Genomics, sexed semen and maternal and terminal cattle?

How will genomic testing, sexed semen affect the cattle business? I attended a genex delegate meeting yesterday in NY and genex will be genomic testing all new bulls. They are working on plans to offer sexed semen for maternal lines and terminal lines of cattle. If this comes to pass one could breed a percentage of the herd for replacement females and the rest for quality beef production. As higher density dna chips become available more traits will be identified and used in selection of genitics. Will the pedigree matter much in the future or just the genomic profile of animals?

Heard a presentation on sexed semen from some guy at CSU a couple of weeks ago. Not much impressed with the conception rate which I see as being a large problem. I know Genex has put some money into it. What kind of conception rates are they talking about Pat?

Quote :

How will genomic testing, sexed semen affect the cattle business? I attended a genex delegate meeting yesterday in NY and genex will be genomic testing all new bulls. They are working on plans to offer sexed semen for maternal lines and terminal lines of cattle. If this comes to pass one could breed a percentage of the herd for replacement females and the rest for quality beef production. As higher density dna chips become available more traits will be identified and used in selection of genitics. Will the pedigree matter much in the future or just the genomic profile of animals?

If we take a historical look at genetic promoters, semen salesmen, etc, the new discovery leads to a race to reach the highest extreme of the lastest developed fad. Sexed semen from a highly promoted useless bull will still create useless males or useless females. I honestly do not think that the average semen company or breed association "leader" advising a semen company will be able to separate maternal from terminal because CAB, the showring and the status quo looks for terminal traits as the norm for both selections.

What would be most useful to the cattle industry: genetic tests or doing some linebreeding with the potential sire to see what they really create?

patb wrote:

How will genomic testing, sexed semen affect the cattle business? ... As higher density dna chips become available more traits will be identified and used in selection of genitics. Will the pedigree matter much in the future or just the genomic profile of animals?

From the perspective of one that breeds a lot closer than most, the pedigree will still matter as all of the genes are not yet located, or at least full understood/defined. Then if we ever get to this point then the process will have to begin to educate ourselves on all of the seemingly limitless gene combinations.

Angus 62 wrote:

Heard a presentation on sexed semen from some guy at CSU a couple of weeks ago. Not much impressed with the conception rate which I see as being a large problem. I know Genex has put some money into it. What kind of conception rates are they talking about Pat?

I do not know the current conception rates. I know last spring it was stated that conception rates in dairy varied widely between dairies. The dairy folks at the meeting were using it and seemed to be happy with the results. The biggest grumble was over supply of dairy heifers and resulting reduce sale value. Some were starting to sample their animals for genomic profiles. We are on the tip of a very large iceburg with what will come down with genomics testing in the the future. Rumor had it that they are starting to look at specific disease resistance in some of the dairy breeds ie (johnne's) and other important traits.

EddieM wrote:

Quote :

How will genomic testing, sexed semen affect the cattle business? I attended a genex delegate meeting yesterday in NY and genex will be genomic testing all new bulls. They are working on plans to offer sexed semen for maternal lines and terminal lines of cattle. If this comes to pass one could breed a percentage of the herd for replacement females and the rest for quality beef production. As higher density dna chips become available more traits will be identified and used in selection of genitics. Will the pedigree matter much in the future or just the genomic profile of animals?

If we take a historical look at genetic promoters, semen salesmen, etc, the new discovery leads to a race to reach the highest extreme of the lastest developed fad. Sexed semen from a highly promoted useless bull will still create useless males or useless females. I honestly do not think that the average semen company or breed association "leader" advising a semen company will be able to separate maternal from terminal because CAB, the showring and the status quo looks for terminal traits as the norm for both selections.

What would be most useful to the cattle industry: genetic tests or doing some linebreeding with the potential sire to see what they really create?

I expect to see semen available for true terminal animals in 2 years with the end product in mind. The end market is pretty well defined for most steers. The maternal side of the equation is where things will get tricky. What is an ideal cow and what traits does she need to have? Can we select for low heritable traits via genomic profileing?

According to the CSU guy [I forgot his name, George Seidel who has worked on this for years was unavailable] conception rates aren't very good, 50% maybe. The problem is sorting semen is very hard on it. If you typically can get very high rates you might do better but I would think you might get real low rates in syncronized cows in varying condition.

It is my understanding that not all bulls can be sorted and have a viable product. I am far from an expert on this.

