| Line 1 Hereford | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Line 1 Hereford Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:43 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:12 am | |
| | |
|
| |
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:18 am | |
| | |
|
| |
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:25 am | |
| I sure think the heritability of udders is higher than...
The average posterior heritability of udder score estimated from these data was 0.23, in close agreement with estimates of heritability for teat and suspensory scores (0.27 and 0.22, respectively) for Gelbvieh cattle calculated by Sapp et al. (2004) using a scoring system with finer gradations than was employed here. DeNise et al. (1987) used 5-point scales in assessing the udder capacity and shape of Hereford cows and derived heritability estimates of 0.12 and 0.15, respectively, from paternal half-sib analyses. | |
|
| |
EddieM
Posts : 632 Join date : 2010-09-24 Location : South Carolina
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:38 pm | |
| They changed BW, growth and MM but did't do much for stayability. Did the selection for growth antagonize the stayability of the females? | |
|
| |
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:26 pm | |
| - EddieM wrote:
- They changed BW, growth and MM but did't do much for stayability. Did the selection for growth antagonize the stayability of the females?
they had no luck lowering cow size by limiting BW...the Beckton theory did not work with Line 1 | |
|
| |
Grassfarmer
Posts : 660 Join date : 2010-09-27 Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:58 pm | |
| - MKeeney wrote:
- EddieM wrote:
- They changed BW, growth and MM but did't do much for stayability. Did the selection for growth antagonize the stayability of the females?
they had no luck lowering cow size by limiting BW...the Beckton theory did not work with Line 1 Has that Beckton theory worked anywhere other than Beckton? I've always been intrigued by the claims of cow mature remaining unchanged for 30 years while growth has increased dramatically. Can the cow mature weight really be controlled environmentally without losing functionality? | |
|
| |
EddieM
Posts : 632 Join date : 2010-09-24 Location : South Carolina
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Sat Sep 10, 2011 12:11 pm | |
| I've never figured that one out either. | |
|
| |
Kent Powell
Posts : 441 Join date : 2010-09-24 Location : SW Kansas
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:18 pm | |
| Are two different forces pulling in different directions yet keeping things balanced? The same effect as picking from the middle to keep things the same, but perhaps providing more vigor using the bulls with the most and the females with just enough being somewhat different. Environment and BW - VS- Growth. We have experienced using long dead bulls with inferior numbers yet superior performers. Would the Becton system bring/keep the numbers up as if they are increasing, yet they are just staying current? I have been told that old bulls' numbers go down with time as their ties to the current population diminish, is the opposite built into the system to encourage rapid generation turnover? A system loophole? - Grassfarmer wrote:
- MKeeney wrote:
- EddieM wrote:
- They changed BW, growth and MM but did't do much for stayability. Did the selection for growth antagonize the stayability of the females?
they had no luck lowering cow size by limiting BW...the Beckton theory did not work with Line 1 Has that Beckton theory worked anywhere other than Beckton? I've always been intrigued by the claims of cow mature remaining unchanged for 30 years while growth has increased dramatically. Can the cow mature weight really be controlled environmentally without losing functionality? | |
|
| |
MKeeney Admin
Posts : 3797 Join date : 2010-09-21
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:24 pm | |
| - Keystone wrote:
- Are two different forces pulling in different directions yet keeping things balanced? The same effect as picking from the middle to keep things the same, but perhaps providing more vigor using the bulls with the most and the females with just enough being somewhat different. Environment and BW - VS- Growth.
We have experienced using long dead bulls with inferior numbers yet superior performers. Would the Becton system bring/keep the numbers up as if they are increasing, yet they are just staying current? I have been told that old bulls' numbers go down with time as their ties to the current population diminish, is the opposite built into the system to encourage rapid generation turnover? A system loophole?
- Grassfarmer wrote:
- MKeeney wrote:
- EddieM wrote:
- They changed BW, growth and MM but did't do much for stayability. Did the selection for growth antagonize the stayability of the females?
they had no luck lowering cow size by limiting BW...the Beckton theory did not work with Line 1 Has that Beckton theory worked anywhere other than Beckton? I've always been intrigued by the claims of cow mature remaining unchanged for 30 years while growth has increased dramatically. Can the cow mature weight really be controlled environmentally without losing functionality? Kent, you are on a roll today...a leading role in fact...I think you are on to something here...a selection creation instead of a genetic creation, if I`m reading you correctly... | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Line 1 Hereford | |
| |
|
| |
| Line 1 Hereford | |
|