Marbling...how much should you care?

[Jake]

Got the grid data back on our steers a couple weeks ago. Almost all were SAV sired. We fed them about 3-4 weeks longer than I would have liked but the fed cattle market kept rallying and we had corn bought cheaper so the math worked to keep going

68 head 17 months old
1393 Live weight #885 carcass. 63.55% dress
27 head Prime
41 Choice
55 head YG1-3

Our feed conversions were good, don't have that data in front of me at the moment. Had too many go over 1050 and those were the ones that hurt our YG.

Never have used a "carcass" angus bull and won't chase that solely either.

 

[TennesseeTuxedo]

Got the grid data back on our steers a couple weeks ago. Almost all were SAV sired. We fed them about 3-4 weeks longer than I would have liked but the fed cattle market kept rallying and we had corn bought cheaper so the math worked to keep going

68 head 17 months old
1393 Live weight #885 carcass. 63.55% dress
27 head Prime
41 Choice
55 head YG1-3

Our feed conversions were good, don't have that data in front of me at the moment. Had too many go over 1050 and those were the ones that hurt our YG.

Never have used a "carcass" angus bull and won't chase that solely either.

Very impressive.

 

[J+ Cattle]

68 head 17 months old
1393 Live weight #885 carcass. 63.55% dress
27 head Prime
41 Choice
55 head YG1-3
Had too many go over 1050 and those were the ones that hurt our YG.

The Choice-Select spread has been pretty significant in recent months, currently it's $28.32. The premiums for Choice, CAB, and Prime would outweigh the discounts for the YG4s. In other words it paid out well to feed 3-4 weeks longer....it takes money to make money.

Now based on your results do feel a need to reduce the external back fat by selecting bulls with a negative FAT EPD? Couldn't that help lower the number of YG4s?

J+ Cattle

 

[Jake]

The Choice-Select spread has been pretty significant in recent months, currently it's $28.32. The premiums for Choice, CAB, and Prime would outweigh the discounts for the YG4s. In other words it paid out well to feed 3-4 weeks longer....it takes money to make money.

Now based on your results do feel a need to reduce the external back fat by selecting bulls with a negative FAT EPD? Couldn't that help lower the number of YG4s?

J+ Cattle

Agreed, the YG4 discounts weren't punitive at all compared to the premiums and added weight.

Probably won't try to cut any back fat out of the herd as I still make more money by having easy fleshing mommas than what I get hit for those 4s.

 

[J+ Cattle]

I found this table which correlates Marbling EPDs to CAB acceptance. This allows you to determine how much is enough based on your goals.
The link is here so you can read the full article. It talks about "nurture versus nature", or rather the environmental/management aspect of marbling. Genetics is only part of the story.

Livestock Management recent news | Beef Magazine

Explore the latest news and expert commentary on Livestock Management brought to you by the editors of Beef Magazine

www.beefmagazine.com

 

[sstterry]

I found this table which correlates Marbling EPDs to CAB acceptance. This allows you to determine how much is enough based on your goals.
The link is here so you can read the full article. It talks about "nurture versus nature", or rather the environmental/management aspect of marbling. Genetics is only part of the story.

Livestock Management recent news | Beef Magazine

Explore the latest news and expert commentary on Livestock Management brought to you by the editors of Beef Magazine

www.beefmagazine.com

View attachment 14231

That was a very good and educational read. Thank you.

 

[Nkline]

I found this table which correlates Marbling EPDs to CAB acceptance. This allows you to determine how much is enough based on your goals.
The link is here so you can read the full article. It talks about "nurture versus nature", or rather the environmental/management aspect of marbling. Genetics is only part of the story.

Livestock Management recent news | Beef Magazine

Explore the latest news and expert commentary on Livestock Management brought to you by the editors of Beef Magazine

www.beefmagazine.com

View attachment 14231

I would say that is an inaccurate chart, we beat 50% prime with bulls around 0.60 marbling epds, and commercial cows. Granted we don't chase numbers and may have higher epds if our bulls were from a different herd. What we get kicked out of CAB the most for is too large of ribeye area.

 

[sstterry]

I would say that is an inaccurate chart, we beat 50% prime with bulls around 0.60 marbling epds, and commercial cows. Granted we don't chase numbers and may have higher epds if our bulls were from a different herd. What we get kicked out of CAB the most for is too large of ribeye area.

Are you using Continental Bulls or Cows in your program?

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I noticed (of course I would!) that the article conveniently did not refer to Simmental continental calves. Simmental is the highest marbling continental breed. We have no problem keeping YG low and marbling to Choice at 12-13 months of age with PB. The SimAngus are even better, because they keep the good marbling, but have better YG. And I don't have the research handy, just know what I've heard/read in past and KNOW by my own experience how easily they marble. And I do NOT even look at carcass data of the bulls I use other than REA.

 

[J+ Cattle]

Simmental is the highest marbling continental breed.

The SimAngus are even better, because they keep the good marbling, but have better YG.

I agree SimAngus makes a good cross but if I was breeding for this cross, I would still want to see the marbling EPD of the sire. Simme bulls just like Angus bulls can have a marbling EPD that ranges from positive to negative.

 

[Nkline]

Are you using Continental Bulls or Cows in your program?

