Ultrasound

Help Support CattleToday:

A

Anonymous

I'm curious. Scanning bulls via ultrasound has become very popular. How many breeders are using this technology. Is it an effective marketing tool?
<br>
<br><hr size=7 width=75%><p>
 
OP
A

Anonymous

(User Above)":3gb2iln3 said:
: I'm curious. Scanning bulls via ultrasound has become very popular. How many breeders are using this technology. Is it an effective marketing tool?<p>This technolgy is still very new! It does look very<br>promising! <p>Feedlots are beginning to use this in sending <br>finished cattle to the packer! They are reading<br>the cattle and are sending some to the packer saving<br>10, 20 or even 30 days of feeding time and costs!<p>As more is learned from experience this technolgy<br>may select herd bulls that will finish faster! <p>Mississippi State University just hosted a national <br>tech school for Ultrasound last month! They had <br>over 50 people to attend!<p>The June/July issue of "Cattle Business in <br>Mississippi" had a good article by Dr. Allen<br>Williams @ MSU. His phone number is<br>662.325.7466 and e-mail is [email protected]<p>Give him a call or e-mail and I believe he can<br>tell you how this is going! <p>E-mail if you have questions!<br>
<br>
<br><hr size=7 width=75%><p>


[email protected]
 
OP
A

Anonymous

I think ultrasound information is going to become like EPDs, you don't necessarily get paid for them, but no one is willing to pay top dollar for a bull that doesn't have them. We test our bulls at OBI at Stillwater, OK and they routinely ultrasound them and will now send the data to the Angus Association to build carcass EPDs. The Hereford Association has used ultrasound to get a "jump start" on carcass EPDs and has found the ultrasound data to be very accurate when compared to actual carcass data. If you're interested in having your cattle ultrasounded, there's a list of technicians at the Angus site (http://www.angus.org).<br>
<br>
<br><hr size=7 width=75%><p>


[email protected]
 
OP
A

Anonymous

I've been ultrasounding all yearling bulls and<br>heifers for 5 years now. Initially I was doing it<br>because I felt I had a ribeye problem in my herd<br>and was trying to sort it out (i.e. cull animals<br>that did not meet 1" ribeye per hundred weight).<br>Of course you have to watch that you don't reduce<br>the frame of your animals by selecting only by<br>ribeye measurment...you have to look at the<br>yearling weight too. So 500 pounders may have a 6"<br>ribeye but they are still culled! I use it for<br>within herd comparison only, there is too much<br>variation yet on who reads it and how the data<br>is handled.<br>For example, I had a bull on test (calved 3/12/98)<br>he had an actual ribeye measurement of 13.5<br>(weighed 1118) end of February at the test. I brought<br>him home to use here. He was off feed, just<br>pasture to condition him. When I ultrasounded the<br>heifers and bulls that were kept at home I decided<br>to run him through again (I was speculative of that<br>high a measurement). Different technician, different<br>software. May 7th reading 9.9 actual REA (1032lbs)!<br>Well did he lose 4 inches of ribeye? Or is the variation<br>that wide. I don't know. But using it for within herd<br>I can safely use it because I know the animal. There<br>were the same variations in rib fat and IM fat.<br>Keep in mind what is important, I had bulls measure<br>well but failed their semen test! No I can't get more<br>money for them or the heifers but I am improving<br>my herd.<br>
<br>
<br><hr size=7 width=75%><p>


[email protected]
 
OP
A

Anonymous

<br>: I've been ultrasounding all yearling bulls and<br>: heifers for 5 years now. Initially I was doing it<br>: because I felt I had a ribeye problem in my herd<br>: and was trying to sort it out (i.e. cull animals<br>: that did not meet 1" ribeye per hundred weight).<br>: Of course you have to watch that you don't reduce<br>: the frame of your animals by selecting only by<br>: ribeye measurment...you have to look at the<br>: yearling weight too. So 500 pounders may have a 6"<br>: ribeye but they are still culled! I use it for<br>: within herd comparison only, there is too much<br>: variation yet on who reads it and how the data<br>: is handled.<br>: For example, I had a bull on test (calved 3/12/98)<br>: he had an actual ribeye measurement of 13.5<br>: (weighed 1118) end of February at the test. I brought<br>: him home to use here. He was off feed, just<br>: pasture to condition him. When I ultrasounded the<br>: heifers and bulls that were kept at home I decided<br>: to run him through again (I was speculative of that<br>: high a measurement). Different technician, different<br>: software. May 7th reading 9.9 actual REA (1032lbs)!<br>: Well did he lose 4 inches of ribeye? Or is the variation<br>: that wide. I don't know. But using it for within herd<br>: I can safely use it because I know the animal. There<br>: were the same variations in rib fat and IM fat.<br>: Keep in mind what is important, I had bulls measure<br>: well but failed their semen test! No I can't get more<br>: money for them or the heifers but I am improving<br>: my herd.<p>Dear Deb,<br>I'm really sorry to hear about the variation in your ultrasound measurements. Most technicians are good, but a few are not. Please be sure to use only AUP certified technicians. We have passed a very thorough test. Keep on improving your herd - beauty is only skin deep!<p>Thanks,<br>Clare
<br>
<br><hr size=7 width=75%><p>


[email protected]
 
OP
A

Anonymous

(User Above)":3jrq7151 said:
: <br>: : I've been ultrasounding all yearling bulls and<br>: : heifers for 5 years now. Initially I was doing it<br>: : because I felt I had a ribeye problem in my herd<br>: : and was trying to sort it out (i.e. cull animals<br>: : that did not meet 1" ribeye per hundred weight).<br>: : Of course you have to watch that you don't reduce<br>: : the frame of your animals by selecting only by<br>: : ribeye measurment...you have to look at the<br>: : yearling weight too. So 500 pounders may have a 6"<br>: : ribeye but they are still culled! I use it for<br>: : within herd comparison only, there is too much<br>: : variation yet on who reads it and how the data<br>: : is handled.<br>: : For example, I had a bull on test (calved 3/12/98)<br>: : he had an actual ribeye measurement of 13.5<br>: : (weighed 1118) end of February at the test. I brought<br>: : him home to use here. He was off feed, just<br>: : pasture to condition him. When I ultrasounded the<br>: : heifers and bulls that were kept at home I decided<br>: : to run him through again (I was speculative of that<br>: : high a measurement). Different technician, different<br>: : software. May 7th reading 9.9 actual REA (1032lbs)!<br>: : Well did he lose 4 inches of ribeye? Or is the variation<br>: : that wide. I don't know. But using it for within herd<br>: : I can safely use it because I know the animal. There<br>: : were the same variations in rib fat and IM fat.<br>: : Keep in mind what is important, I had bulls measure<br>: : well but failed their semen test! No I can't get more<br>: : money for them or the heifers but I am improving<br>: : my herd.<p>: Dear Deb,<br>: I'm really sorry to hear about the variation in your ultrasound measurements. Most technicians are good, but a few are not. Please be sure to use only AUP certified technicians. We have passed a very thorough test. Keep on improving your herd - beauty is only skin deep!<p>: Thanks,<br>: Clare <p>Interesting.<br>
<br>
<br><hr size=4 width=75%><p>
 
Top