Keeney`s Corner

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

Share | 
 

 Inbred selection

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


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:43 am

df wrote:
I would not say that. I was just pointing out that poultry and swine breeding companies collect data. They may not share the results as their customers get a specific line of females which is crossed with a specific line of males to get specific results.

Creating those lines in beef cattle is much more costly than in corn.

my lands Dennis, any breeder, as a first step, evaluates his stock by the methods needed commensurate with his direction ..how costly has it been to create breeds? Do we have breeds, or just registries today with satistics? If breeds are needed, and aren`t too costly, why would lines within a breed be too costly?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:51 am

MKeeney wrote:
df wrote:
I would not say that. I was just pointing out that poultry and swine breeding companies collect data. They may not share the results as their customers get a specific line of females which is crossed with a specific line of males to get specific results.

Creating those lines in beef cattle is much more costly than in corn.

my lands Dennis, any breeder, as a first step, evaluates his stock by the methods needed commensurate with his direction ..how costly has it been to create breeds? Do we have breeds, or just registries today with satistics? If breeds are needed, and aren`t too costly, why would lines within a breed be too costly?

I disagree. The breeders who profess to believe in fertility and reproductive success as the key to profitable beef production do not collect nor submit the data to prove they are going in the right direction. It is often these same who don't believe EPDs have a place in breeding decisions. They are quickly becoming the leaders in emotion.

I did not say lines were too costly; I said they are created at a much higher costs compared to corn. While there is much comparison to corn, the reality is that the selfing of corn makes it possible to be 50% inbred in one generation and 75% inbred in two generations. Any line that does not cross well with another can be quickly discarded. Not so in beef cattle.

If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:00 am

It is often these same who don't believe EPDs have a place in breeding decisions.

you`re having a few jstinkbug moments this AM df...I don`t know anyone who believes the above...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:06 am

If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?

too many overpaid experts creating too high an overhead...so, what is your hypothesis for improvement? more data? I don`t see how you can keep hedging, straddling the fence on breeds...which is more important, breeds or data?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:32 am

MKeeney wrote:
If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?

too many overpaid experts creating too high an overhead...so, what is your hypothesis for improvement? more data? I don`t see how you can keep hedging, straddling the fence on breeds...which is more important, breeds or data?

Breeds and data are both important. That's because there is more than one market and more than one environment.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:13 pm

Quote :
Nobody talks about phenotype more than those who don't use EPDs.

If you look in any of the major 2011 AI catalogs you can be sure that they ignore phenotype. Talked with a guy today who had the same thoughts; The ugliest collection of bulls he had ever seen. But they are valuable?

What would be the difference in costs to keep a herd that was a line vs being a breed? I have picked up that "marketing" is a dirty word, but since somebody has to pay the bills, the folks who might want to buy some of your cows and you might want to"tell somebody about them" will be a different crowd.
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:21 pm

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
Nobody talks about phenotype more than those who don't use EPDs.

If you look in any of the major 2011 AI catalogs you can be sure that they ignore phenotype. Talked with a guy today who had the same thoughts; The ugliest collection of bulls he had ever seen. But they are valuable?

What would be the difference in costs to keep a herd that was a line vs being a breed? I have picked up that "marketing" is a dirty word, but since somebody has to pay the bills, the folks who might want to buy some of your cows and you might want to"tell somebody about them" will be a different crowd.

You can thank MikeK for making "marketing" a dirty word; but he should not get all the credit as he as had some help. Very Happy
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:23 pm

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
Nobody talks about phenotype more than those who don't use EPDs.

If you look in any of the major 2011 AI catalogs you can be sure that they ignore phenotype. Talked with a guy today who had the same thoughts; The ugliest collection of bulls he had ever seen. But they are valuable?

What would be the difference in costs to keep a herd that was a line vs being a breed? I have picked up that "marketing" is a dirty word, but since somebody has to pay the bills, the folks who might want to buy some of your cows and you might want to"tell somebody about them" will be a different crowd.

Your assuming the picture is an accurate representation of the bull. It could be worse. Shocked

Does the club calf crowd use EPDs? What about the rest of the show crowd?
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:10 pm

df wrote:
EddieM wrote:
Quote :
Nobody talks about phenotype more than those who don't use EPDs.

If you look in any of the major 2011 AI catalogs you can be sure that they ignore phenotype. Talked with a guy today who had the same thoughts; The ugliest collection of bulls he had ever seen. But they are valuable?

What would be the difference in costs to keep a herd that was a line vs being a breed? I have picked up that "marketing" is a dirty word, but since somebody has to pay the bills, the folks who might want to buy some of your cows and you might want to"tell somebody about them" will be a different crowd.

Your assuming the picture is an accurate representation of the bull. It could be worse. Shocked

Does the club calf crowd use EPDs? What about the rest of the show crowd?
marketing is no longer a bad word..aggrandizement is...what`s even worse is reading the aggrandizement of the grandizers by their fellow aggrandizers...