We are using purebred Angus bulls over commercial high percentage Angus cows. We raise our own bulls and sell some, and selected to increase ribeye a little a couple years. Now I don't care if we use below breed average bulls it's worth it to put my selection pressure elsewhere.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

@J+ Cattle - The Simmental carcass EPD's are definitely helpful, but carcass data is NOT on my list of priorities - other than REA. I used to put steers on Cornell's steer program. All breeds fed out together and carcass data collected. My steers were always the highest profit steers, every black one qualified for CAB, never had a Select carcass. Cornell had a hard cutoff date, but they made 2 or 3 cuts prior to final date and pulled those that appeared finished. Mine were always in the first cut. The program was for about 20 years. Have not done it in about 15 years.
I presently sell all my spring born steers to a feedlot. Owner has his own butcher shop. He tells me every time we deliver to him, that he loves my steers because he makes good MONEY on them. He buys all I have "sight unseen". So --- my show type bulls that I choose must be doing something right in the carcass end of things, and I don't believe it was "accidental" that I picked the right kind of bulls. LOL
I have only bred to maybe 2 bulls that were not Purebred/Fullblood since 1972. So, I'm not saying everyone's Simmental herd will do what mine have done because a lot of herds are using mixed sires.

 

[Dave]

People should be concerned how their cattle do at the end. A while back I posted about 3 sets of heifers that sold on Superior. They were all about the same size, came from a relatively short distance from each other but were bred different and sold for a hugely different price. The bottom selling load were out of longhorn cows bred to Charolais bulls. The top selling load was out of various Angus, Red Angus, and Hereford cross cows bred to top of the line carcass quality Red Angus bulls. The Longhorn cross calves brought $1.36. The calves from the carcass quality bulls sold for over $2.00. That makes for some pretty easy math.

 

[Ebenezer]

People should be concerned how their cattle do at the end. A while back I posted about 3 sets of heifers that sold on Superior. They were all about the same size, came from a relatively short distance from each other but were bred different and sold for a hugely different price. The bottom selling load were out of longhorn cows bred to Charolais bulls. The top selling load was out of various Angus, Red Angus, and Hereford cross cows bred to top of the line carcass quality Red Angus bulls. The Longhorn cross calves brought $1.36. The calves from the carcass quality bulls sold for over $2.00. That makes for some pretty easy math.

Were they valued by % marbling or by hide and breed?

I laughed that someone thinks that a higher % of slaughter cattle will improve the overall cow herd when folks will go out and buy the same type replacement heifers and bulls that they have always used. It is a never ending cycle of the same old, same old. We have been at the effort to improve the cow herd in the US for centuries. So far the modern answer has been "black hair". And that is after 100's of years. If, like GAR, you choose to chase a trait you will only have a limited # of bulls to use and you will be forced to ignore all of the other traits that are important. And I will say, more important. GAR is a feedlot and high turn over operation. I've seen enough to not need that in a forage based system. If you really want marbling, use Wagyu or % Wagyu bulls and be done with it. GAR has been working decades to "Wagyu-ize" their selection of Angus genetics. More power to them. you fund them in their work evertime you pay more than the local prices for breeder bulls or buy semen. But I stick by the old saying that maternal is 10X more useful and profitable than strict carcass selection.

 

[J+ Cattle]

The Longhorn cross calves brought $1.36. The calves from the carcass quality bulls sold for over $2.00. That makes for some pretty easy math.

The consumer makes buying decisions with their wallet. At the sale barn, the buyer is your consumer's representative. The trend for many years now has been that quality is key to receiving the top price and marbling has been linked in people's mind as leading to a quality product. I know that marbling alone is not the answer, but it is a factor that many have overlooked. GAR has known this and has been promoting higher marbling for a long time, making an entire seedstock business out of it. In Dave's example the top price was about 50% higher than the lower price. That's simply too large of a difference in your yearly income to ignore if you're trying to run a profitable operation. If you're just doing as a hobby and don't care about the money, then I guess you can do as you please.
In reference to another thread, you may be missing the boat by not raising high marbling cattle.

 

[Dave]

Were they valued by % marbling or by hide and breed?

These were simply sale results on Superior. The closest ones to me were 50 miles away. The other ones were maybe 100 miles away. All I knew was what the rep posted about them. Did the buyers know more? I do know that Red Angus has been pushing carcass quality. Exactly how they are measuring that again I don't know but I assume it takes in more than just marbling.
Look up Superior's Bellringer sale January 12-14. Select Oregon weaned heifers weighing 400-500 pounds. Look at the results and descriptions of lots 1931C, 1948, and 1949.

 

[simme]

I think it is difficult for the little guy that sells at the local auction to get paid for marbling and carcass traits. Primarily, the weaning age calves at the local yard are going to a stocker operation. Price is going to be determined by what the buyer thinks will make him money. How the buyer will eventually market the calves will determine how important marbling and carcass traits might be to his profit.

If you are going to retain ownership to slaughter or sell beef direct to the consumer, then carcass traits are more important. And more important each time ownership changes as the calf gets closer to the end point. Vertically integrated operations (chickens and pigs) have the same importance on traits from beginning to end since there is one owner. But the small guy that hauls a few trailer loads to the local barn probably does not get his share of the carcass value traits.

There are several traits and conditions that add value to the calf. Pre-weaned, vaccinated, castrated, dehorned, growth genetics, carcass genetics, etc. Problem is that many of those go unrecognized and unrewarded unless they can be determined by visual appraisal or the stockyard has a program to document/certify and recognize them. Providing what the buyer wants and will pay for is the ultimate reward. Any increase in a condition or trait that does not result in more net on the calf ends up costing the seller money regardless of what value it may ultimately provide for someone further down the line.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

My breeding program is NOT based on carcass or steers at all. But, I get the highest price paid at the best feeder sale market in our state. Steers are just a side line giving me cash flow.
Commercial breeders need to focus on carcass traits even if they are selling everything as a feeder. If they want high price, they have to have calves that work for the feedlot so that they are REPEAT buyers. Reputation is everything in any line of business.