BSE exam

Help Support CattleToday:

gizmom

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
228
Location
Molino Florida
We had the BSE done on Tuesday for the bulls we will be using for clean up this year. Three of these bulls are 2 year olds the other will be 6 in Feb. We pay attention to SC on our young bulls but to be honest haven't given much thought to the SC on the older bulls. The reason is they would not be an older bull in our herd if they didn't have an acceptable SC as a young bull. So now I have a question what do you consider a good SC for a mature bull? Our older bull had a SC of 48 when measured on Tuesday, when we purchased him as a yearling bull his SC was 40. The three two year olds had 39, 44 and 40.5 so all acceptable.

Gizmom
 

dun

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
47,334
Reaction score
1
Location
MO Ozarks
Our minimum for young bulls is 40 and the same for the older bulls.
 

bigbull338

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2005
Messages
16,565
Reaction score
0
Location
texas
agree with dun.if a bull dont have a min of 40 or more as a 2yr old.he needs tobe culled in my eyes.
 

wbvs58

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction score
409
Location
S.E. Queensland, Australia
I think an older bull should be at least 46.
With a 2yr old yes I like to see them over 40 but a bull with 38 will work well but if you were keeping heifers from him there could be some question as to being ready to breed early enough although I am sure most would be.
Why do you people measure SC in cm when all your other measurements are in inches or pounds etc? Is it because you are just complying with the rest of the world?
Ken
 

wbvs58

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction score
409
Location
S.E. Queensland, Australia
gizmom":18g3x7te said:
Well fellas I am so glad y'all weren't the breeder of EXT, I really think he turned out to be pretty darn good and he had 35 SC as a yearling. http://abs-bs.absglobal.com/beef/angus. ... o=29AN1413

Gizmom
What was he as a 2yr old? I am sure he would have grown at least up to the 38 mark.
Our min standards now are 33.5 for a 500kg weight bull, about yearling weight and 36.5 for 800kg weight, typical 2 yr old bull. In my experience most Angus bulls are comfortably over those minimums.
Ken
 

AllForage

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Wisconsin
Here is a question, have these high scrotal requirements come around the same time Bulls were being developed on hot rations? Is it a compensating thing?

Have any of you had 35 cm Bulls not breed your cows?
 

dun

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
47,334
Reaction score
1
Location
MO Ozarks
The reasons it's given in cm is because that is what is specified in the Theriogenology manuals. Scrotal is important (supposedly) in the earliness of puberty in the bulls daughters.
 

wbvs58

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction score
409
Location
S.E. Queensland, Australia
AllForage":h3g7362b said:
Here is a question, have these high scrotal requirements come around the same time Bulls were being developed on hot rations? Is it a compensating thing?

Have any of you had 35 cm Bulls not breed your cows?
In younger animals I don't think the ration makes much difference. I frequently measure my bulls in our autumn in April for breedplan when I bring my bulls in from the paddock and start feeding for the sale in July as 2 yr olds. I find there is very little difference in SC compsred to when they have the BSE done in early July after about 3 months of heavy feeding. Heavy mature bulls may have their SC plumped out a bit with fat but their lazy nature when not working usually has them in pretty good nick without heavy feed.
A 2yr old bull with a SC of 35 will usually breed quite adequately but as I said previously, one might question whether retained heifers would have early enough maturity. You may not see this immediately in 1 or 2 generations but if you were to continually use bulls with SC at the lower end of what is acceptable I think late puberty in heifers might be an issue. Of course using these bulls as terminal sires wouldn't be an issue as long as they get the job done and calves grow well.
Ken
 

AllForage

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Wisconsin
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all
 

wbvs58

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction score
409
Location
S.E. Queensland, Australia
AllForage":304xzr06 said:
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all
Good thought anyhow.
With regards to the cm's I just can't help stirring you guys about your old colonial system of measurements but what I have learnt from CT is that there are 3 things that you don't try and take from you and they are.
- Your guns.
- Your big V8's
- Your imperial system of measurements
But it doesn't mean that I can't have a bit of a dig at you about it whenever I can. It is the sort of thing that Australians do.
Ken
 

smnherf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
Location
South Dakota
AllForage":2a73lkvp said:
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all

Be very careful with this assumption. Hotter rations, with higher nutrition levels wont necessarily increase the size of the testicles. It might increase the scrotal measurements because there is fat deposited in the scrotum and most don't or cant account for it but that fat has short term and long term negative effects on a bulls fertility.

A few years ago, a young vet here was talking about all 1300 lb bulls with 40+ scrotals that were failing bsc exams because of a lack of motility and deformation of the sperm cells. One day she went to fertility test some 850 lb bulls that were really, really green and at first site, she thought it was going to be a disaster. Turned out those were the best testing bulls she did and they didn't have very big testicles.

I think a 36 to 38 is ideal and if I see a list of a lot of bulls over 40, I tend to either question the person who measured or am suspicious of the feed level.
 

angus9259

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
2,843
Reaction score
2
Location
Michigan
dun":1avf3c3y said:
The reasons it's given in cm is because that is what is specified in the Theriogenology manuals. Scrotal is important (supposedly) in the earliness of puberty in the bulls daughters.

I've heard this but NEVER seen actual data. Does real data exist somewhere to substantiate or is it farmer lore??
 

