Technology Lag: We Don't Have Time

From Shauna Hermel's Twitter feed, I came across this article about David Buchanan's talk at the 2013 BIF Research Symposium and Convention. Buchanan said,
There is a sizable investment being made in agricultural research, which should result in new technologies, but it takes time for development and adoption, and then for the benefits to be realized. Historically, it takes about 30 years. We don’t have 30 years.
I also see technology adoption as a major shortcoming of the beef industry. This will be a continued theme of this blog and my extension program.

But, in this post I want to discuss the unresolved concern raised in Troy Smith's article. He quotes Buchanan as saying, "“We’ve done pretty well, but we could do better. But better selection tools just get us into trouble faster if we aren’t selecting for the right things.”

Yet, the article does not suggest what are the "right things". In your experience and based on scientific information, what are the right things?

Please leave your thoughts in the comment section below.
(I have turned off word verification, so it should be easier to comment on the blog. If spam gets out of control, I'll have to turn word verification back on.)

After you have left a comment, click on the button below to see my thoughts.



Comments

Anonymous said…
respiratory disease resistance
disease resistance in general
across breed causality
April 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM
Don Nicol said…
I attended the farewell dinner for a retiring extension adviser here in Queensland a few years ago. When asked if the rate of adoption had improved over his career, he replied "Well yes, what used to take 20 years now only takes 19 years…."
In many ways the coming of genomics in beef has just made the genetic messages more complex and has added new jargon & new dimensions to the "black box". Genetic improvement as a permanent, sustainable means of herd improvement and supply chain improvement needs continuous education and simple profit messages but how to ramp up adoption is still a challenge
April 12, 2014 at 6:13 PM
Graybull said…
"It is dishonest to suggest, or imply, that BLUP (EPD) analysis will allow accurate genetic comparisons of all economically important traits across all environments. A trait such as fertility is determined by hormonal balance (largely unaffected by environment) and body condition (largely a reflection of environmental adaptation). It is therefore subjected to genotype X environment interaction. Animals performing well in one environment may perform poorly in a different environment. This is reflected in fertility. No mathematical model can correct for this in order to allow animals be compared across environments with regard to traits that are subjected to genotype X environment interaction."


Johann Zietsman


From: Man - Cattle - Veld, A Ranching Revolution: To be published later this year.

Potentially more accurate selection (Genomics) for the wrong things will NOT improve genetics and/or profitability. For the RIGHT things…….

http://profitableranching.com
April 14, 2014 at 5:53 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EPDs 101: Use Information to Improve Your Herd

Image
Jared E. Decker
Associate Professor, Division of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri

Reprinted with permission from The Cattlemen and Santa Gertrudis Breeders International.

Can we be frank for a minute? It is quite simple: EPDs work. When we use EPDs to make selection decisions (which bulls to buy, which females to keep and cull), the performance of our herd improves. Let’s discuss why EPDs work, how they can be used, and pitfalls to avoid. Defining EPDEPD stands for Expected Progeny Difference. “Expected” in this context is a loaded word. We use it here the way a statistician would use it. Expected means we are describing a prediction of the future. Expected also means we are discussing an average, not a single observation. What is the average that we are predicting with EPDs? We are predicting the average progeny, or the average of an animal’s calf crop. Finally, when we are discussing EPDs we are discussing differences. Either the difference between two animals or the difference b…
Read more

Bob Hough Comments on Changes at Breed Associations

Bob Hough recently posted the following comment on Facebook (posted with his permission):
Early in my career at a breed association, the much beloved American Angus breed executive told me that the secret to success running a breed association was to have a top junior program, keep the books straight, and make sure the numbers (EPDs) don't change. This philosophy meant Angus valued stability in their genetic predictions over keeping them up-to-date with the latest science. The Angus Association also marketed extremely effectively the infallibility of their EPDs because of the size of their database. I will start with the later. Yes, a database needs certain critical mass to make sure the animals are tied, but that can be achieved in a modest size database. After that, data quality far and away outweighs data quantity in assuring the most precise and reliable EPDs possible. On the former point, Angus breeders are simply not use to change. This is not the case in most breed associati…
Read more

New Show-Me-Select Sire EPD Requirements Announced

Image
At the January 4th Show-Me-Select Board of Directors meeting, new service sire EPD requirements were approved. All sires, artificial insemination and natural service, must meet minimum Calving Ease Direct (CED) EPD requirements. In addition to yearly updates, two changes were made.

First, no Birth Weight EPD requirement will be published. All commonly used breeds now have CED EPDs available.

Second, all breeds in the International Genetic Solutions (IGS) genetic evaluation are now set to a common requirement. In the summer of 2018, breeds within the International Genetic Solutions switched to a single-step BOLT multi-breed genetic evaluation. The EPDs for animals in the IGS genetic evaluation are directly comparable across breeds.

In 2017, the Red Angus requirement for CED was a CED of 8, which represents the 30th percentile. Less than 5% percent of heifers breed to a bull with a CED EPD of 8 or larger had calving difficulty.We feel that this require is meeting the need to reduce cal…
Read more