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



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:30 am

Why then parallell selection resulting from uniform data collection criteria? Wouldn't different data be important in different areas, and wouldn't that information be best determined by the professional breeder and the professional cattleman customer rather than the breed association?

df wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?

too many overpaid experts creating too high an overhead...so, what is your hypothesis for improvement? more data? I don`t see how you can keep hedging, straddling the fence on breeds...which is more important, breeds or data?

Breeds and data are both important. That's because there is more than one market and more than one environment.


Last edited by Keystone on Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:38 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Kent Powell



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:32 am

Didn't the experts usher in the era of tall trash and pampered cripples soon after? Would a professional take part in that rodeo?

MKeeney wrote:
If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?

too many overpaid experts creating too high an overhead...so, what is your hypothesis for improvement? more data? I don`t see how you can keep hedging, straddling the fence on breeds...which is more important, breeds or data?
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Kent Powell



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:33 am

Who are these mysterious non collectors?

df wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
df wrote:
I would not say that. I was just pointing out that poultry and swine breeding companies collect data. They may not share the results as their customers get a specific line of females which is crossed with a specific line of males to get specific results.

Creating those lines in beef cattle is much more costly than in corn.

my lands Dennis, any breeder, as a first step, evaluates his stock by the methods needed commensurate with his direction ..how costly has it been to create breeds? Do we have breeds, or just registries today with satistics? If breeds are needed, and aren`t too costly, why would lines within a breed be too costly?

I disagree. The breeders who profess to believe in fertility and reproductive success as the key to profitable beef production do not collect nor submit the data to prove they are going in the right direction. It is often these same who don't believe EPDs have a place in breeding decisions. They are quickly becoming the leaders in emotion.

I did not say lines were too costly; I said they are created at a much higher costs compared to corn. While there is much comparison to corn, the reality is that the selfing of corn makes it possible to be 50% inbred in one generation and 75% inbred in two generations. Any line that does not cross well with another can be quickly discarded. Not so in beef cattle.

If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Kent Powell



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:37 am

Who df is qualified to decide if I am going in the right direstion? What is the right direction? To whom do I have to prove something? What do I need to prove?

df wrote:

I disagree. The breeders who profess to believe in fertility and reproductive success as the key to profitable beef production do not collect nor submit the data to prove they are going in the right direction. It is often these same who don't believe EPDs have a place in breeding decisions. They are quickly becoming the leaders in emotion.

I did not say lines were too costly; I said they are created at a much higher costs compared to corn. While there is much comparison to corn, the reality is that the selfing of corn makes it possible to be 50% inbred in one generation and 75% inbred in two generations. Any line that does not cross well with another can be quickly discarded. Not so in beef cattle.

If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
PatB



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:21 am

Keystone wrote:
Who df is qualified to decide if I am going in the right direstion? What is the right direction? To whom do I have to prove something? What do I need to prove?

df wrote:

I disagree. The breeders who profess to believe in fertility and reproductive success as the key to profitable beef production do not collect nor submit the data to prove they are going in the right direction. It is often these same who don't believe EPDs have a place in breeding decisions. They are quickly becoming the leaders in emotion.

I did not say lines were too costly; I said they are created at a much higher costs compared to corn. While there is much comparison to corn, the reality is that the selfing of corn makes it possible to be 50% inbred in one generation and 75% inbred in two generations. Any line that does not cross well with another can be quickly discarded. Not so in beef cattle.

If creating lines is so profitable, why did Pioneer give it up in the 1970's?

To the wife Very Happy and the maybe the banker Twisted Evil but the most important person is yourself. cheers
Back to top Go down
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:39 am

Quote :
Does the club calf crowd use EPDs? What about the rest of the show crowd?

Why wonder what they do if they are not relevent to the main beef industry? They are running their own freak show.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:43 am

Quote :
marketing is no longer a bad word..aggrandizement is...what`s even worse is reading the aggrandizement of the grandizers by their fellow aggrandizers...

Yikes!!!! I can barely spell marketing and now you come up with some big French word that I'll never be able to spell and will drawl through my attempt to pronounce. I might just stick to simple ol' "sellin'"! Wink
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:02 am

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
marketing is no longer a bad word..aggrandizement is...what`s even worse is reading the aggrandizement of the grandizers by their fellow aggrandizers...

Yikes!!!! I can barely spell marketing and now you come up with some big French word that I'll never be able to spell and will drawl through my attempt to pronounce. I might just stick to simple ol' "sellin'"! Wink
aggrandizement is using 13 year old carcass data as a reference point for the cattle you are sellin` today...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:26 pm

Quote :
aggrandizement is using 13 year old carcass data as a reference point for the cattle you are sellin` today...

