Implanting cattle with steroids significantly enhances feed efficiency, rate of gain, and muscle growth. However, the mechanisms responsible for these improvements in muscle growth have not been fully elucidated. Trenbolone acetate (TBA), a testosterone analog, has been shown to increase proliferation rate in bovine satellite cell (BSC) cultures. The classical genomic actions of testosterone have been well characterized; however, our results indicate that TBA may also initiate a quicker, nongenomic response that involves activation of G protein–coupled receptors (GPCR) resulting in activation of matrix metalloproteinases 2 and 9 (MMP2 and MMP9) that release membrane-bound heparin-binding epidermal growth factor–like growth factor (hbEGF), which then binds to and activates the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and/or erbB2. Furthermore, the EGFR has been shown to regulate expression of the IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R), which is well known for its role in modulating muscle growth. To determine whether this nongenomic pathway is potentially involved in TBA-stimulated BSC proliferation, we analyzed the effects of treating BSC with guanosine 5′-O-2-thiodiphosphate (GDPβS), an inhibitor of all GPCR; a MMP2 and MMP9 inhibitor (MMPI); CRM19, a specific inhibitor of hbEGF; AG1478, a specific EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor; AG879, a specific erbB2 kinase inhibitor; and AG1024, an IGF-1R tyrosine kinase inhibitor on TBA-stimulated proliferation rate (³H-thymidine incorporation). Assays were replicated at least 9 times for each inhibitor experiment using BSC cultures obtained from at least 3 different animals. Bovine satellite cell cultures were obtained from yearling steers that had no previous exposure to androgenic or estrogenic compounds. As expected, BSC cultures treated with 10 nM TBA showed (P < 0.05) increased proliferation rate when compared with control cultures. Additionally, treatment with 5 ng hbEGF/mL stimulated proliferation in BSC cultures (P < 0.05). Treatment with GDPβS, MMPI, CRM197, AG1024, AG1478, and/or AG879 all suppressed (P < 0.05) TBA-induced increases in proliferation. These data indicate that TBA likely initiates a nongenomic response involving GPCR, MMP2 and MMP9, hbEGF, EGFR, erbB2, and IGF-1R, which may play a role in TBA-mediated increases in BSC proliferation.

Nutrition and other external factors are known to have a marked effect on growth of skeletal muscle, modulated, at least in part, through effects on satellite cells. Satellite cells and their embryonic precursors play an integral role in both prenatal and postnatal skeletal muscle growth of mammals. Changes in maternal nutrition can impact embryonic muscle progenitor cells which ultimately impacts both prenatal and postnatal skeletal muscle development. Satellite cells are important in postnatal skeletal muscle growth as they support the hypertrophy of existing myofibers. Hypertrophy of existing fibers is the only mechanism of postnatal muscle growth because muscle fiber number is fixed at birth and fiber nuclei have exited the cell cycle. Because fiber nuclei do not divide, additional nuclei required for hypertrophy must be acquired from satellite cells. To date, little research has aimed at determining whether nutrition directly impacts satellite cell populations within skeletal muscle of livestock species. However, it is well established that nutrition alters circulating concentrations of various growth factors such as insulin-like growth factor 1, epidermal growth factor, hepatocyte growth factor and fibroblast growth factor. Each of these different growth factors impact satellite cell proliferation and/or activation, indicating that nutrition likely plays a large role in skeletal muscle growth through impacting the satellite cell pool in both prenatal and postnatal growth. The relationship among nutrition, growth factors, and satellite cells relative to skeletal muscle growth is an important area of research that warrants further consideration.

Introducing Bos indicus (BI) genetics into a beef herd has the potential to increase environmental sustainability. When introducing BI genetics, there are concerns regarding negative impacts on temperament, growth, and carcass characteristics. Implants are routinely used in the United States, with majority of cattle on feed receiving an anabolic implant to improve growth and efficiency, however research regarding the interaction between cattle breed type and anabolic implants is limited. This research compared the use of implants in BI influenced animals versus Bos taurus in a feedlot setting. Twenty steers were stratified by initial weight in a 2 × 2 factorial design examining two different breeds: Angus (AN; n = 10) or Santa Gertrudis influenced (SG; n = 10), and two implant strategies: no implant (CON; n = 10) or a combined implant containing 120 mg TBA and 24 mg E2 (IMP; n = 10; Revalor-S, Merck Animal Health). We hypothesized that anabolic implants would improve growth and feedlot performance of BI influenced animals. Steers were randomly placed into covered pens equipped with GrowSafe bunks and fed the same ration for 129 d. Steers were weighed every 28 d. Dry matter intake, feeding behavior, and carcass data of the steers was collected. Blood was collected and harvested as serum on d 0, 2, 10, 28 and every 28 d after that, and analyzed for serum urea nitrogen (SUN), haptoglobin, and 25HydroxyVitamin D. Angus steers tended to gain more (P = 0.06) weight than SG, while IMP tended to gain more (P = 0.10) weight than CON with no breed × treatment interaction observed (P > 0.10). A breed × treatment interaction was observed when analyzing SUN (P = 0.05) and haptoglobin (P = 0.02) concentrations. Serum 25HydroxyVitmain D concentrations tended to be increased (P = 0.09) in SG-IMP steers compared to SG-CON steers. Angus steers tended (P = 0.10) to have greater amounts of marbling compared to SG steers, while SG steers had improved (P = 0.04) yield grade. Economic return was decreased by $46 a head when introducing SG genetics, while implanting steers improved economic return by $46 a head. This research provides evidence suggesting that BI influenced animals may respond differently to anabolic implants when compared to BT animals. Economic analyses demonstrate that anabolic implants improve economic return to beef producers, while introducing SG genetics decreases economic return in animals raised in more temperate climates.