Reaching genetic potential

[cypressfarms]

All of the advancements made in the past couple of decades have greatly increased the "genetic potential" of cattle. Being able to get semen from the top bulls will increase the quality of any herd if done correctly. Desirable traits (low BW, high WW, YW,marbling, etc) are being selected for, so in turn the quality of our cattle should be getting better and better each generation.

Taking EPD's as an example, I have a couple of "questions" that I've been considering:

1. For current offspring of a bull (x), for example, would the calves not reach their "potential" unless they were raised a certain way? Example, WW is normally at 205 days. For a calf to reach that high WW that we all want, would he/she have to be creep fed? Would my bermuda pastures (or any other) hold the calf from reaching potential? It would be great to have a bull with a BW of 0 and a WW of +150, but could it be done on normal forage?

2. At what point will genetic potential outpace the forage that we can give cattle? I'm picturing a world when in order for us to reach that +275 YW (o.k. I know it's extreme), that the calf would have to be creep fed a certain %/type feed constantly to attain that potential. I think that Milk production may have reached this in some breeds already.(Their milk output is so high, that they require substantially more feed/forage)

3. Feed efficiency is important; will there be a time when feed efficiency will be more important than WW, YW, etc?

Maybe I'm "thinking too much" ahead of time. When I look at all of the bulls available in Genex, I wonder about the above concerns. Is their a diminishing return? Anoyone have any comments. anyone think I'm way off my rocker?
All opinions welcome...

 

[Caustic Burno]

First with your air castle cattle got to get the thing here alive with your weaning weight have to weigh 200 or 300 pounds at birth. Second you will never get there that is why cattleman live to be so old trying to reach the goal of the perfect herd. Then they die and there kids run the old culls through the salebarn and sell the farm.

 

[ollie']

Then they die and there kids run the old culls through the salebarn and sell the farm.

Truer words were never spoken. I have an old buddie that is 78. He says to breed a nice set of cows it takes a lifetime and you can't make many mistakes. When your done you can look back and say like Soloman...all is vanity.

 

[Brandonm2]

All of the advancements made in the past couple of decades have greatly increased the "genetic potential" of cattle. Being able to get semen from the top bulls will increase the quality of any herd if done correctly. Desirable traits (low BW, high WW, YW,marbling, etc) are being selected for, so in turn the quality of our cattle should be getting better and better each generation.

Taking EPD's as an example, I have a couple of "questions" that I've been considering:

1. For current offspring of a bull (x), for example, would the calves not reach their "potential" unless they were raised a certain way? Example, WW is normally at 205 days. For a calf to reach that high WW that we all want, would he/she have to be creep fed? Would my bermuda pastures (or any other) hold the calf from reaching potential? It would be great to have a bull with a BW of 0 and a WW of +150, but could it be done on normal forage?

2. At what point will genetic potential outpace the forage that we can give cattle? I'm picturing a world when in order for us to reach that +275 YW (o.k. I know it's extreme), that the calf would have to be creep fed a certain %/type feed constantly to attain that potential. I think that Milk production may have reached this in some breeds already.(Their milk output is so high, that they require substantially more feed/forage)

3. Feed efficiency is important; will there be a time when feed efficiency will be more important than WW, YW, etc?

Maybe I'm "thinking too much" ahead of time. When I look at all of the bulls available in Genex, I wonder about the above concerns. Is their a diminishing return? Anoyone have any comments. anyone think I'm way off my rocker?
All opinions welcome...

EPDs are "supposedly" the average taken across all possible enivronments. Obviously, in an extremely harsh environment your are not going to see a +100 yearling weight EPD spread be expressed in a set of calves, even if it exists in the genes. I think in a perfect world where nutrition is perfect, weather is perfect (not too hot or too frigid), no droughts, no floods (OR hurricanes!@!) and herd health is fantastic and all the calves are being fed creep so each calf grows to his maximum genetic potential I THINK (we are really guessing here) the high EPD cattle would outperform the EPD and you would see an even bigger spread between the mediocre genetics and the great genetics than what the EPD shows. All that said I don't really know enough to recognize that mythical AVG ranch conditions where all the numbers work out perfectly like they say in the pedigrees if you took me out to the ranch and showed me the place. The EPDs are good but they are not perfect. It is very possible that some high EPD cattle will not perform well in your particular environment. They are averages across cattle types, management styles, environments, etc and are not meant to perfectly predict what exact spread you will find in two sets of calves on your individual farm....though they are the best prediction tool available to us.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

1. For current offspring of a bull (x), for example, would the calves not reach their "potential" unless they were raised a certain way? Example, WW is normally at 205 days. For a calf to reach that high WW that we all want, would he/she have to be creep fed? Would my bermuda pastures (or any other) hold the calf from reaching potential? It would be great to have a bull with a BW of 0 and a WW of +150, but could it be done on normal forage?

