EPD's

[cattleman99]

This was mentioned on another topic but I thought it deserved it's own. I don't use them as I find them totally unreliable. They are very easily manipulated. I know a lot of purebred breeders in many different breeds who don't own scales but always have great weaning and yearling weights on their papers and in their sale catalogs. Not suggesting no one weighs but facts are facts. Same with Calving ease (CE). A 120 lb bull is recorded as 85 lbs Not suggesting everyone does it but I know it gets done. It's just so easy to manipulate things.

Further facts check out you favorite bulls in whatever breed in the Canadian Association and the American Association. Lots of differences. For example I breed mostly Simmental. Check Circle S Leachman 600U. He's in most Purebred Simmental Pedigrees multiple times if you look far enough back. Yet he's in the top 60% for WW in Canada and 41% in the US. That's quite the discrepancy. Wheatland Red Teddy. Another very popular AI bull currently on both sides of the border. Top 15% for CE in Canada and 75% in the US. He's also 48% for WW in the US and 80% in Canada. I could go on and on and list many other popular bulls but the Simmental breed is a great breed to use as an example as it dominates Canada and is very popular in the US as well. We've been number 1 for most of the past decade in registrations in Canada.

It's actually scary that some people make breeding decisions on EPD's alone to me. I'm not saying you won't find very similar numbers on some bulls either because you do. There is just no consitency. This occurs in every Breed. I'd like to know the Scientific explanation but I already know there isn't one. I'm curious about your thoughts.

 

[redcowsrule33]

I first want to say that I do believe in EPDs, but only for what they are worth (based on accuracies and the bloodlines).

That being said, I too have wondered about the discrepancies between Canadian and US Simmental EPD's. I also have noticed a difference in general in phenotype, plus they are less concerned it seems with higher birthweights. My theory has been that their "average" animal is different from a US "average" animal. Most US late-model bloodlines are not used as heavily in Canada. They have a larger cohort of fullbloods as well. I would be interested in seeing a phenotypic comparison of the "average" cow in Canada and the US. Perhaps there is enough divergence to account for the differences. If this were true, then you would have to use a formula similar to the MARC breed comparisons to fairly compare them "apples to apples".

Or maybe I'm full of it. I've been accused of worse. JMHO.

 

[cattleman99]

There are definately overall differences in the phenotype but the bulls I used as examples are, in 600U's case it's hard to not find him somewhere in a purebred pedigree in either the US or Canada and in Red Teddy's case he is currently one of the heaviest used bulls in both the US and Canada.

My point is there is just to much human interferance in EPD's to make them much use. I've found it's more practical to just ignore them. The other problem with EPD's is when you buy a yearling bull and use him for several years his EPD's are often not even close to being what they were when you bought him. I realize environment, etc can influence things and I would expect to see a slight difference between Canada and the US but not the types of swings you see. I expect higher birth weights in Canada than the US but this shouldn't influence the overall calving ease as for the most part our cows are bigger. They should be having larger calves.

DNA on the other hand is beginning to look very interesting to me to use as they are developing more tests. DNA is DNA and isn't going to lie to you.

 

[dun]

Unless they are merged as one database, some of the difference may be the different base that each was developed form. A 0 for BW may mean 2 different things.

 

[CSM]

I do not own a set of scales but that does not keep me from weighing my cattle at weaning and yearling for the last 11 years. Also, I think you will see a lot of variances in Canadian and U.S. for the average cow of any breed. But my main point, you are not dishonest just because you don't own scales.

CSM

 

[cattleman99]

I don't care if you own scales if you actually rent or borrow some or don't put weights in at all. I've been to lots of sales where there are no birthweights as the guys calve in the pasture. It's the guys that are either eyeballing them or making up weights that they know will sell that really make EPD's useless.

 

[dun]

I don't care if you own scales if you actually rent or borrow some or don't put weights in at all. I've been to lots of sales where there are no birthweights as the guys calve in the pasture. It's the guys that are either eyeballing them or making up weights that they know will sell that really make EPD's useless.

