Does more pounds per acre make up for being docked at the sale barn for small frame size?

[Rmc]

And I'm not "attacking" you when I express an observation... unless my observation is inaccurate.

That's a misunderstanding of the information. Correlation does not imply causation.

"Correlation tests for a relationship between two variables. However, seeing two variables moving together does not necessarily mean we know whether one variable causes the other to occur. This is why we commonly say "correlation does not imply causation."

Your observation that fertility and frame size aren't caused by the same thing.
Is in direct opposition to the numerous research documents published about the plag1 gene. So are you going to explain to me how my interpretation of the research is wrong? Or are you once again replying to my posts for nothing more than you don't like me and are trying to play gotcha. Or are you actually going to discuss the topic and support your claims that fertility and small frame size aren't genetically linked?

 

[Silver]

I think a producer interested in fertility would be wiser to spend their efforts ensuring proper nutrition for their breeding herd than trying to select for a gene.

 

[Rmc]

proper nutrition can only allow for maximum genetic potential. All the proper nutrition can't change inherent infertility!

 

[Stickney94]

Regarding the research article posted -- My daughter had a purebred jersey heifer as a 4H calf. The heifer is now a 7 year old cow that is nothing but bones and bag. That jersey cow still weighs 1100+ lbs. I don't know what a 1,000 lb cow looks like (or should I say a healthy 1,000 lb cow -- not BCS 1 -- haha).

In my case, I just reviewed my cow weights and 4 out the 5 lightest cows are currently in the cull pen due to fertility issues. Only 1 of the top 10 heaviest is likely to be culled and that has to do with a structural issue not fertility.

But my main point to anyone reading -- get some scales. Scales may be the single best investment I've made.

 

[Silver]

proper nutrition can only allow for maximum genetic potential. All the proper nutrition can't change inherent infertility!

All the genetic potential can't help fertility without nutrition!

 

[Rmc]

I can change nutrition throughout the cows life. Can't change the genes at any time past fertilization.

 

[Warren Allison]

If y'all want to stand around and sing ring around the rosey be my guest.
I am here to learn about and discuss cattle. Could care less if you or others like me or not. Doesn't change the science or the research ,If you like someone or not.
So Warren what is your opinion on increase in fertility as frame sizes are reduced?

Angus became so popular back when they were small, in part because of their fertility.. And there sure isn't anything more fertile than a Corriente or Longhorn. But, today's 1500 lb Angus are just as noted for fertility, as they were at 800 lbs. And, I have had some Brahma x Chianina cows approaching 2k lbs that never missed a calf or calved late. I think a person can take a breed noted for fertility, and work at increasing frame size while preserving the fertility rate. Or, can take a large-sized breed, and select for fertility without reducing the size.

 

[Travlr]

Your observation that fertility and frame size aren't caused by the same thing.
Is in direct opposition to the numerous research documents published about the plag1 gene. So are you going to explain to me how my interpretation of the research is wrong? Or are you once again replying to my posts for nothing more than you don't like me and are trying to play gotcha. Or are you actually going to discuss the topic and support your claims that fertility and small frame size aren't genetically linked?

See? There is your basic misunderstanding right there, in a nut shell.

Rmc said:
Use whatever terminology you want but if you are selecting for fertility you are selecting against increasing frame size.

My comment to this... is where you infer that I'm talking about the way fertility and frame size are related. This is what happens when the discussion includes a single minded person that can't think beyond the original conclusion that they are trying to hammer.

It is not terminology, my selection process is to doesn't take into account cow size. The less fertile cows work their way out of the herd. I put Darwin in the driver's seat. I save all the healthy registered heifers and feed them just enough to try and get around half of them bred as yearlings. Those that breed up stay in the herd. If anything, I am selecting for sexual dimorphism. I don't believe in using an average or below average growth bull. Whatever downward pressure on frame on the female side is offset by the use of growthy bulls.

@StrojanHerefords gets it.

Causation is handled differently in a study than the way an individual producer selects for fertility. And even in the study it doesn't account for outliers ( @Jeanne - Simme Valley ) with great success producing fertile heavy cows.

 

[Travlr]

Angus became so popular back when they were small, in part because of their fertility.. And there sure isn't anything more fertile than a Corriente or Longhorn. But, today's 1500 lb Angus are just as noted for fertility, as they were at 800 lbs. And, I have had some Brahma x Chianina cows approaching 2k lbs that never missed a calf or calved late. I think a person can take a breed noted for fertility, and work at increasing frame size while preserving the fertility rate. Or, can take a large-sized breed, and select for fertility without reducing the size.

Exactly...

 

[wbvs58]

Your Plag gene may very well be linked to frame size and if fertility was your only criteria for culling then maybe over time you might reduce your frame size however most of us have a fair bit of fertility in reserve and cull for a lot of other things as well as fertility, small frame size may be one of them. We all have large frame cows whose fertility and efficiency is 2nd to none.
It is nice of you to point out about the Plag gene and we should probably keep an eye on it however this is a typical case of where the application of research research is different to the practical day to day management of cattle breeding, there are a lot more factors involved than a sterile experiment would have.

Ken

 

[Travlr]

Your Plag gene may very well be linked to frame size and if fertility was your only criteria for culling then maybe over time you might reduce your frame size however most of us have a fair bit of fertility in reserve and cull for a lot of other things as well as fertility, small frame size may be one of them. We all have large frame cows whose fertility and efficiency is 2nd to none.
It is nice of you to point out about the Plag gene and we should probably keep an eye on it however this is a typical case of where the application of research research is different to the practical day to day management of cattle breeding, there are a lot more factors involved than a sterile experiment would have.

