Stacking low birth weight genetics

[Bright Raven]

Environment plays a major role, I know the heat and humidity we have in Northwest Florida has an impact on calf size. Just as our washy Bahia grass does. BR your birth weights are higher than FS but I have seen photos of your cows and they would rate pretty high on the body condition score chart. Body condition of the cow also plays a part in calf size. So I think it's safe to say management and environment both factor into calf size. Ok so far no one has said I'm as nutty as a fruitcake not even BR, how bout now op:

One thing EPD's don't seem to do is factor in environment. Many years ago I used a bull called Thriple Threat he was really nice and being used heavily. I used him and the cattle were really good but had way to much hair for our part of the country. That is why I like to put my eyes on bulls we are going to use. I don't always manage to do it but if I can't actually see them I will call the owner or the stud and ask about hair. Nowadays I also ask about feet because if you don't think the Angus breed has a foot issue your hiding your head in the sand. The first step in fixing a problem is admitting there is one. We have culled entire cow family lines because of feet, the boss is very strict on both feet and udders.
Gizmom

This is a valuable thread. Thanks for starting it. If Ebenezer would just stop shaking his rattles and dancing around the fire under a full moon, life would be wonderful.

 

[Hunter]

How about all of the things being discussed effects the size of the calf and we never know which percent of those factors effects it the most as each cow and environment is different.
If we knew exactly what we would be getting from each mating I personally think it could get very boring.

FWIW, my small mind would think that the more you breed LBW to LBW the smaller they would get....but what do I know.

 

[Ebenezer]

Environment plays a major role, I know the heat and humidity we have in Northwest Florida has an impact on calf size. Just as our washy Bahia grass does. BR your birth weights are higher than FS but I have seen photos of your cows and they would rate pretty high on the body condition score chart. Body condition of the cow also plays a part in calf size. So I think it's safe to say management and environment both factor into calf size. Ok so far no one has said I'm as nutty as a fruitcake not even BR, how bout now op:

One thing EPD's don't seem to do is factor in environment. Many years ago I used a bull called Thriple Threat he was really nice and being used heavily. I used him and the cattle were really good but had way to much hair for our part of the country. That is why I like to put my eyes on bulls we are going to use. I don't always manage to do it but if I can't actually see them I will call the owner or the stud and ask about hair. Nowadays I also ask about feet because if you don't think the Angus breed has a foot issue your hiding your head in the sand. The first step in fixing a problem is admitting there is one. We have culled entire cow family lines because of feet, the boss is very strict on both feet and udders.
Gizmom

This is a valuable thread. Thanks for starting it. If Ebenezer would just stop shaking his rattles and dancing around the fire under a full moon, life would be wonderful.

Just added more wood to the fire - can you smell the smoke or hear George Jones singing? Practicing for tonight's rain dance or more appropriately, dance in the rain.

 

[jehosofat]

In for the learning.

 

[CattleMan1920]

For what it's worth, here are my two cents. We used a bull in 2015, and still own him, who produced 30 plus calves for us, 17 which have been DNA tested. He is a +12 CED as per his HD50K test, which is top 10% of the Angus breed for calving ease. He was a relatively moderate size bull, until he filled out over the last year or so, right now he weighs about 2450 pounds. Long story short, he is a low birth weight, high CED bull that has produced numerous calves that were in the 100-105 pound range, the majority were 85-100 pounds, and only a few were in the low 70-pound range. The cows he was used on, as well as the heifers, have high CED numbers and are DNA tested as well. That goes to show you that the calving ease craze that is going on is largely nonsense. We recently lost a bull calf, who was dead on arrival, must have gotten fluid in his lungs during birth, anyway, he was an AI son of EXAR Denver bred to a calving ease cow, the calf weighed about 112 pounds, a monster, and Denver is calving ease. After seeing this, we now routinely breed terminal bulls, i.e. SAV Harvestor, SAV International, etc to 14-month-old heifers, with no issues at all. The main thing is to keep the heifers and cows extremely healthy throughout the pregnancy. Here in Kentucky, the main objective is very low birthweights and very high calving ease, what is resulting from this mentality, which is pushed hard by University of Kentucky and Morehead State University, is that the Angus here are becoming PUNY. The bull I mentioned earlier in my post has put off some very nice animals, but they don't seem to have the sheer growth that I get from using SAV genetics, which I have been told around here is a 'bad thing" due to the size of the calves and ultimately the size of the animal when they become older. This is COMPLETE and UTTER misinformation. The real issue here is that too many cattle producers in Kentucky are focused on EASY, they don't want to watch their cattle closely, and give them everything they need to have that calf safely, they are more focused on what the auctioneer says "this bull let's you sleep all night, golf all day". That strategy will assure you that at weaning your steers won't cut the mustard. Here is a photo of our "calving ease bull" that has put off some huge calves, but moderate weaning weights. His AAA# is 17840928. In my opinion, there are much more important parameters to consider when buying a bull or choosing an AI sire than simply his birthweight and CED numbers.