The below accelerated video on genomics is well worth watching.

http://www.accelgen.com/Genomics.aspx

It is fairly obvious that the traditional values of the registered industry are doomed as technology advances, the only way for AAA to succeed is to CONTROL all technological advances requiring everyone to go thru them for authentic certification ....

The question is will there be a need for breed associations or will all genomic data be kept at for PROFIT companies? LL tru-line philosophy may come faster then he invisioned in a different way with sexed semen and genomics playing a larger role . As the world of genomics continues to unfold at a accelerated rate what major changes will take place in the seedstock and semen business?

As with any tools it is how the tools are used that will dictate the overall outcome.

Saturday went to repair a broken stand of barb wire and did not take a hammer along. Ended up using the fence strecher to drive in a nail to the wood post. Definately not the proper tool but it did work.

To many times people fall for marketing now is it the fault of the marketer or is it the fault of the individual wanting something for nothing. I have found there is a price for everything and am I willing to pay the price to gain what I am looking for.

I think there will be value in all the new tools such as DNA tracking. There is a benefit but keep in mind that as an example the benefit from genetic testing right now has low repeatability with out EP's used in conjunction with the data from genetic testing. Along with actual real data such as ultrasound and kill data to back up the genetic testing. Going off a poor memory but REA on genetic testing alone is low about .05-.15 accuracy but when added to EPD data, Ultrasound data, and finally with kill data is goes way up in accuracy. It goes back to using all the tools available. Now comes the question is it worth the expense?

As for breed associations there will be a need for someone to gather all the documentation and track the documentation. Does that mean an organization like the AAA can survive if it only keeps documentation of the pedigree.

Good example is in the chicken industry all the major breeds started with cross breds generations ago. Now they still keep the original genetic pool to start the specific lines. The genetic suppliers in poultry all have maternal and terminal lines. Time is proving that sacrificing in the maternal lines due to increased feed costs you can give up tons of maternal traits and the costs are offset in the terminal gains. Example in the early 1980's there was a genetic line of chickens that had 90% of the male rooster business. Think about that 90% market share. Today that line is gone. Why because it was totally maternal. Good example is on average in the early 80's a maternal line of chickens would get on average 220+ eggs a year for hatching with an average hatch of 95+%. Now if you get over 150 hatching eggs and over 90% hatch it is exceptionally good. But the growth in the chicken has gone from around in the 1950s, it took 85-90 days to raise a five-pound chicken. Due to selective breeding it now takes an average of only 45 days to get to that same weight. This is protein and this is what we all compete with in the long run as we all produce protein.

The classic example of selection would be that the turkey. The turkey meat you will buy for Thanksgiving this year from the grocery store is the result of AI. Why you may ask is that the males have gotten so large that it is economically unfeasable to have natural service. So I guess watch what you select for.

Quote :

So I guess watch what you select for.

Beef Check-off promotes lean and ultra-lean beef.

Packers pay for high-fat beef(Prime/high-choice).

Quote :

the males have gotten so large that it is economically unfeasable to have natural service

Not economically unfeasable, but physically impossible. I'm not sure that we or THEY will ever be able to tweek a feedlot of steers as tight as they tweek chickens because the cost of a single hatching egg or the cost of a single chick is pretty small. The cost of a calf is not cheap. Time is money and the days of a broiler and the weeks of a turkey are cheaper than the months of a steer. But it is good to know what the competition is up to.

sugar springs wrote:

As with any tools it is how the tools are used that will dictate the overall outcome.

Saturday went to repair a broken stand of barb wire and did not take a hammer along. Ended up using the fence strecher to drive in a nail to the wood post. Definately not the proper tool but it did work.

To many times people fall for marketing now is it the fault of the marketer or is it the fault of the individual wanting something for nothing. I have found there is a price for everything and am I willing to pay the price to gain what I am looking for.

I think there will be value in all the new tools such as DNA tracking. There is a benefit but keep in mind that as an example the benefit from genetic testing right now has low repeatability with out EP's used in conjunction with the data from genetic testing. Along with actual real data such as ultrasound and kill data to back up the genetic testing. Going off a poor memory but REA on genetic testing alone is low about .05-.15 accuracy but when added to EPD data, Ultrasound data, and finally with kill data is goes way up in accuracy. It goes back to using all the tools available. Now comes the question is it worth the expense?

As for breed associations there will be a need for someone to gather all the documentation and track the documentation. Does that mean an organization like the AAA can survive if it only keeps documentation of the pedigree.

