Glad to see a conversation about this.
I think what triggered my original post is some work I have been doing looking at genetic variation within breeds (or the range of variation). Using a bit of trickery with some information from USDA-MARC it is pretty interesting to see the "genetic overlap" in the major breeds. In other words, it appears somewhat that many breeders in every breed are selecting for the same things, even though their breeds "should?" more than likely be used for specific purposes. For example, there is a lot of overlap in milk genetics between terminal type breeds and maternal type breeds. I don't think this is a great surprise, but for us at home, our terminal bulls better not have a high milk number, as I would rather have muscle growth than milk production. It is also interesting to see breeds that are passing other breeds for traits that we consider the strengths of the breeds that are being passed. Has anyone looked at Milk numbers in Angus cattle lately?
Pretty much I agree with most of the comments posted above, but it is interesting to see how things are done, versus how we think they should be done.
Perhaps the biggest problem we face as an industry (RKaiser aside) is that even if we select on the information we know about our cattle (measured efficiency, growth, net return, etc.) most of us still sell our calves visually in large groups, or even in presort sales.
Basically, we put effort into selecting cattle that work and then just turn into a ring and say "These ones are pretty/shiny/taller/thicker so please bid an extra 5 cents."
A bit oversimplified, but certainly a goofy way to sell a product. I think that perhaps this is why we are seeing auction market volumes decline over the last several years. Certainly shows the difference between value added and commodity production.
I think what triggered my original post is some work I have been doing looking at genetic variation within breeds (or the range of variation). Using a bit of trickery with some information from USDA-MARC it is pretty interesting to see the "genetic overlap" in the major breeds. In other words, it appears somewhat that many breeders in every breed are selecting for the same things, even though their breeds "should?" more than likely be used for specific purposes. For example, there is a lot of overlap in milk genetics between terminal type breeds and maternal type breeds. I don't think this is a great surprise, but for us at home, our terminal bulls better not have a high milk number, as I would rather have muscle growth than milk production. It is also interesting to see breeds that are passing other breeds for traits that we consider the strengths of the breeds that are being passed. Has anyone looked at Milk numbers in Angus cattle lately?
Pretty much I agree with most of the comments posted above, but it is interesting to see how things are done, versus how we think they should be done.
Perhaps the biggest problem we face as an industry (RKaiser aside) is that even if we select on the information we know about our cattle (measured efficiency, growth, net return, etc.) most of us still sell our calves visually in large groups, or even in presort sales.
Basically, we put effort into selecting cattle that work and then just turn into a ring and say "These ones are pretty/shiny/taller/thicker so please bid an extra 5 cents."
A bit oversimplified, but certainly a goofy way to sell a product. I think that perhaps this is why we are seeing auction market volumes decline over the last several years. Certainly shows the difference between value added and commodity production.
Comment