pinebank newsletter

Gavin wrote:

The saying for this month is :
‘Any animal showing superiority for any characteristic, carries with it its heritability for that trait (as estimated) regardless of the performance of its parents.

I can't read on any further. I must mull this over in my own mind before reading any more of this post. So I'll be chewing on this until I return. This has really hit me upside the head.
Dennis Voss in the vicinity of getting clobbered by Gavin

Dennis Voss wrote:

Gavin wrote:

The saying for this month is :
‘Any animal showing superiority for any characteristic, carries with it its heritability for that trait (as estimated) regardless of the performance of its parents.

I can't read on any further. I must mull this over in my own mind before reading any more of this post. So I'll be chewing on this until I return. This has really hit me upside the head.
Dennis Voss in the vicinity of getting clobbered by Gavin

yelp, when I read that, I laughed thinking that Gavin had just dropped a t-post on us...makes me think how much fun it would be to get Gavin on SKYPE in Red Lodge, and ask him some questions

Dennis Voss wrote:

Gavin wrote:

The saying for this month is :
‘Any animal showing superiority for any characteristic, carries with it its heritability for that trait (as estimated) regardless of the performance of its parents.

I can't read on any further. I must mull this over in my own mind before reading any more of this post. So I'll be chewing on this until I return. This has really hit me upside the head.
Dennis Voss in the vicinity of getting clobbered by Gavin

Would not the reverse be true?

"Any animal showing inferiority for any characteristic, carries with it its heritability for that trait (as estimated) regardless of the performance of its parents."

Would this animal still be able to pass along the 'superior genes' of the parents?

Mr. Fallon wrote:

It is the strongest, fittest, healthiest, best suited to handle and cope with the environment in which they all live. Nature the master breeder of all time.

But isn't this the direction that nature points us in making our breeding decisions?

I'm kinda having trouble with this. First, the superiority or inferiority (for RobertMac) must not be due to environment. I guess that's taken care of by limiting the discussion to EBVs, which are supposed to be adjusted to account for the environment.

But what about heterosis? I still need a way to account for that. You don't generally get to use heterosis over and over again, do you? So EBV superiority caused by heterosis-- isnt that illusory to some degree?

Mean Spirit, in the vicinity of a burger at Myra's in Valdese, NC.

Following Gavin's line of thought one should use bulls and cows that display the greatest combination of desired traits to breed the next generation. Is this the same as using the outliers to move the future population in the desired direction?

patb wrote:

Following Gavin's line of thought one should use bulls and cows that display the greatest combination of desired traits to breed the next generation. Is this the same as using the outliers to move the future population in the desired direction?

I think everyone acknowledges use the outlier to make change...the extent of resulting that change is the point of debate....

I've been thinking about the Pinebank newsletter since yesterday and still can't my head around it.
Quote:
"I have mention before that we produced a calf one year that was 100 kilos ahead of any other calf at 200 days. The calf was out of one of the lower performing cows by an average bull............We disregarded the figures and used the bull with great success. He was so successful that we tried to recover him but he had died in an accident. A big loss."

To have a calf 220lbs ahead of any other calf at 200 days is a huge difference in growth, that such a bull could come from a lower performing cow and an average bull is even more surprising. I'm assuming he wasn't a milk stealer because that can certainly boost the 200 day way up there. I'm curious what the offspring of the bull did that made him a great success - I'm assuming they grew faster and heavier? - how much of the sires extra growth did they inherit? Doesn't this all run contra to the theories about outliers or extreme's offspring returning to around the average of the genepool?
I feel I've just reached the next level of confusion

I`m past to confused stage GF; I`m entering the disagreeing stages...

GF. maybe there is two sides to this whole deal. One, a calf born to parents who are on the speed slant towards ave. or less, that "puts it all together" I get that, I've used calves like that, but to the degree where you suspect milk robbing deluxe, that is another matter, and isn't realistic to me. So I think your theory is on the money, GF DV, near nightfall and puzzled

The calf just won the jackpot of the genes. The angus breed has had bulls that far out produce themselves according to what epd's predicted and parents were. I am presuming the offspring from this bull were superior to all other bulls that year. This would be a bull to use in a linebreeding project to move the future population to the next level if there were not major issues such as extra large frame, excessive birth weight or some other undesireable challenge.

patb wrote:

The calf just won the jackpot of the genes. The angus breed has had bulls that far out produce themselves according to what epd's predicted and parents were. I am presuming the offspring from this bull were superior to all other bulls that year. This would be a bull to use in a linebreeding project to move the future population to the next level if there were not major issues such as extra large frame, excessive birth weight or some other undesireable challenge.

and many that fail what their epd`s projected...if my goal was to be moving to a new level, I would not linebreed anything until I got to that level...chances are, anyone "moving", will always be "moving" ...Gavin is one of those " movers"...

If they are bigger, they are bigger. A calf that outweighs his contemporaries by 200 lbs will have a bigger frame and will have bigger birth weights and will have a larger mature size. It sez here that you get it all as part of the package.

Quote :

The calf just won the jackpot of the genes. The angus breed has had bulls that far out produce themselves according to what epd's predicted and parents were. I am presuming the offspring from this bull were superior to all other bulls that year. This would be a bull to use in a linebreeding project to move the future population to the next level if there were not major issues such as extra large frame, excessive birth weight or some other undesireable challenge.

Sounds like the writeup in an AI catalog when they first show the new bull. Tell me that his gain was all genes and fresh air (was it economical gain?). Tell me that the extra gain was not fat. How do you base a presumption of superiority of future calves from individual performance?

I find what Pinebank is doing to be very ingenious, to the point that you would have to live a hundred years of the program being in place to gain enough perspective to be more definitive in understanding. Of course we can all reason as to what the cause and effect results will be based on our understanding of natural law, but there is no denying the admirably of someone that invests more of his time doing, and less time speculating.

I would like to know how long his program had been running before this calf showed up, but more than anything I would like to have been there to see the population as a group the day the program was started.

In my poor rational, if you are selecting for the more efficient genes in a closed population you will inevitably end up close breeding these particular genes, with that in mind the use of outliers, regardless of origin... random gene "jackpot" within herd, outside bull brought in for a certain reason or simply a broken fence... the prepotentcy of the long term closed herd, should run herd on the functional traits, while the gain in heterosis would dissipate into the population in a few generations.

Hilly wrote:

I find what Pinebank is doing to be very ingenious, to the point that you would have to live a hundred years of the program being in place to gain enough perspective to be more definitive in understanding. Of course we can all reason as to what the cause and effect results will be based on our understanding of natural law, but there is no denying the admirably of someone that invests more of his time doing, and less time speculating.

I would like to know how long his program had been running before this calf showed up, but more than anything I would like to have been there to see the population as a group the day the program was started.

In my poor rational, if you are selecting for the more efficient genes in a closed population you will inevitably end up close breeding these particular genes, with that in mind the use of outliers, regardless of origin... random gene "jackpot" within herd, outside bull brought in for a certain reason or simply a broken fence... the prepotentcy of the long term closed herd, should run herd on the functional traits, while the gain in heterosis would dissipate into the population in a few generations.

so well put as usual; I may disagee with Gavin from mis-understanding...whether disgree or misunderstand, I have the greatest respect for the man...like Larry, not so much as what they have gotten done {though significant}, but moreso for what they set out to do...

a little diversion here; putting this picture of the 1/2 Pinebank outcross Angus cow back up here...





in heat today; 11 months old; one fourth 41/97, fall born,only grass after weaning; mother raised her on stockpile and hay...I see her as repeating the type cow above her...
It`s the type, not the frame that matters most...




I hear all this Pharo inspired gibberish about more efficient cows, I buy none of it...however, some cows are more effective in varying environments than others...I know some of you don`t prefer this kind of cow...but...
I am cutting green hay here with at least 40% chance of rain everyday for the next 8 of 10 days...just a fact of where we live...cows are eating green grass full of water....to be effective, she best have some belly...her frame won`t affect her effectiveness, unless you want to raise her to maturity strictly on grass...if so, she best mature pretty quick...isn`t determining the "best type" a matter of deciding how much we need the cow to put into her calf versus how much she retains for her own health and reproductive function...and her longevity per discussed on the other thread...damn tradeoffs

just something to argue about; since LL wonders why no one ever argues with him?
[/quote]

Nice looking heifer We haven't had a 10% chance of rain for the last 40 days here, yet some cows and calves are looking ok. What little grass we do have must be stonger this year,but it's about over for us this year. What I think are my better cows will be headed to Ohio next week(and the rest sold) thanks to Trevorgrey cattle who I may have never meet if it wasn't for these forums.

Yes, if not for this forum and one other, (not 4.9 coffelt bar) I would have not met some really great folks. Lookin forward to seeing you soon buddy.

Lots of grass and hay around me this year. Glad I can help.

I got everything sorted and ready,just waiting on the guy to get my new clutch in.

MKeeney wrote:

a little diversion here; putting this picture of the 1/2 Pinebank outcross Angus cow back up here...





in heat today; 11 months old; one fourth 41/97, fall born,only grass after weaning; mother raised her on stockpile and hay...I see her as repeating the type cow above her...
It`s the type, not the frame that matters most...




I hear all this Pharo inspired gibberish about more efficient cows, I buy none of it...however, some cows are more effective in varying environments than others...I know some of you don`t prefer this kind of cow...but...
I am cutting green hay here with at least 40% chance of rain everyday for the next 8 of 10 days...just a fact of where we live...cows are eating green grass full of water....to be effective, she best have some belly...her frame won`t affect her effectiveness, unless you want to raise her to maturity strictly on grass...if so, she best mature pretty quick...isn`t determining the "best type" a matter of deciding how much we need the cow to put into her calf versus how much she retains for her own health and reproductive function...and her longevity per discussed on the other thread...damn tradeoffs

just something to argue about; since LL wonders why no one ever argues with him?

[/quote]


Whats up with the sideways A on the heifer?

Bootheel wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

a little diversion here; putting this picture of the 1/2 Pinebank outcross Angus cow back up here...





in heat today; 11 months old; one fourth 41/97, fall born,only grass after weaning; mother raised her on stockpile and hay...I see her as repeating the type cow above her...
It`s the type, not the frame that matters most...




I hear all this Pharo inspired gibberish about more efficient cows, I buy none of it...however, some cows are more effective in varying environments than others...I know some of you don`t prefer this kind of cow...but...
I am cutting green hay here with at least 40% chance of rain everyday for the next 8 of 10 days...just a fact of where we live...cows are eating green grass full of water....to be effective, she best have some belly...her frame won`t affect her effectiveness, unless you want to raise her to maturity strictly on grass...if so, she best mature pretty quick...isn`t determining the "best type" a matter of deciding how much we need the cow to put into her calf versus how much she retains for her own health and reproductive function...and her longevity per discussed on the other thread...damn tradeoffs

just something to argue about; since LL wonders why no one ever argues with him?

Whats up with the sideways A on the heifer?[/quote]
a poor assed job of hot branding...then reversing the picture...I forgot to put the Pharo, "she ain`t had nothing to eat" embellishment on this photo...this heifer and Dam and 40 others spent Feb through June 50 miles from home; the dams remain...my new partner in this adventure thought it best to hot brand...a learning process...

Winter has been benign this year which is easy on these old bones. Two unusually bad storms came in early July dropping a surprising dump of snow.

We do not often get snow around our house but this time we had almost blizzard condition for a short period. Back to the fine weather with heavy frosts again now with spectacular fine clear days.

Where I sit in my office, I look out across the valley at the snow capped mountains and they make the most beautiful backdrop, an ideal view to assist meditation.

We cannot afford to winter a cow who does not give us a calf annually, and neither can you. Weather is cold and feed is short and expensive, and cows body weights must be retained. You should be ready to put them on a rising plane of nutrition as calving approaches. In New Zealand we universally calve in spring. The only thing that differs in the time of Spring is whether it is early or late. Stud breeders usually calve early thinking that it will make their calves bigger, (but then they are mostly feeding concentrates). Interestingly this is largely a matter of genes.

No matter how hard you feed calves they will only realise their genetic growth potential. They should be able to be achieve the same size on grass alone.

Calving cows are the most important part of the economics of the beef production cycle. No live calf on the ground and you have no profit for the year. Fertility is four times more important than growth so the whole years management should be aimed at getting the cows in calf, and then getting a live calf on the ground. That is where efficiency and profit starts and finishes.

Work done in New Zealand where one of our geneticists tried to establish a herd of twinning cows was completely unsuccessful. He came to the conclusion that the only way to improve fertility was to cull anything that failed to conceive, or who failed to walk in with a live calf. We have been doing this for some years and most certainly our fertility has increased.

I began weighing the calves as they were born because American Scientists told me that I was going to get calving problems if I kept on using the present programme selecting for growth.

So to see if my birth weights were rising I set out to weigh at birth. My birth weights were rising, so I changed selection to low birth weights. This had the effect of not only dropping birth weights but of shortening gestation period both being of economic value. This affected our final weight as there is a regression between birth and subsequent weights, but now we have overcome that and have succeeded in bending the curve. Now we get low birth weights and high final weights.

