Keeney`s Corner

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

Share | 
 

 Fertility revisited

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



Posts : 443
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:17 pm

Reactions are opposite of what they should be. Rather than think it is all great then freak out when something is found, you should be happy when something is found. A known is no longer a problem.

I applaud your passion, but I fear you will be disappointed when it keeps coming and coming. Millions wasted. IF something is not noticeable, is it really a problem? The only thing I did notice was the two precision had. Dead freaky calves dead on the Vets floor every day. That is a problem. I don't mind the P's.

On fertility, I don't think the wrong type or production level for the management should blame fertility. That said, there are examples that break the mold. I think too much milk is a problem in Angus, but I have ran 1/2 Jerseys with them and they seem to breed no matter how tough life gets. Breaks the easy fleshing = Fertility idea. An extreme with fertility. The good extreme.
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
PatB



Posts : 335
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:37 pm

Kent Powell wrote:
Reactions are opposite of what they should be.  Rather than think it is all great then freak out when something is found, you should be happy when something is found.  A known is no longer a problem.  

I applaud your passion, but I fear you will be disappointed when it keeps coming and coming.  Millions wasted.  IF something is not noticeable, is it really a problem?  The only thing I did notice was the two precision had.  Dead freaky calves dead on the Vets floor every day.  That is a problem.  I don't mind the P's.

On fertility, I don't think the wrong type or production level for the management should  blame fertility.  That said, there are examples that break the mold.    I think too much milk is a problem in Angus, but I have ran 1/2 Jerseys with them and they seem to breed no matter how tough life gets.  Breaks the easy fleshing = Fertility idea.  An extreme with fertility.  The good extreme.

Why keep the animals that exhibit challenges you want to avoid or eliminate? I need to sell x number of animals a year and animals that exhibit a challenge that I consider a problem are the first to be removed from the herd. I highly suspect we have had CA and DD calves in the past and the mother has been removed from production here. That stupid calf that can hardly stand and eat on its on for the first week plus of its life or the calf that acts like it got drop on its head and does not make it. Using tested free bulls is pretty cheap insurance against multiplying a known challenge in your herd or a customers herd.

How much is fertility affected in angus by the current known genetic defects. I have a fealing that fertility will increase as more mutations that cause embryonic death are identified and managed considering how small the main stream angus gene pool is becoming.
Back to top Go down
pukerimu



Posts : 88
Join date : 2012-06-02
Location : Norsewood, New Zealand

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Wed Feb 26, 2014 2:13 pm

I was going to say that fertility levels in the pedigree Angus herd have probably been challenged spectacularly by the three known lethal genetic defects AM, NH and DD - if Dr Beever is correct about DD, only a minute fraction of DD is displayed by deformed calves - by far and away the most affected foetus's are aborted at early stage pregnancy (rule of thumb 80/20) - probably after preg scanning giving a false indication of fertility in the cow or the usefulness of the bull.

The commercial herd will feel the effects of stud breeders continued attempts at using high figured bulls - I did an exercise on the Australasian/NZ pedigree Angus herd (Breedplan is combined of the two countries herds)- the Eye Muscle Area EBV (EMA) is currently an average of +4 or thereabouts across the breed - seemingly if you wanted cattle with above average EMA you would use a sire with +6 or more (depending on the figures for your own cows) of the 140 registered, active and published sires within Breedplan that have an EMA of +6 or more, only TWO (yes you read that right) do not trace their lineage back to Precision 1680 or B/R New Design 036, or both multiple times - interestingly the more drops there are the higher the figures but apparently only the ignorant or uninformed in NZ even dare to suggest that simple maths plays a fairly big part in the apportionment of figures - between them these two bulls are accountable for all three of the, so far known, lethal defects - NZ has instigated strict pre-registration testing criteria but personally I think the genie is out of the bottle and commercial cattlemen are going to be facing enormous fertility issues if they have been buying their "EMA" bulls from the same studs for several years. We have never gone down the figure chasing road so apart from clearing up a few (and I mean a few - 7 maybe) of older cows with Premier Independence way back when and with 2 - 3% suspect ratings we have had to do no testing and our herd is 100% free of any suspects - regardless any potential stud bull must now be sire and dam pedigree verified and tested free of all known defects. From within your own herd or from outside. Breeders have been specifically requested to not catalogue any carriers of any defect - most comply some defy spectacularly. Can only be a good thing but hellishly expensive for some breeders to even test their sale catalogues to clear suspects.
Back to top Go down
http://www.mtmableangus.co.nz
RobertMac



Posts : 254
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Wed Feb 26, 2014 3:31 pm

MKeeney wrote:


if heritability of fertility is even 30%, leaving 70% to things other than genetics... why not, or maybe you have,  explore the 70% other first? producers keep searching for genetic cures for management failures, when there may not be any genetic cures...of course, one reason producers keep searching for genetic cures is because they are constantly bombarded with genetic cure marketing...
so, some breeders guarantee calving ease, some feet, etc...ever see one guarantee fertility?

Mike, do you keep the 4% that don't breed?

