Frankie":31i61bl4 said:
RD-Sam":31i61bl4 said:
Avalon":31i61bl4 said:
along the same lines as Frankie stated. (IMF) is suppose to be positive. It is the good fat. (FAT) This is the fat on the exterior that gets trimmed and fed to the dogs. Ergo Fat takes away from the amount of salable meat.So the lower amount you have on a claf / the more profit you have. Too much fat - too much in the trash can....
IMF - Good fat FAT - bad Fat
Yep, I knew the IMF fat was a good thing, and it says the same thing in the CAB book. Do you have any idea how much the measurement would be in inches for Fat and have a 0 EPD?
No. EPDs aren't ever a specific number. When our bulls come of a feed test, they generally have too much backfat. Those same bulls developed on grass would carry much less backfat.
Backfat is not all bad. Packers want some fat cover to stop the meat from drying out while it's hanging. Back fat on cows helps insulate them in cold weather, plus they can draw on it during times of low forage quality. So you have to figure how backfat fits into your program, just like other EPDs.
RD-Sam-
In written exchange(s!) that you and I had several months ago, I pointed out that the different EPD's on various traits were not a TEMPLATE to be used for an ABSOLUTE, SET GOAL to be used for every circumstance in order to
MOLD your seedstock into, and therefore have a guaranteed "cookie stamp" from which you could pop-out calves - all of which would be just exactly alike!
As Frankie said, the different Positives (+) or Negatives (-) depend entirely on the characteristic(s) about which were are concerned. A negative (-) prediction is desirable when mating two individuals with a disparity of extremes in order to
approach a desirable "happy medium" with their progeny's genetics. The same principle applies to the subject of FAT, about which you seem to be confused. ...another feature, or element, which we must be aware of, is that the percentages of Fat which is being appraised and reported in the EPD charts is listed in the
thousandth's of the total. THOUSANDTH'S! That is merely an indication of something that is - somewhat - insignificant in the overall analysis of the interpretation, or conception, of an individual. The
combining of ALL the information is important, but the
application of that knowledge is precarious in the cumulative application of that data!
The critical pertinence in understanding the relevance of importance of EPD's is how to APPLY the knowledge of Expected Progeny
DIFFERENCES when planning sensible matings - NOT attempting to refute EVERY question, or expedite EVERY expectation regarding the "Building of the PERFECT BEEF ANIMAL". If that were even slightly possible, some of the best breeders in the business would have found the Formula - -a L - O - O - O NG time ago.
Hasn't happened - YET! There are different reasons for some breeder's seeking one trait percentage over another - or one EPD over another, and one can never know what the ultimate subliminal justifications may be for their reasoning.
Probably never will!
DOC HARRIS