Keeney`s Corner

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

Share | 
 

 Breeding goals

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Hilly



Posts : 406
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : Sylvan Lake, Alberta

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:15 pm

Grassfarmer wrote:
Selection criteria from the outset was on yearling weight only. Selecting for one trait for that long (any trait) would surely result in more uniformity in the cattle in all traits wouldn't it? scratch 

The birth weight variation staggers me - we had nothing like that spread in our starting population - a cross section of our entire breed. So will our variation increase with line-breeding? - i'd have thought the opposite.

After visiting the Line One herd I started thinking about the Yin and Yang of things... Constant selection for YW without changing management inputs pits the cow and her ability to raise a calf and get bred back in a fairly static environment against the bull that is selected from the opposite somewhat antagonistic side of maximum YW.





So when the group was out looking at the cows almost everyone was surprised that the cows were not bigger and in fact were on average smaller.

So in my mind I seen the smaller cows were the result of selecting for more calf without increasing inputs and in order to do her job and try to pull the population back to a more sustainable production level. So until inputs increase or YW decrease you will have smaller cows having bigger calves and all the variation that fits between the two.

And if not your population will continue to decrease in numbers which in turn will increase IBC and the costs that come with it.

I may be way off base and be poorly explaining it, but that’s what got stuck in my head when we were visiting the Line One herd.
Back to top Go down
mikejd4020



Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-12-31
Location : Bainville, MT

PostSubject: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:09 pm

I somewhat agree with Grassy on this. I was taken back by the variation in ww. I was also shocked at the amount that died or were sold, at such an odd time. Now only living about 2.5 hours away I feel like the dumbass that didn't go to the Gathering in MC. Anyways did the cattle have a certain Type? I mean did they have there own distinct look about them?

I also see Hilly's point. They increased nothing really. Seems if you do what you always did you are going to get what you always got. What I am taking away from the spreadsheet was that It was neat what Miles City did by inbreeding for so long, however it didn't really work worth a shit and they didn't accomplish much.

What really makes it interesting for me is that for a while now I have been picking up a few bulls from KA. The bulls have there own type. The offspring of those bulls have the same type. To the point where I can visually see the type even before looking at the tags.

Alex after you got the Domino's did there type change? How long did it take?

I recently purchased about 90 cows. (Yes PatB that gets me to 335, sorry couldn't resist, I have letting go problems). Anyway the 90 cows were of distinctly different type than mine. All are angus, but vastly different management styles. The cows that came here the end of Oct. Are beginning to look more and more like my cow's.

How come KA type seems to stay the same after a 1500 mile move and the one's I bought changed seemingly as soon as they walked through the gate?
Back to top Go down
alexfarms



Posts : 10
Join date : 2013-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Gypsum, KS

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 8:46 pm

Hilly wrote:
Grassfarmer wrote:
Selection criteria from the outset was on yearling weight only. Selecting for one trait for that long (any trait) would surely result in more uniformity in the cattle in all traits wouldn't it? scratch 

The birth weight variation staggers me - we had nothing like that spread in our starting population - a cross section of our entire breed. So will our variation increase with line-breeding? - i'd have thought the opposite.

After visiting the Line One herd I started thinking about the Yin and Yang of things... Constant selection for YW without changing management inputs pits the cow and her ability to raise a calf and get bred back in a fairly static environment against the bull that is selected from the opposite somewhat antagonistic side of maximum YW.





So when the group was out looking at the cows almost everyone was surprised that the cows were not bigger and in fact were on average smaller.

So in my mind I seen the smaller cows were the result of selecting for more calf without increasing inputs and in order to do her job and try to pull the population back to a more sustainable production level. So until inputs increase or YW decrease you will have smaller cows having bigger calves and all the variation that fits between the two.

And if not your population will continue to decrease in numbers which in turn will increase IBC and the costs that come with it.

I may be way off base and be poorly explaining it, but that’s what got stuck in my head when we were visiting the Line One herd.

I think you make a good point, selecting for YW could drive up bw.

They do select for fertility by culling opens. Often they give them a second chance and then cull if open. They have had experiments on selecting light birth weight bulls and its effects. Usually, they split the herd for those types of experiments and then throw them all back together after several years.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:19 pm

alexfarms wrote:

Are there some past posts or other info on the "Becton herd"?
Not really. I just read or recall the selection criteria in their catalogs and wonder how they have been able to achieve all things good from both ends without changing the cow base.