3. Feed efficiency is important; will there be a time when feed efficiency will be more important than WW, YW, etc?

1) The way I understand EPDs that they are feed independent comparisons. So that weaning weight of +150 means that you should be able to attain 150 extra pounds on any type of feed, in comparison to the baseline, as long as the baseline is on the same type feed. I could definitely be wrong on this though.

3) I'm there already. I think the current quest for the 'highest WW EPD or YW EPD' is a waste of time. EPDs are a tool to aid in bull selection, but they are NOT your most important tool. When I select an animal I ask the owner what he fed the animal, then I look at the animals performance (and if possible, performance of the offspring). Then I make my own gauge on how that animal (and his offspring) will perform. I'll also never buy an animal from someone who feeds super high energy rations in an attempt to maximize gain. It burns the animal out, shortens the life span, and gives you absolutely no good idea how the animal will perform in real life circumstances. I look for high gainers that have been on grass, forage, and a little grain to round things out. If they gain good on that ration, then I know they're easy keepers with good efficiency and an ability to put some flesh on their bones. I also know that when their calves are put on a high energy finishing diet, they'll perform for whatever feedlot buys them. The same doesn't always hold for the animals who were performance indexed on high energy rations.

Quite frankly, I think the current EPD formula needs to be revisited, as I've seen far too many high EPD, high accuracy bulls and cows not perform anywhere near what the EPD says it will, and I've seen the opposite as well. My current bull has average EPDs, 70% accuracy, right even with the average, yet the performance on my calves is fantastic. Only average WW, but I'm getting 3.5 - 4.5 lbs/day growth on free choice hay and 8 lbs of oats per calf. The bull I had 3 years ago had top end EPDs. His sire was an Agribition grand champion. And the calves were the worst I ever had. Below average weaning weights and feedlot performance under 2lbs/day in some cases.

Rod

 

[Aero]

the limiting factor on genetic potential will be how much time you have to spend making them grow and how much money you have to invest in their growth.

with low-input cattle, you pretty much have almost no work put into their growth... and out of this you get reduced growth and reduced pay for your lighter calves.

with high-end cattle, you spend your time hauling extra tons of feed, spending more on supplies, killing yourself to get that 100-200 extra pounds at weaning.

the growth vs input graph has an optimum, and the further to the right you go, the less efficient your operation becomes.

when the cost (in time and cash) gets too high, the limit has been reached. and upper growth numbers will hit a soft ceiling.

i realize this isnt new information, but it's nice to get it down in print sometimes

 

[Aero]

I've seen far too many high EPD, high accuracy bulls and cows not perform anywhere near what the EPD says it will

many times, this is just a case of management and environment not fitting the type of cattle being bred. your good performance with lower EPD cattle shows the nice fit you have found.

and the +150 isnt compared to the baseline, it's compared to other available bulls.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

I've seen far too many high EPD, high accuracy bulls and cows not perform anywhere near what the EPD says it will

many times, this is just a case of management and environment not fitting the type of cattle being bred.

Oh for sure, but I should rephrase: I've seen far too many high EPD, high accuracy bulls and cows not perform anywhere near what the EPD says it will, even when they were properly managed. As far as environment goes, again I thought EPDs were environment independent comparisons? Given the same breed, and all other factors equal (accuracy, feed, etc etc etc), the animal with the higher EPD should outperform the lower EPD animal?

and the +150 isnt compared to the baseline, it's compared to other available bulls.

Not meaning to debate, but rather to clarify as my understanding of EPDs may not be complete, but isn't that +150 is a comparison to a theoretical "0" animal, or baseline? The baseline may be fixed or a rolling baseline, depending on breed? And the baseline or "0" animal is not herd average (although in the case of rolling bases, it may be close). Either way, the EPD is only useful when compared against other animals (the +150 animal should raise 3 more lbs of calf than a +147 EPD animal, etc etc)

Rod

 

[dun]

The EPD difference would be in a group of calves that are in the same contemporary group. A guy down the road can't compare calves with yours.
There is also the cow influence both geneticly and maternally.

dun

 

[Aero]

but isn't that +150 is a comparison to a theoretical "0" animal, or baseline? The baseline may be fixed or a rolling baseline, depending on breed? And the baseline or "0" animal is not herd average (although in the case of rolling bases, it may be close).

for the AAA that baseline is the 1973 (i think) breed average. if this is what you want to compare against that is fine... but it's a poor representation.