AllForage

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Wisconsin
smnherf":1br4oufe said:
AllForage":1br4oufe said:
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all

Be very careful with this assumption. Hotter rations, with higher nutrition levels wont necessarily increase the size of the testicles. It might increase the scrotal measurements because there is fat deposited in the scrotum and most don't or cant account for it but that fat has short term and long term negative effects on a bulls fertility.

A few years ago, a young vet here was talking about all 1300 lb bulls with 40+ scrotals that were failing bsc exams because of a lack of motility and deformation of the sperm cells. One day she went to fertility test some 850 lb bulls that were really, really green and at first site, she thought it was going to be a disaster. Turned out those were the best testing bulls she did and they didn't have very big testicles.

I think a 36 to 38 is ideal and if I see a list of a lot of bulls over 40, I tend to either question the person who measured or am suspicious of the feed level.

Not sure what assumption you read that I made. In fact your story, yet anecdotal, proved my theory nicely.

I was trying to be polite about the way I suggested that the same University types telling us 40+ balls are necessary are the same one running bull tests. To me it seems a commodity way of thinking to make such arbitrary requirements without ever having a problem. I have said this before that knowledge of lines and breeds goes a lot further. NOt sure if there is any info on fast any particular bull producing sperm at a slower/faster rate than a contemporary.
 

Nesikep

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,407
Reaction score
736
Location
Lillooet, BC, Canada
I think a bull's breeding habits are just as important.. I've had bulls (with big nuts) that would pester a cow for days, and wear both of them out in the process.. he'd mount countless times... and his conception rates were actually lower than another bull we had that would sniff, mount, sniff, and go back to grazing.

I don't know about you, but as long as my heifers are cycling by breeding time I certainly don't see any benefit of having them in heat before they're weaned!
 

angus9259

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
2,843
Reaction score
2
Location
Michigan
AllForage":30an6ztg said:
smnherf":30an6ztg said:
AllForage":30an6ztg said:
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all

Be very careful with this assumption. Hotter rations, with higher nutrition levels wont necessarily increase the size of the testicles. It might increase the scrotal measurements because there is fat deposited in the scrotum and most don't or cant account for it but that fat has short term and long term negative effects on a bulls fertility.

A few years ago, a young vet here was talking about all 1300 lb bulls with 40+ scrotals that were failing bsc exams because of a lack of motility and deformation of the sperm cells. One day she went to fertility test some 850 lb bulls that were really, really green and at first site, she thought it was going to be a disaster. Turned out those were the best testing bulls she did and they didn't have very big testicles.

I think a 36 to 38 is ideal and if I see a list of a lot of bulls over 40, I tend to either question the person who measured or am suspicious of the feed level.

Not sure what assumption you read that I made. In fact your story, yet anecdotal, proved my theory nicely.

I was trying to be polite about the way I suggested that the same University types telling us 40+ balls are necessary are the same one running bull tests. To me it seems a commodity way of thinking to make such arbitrary requirements without ever having a problem. I have said this before that knowledge of lines and breeds goes a lot further. NOt sure if there is any info on fast any particular bull producing sperm at a slower/faster rate than a contemporary.


EXACTLY to both of you!! We all think we want big nuts but is there actually any proof that big nuts actually do anything other than look impressive in the summer heat? I'm open to the idea the DO do something but have never actually seen anything other than hearsay...
 

smnherf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
Location
South Dakota
AllForage":2kacwyt0 said:
smnherf":2kacwyt0 said:
AllForage":2kacwyt0 said:
Thanks Ken, I was thinking out loud to the relation of hot feed and actual fertility. Needing bigger balls hence more sperm due to the feedlot rations reducing motility. Was just a thought that's all

Be very careful with this assumption. Hotter rations, with higher nutrition levels wont necessarily increase the size of the testicles. It might increase the scrotal measurements because there is fat deposited in the scrotum and most don't or cant account for it but that fat has short term and long term negative effects on a bulls fertility.

A few years ago, a young vet here was talking about all 1300 lb bulls with 40+ scrotals that were failing bsc exams because of a lack of motility and deformation of the sperm cells. One day she went to fertility test some 850 lb bulls that were really, really green and at first site, she thought it was going to be a disaster. Turned out those were the best testing bulls she did and they didn't have very big testicles.

I think a 36 to 38 is ideal and if I see a list of a lot of bulls over 40, I tend to either question the person who measured or am suspicious of the feed level.

Not sure what assumption you read that I made. In fact your story, yet anecdotal, proved my theory nicely.

I was trying to be polite about the way I suggested that the same University types telling us 40+ balls are necessary are the same one running bull tests. To me it seems a commodity way of thinking to make such arbitrary requirements without ever having a problem. I have said this before that knowledge of lines and breeds goes a lot further. NOt sure if there is any info on fast any particular bull producing sperm at a slower/faster rate than a contemporary.

My post was in reference to the "needing bigger balls to produce more volume in order to make up for poor semen quality." A gallon of poor semen wont get a cow pregnant.

Yes the universities have told us that higher scrotal measurements lead to earlier puberty in the daughters, but it is the breeders that are selling fat bulls with big sc measurements as a plus. Its up to the bull buyers to learn the difference between a fat scrotal and a highly fertile one.
 

dun

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
47,334
Reaction score
1
Location
MO Ozarks
smnherf":2tjz0cfw said:
Its up to the bull buyers to learn the difference between a fat scrotal and a highly fertile one.
That may be what our difference is. Our bulls aren;t developed on grain so fatty scrotums aren;t an issue.
 
Top