Keeney`s Corner

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

Share | 
 

 Yin and Yang of Deceit

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
AuthorMessage
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Fri Feb 26, 2016 1:31 pm

jonken wrote:
PatB wrote:
jonken wrote:

More questions regarding DNA Genotyping ......

1.   How many genes have been identified or linked with specific desired traits (ex.... milk production,   marbling, etc...) ?  It might be more appropriate to reword that to how many traits have been identified with specific genes?

2.  Have any/all of the desired traits referenced above been identified as sex linked?  

3.  If genotyping can verify homozygosity in an animal but not specific with traits linked to specific genes, what does the genotype profile provide that a pedigree and observations of 15 years of related breeding can't tell?

-Kendra

1 It depends on species, breed and line. Traits have been linked to genes but it is the variants/alleles that make up genes that control the expression of traits we need to identify.   Human and mice have had more variants/alleles identified then dairy and dairy has more then beef.  

2.  Don't know.

3.  It comes down to species, breed, lines on what we know.  University of Missouri is working on identifying around 200,000 variants in angus cattle and the preliminary findings should be out by 2016 BIF conference.   There are far more questions then answers in the brave new world of genomics in my opinion.


I expect to see more/faster progress made in identifying alleles/variants with the improvement in technology, models and varying desciplines of scientist working on the different challenges.  

For a common definition...... what is meant by 200,000 variants?

roughly 200,000 thousand is the number dna alleles (not sure of proper term) that are different then what is expected at those points on the dna strands.  It is MY UNDERSTANDING  is they are looking to identify variants that my cause early embryonic loss, loss of function of genes or what ever positive effects that can be identified.

edited to add

I can across this article that will explain it better then I ever could.

http://digitaled.cattlenetwork.com/February2015#&pageSet=3
Back to top Go down
jonken



Posts : 115
Join date : 2011-12-17
Location : nemo

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:42 pm

PatB wrote:
jonken wrote:
PatB wrote:
jonken wrote:

More questions regarding DNA Genotyping ......

1.   How many genes have been identified or linked with specific desired traits (ex.... milk production,   marbling, etc...) ?  It might be more appropriate to reword that to how many traits have been identified with specific genes?

2.  Have any/all of the desired traits referenced above been identified as sex linked?  

3.  If genotyping can verify homozygosity in an animal but not specific with traits linked to specific genes, what does the genotype profile provide that a pedigree and observations of 15 years of related breeding can't tell?

-Kendra

1 It depends on species, breed and line. Traits have been linked to genes but it is the variants/alleles that make up genes that control the expression of traits we need to identify.   Human and mice have had more variants/alleles identified then dairy and dairy has more then beef.  

2.  Don't know.

3.  It comes down to species, breed, lines on what we know.  University of Missouri is working on identifying around 200,000 variants in angus cattle and the preliminary findings should be out by 2016 BIF conference.   There are far more questions then answers in the brave new world of genomics in my opinion.


I expect to see more/faster progress made in identifying alleles/variants with the improvement in technology, models and varying desciplines of scientist working on the different challenges.  

For a common definition...... what is meant by 200,000 variants?

roughly 200,000 thousand is the number dna alleles (not sure of proper term) that are different then what is expected at those points on the dna strands.  It is MY UNDERSTANDING  is they are looking to identify variants that my cause early embryonic loss, loss of function of genes or what ever positive effects that can be identified.

edited to add

I can across this article that will explain it better then I ever could.

http://digitaled.cattlenetwork.com/February2015#&pageSet=3

For a common understanding of the desired goal/purpose.......  What has been determined to be the  primary outcome goal of DNA Genotyping?
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4007
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sat Feb 27, 2016 8:40 am

here`s his own  updated work of Jared Decker, who is actually going about the country promoting genomics...unreal !