Quote :
They do select for fertility by culling opens. Often they give them a second chance and then cull if open. They have had experiments on selecting light birth weight bulls and its effects. Usually, they split the herd for those types of experiments and then throw them all back together after several years.

I still do not know if culling alone is fix for fertility or merely a reaction to past poor selection and culling practices or a true indication that the lines you have are not working. Second chances based on environmental extremes work sometimes but do not work if a line has a fertility weakness genetically. Mixing low BW selections back with high BW standard cattle is pretty much a paint stirrer for the trait and other linked traits. More like a band aide approach to longterm selection that is seen speeding toward the edge of the cliff and wanting to slow down the finale?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:22 pm

Craig's explanation of the ying and yang story is the best explanation I have heard, and when he explained it to me it has made a impression that I have not lost. the smaller cows working there asses off to maintain the herd, and the larger cows struggling to fit the environment, yet the selection for the larger less efficient animal continues as the fertility and sustainability are discarded for the sake of YW.. Thanks Hilly for bringing that up again.
Back to top Go down
alexfarms



Posts : 10
Join date : 2013-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Gypsum, KS

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:51 pm

mikejd4020 wrote:
I somewhat agree with Grassy on this. I was taken back by the variation in ww. I was also shocked at the amount that died or were sold, at such an odd time. Now only living about 2.5 hours away I feel like the dumbass that didn't go to the Gathering in MC. Anyways did the cattle have a certain Type? I mean did they have there own distinct look about them?

I also see Hilly's point. They increased nothing really. Seems if you do what you always did you are going to get what you always got. What I am taking away from the spreadsheet was that It was neat what Miles City did by inbreeding for so long, however it didn't really work worth a shit and they didn't accomplish much.

What really makes it interesting for me is that for a while now I have been picking up a few bulls from KA. The bulls have there own type. The offspring of those bulls have the same type. To the point where I can visually see the type even before looking at the tags.

Alex after you got the Domino's did there type change? How long did it take?

I recently purchased about 90 cows. (Yes PatB that gets me to 335, sorry couldn't resist, I have letting go problems). Anyway the 90 cows were of distinctly different type than mine. All are angus, but vastly different management styles. The cows that came here the end of Oct. Are beginning to look more and more like my cow's.

How come KA type seems to stay the same after a 1500 mile move and the one's I bought changed seemingly as soon as they walked through the gate?

When I first bought the King Dominos (late 2001) I lived in northeast Nebraska. The type did change to more feminine, less coarse, probably a little more frame and less flesh. In 2007, I relocated to central Kansas. Here, the cows that stay around are frame 5 and down and easier fleshing than in Nebraska.
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:12 pm

mikejd4020 wrote:
I was also shocked at the amount that died or were sold, at such an odd time. Now only living about 2.5 hours away I feel like the dumbass that didn't go to the Gathering in MC. Anyways did the cattle have a certain Type? I mean did they have there own distinct look about them?

Looks like they lost 14 calves at or near birth out of 154 callings then another 5 late fall - maybe pneumonia? Not a great result, would be interesting to know if that was typical or a bad year. I thought the cows looked decent at MC, to my untrained eye they looked like herefords adapted to what to me appears a tough environment. Nothing remarkable, but "work and wear" types I thought.


alexfarms wrote:
I think you make a good point, selecting for YW could drive up bw.

After 80 years of selection for YW that doesn't seem to be borne out by the data you posted. Birthweights are all over the place from high to low.

I thought the Beckton apparent miracle of increasing growth over decades with the cow weight remaining the same or getting smaller was previously explained as them having a tough enough environment that they could "manage" the cows from getting bigger but when Beckton genetics were moved to an easier environment they attained their genetic potential. Or did I imagine that conversation?
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:39 pm

Calving ease and fertility go hand in hand IMO...."I believe I counted like 18 out of 42 2-year-olds required assistance." In my head this is somewhere around 41% of heifers that needed assistance. IMO That should stand out as a large red flag! That has a dramatic effect on the entire program. Again the moderate cows are the workers supporting the welfare recipients. As the replacements are chosen for there Higher YW. Resulting in more dystocia and less fertility. IMO IBC has little to do with the end result. As the single trait selection for YW and a secondary trait selection for lower IBC has a bit of contradiction in my eyes. If I remember correctly they stated that 28% of all births are assisted. That IMO is a problem that is not going to be overcame until that criteria for selection is changed.
Back to top Go down
alexfarms



