Sorry for the length, but Summitcrest has had this at the back of their bull catalog for the last couple of years. I have always kind of liked it, and I thought I would put it out there for everyone to comment on. I sure don't mean it to be a sales pitch, but would like to here if there are other factors that should be considered.
"There are three methods used in the industry today to evaluate animals for end product value - Ultrasound, DNA such as the GeneSTAR® test by Bovigen which is featured throughout this sale book, and the collection of actual carcass values and data from progeny. Summitcrest uses all three of these methods quite extensively to determine and evaluate the true value of our genetics. Ultrasound and DNA testing so far will not give you a real and complete evaluation of genetic end value.
Ultrasound is still an imprecise method of evaluating carcass traits since most scans are done on animals not intended for,
or ready for market. This data is collected mostly on bulls at a year of age and/or replacement heifers also at a year of age,
which are completely different animals from steers (or heifers) fed to a consistent end point for the purpose of slaughter.
Therefore ultrasound and the predictions made from ultrasound can, at best, be considered an indicator trait for the true economic carcass value traits such as marbling, fat deposition, ribeye area, and retail product. Also, ultrasound determinations
for %intramuscular fat are not entirely accurate in this determination, and furthermore, %intramuscular fat is only part of the quality grading process.
DNA is very exact as to what is or is not present in the genetic makeup of any animal but only for the traits that can be
evaluated such as the two marbling and the three tenderness traits provided by GeneSTAR®. The three tenderness traits
determined by GeneSTAR® are very useful because they give us insight into the qualities that neither ultrasound or carcass
data can provide. This technology is still in its infancy, and, as such, is not yet able to tell us all that we need to know about
end value such as marbling and yield, etc.
Carcass data collection is, in our opinion, the third leg of a three-legged stool that is essential to knowing the true economic value of what we produce and what we sell. Through the continuous collection of carcass data we learn in real dollars and cents what these traits are worth and where they reside within our breeding population. Summitcrest has systematically collected more than 6,000 head of carcass results sired from our herd sires which are submitted to AAA for sire evaluation. It is through this process that Summitcrest High Prime was discovered, who, to date, has achieved over 95% choice, 70.83% CAB® acceptance, and 22.62% prime on 168 head evaluated by our system. High Prime is truly a sire who produces superior economic returns for end value, which is not necessarily apparent via ultrasound or DNA.
So you must ask yourself - how stable is the chair that you are sitting on if it has only one or two legs? By using all three
methods Summitcrest can afford you a stable future for end value."
In talking with Fred Johnson, originator of Summitcrest Farms and co-founder of CAB, prior to the sale, he was talking about how when they started CAB a pretty high percentage of the cattle qualified for CAB, now CAB can't get enough cattle. I am sure part of that is due to the demand of the program, but it also doesn't help that % qualifiying are much, much less now than when the program started. "Something is wrong, Fred said, and we have to fix it." I think he turned 91 or 92 last week, and he is still very much determined to "improve the breed." Is it common that breeders in any breed use all three of these methods? Thoughts? Thanks in advance.
"There are three methods used in the industry today to evaluate animals for end product value - Ultrasound, DNA such as the GeneSTAR® test by Bovigen which is featured throughout this sale book, and the collection of actual carcass values and data from progeny. Summitcrest uses all three of these methods quite extensively to determine and evaluate the true value of our genetics. Ultrasound and DNA testing so far will not give you a real and complete evaluation of genetic end value.
Ultrasound is still an imprecise method of evaluating carcass traits since most scans are done on animals not intended for,
or ready for market. This data is collected mostly on bulls at a year of age and/or replacement heifers also at a year of age,
which are completely different animals from steers (or heifers) fed to a consistent end point for the purpose of slaughter.
Therefore ultrasound and the predictions made from ultrasound can, at best, be considered an indicator trait for the true economic carcass value traits such as marbling, fat deposition, ribeye area, and retail product. Also, ultrasound determinations
for %intramuscular fat are not entirely accurate in this determination, and furthermore, %intramuscular fat is only part of the quality grading process.
DNA is very exact as to what is or is not present in the genetic makeup of any animal but only for the traits that can be
evaluated such as the two marbling and the three tenderness traits provided by GeneSTAR®. The three tenderness traits
determined by GeneSTAR® are very useful because they give us insight into the qualities that neither ultrasound or carcass
data can provide. This technology is still in its infancy, and, as such, is not yet able to tell us all that we need to know about
end value such as marbling and yield, etc.
Carcass data collection is, in our opinion, the third leg of a three-legged stool that is essential to knowing the true economic value of what we produce and what we sell. Through the continuous collection of carcass data we learn in real dollars and cents what these traits are worth and where they reside within our breeding population. Summitcrest has systematically collected more than 6,000 head of carcass results sired from our herd sires which are submitted to AAA for sire evaluation. It is through this process that Summitcrest High Prime was discovered, who, to date, has achieved over 95% choice, 70.83% CAB® acceptance, and 22.62% prime on 168 head evaluated by our system. High Prime is truly a sire who produces superior economic returns for end value, which is not necessarily apparent via ultrasound or DNA.
So you must ask yourself - how stable is the chair that you are sitting on if it has only one or two legs? By using all three
methods Summitcrest can afford you a stable future for end value."
In talking with Fred Johnson, originator of Summitcrest Farms and co-founder of CAB, prior to the sale, he was talking about how when they started CAB a pretty high percentage of the cattle qualified for CAB, now CAB can't get enough cattle. I am sure part of that is due to the demand of the program, but it also doesn't help that % qualifiying are much, much less now than when the program started. "Something is wrong, Fred said, and we have to fix it." I think he turned 91 or 92 last week, and he is still very much determined to "improve the breed." Is it common that breeders in any breed use all three of these methods? Thoughts? Thanks in advance.
