Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
Huh? Comments, please
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Frankie" data-source="post: 61253" data-attributes="member: 13"><p>OK, here are some codes and formulas for you to look at. </p><p></p><p>This is the BIF Cattle Evaluation site: <a href="http://beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap5.PDF" target="_blank">http://beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap5.PDF</a></p><p></p><p>This explains Contemporary Groupings:</p><p><a href="http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap3.PDF" target="_blank">http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap3.PDF</a></p><p></p><p>and this is Animal Model for a Maternally Influenced Trait:</p><p><a href="http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/App5-1.PDF" target="_blank">http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/App5-1.PDF</a></p><p></p><p>And from the Angus Sire Summary: <a href="http://www.angus.org/sireeval/wean_year.html" target="_blank">http://www.angus.org/sireeval/wean_year.html</a></p><p></p><p>Weaning/Yearling</p><p>Weaning weight/Yearling weight/Maternal Milk. Weaning weight/ postweaning gain were evaluated together in a multi-trait model. As it is recommended by the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) for the evaluation of maternally influenced traits, a direct genetic effect, a maternal genetic effect and a maternal permanent environmental effect were fitted for weaning weight. Direct and maternal effects were not assumed to be correlated. Postweaning gain was not considered to be maternally influenced and, therefore, the direct genetic effect was the only random effect fitted. Weaning weight direct and postweaning gain were assumed to be correlated. Yearling weight EPDs were calculated from the EPDs for weaning weight direct and postweaning gain. </p><p>Yearling height. Yearling height was evaluated in a multi-trait model including 365-day adjusted yearling weight as a genetically correlated trait. </p><p>Scrotal circumference. This multi-trait animal model, encompassing yearling weight and scrotal performance data, includes an additional generation of pedigree added to improve pedigree ties and expand the availability of interim EPD values. </p><p></p><p>This is all available to anyone who truly wants the questions you've asked answered. I'll stand by my belief that you really don't want to know more about EPDs. You don't like them and are perfectly happy complaining about them instead of using them properly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've posted information explaining that EPDs have nothing to do with what an animal will weigh. <strong>Ever</strong>. You continue to ignore that. And again, what is a "great" EPD?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Apparently you're doing fine without EPDs. So why are you complaining that high EPDs are "what sells an animal"? If you have consistent cattle, you'll have consistent EPDs. I'd suggest that crossbreeding as you're doing will lead to inconsistent cattle, as well as unreliable EPDs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, what are "lovely EPDs?" There are no good ones or bad ones. Everyone needs to collect actual performance data on their cattle; it will make their breed's EPDs more reliable.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thank goodness there's no requirement for a person to use EPDs. If a person want's to leave a valuable tool on the shelf, that's his choice.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then, out of curosity, why are you so PO-ed that the Angus Association is not joining into the BIF program?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But you don't say for which trait? And are you talking about actual performance or an EPD? The Angus site, <a href="http://www.angus.org" target="_blank">http://www.angus.org</a>, has average EPDs of the breed on their website. I'm not going to dig it up for you. If you really wanted to know, Angus average EPDs are available several plances.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't dis every breed except Angus. I have a lot of respect for several breeds whose breeders are working hard to create branded beef programs, reliable EPDs, etc. I don't believe I've ever seen a Chi and only know one person who claims to have owned part of a Chi bull years ago. I do not have much patience with someone who will come on this board and whine and cry about something not working when they have no understanding of how it's supposed to work. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, check out the number 1 complaint of consumers about beef. Surely you know what that is? If not, I'll tell you: it's inconsistency. Chicken and pork are eating our lunch because they are so consistent. You know what a chicken will taste like when you buy it at the supermarket. You may not like it, but you know what to expect. IMO, the wide variety of breeds in the US is a major contributor to that inconsistency. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My breed can be compared across breeds with many others. You're the one who chose a special breed and now complain because no one is willing to support it. While every breed may have something to share, I don't agree that every breed has something <strong>worthwhile</strong> to share. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>EPDs take all that actual performance into consideration and more history than you can possibly incorporate.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>EPDs aren't theory. They work. Several universities have proven that. When the Angus Association first came out with the Milk EPD, University professors were knocking themselves out to milk their Angus cows and see if the ones with a high milk EPD actually produced more milk than those with lower milk EPDs. And they did. (BTW, the milk EPD is actually measured in pounds of calf weaned, not pounds of milk, but there is some correlation). OK State did a several year project where they bred similar cows to Angus bulls with high milk EPDs and low milk EPDs. They then kept heifers and measured the difference in their milk production and pounds of calf produced. They found the milk EPDs to be quite accurate. EPDs are not a fad; they're here to stay.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh? I thought you wanted to look at the program that created EPDs in case a dozen universities and breed associations might have made a mistake in their computation?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Frankie, post: 61253, member: 13"] OK, here are some codes and formulas for you to look at. This is the BIF Cattle Evaluation site: [url=http://beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap5.PDF]http://beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap5.PDF[/url] This explains Contemporary Groupings: [url=http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap3.PDF]http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/Chap3.PDF[/url] and this is Animal Model for a Maternally Influenced Trait: [url=http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/App5-1.PDF]http://www.beefimprovement.org/guidelines/App5-1.PDF[/url] And from the Angus Sire Summary: [url=http://www.angus.org/sireeval/wean_year.html]http://www.angus.org/sireeval/wean_year.html[/url] Weaning/Yearling Weaning weight/Yearling weight/Maternal Milk. Weaning weight/ postweaning gain were evaluated together in a multi-trait model. As it is recommended by the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) for the evaluation of maternally influenced traits, a direct genetic effect, a maternal genetic effect and a maternal permanent environmental effect were fitted for weaning weight. Direct and maternal effects were not assumed to be correlated. Postweaning gain was not considered to be maternally influenced and, therefore, the direct genetic effect was the only random effect fitted. Weaning weight direct and postweaning gain were assumed to be correlated. Yearling weight EPDs were calculated from the EPDs for weaning weight direct and postweaning gain. Yearling height. Yearling height was evaluated in a multi-trait model including 365-day adjusted yearling weight as a genetically correlated trait. Scrotal circumference. This multi-trait animal model, encompassing yearling weight and scrotal performance data, includes an additional generation of pedigree added to improve pedigree ties and expand the availability of interim EPD values. This is all available to anyone who truly wants the questions you've asked answered. I'll stand by my belief that you really don't want to know more about EPDs. You don't like them and are perfectly happy complaining about them instead of using them properly. I've posted information explaining that EPDs have nothing to do with what an animal will weigh. [b]Ever[/b]. You continue to ignore that. And again, what is a "great" EPD? Apparently you're doing fine without EPDs. So why are you complaining that high EPDs are "what sells an animal"? If you have consistent cattle, you'll have consistent EPDs. I'd suggest that crossbreeding as you're doing will lead to inconsistent cattle, as well as unreliable EPDs. Again, what are "lovely EPDs?" There are no good ones or bad ones. Everyone needs to collect actual performance data on their cattle; it will make their breed's EPDs more reliable. Thank goodness there's no requirement for a person to use EPDs. If a person want's to leave a valuable tool on the shelf, that's his choice. Then, out of curosity, why are you so PO-ed that the Angus Association is not joining into the BIF program? But you don't say for which trait? And are you talking about actual performance or an EPD? The Angus site, [url=http://www.angus.org]http://www.angus.org[/url], has average EPDs of the breed on their website. I'm not going to dig it up for you. If you really wanted to know, Angus average EPDs are available several plances. I don't dis every breed except Angus. I have a lot of respect for several breeds whose breeders are working hard to create branded beef programs, reliable EPDs, etc. I don't believe I've ever seen a Chi and only know one person who claims to have owned part of a Chi bull years ago. I do not have much patience with someone who will come on this board and whine and cry about something not working when they have no understanding of how it's supposed to work. Yeah, check out the number 1 complaint of consumers about beef. Surely you know what that is? If not, I'll tell you: it's inconsistency. Chicken and pork are eating our lunch because they are so consistent. You know what a chicken will taste like when you buy it at the supermarket. You may not like it, but you know what to expect. IMO, the wide variety of breeds in the US is a major contributor to that inconsistency. My breed can be compared across breeds with many others. You're the one who chose a special breed and now complain because no one is willing to support it. While every breed may have something to share, I don't agree that every breed has something [b]worthwhile[/b] to share. EPDs take all that actual performance into consideration and more history than you can possibly incorporate. EPDs aren't theory. They work. Several universities have proven that. When the Angus Association first came out with the Milk EPD, University professors were knocking themselves out to milk their Angus cows and see if the ones with a high milk EPD actually produced more milk than those with lower milk EPDs. And they did. (BTW, the milk EPD is actually measured in pounds of calf weaned, not pounds of milk, but there is some correlation). OK State did a several year project where they bred similar cows to Angus bulls with high milk EPDs and low milk EPDs. They then kept heifers and measured the difference in their milk production and pounds of calf produced. They found the milk EPDs to be quite accurate. EPDs are not a fad; they're here to stay. Oh? I thought you wanted to look at the program that created EPDs in case a dozen universities and breed associations might have made a mistake in their computation? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
Huh? Comments, please
Top