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
marbling and tenderness genes
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: 220499" data-attributes="member: 13"><p>If I had the choice in using two bulls, similar quality, I'd use the one with DNA markers for tenderness and marbling. But I think there's a lot of work left to be done in identifying how those genes actually work. For example, in the current <em>Oklahoma Cowman </em>magazine, Dr Glenn Selk, OK State Animal Science Dept, has results of work done at the University of IL and ISU on predicting carcass composition. They studied 1) realtime ultrasound; 2) live evaluation; 3)carcass EPDs and 4) GeneStar marbling. Over a 4-year period 192 Simmental steers were fed. DNA analysis was used to categorize steers as 0, 1 or 2STAR. The primary results showed the GeneSTAR mabling DNA marker was not an accurate indicator of IMF. Marbling EPD was correlated to IMF; live visual evaluation better estimated YG than quality grade; realtime ultrasound most accurately predicted marbling, carcass value and profit.</p><p></p><p>Source: Rincker and co-workers. 2006. Professional Animal Scientist. Vol. 22:144-152.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Frankie, post: 220499, member: 13"] If I had the choice in using two bulls, similar quality, I'd use the one with DNA markers for tenderness and marbling. But I think there's a lot of work left to be done in identifying how those genes actually work. For example, in the current [i]Oklahoma Cowman [/i]magazine, Dr Glenn Selk, OK State Animal Science Dept, has results of work done at the University of IL and ISU on predicting carcass composition. They studied 1) realtime ultrasound; 2) live evaluation; 3)carcass EPDs and 4) GeneStar marbling. Over a 4-year period 192 Simmental steers were fed. DNA analysis was used to categorize steers as 0, 1 or 2STAR. The primary results showed the GeneSTAR mabling DNA marker was not an accurate indicator of IMF. Marbling EPD was correlated to IMF; live visual evaluation better estimated YG than quality grade; realtime ultrasound most accurately predicted marbling, carcass value and profit. Source: Rincker and co-workers. 2006. Professional Animal Scientist. Vol. 22:144-152. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
marbling and tenderness genes
Top