Here is the part you need to be aware of as a beef producer, especially if you sell bred heifers. The return on investment (ROI) for a heifer with a high density genomic-enhanced EPD is 433% 167%. But, we know we should be testing our heifers with the low density panels, thus the ROI for a heifer with GE-EPDs is 789% 326%. Commercial heifers tested with available commercial heifer products have ROI around 900% to 1500% 400% to 700%. Let's say my estimate is off by $300, with a $100 premium and a $40 test, the ROI is 150%.



where is the return to the commercial industry?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sat Feb 27, 2016 8:58 am

I would like to know more about his assumptions that he used to derive this conclusions about ROI. The BS meter is pegged out on this article. Genomics was designed to be a selection tool but is being used as a marketing tool .
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4007
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sat Feb 27, 2016 9:17 am

PatB wrote:
I would like to know more about his assumptions that he used to derive this conclusions about ROI.   The BS meter is pegged out on this article.  Genomics was designed to be a selection tool but is being used as a marketing tool .

already posted, but few read ...

http://blog.steakgenomics.org/2016/02/genomic-roi-early-returns-suggest.html


Jared Decker
1 week ago - Shared publicly

As a best case scenario, my predictions are correct. As a worst case scenario, my predictions are wrong and buyers simply reward progressive cattle producers (consignors). Either way, the heifer's seller wins.


what does the buyer win?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



Posts : 648
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sat Feb 27, 2016 5:26 pm

MKeeney wrote:
PatB wrote:
I would like to know more about his assumptions that he used to derive this conclusions about ROI.   The BS meter is pegged out on this article.  Genomics was designed to be a selection tool but is being used as a marketing tool .

already posted, but few read ...

http://blog.steakgenomics.org/2016/02/genomic-roi-early-returns-suggest.html


Jared Decker
1 week ago  -  Shared publicly

As a best case scenario, my predictions are correct. As a worst case scenario, my predictions are wrong and buyers simply reward progressive cattle producers (consignors). Either way, the heifer's seller wins.


what does the buyer win?
A gift assortment of numbers.
Back to top Go down
jonken



Posts : 115
Join date : 2011-12-17
Location : nemo

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 3:49 am

The marketing and manipulation was blatantly obvious in the article prompting my initial question. My lack of knowledge about the scientific aspect of DNA genotyping stirred my interest to seek understanding, not necessarily agreement with the tool and process being promoted as the deliverer of “superior genetics.”  
From my non-scientist, nobody of significance  perspective, I’ve interpreted:

1. The University of Missouri study referenced in an earlier reply is being expected to unfold the “magic” needed to improve fertility in beef cattle.  A need for increased conception rate is the motivation of this study, yet the following seem to be concerning to someone as common as myself.
    A. What is the desired fertility %?    What is a realistic % given the tradeoff that is inevitable when carcass traits have/are being
        pushed to the maximum levels?  I’ve understood fertility and carcass goals to be antagonistic when a maximum level is pushed for    
        both.
    B. There is no mention or even acknowledgement to the significance of the maturity pattern of the heifers (or bulls) being bred.  With all
         the data, charts, and analysis I have not been able to find any reference to maturity pattern being collected with successful or
        unsuccessful conception rates.   Mapped or unmapped DNA, maturity pattern is a critical consideration.
    C. The Univ. of MO study initially states its goal is to improve fertility, quoting that even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify
        the use/ cost of DNA mapping.  The entire focus on the research however is identifying mutations.  Mutations from homozygous
        recessive alleles identified as lethal conditions.  However, the study doesn’t promote the idea of culling animals that are identified
        with this genetic mutation, but instead…. Through the use of a sophisticated software program (software development and
        management by a breed association is included in this grant project) the carrier animals will be strategically mated with other
        animals. (I wonder if a “Show Me Select Bull Sire program will be unveiled.)  It was cited that the superior genetic merit from a
        potential carrier could be so valuable that culling would not be feasible.  
     D. 10,000 heifers from the show me select heifer program are being tested through this study ($400,000 to genotype them) to see
         which ones never turn up as homozygotes.   University and breed associations are funding the platform that appears will market
         these heifers for a premium price to unsuspecting, often young FFA and 4-H kids as superior animals. In the end, the Show me
         select producer walks to the bank with their bigger than average monetary deposits from a product that our land grant institution
         funded, marketed and promoted.  The seller/producer of the show me select heifer program appears to benefit first and
         foremost.  DNA profiling company  and breed Associations with their generous donations for the research project are all cogs in the
         wheel of the well-oiled Yin and Yang of Deceit machine that will  most likely soon spit out the newly developed EPD for fertility.  