Posts : 10
Join date : 2013-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Gypsum, KS

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:56 pm

W.T. wrote:
Calving ease and fertility go hand in hand IMO...."I believe I counted like 18 out of 42 2-year-olds required assistance." In my head this is somewhere around 41% of heifers that needed assistance. IMO That should stand out as a large red flag! That has a dramatic effect on the entire program. Again the moderate cows are the workers supporting the welfare recipients. As the replacements are chosen for there Higher YW. Resulting in more dystocia and less fertility. IMO IBC has little to do with the end result. As the single trait selection for YW and a secondary trait selection for lower IBC has a bit of contradiction in my eyes. If I remember correctly they stated that 28% of all births are assisted. That IMO is a problem that is not going to be overcame until that criteria for selection is changed.

I agree. The calving troubles are the biggest surprise that I see from the calving sheets. I didn't know they were having that much trouble and its something they are going to have to fix. I remember reading about the several lines that Colorado State had assembled years ago and reading the reasons some of the lines were abandoned and calving difficulties was mentioned for some of them. It can be a huge problem.
Back to top Go down
mikejd4020



Posts : 58
Join date : 2011-12-31
Location : Bainville, MT

PostSubject: So the other question?   Mon Dec 30, 2013 1:34 am

So the big question. Lets just say do to a government shutdown and the tea party and the whoevers can't get it worked out. Miles City sells the cows.

What are they worth? On reputation? On Merit?

I can't say that I would want them, yet the perception is that they are special, line bred, rare, closed, historic. A look into the past and future?

What is their non-intrinsic worth?

Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:52 am

W.T. wrote:
Calving ease and fertility go hand in hand IMO...."I believe I counted like 18 out of 42 2-year-olds required assistance." In my head this is somewhere around 41% of heifers that needed assistance. IMO That should stand out as a large red flag! That has a dramatic effect on the entire program. Again the moderate cows are the workers supporting the welfare recipients. As the replacements are chosen for there Higher YW. Resulting in more dystocia and less fertility. IMO IBC has little to do with the end result. As the single trait selection for YW and a secondary trait selection for lower IBC has a bit of contradiction in my eyes. If I remember correctly they stated that 28% of all births are assisted. That IMO is a problem that is not going to be overcame until that criteria for selection is changed.

calving ease and fertility are not the same in my selection paradigm...FERTILITY is the heifer`s ability to get bred; Calving ease can be calving ease maternal {ability of a heifer to deliver a calf} or calving ease direct {the ability to parent calves born more easily}...
We need to remember, or know, before we critique {what they oughta do} from the outside; that this is a research herd not a breeding herd...it`s what university herds should be doing; creating greater understanding instead of playing registered games...
here`s the stated objective from the beginning...

Selection based upon:

Progeny testing

Rate & efficiency of BW gain to 1 yr of age

more on their objectives and contributions
http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/genetics/documents/ITWG_AnGR_7/side-event/25Oct/Blackburn.pdf

2 year old heifers unable to deliver they own kind is nothing new in beef breeding; {longhorn, wagyu, calving ease "specialist" current usage proof enough} and is not necessarily a ramification of 40 years performance selection...LL has mentioned his C-sections on early purchases, I remember pulling calves routinely from heifers by a grand old bull and two close realatives of the "Angus purity" era, Whitney Bardoliermere 12th 45 years ago...
the selection criteria should stay the same; calving difficulty/death will self-limit birth weight; and so will inbreeding be self-limiting...if the herd becomes extinct; no big deal; it will have served it`s contribution to increased understanding of cattle breeding...but in the duration of another 100 years, the survivors of the current selection might pass through all of Gavin`s "bulmer effect" and through the depression to rise to a deleterious gene freedom population not yet achieved by man or nature  cheers 

the biggest underlying problem I saw with the herd was that the help was being paid from the proceeds of the cattle...nothing has been more detrimental to long term breeding projects than having to pay bills...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:54 am

