Going thru my semen catalog, I keep seeing the same animals over and over. Do you think the genetic pool will get to close one day. What I'm trying to say is in ten years are 80 % of the angus breed going to come from two or three bulls? My catalog has 1680 in over and over and 036. What if one day we find out there is something wrong with one of these animals, we've already bred the entire breed to these few animals. Just thinking out loud.
too much of a good thing
- Thread starter tuck
- Start date
That is a very valid concern.....see the TH problem in Shorthorn cattle! That is also a good reason for keeping old semen. It is always possible that a bloodline which has been discarded or remains marginal can come back with a roar when market conditions/fads/needs etc change.
I don;t have a dog in this fight cause we don;t use those odd colored black Angus, but generally a bull that is used extensively AI in a common breed will have the defects noted and the bull will fall from use before the accuracys get very high.
The Holstein associciation considers 12 1/2% of any one animal in a pedigree to be the maximum acceptable without being inbred. But there are only a handful of Holstein bulls that are used in the majority of herds.
I personally feel comfortable with anything that doesn;t show up in 4 generations although I have been known to make exceptions.
dun
The Holstein associciation considers 12 1/2% of any one animal in a pedigree to be the maximum acceptable without being inbred. But there are only a handful of Holstein bulls that are used in the majority of herds.
I personally feel comfortable with anything that doesn;t show up in 4 generations although I have been known to make exceptions.
dun
tuck":1vnijg3v said:
I think you're getting carried away a bit. TC Foreman doesn't have 1680 or 036 in his pedigree. Nor does Freightliner, 602C, Lead On, Strategy, On Target, Bushwhacker, Foresight...to name a few.
As many cows as those two bulls have been bred to, I'd think any genetic defects would have shown up by now. There are people today that already think something is "wrong" with these two bulls and won't use them or their sons in their breeding program. But the Angus breed has a wide range of genetics. If that catalog doesn't make you happy, find an ABS, Genex, Angus Semen Service catalog.
KMacGinley
Well-known member
The problem is that there is a lot of single trait selection going on when you are using those bulls and that has always been very self defeating.
SEC
Well-known member
Many people have expressed this opinion before. Like it or not, there isn't much genetic variance in the Angus cattle. There are only limited bloodlines available and no more can be made. I do agree that the Precision / New Design thing is overdone and it's a little scary for myself anyways. I will agree that if there were to be genetic defects coming out of these bulls we sure would have seen it by now.
As I have stated before there is plenty of weird stuff that comes out of these two bulls to begin with just not in the form of defects.
The New Design cattle have shown Chi characteristics, while the Precision cattle keep spiralling downward towards the point of being completely infertile. For the cattle that I think that work, I think fertility is a pretty important trait. Especially if it's all in the name of ultrasound. I know that we need to make beef as good as it can be, but if we don't have fertility we have nothing. I do believe that these carcass bulls will be the Lonestar, Manhattan, New Yorker, Harrisons in the years to come.
I have never understood why you would use a bull that would contain some questionable sires and then maybe double, triple or quadruple them up according to what your cow has in the pedigree.
If we understand a little better the starting point of these cattle it's no wonder why they are the way they are. Traveler cattle, you need to watch their feet, go back to Camilla bandolier and his feet were quite questionable so it's no wonder that it's bred down the line. I believe this is why weird things show up.
But nature will always figure things out if we let her.
As I have stated before there is plenty of weird stuff that comes out of these two bulls to begin with just not in the form of defects.
The New Design cattle have shown Chi characteristics, while the Precision cattle keep spiralling downward towards the point of being completely infertile. For the cattle that I think that work, I think fertility is a pretty important trait. Especially if it's all in the name of ultrasound. I know that we need to make beef as good as it can be, but if we don't have fertility we have nothing. I do believe that these carcass bulls will be the Lonestar, Manhattan, New Yorker, Harrisons in the years to come.
I have never understood why you would use a bull that would contain some questionable sires and then maybe double, triple or quadruple them up according to what your cow has in the pedigree.
If we understand a little better the starting point of these cattle it's no wonder why they are the way they are. Traveler cattle, you need to watch their feet, go back to Camilla bandolier and his feet were quite questionable so it's no wonder that it's bred down the line. I believe this is why weird things show up.