If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

What is the correct management level?

USDA Economic Research Service...
national total operating cost of $610 per cow
Northern Great Plains $884 per cow
Gulf Coast region $387 per cow
Back to top Go down
MVCatt



Posts : 112
Join date : 2010-09-24
Age : 43
Location : SW Penn

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:31 pm

PatB wrote:
What difference does it make if you are using outside genetics if they are AI or walking semen factories besides bio security?

The difference is that the majority of producers using A.I. know very little about the genetics they are using. Many find it exciting to find a new cure all bull every year (a yearly tradition kinda like Christmas shopping  santa ). It also leaves the door wide open when it comes to identifying problems within your herd...genetic defects? genetic infertility? aliens giving your cows shots of Lutalyse alien? Anything is possible when you don't know what you got. The beauty of the whole thing is that next year you'll get to pick a new bull all over again. Stop the world I'm wanna get off  drunken . Using your own bulls or bulls from a reputable local breeder who uses their own bulls is just about as boring as it gets  Sleep.

MV...Sayin live by the sword die by the sword...
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:04 am

RobertMac wrote:
MKeeney wrote:


if heritability of fertility is even 30%, leaving 70% to things other than genetics... why not, or maybe you have,  explore the 70% other first? producers keep searching for genetic cures for management failures, when there may not be any genetic cures...of course, one reason producers keep searching for genetic cures is because they are constantly bombarded with genetic cure marketing...
so, some breeders guarantee calving ease, some feet, etc...ever see one guarantee fertility?

Mike, do you keep the 4% that don't breed?

not the open yearling heifers of course; the open two`s go to a fall herd where they function at about a 97% rebreed rate the rest of their productive life...inherent fertility doesn`t improve with age, does it?

If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

management changes as often as the weather...

What is the correct management level?

a level that that can REGULARLY produce beef animals which at the LOWEST POSSIBLE COST and expenditure of labor give the highest possible and longest lasting net returns.
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:30 am

some pics...crossing tru-lines to produce beef at less cost?
http://www.peelfarmersmarket.com.au/lex_and_karen_langridge/lex_and_karen_langridge/target7.html

one of several research papers showing the superior fertility of jersey cows

http://www.beefextension.com/research_reports/research_56_94/rr81/rr81_10.pdf

question; after reading the various producer attitudes about temperament at ACS...

How/why are jersey cows so nice and Jersey bulls among the meanest?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Kent Powell



Posts : 443
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:01 am

Sex differentiation and character.
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:29 pm

research says I ought to buy a Jersey bull; then I happened to think, I own Pete and Re-Pete...Smile 
so mean is sex differentiated; wild is wild no matter  Smile 
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Kent Powell



Posts : 443
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:55 pm

Has anyone noticed daughters of nice tame bulls being wild or mean?
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
larkota



Posts : 294
Join date : 2010-09-23
Age : 57
Location : Kimball South Dakota

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 7:51 pm

know my brother can make a tame one wild. when moving cows I asked him why he pushes them so hard, his response was "I'm just trying to keep up"

Larkota thinking I'm such a nice guy, why was my brother so mean to me?  scratch 
Back to top Go down
Kent Powell



Posts : 443
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sat Mar 01, 2014 8:44 pm

He's just trying to keep up!!! pirat 
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:35 am

Kent Powell wrote:
Sex differentiation and character.

Testosterone and estrogen... and in females, progesterone?

instead of dna, maybe we need a saliva test  Smile 

http://www.johnleemd.com/store/prod_stest.html
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
RobertMac



Posts : 254
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:47 am

I thought Jersey bulls were used as gomers and they turned mean when they realized they weren't having any fun.
Back to top Go down
RobertMac



Posts : 254
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:54 am

If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.
Back to top Go down
R V



Posts : 33
Join date : 2010-10-04

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:27 pm

MKeeney wrote:
some pics...crossing tru-lines to produce beef at less cost?
http://www.peelfarmersmarket.com.au/lex_and_karen_langridge/lex_and_karen_langridge/target7.html

one of several research papers showing the superior fertility of jersey cows

http://www.beefextension.com/research_reports/research_56_94/rr81/rr81_10.pdf

question; after reading the various producer attitudes about temperament at ACS...

How/why are jersey cows so nice and Jersey bulls among the meanest?

Mike,
Did I miss something in the beef extension article? I found it interesting, but I thought it was cow efficiency calculated by pounds of calf compared to cow weight that the Jersey crosses were the best. I didn't find a correlation of percentage of cows exposed to cows calved or calves weaned. Wouldn't that be a better measure of fertility?
Ron
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:58 pm

R V wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
some pics...crossing tru-lines to produce beef at less cost?
http://www.peelfarmersmarket.com.au/lex_and_karen_langridge/lex_and_karen_langridge/target7.html

one of several research papers showing the superior fertility of jersey cows

http://www.beefextension.com/research_reports/research_56_94/rr81/rr81_10.pdf

question; after reading the various producer attitudes about temperament at ACS...

How/why are jersey cows so nice and Jersey bulls among the meanest?

