sheep was the import of continentals (much like with sucklers) and the constant selection of grain fed animals living in the lap of luxury. Bit like Micheal winner, well fed but maybe not the best olympian on a normal diet.

 

[Ysgythan]

the point of recording animals is so you know what has got fat on, the customer can then decide if thats what he wants.

Err, no, the whole point of recording was to breed fat off the Downs breeds.

 

[Ysgythan]

My point is that there are plenty of genetically lean terminal sire ewes in the UK, that are fat as f**k all year round.

And that's dangerous for the animal, I agree, but there are plenty that aren't as well. Even the magic circle aren't daft enough to keep every ewe in show condition.

 

[Ysgythan]

Bit like Micheal winner, well fed but maybe not the best olympian on a normal diet.

Very good

 

[andybk]

They dont want to put fat back on per se, more a little more fat on the ewe to handle more stressful environments, and more intramuscular fat if any and produce lower saturated fat and more poly unsaturated and omega 3 oils through breeding? and diet.
This is a bit different from saying recording animals has taken the fat off, which i disagree with.. the point of recording animals is so you know what has got fat on, the customer can then decide if thats what he wants.

I have one of the fattest meatlincs of its year here.. think it was 3.4mm fat, which knocked its index down but one of the very best growth rates and muscle depth. They were early lambed and sold off milk and grass which could go short for a few weeks.. they handled leaner than i'd sell them now but didnt matter much in April/May then and no doubt more likely to be graded R2/3's. Lambs off the same tup lambed nearer April and sold older are hitting R's and U's but up to 4l's and h's if i'm not careful. The Dorset X mothers carry a bit of fat and really i would pick a leaner Terminal now than before.. horses for courses.
Probably the bigger cause of lean sheep was the import of continentals (much like with sucklers) and the constant selection of grain fed animals living in the lap of luxury. Bit like Micheal winner, well fed but maybe not the best olympian on a normal diet.

one of the ones i imported this year is very similar , v good growth rates 430gpd, good upto 40-50 kg then went a bit fat , index suffered at scanning , so will watch his offspring with interest regarding your comments on the meatlink .was looking to get a bit more cover on the ewes to feed lambs outside in winter better .

 

[neilo]

Err, no, the whole point of recording was to breed fat off the Downs breeds.

Selection on those records would certainly allow you to breed fat off the Down breeds, but also to breed fat into others, depending on the aim. Without recording what you have, how can you improve it?