That is a Stone Gate Farm Angus bull! The Stone Gate Farm Angus bulls were a recent topic here. ddd75, one of Cattle Today's users from Ohio had bad luck with their bulls. What is your impression of their operations? I am near Mayslick and have always heard good comments on their operations.

My personal opinion for what it's worth. I think Stone Gate has high-quality sires. Are they the same as a direct son out of a top AI Sire, i.e. Hoover Dam or Basin Payweight?, I don't think so, but for the commercial producer, they do a good job. Their genetics lean on calving ease, but from my experience, they are heavily focused on the maternal side and energy efficiency. Charles Cannon has been a friend of ours for several decades and has ALWAYS done right by us. Our operation stopped using his bulls in 2015 because we are highly focused on producing seed stock out of A.I., and we A.I. nearly our entire herd. I'm partial to what we are producing, but I think Stone Gate has really good cattle. You don't remain in the business since the 1950's if you don't produce a consistent animal and do right by your clients. Those are my two cents.

 

[CattleMan1920]

IMO - The average angus cow's mature size has gotten too big. I would like to see it reversed for a generation or 2.
Old Doc Harris would preach balance, balance, balance and caution all against any single trait selection.

Agree X2. But at least they are smaller and more moderate than they were back 25-30 years ago when there were many Angus that were as tall as Chianina's... I bred many while doing relief work for our Select Sires tech that I had to stand on my toes, or on a milk crate.....
And they have lost that "meat wagon " look..... as have most all the herefords.
Someone had a picture on here of some ribbon winning angus in the 50's, they were barely above the guys belt buckle.... and looked as stout as can be.

How is this for a "meat wagon"? This gal is 2040 pounds as per our Tru Test scales. She is settled right now to SAV President 6847. I think we are going to need a bigger chute!

 

[farmerjan]

That's a meat wagon !!!! Yet she doesn't look real tall.

 

[Bright Raven]

IMO - The average angus cow's mature size has gotten too big. I would like to see it reversed for a generation or 2.
Old Doc Harris would preach balance, balance, balance and caution all against any single trait selection.

Agree X2. But at least they are smaller and more moderate than they were back 25-30 years ago when there were many Angus that were as tall as Chianina's... I bred many while doing relief work for our Select Sires tech that I had to stand on my toes, or on a milk crate.....
And they have lost that "meat wagon " look..... as have most all the herefords.
Someone had a picture on here of some ribbon winning angus in the 50's, they were barely above the guys belt buckle.... and looked as stout as can be.

How is this for a "meat wagon"? This gal is 2040 pounds as per our Tru Test scales. She is settled right now to SAV President 6847. I think we are going to need a bigger chute!

I have the same chute SO4. I have a cow that can get in up to her hips. Her hips lock before she goes all the way in. I don't have scales but I would guess she is 1700.

 

[gizmom]

I would like to see a photo of that cow when her head isn't buried in a feed tub :x no wonder she weighs 2040. All kidding aside I would like to see a better picture. What is her frame score she doesn't look tall just wide and deep.

Gizmom

 

[CattleMan1920]

We were preg checking her and others, I use the feed so they see the chute as a good experience. I like a low stress environment. She gets only about 3 pounds of grain a day and hay, she is just a really big girl. She isn't overly tall, but she is taller than she appears in that photo. I have several that are taller than she is. I would say she is a 7 score. I did not measure her that night, just estimating. I could pull her completely off grain and have her on hay/pasture alone and she would stay big. I have a daughter and a son from her, both are thicker than a Snicker.

