$EN Criteria ?

[Stocker Steve]

Has this had much effect on your sire selection, or noticeably improved your cows fleshing ability?

 

[TSR]

Has this had much effect on your sire selection, or noticeably improved your cows fleshing ability?

Yes, its the first epd that I look for-the more positive the better , all else being equal. JMHO BTW it does express itself in the cows or at least I think I can see it in mine.

 

[3waycross]

Has this had much effect on your sire selection, or noticeably improved your cows fleshing ability?

Yes, its the first epd that I look for-the more positive the better , all else being equal. JMHO BTW it does express itself in the cows or at least I think I can see it in mine.

I don't disagree but it sure seems antagonistic to virtually all of the carcass traits. An example of course would be virtually any of the Ohlde bulls.

 

[Stocker Steve]

A high EN value in ABS in N Bar Prime Time. His pictured daughters look a bit fleshy - - kind of traditional.
Some of the low EN daughters from other BA bulls look almost dairy...

 

[Northern Rancher]

I like them to be at least be breed average-an extreme in any trait is not a good thing. I've fed alot of calves out over the years-selecting mother cows on carcass traits is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Stocker Steve]

I like them to be at least be breed average-an extreme in any trait is not a good thing. I've fed alot of calves out over the years-selecting mother cows on carcass traits is a recipe for disaster.

Does not sound like you are buying bulls from Pharo.

 

[robert]

$EN is an index I personally have no use for, it is only a measure of input, it's like saying your gas tank holds 10 gallons, how many miles can you go with that? no fricking clue! Could be 100, 500 or somewhere in the middle, it has proven to be a useful bragging tool for zero growth, zero milk cattle though....
If any of the $indexes are worth a hoot in the real world then $W comes closest, it contrasts inputs ($EN) with output (growth to weaning) to create a balance. I know from my own herd records if I rank my cows on $EN the least productive, least milky cows rise to the top, if I rank on $W you will pretty well see the Pathfinders and everything else after that.

 

[3waycross]

$EN is an index I personally have no use for, it is only a measure of input, it's like saying your gas tank holds 10 gallons, how many miles can you go with that? no fricking clue! Could be 100, 500 or somewhere in the middle, it has proven to be a useful bragging tool for zero growth, zero milk cattle though....
If any of the $indexes are worth a hoot in the real world then $W comes closest, it contrasts inputs ($EN) with output (growth to weaning) to create a balance. I know from my own herd records if I rank my cows on $EN the least productive, least milky cows rise to the top, if I rank on $W you will pretty well see the Pathfinders and everything else after that.

So Robert if you had to correalate one of those EPD's to the Red Angus EPD, ME which would it be.

 

[robert]

don't know enough about the RA system to comment, I made an assumption that stocker steve was talking Black Angus, maybe I assumed too much? As a general principle though an output requires an input, the output should exceed the value of the input.

 

[3waycross]

This is how they explain it. To me it's a very important tool in determining which RA bulls I want to use to make red balancers. I really would like your opinion on how it compares with the BA epd's since I have a harder time with them in this respect.

Accounting for 30 - 40% of the annual cow costs, requirements
for Maintenance Energy is typically the single
largest expense of cow/calf operations. Red Angus' ME
EPD allows producers to select bulls whose daughters
will require less feed to maintain their body weight and
condition; thus, increasing profitability.
How does this affect me? The energy content of
average quality range forage is approximately 0.86 Mcal
per pound of dry matter. If a sire has an ME EPD of +20
Mcal/month his offspring will require approximately 23 lbs
(20/0.86) more dry matter per month than offspring of the
sire with an ME EPD of 0. Magnify that difference over
12 months and 100 cows: you'll need another 14 tons of
feed, or to get rid of a few cows.
How is ME EPD calculated?
There are three components of ME EPD: Mature Weight,
Milk, and Body Condition Score (BCS). To calculate ME
EPD, Red Angus breeders collect mature cow weights
(taken when calves are weaned) and BCS (cows should
be scored when weighed). The Mature Weights are
adjusted to 5 years of age, and to a common BCS of 5. It
is essential that all cows in the same contemporary group
are scored by the same person. BCS plays an important
role in calculating Red Angus' ME EPD as it is essential

 

[robert]

This is how they explain it. To me it's a very important tool in determining which RA bulls I want to use to make red balancers. I really would like your opinion on how it compares with the BA epd's since I have a harder time with them in this respect.

Accounting for 30 - 40% of the annual cow costs, requirements
for Maintenance Energy is typically the single
largest expense of cow/calf operations. Red Angus' ME
EPD allows producers to select bulls whose daughters
will require less feed to maintain their body weight and
condition; thus, increasing profitability.
How does this affect me? The energy content of
average quality range forage is approximately 0.86 Mcal
per pound of dry matter. If a sire has an ME EPD of +20
Mcal/month his offspring will require approximately 23 lbs
(20/0.86) more dry matter per month than offspring of the
sire with an ME EPD of 0. Magnify that difference over
12 months and 100 cows: you'll need another 14 tons of
feed, or to get rid of a few cows.
How is ME EPD calculated?
There are three components of ME EPD: Mature Weight,
Milk, and Body Condition Score (BCS). To calculate ME
EPD, Red Angus breeders collect mature cow weights
(taken when calves are weaned) and BCS (cows should
be scored when weighed). The Mature Weights are
adjusted to 5 years of age, and to a common BCS of 5. It
is essential that all cows in the same contemporary group
are scored by the same person. BCS plays an important
role in calculating Red Angus' ME EPD as it is essential

this is the AAA definition. Cow Energy Value ($EN), expressed in dollars savings per cow per year, assesses differences in cow energy requirements as an expected dollar savings difference in daughters of sires. A larger value is more favorable when comparing two animals (more dollars saved on feed energy expenses). Components for computing the cow $EN savings difference include lactation energy requirements and energy costs associated with differences in mature cow size.