Ken

And then there is this:

Heifers with two copies of the alternate allele (TT) conceived earlier and had higher pregnancy and calving rates. However, the effects of PLAG1 genotype on fertility began to diminish as cows aged and did not significantly influence stayability at later ages.

 

[Silver]

I can change nutrition throughout the cows life. Can't change the genes at any time past fertilization.

If you pay attention to nutrition you will forget all about plag1 and move on to things that matter.

 

[kenny thomas]

Calf prices used were real world calf prices actual hard numbers . Might be off for your area but not inter mountain west . Different feed regimes were in the article because depending on local all three are used in various locations throughout the intermountain west due to elevation changes and location. Article is a compilation of several studies all are listed at the end of the article. Don't know where you are getting $1 pound for cattle but even Holstein and jerseys are higher than that.

Might be higher where you are but i seen some Belted/Highland cross as low as .50 Saturday. Seen some Holstein at .72. Jerseys would be in between those prices.

 

[Rmc]

You can pay attention all you want to nutrition. I will continue to pay attention to fertility and longevity in the herd.
Numerious studies for years have proven over and over that larger framed cattle are less fertile and have reduced longevity even within the same herd.
Use any terminology you want but when you select for fertility you are also reduceing frame size regardless of intent.
Two sides of the same coin. Numerous research has documented that fertility and frame size are genetically linked.

 

[Rmc]

Might be higher where you are but i seen some Belted/Highland cross as low as .50 Saturday. Seen some Holstein at .72. Jerseys would be in between those prices.

Sold my teenaged highland cross cull cows for over a $1 a pound . And calves have sold in the exact same price range as the non cross calves.

 

[Ky hills]

I'm going to wade into this with just anecdotal experiences.
When I had registered Charolais around 30!years ago, my smallest cows were around 1450 and largest around 1800, with most being inbetween at 1500+ to 1700 or so. Those cows were extremely fertile and reliable calved on time consistently. The exceptions were individuals from sone of the popular show bloodlines of the day. They were big framed too but very different in that they were very slow to breed as heifers and not reliable to calve in a consistent time frame afterwards.
Fast forward to now
I've had a range of sizes of commercial cows mostly Angus and Herefords some registered and some commercial.
Had some cows that weighed from 1800-2000 some were extremely reliable and others not as much.
Same story with the smaller cows say 1100-1300 can't say that they were any different when it come to calving on time it was mixed results just like any other size group. We've had fairly heavy cull rates out of all sizes.
The majority of our cows now are going to be 1300-1400 range with a few larger and a few smaller.
In our heifers it seems consistent that picking middle of the road is the safest bet. Sometimes there are anomalies but generally speaking the smallest are not good choices nor are the largest. Last year at preg check we culled out the smallest heifer for being open and the largest 2.
With the herd I am working with now, I think the average size females bred to slightly more growthy bulls is the best balance to strike.
I do believe nutrition plays a major role as well as genetics.
If you don't have the nutrition the genetics are not going to be fully expressed.

 

[kenny thomas]

Sold my teenaged highland cross cull cows for over a $1 a pound . And calves have sold in the exact same price range as the non cross calves.

No cull cows here over $1 right now. Im just saying what I seen. Small frame black calves with a belt and longer hair. Owner told what cross they were.

 

[Travlr]

The impact of cow size on cow-calf and postweaning progeny performance in the Nebraska Sandhills

Optimizing beef production system efficiency requires an understanding of genetic potential suitable for a given production environment. Therefore, the objective of this retrospective analysis was to determine the influence of cow body weight (BW) adjusted ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And another one

This from your own link:

Increasing cow BW (body weight) was positively associated (P < 0.01) with the percentage of cows that conceived during a 45-d breeding season. For every additional 100-kg increase in cow BW, calf BW increased (P < 0.01) at birth by 2.70 kg and adjusted 205-d weaning BW by 14.76 kg. Calf preweaning average daily gain (ADG) increased (P < 0.01) 0.06 kg/d for every additional 100-kg increase in cow BW.

AND

Herds with smaller cows cull a larger share of the herd each year, resulting in relatively more cull cow gross revenue. Total costs to run a smaller cow were larger due to added fixed costs of running another cow–calf pair

What am I supposed to think when your own links don't deal in your contentions about PLAG 1 variations? But easily found in a short search:

PLAG1 is a gene with allelic variation that has well-documented associations with stature and age at puberty in cattle.

AND

the effects of PLAG1 genotype on fertility began to diminish as cows aged and did not significantly influence stayability at later ages.

 

[Travlr]

Or are you actually going to discuss the topic

Crickets...

 

[Rmc]

This from your own link:

Increasing cow BW (body weight) was positively associated (P < 0.01) with the percentage of cows that conceived during a 45-d breeding season. For every additional 100-kg increase in cow BW, calf BW increased (P < 0.01) at birth by 2.70 kg and adjusted 205-d weaning BW by 14.76 kg. Calf preweaning average daily gain (ADG) increased (P < 0.01) 0.06 kg/d for every additional 100-kg increase in cow BW.

AND

Herds with smaller cows cull a larger share of the herd each year, resulting in relatively more cull cow gross revenue. Total costs to run a smaller cow were larger due to added fixed costs of running another cow–calf pair

Yet the conclusion of the first study you conveniently didnt quote why was that?
Maybe because it in part said this!