Little Difference Between Breeds in Growth

[Brandonm22]

I saw this article today

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Article.as ... id=Archive

Check out the second table. The Angus and Hereford bulls are about the same for weaning weight as Limousin and sire heavier calves than Chiangus, Maine Anjou, Braunvieh, or Santa Gertrudis bulls and really aren't trailing Charolais, Simmental bulls by much. Angus is only trailing Charolais (the growthiest major breed) by 21 pounds. While I respect the amount of work that Hereford and Angus breeders have put into changing their cattle, My question is it a good thing for the industry's top maternal breeds???

 

[Julian]

Are they maternal as they used to be?

 

[WichitaLineMan]

In a word: NO

 

[WichitaLineMan]

My response was to 22. The red angus guy snuck in front of me. But to answer his question: NO

 

[mrvictordomino]

I agree that the answer to both questions is NO. To repeat a comment I made on another thread,
no one breed can do it all. Each breed has it's own strengths and weaknesses and we all have the opportunity
to select and use genetics that complement our own current genetic make up or what works best in our environment.
If all breeds were the same in all traits, how then could we make any improvements or changes to our herds?
Assuming there are no perfect breeds of cattle, which of coarse there aren't.
DM

 

[ANAZAZI]

If all breeds were the same in all traits, how then could we make any improvements or changes to our herds?
Assuming there are no perfect breeds of cattle, which of coarse there aren't.
DM

Then we can not make one breed compliment the other; we can however still procure the highly desired heterosis effect, assuming the breeds have at least somewhat different gene pools.

(plagarizing Doc`s vocabulary)

 

[WichitaLineMan]

I think those across breed comparisons and EPDs are next to worthless. The sample size it too small and even if it were not too small it would only apply to that one specific environment (Clay Center, Nebraska). IMNSHO.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

I saw this article today

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Article.as ... id=Archive

Check out the second table. The Angus and Hereford bulls are about the same for weaning weight as Limousin and sire heavier calves than Chiangus, Maine Anjou, Braunvieh, or Santa Gertrudis bulls and really aren't trailing Charolais, Simmental bulls by much. Angus is only trailing Charolais (the growthiest major breed) by 21 pounds. While I respect the amount of work that Hereford and Angus breeders have put into changing their cattle, My question is it a good thing for the industry's top maternal breeds???

Good question. Brandonm22! You correctly point out the absolute facts that have transpired in the beef cattle industry in the last several years; that breeders are focusing on improving the 'profit' traits of their seedstock - and it has resulted in the 'improved' factors getting closer and closer to the 'edge of the cliff', but never falling off - - to oblivion. In theory, one may cut the distance to the edge in half every generation, but NEVER reach the point where there is not enough cliff edge on which to stand. BUT, in reality, that distance eventually gets to the point that there is nowhere else to go, and any improvement is almost nonexistent!

At that point in time, "Single Trait Selection" again rears its ugly head, and Producers of ALL breeds begin to converge and narrow the gap of desirable characteristics, to the exclusion of BALANCE between Epd's, Functional Traits, and DNA Marker Technology. As producers of some breeds seek Growth traits in their selection protocols to the avoidance of maintaining Maternal characteristics with the same matings, others pursue Low Birth Weight and High Milk EPD's, resulting in loss of muscularity and 'beefiness' in the resulting progeny - with Carcass, Marbling, Rib Eye and Fat Thickness taking a hit in the process!

An analogy of this conundrum would be (if I can remember that far back!) in the disciplining of kids - - use thought, logic, and blending of reasonableness :| :tiphat: before you loose all sense of foundation, cause, and effect :nod: :? and go completely off on a tangent - and make a new hole in the roof, which, after due consideration of your actions, you will later regret! :cry2:

With most producers seeking the same results for years, and using the same agendas to achieve those results, it stands to reason the various breeds of beef cattle are going to resemble each other in many characteristics,

It is a "tempest in a teapot'!

DOC HARRIS

 

[dun]

And this comes as news?
Since shortly after the first continental breeds started to be imported they started moderating them to be more british like and the british started going to the extreme to be more continental like.

 

[MO_cows]

Dr. Keuhn worked on this for years before it went public. He consulted with the number crunching folks who generate each of the breed's EPD, etc. I don't think across breed EPD's are hooey at all. I think they are just another tool to help the commercial guy compare different breeds on a more level playing field. Don't bet the farm on them, but don't pooh-pooh them either.

Can't help myself, I just gotta say it. Every time a new across-breed table comes out I can't help but notice how well the Tarentaise numbers compare. One of the lowest birth weight factors, one of the highest weaning weight factors. And a moderate yearling weight adjustment to reflect moderate frame size. Now 'scuse me while I go look for my bulletproof vest.......

 

[WichitaLineMan]

My problem is the numbers are taken from data produced by 3000 cows in a single location in the corn country of Nebraska. The data to me is too geographically limited.

 

[backhoeboogie]

My problem is the numbers are taken from data produced by 3000 cows in a single location in the corn country of Nebraska. The data to me is too geographically limited.

