Some of you black breeders are such epd fans, why not just add a new epd column which would rate the likelihood that a bull is a CCS bull. Funny how you all switch to actual data when the genetic defect is lethal but when the genetic defect is only performance or structure you love your epd's.
CCS and EPD's
- Thread starter ollie?
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
ollie?":3l2l43kj said:
Having a bad morning are you, Ollie? Sun is shining here, cool, clear, no wind. Beautiful fall day. Supposed to rain Monday. Still got grass. The fall calves are nice. Heifers are growing. Try to smile and enjoy the day.
Yes, a lethal defect is more important to the AAA than one judge's opinon on one day about one particular animal's structure. Funny how that works.
ollie?":2znajb0c said:
Ollie, I don't know you. All I can remember is some of your posts, and I have never known you to post something like that.
It is 9am central time, and I will award you with dumbest post of the day award. Congratulations.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
ollie?":3sqapja7 said:
Interesting. This comment regards all color cattle....I wonder if the scientists have ever performed research studies about lethal bovine genes being consumed by homo-sapiens. There sure are allot of unexplained deaths. As an example, I heard some human deaths were the result of power lines running near homes.
Brandonm22
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,848
- Reaction score
- 0
HerefordSire":2to19ruh said:
Ollie had the dumbest post of the day until that remark. This is a genetic defect NOT a consumed toxin. A bad gene doesn't mean the carcass is poisoned or some such. The DNA is simply the genetic code of the animal. An expressed lethal gene simply results in the cells building a faulty animal. It is like a mistake in the blueprints of a building. If an error is made in the plans the building falls down. A termite who ate a bad set of blueprints isn't any sicker than a termite who atea good set of blueprints. It is the same with eating an animal that carries a recessive gene. A recessive gene is masked by it's dominant normal allele and is only expressed when an animal gets two such lethal genes for the same allele. This is very simple genetics.
Humans (particularly in this country) live an excessively long time already compared to historical norms so I don't know where you jump to the conclusion that there is some epidemic of unexplained deaths. We could stretch life expectancy into the 90s simply by limiting our consumption of sodas, snacks, driving less often and at slower speeds, jogging a mile 3 or 4 days a week, stop smoking, gunning down less people, and by curtailing our excessive use of alcohol and legal/illegal narcotics.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
Ollie needs to thank me, huh?
B...I was not referring not to genetic defect but to the appearantly healthy animal carrying a lethal recessive genes. Have you ever heard someone getting cancer by living close to power lines?
B...I was not referring not to genetic defect but to the appearantly healthy animal carrying a lethal recessive genes. Have you ever heard someone getting cancer by living close to power lines?
KMacGinley
Well-known member
Well played HS... could you be a little less subtle in your attempt to insinuate that Angus beef is dangerous to eat now due to CCS. You keep sticking your toe in the water, why not just do a cannon ball right in!
Eating CAB or angus beef made from carriers of the lethal gene causes........ Cancer, or does it cause the eater to die Him or Herself from CCS? Could it make the consumer want to move next to a power line and die from power line disease?
Of course what you are trying to say is that Hereford beef is safer to eat than angus.
Genes are made of DNA, which is made of amino acids. In the monogastric animal, (are Vulcans Monogastrics?) enzymes chop Proteins (like DNA or genes) into amino acids so they can be reassembled in the cell into proteins. Billions of genes are deconstucted each day by omnivores and carnivores and remade into proteins for the nutrition of the body.
There is no way that this has any effect on beef quality, at worst people may lose a calf occasionally and people may have to quit breeding cattle so close in 9J9 or Precision lines, but sadly for you the hereford breed will just have to begin using their heads and breeding cattle that people want to regain their lost standing.
Eating CAB or angus beef made from carriers of the lethal gene causes........ Cancer, or does it cause the eater to die Him or Herself from CCS? Could it make the consumer want to move next to a power line and die from power line disease?
Of course what you are trying to say is that Hereford beef is safer to eat than angus.
Genes are made of DNA, which is made of amino acids. In the monogastric animal, (are Vulcans Monogastrics?) enzymes chop Proteins (like DNA or genes) into amino acids so they can be reassembled in the cell into proteins. Billions of genes are deconstucted each day by omnivores and carnivores and remade into proteins for the nutrition of the body.