 

[Katpau]

One thing EPD's don't seem to do is factor in environment.
Gizmom

EPD's are calculated based on the data turned in for contemporary groups, so that should take environment into consideration. The weights and measures you turn in are used to compare animals that were all raised in the same environment and under the same conditions.

For example if I have a herd of cows in northern Minnesota and the average birth weight for their calves is 90 pounds, then 90 pounds might be considered 0 and the cows and bulls in that herd would receive EPD's based on how their average calf birth weights compare to the average of the herd. If you move the entire herd to Florida and the herds average birth weight drops to 75 pounds, you might think their BW EPD's would change, but they won't. They will still be compared to the birth weights within their contemporary group. If you want to check the accuracy of your herds EPD's, the best way is to use a high accuracy AI bull along with the bulls you are currently using. That enables you to see how your bulls calves compare to those of the highly proven AI bull.

 

[gizmom]

Katpau

Very good point, and not one I feel confident enough to debate, I am not a number cruncher. I do understand that the numbers are calculated based on data submitted from herds all over the country. What I don't quite understand is how the data is calculated.



Florida is quite a way down the list as far as number of cattle as is Alabama since we don't have as many cattle wouldn't that have an effect on data or am I looking at this wrong. Again I'm not a number cruncher but it would seem a smaller % of data turned in from our geographical location would not have as much impact as the larger quantity of data turned in by the western states.


Gizmom

 

[gcreekrch]

IMO - The average angus cow's mature size has gotten too big. I would like to see it reversed for a generation or 2.
Old Doc Harris would preach balance, balance, balance and caution all against any single trait selection.

I agree, 1500+ lb cows of any breed may produce performance but drastically lose efficiency.

 

[Katpau]

Katpau
Very good point, and not one I feel confident enough to debate, I am not a number cruncher. I do understand that the numbers are calculated based on data submitted from herds all over the country. What I don't quite understand is how the data is calculated.

Florida is quite a way down the list as far as number of cattle as is Alabama since we don't have as many cattle wouldn't that have an effect on data or am I looking at this wrong. Again I'm not a number cruncher but it would seem a smaller % of data turned in from our geographical location would not have as much impact as the larger quantity of data turned in by the western states.
Gizmom

I don't think the number of cattle from any one state affects it. How the numbers are calculated involves complex calculations that are done by computers. I won't pretend to completely understand it and I know it takes more data than most of us are capable of collecting to attain the kind of accuracy that we might wish for. I do know that within my own herd the EPDs will match what my records show once I have been able to report enough calves. I can't necessarily compare my cow to one of yours based just on their EPDs, but I can use those numbers within my own herd to help with selection. I do think adding a genomic profile and using high accuracy AI bulls gives one a better means of comparing two animals in different herds.

When I did genetic profiles on my old cows that have produced enough offspring for me to feel confident in what to expect, I found those profiles to be quite accurate regarding the traits I was measuring. That was not true even two years ago, but the adjustments that have been made with the last few updates have really improved in accuracy. If you go to the AAA website and log into your account, then go to "animal lists" and "registered inventory" you will see a complete list of your registered herd. Click on "AHIR" data for an animal with an older genetic profile and you will see the most current numbers for that animal. I often hear people say that the genetic profile they got when they bought a bull a few years ago is not very accurate. That is often true, but if they look at the updated profile today they will likely find it to be much more accurate. Single step and the new computer generated calculations have made huge improvements in the last year and continue to get better and better as more phenotypes and genotypes are collected.

I do breed about 1/3 of my cows to high accuracy AI bulls. That enables me to compare how my walking bulls compare to those AI bulls. By doing that and adding a genomic profile I get a more accurate view of how my herd compares to others. Lets say I have 1000 cows and a group of bulls with no genetic profiles and all have BW EPD's of +2 with accuracy of only 10%. Say my average birth weight is 90 pounds. I would expect that If I bred those cows to a bull with a BW EPD of -2.00 and accuracy of 99% that I should be able to cut 4 pounds off of my birth weights. If I bred half the herd to that -2 BW 99% acc. bull and the other half to my +2 pound bulls, but ended up with my bulls continuing to sire calves that average 90 pounds but the AI bull sires calves that average 92 pounds, I would discover that those heavy weights were due to my environment and my cows. With enough data reported, my bulls EPDs should end up moving lower for BW than the AI bull.