MKeeney wrote:
W.T. wrote:
Calving ease and fertility go hand in hand IMO...."I believe I counted like 18 out of 42 2-year-olds required assistance." In my head this is somewhere around 41% of heifers that needed assistance. IMO That should stand out as a large red flag! That has a dramatic effect on the entire program. Again the moderate cows are the workers supporting the welfare recipients. As the replacements are chosen for there Higher YW. Resulting in more dystocia and less fertility. IMO IBC has little to do with the end result. As the single trait selection for YW and a secondary trait selection for lower IBC has a bit of contradiction in my eyes. If I remember correctly they stated that 28% of all births are assisted. That IMO is a problem that is not going to be overcame until that criteria for selection is changed.

calving ease and fertility are not the same in my selection paradigm...FERTILITY is the heifer`s ability to get bred; Calving ease can be  calving ease maternal {ability of a heifer to deliver a calf} or calving ease direct {the ability to parent calves born more easily}...
We need to remember, or know, before we critique {what they oughta do} from the outside; that this is a research herd not a breeding herd...it`s what university herds should be doing; creating greater understanding instead of playing registered games...
here`s the stated objective from the beginning...

Selection based upon:

Progeny testing

Rate & efficiency of BW gain to 1 yr of age

more on their objectives and contributions
http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/genetics/documents/ITWG_AnGR_7/side-event/25Oct/Blackburn.pdf

2 year old heifers unable to deliver they own kind is nothing new in beef breeding; {longhorn, wagyu, calving ease "specialist" current usage proof enough} and is not necessarily  a ramification of 40 years performance selection...LL has mentioned his C-sections on early purchases, I remember pulling calves routinely from heifers by a grand old bull and two close realatives of the "Angus purity" era, Whitney Bardoliermere 12th 45 years ago...
the selection criteria should stay the same;  calving difficulty/death will self-limit birth weight; and so will inbreeding be self-limiting...if the herd becomes extinct; no big deal; it will have served it`s contribution to increased understanding of cattle breeding...but in the duration of another 100 years, the survivors of the current selection might pass through all of Gavin`s "bulmer effect" and through the depression to rise to a deleterious gene freedom population not yet achieved by man or nature  cheers 

the biggest underlying problem I saw with the herd was that the help was being paid from the proceeds of the cattle...nothing has been more detrimental to long term breeding projects than having to pay bills...

Agreed fertility is the ability of the heifer to get bred. And also the line 1 is just what it should be a research herd and nothing more. Should it continue by all means. and yes the biggest problem is that the help is paid by the proceeds, therefore skewing the data for monetary value.... well worth the visit to Ft Keough.

I have not given in to the longhorn and Wagyu breeding to heifers. I am still breeding like to like and have had good results with calving heifers that were bred to bulls of the same breed. out of 50 heifers I pulled two calves and lost 3.. I can live with those odds... And as we go from year to year my biggest challenge is to get more two year olds to calve as three year olds...... Getting heifers bred has never been the issue but getting them to rebreed and calve until they are past 7 is the on going challenge....... IMO everything rolls into one as we establish a cow herd, that is fertile, productive and profitable. Just because we have a calf doesn't make it profitable, and if we cant reproduce cows with some consistency, we have just become no better than the Bull of the month club. Home raised heifers last spring were total of 15 pulled one calf lost two 12 rebred out of the 13 left. Purchased heifers 35 Pulled one lost one 1 16 rebred too calve as three yr olds no excuses all bred to the same bulls and all treated the same. Yes the home raised heifers had a advantage as they were adapted to the desert. Yes a fool and his money are parted easily. But I have a deep belief that we should be able to do as Bob H has stated and turn the Girls out with the boys and see what happens.... And too much time over thinking and wondering what could have been is just senseless worry IMO. W.T Thinkin we make things harder than they need to be.



Last edited by W.T. on Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:25 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:07 am

Wayne, of further interest is how many have used Line ones to what seems greater benefit than Ft. Keough...but that could just be a result of greater feed; bigger BS, and possibly out-crossed effect...
I like John`s project...his honest and insightful comments about his experiences should be of good benefit to anyone embarking on such a path with a population of cattle...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:43 am

MKeeney wrote:
Wayne, of further interest is how many have used Line ones to what seems greater benefit than Ft. Keough...but that could just be a result of greater feed; bigger BS, and possibly out-crossed effect...
I like John`s project...his honest and insightful comments about his experiences should be of good benefit to anyone embarking on such a path with a population of cattle...