I thought EPDs were environment independent comparisons

i would concede that they are very generic, but "environment independent" might be a stretch. nobody in their right mind would expect a top 1% WW, YW, Milk Angus cow to produce anything worth keeping in desert range conditions even though the numbers tell you they should be best if you just look at the EPD definitions.
the problem is that all factors are not equal.

 

[Frankie]

All of the advancements made in the past couple of decades have greatly increased the "genetic potential" of cattle. Being able to get semen from the top bulls will increase the quality of any herd if done correctly. Desirable traits (low BW, high WW, YW,marbling, etc) are being selected for, so in turn the quality of our cattle should be getting better and better each generation.

Taking EPD's as an example, I have a couple of "questions" that I've been considering:

1. For current offspring of a bull (x), for example, would the calves not reach their "potential" unless they were raised a certain way? Example, WW is normally at 205 days. For a calf to reach that high WW that we all want, would he/she have to be creep fed? Would my bermuda pastures (or any other) hold the calf from reaching potential? It would be great to have a bull with a BW of 0 and a WW of +150, but could it be done on normal forage?

EPDs don't tell you what anything will weigh, ever. EPDs are based on contemporary groups. Contemporary groups are calves raised in the same management system (creep or not). EPDs allow you to compare two or more animals. If you breed a bull with a WW EPD of 50 lbs, you'd EXPECT his calves to weigh 50 more pounds at weaning than if you bred those same cows, same management, same climate, same everything, to a bull with a 0 WW EPD.

2. At what point will genetic potential outpace the forage that we can give cattle? I'm picturing a world when in order for us to reach that +275 YW (o.k. I know it's extreme), that the calf would have to be creep fed a certain %/type feed constantly to attain that potential. I think that Milk production may have reached this in some breeds already.(Their milk output is so high, that they require substantially more feed/forage)

WW EPDs don't take forage into consideration at all. I think your management (forage, etc.) is probably affected by EPDs when you get cattle that are either too big or milk too much.

3. Feed efficiency is important; will there be a time when feed efficiency will be more important than WW, YW, etc?

Feed efficiency is already important. We performance test our bulls and buyers are willing to pay more for bulls that did well on test. It may be more important to feed lots than ranchers, though. As long ranchers sell their calves by the pound, weight will be a concern. But more and more producers are starting to retain ownership, partner with a feedlot, or at least get information on their calves back from feedlots.

Maybe I'm "thinking too much" ahead of time. When I look at all of the bulls available in Genex, I wonder about the above concerns. Is their a diminishing return? Anoyone have any comments. anyone think I'm way off my rocker?
All opinions welcome...

I think your concerns are valid. But the major concern for me is size and milk. We want big bulls to sell, but that also translates into bigger heifers and the milk EPD in the Angus breed has gotten too high, IMO. It's a balancing act.

 

[Frankie]

Aero said:

i would concede that they are very generic, but "environment independent" might be a stretch. nobody in their right mind would expect a top 1% WW, YW, Milk Angus cow to produce anything worth keeping in desert range conditions even though the numbers tell you they should be best if you just look at the EPD definitions.
the problem is that all factors are not equal.

EPDs are environment independent. They are based on contemporary groupings. Contemporary groups are supposed to be raised in the same environment.

EPDs won't tell you what sort of a calf a cow will raise under any conditions. That's not what EPDs do.

If you're running Angus cows under desert conditions and breed them to a bull with a BW EPD of 5, you'd expect the calves to weigh five more pounds at birth than if you bred them to an Angus bull with a BW EPD of 0. That's what EPDs do. You shouldn't compare EPDs of different breeds.

 

[ollie']

Aero said:

i would concede that they are very generic, but "environment independent" might be a stretch. nobody in their right mind would expect a top 1% WW, YW, Milk Angus cow to produce anything worth keeping in desert range conditions even though the numbers tell you they should be best if you just look at the EPD definitions.
the problem is that all factors are not equal.

EPDs are environment independent. They are based on contemporary groupings. Contemporary groups are supposed to be raised in the same environment.

EPDs won't tell you what sort of a calf a cow will raise under any conditions. That's not what EPDs do.

If you're running Angus cows under desert conditions and breed them to a bull with a BW EPD of 5, you'd expect the calves to weigh five more pounds at birth than if you bred them to an Angus bull with a BW EPD of 0. That's what EPDs do. You shouldn't compare EPDs of different breeds.