By the time the accuracy starts to get around .6-.7 unless the partiular animal has never been used except in one herd, a lot of what you're complaining about is averaged out. Even if the EPD has an accuracy of .9 that is still only accuarte for 66%, the variation within that 66% is smaller but you still have that other 33% to contend with.

 

[JustSimmental]

I am a PB Simmental breeder and I stand firm on EPD's as I think they are very helpful.
My analogy about EPD's is "like buying hay without a forage sample--ya just cant tell by looking".
I do know that there are big differences between the Canadian EPD's and the US EPD's, but I think most of this is due to a larger percentage of Fleck influence in Canada. Your example:

CIRCLE S LEACHMAN 600U Birth Date: 1986-03-20
CE: 11.7 BW: 0.8; WW: 32.1; YW: 62.9; MCE: 3.5; Milk: 3.2; MWW: 19,2; Stay: 25.2; CW: 1.4 YG: .02; Marb: 0.30; BF: 0.01; REA: 0.05; API: 135.3; TI: 66.6
We can easily look it up: http://herdbook.simmental.org/simmapp/template/evalstats,purebred.vm
WW of 32.1>> which is top 44%, which in todays standards isnt that great.
CE of 11.7 >> which is top 8%, which even in todays standards is very good.

Now in the FullBlood percentile tables it is different--- this is what you are using, which you can't use for PB Simmental. FB Tables: http://herdbook.simmental.org/simmapp/template/evalstats,fullblood.vm

WW of 32.1 in the FB Table is top 60%
CE of 11.7 in the FB Table is top 1 %

You cannot measure Purebred (PB) EPD's by using the Full Blood (FB) tables and vice versa.

No descrepancy here, except you were using the wrong table to measure PB simmentals.

JustSimms

This was mentioned on another topic but I thought it deserved it's own. I don't use them as I find them totally unreliable. They are very easily manipulated. I know a lot of purebred breeders in many different breeds who don't own scales but always have great weaning and yearling weights on their papers and in their sale catalogs. Not suggesting no one weighs but facts are facts. Same with Calving ease (CE). A 120 lb bull is recorded as 85 lbs Not suggesting everyone does it but I know it gets done. It's just so easy to manipulate things.

Further facts check out you favorite bulls in whatever breed in the Canadian Association and the American Association. Lots of differences. For example I breed mostly Simmental. Check Circle S Leachman 600U. He's in most Purebred Simmental Pedigrees multiple times if you look far enough back. Yet he's in the top 60% for WW in Canada and 41% in the US. That's quite the discrepancy. Wheatland Red Teddy. Another very popular AI bull currently on both sides of the border. Top 15% for CE in Canada and 75% in the US. He's also 48% for WW in the US and 80% in Canada. I could go on and on and list many other popular bulls but the Simmental breed is a great breed to use as an example as it dominates Canada and is very popular in the US as well. We've been number 1 for most of the past decade in registrations in Canada.

It's actually scary that some people make breeding decisions on EPD's alone to me. I'm not saying you won't find very similar numbers on some bulls either because you do. There is just no consitency. This occurs in every Breed. I'd like to know the Scientific explanation but I already know there isn't one. I'm curious about your thoughts.

 

[cattleman99]

Nope. I used the Purebred template if you check closely i said 60% in Canada. It's just coincidence it corresponds with the American Fullblood template.

 

[JustSimmental]

Well, not following EPD's is a mistake, because you just can't tell by looking.
I have looked at some of the Canadian Simmental and most of them wont cut it on US standards for PB Simms. I think perhaps it is the huge fleck influence.

I notice that they dont even include API and TI.

Nope. I used the Purebred template if you check closely i said 60% in Canada. It's just coincidence it corresponds with the American Fullblood template.

 

[redcowsrule33]

Well, not following EPD's is a mistake, because you just can't tell by looking.
I have looked at some of the Canadian Simmental and most of them wont cut it on US standards for PB Simms. I think perhaps it is the huge fleck influence.

