Angus Maternal Index $M

[DCortes]

Interested in opinions about the Angus Maternal Value Index ($M). I downloaded data on the top $M dams in the breed and found somethings that are odd. The top cow has CED of -2 (95%), awful low for the most maternal cow in the breed. 18 out of the top 100 cows have CED below breed average. Said cows had above breed average WW EPDs. I messed with the data using some magic math and seems $M is mainly driven by WW (37%). Looking at the top 100 $M cows, you can have mediocre CED (48/100 in single digits), mediocre feet (10/100 have claw above 0.5 and 6/100 have angle above 0.5), too much milk (80/100 are above 25). Now, I am not saying these are bad cows. I have not seen them, and even if I had, I may not be able to pick the good from the bad (besides the obvious three legged cow). But $M has not seen them either. The number is just based on the EPDs.

 

[wbvs58]

As long as it weeds out the 3 legged one you should be right. I look at all these new indexes but they don't interest me. I do pay attention to the more nitty gritty EBV's/EPD's.

Ken

 

[J+ Cattle]

Take $M and all other indexes with a grain of salt, I don't think the genetics companies know what makes a good cow. I myself send in DNA samples to Zoetis and they gave high index scores to a heifer that also shows poor feet and udder scores. Let me know if want to purchase a high scoring cull heifer.

 

[coachg]

I’ve never understood all the fuss on epd’s especially on heifers and bulls that haven’t sired a calf . It’s all projection. I realize on a proven herd sire or a 4-8 year old cow it’s different.

 

[simme]

The $ indexes are a composite of multiple epd's weighted and added together to attempt to gauge economic value for a collective group of epd's. $M is for maternal traits.

Per AAA, for $M - "EPDs directly influencing the index include: calving ease direct and maternal, weaning weight, maternal milk, heifer pregnancy, docility, mature weight as well as foot angle and claw set."

So, there can be quite a lot of diversity and differences in the individual trait epd values for cows with the same or similar $M value. Cows with the same $M value could have low milk, low ww, high CED and high docility and good feet. Or they could have high milk, high ww, low CED and low docility and bad feet. I refer to the $ indexes as epd's for lazy people. Instead of looking at each epd, just look at an index that combines several epds. I think they are a gimmick and marketing tool as opposed to a valuable selection tool. If you place value on epd's, look at the individual epds. If you don't place value on epd's, I don't see how you would find any value in $ indexes.

AAA has a bunch of these indexes. Simmental has only two - I think they felt they needed those since AAA had some. I don't pay any attention to the simmental indexes. Just entertainment, IMO.

 

[Ebenezer]

Apparently the formula used is not shown and is proprietary. I don't understand the need if you have the sire search and can look up the traits as you need them: CED, WW, MM, HP, DOC, MW, angle and claw scores if that is your set of wannas. Seems to be a screwed up rating system with such a possible range of types. What's new. Then the folks who go for $M will also highlight some other index or indices as good info on the same animal. I don't grasp that need to check all of the boxes if each index has a given purpose/division.

 

[DCortes]

Apparently the formula used is not shown and is proprietary. I don't understand the need if you have the sire search and can look up the traits as you need them: CED, WW, MM, HP, DOC, MW, angle and claw scores if that is your set of wannas. Seems to be a screwed up rating system with such a possible range of types. What's new. Then the folks who go for $M will also highlight some other index or indices as good info on the same animal. I don't grasp that need to check all of the boxes if each index has a given purpose/division.

I agree. However, the associations sell the indexes as "don't worry about making sense of all theses other numbers (EPDs), as long as you have a high $M you will make good cows." Only problem is they do not disclose how the index is actually calculated. $M is made of CED, WW, CEM, Milk, MW, DOC, HP, Claw and Angle. So, it gives the impression that all traits are some how weighted equally. But what good is $M when WW alone makes up 37% and CED only 1%. Why not show the formula and let people deside how useful the index actually is?

 

[DCortes]

I've never understood all the fuss on epd's especially on heifers and bulls that haven't sired a calf . It's all projection. I realize on a proven herd sire or a 4-8 year old cow it's different.

I like EPDs. I think they can be pretty useful. I was watching a video of a guy in Wyoming that was pulling calves of off heifers left and right. One even prolapsed and died on the spot. The guy had a channel so I went back to the videos where he bought his heifer bull. He shows the catalog and is very proud of his heifer bull. You put the registration number in the AAA database and it shows CED +2, BW +2.4. Being a young bull without genomic data the accuracy is pretty low, but still those numbers scream avoid for heifers. Even in unproven cattle they can be pretty handy.