John's Project has me excited about reading this thread. And I am all ears about the out cross effect. I have some inbred cows crossed on char bulls and cant wait to see what happens! Or maybe cant wait to see the wreck? But what the hell were going to find out good or bad. Too often we put ourselves in a box with our own ideas of what we see as correct. And fail to see the other side of the same Box that has a different view of the same thing. I Purchased a KA Bull In 2012 and a Powell Bull as well and the calves have a distinct different result....... My herd has no Shoshone or Pinebank and those calves were without a doubt the highest weaning calves from my line bred cows, My cattle all trace back to Ankony Dynamo and the powell bull sired calves were just calves but when bred to un related Red Angus cows the result was just as good as the KA cross on line bred cattle.... I ask can we have hybrid vigor within the same breed? Do we need breed's? Lots of the same questions that many have asked before but we all have to see for ourselves before we can see. W.T rambling.
Back to top Go down
PatB



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

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:24 am

W.T. wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
Wayne, of further interest is how many have used Line ones to what seems greater benefit than Ft. Keough...but that could just be a result of greater feed; bigger BS, and possibly out-crossed effect...
I like John`s project...his honest and insightful comments about his experiences should be of good benefit to anyone embarking on such a path with a population of cattle...

John's Project has me excited about reading this thread. And I am all ears about the out cross effect. I have some inbred cows crossed on char bulls and cant wait to see what happens! Or maybe cant wait to see the wreck? But what the hell were going to find out good or bad. Too often we put ourselves in a box with our own ideas of what we see as correct. And fail to see the other side of the same Box that has a different view of the same thing. I Purchased a KA Bull In 2012 and a Powell Bull as well and the calves have a distinct different result....... My herd has no Shoshone or Pinebank and those calves were without a doubt the highest weaning calves from my line bred cows, My cattle all trace back to Ankony Dynamo and the powell bull sired calves were just calves but when bred to un related Red Angus cows the result was just as good as the KA cross on line bred cattle.... I ask can we have hybrid vigor within the same breed? Do we need breed's? Lots of the same questions that many have asked before but we all have to see for ourselves before we can see. W.T rambling.

Isn't LL theory is to use linebred animals to produce the next generation and total outcross animals to produce the seedles fruit (feeders/stockers/finished beef)? Gavin's theory/practice is keep selecting animals with the best growth and concentrate the desired genes without too much inbreeding. A combination of the two theories/practices may yield the best results. It has been theorized that concentrating/increasing the desired genes and eliminating/reducing the undesirable genes combinations could increase beef production far beyond the the benefit of outcrossing. Breed the most adapted better cows for the next generation of females and the rest of the herd to a terminal total outcross bull for maximum pounds/quality beef.

Yes you can have hybred vigor in the same breed just look at the mainstream angus that continue to use outcross sires.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:35 am

PatB wrote:
W.T. wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
Wayne, of further interest is how many have used Line ones to what seems greater benefit than Ft. Keough...but that could just be a result of greater feed; bigger BS, and possibly out-crossed effect...
I like John`s project...his honest and insightful comments about his experiences should be of good benefit to anyone embarking on such a path with a population of cattle...

John's Project has me excited about reading this thread. And I am all ears about the out cross effect. I have some inbred cows crossed on char bulls and cant wait to see what happens! Or maybe cant wait to see the wreck? But what the hell were going to find out good or bad. Too often we put ourselves in a box with our own ideas of what we see as correct. And fail to see the other side of the same Box that has a different view of the same thing. I Purchased a KA Bull In 2012 and a Powell Bull as well and the calves have a distinct different result....... My herd has no Shoshone or Pinebank and those calves were without a doubt the highest weaning calves from my line bred cows, My cattle all trace back to Ankony Dynamo and the powell bull sired calves were just calves but when bred to un related Red Angus cows the result was just as good as the KA cross on line bred cattle.... I ask can we have hybrid vigor within the same breed? Do we need breed's? Lots of the same questions that many have asked before but we all have to see for ourselves before we can see. W.T rambling.

Isn't LL theory is to use linebred animals to produce the next generation and total outcross animals to produce the seedles fruit (feeders/stockers/finished beef)?  Gavin's theory/practice is keep selecting animals with the best growth and concentrate the desired genes without too much inbreeding.   A combination of the two theories/practices may yield the best results.   It has been theorized that concentrating/increasing the desired genes and eliminating/reducing the undesirable genes combinations could increase beef production far beyond the the benefit of outcrossing.  Breed the most adapted better cows for the next generation of females and the rest of the herd to a terminal total outcross bull for maximum pounds/quality beef.  