Kendra
Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:29 am

The f250 chip which is the one being used to identify lethal a variants cost around $100. There are around 17,000 animals being tested and possible more expected as the research project grows. I am not sure how many bulls will be tested as part of this project. The 10,000 show me select heifers was an easy source of dna that represented a current genetics in use with phenotype data to be used in further studies of the alleles/variants/mutations. Just think of the known lethal/semi-lethal mutations in in dairy cattle and how they are handled today. The lethal haplotypes on tested animals are made available to all breeder and they can make their breeding selections accordingly. The AI studs have designed bull selection programs to take in account known lethal haplotypes, genomic enhanced epd's and breeders objectives.

If one wants an education on genetics/genomics I would suggest watching the "Useful Genetics" modules on youtube.
Back to top Go down
RobertMac



Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:57 am

MKeeney wrote:
here`s his own  updated work of Jared Decker, who is actually going about the country promoting genomics...unreal !

Here is the part you need to be aware of as a beef producer, especially if you sell bred heifers. The return on investment (ROI) for a heifer with a high density genomic-enhanced EPD is 433% 167%. But, we know we should be testing our heifers with the low density panels, thus the ROI for a heifer with GE-EPDs is 789% 326%. Commercial heifers tested with available commercial heifer products have ROI around 900% to 1500% 400% to 700%. Let's say my estimate is off by $300, with a $100 premium and a $40 test, the ROI is 150%.



where is the return to the commercial industry?

Per a question l asked on ranchers.net years ago, most commercial producers believe the best source for replacements is their own cows. What they aren't convinced of, is the best source for bulls to produce those replacements also come from those same cows.
Back to top Go down
RobertMac



Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:01 am

PatB wrote:
The f250 chip which is the one being used to identify lethal a variants cost around $100.  There are around 17,000 animals being tested and possible more expected as the research project grows.  I am not sure how many bulls will be tested as part of this project.    The 10,000 show me select heifers was an easy source of dna that represented a current genetics in use with phenotype data to be used in further studies of the alleles/variants/mutations.   Just think of the known lethal/semi-lethal mutations in in dairy cattle and how they are handled today.  The lethal haplotypes on tested animals are made available to all breeder and they can make their breeding selections accordingly.   The AI studs have designed bull selection programs to take in account known lethal haplotypes, genomic enhanced epd's and breeders objectives.  

If one wants an education on genetics/genomics I would suggest watching the "Useful Genetics" modules on youtube.

It's a marketing tool!

Kent and Jon have it right.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



Posts : 648
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:35 am

Quote :
even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify the use/ cost of DNA mapping.

Quote :
10,000 heifers from the show me select heifer program are being tested through this study ($400,000 to genotype them)

If they achieve +2% or say, 200 heifers from this group, the test cost, but not the development and weaning cost of the 200 would be +$2000 each. PatB's point is that my expense to test would benefit other people who might not choose to test. Sounds a bit socialistic but then it might be.

If folks are serious about fertility, they can blow the dust off of studies which pinpoint antagonists to fertility, minimize or eliminate the antagonists and achieve much more than 2% increase for a whole lot less. But like PatB points out so well, it is not for the good of the paying participant but for the owner of the few mainstream bulls that will get to put a feather in their bonnet on the expense of others. If the big wigs, horn blowers and self-back patters want data to promote XXX Questionable, let them do their own testing and THEN sell semen from the unbelievable.

Otherwise fodder for articles for research and speakers and something to write on shiny pages of AI catalogs and sale catalogs.

Remember war: seems exciting to drop bombs from afar. The battle is won in the trenches.
Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:45 am

The university of missouri project is on the right track trying to identify alleles/variants/mutations and what they affect. The next step will be whole genome scan large number of animals and identify the differences in the genetic code and work on identifying what those differences result in. In theory one should be able to identify the alleles responsible for fescue, heat, cold tolerance, growth, marbling, feet, leg structure any other trait of interest. Genomics is a selection tool that has been turned into a marketing tool like epd's and pedigrees before that.
Back to top Go down
RobertMac



Posts : 262
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:00 am

No, genomics, like epd's and pedigrees are marketing tools being sold as selection tools.
Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 12:01 pm

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify the use/ cost of DNA mapping.

Quote :
10,000 heifers from the show me select heifer program are being tested through this study ($400,000 to genotype them)

If they achieve +2% or say, 200 heifers from this group, the test cost, but not the development and weaning cost of the 200 would be +$2000 each.  PatB's point is that my expense to test would benefit other people who might not choose to test.  Sounds a bit socialistic but then it might be.

