Featured Post

Dr. Jamie Courter is your Mizzou Beef Genetics Extension Specialist

Image
By Jared E. Decker Many of you have probably noticed that things have been a lot less active on the A Steak in Genomics™   blog, but you probably haven't known why. In January 2021, I was named the Wurdack Chair in Animal Genomics at Mizzou, and I now focus on research, with a little bit of teaching. I no longer have an extension appointment. But, with exciting news, the blog is about to become a lot more active! Jamie Courter began as the new MU Extension state beef genetics specialist in the Division of Animal Sciences on September 1, 2023. I have known Jamie for several years, meeting her at BIF when she was a Masters student. I have been impressed by Jamie in my interactions with her since that time.  Dr. Courter and I have been working closely together the last 6 weeks, and I am excited to work together to serve the beef industry for years to come! Jamie holds a bachelor’s degree in animal science from North Carolina State University and earned a master's degree in animal
1 comment

BIF 2016: Growing profit by understanding cow maintenance efficiency and maintenance requirement in an animal and systems context

Dr. Mark Enns
Colorado State University

If we had the ability to improve maintenance feed consumption likely would improve profitiability of beef production.
To make genetic improvement we need genetic variability. Is there variability for maintenance energy? Hotovy et al 1991 measured intake and fasting heat production on twins to estimate heritability of maintenance energy. The heritability was 0.51.

But, putting a large number of cattle through metabolism chambers is not feasible.

What tools are available to change maintenance energy?

  • Mature weight and height
  • Body condition scores
  • Maintenance energy EPD


For two beef breeds, we see an unfavorable trend for mature size. If we go from a 1000 pound cow to a 1500 pound cow, we have increased the maintenance requirement by 35.5%.

But, maintenance energy is a function of both body weight and milk production. $EN index produced by the Angus Association is an economic index weighting both body weight and milk production.
Maintenance energy EPD (Mcal/Month), which accounts for mature weight and milk, is an EPD that allows selection of cows requiring less feed for maintenance.

Both $EN and ME EPD have both had unfavorable genetic trends (although ME EPD has plateaued the last few years).

Body condition score adjustments.
Let's assume an average mature weight of 1,350 pounds. If a cow has a body condition score of 5, there is no adjustment. If a cow has a body condition score of 7, the adjusted mature weight is 1144 pounds.

Red Angus Association: mature weight and body condition scores represent roughly 20% of the numbers of weaning weight records reported.
For American Angus Association, there are over 9.1 million weaning weight records. There are about 120,000 mature weight records.

The genetic relationship between birth weight and yearling weight is 0.55. Despite this strong relationship, we have successful created curve bender bulls with good calving ease and high growth.

The relationship between mature weight and yearling weight is 0.72. Just as we have broken the genetic antagonism between birth weight and yearling weight, we need to do the same thing for yearling weight and mature weight.

There has been encouraging progress on the research side. We have improvements in genomic predictions for feed intake. The correlation between feed intake on forage and grain is favorable (Shike), but we need to look at this from a genetic correlation perspective.

"There is evidence that selection can be successful for reducing maintenance energy requirements while still improving growth." Enns said.

Using an economic index, a cattle herd in Australia held mature size constant but increased slaughter weights.

Selection indexes work! Think what we can do with EPDs if we have the necessary data.

We need more data for mature weight and body condition scores.

 See bifconference.com for more information about this talk.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Show-Me-Select Board Approves Genomic Testing Requirement for Natural Service Sires

Image
All bulls purchased after February 1st, 2019 for use as natural service sires in the Show-Me-Select Replacement Heifer Program ™  must be DNA tested to have genomic-enhanced EPDs. All bulls used as natural service sires after February 1st, 2020 must have genomic-enhanced EPDs, regardless of when they were purchased. Seedstock producers classifying bulls as Show-Me-Select qualified in sale books must have genomic-enhanced EPDs on those lots. Bulls purchased prior to February 1st, 2019 will be grandfathered into the program, as is the common practice with all natural service sires. However, this grandfather grace period will end February 1st, 2020. At that time for a bull to qualify for use in the program, it must have genomic-enhanced EPDs. Why the change? The Show-Me-Select Replacement Heifer Program has the goal of producing premium heifers that perform predictably as 2 year olds. The program has a history of requiring Show-Me-Select producers to go beyond typical cat
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 re
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 associ
Read more