Keeney`s Corner

A current and reflective discussion of cattle breeding from outside the registered mainstream
 
HomeUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 hoooo-hummmmm

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: hoooo-hummmmm   Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:52 am

A ND036 linked defect could be a direct shot to the brain for my herd, and many other Angus herds. I purchased a 5050 donor in May and I just spent $3,000 on flushing two cows to 5050, hope it wasn't money down the toilet.

you flush it all just because of one gene ?? well, in the registered game, I suppose you must...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
OAK LANE FARM



Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-25

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:55 am

MKeeney wrote:
A ND036 linked defect could be a direct shot to the brain for my herd, and many other Angus herds. I purchased a 5050 donor in May and I just spent $3,000 on flushing two cows to 5050, hope it wasn't money down the toilet.

you flush it all just because of one gene ?? well, in the registered game, I suppose you must...
It is just an excuse- it should have been flushed before it was flushed
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:02 am

I don`t follow Scott.... flushed because of other traits?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
R V



Posts : 74
Join date : 2010-10-04

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:28 pm

I would take it as flushed - as in down the drain/to the sale barn - before ET work.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Mon Aug 12, 2013 11:05 pm

R V wrote:
I would take it as flushed - as in down the drain/to the sale barn - before ET work.
because of a single genetic defect? a case of let him without defect cast the first stone?

no, for of course, the registered business is propelled by rarity, not commercial usefulness, so some ethnic cleansing creates as many winners as it does losers...a zero sum game...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Mon Aug 12, 2013 11:40 pm

MKeeney wrote:
R V wrote:
I would take it as flushed - as in down the drain/to the sale barn - before ET work.
because of a single genetic defect? a case of let him without defect cast the first stone?

no, for of course, the registered business is propelled by rarity, not commercial usefulness, so some ethnic cleansing creates as many winners as it does losers...a zero sum game...
And there are always more loser's than winners! But then how else can you play a GAME. W.T Thinkin there just cows.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:53 am

this is a copy and paste from Advantage without credit to the author...the only sensible thing I`ve read midst the hysteria..

Food for Thought

The advent of technologies such as AI, ET, and cryopreservation have made genetic defects in a breed setting both more discoverable and the effects much more detrimental. It allows animals to produce more offspring over their lifespan which increases the chance that their genes will be compounded. It allows more breeders over a wider span of locations to put all of their eggs in the same basket. Rather than producing hundreds of carriers over a lifetime in a handful of herds, a sire can now produce thousands (tens or hundreds of thousands) across hundreds or thousands of herds.

One can blame linebreeding until they are blue in the face about the expression of genetic defects or abnormalities, and they would be correct. But, within a breed system it is only a matter of time before a line crosses and recrosses. Inbreeding is inevitable, and it is completely impossible to maintain a sustainable outcrossing system within a breed. As L.P. McCann pointed out in his evaluation of Hereford dwarfism, outcrossing compounds the effects of a genetic defect by hiding it and allowing a greater number of carriers to be produced. The more a pedigree is ignored in the name of chasing "genetic progress," it seems the faster the crossing of a common line occurs.

The nature of EPDs, Bioeconomic indexes, as well as, testing for genetic traits, is that information must be fed into the system in order to generate numbers, which is weighted towards popular animals and cowherds with large numbers, because the have the most comparative data. The system is also weighted towards younger animals due to the premise that each generation, should be genetically superior to the previous. Anyone with a true understanding of genetics would recognize this as a half-truth. We are at the mercy of the genetic code, antagonistic relationships, and the fit of both for the environment.

Increasing the genetic interval rate is only effective as the selection of animals, and in no way guarantees the identification of the individual that would provide the most genetic change. Selection can only be accurate if a fair evaluation is completed, but the tendency is to select outliers. I would be skepical that in many cases that outliers may be the most heterozygous individuals in the population, which would result in less consistency, with statistically insignificant advantages if an over the average when compared on theorhetically equal quality cows.

In reality increasing the generation interval rate decreases the accuracy of information used in mating decisions, leading to less genetic gain than using proven bulls in some cases and limiting our information about other economically important traits such as longevity and suitability for an environment.

Outcrosses and genetic diversity are created through divergent breeding. A breeding program can only be divergent through inbreeding or linebreeding and most effective if there are very limited numbers of animals that leave the herd to join the mainstream population. Such populations must be evaluated in way that ensures the quality of traits. AI and the internet have removed many of the geographical obstacles that fostered divergent breeding. Genetic Defects, ET, AI, EPDs, and other performance tools as well as current national cowherd trends, may be limiting the genetic diversity available to cattlemen commercial or purebred.