Didn't know you could age beef that long!! clown
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:00 pm

Can similar in type and purpose, but non-related, inbred strains regressed beyond phenotypic acceptance, be crossed and the single cross product be a parent stock improvement in consistency and predictability to the industry over what currently exists?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Mean Spirit



Posts : 321
Join date : 2010-09-26

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:35 am

Mike, just to clarify, do you mean the progeny of the cross of two inbred regressed would be better parent stock, with the crossed progeny producing more consistent, predictable offspring? Who is the other parent?
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:51 am

Mean Spirit wrote:
Mike, just to clarify, do you mean the progeny of the cross of two inbred regressed would be better parent stock, with the crossed progeny producing more consistent, predictable offspring? Who is the other parent?

the commercially availiable parent stock would be a controlled single cross of two linebred strains, instead of one strain, to be used on the general populace for the characteristics of the strains...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Mean Spirit



Posts : 321
Join date : 2010-09-26

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:33 am

Like breeding a fairly inbred Shoshone to a fairly inbred Hoodoo (who are similar to each other in some trait or traits of interest) and using the bull progeny in commercial herds? Or doing something like that but less radical by staying within breeds-- Shoshone-inbred X Falloon-inbred?

Why do you think that'd result in increased predictability?

Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:44 am

Mean Spirit wrote:
Like breeding a fairly inbred Shoshone to a fairly inbred Hoodoo (who are similar to each other in some trait or traits of interest) and using the bull progeny in commercial herds? Or doing something like that but less radical by staying within breeds-- Shoshone-inbred X Falloon-inbred?

Why do you think that'd result in increased predictability?


certainly not predictability over the single strain parent stock, but far greater than typical of the current registered helter skelter epd mix and match;or a run them down the guantlet culling program....John, I am talking about strains regressed to their base core...where few have been before...not just a "falloon" or a "Shoshone
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Mean Spirit



Posts : 321
Join date : 2010-09-26

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 9:41 am

I wonder how you'd know when a strain is regressed to its base core?

I'd guess that mating two different highly inbred strains having the same phenotypes in some traits of interest would probably result in a uniform group of calves. The parents would be themselves very likely quite homozygous if they were both (1) inbred by pedigree and (2) significantly phenotypically depressed. And you might assume that the two strains are pretty alike genotypically if the same phenotype is a good proxy for genotype. So the progeny would be pretty homozygous too, and would breed like that-- predictable.

But--
(1) If the two strains are alike genotypically, why would you do the cross? There shouldn't be any hybrid vigor, and there wouldn't be any complementary traits if the cattle are alike. If your goal was to just change the names in a pedigree, it'd work, but I don't think that'd be your goal.

(2) If the two strains are not alike genotypically, why would you do the cross? You might be making a new breed, or something like a new breed, but I'm not sure why you'd go to the trouble. Will the new "breed" be any better at anything than the parent strains?

Back to top Go down
Hilly



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

PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:05 am

MKeeney wrote:
Can similar in type and purpose, but non-related, inbred strains regressed beyond phenotypic acceptance, be crossed and the single cross product be a parent stock improvement in consistency and predictability to the industry over what currently exists?

I would think you would be dealing with smaller deviation, as the combined gene pools would be smaller and more overlapping than the more industry standard of fire and ice type pool combinations, in the context of parent stock.

Larrys spherical illustrations on page 22 of “Reflections” is the bases for my thought process , the quest for one breed to do everything has arguably mixed genes up to the point that breeds are redundant and the spherical size of the breed sub-pool, as well as it’s distributions are gaining in size.



By selection and inbreeding of more specific type, you end up focusing in on a smaller gene pools and subsequently less distribution even when combined with an unrelated pedigree wise but similar in purpose strains, as I would think the two pools would have certain percentage overlap.

Which in my mind brings forward the question what is considered “unrelated”.... where would my base cows be in the Bovine Species world and how much overlap would my gene pool have with the Shoshone herd? Would any overlap constitute related and if so I would think it hard to find unrelated but similar in type and purpose cattle unless we draw the line at a certain generation deep pedigree.

Hypothetically if we take the bovine species zoom in on the angus breed, then on to Shoshone , increased the resolution further to the yellow strain and then at this point went on to further trait selection strains like say for feet, udders, calving ease(or whatever else Larry is up to behind the scenes Wink ) and inbred out of eyeball and monetary acceptance, and then went on to test and cross these strains, not to back track on the organization of the genetics but for the economical advantages this new level of order and clarity allows, keeping in mind that all this is occurring within the yellow subpopulation and when looking for the seedless fruit cross we have the whole of the Bovine Species to chose from, the more unrelated the more genetic distribution we incur but that's the whole point if sold as hamburger....

I’m not sure anything I just typed makes sense, kind of ironic in a way how I can muddle (one of my middle son’s most used words as he likes things to be in order) things up... cattle are no exception here. Smile
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Inbred selection   

Back to top Go down
 
Inbred selection
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 4 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Inbred selection
» selection at weaning
» The Development of an Inbred Line of Swine (Minn. No. 1) from a Crossbred Foundation1
» The SPICA Space Telescope
» Natural selection

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