If folks are serious about fertility, they can blow the dust off of studies which pinpoint antagonists to fertility, minimize or eliminate the antagonists and achieve much more than 2% increase for a whole lot less.  But like PatB points out so well, it is not for the good of the paying participant but for the owner of the few mainstream bulls that will get to put a feather in their bonnet on the expense of others.  If the big wigs, horn blowers and self-back patters want data to promote XXX Questionable, let them do their own testing and THEN sell semen from the unbelievable.

Otherwise fodder for articles for research and speakers and something to write on shiny pages of AI catalogs and sale catalogs.

Remember war: seems exciting to drop bombs from afar.  The battle is won in the trenches.

If they can identify the alleles/variations/mutations that cause loss of fertility, growth or any other traits of interest. Cattle persons can use this information to select cattle that fit their needs. In the big scheme of things a $45 dollar test is cheap risk management tool on a $2500 plus bull. The lost revenue of one lost calf could pay for years of testing. With all the known defects in the registered and commercial cattle herds confirmation of the parentage may help in management of lethal defects.

The owners of the current mainstream bulls will most likely be hit harder than those with linebred herds that have been working to eliminate fertility and other challenges in their herd. On the downside if a fertility challenge is identified in a linebred herd the breeder will have a harder time to breed around it than a mainstream breeder who just needs to use a clean out cross sires.

Back to top Go down
EddieM



Posts : 648
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 1:07 pm

PatB wrote:
EddieM wrote:
Quote :
even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify the use/ cost of DNA mapping.

Quote :
10,000 heifers from the show me select heifer program are being tested through this study ($400,000 to genotype them)

If they achieve +2% or say, 200 heifers from this group, the test cost, but not the development and weaning cost of the 200 would be +$2000 each.  PatB's point is that my expense to test would benefit other people who might not choose to test.  Sounds a bit socialistic but then it might be.

If folks are serious about fertility, they can blow the dust off of studies which pinpoint antagonists to fertility, minimize or eliminate the antagonists and achieve much more than 2% increase for a whole lot less.  But like PatB points out so well, it is not for the good of the paying participant but for the owner of the few mainstream bulls that will get to put a feather in their bonnet on the expense of others.  If the big wigs, horn blowers and self-back patters want data to promote XXX Questionable, let them do their own testing and THEN sell semen from the unbelievable.

Otherwise fodder for articles for research and speakers and something to write on shiny pages of AI catalogs and sale catalogs.

Remember war: seems exciting to drop bombs from afar.  The battle is won in the trenches.

If they can identify the alleles/variations/mutations that cause loss of fertility, growth or any other traits of interest.  Cattle persons  can use this information to select cattle that fit their needs.  In the big scheme of things a $45 dollar test is cheap risk management tool  on a $2500 plus bull.   The lost revenue of one lost calf could pay for  years of testing.  With all the known defects in the registered and commercial cattle herds confirmation of the parentage may help in management of lethal defects.

The owners of the current mainstream bulls will most likely be hit harder than those with linebred herds that have been working to eliminate fertility and other challenges in their herd.  On the downside if a fertility challenge is identified in a linebred herd the breeder will have a harder time to breed around it than a mainstream breeder who just needs to use a clean out cross sires.  
A pipe dream. Any promotion of new technology accepted and sponsored by a run away breed association is a "top down" issue. Eliminate problems quicker or better? Hardly. The effort to eliminate/select trait(s) is still going to be exponential rather than linear whether one uses tea leaves, observation, linebreeding or genetics.

What will happen when every main line and noted herd in the USA has their specific defects DOCUMENTED that are already OBSERVED? They are not going to come crawling to me or you for better animals because we did not fall for the smoke and mirror advertising and we bred the cattle we knew were better. They are going to motor on with the same disdain for the buying members as ever because they see themselves as superior and they want to believe that their animals are superior.

PatB, your continued desire to infuse mainstream genetics into your herd might be the catalyst for you being so interested in gene technology. I am not that connected to the mainstream and see stabilization, improvement and breeder (self) satisfaction without the technology. The new tests and hope for better from the whole might be your aspirin or sedative for your selection headache.