I notice that they dont even include API and TI.

Nope. I used the Purebred template if you check closely i said 60% in Canada. It's just coincidence it corresponds with the American Fullblood template.

This was my point earlier. It's not coincidence that the American Fullblood template corresponds so tightly to the Canadian template. They have far more flecks and the flecks in the US have not diverged significantly from the Canadian ones. When you are looking at the EPDs from a percentile basis, you are not comparing apples to apples since the average US simmental is not the same animal as the average Canadian simmental. It would be like comparing a US black angus to a US red angus. Fundamentally similar breeds when you look at their genetic origens but have taken divergent paths. You could never say that a black angus that is in the 50th percentile for YW is the same as a red angus in the 50th percentile. This is why they have gone through all the trouble to create conversions between breeds so you can compare apples to apples. This is why the EPDs of a US bull in Canada is so different to a US bull in the US EPD system. They are being compared to a totally different group of animals.

As has been said 5 bizillion times on this board, EPDs are a selection TOOL and should not be considered to be the sole basis of selection of any one individual. As for DNA, I am skeptical of that as well for being the holy grail of cattle breeding since just because you carry the DNA does not mean it is a) expressed or b) necessarily passed on in the right combination to the progeny. Just another TOOL.

Just out of benign curiosity, cattleman99, even though you don't like EPDs (and that is your right!) you must register your animals and they are generated anyway. I would like to see the kind of animals you like to raise and what their EPDs are. I'm not out to make fun of you, I am very interested to see how your methods are working out. Prove your point!

 

[cattleman99]

You can't deny the Fleckvieh influence in the Canadian Simmental Herd. The commercial man demands the easy doing and natural fleshing with the moderate frame. They want calves that are going to provide lbs in the fall. That's why Simmental is as popular as it is up North here.

As for showing a bunch of my numbers they aren't relevant as I don't use them. I will say this though. My top 1st calf heifer has terrible numbers. Your comments made me actually look up her EPD's. She is in the 95th % for WW and YW. She weaned a 705 lb FEb 24 bull calf the other day which is off a heifer bull and not a performance bull within my own herd. I'm sure not complaining as few of his calves are ever keepers but he calves darn easy so both my brother and I use him on our heifer pens as we calve at different times. Shows you the value of the EPD's. I also have cows with great EPD"s. But I couldn't care less. I don't market EPD's I market genetics and quality cattle. My customers are who I answer too. And after 27 years and counting in the Purebred Industry I'm still here and doing alright.

I'm also breeding a select few of my cows Red Angus the past couple of years as some of my customers have requested this. It's small samples but I've used LCC Field Day who is supposed to be a performance bull. They are made right but I find them on the small side so I won't use him again. There certainly isn't a lot of performance in those calves. I've also used LMG Gills Custer on some heifers and he not only calves easy but the first 3 should calve in January to an easy calving Fleckvieh bull to give me some 3/4 bloods and look great. I'm very happy with him and will continue to use him selectively. He's supposed to be all calving ease and not much else based on the so called numbers. My Select Sires rep recommended them and he's known my cows for the past 7 or 8 years now.

 

[Herefords.US]

I am a PB Simmental breeder and I stand firm on EPD's as I think they are very helpful.
My analogy about EPD's is "like buying hay without a forage sample--ya just cant tell by looking".

I probably ought to stay out of a "Simmental" thread, but I just couldn't let this statement pass.

Your analogy of comparing EPDs to the forage testing of hay is, frankly put, FALSE!

Genetic DNA profiling of cattle might be a comparable analogy to forage testing, if all the relevant markers regarding important economic traits had been identified in cattle.

But EPDs are nowhere that absolute, and except in cases of highly proven bulls where the accuracy level has topped the .6 level, completely unreliable.

If you're looking at virgin bulls...or cows of any age...and you think those EPD numbers ACCURATELY reflect that animal's producing ability...like a forage test...you're kidding yourself!

George