There is no way that this has any effect on beef quality, at worst people may lose a calf occasionally and people may have to quit breeding cattle so close in 9J9 or Precision lines, but sadly for you the hereford breed will just have to begin using their heads and breeding cattle that people want to regain their lost standing.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
KMacGinley":1zrqigjb said:
Sounds like you two know what you are talking about. I may eat beef with a lethal genes but I would not knowingly. Would you?
In the case of CCS, yes. Consuming beef from a carrier animal is of no threat. CCS is only manifestied when the animal is homozygous for it. It seems to be a deletion in the DNA across part of two genes. The deletion results in a protein not being made that is critical for fetal nervous system development. Beef from a carrier is completely normal. And as was stated above, DNA within the beef (although not made up of amino acids - proteins are) is digested when eaten and the enzymes in our digestive tracts are not at all affected by the sequence of the DNA.
HerefordSire
Well-known member
whitecow":bzp5ne13 said:
TY whitecow. Excellent explanation!
Does consumer meat have DNA that is alive (atoms, molecules, quarks, etc.)?
Actually I'm having a wonderful morning. Just posting a point of view to produce some discussion. Do you remember this post?Frankie":226tzhf6 said:ollie?":226tzhf6 said:
Having a bad morning are you, Ollie? Sun is shining here, cool, clear, no wind. Beautiful fall day. Supposed to rain Monday. Still got grass. The fall calves are nice. Heifers are growing. Try to smile and enjoy the day.
Yes, a lethal defect is more important to the AAA than one judge's opinon on one day about one particular animal's structure. Funny how that works.
Why is it more important to use a bull with a good marbling epd when actual data available on most sale bulls?Frankie":226tzhf6 said:
ollie?":3qc7h1ws said:
No, I don't remember, but I believe it's true. We're dealing with two things here. #1 being profit. As far as I know, packers don't pay more for tender beef. They do pay more for marbled meat. While the research only shows about a 10% correlation between tenderness and marbling, I know some meat scientists who think it's considerably higher. And there's research showing the higher the quality grade, the less likely a cut of meat will be tough.
And #2 is EPDs. An EPD, at least in the Angus breed, is not just an indicator of the beeding animal's data. His/her data is fed into the system, compared and combined with thousands of other bits of data to produce EPDs. A well fed bull with a mediocre marbling EPD might scan a higher IMF score than a grass fed bull with a high marbling EPD. But the bull with the higher EPD would be most likely to produce higher marbling calves.
ollie?":2tlus2w1 said:
In my opinion, right now EPDs are the best indicator we have of an animal's potential performance. There are many cattle gurus who agree with that. If you can refer me to research, an internet site, that predicts tenderness by gene combination, I'd be glad to read it.
Frankie:
I think he is referring to the Genestar markers for tenderness. There is little question that there is a correlation to the Dna markers and ultimate tenderness and with the QG markers even marbling. However, it seems to me that the EPD's are still the most widespread and best used indicators of the potential to marble. EPD's used in conjunction with GeneStar and ultrasound should in most instances give us very good predicability. However, if you read his posts, you could come away with the conclusion that he is really trying to make the case that ultrasound on individual animals, not gene markers, are a better indicator of that animals IMF. However, outside of a contemporary group of similarly treated animals, I think that ultrasound measurements are pretty worthless by themselves because they don't take into account the management treatment i.e. grain or just grass and other environmental factors. To me, I use EPD's to select for that trait, then confirm that trait with a combination of ultrasound relative to contemp groups and the gene markers from that line if available.
I think he is referring to the Genestar markers for tenderness. There is little question that there is a correlation to the Dna markers and ultimate tenderness and with the QG markers even marbling. However, it seems to me that the EPD's are still the most widespread and best used indicators of the potential to marble. EPD's used in conjunction with GeneStar and ultrasound should in most instances give us very good predicability. However, if you read his posts, you could come away with the conclusion that he is really trying to make the case that ultrasound on individual animals, not gene markers, are a better indicator of that animals IMF. However, outside of a contemporary group of similarly treated animals, I think that ultrasound measurements are pretty worthless by themselves because they don't take into account the management treatment i.e. grain or just grass and other environmental factors. To me, I use EPD's to select for that trait, then confirm that trait with a combination of ultrasound relative to contemp groups and the gene markers from that line if available.