Genetic defects and abnormalities are naturally occuring and will require constant monitoring. Much can be done to mitigate the effects of genetic defects through checks and balances in planned mating systems. Genetic evaluation tools will constantly evolve. Genetic change will be a moving target as the traits of focus will shift due to social, economical, and environmental pressures. What is popular is not necessarily profitable nor is it the best direction for a cowherd, breed, or industry. What is best for the cowherd, breed, or industry also not necessarily profitable.
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
R V



Posts : 74
Join date : 2010-10-04

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:36 am

MKeeney wrote:
R V wrote:
I would take it as flushed - as in down the drain/to the sale barn - before ET work.
because of a single genetic defect? a case of let him without defect cast the first stone?

no, for of course, the registered business is propelled by rarity, not commercial usefulness, so some ethnic cleansing creates as many winners as it does losers...a zero sum game...
I took it to mean that Scott wouldn't have used this bull in his program even before the DD genetic defect was identified. I also don't think this bull was propelled by rarity in the registered world. Doesn't he have a "me too" type pedigree? His type/pedigree didn't work around here - even when I was supplementing feed. Like you, I strongly doubt there is any commercial usefulness.

Thanks for posting the excerpt from Advantage as I have never been to their forum. It did remind of a question I did want to ask/revisit.

Do you (or anyone else) think mother/son matings are/would be a useful evaluation of potential herd sires? It was apparently a common practice for ranchers many years ago and a breeding practice that you apparently have experience with. I presume this was done to help rule out genetic defects/unwanted genes before the bulls were used on a larger group of cows and/or to concentrate the cow in each of these matings.

My first calf from such an experiment is a bull and is growing better than I had expected - not great, but average.

Ron, in need of remedial classes.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:25 am

from limited observation, I think there is commercial usefulness for the New Design lineages...they were bred for terminal traits, and it appears they produced them...why would any knowledgeable breeder expect the daughters to be anything useful "maternally" speaking?
if I was railing cattle, I would readily buy a set of carrier bulls for stockyard price and rail the steers and heifers...not because some heifers would carry this defect, but because of what the genetics are bred to do;make good steers....
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:31 am

pat said,

I am thankful for Dr Beever and his diligence in tracking down mutations that are causing cattle producer financial loss.

who are the commercial breeders suffering financial loss from this defect?

Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
PatB



Posts : 455
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:43 am

MKeeney wrote:
pat said,

I am thankful for Dr Beever and his diligence in tracking down mutations that are causing cattle producer financial loss.

who are the commercial breeders suffering financial loss from this defect?

Any commercial producer who has used a carrier bull on carrier females and had more opens then expected.  The biggest loss is open cows or cows that get bred late in the season due to loosing the first preqnancy.  

I see that you are back to using the program to automatically subsitute words again.Crying or Very sad 
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:10 am

PatB wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
pat said,

I am thankful for Dr Beever and his diligence in tracking down mutations that are causing cattle producer financial loss.

who are the commercial breeders suffering financial loss from this defect?

Any commercial producer who has used a carrier bull on carrier females and had more opens then expected.  The biggest loss is open cows or cows that get bred late in the season due to loosing the first preqnancy.  

I see that you are back to using the program to automatically subsitute words again.Crying or Very sad 
what a windfall for the testing companies...every open cow is a recessive gene defect suspect...thankfully, most commercial producers ignore registered hysteria...

yes pat, I`m tired of you calling defects challengess ...they are defects...calling things by their real name is standard practice here...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
PatB



Posts : 455
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:30 am

MKeeney wrote:
PatB wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
pat said,

I am thankful for Dr Beever and his diligence in tracking down mutations that are causing cattle producer financial loss.

who are the commercial breeders suffering financial loss from this defect?

Any commercial producer who has used a carrier bull on carrier females and had more opens then expected.  The biggest loss is open cows or cows that get bred late in the season due to loosing the first preqnancy.  

I see that you are back to using the program to automatically subsitute words again.Crying or Very sad 
what a windfall for the testing companies...every open cow is a recessive gene defect suspect...thankfully, most commercial producers ignore registered hysteria...

yes pat, I`m tired of you calling defects challengess ...they are defects...calling things by their real name is standard practice here...
I look at defects as another c h a l l e n g e to be managed for.  If a producer uses clean bulls then they should not have to worry about the carrier status of the cow herd.  Is it not the seed stock producers obligation to produce the lowest c h a l l e n g e genetics as possible for the commercial sector?
Back to top Go down
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:58 am

PatB wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
PatB wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
pat said,

I am thankful for Dr Beever and his diligence in tracking down mutations that are causing cattle producer financial loss.

who are the commercial breeders suffering financial loss from this defect?

Any commercial producer who has used a carrier bull on carrier females and had more opens then expected.  The biggest loss is open cows or cows that get bred late in the season due to loosing the first preqnancy.  