EPD's can't be environmentally independent Frankie if the data isn't compiled in a perfect cross section of environments. If the data is collected from range conditions mostly then it would be relevant to an operation run on range but if in a high concentrate environment it might not be accurate.

 

[Brandonm2]

Oh for sure, but I should rephrase: I've seen far too many high EPD, high accuracy bulls and cows not perform anywhere near what the EPD says it will, even when they were properly managed. As far as environment goes, again I thought EPDs were environment independent comparisons? Given the same breed, and all other factors equal (accuracy, feed, etc etc etc), the animal with the higher EPD should outperform the lower EPD animal?Rod

NOT true!! Nothing is absolute. EPDs are "expected" progeny differences, not "progeny differences". There are a LOT of environmental factors which can tilt the data. Everybody in this business knows that some cattle perform better on infected fescue than other families of cattle. Dittoe with heat or cold. I can use the cross breed EPD tables to compare an Angus sire versus a Brahman sire; but if I am in Florida do I really expect the Brahman to not outperform his EPD versus the Angus? But if I am grazing a mountain in west Montana the Angus should have an advantage over the Brahman greater than what the EPD comparison should predict. I know that is an EXTREME example; but there are smaller differences even between cattle within breeds. In another string we looked at a high growth Angus bull. His daughters should be very high growth, very productive very framy cows. I (grazing fescue in Alabama) 'might' have some problems with a group of frame score 8 Angus cows here that a dude on a farm in Ohio won't have. I might do better with a more moderate framed set of cows despite the EPDs while those moderate cows might underperform versus the bigger cows in a well managed Ohio farm. EPDs are management tools. That does not mean that we should not be talking to other breeders in our area about their experiences and keep in herd ratios on how those genetics perform on your particular ranch.

 

[MikeC]

The EPD difference would be in a group of calves that are in the same contemporary group. A guy down the road can't compare calves with yours.
There is also the cow influence both geneticly and maternally.

dun

Correct Dun, but every cow/calf/bull is compared against every other animal within the database when EPD's are computed and contemporary groups are extremely important in those calculations.

Environmental factors and management types (creep or no creep) are calculated in also.

However, the results are no more accurate than the data submitted.

Changes in the model are made periodically to reflect new research data.
Example: A couple of years ago the Charolais YW numbers went up approx. 20 points and the Milk numbers dropped about 8 points, across the board. None of the animals acually changed YW or Milk propensities, it was simply found that YW growth has less to do with Milking ability genetics than was previously thought.
i.e. the model was corrected to show the antagonistic relationship.

The biggest problem to me at this point in calculating EPD's is that when a "Commercial" cattleman buys a young bull, the EPD's are only a "Pedigree Estimate" or "Interim" EPD's, which are subject to change drastically and the new owner will not know of these changes because he doesn't turn in data to the respective Association.

In other words, a young bull that you bought this year that you thought had a LOW EPD for BW could actually be much higher than the incomplete sale data printed in the catalog due to the genetic difference possible. Same would go for other EPD traits.

This is why so many commercial cattlemen AI to "Proven" bulls and reduce their chances for a "Trainwreck".

EPD's are just another tool in the box.

There is no way to "Skew" the numbers on a proven bull with hundreds of offspring in the database, but a young bull could be off by several digits.

 

[Frankie]

Ollie' said:

EPD's can't be environmentally independent Frankie if the data isn't compiled in a perfect cross section of environments. If the data is collected from range conditions mostly then it would be relevant to an operation run on range but if in a high concentrate environment it might not be accurate.

Yes, they are, Ollie'. You have a set of cows in your environment and management system. You compare EPDs on two bulls you're considering using. Bull #1 has a BW EPD of 0, Bull #2 has a BW EPD of 5. Breeding those bulls to those cows in your management and environment, you would EXPECT Bull #2's calves to weigh 5 more pounds at birth than bull #1's calves. That's why EPDs can never, ever tell you what a calf will weigh at any time. It's not an exact science, but that's what EPDs do.

Contemporary groupings are the key. In contemporary groups all the calves should be managed and raised in the same conditions. That's the data they use to build EPDs, not individual data. If I report a single calf to the Angus Assn, they don't include that data in the NCE.

Merry Christmas, by the way.

 

[MikeC]

3. Feed efficiency is important; will there be a time when feed efficiency will be more important than WW, YW, etc?

Because of the high correlation of growth traits to feed efficiency it is ALREADY more important than WW or YW. It's just that there is no easy way to collect data on individual animals for the prediction in genetics.

