Genestar's note appears to show a lot of bias. First, looking at the charts, there is a clear negative correlation between feed efficiency and IMF. 4% IMF and 6% IMF is a huge difference, and the highest IMF was clearly in the least efficient cows. Second, how come genestar doesn't note if there is any correlation between its tenderness genes and efficiency? Anyone care to bet whether the tenderness/efficiency correlation is also a statistically significant negative correlation?
Wouldn't it be interesting if a paper came out proving a negative correlation between growth and quality (IMF/tenderness)? Where would we as an industry go then?