I see that you are back to using the program to automatically subsitute words again.Crying or Very sad 
what a windfall for the testing companies...every open cow is a recessive gene defect suspect...thankfully, most commercial producers ignore registered hysteria...

yes pat, I`m tired of you calling defects challengess ...they are defects...calling things by their real name is standard practice here...
I look at defects as another c h a l l e n g e to be managed for.  If a producer uses clean bulls then they should not have to worry about the carrier status of the cow herd.  Is it not the seed stock producers obligation to produce the lowest c h a l l e n g e  genetics as possible for the commercial sector?
What is a "clean bull"? One that is clear of known and unknown defects, sires perfect feet, legs, udders, the daughters have high fertility and are the right size, the sons are highly desirable to the buyers, the steers top the sales and grow like weeds and what else? I do not think that that bull. A lot of this stuff is chasing rainbows.
Back to top Go down
Kent Powell



Posts : 606
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:53 pm

If I read this PC bullshit word c h a l l e n g e one more time...


Last edited by Kent Powell on Wed Aug 14, 2013 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Austin Risty



Posts : 4
Join date : 2011-05-25

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 3:04 pm

Pat the only defect is stuffing the dead frozen defective calf into a plastic tote so Dr. Beever can test it.  2nd defect is getting UPS to come to middle of nowhere to haul dead defective calf
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Wed Aug 14, 2013 10:47 pm


Quote :
potential carriers need to be tested before registration with no male carriers being registered unless steered.
Are registered steers required for a registered Angus burger?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:05 am

MKeeney wrote:

Quote :
potential carriers need to be tested before registration with no male carriers being registered unless steered.
Are registered steers required  for a registered  Angus burger?
Might give them an authentic taste. I wonder on all of this "Angus beef" deal if they ought to throw a few black hairs in each serving to let the eater know it is the real thing?
Back to top Go down
Oldtimer

avatar

Posts : 308
Join date : 2010-10-04
Location : Northeast Montana

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Thu Aug 15, 2013 9:55 pm

Quote :
August 14, 2013



Dear Angus Breeders,



Today, the Board of Directors voted unanimously to recognize Developmental Duplication (DD) as a genetic condition, inherited as a simple recessive. The Board also unanimously adopted a policy relating to the registration status of current and future animals determined to carry this mutation. This newly-adopted policy does not require or mandate the testing of potential carriers as a precondition of continued or prospective registration. Rather, the policy assumes that members will follow sound breeding decisions and make strategic use of DNA testing in dealing with this genetic condition. Because this policy represents an evolution in the Association's approach to genetic conditions generally and, in some respects, a departure from those policies first formulated in the fall of 2008 and the winter of 2009, the Board asked that I share some of its thinking with you on the subject.



With the onset of DD, it became clear that the discovery of genetic conditions will be a part of the future for all breeds of cattle. This Association's early "DNA era" began in 2008 with the development of policies related to first AM and then NH. Those policies were based on the perception that each represented catastrophic, once-in-a-lifetime events. Both conditions were lethal. These early policies were premised on the good faith belief that the best way to eliminate the condition and, at the same time, protect the interests of our commercial customers, was to impose some form of testing as a precondition for registration. This mandatory testing approach has undoubtedly resulted in a measurable decrease in the frequency of AM, NH, and CA, but has come with a significant price tag for the membership.



As the article authored by Jonathan Beever, Ph.D of the University of Illinois that was posted on our website on August 12, 2013 makes clear, the discovery of DD appears to present another condition similar in scope to AM, NH and CA. Leading geneticists in the bovine academic community have increasingly observed that all breeds have hundreds of mutation in their genome and that an Association's approach to genetic conditions should be adapted to reflect the likelihood – indeed, the certainty – that the discovery of such conditions will continue in the future and at a pace accelerated by new scientific tools available at every turn.



There are alternatives to mandatory testing and, over the past five years, our members have shown a willingness to embrace them. These include a better understanding and acceptance of the ability to manage around a known genetic condition by avoidance of breeding carrier to carrier and by the use of voluntary, strategic DNA testing. Equally important, our commercial breeders also understand and embrace these management principals.



The Board has considered this condition, the best interests of the breed and the membership, the state of where the science of genetics is moving with respect to the early detection of genetic conditions and our members' and their customers’ ability to manage such conditions. Based on its review of these factors, undertaken over an abbreviated period given the timing of the issue, the Board has adopted the attached policy.

Click here to view the policy.
http://www.angus.org/Pub/DD/DDPolicy08142013.pdf


The Board thanks you for your patience over the past week.





Best regards,

Sig

Phil Trowbridge

President

American Angus Association

The AAA President and Board all seem to think its hooooo-hummmmm too-- and are poo-pooing it away..