I remember my first show calf in 1963. I weighed the feed I fed him each day and his conversion rate was 14:1. That is totally unacceptable today. I had a bull last year that converted 5:1.

 

[ollie']

Ollie' said:

EPD's can't be environmentally independent Frankie if the data isn't compiled in a perfect cross section of environments. If the data is collected from range conditions mostly then it would be relevant to an operation run on range but if in a high concentrate environment it might not be accurate.

Yes, they are, Ollie'. You have a set of cows in your environment and management system. You compare EPDs on two bulls you're considering using. Bull #1 has a BW EPD of 0, Bull #2 has a BW EPD of 5. Breeding those bulls to those cows in your management and environment, you would EXPECT Bull #2's calves to weigh 5 more pounds at birth than bull #1's calves. That's why EPDs can never, ever tell you what a calf will weigh at any time. It's not an exact science, but that's what EPDs do.

Contemporary groupings are the key. In contemporary groups all the calves should be managed and raised in the same conditions. That's the data they use to build EPDs, not individual data. If I report a single calf to the Angus Assn, they don't include that data in the NCE.

Merry Christmas, by the way.

Merry Christmas to you as well Frankiestien. You are wrong btw. If the two bulls have data collected in two different environments their data is incomplete. This is what Cypress is saying. If 878 calves are higher than travler 004 by 50 lbs on average and thousands of calves data have been collected but 60% of the data is off lush environments but you were going to use the bulls in the south then 004 might actually be better in a low input program efficiency isn't considered in the ww equasion. On the other hand the cows were strip grazing alfalfa and the calve were creep fed possibly the 878 calves would weigh 80 lbs more at weaning. The ww epd is an expected progeny difference...not an actual difference every time.
P.S Frankie have you got my present bought?

 

[DOC HARRIS]

This thread is as convoluted and compound a subject as almost any in which beef breeders may indulge themselves. Here are a few of my thoughts on the topic at hand.

The physiology of the "Bovine" animal is designed to utilize roughage - material that is present in this world that human beings are not capable of consuming for sustenance. God provided a perfect balance for us in that regard! It is the responsibility of human beings to provide optimal and acceptable livestock (cattle) management practices and a LOT of common 'horse' sense to attempt to approach a level of Accuracy which will result in a high degree of success in the Beef BUSINESS.

EPD's and all other technological advances and discoveries must be utilized in conducting a successful and profitable BUSINESS venture or enterprise - ALONG WITH visual appraisals of PHENOTYPE. All skills and knowledge go hand-in-hand with experience and dedication.

cypressfarms - your probing and investigative questions seeking the absolute and ultimate in perfection in beef cattle breeding has been the intent and objective since the days of Cain and Abel. Those expedient goals have been imminent but never wholly achieved.

In My Opinion, the uncompromising efforts of all participants of all facets of the beef BUSINESS in recent years (30-50) has culminated in a "Beef Machine", if you will, that is close to optimum - - but at the same time - is approaching a point of forewarning ; that is the accomplishment of one objective resulting in the deterioration of another! :shock:

We are aware of the antagonistic effects of Growth Genes competing with Maternal Genes. Ritchie emphasizes the importance of keeping things in balance to preclude destroying "Positives" which have already been achieved.

I agree, cypressfarm, that you are "thinking too much ahead of time". We don't want to 'throw out the baby with the bath water' in our eagerness to achieve absolute perfection in our Breeding Techniques. Absolute perfection in not going to occur in our lifetime, but we need to think and plan with irrefutable logic, cogency, and practicality to prevent a 'train wreck' with our breeding and feeding plans.

In order to preserve the functional traits which have been acquired it is necessary to perform a balancing act between genetic evaluation and phenotypic observation. Let Nature take it's course!

DOC HARRIS

 

[la4angus]

Not meaning to debate, but rather to clarify as my understanding of EPDs may not be complete, but isn't that +150 is a comparison to a theoretical "0" animal, or baseline? The baseline may be fixed or a rolling baseline, depending on breed? And the baseline or "0" animal is not herd average (although in the case of rolling bases, it may be close). Either way, the EPD is only useful when compared against other animals (the +150 animal should raise 3 more lbs of calf than a +147 EPD animal, etc etc)

Rod

No. 1 I have never heard of a baseline being used when talking about EPD's.
#2 On average, An animal with +150 YW EPD should produce an animal 3 lb heavier than an animal with a +147 YW EPD under same conditions.