Yes you can have hybred vigor in the same breed just look at the mainstream angus that continue to use outcross sires.  

NO SHIT SHERLOCK But WTF lines work and which ones don't is the million dollar question????????????? W.T Thinkin the air is heavy in New England and every once in a while someone needs to breath.
Back to top Go down
Gus



Posts : 35
Join date : 2010-10-10
Location : Southeast Idaho

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:04 pm

W.T. wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
Wayne, of further interest is how many have used Line ones to what seems greater benefit than Ft. Keough...but that could just be a result of greater feed; bigger BS, and possibly out-crossed effect...
I like John`s project...his honest and insightful comments about his experiences should be of good benefit to anyone embarking on such a path with a population of cattle...

John's Project has me excited about reading this thread. And I am all ears about the out cross effect. I have some inbred cows crossed on char bulls and cant wait to see what happens! Or maybe cant wait to see the wreck? But what the hell were going to find out good or bad. Too often we put ourselves in a box with our own ideas of what we see as correct. And fail to see the other side of the same Box that has a different view of the same thing. I Purchased a KA Bull In 2012 and a Powell Bull as well and the calves have a distinct different result....... My herd has no Shoshone or Pinebank and those calves were without a doubt the highest weaning calves from my line bred cows, My cattle all trace back to Ankony Dynamo and the powell bull sired calves were just calves but when bred to un related Red Angus cows the result was just as good as the KA cross on line bred cattle.... I ask can we have hybrid vigor within the same breed? Do we need breed's? Lots of the same questions that many have asked before but we all have to see for ourselves before we can see. W.T rambling.

It excites me too. When I was young and dumb, but thought I knew everything and had all the answers. I devised a line breeding scheme, where the IBC would rise over time, it would of been a very long process, and after giving it a half hearted try. I liked what I saw, but the fact it would take a lifetime or  longer to see the final results, and not having the funding, I more or less abandon the project. I still dabble in inbreeding. I also like the fact his bull is #736, as that is the number of bull I bred that I'm so proud of. Very Happy


Last edited by Gus on Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:12 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:48 pm

Pat, wt, does the mainstream really get hybrid vigor by outcrossing ?? defined as a performance level of a trait beyond the expected average of the two parents? or do they outcross merely to avoid producing an average below{registered business death} the average of the parents?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:56 pm

mikejd4020 wrote:
So the big question. Lets just say do to a government shutdown and the tea party and the whoevers can't get it worked out. Miles City sells the cows.

What are they worth? On reputation? On Merit?

I can't say that I would want them, yet the perception is that they are special, line bred, rare, closed, historic. A look into the past and future?

What is their non-intrinsic worth?


now there is the $64,000 registered mainstream question? or is merely a $64 commercial production question?  Smile if the inbreeding level would be one`s goal; the time saved would be enormous...so what is a purebred worth versus a helter-skelter registered bull? we know helter-skelter brings in traditional marketing...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:00 pm

mikejd4020 wrote:
I somewhat agree with Grassy on this. I was taken back by the variation in ww. I was also shocked at the amount that died or were sold, at such an odd time. Now only living about 2.5 hours away I feel like the dumbass that didn't go to the Gathering in MC. Anyways did the cattle have a certain Type? I mean did they have there own distinct look about them?

I also see Hilly's point. They increased nothing really. Seems if you do what you always did you are going to get what you always got. What I am taking away from the spreadsheet was that It was neat what Miles City did by inbreeding for so long, however it didn't really work worth a shit and they didn't accomplish much.

What really makes it interesting for me is that for a while now I have been picking up a few bulls from KA. The bulls have there own type. The offspring of those bulls have the same type. To the point where I can visually see the type even before looking at the tags.

Alex after you got the Domino's did there type change? How long did it take?

I recently purchased about 90 cows. (Yes PatB that gets me to 335, sorry couldn't resist, I have letting go problems). Anyway the 90 cows were of distinctly different type than mine. All are angus, but vastly different management styles. The cows that came here the end of Oct. Are beginning to look more and more like my cow's.