Money talks- and they are starting to sound like the Federal government- rules/laws are meant only to be broken/ changed in mid stride depending upon how they effect whoever.... Wink 

And I was wrong-- neither Greg at Cole Creek  or I can any longer say they/we are genetic free-as back in 1984 Cole Creek used a bull called Auch Mr Reb A179 AAA #10193599  which was a son of Ken Caryl Mr Angus 8017 who has been shown to have tested positive as a carrier... And I have a 9th generation daughter- #16769947 WCR Celtic Beauty 013X- which rings the bells as a potential carrier...
Nice little young cow- so as soon as the commercial test is available- I will test her...  She has one son that is in a commercial herd that I contacted- but he isn't very worried over it either...
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:51 pm

do you want the AAA to make a rule against registering bad udders OT? What`s the problem with giving individual`s economic choice? I think a far costlier loss in the industry is the $10,000+ bull; yet I notice you are quick to be impressed by such; genetic defects have little history of bankrupting operations; spending too much for registered cattle has; but that`s CHOICE...and here I thought you were some kind of libertarian; you still belong to the Old Hypocrite Party...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
larkota



Posts : 371
Join date : 2010-09-23
Age : 57
Location : Kimball South Dakota

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:17 am

for oldtimer after finding his cows were not genetic free.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1okb5EIo1nw
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:22 am

The sky has fallen and HENNY PENNY is dead. And the drama queens have something to talk about for this fall and winter. The debates of what bull will become the next greatest BULL OF THE MONTH have already began. OH what a life being a registered breeder must be, always a crisis and some new test to spend your money on. But as TD says as long as they are black and polled who cares.
Back to top Go down
Oldtimer

avatar

Posts : 308
Join date : 2010-10-04
Location : Northeast Montana

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Fri Aug 16, 2013 11:56 am

MKeeney wrote:
do you want the AAA to make a rule against registering bad udders OT? What`s the problem with giving individual`s economic choice? I think a far costlier loss in the industry is the $10,000+ bull; yet I notice you are quick to be impressed by such; genetic defects have little history of bankrupting operations; spending too much for registered cattle has; but that`s CHOICE...and here I thought you were some kind of libertarian; you still belong to the Old Hypocrite Party...
I have no real problem with it-- I believe folks should take responsibility...But from my years of work in a profession where you see hordes of people that have difficulty doing anything responsible (and who usually try to blame their problems on someone else) - and seeing how some "breeders" pawned off their problem animals with the previous genetic "conditions"-- I don't have a lot of faith that all will accept that responsibility without some direct oversight... During the 40+ years I have been involved with the criminal justice system- the number of police, probation, and judges has increased by many fold... To me this does not indicate evidence of folks taking responsibility...

To me the only problem is and the only hypocrisy I see here is the ever changing rules...Question 

One thing this does indicate to me is another plus of having registered cattle- that the association could so quickly identify for me thru the pedigree of a possible problem created by an animal 9 generations back- and allow me to take action accordingly...
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Fri Aug 16, 2013 12:54 pm

Quote :
During the 40+ years I have been involved with the criminal justice system- the number of police, probation, and judges has increased by many fold... To me this does not indicate evidence of folks taking responsibility...
that`s because too damned many laws have been passed; very often the primary purpose is nothing more than to create more police, probation, and judges

Quote :
I don't have a lot of faith that all will accept that responsibility without some direct oversight...
I have less faith in the ability of the oversight committee...

Quote :
To me the only problem is and the only hypocrisy I see here is the ever changing rules...
Rules can`t be changed as circumstances change...and rule makers get smarter?

Quote :
One thing this does indicate to me is another plus of having registered cattle- that the association could so quickly identify for me thru the pedigree of a possible problem created by an animal 9 generations back- and allow me to take action accordingly...
9 generations of fees to find one animal via pedigree versus testing the entire current herd if a recessive problem here was evident...I`ll stay on my course; and continue to depend on ME  for my genetics and testing...doing more breeding to eliminate problems than the composite breeder who always is breeding to hide problems...

Quote :
Troy Marshall
Several years ago, when another defect (Arthrogryposis Multiplex, commonly known as Curly Calf Syndrome)was announced, the industry overreacted. The result was that many breeders were financially devastated

it`s wasn`t the recessive that devastated them; it was the over-priced admission they paid to join the game that devastated them...

Quote :
Mark Gardiner
without this wonderful data base and these value added genetics our customers wouldn`t have a chance to make a living with cattle...

HORSESHITcheers
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:04 pm



it`s wasn`t the recessive that devastated them; it was the over-priced admission they paid to join the game that devastated them...

Wall Hanger status.cheers 
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: hoooo-hummmmm   

Back to top Go down
 
hoooo-hummmmm
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Keeney`s Corner :: Breeding Philosophies :: Breeding Philosophies-
Jump to: