Linebreeding Info

[cotton1]

Hello all, I'm looking for info on linebreeding with regards to the information obtained by a inbreeding calculator. Some of you already know I have been moving towards reducing my gene pool in my herd for a little while now. As a registered producer I feel it is important to set a type in my cattle to provide uniformity, make my cattle identifiable within the breed, and provide as much heterosis to my customers as possible.

I was playing with a inbreeding calculator this morning using some of the matings that are taking place in my pastures right now, and comparing them to could have beens if I had chosen to AI instead of using my bull. I have looked at the inbreeding calculators before, but not too in depth so I developed a few questions.

Some of my matings offspring next fall could have coefficents ranging from 3.25% to as high as 25% on the father/daughter matings. Those 25% matings will likely become more common here over the next few years as I am pleased with the first crop on my bull and will know much more by this time next year as the second crop here and a crop off his natural service at a friends should be here this spring along with several AI calfs abroad.

So, opinions on how much coeffiecent is too much? How much is not enough( to make any difference)?

Next question: Can the % blood be used to sway the direction of the genotype for a better chance at getting the desired type in the offspring? This refers to the generations back in the pedigree a little. As an example, one of the cows had a bull in there I know is not consistent. When I did the 4 gen calculation, he was only at 6% blood. The bulls I do know are consistent, and desired for my use are at like 18% I think. I think I am wondering if I can find a magic %blood number to keep undisreables at or under untill I have some stacked genes in the first part of the pedigrees, like the father daughter matings should produce.

One more for now: If i do a 4 gen calculation and have the same bull in there 3-4 times, how does that compare to doing a say 10 gen calculation and some foundation bull back there being in there say 10 times? Will I be "mining" the old traits out?

This is not easy for me to understand. Putting the boy with the girls is easy, but I want to line breed with purpose, so I need to learn all I can.

Thanks in advance,

Cotton1

 

[Ebenezer]

So, opinions on how much coeffiecent is too much?

When you see loss of workable phenotype but it is then a selection or culling of the individual and not a loss of the line.

How much is not enough( to make any difference)?

15% or less

Can the % blood be used to sway the direction of the genotype for a better chance at getting the desired type in the offspring? This refers to the generations back in the pedigree a little. As an example, one of the cows had a bull in there I know is not consistent. When I did the 4 gen calculation, he was only at 6% blood. The bulls I do know are consistent, and desired for my use are at like 18% I think. I think I am wondering if I can find a magic %blood number to keep undisreables at or under untill I have some stacked genes in the first part of the pedigrees, like the father daughter matings should produce.

Depends on the prepotency of the dud ancestor, the amount of influence inherited from him at random and the unknown of recessive genes in the cattle that you consider to be better or superior.

If i do a 4 gen calculation and have the same bull in there 3-4 times, how does that compare to doing a say 10 gen calculation and some foundation bull back there being in there say 10 times? Will I be "mining" the old traits out?

Much beyond 4 generations is just to know and little more than words. But some like to know.

This is not easy for me to understand.

Much easier that always searching for a corrector bull or something new to give you a thrill down your leg. And cheaper and more useful to any who buy better animals from you.

 

[pdfangus]

you are concentrating genes

concentrating good genes and

concentrating bad genes

it is up to you to remove the bad genes and to look hard at the cattle that produced the bad genetic expression....

even if they are your favorites or most expensive.

 

[RanchMan90]

How do you calculate coefficient?

 

[cotton1]

Using a online inbreeding calculator. They are mostly for dogs, but they are out there.

I don't know how to post the links like many do. Just search for it, they all use the same formula developed in the 1920s I believe.

15% min, got it. If 4 gens are really all that's going to matter likely, I should be OK soon. Right now I'm developing a base herd, or think I am anyway.

The most expensive ones may be relative. If I can develop a herd, and pasture that compliment each other with little input, my cows will be much cheaper. Its going to cost something to get there I'm sure.

Cotton1

 

[WalnutCrest]

Read up on the breeding strategies deployed by those who breed racing pigeons. Shorter gestational cycles and more progeny. Some lines have extensive practical record keeping and testing, including record keeping resulting from crossing various tightly bred lines.

Transformationally interesting (at least to me).

 

[Son of Butch]

Dr Tatiana Stanton from Cornell University says 12.5% is the optimal level, she breeds goats and has her own goat herd.
12.5% ensures consistency and uniformity while allowing enough diversity to avoid inbred suppression across the herd.

 

[RanchMan90]

What would be the coefficient off a bull bred to his offspring? And coefficient of bull bred to grand offspring? I've always been told a good bull is half your cowherd, could be stretched to being much more with line breeding.

 

[City Guy]

Am I correct when I say that the Wye herd in Maryland and the Pinebank herd in New Zealand have not introduced new stock in nearly 100 years? May also be true of the Rotokawa herd, formally of New Zealand.

 

[Son of Butch]

It is my understanding that while the Wye herd have individuals with dozens and dozens of crosses going back to bring
up superior individuals, the herd coefficient is kept to the low side of a 6.25 - 9.38 range

But it is not something that I have looked at closely and just going by what I was told.

 

[Nesikep]

I guess the post I thought I had written I didn't post...
Here's another good link https://www.leonbergerdatabase.com/avk_e.html

I've been doing some experiments with it.. My homeraised bull bred a number of half siblings the year before last and the calves looked good.. a little small but they were all from young cows as well.. Last year he got a better quality group of cows to breed so I'll see how those calves work out for me next year

 

[Waterway65]

Line breeding is a tool. When I was in college at SDSU the dairy science department was experimenting with inbreeding trying to develop two separate lines. They Definitly found the under oracle traits from what I saw. When they crossed the two lines later they Definitly produced a animal superior to the parents. However had they simply used the best genetic available to the breed they would have improved the herd faster. Line breeding can be useful but seeking out top animals that can meet your criteria where ever is probably more important.

