Transcript Cattle Adaptability-Brown Bagger

1
The Brown Bagger
Beef Cattle Adaptability
Current Tools of Assessment
John L. Evans
Oklahoma State University
2

Challenge
Production of profitable cattle
– Higher revenue
– Lower production cost
Sustainable and adaptable
 Competitive

– Domestic and international markets
3

“A reasonable goal for the beef industry
is to produce low-cost, high-profit cattle
that yield competitively priced, highly
palatable, lean products; while
conserving and improving the resources
utilized.”
T. Field, BIF (2003)
4
Expected Progeny Differences

Typical trait categories
– Growth and maternal
Birth weight, weaning weight, yearling weight
 Milk

– Reproduction

Scrotal circumference
– End product

Ribeye area
5
How Many EPD Are There?
23 breeds conducting a genetic evaluation
 21 different traits
 Recent addition of several new traits and
indexes

Colorado State Univ., CGEL, 2002
6
Adaptability--Example

Pulmonary arterial pressure EPD
– Indicator trait for brisket disease in beef
cattle
– Symptoms of pulmonary edema
– Observed at high altitude (>5000 ft)
– EPD related to survival and specific to high
mountain regions
7
Adaptability
Are producers able to identify and
develop highly adaptable cattle with the
current set of EPD?
 Industry Segments

–
–
–
–
–
Commercial
Seedstock
Stocker/Feedlot
Packer
Retail
8
Adaptability

Current EPD
– Difficult to assess adaptability
– Effective at genetic change
– Tools are limited or non-existent with respect
to development of a producers breeding
objectives
9
Economically Relevant Traits

Focus on profitability and sustainability
– Expenses
– Revenue

Achieve genetic improvement instead of
genetic change
Garrick and Enns, BIF (2003)
10
Typical Current
Genetic Evaluation EPD





Birth weight
Weaning weight
Milk
Total maternal
Yearling weight


Carcass
Calving ease
11
Potential Sire Summary of the Future



















Birth direct
Birth maternal
Weaning direct
Weaning maternal
Total Maternal
Yearling direct
Calving direct
Calving maternal
Carcass wt
Rib fat
Rump fat
Ribeye area
Marbing score
Quality grade
Ultrasound Ribeye area
Ultrasound Rib fat
Ultrasound marbling
Fat percentage
Condition score


















Gestation length
Days to calving
Calving interval
Stayability
Heifer Pregnancy
Scrotal Circumference
Pelvic area
Frame score
Muscle score
Udder score
Docility
Tick score
Parasite egg count
Mature weight
Maintenance energy
Feed efficiency
Gut weight
Type score
B.L. Golden
12
Current Direction

Proliferation of EPD
– EPD indirectly related to economic goals
– Increasing list of traits

Producer frustration
13
Economically Relevant TraitGoal

Producers should use EPDs objectively in
the context of their business goals
Profit = Income –Expense
Garrick and Enns, NBCEC
Brown Bagger (2002)
14
Heifer Pregnancy

Indicators:
– Scrotal circumference
– Age at puberty
– Pregnancy observations
15
Economically Relevant Traits

Proposed list
–
–
–
–
–
–
Sale weight
Probability of calving ease
Cow maintenance energy requirements
Heifer pregnancy rate
Stayability
Days to finish (weight, fat, or marbling)
Golden, et al. (2000), BIF Wichita, KS
16
Mature Cow Maintenance Energy

An average of 70% of
feed inputs are used
for maintenance
energy requirements

Cost of feed inputs
represent 40 to 60% of
the average annual
cow cost
NRC (1996), McGrann (1999), Hughes (1999)
17
Maintenance Energy EPD

Why develop a maintenance EPD over
using mature weight?
– Uses multiple indicator traits to generate one
EPD
Mature weight
 Milk (maternal weaning weight)
 Body condition

– Easier to determine the value of the
prediction on profit
Maintenance Energy EPD
Development
18

Apply current research
– Maintenance energy genetic prediction
– Milk production and milk EPD
– Body condition related to weight change
MEm = MEm*(MWT) + 0.10*(MEp)
19
Maintenance Energy EPD-Example
Sire A EPD = 0 Mcal/yr
Sire B EPD = 200 Mcal/yr
Outcome
Daughters from sire B would require 200
Mcal/yr more energy for maintenance
requirements than daughters from Sire A
20
Benefits of Maintenance Energy
EPD
Select animals that are more feed
efficient
 Lower annual cost of production
 Improve selection of animals for
production environment
 Insurance against poor feed conditions

21
Breed Index
Charolais Association Terminal Sire
Profitability Index
 Angus Association

– Grid market
– Feedlot
– Combination

Gelbvieh Association
– Grid merit
– Feedlot merit
22
Simulation

Decision Evaluator for the Cattle IndustryDECI
– Bioeconomic simulation model (Bourdon, 1998)
– Assist with management decisions
– http://www.marc.usda.gov/

Cornell Value Discovery System (Fox et al.
2002)
– Determine feed requirements for animals fed in
groups
– Prediction of individual performance
– http://www.cncps.cornell.edu/cvds/main.htm
23
Mating Systems

Crossbreeding
–
–
–
–
Terminal
Rotational
Combination
Composite
24
Heterosis / Hybrid Vigor
An increase in the performance of
hybrids over that of purebreds for
measured traits, most noticeably in
traits like fertility and survivability
Bourdon, 2000
25
Breed Complementarity
An improvement in the overall
performance of crossbred offspring
resulting from crossing breeds of
different but complementary biological
types
Bourdon, 2000
26
Rotational System
27
Useful Information & Tools

USDA Meat Animal Research Center
– Breed evaluation program
– Across breed EPD

Genetic parameter estimates
– Estimates of heritability and correlation
– Assist management of antagonisms between traits


Multiple breed EPD
Financial records & Standardized Performance
Analysis (SPA)
28
Producer Comments
Question 1. Are current Expected
Progeny Differences (EPD) effective for
the identification of adaptable cattle?
 Question 2.What traits are important in
your selection program?

29
Future Potential
Research and development of traits
related to adaptability and profitability
 Research and development of decision
support software
 Cooperation with other scientific
disciplines
 Evaluation and regular assessment of
available tools

30
What Does the Future Hold?


Working group on cattle adaptability
Group focus:
– Explore and develop ideas related to beef cattle
adaptability
– Develop guidelines and make recommendations to
improve adaptability for genetic evaluations
– Represents a cooperative effort between industry
and the National Beef Cattle Evaluation Consortium
– Stay Tuned!
31
Questions