Good example is in the chicken industry all the major breeds started with cross breds generations ago. Now they still keep the original genetic pool to start the specific lines. The genetic suppliers in poultry all have maternal and terminal lines. Time is proving that sacrificing in the maternal lines due to increased feed costs you can give up tons of maternal traits and the costs are offset in the terminal gains. Example in the early 1980's there was a genetic line of chickens that had 90% of the male rooster business. Think about that 90% market share. Today that line is gone. Why because it was totally maternal. Good example is on average in the early 80's a maternal line of chickens would get on average 220+ eggs a year for hatching with an average hatch of 95+%. Now if you get over 150 hatching eggs and over 90% hatch it is exceptionally good. But the growth in the chicken has gone from around in the 1950s, it took 85-90 days to raise a five-pound chicken. Due to selective breeding it now takes an average of only 45 days to get to that same weight. This is protein and this is what we all compete with in the long run as we all produce protein.

The classic example of selection would be that the turkey. The turkey meat you will buy for Thanksgiving this year from the grocery store is the result of AI. Why you may ask is that the males have gotten so large that it is economically unfeasable to have natural service. So I guess watch what you select for.

very informative post; controlled environments and measured inputs allow for genetic change based on economics rather than promotions .

The question will what will be the traits the female (maternal) side need to have? How much milk, leg/foot structure, size, marbling, feed conversion, fertility, mothering ability, disease resistance and countless other traits will be needed in the future maternal lines? The terminal line will need to be feed efficient, tender, carcass quality, growth, and have excellent semen quality to survive sorting and freezing and other traits. It will take a combination of tools and management to be a successfull beef producer in the future.

Are these tests breed specific?

The history of the test indicate they are breed specific for most traits so far.

Economics is always the driver.

Breed specific will be needed until the full DNA of bovine is validated.

Here is how poultry did the consistent results without DNA typing. In poultry you have the parents male-female that produce the slaughter animals.
The parent stock are determined by the specific male and female lines you choose that you are going to slaughter for the end product you are supplying the consumer. Example if you supply KFC you use a different cross than if you are suppling McDonald's filet sandwich meat.

The process in poultry is as follows.

Phase 1: Parent stock produce the terminal cross that is slaughtered. Both males and females from this cross go to slaughter. The male and female line are determined by the end product you are slaughtering.

Phase 2: Grand Parent Stock (GP) are kept for both the female and male lines on both sides of the parent stock.

Phase 3: Great Grand Parent Stock (GGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GP

Phase 4: Great Great Grand Parent Stock (GGGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GGP

Phase 5: Gene Pool supplies the male and the female side for the male and the female of the GGGP both sides.

This is how they have a consistent product with consistent results at feeding and slaughter.

Now I know some maintain this can not be done in livestock and I will agree it won't happen until the ECONOMIC DRIVER takes over. How long I am not sure but it will be done once the ECONMIC DRIVER is in place.

I am always reminded of the day I had a man call me and say he needed to replace his whole herd of cattle because he just sold calves for the highest price he had ever recieved for his calves. The problem was the price he recieved was way off the top of the market. I always try to remember that at some point all beef is consumed.

I am approaching DNA genomics the same way I approached EPD's cautously. I am sampling my herd bulls and will have a better idea in several years. I am trying to use bulls that have genomic profile and genetic defect tests done. The price of genetic testing is cheaper than discovering that you have a defect several generation later that could of been avoided by testing. How many linebreeding projects faltered due to a genetic defect showing up?

sugar springs wrote:

Economics is always the driver.

Breed specific will be needed until the full DNA of bovine is validated.

Here is how poultry did the consistent results without DNA typing. In poultry you have the parents male-female that produce the slaughter animals.
The parent stock are determined by the specific male and female lines you choose that you are going to slaughter for the end product you are supplying the consumer. Example if you supply KFC you use a different cross than if you are suppling McDonald's filet sandwich meat.

The process in poultry is as follows.

Phase 1: Parent stock produce the terminal cross that is slaughtered. Both males and females from this cross go to slaughter. The male and female line are determined by the end product you are slaughtering.

Phase 2: Grand Parent Stock (GP) are kept for both the female and male lines on both sides of the parent stock.

Phase 3: Great Grand Parent Stock (GGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GP

Phase 4: Great Great Grand Parent Stock (GGGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GGP

Phase 5: Gene Pool supplies the male and the female side for the male and the female of the GGGP both sides.

This is how they have a consistent product with consistent results at feeding and slaughter.