They should try it here in my climate. Except such an experiment would be pointless since it has already been going on for years and years.

Dun is on the money.

And the next cycle is????????

 

[TexasBred]

My problem is the numbers are taken from data produced by 3000 cows in a single location in the corn country of Nebraska. The data to me is too geographically limited.

Location shouldn't matter since they're all exposed to the same elements. You could run the tests in all 50 states and when you arrived at your weighted averages you'd get the same result.

 

[WichitaLineMan]

Also not breed's besides angus have enought data to have reliable epds anyways and now you are comparing these unreliable epds to one another?

 

[ANAZAZI]

I would say that the epd part is less intresting than the real numbers. Real numbers are not nice to the purely terminal breeds in the comparison.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

In the years since EPD's have been a force to consider in beef cattle selection and breeding technics, I have been interested in the sometimes vociferous and vituperous debates expressed on both sides of the subject. I won't go into the many reasons and explanations as to WHY the emphasis of using EPD's to improve breeding decisions are sensible and accurate at this time. That has been accomplished sufficiently in the past many times. But any one who will clear their mind of prejudicial bias, and allow common sense and reason to prevail should understand that IF there were a more accurate method to ascertain the genetic data of seedstock - surely at least ONE of the Geniuses who so continuously condemn and censure EPD's would have presented their academic findings and basked in the glory that would have shone upon them!

The enhancement of EPD's and verification of EPD Accuracies by the use of DNA-Marker Technology has "Leap-Frogged" Trait and Characteristic awareness through the expedient use of Molecular Value Predictions (MVP's). The tremendous scientific and accurate incorporation of these DNA Markers relating to Feed Efficiency, Marbling and Tenderness has opened a wide door to additional methods of providing reliable information for producers to utilize in making breeding decisions.

Do the 'EPD nay-sayers' stubbornly oppose this most recent method of assistance in obtaining greater genetic selection opportunities? Or will they continue to insist that "What was good enough for my Daddy is good enough for me?" And will they persist in blathering the same old - - "They still pay by the pound, don't they??" rhetoric, - which selection methods result in a loss of PROFIT!

Throughout all of history there has been at least two sides to every discussion. At least one-half of the participants in any argument are WRONG. Where do YOU stand on accepting scientific facts for your seedstock selection practices?

DOC HARRIS

 

[LFF]

In the years since EPD's have been a force to consider in beef cattle selection and breeding technics, I have been interested in the sometimes vociferous and vituperous debates expressed on both sides of the subject. I won't go into the many reasons and explanations as to WHY the emphasis of using EPD's to improve breeding decisions are sensible and accurate at this time. That has been accomplished sufficiently in the past many times. But any one who will clear their mind of prejudicial bias, and allow common sense and reason to prevail should understand that IF there were a more accurate method to ascertain the genetic data of seedstock - surely at least ONE of the Geniuses who so continuously condemn and censure EPD's would have presented their academic findings and basked in the glory that would have shone upon them!

The enhancement of EPD's and verification of EPD Accuracies by the use of DNA-Marker Technology has "Leap-Frogged" Trait and Characteristic awareness through the expedient use of Molecular Value Predictions (MVP's). The tremendous scientific and accurate incorporation of these DNA Markers relating to Feed Efficiency, Marbling and Tenderness has opened a wide door to additional methods of providing reliable information for producers to utilize in making breeding decisions.

Do the 'EPD nay-sayers' stubbornly oppose this most recent method of assistance in obtaining greater genetic selection opportunities? Or will they continue to insist that "What was good enough for my Daddy is good enough for me?" And will they persist in blathering the same old - - "They still pay by the pound, don't they??" rhetoric, - which selection methods result in a loss of PROFIT!

Throughout all of history there has been at least two sides to every discussion. At least one-half of the participants in any argument are WRONG. Where do YOU stand on accepting scientific facts for your seedstock selection practices?

DOC HARRIS

Very well said Doc! AHMEN .

 

[ANAZAZI]

Well Doc; I suppose one can translate your post to: "We must use whatever information we have, otherwise we are foolish"

(Vituperous is a new word for me, but I hope I got the general idea)

 

[WichitaLineMan]

Doc,

Derivative contracts on Wall Street were designed by best MATH minds in the country. Way smarter than the folks designing EPD calculations. And we see how that turned out.

I do believe in the "theory" of EPDS. My gripe is that the only breed with sufficient numbers for them to have any shred of credibility is Angus. And MAYBE the most highly used sires in the Hereford breed. The rest of the breeds are too small. The second factor that effects the accuracy is bad reporting whether it be down right lies, using estimates, bad contemporary group formings, ect..

 

[andybob]

Due to the extremes in the modern British breeds, there has been a increased interest in sourcing bulls and semen from the remaining pure native herds of Aberdeen Angus, Hereford and Devon, to breed new damline herds out of the oversized modern cattle, the herd on the estate here were developed for the local grassfed sales to top restraunts in London, but there is now a growing demand for bulls and semen from the herds.
Are EPD's recorded in the USA the only ones accepted? I was thinking about breeds such as the Bonsmara which have been performance tested since the development of the breed.