But nature will always figure things out if we let her.
dun":3m3j6z85 said:
Normally you would be right, but to detect that you would already have to have the gene in your herd. If a bull is a dwarf carrier we should find that out reasonably quick because there are still dwarfism carriers in the nation's cow herd. The big exception would be a new defect we aren't looking for or one that isn't often lethal. I don't know all the details of the TH debacle in Shorthorns; but people multiplied TH positive cattle for many years. Only when they started getting TH carriers on both sides of the pedigree did they realize they had really messed up. A better known example is the whole Impressive HYPP debacle in Quarterhorses. There were 55,000 Quarter Horses, Paints, and Appaloosas with Impressive in their pedigree before the horse industry realized that the rapidly increasing defect traced back to him and IF we had had legalized horse AI all those years no telling how many horses WOULD have had the Great Sire in their pedigree.
KMacGinley
Well-known member
I agree with what you were saying SEC. I do not find the majority of the "Hot cattle" in the Angus breed very appealing. I like the thick, balanced efficient types.
SEC
Well-known member
With that, myself I am very frustrated as I don't think that there are enough "good" bulls around that carry a balance of traits. It's seems that only the extreme bulls are presented in the catalogue for one trait or another. Where do we find bulls that are balanced in all aspects of traits?
I think that the stud companies are supposed to set the pace in some cases to where the right blood might be. Instead, it's politics and EPD's that fill our catalogues with AI sires. This is meant in no disrespect to those with AI sires in the books as there can be exceptions to the rules. Like a previous thread, I wanted to know what bulls breeders have or would go back to and use. There wasn't many replies of sure fire bulls that have left a positive impact in their respective herds.
In all fairness, I sell semen and I do my best to research the bulls that I am selling to make sure we know what a bull does wrong to make sure we have the bases covered when breeding with him. It's not hard to find out what the bull has done right. But we spend a few years trying to figure out how the bull breeds and get discouraged and then move on to something else hoping it will be easier to get things right with the next bull.
I think that the stud companies are supposed to set the pace in some cases to where the right blood might be. Instead, it's politics and EPD's that fill our catalogues with AI sires. This is meant in no disrespect to those with AI sires in the books as there can be exceptions to the rules. Like a previous thread, I wanted to know what bulls breeders have or would go back to and use. There wasn't many replies of sure fire bulls that have left a positive impact in their respective herds.
In all fairness, I sell semen and I do my best to research the bulls that I am selling to make sure we know what a bull does wrong to make sure we have the bases covered when breeding with him. It's not hard to find out what the bull has done right. But we spend a few years trying to figure out how the bull breeds and get discouraged and then move on to something else hoping it will be easier to get things right with the next bull.
KMacGinley
Well-known member
I like the look and information that I am hearing about the Ohlde cattle? What do you know about the Nichol's bloodlines?
SEC":2c2zhnkb said:
Thoe balanced trait bulls aren;t very common but they do exist. Most bulls seem to be either maternal or terminal, those happen mediums can be hard to find. But, if you find a breder/herd that manages for optimum rather then maximum you'll have a much better chance of locating the balanced bulls that you need.
Even with the balanced bulls you still frequently have to make compromises. Maybe not as good a weights but still acceptable, maybe a little more or less milk, but still acceptable, etc.
dun
SEC
Well-known member
Fair enough, if a person is searching for a bloodline that one wants to use, it's always the extremes which are presented. When it comes to growth, I have yet to be able to detect the difference in the calves born off the bulls with the 120 YW or the 80 YW.
Milk is interesting because most animals will get enough milk. I feel as long as the calf isn't dry haired, pot bellied that calf is getting enough milk. What he doesn't have when he is weaned he will replace in the winter feeding with good gains.
Milk is interesting because most animals will get enough milk. I feel as long as the calf isn't dry haired, pot bellied that calf is getting enough milk. What he doesn't have when he is weaned he will replace in the winter feeding with good gains.
SEC
Well-known member
I have always been interested in the Nichols program. I don't know much about it. What interests me is they have a program and a vision.
seth
Well-known member
I have used Nichols Landmark L56 in our program. In fact I used him for 5 consecutive years and I still have a little semen left. It might get used this year!
The Nichol cattle are no-nonsense cattle that are "fad-free" if you will forgive the phrase. Dave Nichols never went near a show ring and based his program on function.
Landmark cows were the cornerstone of our program for many years. His use was one of the best breeding decisions I ever made. They are perhaps not the prettiest cows, but extremely functional in every respect.
The Nichol cattle are no-nonsense cattle that are "fad-free" if you will forgive the phrase. Dave Nichols never went near a show ring and based his program on function.
Landmark cows were the cornerstone of our program for many years. His use was one of the best breeding decisions I ever made. They are perhaps not the prettiest cows, but extremely functional in every respect.