It must be remembered that our herd goes directly back to the original Scottish imports and we never used American blood. Those original cows were very docile. Experience had taught me that you were unwise to mix it with a cow just after she had calved. As I was determined to weigh every calf, I purchased a tranquilizer gun. Many amusing and exciting events occurred, mostly unpleasant. I only used the gun on one cow and she was a purchased cow. I found that with on our own cows, I did not need the gun. The drug I was using seemed to disturb rather than quieten the cows. I was given what was a new drug at that time ‘Rompun,’ provided that I wrote a report on its results (or rather the cattle behaviour).

I learned that if I walked confidently straight up to the freshly calved cow, after she had bonded, ignoring all the roaring and foam blowing and just went about tagging and weighing the calf, I could get away with it. Only once was I hooked off a calf, the cow just rolled me away from the calf and then returned to it. I got up and returned to the calf and was successful next time. But you must never take anything or anyone with you. I thought then that I had about 2 hours after she had calved when I appeared to be safe. I considered that this was because the cow was afraid of hurting her calf during this period.

You will find that sometimes a cow appears to be attacking her calf and she will be rolling it around with her head, this I believe is to stimulate the calf to begin breathing.

The cow must be able to concentrate on you. Any cow that attacked me was culled straight away, and still is. I would not do it for any other cows other than our own as I have tried but found that the American cows appeared to have a quite different temperament.

There have been some very bad injuries in N.Z. by breeders trying to do what I have been doing. At least one paraplegia. There is a high risk and it is not worth taking.

In the first year I found out more about cows than I had learned in the past thirty years.

1) I would find a calf lying in the rushes, obviously not suckling. I would identify the calf and then find the cow and take her to the cattle yards and check her milk. To find that either she had none or it was bad. Either way it was the end of her.

2) I found cows that did not have a calf at weaning and upon checking the books found that she had calved and had been recorded as having done so, but on weaning she had no weights for her calf. She had done so for the last three years. But had come in at mating, had a bag, and was considered wet and so mated for the next year.

3) Another cull of a number of cows, was failure to mother properly. These cows had slowly gone off their milk and these calves were small and stunted.

There is no doubt in my mind that the first year I tagged and weighed at birth, I learnt a great deal and culled a lot of cows, succeeding in making our cow herd much more efficient and profitable.

It must be remembered that our herd is meticulously recorded. We are endlessly collecting information on their behaviour and performance. Performance records go right back to 1950 when we began weighing and recording more information.

When I began weighing at birth, I wrote down how each cow behaved and we found that birth behaviour was highly repeatable, and calves that bellowed and fought, tendered to be bad tempered when they got older.

You must try and prevent calves from bellowing as this excites the mother and can cause an attack so you grab the calf’s muzzle and keep its mouth closed.

Because the cows were under such close supervision we saved a lot of calves.

Cows always leave the mob and go to the lowest part of the surrounding country to calve if they have the chance. On our country we have a number of creeks and the cows often drop their calves in the creek or in underrunners (underground creeks with occasional openings).

There are a few simple ways that you can help yourself to get more calves. The most successful way is to overmate and then pregnancy test and cull those cows who have failed to conceive. In this way you know that every cow you are carrying has a calf inside her.

If you are unhappy with your cows performance then buy your bulls from a breeder who specializes on Dam traits. You should have your cow herd straighten out in about three generations. In our own herd, because of their importance, Dam traits have been a major part of the selection process since the beginning. Close to 60 years now.

Pat,
reflecting on the fertility statements above which are consistant with statements you have made in the past..., since fertile cattle have more calves than non-fertile cattle, why wouldn`t fertility problems have solved themselves by now?

MKeeney wrote:

Pat,
reflecting on the fertility statements above which are consistant with statements you have made in the past..., since fertile cattle have more calves than non-fertile cattle, why wouldn`t fertility problems have solved themselves by now?

We can reduce the fertility challenges by management but never eliminate them. The dairy industry has just published research on haplotypes that result in embryonic death if a potential calf gets two copies of specific haplotype. The founder effect is giving the jersey breed a higher precentage of animals carrying this challenge. Breeders have to live with the selection of parent stock by the founders of the breed and every breeder of the animals before them. The best we can do is to minimize the challenges to future breeders who use our genetics by using the tools and breeding methods available to us.

MKeeney wrote:

Pat,
reflecting on the fertility statements above which are consistant with statements you have made in the past..., since fertile cattle have more calves than non-fertile cattle, why wouldn`t fertility problems have solved themselves by now?

Because we continuously, inadvertently select against fertility in our efforts to "improve" cattle.