 

[Ebenezer]

Linebreeding rule #1 - have a purpose defined before you start. #2 Be sure that nobody already has what you need for your purpose as it is easier to buy than to breed.

12.5% is a super safe level. To create true prepotency you need the spirit of the late Bubba the reneck, of most southern communities who had the final words of , "Hey ya'll, ... Watch this!" and bump up higher.

 

[cotton1]

Ranchman90-I believe a bull bred to his daughter will produce a calf with a 25% coefficient. Not sure about the bull to his grand, but it may be as low as 5-6% I would guess.

Folks I know who do it have a type thats suitable, and repeatable. If the foundation is any good you can "Watch this" for decades from what Ive seen.

I was just wondering if anybody could tell me a % blood that would have an effect on the offspring that would be substantial, as if it were a tool to gauge probability. In hind sight of a inbred calf none of this really matters to me. I was just wondering if there was a way to minimally project what would likely happen using a inbred calculators percentages in a pedigree if plugged in before a mating took place. Much like "doing the math" with EPDs.

This kind of info would require somebody had been down that path and made some observations. I can tuff it out myself just fine, but since I am creating a basis for my next herd I thought I would ask. You never know what you can learn if you ask.As I hear a lot when things get weird, "their just cows". Lessons learned hardest, are lessons learned best so it seems.

If this post seems like I'm a ass, I don't intend it that way. I appreciate all contributions to this thread thus far. I can see where it may seem that way to some. Maybe I am over thinking things, but when there is a question in my mind and no answer to be found, it is frustration.

Cotton1

 

[Ebenezer]

I was just wondering if anybody could tell me a % blood that would have an effect on the offspring that would be substantial, as if it were a tool to gauge probability.

Each genepool will respond differently so that annswer is "it depends". The 12.5% mentioned is a sustainable population but we do not know if that is the average of the population or the maximum allowed per individual. As either, it is borderline and probably would relate to the 1st cousin rule or somewhere there about. That was Lent's upper limit which he imposed upon himself. Wye probably has individuals as high as 15 or 20% but overall are low % IBC.

Linebreeding is about the population but the individuals still need evaluation to see if they are fits or outliers. It is hard to sell a highly inbred bull that is a good fit.

You will know "when" by slip of function and/or phenotype and you do not think that you can afford them anymore. There is a sag early on, according to Falloon, called the Bulmer effect. Get past it and things can rebound from an assumed failure. From historic efforts and other folks who are still linebreeding - expect 85% failure (total line depletion) of initial lines when trialed at significant inbreeding efforts.

A tight genepool is a double whammy. You work with what you start with and then realize that as in every generational interval there is genetic loss rather than genetic gain. The other things that come along are mutations, good and bad, and the stacking of recessive genes.

 

[WalnutCrest]

This guy has some fascinating (to me) stuff on inbreeding / linebreeding of racing pigeons on his website.

Here's a direct link to his writings / thoughts on breeding.

And a bit on his performance testing.

There are lessons to be learned here and applied to breeding better cattle. IMO.

 

[cotton1]

Thank you Gents, I will investigate.

Cotton1

 

[Son of Butch]

The one thing that worries me about tight matings is there seems to be a genuine decline in pg rates and that is where I would cull the hardest, by not making excuses for a great looking individual that has trouble breeding back on time.
That is hard for me and most others I believe, culling one that looks so good... but doesn't perform reproductively, it's easy [and perhaps human nature] to make excuses for her based on hope and not reality.
To develop a real good line demands ruthlessness.

 

[Ebenezer]

http://www.angus.media/News/Angus-Convention/547/Smaller-Isnt-Always-Better

Might want to reconsider linebreeding or sire selection for small calves and short gestation. We had something of this discussion somewhere else and I mentioned selecting sires for combination of +BW EPDs and +CED EPDs and there was some static.

making excuses for a great looking individual

Nobody said but plenty think that linebred cattle are linebred for looks. The first rule is #1 have a purpose. The purpose must over rule the look. Get them tight and they may function properly without phenotypic flaws but not look like you expected. A lot of great linebred cattle look plain. You just have to get over it.

Purposes: surely not terminal as the EPD race, higher inheritance factors for carcass traits and breeder's pride and greed have supplied plenty of terminal cattle. If you want growth, just pick one of hundreds of Angus bulls that are in AI catalogs or go back and pick up some semen on PDBS, Scotch Cap or past monster bulls. Want carcass, use Wagyu or a Wagyu influenced bull.

What if maternal is the goal of linebreeding. Do you really care what a maternal cow or bull looks like if you are really searching for the best or will you override #1 priority for # __ looks? Aren't they going to be complemented later with the use of terminal bulls bred to their offspring?

If you linebred for something else (but I don't see how you could not highly value maternal in any linebreeding effort due to cost and effort) at least breed for environmental fit.

 

[Nesikep]

I think if you want to do linebreeding and "fiddle around" and experiment, do it on a smaller portion of your herd.. It will limit the extent of any disaster, should you encounter one.. If it's successful, you can always keep a bull and breed the rest of the herd to him (which is probably significantly related anyhow.. half siblings, cousins, etc).

Just an example of my experimentation.. I bred my homeraised bull to a 7/8th sister (all paternal side), both had white stockings on the hind legs, the calf came out and was rather spotted, but well built and grew nicely for a first timer.. This year I didn't use him on any cow that had significant white (1 brockleface).. we'll see how the calves look in the spring.. Now those calves may still carry white genes, but with conscientious breeding I should be at least able to keep it from showing, and with WORK, actually eliminate it if I care to... At this point I'm not concerned about a brockleface here and there, the build and function is of more importance to me.