How come KA type seems to stay the same after a 1500 mile move and the one's I bought changed seemingly as soon as they walked through the gate?

the only guess on my part is moving bulls creates less adaptation stress to new management/environment than moving cows...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:22 pm

MKeeney wrote:
Pat, wt, does the mainstream really get hybrid vigor by outcrossing ?? defined as a performance level of a trait beyond the expected average of the two parents? or do they outcross merely to avoid producing an average below{registered business death} the average of the parents?

does the mainstream really get hybrid vigor by outcrossing

They get protection from defining a line for which they would have to either take credit or especially take blame. The lack of strongly definable bloodlines and the associated prepotent trait concentrations (especially those that are seen as bad or undesirable) is a free ride to have acceptable cattle while not taking direct responsibility. The most heritable traits still seem to concentrate to produce "better mainstream cattle".

Eddie, not Pat or W.T
Back to top Go down
alexfarms



Posts : 10
Join date : 2013-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Gypsum, KS

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:02 pm

When we really wrap these cattle up to 30-50% inbred and then outcross them, we get an outcross animal that reverses the inbreeding depression that has occurred from the excessive inbreeding.  That inbreeding depression shouldn't be evident again, unless we start wrapping them up tight again, so it really shouldn't be a one generation effect from the initial outcrossing.  But when we get heterosis from crossing two different breeds, we talk about that being a 1 time event.  Isn't there a difference between reversing inbreeding depression and heterosis?  If we keep breeding crossbreds to crossbreds, don't we lose performance without creating inbreeding depression?

The current swine industry might be a good study on answering those questions.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:41 pm

MKeeney wrote:
Pat, wt, does the mainstream really get hybrid vigor by outcrossing ?? defined as a performance level of a trait beyond the expected average of the two parents? or do they outcross merely to avoid producing an average below{registered business death} the average of the parents?

Personally the mainstream is a dog from every town . And depending on what dog you chose you may be surprised at what you get? Therefore if you have a close bred cow herd you may see a touch of hybrid vigor. But the main purpose for me is to have the maternal traits stacked in my cows that result in a similar type and when crossed on a different breed Bull such as Line one Herefords I should be able to see the maximization of the crossing of two distinct breeds. Not the mongrelized version of mainstream Angus as I know it. I don't think mainstream angus have any idea as to exactly what they have at this point in time and it no longer matters. They are what they are and in the end they are just cows priced by the pound. What W.T Thinks not a dam word of pat's.
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:46 pm

Gus wrote:

It excites me too. When I was young and dumb, but thought I knew everything and had all the answers. I devised a line breeding scheme, where the IBC would rise over time, it would of been a very long process, and after giving it a half hearted try. I liked what I saw, but the fact it would take a lifetime or  longer to see the final results, and not having the funding, I more or less abandon the project. I still dabble in inbreeding. I also like the fact his bull is #736, as that is the number of bull I bred that I'm so proud of. Very Happy

Gus, I don't follow - what did you see that you liked and wasn't it commercially viable? As for the time aspect - that doesn't worry me - if the journey is enjoyable and successful does it really matter if we ever get to the final destination? Can there ever be a "final result" in an endeavour like this?
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:09 pm

alexfarms wrote:
When we really wrap these cattle up to 30-50% inbred and then outcross them, we get an outcross animal that reverses the inbreeding depression that has occurred from the excessive inbreeding.  That inbreeding depression shouldn't be evident again, unless we start wrapping them up tight again, so it really shouldn't be a one generation effect from the initial outcrossing.  But when we get heterosis from crossing two different breeds, we talk about that being a 1 time event.  Isn't there a difference between reversing inbreeding depression and heterosis?  If we keep breeding crossbreds to crossbreds, don't we lose performance without creating inbreeding depression?

The current swine industry might be a good study on answering those questions.

If we keep breeding crossbreds to crossbreds, don't we lose performance without creating inbreeding depression?

not sure; we lose the hybrid effect on phenotype, but genotypic loss?? I don`t think so...seems the greatest loss would be in predictability  Question indexes seem to produce the same number by traveling differing roads...

the ultimate question seems to be...do we need breeds or just use indexes? Given the current association/mainstream strategies, all the breeds might as well be lumped together and select from the pack with indexes...the only reason that`s not happening is it would decimate association coffers...
John, don`t know how much of LL`s writing you have read, but the constant point is...every time breeds get lumped together, a new breed is selected from mongrelization...but is that from need for production, or just a new breed to market the "rarity effect"  Question 
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Breeding goals   

Back to top Go down
 
Breeding goals
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Dunlouise Scottish "Pure" Cattle
» The Cowboy NFR
» Wheel Invented!!! Inbreeding in Terminal Cattle
» What are the odds?
» cow family

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