The low milking, low mature weight cow will score higher on $EN because it only considers inputs based on EPD levels for milk, mature weight. There is no consideration of BCS, I think on the face of it the RA EPD (as opposed to a $ index) encourages a positive selection criteria with some practical application including BCS, not a huge fan of subjective measures in EPDs but I suspect they take the raw data from a herd and if the range of bcs is 5, 6 and 7 they reduce that to -1, 0 & +1 for EPD purposes. Neither the RA or BA tool includes an output, you could well reduce feed intake, equally though you could be just reducing frame size and milking ability, which may be a benefit if for example the number of open cows, particularly young cows, has been creeping up. There is no doubt that the cost of keeping the cow for a year to produce one calf is bay far the biggest chunk of the pie, and anything that can reduce that cost is a positive providing the output either remains the same, or improves, or does not get reduced disproportionately to that reduction in cost.

This is where this $index from AAA makes more sense to me "Weaned Calf Value ($W), an index value expressed in dollars per head, is the expected average difference in future progeny performance for preweaning merit. $W includes both revenue and cost adjustments associated with differences in birth weight, weaning direct growth, maternal milk, and mature cow size." it takes the components of $EN and sets that against output to arrive at the value.

Overall, I'm not looking for the extremes on any of this, the only time anyone gives a crap about the numbers is when the game of seedstock trading begins, for the rest of their lives all the cows have to do is meet my requirements and expectations within the parameters I've set for my operation, have a calf, raise it, make it keepable or saleable, do it with gentle good humor, and do it all again next year. Very simple it is when you boil it all down.

Here's an example of what I mean about $EN and $W, 9936489 look him up on the AAA site, $EN makes him look like a shining star, $W shows him up for the pos he was!

 

[3waycross]

yes he sucks but to be fair I never woulda read past the CED of -16 and BW 7.0. :shock: :shock: :shock: That bull would have to crap gold bricks for me to want to own him.

I do see what you mean though, Robert. I also like the RA definition a little better. It seems to be a more common sense approach.

 

[Stocker Steve]

A high EN value in ABS in N Bar Prime Time. His pictured daughters look a bit fleshy - - kind of traditional.
Some of the low EN daughters from other BA bulls look almost dairy...

N Bar Prime Time is high for $W and EN, so is he a good cow maker?

 

[Oldtimer]

A high EN value in ABS in N Bar Prime Time. His pictured daughters look a bit fleshy - - kind of traditional.
Some of the low EN daughters from other BA bulls look almost dairy...

N Bar Prime Time is high for $W and EN, so is he a good cow maker?

Many that have used him claim so... I will tell you in 10 years- as I have a half dozen or so daughters about to calve for the first time...... ;-)

 

[robert]

A high EN value in ABS in N Bar Prime Time. His pictured daughters look a bit fleshy - - kind of traditional.
Some of the low EN daughters from other BA bulls look almost dairy...

N Bar Prime Time is high for $W and EN, so is he a good cow maker?

I would say a productive cow maker, good is too subjective (but better than 'great' that usually accompanies the latest unproven product of the poodle club )

 

[Lucky_P]

I consider $EN, and prefer to have a value above +$10.00 - though I'm having some doubts as to whether or not it really makes much difference with the current winter feeding program we have; but don't have enough daughters of high $EN sires producing for a long enough period to really make a judgement.

Got any thoughts on Gardens Wave?
http://abs-bs.absglobal.com/beef/angus. ... o=29AN1701
High $EN of +$30.68, $W of $39.83, $B of $71.67
High Marbling (+1.05), high Ribeye (+.86), and he's homozygous for all tenderness genes.
I used 15 units of Wave before his initial Docility rating came out: -23 - Yikes! But he's 'come up' to a -2 Docility score in the meantime, and as nice as the fall group of Wave-sired calves look here - especially the heifers - I'll probably go back to him again, if they don't turn out too squirrely.

Have a handful of N Bar Prime Time D806 daughters that have calved out, and a dozen or more in the pipeline over the next 2 years; most out of SimAngus cows. He definitely reduces frame size. Big time.
He's noted as an udder improver as well, and while his milk epd of 18 is pretty moderate, I've had 3 D806 daughters that had tiny little udders - look like the bags I was used to seeing on Chianina cows starving their calves back in the '80s; the D806 daughters' calves did OK, but were nothing special to write home about - I'm hoping the second time out of the gate, they'll look a little more 'wet'.