Now I know some maintain this can not be done in livestock and I will agree it won't happen until the ECONOMIC DRIVER takes over. How long I am not sure but it will be done once the ECONMIC DRIVER is in place.

I am always reminded of the day I had a man call me and say he needed to replace his whole herd of cattle because he just sold calves for the highest price he had ever recieved for his calves. The problem was the price he recieved was way off the top of the market. I always try to remember that at some point all beef is consumed.

How much of a factor is consistent environment?

RobertMac wrote:

sugar springs wrote:

Economics is always the driver.

Breed specific will be needed until the full DNA of bovine is validated.

Here is how poultry did the consistent results without DNA typing. In poultry you have the parents male-female that produce the slaughter animals.
The parent stock are determined by the specific male and female lines you choose that you are going to slaughter for the end product you are supplying the consumer. Example if you supply KFC you use a different cross than if you are suppling McDonald's filet sandwich meat.

The process in poultry is as follows.

Phase 1: Parent stock produce the terminal cross that is slaughtered. Both males and females from this cross go to slaughter. The male and female line are determined by the end product you are slaughtering.

Phase 2: Grand Parent Stock (GP) are kept for both the female and male lines on both sides of the parent stock.

Phase 3: Great Grand Parent Stock (GGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GP

Phase 4: Great Great Grand Parent Stock (GGGP) for the male and the female lines of both sides of the GGP

Phase 5: Gene Pool supplies the male and the female side for the male and the female of the GGGP both sides.

This is how they have a consistent product with consistent results at feeding and slaughter.

Now I know some maintain this can not be done in livestock and I will agree it won't happen until the ECONOMIC DRIVER takes over. How long I am not sure but it will be done once the ECONMIC DRIVER is in place.

I am always reminded of the day I had a man call me and say he needed to replace his whole herd of cattle because he just sold calves for the highest price he had ever recieved for his calves. The problem was the price he recieved was way off the top of the market. I always try to remember that at some point all beef is consumed.

How much of a factor is consistent environment?

Environment and chickens, a funny thing you should ask, Robert, and I hope this is the last time I discuss chickens......that so called superior, more efficient chicken Sugar is touting above, is far from it.

Here is why I am no longer in the chicken business, plain and simple: this new efficient chicken, needs a newer and more efficient evironment, to the tune of $400,000 for a four house upgrade. Now the brain waves, offer me a pay raise, to "compensate" for added expense, netting me a $200 dollar pay decrease, per house, per month, for the the next 10 years. No thank you sirs, and you can keep your Vaseline and your "efficient" chickens.

Now, it may not like this everywhere, but the complex here is in self destruct mode, maybe your company is better Sugar, but I doubt it.

chickens, ugh

I see the technological revolution in beef creating the same serfdom economic scenario for beef producers...those that don`t follow might have to sell direct...so laws may be made, are being made, to prevent that? And if that happens; those Eastern KY creek bottoms will become quail and grouse habitant again...but I guess that`s a plus for a segment of our society...

patb wrote:

I am approaching DNA genomics the same way I approached EPD's cautously. I am sampling my herd bulls and will have a better idea in several years. I am trying to use bulls that have genomic profile and genetic defect tests done. The price of genetic testing is cheaper than discovering that you have a defect several generation later that could of been avoided by testing. How many linebreeding projects faltered due to a genetic defect showing up?

in a rare positive exploration for me, what if, DNA shows those herds that have linebred for maternal traits{or other traits} to be more homozygous for a batch of needed traits? Might DNA be the genetic proof that turns breeding from a phenotypic hodpodge to genotypic matings? and the linebreeder finally reaps his just monetary reward?

MKeeney wrote:

patb wrote:

I am approaching DNA genomics the same way I approached EPD's cautously. I am sampling my herd bulls and will have a better idea in several years. I am trying to use bulls that have genomic profile and genetic defect tests done. The price of genetic testing is cheaper than discovering that you have a defect several generation later that could of been avoided by testing. How many linebreeding projects faltered due to a genetic defect showing up?

in a rare positive exploration for me, what if, DNA shows those herds that have linebred for maternal traits{or other traits} to be more homozygous for a batch of needed traits? Might DNA be the genetic proof that turns breeding from a phenotypic hodpodge to genotypic matings? and the linebreeder finally reaps his just monetary reward?

But someone would have to MEASURE those traits, and put a patent on those traits because right now anybody can almost corner the market by buying a few $1500 bulls from KY.