Ultrasound Data

[ollie]

Does any one know of a bull of that has yearling ultrasound data of:
imf 5% or better
rea 1.3 sq.in. /cwt or bigger
b.f. <.3
yearling weight 1200# or greater
Any breed but must be purebred

 

[certherfbeef]

ollie,

I enjoy reading your posts and you are a valueable asset to this board. But, i have to say, after the discussion about EPD's. Maybe everyone is a little leary to answer this one!

 

[ollie]

Might I ask why. Just give the bulls name and where semen is sold if your afraid to dialog.

 

[certherfbeef]

Give the Felton's Legend 242 bull a look. IHP0816
Here should be the link to 242
http://cridata.crinet.com/beef/index.php?action=DETAIL&code=1HP0816&lang=EN

And a link to the rest of the Genex herefords

http://cridata.crinet.com/beef/index.php?action=BYBREED&Breed=Hereford&lang=EN

 

[certherfbeef]

Does any one know of a bull of that has yearling ultrasound data of:
imf 5% or better
rea 1.3 sq.in. /cwt
b.f. <.3
yearling weight 1200# or greater
Any breed but must be purebred

Ollie, the back fat <.3 isn't back fat based on the condition that the animal carries? Then back fat would only be based on management and environment.
And how can it be used to compare animals if it is only a measure of the condition an animal carries? Or is it a mearsure of an animal's fleshing ability?
Please help me understand some of this. ~Missi

 

[ollie]

Legend 242 won't meet the criteria.

 

[greatgerts]

I sold a bull to a commercial breeder that was 4.9 IMF, .14 back fat and was 1025 at 12 months. That is the closest I have had. I will look up some bulls for you if you want.

 

[ollie]

I sold a bull to a commercial breeder that was 4.9 IMF, .14 back fat and was 1025 at 12 months. That is the closest I have had. I will look up some bulls for you if you want.

What size ribeye per cwt did he have. You have earned some bragging rights with a imf like that and bf less that .2 It usually takes atleast .2 bf for an animal to express his full genetic potential in regards to imf.

 

[Frankie]

Does any one know of a bull of that has yearling ultrasound data of:
imf 5% or better
rea 1.3 sq.in. /cwt
b.f. <.3
yearling weight 1200# or greater
Any breed but must be purebred

Ollie, the back fat <.3 isn't back fat based on the condition that the animal carries? Then back fat would only be based on management and environment.
And how can it be used to compare animals if it is only a measure of the condition an animal carries? Or is it a mearsure of an animal's fleshing ability?
Please help me understand some of this. ~Missi

Missi, you're correct that backfat will vary according to the condition of the bull. Ribeye can also be affected by management. In fact, all the things Ollie mentioned are greatly affected by management. Breed associations take that performance info from hundreds of related animals, run the data through a complicated math formula and produce EPDs.

 

[ollie]

Frankie , Your all talk . Back up your claims. I didn't put up the post to discuss epd's . If you have information related to carcas data then post the bulls name . Talk about epd's on a different post. You don't know what your talking about and are missleading people .

 

[dun]

Frankie , Your all talk . Back up your claims. I didn't put up the post to discuss epd's . If you have information related to carcas data then post the bulls name . Talk about epd's on a different post. You don't know what your talking about and are missleading people .

It must be very satisfying to be one of the few people in the world that realize that everyone else is wrong and that EPDs are bogus

dun

 

[ollie]

Hello dun , do you know of a bull that meets the criteria. If not please go to the sniping page.

 

[ollie]

Forget the whole post. You guys can have it . Talk epd's till your heart is content.

 

[txag]

ok, ollie, i'm sure there are bulls that fit all the criteria, but it looks like this is the best i can do tonight w/internet searching & the few sale catalogs i have w/me.

now would you like to enlighten us as to your point?

lot 26 (yw a little low)


http://www.steinerranches.com/uploads/Steiner304.pdf

 

[dun]

Hello dun , do you know of a bull that meets the criteria. If not please go to the sniping page.

Gee, you sure can't take a compliment very well

dun

 

[Frankie]

Frankie , Your all talk . Back up your claims. I didn't put up the post to discuss epd's . If you have information related to carcas data then post the bulls name . Talk about epd's on a different post. You don't know what your talking about and are missleading people .

"...all talk?" What does that mean. Back up what claims? That performance data is used to creat EPDs? You're not making any sense, Ollie.

No, I don't know a specific bull that meets that criteria. Actually, since that criteria is heavily reliant on management, I don't pay much attention. Some, but not much. Are you looking for a bull to buy that has those qualities?

This is an open forum. I can talk about whatever I want to on this thread. You can continue to talk about performance; I don't care. I was merely responding to Missi's post. As for misleading people, if you don't think there will be a great deal of difference in the backfat, ribeye, and IMF of bulls performance tested on hot feed or raised on grass, you need to do some research.

If you really are looking for bulls with that sort of data, I can post links to some bull test stations that also include ultrasound data. You might find one there. If you're merely keeping us in suspense so you can present a specific bull, I'll be glad to see him.

 

[hillbilly]

Does any one know of a bull of that has yearling ultrasound data of:
imf 5% or better
rea 1.3 sq.in. /cwt or bigger
b.f. <.3
yearling weight 1200# or greater
Any breed but must be purebred

I don't do home work. Never did. If you've got a point, make it.


Hillbilly

 

[Tod Dague]

Not exactly what you were looking for but fairly close. Red Angus Reg # 924439 BW 80 WW 710 YW 1382 ADG 4.2 Marb 5.5 REA/ CWT 1.24 FT .25

Tod

 

[Anonymous]

Example of one of the Chiangus's with the scientific criteria. This one is purebred.

REA - 18.6
% IMF - 5.1
BF - .3
REA/CWT - 1.46
Yearling - 1389
Double Star gene marbling
Double Star gene tenderness one
Double Star gene tenderness two

 

[greatgerts]

greatgerts wrote:
I sold a bull to a commercial breeder that was 4.9 IMF, .14 back fat and was 1025 at 12 months. That is the closest I have had. I will look up some bulls for you if you want.
What size ribeye per cwt did he have. You have earned some bragging rights with a imf like that and bf less that .2 It usually takes atleast .2 bf for an animal to express his full genetic potential in regards to imf.

I dont have the numbers here with me. (I am down at college right now). The REA/cwt was not as high as I would like it. That was the one thing the sire did not do for us was ribeye numbers. Right now, I am crossing the 1/2 sisters to the above mentioned bull to a bull with a higher REA, and am hoping for some good Gert calves to compete intensively with Angus on the rail.