A linebreeder will know pronto if fertility is an issue so that is a bogus comparative. Never think that new technology will impact the powers that be in the long run. AAA finally had to admit to new defects in recent years, being drug in kicking and screaming. Were these defects ELIMINATED from the breed? No way, Jose! Just look at a recent XXX big time sale and see the carrier bulls are grouped and that is a noble act as compared to some sell without proper notation.

Dream on.
Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 1:31 pm

Eddie with the current AAA BOD I do not expect much or any negative information that has impacts the top 100 breeders to be released. The University of missouri's findings will be made public as a condition of the government grant that is funding some of the research.

My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype. If commercial breeders continue to knowingly buy bulls that are confirmed carriers of defects this may be an exercise in futility.

I know that the my foundation cows brought certain challenges that I am working thru that requires outside genetics to correct.
Back to top Go down
jonken



Posts : 115
Join date : 2011-12-17
Location : nemo

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 7:55 pm

The annual grant report submitted by the Univ. of Missouri to the USDA as conditions of the AFRI competitive grant is the source used in my personal conclusions.  It states that from 1/1/2015 – 1/31/2015  “We proposed to genotype a sample of 10,000 Angus females to identify lethals with high-confidence and their allele frequencies. To date, DNA and phenotypic sampling has been completed on 10,252 heifers from 52 herds. We have characterized 86 of the sequenced Angus bulls (those with Heifer Pregnancy EPDs) for the number of LOF alleles that they carry in genes that are predicted to be essential for life and are thus likely to directly impact the fertility of these bulls.”

 The $400,000 costs referenced in my earlier post was also taken from a University’s publication.  I assume costs for genome sequencing has decreased from its earlier costs during 2014, when the University reports having completed genomes for 89 Angus bulls.  Perhaps the research project does include more animals in the study and will be reflected in the current year’s report, however in my way of thinking, it is irrelevant how many individuals they test…..Goals  of the project listed in the original grant states: " Develop a male fertility expected progeny difference (EPD) and enhanced heifer pregnancy rate EPD based upon LOF genotype information. "  Without a quantifiable measure within a given unit of time (ex: Heifer conception rates will increase to 90% success by “X” years of age), does science and research accept the hypothesis as  scientifically valid and the results reliable?  When the hypothesis reads as a predetermined outcome, it is difficult to not consider the effects of self-fulfilling prophecy discrediting any validity.

Using Mean Spirit’s quote:  "Genotyping cattle is a very good thing for the genotypers. And its probably going to someday be a very good thing for cattle marketers. Beyond those groups, no doubt it will be, at best, a wash. Like EPDs before them. Since the advent of EPDs, they have been used successfully. For example, the weaning weight EPD has gone up dramatically for registered cattle since EPDs came into use. (Never mind that weaning weights really haven't changed that much-- wassup with that?). "
What will be different about the contribution, use and benefactors of fertility EPDs?    I remain stuck on the question I asked earlier regarding the University’s study:  What is the desired fertility % being sought to “prove” maximum economic efficiency has been obtained?  When breed associations promote minimal phenotype differences between a Champion Male and a Champion Female, then what % fertility success is considered an optimal success?  When one takes into consideration different environments and management it becomes apparent that defining an established fertility %  is the best  example to illustrate  that no one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other.     None of us are exempt from this choice, regardless to our vocation,  if contentment is desired.  

My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype.—An admirable goal Pat!  You are more trusting than I have been conditioned to be regarding perceived transparency after being introduced to the practice of half-truths.  Government grants do not check the validity of  the omitted half-truths (intentional or unintentional)  to my knowledge.
-Kendra

Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:59 pm

Quote from a January 20, 2016 email I received from Dr. Taylor when I ask about status of this project.

"F250 is built and we have genotyped about 6,000 of the 18,000 animals that I plan on genotyping with the assay. Will have to wait until all the animals are genotyped before we finally run the calls because many of the variants are rare and we need a lot of animals genotyped to even see some classes of homozygotes. Hope to have this all done by end of February. "

If I can increase the level of fertility by 2 percent in my herd without changing feed amount that would mean 1 more calf to sell. If I could identify heifers that have known variants that reduce fertility I could cull them at weaning or select sires that do have same variants. This is all assuming that we are told the variants and who is identified to carry or be free of said variants. In my opinion the info will be almost worthless in an epd form.




Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4007
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:00 pm

PatB wrote:
Eddie with the current AAA BOD I do not expect much or any negative information that has impacts the top 100 breeders to be released.   The University of missouri's findings will be made public as a condition of the government grant that is funding some of the research.  

My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype.  If commercial breeders continue to knowingly buy bulls that are confirmed carriers of defects this may be an exercise in futility.  

I know that the my foundation cows brought certain challenges that I am working thru that requires outside genetics to correct.  



maybe I should have opted for the poem If instead Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4007
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 5:32 am

pat wrote:
My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype.

I already to this everyday Pat; there`s not much hype out in my pastures...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:18 am

MKeeney wrote:
pat wrote:
My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype.  

I already to this everyday Pat; there`s not much hype out in my pastures...

I was thinking about players like GAR, SAV, 44 Farms, Yon, EXAR and you can add the next 1000 names to the list. Some of the mentioned breeders are still selling confirmed DD carriers that will result in lower calving percentage when bred to herds that have used DD carrier bulls in the past. If a walking herd sire has a lethal allele it will only affect the herd(s) he is used in for the first generation but an AI sire could affect thousands of herds the first generation. Considering that the AI studs like to promote sons and grandsons of popular AI sires a lethal allele could have a bad effect on calving percentages and the commercial operations bottom line in a few generations.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4007
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:57 am

PatB wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
pat wrote:
My hope is the information will allow commercial breeders to select bulls with better information then just hype.  

I already to this everyday Pat; there`s not much hype out in my pastures...

I was thinking about players like GAR, SAV, 44 Farms, Yon, EXAR and you can add the next 1000 names to the list.  Some of the mentioned breeders are still selling confirmed DD carriers that will result in lower calving percentage when bred to herds that have used DD carrier bulls in the past.  If a walking herd sire has a lethal allele it will only affect the herd(s) he is used in for the first generation but an AI sire could affect thousands of herds the first generation.  Considering that the AI studs like to promote sons and grandsons of popular AI sires a lethal allele could have a bad effect on calving percentages and the commercial operations bottom line in a few generations.  

valid point Pat; was joshing you again...Yelp, a former president`s catalog I read in the bathroom this morning alluded to the fact that dd is no problem...but a bigger problem might be their choice of "clean sires" for my purposes etc...never had a leading direction in 75 years except to follow the crowd...
seriously, is homozygousity the reason crossbred cows are better for fertility, or is a lack of selection pressure on the purebred? if both, what % of each?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MVCatt



Posts : 114
Join date : 2010-09-24
Age : 43
Location : SW Penn

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:40 am

"quoting that even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify the use/ cost of DNA mapping."

The average beef producer is 58.3 yrs old (How willing are they to embrace new unproven technology?) . The average herd size is 40 head (How many replacements will they need per yr?). 2% is laughable and no one gives a rip about this useless technology other than the usual suspects.
Pat, why not spend more time worrying about your ongoing pasture renovations? They might actually effect your bottom line someday....
Back to top Go down
PatB



Posts : 352
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:08 am

MVCatt wrote:
"quoting that even a 2% increase is substantial enough to justify the use/ cost of DNA mapping."

The average beef producer is 58.3 yrs old (How willing are they to embrace new unproven technology?) . The average herd size is 40 head (How many replacements will they need per yr?). 2% is laughable and no one gives a rip about this useless technology other than the usual suspects.
Pat, why not spend more time worrying about your ongoing pasture renovations? They might actually effect your bottom line someday....

The land conversion/pasture improvement is a daily thing with each days feed placement is selected to improved the ground chosen. Every open heifer or cow that is eating my feed resources affects my bottom line.
Back to top Go down
MVCatt



Posts : 114
Join date : 2010-09-24
Age : 43
Location : SW Penn

PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:56 am

Pat what is you're current yearly cull rate and how many of those are actually open?
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Yin and Yang of Deceit   

Back to top Go down
 
Yin and Yang of Deceit
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Yin-Yang meridians & the hand!
» Yin & Yang: the thumb represents the least active digit!
» orang yang merugi di akhirat
» Tulisan Apa yang Sebenarnya Ada di Tiang Salib Yesus?
» 13 tokoh muhammadiyah yang berbau liberal

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