Matthew C. Stockton
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Matthew C. Stockton.
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics | 2010
Matthew C. Stockton; David Bessler; Roger K. Wilson
Monthly observations on prices from 10 weight/gender classifications of Nebraska beef cattle are studied in an error correction model (ECM) framework. This study attempts a replication of the 2003 paper on Texas prices by Bessler and Davis, where they find medium heifers (600–700 lb) at the center of price discovery. Using the ECM results Nebraska light steers are found to be weakly exogenous, with the innovation accounting results showing marked differences. Industry structure, production choices, and animal type and breeding herd differences between Texas and Nebraska are proposed as plausible reasons for partial (or incomplete) success at replication.
Journal of Animal Science | 2013
Matthew C. Stockton; Roger K. Wilson; Dillon M. Feuz; Leslie Aaron Stalker; R. N. Funston
A target BW is often used to estimate sexual maturity in beef heifers. The target BW, a percentage of mature BW, is generally an average for the breed, herd, or both. Heifer development is done in groups or herds, and not all heifers respond similarly to the same development regimen. Generally, heifers fed at a higher plane of nutrition gain more BW and tend to have increased pregnancy rates, but this usually increases feed costs. Therefore, determining when increased feed costs exceed the economic gains resulting from greater conception rates is critical and requires the inclusion of economic information and relationships. This research focused on the individual heifer as the decision point, and identification of the individual heifer target BW was based on clearly defined biological relationships observed before breeding. These relationships were captured in a maturity index (MI) identified through a series of steps and guided by current, accepted knowledge of heifer growth and development. Using an in-sample mean absolute percent error comparison, it was determined the MI was more accurate than the current group or herd methods in forecasting actual maturity and target BW. Maturity index demonstrated the flexibility in achieving similar maturities with beef heifers of varying characteristics using alternative nutritional programs. The MI was also the only significant predictor of first pregnancy. These results allow for more precision in determining sexual maturity and probability of first pregnancy in beef heifers and serve as the basis for future studies in determining profit differences among heifers.
Journal of Animal Science | 2014
Matthew C. Stockton; Roger K. Wilson; Dillon M. Feuz; Leslie Aaron Stalker; R. N. Funston
Understanding the biology of heifer maturity and its relationship to calving difficulty and subsequent breeding success is a vital step in building a bioeconomic model to identify optimal production and profitability. A limited dependent variable probit model is used to quantify the responses among heifer maturities, measured by a maturity index (MI), on dystocia and second pregnancy. The MI account for heifer age, birth BW, prebreeding BW, nutrition level, and dam size and age and is found to be inversely related to dystocia occurrence. On average there is a 2.2% increase in the probability of dystocia with every 1 point drop in the MI between the MI scores of 50 and 70. Statistically, MI does not directly alter second pregnancy rate; however, dystocia does. The presence of dystocia reduced second pregnancy rates by 10.67%. Using the probability of dystocia predicted from the MI in the sample, it is found that on average, every 1 point increase in MI added 0.62% to the probability of the occurrence of second pregnancy over the range represented by the data. Relationships among MI, dystocia, and second pregnancy are nonlinear and exhibit diminishing marginal effects. These relationships indicate optimal production and profitability occur at varying maturities, which are altered by animal type, economic environment, production system, and management regime. With these captured relationships, any single group of heifers may be ranked by profitability given their physical characteristics and the applicable production, management, and economic conditions.
International Journal of Trade and Global Markets | 2017
Sunil P. Dhoubhadel; Azzeddine M. Azzam; Matthew C. Stockton
With the ever increasing requirement in the USA to blend higher volumes of advanced biofuels with gasoline and the shortfall in domestic production to fulfil this requirement, imports of ethanol from Brazil will likely take on an even more vital role. In this paper, we examine US buyer power over Brazil. For methodology, we estimate the sugarcane ethanol residual supply function facing the USA. We find that while the USA had buyer power before the enactment of the advanced biofuels mandate, that buyer power disappeared after the mandate. One possible explanation is that, given that Brazil is the primary source of the sugarcane ethanol, the mandate requirement has increased rivalry between the USA and the remaining importers, creating a perfect market overlap between the rivals.
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics | 2003
Matthew C. Stockton
Cross-sectional data sets containing expenditure and quantity information are typically used to calculate quality-adjusted imputed prices. Do sample size and quality adjustment of price statistically alter estimates for own-price elasticities? This paper employs a data set pertaining to three food categories-pork, cheese, and food away from home-with four sample sizes for each food category. Twelve sample sizes were used for both adjusted and unadjusted prices to derive elasticities. No statistical differences were found between own-price elasticities among sample sizes. However, elasticities that were based on adjusted price imputations were significantly different from those that were based on unadjusted prices.
Agronomy Journal | 2008
Jerry D. Volesky; Bruce Anderson; Matthew C. Stockton
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics | 2015
Sunil P. Dhoubhadel; Azzeddine M. Azzam; Matthew C. Stockton
2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas | 2011
Brian R. Williams; Matthew C. Stockton
2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA | 2006
Dillon M. Feuz; Matthew C. Stockton; Suparna Bhattacharya
Archive | 2011
Matthew C. Stockton; Sunil P. Dhoubhadel