It is nearly impossible to compare two herds with different management and environment based only on the hard data. EPDs are an attempt to do that, but if yours is a closed herd that never uses outside genetics, EPDs are not reliable for comparisons. They can still be very useful for your within herd selections if you are turning in your data.

 

[Son of Butch]

Your best bet for avoiding problems with stacking low birth weights is to consider how it effects other traits
and not just focus on single trait selection.
Example: 2 low birth weight bulls from Select Sires both ced 15 Heisman and Elation
Heisman 15 ced -2.9 bw .87 acc CEM 6 bottom 23%
Elation 15 ced -1.8 bw .89 acc CEM 11 top 28%

Both are ced 15 and well proven, but one bull's daughters create future calving problems (decreased pelvic size)
While the daughters of the other bull (Hoover Elation) help prevent future problems (increased pelvic room)

I think by being picky on which sires you choose with careful selection you can successfully stack low birth weights.

 

[Ebenezer]

It is nearly impossible to compare two herds with different management and environment based only on the hard data. EPDs are an attempt to do that, but if yours is a closed herd that never uses outside genetics, EPDs are not reliable for comparisons. They can still be very useful for your within herd selections if you are turning in your data.

There have been on and off discussions of regional EPDs. Never got off of the ground.

Trying to tie into mainline bulls to keep EPDs current are sort of a necessary evil if you already have good cattle that you like the way they fit the environment. Maybe a carrot on a string to keep us from weaning off of AI? It is more about marketing than a breeding plan. Sell all of the modern AI stuff for high dollar before they get outdated and get more modern EPDs on home lines is a good money flow.

If EPDs really were the savior of a breed this discussion would not have gone long or gotten to this point.

EPDs are a level of selection. They are bumpers on both the low end and high end, Your sweet spot needs to be known from working knowledge as a range.

In a closed or semi closed herd, the in-herd ratios and herdsman's observations will trump EPDs every time.

 

[Son of Butch]

Herdsman observation trumping epds would depend completely on each individual's observation skill set.
Not all herdsmen are created equal.
Then when he leaves in a few years to start his own herd, the next herdsman would have to start again from scratch.

Dairy industry has proven epds work, even though milk is one of the least heritable traits.
Then again as a rule dairy industry does a better job of collecting information and record keeping than beef ranchers.


Similar debate occurred years ago among dairymen with 1 side contending if you stacked breeding for both higher pins
and shorter cows that eventually you would have a hole in the ground.

 

[Nesikep]

Wow, she is darned heavy!

This one was probably around 1800, REALLY wide, she could just barely make it down the chute not because her belly was wide but because of the hips.. she's had a number of 140 lb bull calves with no help, and I have the birth of one on video.. All done in the time it takes to play a bluegrass song.


These two are full sisters, both in the 1800-2000 lb range.. the all red one had a PAIR of 110 lb twin bull calves, the other had a pair of 70/80 lb calves once too.. Still have the roan one, she's going on 15 now I think.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Katpau has a real good handle on EPD's. Good explaination.
BR - your little herd does not come close to giving you any answers on gestation vs BW. Gestation length definitely has an impact on BW. Many, many years ago, ASA used to keep track of gestation. We would report an AI date, then calving dates.

Stacking LBW with LBW has been proven to become a calving issue - but, with our better and better EPD's, you need to learn to use MCE in your selections. Again, depends on ACCURRACIES.
At one point, John Pollak (Prof at Cornell that did all the Sire Summary's for ASA) wanted to DROP BW EPD's because he said they were meaningless. BW is calculated IN the CE EPD's.
Giz - you may have something else involved, but I think you are on the right track. Watch your MCE.

 

[CattleMan1920]

Wow, she is darned heavy!

This one was probably around 1800, REALLY wide, she could just barely make it down the chute not because her belly was wide but because of the hips.. she's had a number of 140 lb bull calves with no help, and I have the birth of one on video.. All done in the time it takes to play a bluegrass song.


These two are full sisters, both in the 1800-2000 lb range.. the all red one had a PAIR of 110 lb twin bull calves, the other had a pair of 70/80 lb calves once too.. Still have the roan one, she's going on 15 now I think.

VERY NICE! I love docile cows, and your gals look to be really calm and well cared for....