Mike,
Did I miss something in the beef extension article? I found it interesting, but I thought it was cow efficiency calculated by pounds of calf compared to cow weight that the Jersey crosses were the best. I didn't find a correlation of percentage of cows exposed to cows calved or calves weaned. Wouldn't that be a better measure of fertility?
Ron

my bad;
too many articles

http://www.beefextension.com/research_reports/research_56_94/rr81/rr81_9.pdf

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


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:13 pm

RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
RobertMac



Posts : 254
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:13 pm

MKeeney wrote:
RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?

That's the idea, but going from 3 cycles to 1 1/2 cycles is a bit extreme...even for me.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



Posts : 634
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:22 pm

MKeeney wrote:
RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?

Is that seeking outliers in fertility?
Back to top Go down
larkota



Posts : 294
Join date : 2010-09-23
Age : 57
Location : Kimball South Dakota

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:06 pm

EddieM wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?

Is that seeking outliers in fertility?

Larkota thinking Winnie the Pooh said it best. "Oh, Bother"
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:23 am

EddieM wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?

Is that seeking outliers in fertility?

I think most all the registered chest thumping we read is just the sounds of beating a dead horse to see if they can still get another dollar out of his hide...I bet most bulls retained are calves born early in the calving season...most keep the older/bigger heifers...has fertility improved??
perhaps more could be achieved by better fitting the production levels to the feed environment...but that might be more costly if it curtailed over all production  farao ?
I`m just not too worried about fertility here; last year was proof enough that fertility is having little effect on my bottom line...it seems fertility problems here are pretty well self limiting...accept that some will be culled; accept that some will always be culled...
there`s a reason the chest thumpers don`t guarantee fertility...they know there would be hell to pay...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



Posts : 634
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:49 am

MKeeney wrote:
EddieM wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
RobertMac wrote:
If there is one management plan for the entire herd, how can those that don't breed be blamed on a management failure?

I guess this was poorly phrased.
My point was that we have one management plan for the herd and when individuals don't breed, it is a problem with the individual. We can change the management plan to put more pressure or less pressure on fertility.
I think it helps the commercial man when we put on more pressure.

as in a 30 day breeding season versus a 60?

Is that seeking outliers in fertility?

I think most all the registered chest thumping we read is just the sounds of beating a dead horse to see if they can still get another dollar out of his hide...I bet most bulls retained are calves born early in the calving season...most keep the older/bigger heifers...has fertility improved??
perhaps more could be achieved by better fitting the production levels to the feed environment...but that might be more costly if it curtailed over all production  farao ?
I`m just not too worried about fertility here; last year was proof enough that fertility is having little effect on my bottom line...it seems fertility problems here are pretty well self limiting...accept that some will be culled; accept that some will always be culled...
there`s a reason the chest thumpers don`t guarantee fertility...they know there would be hell to pay...

The pure quest for only fertility is a noble cause. Example: Looking at Jersey's would tend to be a study of two things that might explain their high level of fertility: 1- a relatively closed population of the right genes and 2- what are pretty extreme cattle as compared to all cattle: smaller, high milk, over looking the general nature of the bulls, acceptance of horns for the greater %, a little more caution on milk fever, etc. But I do admit that I see Jerseys as more maternal than terminal (paternal) in type: just extremely so.

I think that you have said it here before that 100% conception might not be the most economical level. Fertility is not a trait where I want the average or mean of 50% but I do know that dropping the upper end from the selection process keeps the replacements in a better chance to fit as long as the sires were not a sudden blip on the radar screen or comes highly recommended from Tibet.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 3816
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:55 am

I enjoyed this email from a regular KC reader...thought provoking

I visited with a Texan about using Jersey bulls on heifers as many big ranches did it for pure calving ease . He claimed that a bull raised on a cow would pretty much  be easy to handle .  The bucket raised calves have no respect  of man or beast .He did not understand why the big ranches always sold the heifer calves . He felt the Jersey on heifers was much better than the longhorn , because of color and not getting a fair price .
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
R V



Posts : 33
Join date : 2010-10-04

PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:53 am

MKeeney wrote:
I enjoyed this email from a regular KC reader...thought provoking

I visited with a Texan about using Jersey bulls on heifers as many big ranches did it for pure calving ease . He claimed that a bull raised on a cow would pretty much  be easy to handle .  The bucket raised calves have no respect  of man or beast .He did not understand why the big ranches always sold the heifer calves . He felt the Jersey on heifers was much better than the longhorn , because of color and not getting a fair price .

Several years ago I put in a few Jersey embryos in heifers and raised them to weaning on the heifers. I kept a bull back to use on Charolais cross heifers. He was gentle and easy to handle until he was about 3 years old and then he became as mean as a junkyard dog. That was my first and last experiment with a Jersey bull here.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Fertility revisited   

Back to top Go down
 
Fertility revisited
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Lineage Delusions and Transmission - from Erik Storlie - 2 essays
» Gods
» Fertilty in our hands
» Rotation periods of Uranus and Neptune revisited
» Yearling vs 2 yr old (or older?)

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