Shorthorn Genetic Problems

Belties R Us · Sep 15, 2015

oakview said:
Perhaps someone can enlighten me on the rules for recording carrier animals in the Angus, Simmental, and Maine Anjou breeds. Do you have to test an Angus for all of the genetic defects in the breed to register the calf? Has the Angus breed lost members since the "discovery" of all their defects? Is no one investing in Angus cattle anymore? As long as we're going backwards in time, perhaps we should wish the Angus breed would have taken care of the influx of Holsteins way back when. I had a discussion with our Executive Secretary almost 20 years ago when I had what turned out to be a TH calf. He said he thought he knew the source, but until he was absolutely 100% sure, he really couldn't do too much, let alone pull papers or refuse to record future offspring. No commercial cattleman with any genetic knowledge whatsoever should avoid a Shorthorn bull because of possible genetic defects. No one wanting to invest in Shorthorn cattle should elect not to because of possible genetic defects. The percentage of CLEAN genetics far outweighs the opposite. It's no harder to select for clean genetics than the quality you want.

Angus cattle defect policy is very similar to what someone suggested above. (*NOTE: It also depends on the defect as to their policy. This one is for CA.) Carrier females can be registered, but their offspring have to be tested with the exception of steers. Any calves that are bulls have to test free of the defect to be able to be registered, heifer carriers can be registered. Any AI bull that tests positive as a carrier will no longer be able to have registered offspring conceived 60 days following the denotation of carrier.

References: http://www.angus.org/pub/CA/CAFactSheet.pdf
http://www.angus.org/PolicyandRelatedRules.pdf

cbcr · Sep 15, 2015

Here is a good link to a pdf from MSUCARES.com of genetic defects

http://msucares.com/pubs/publications/p2622.pdf

oakview · Sep 15, 2015

Is it correct to assume, then, that the Angus Association has defined the severity of different defects at different levels? So, for example, if they determined that PHA is worse than TH, the rules you outlined might apply to PHA and not TH? In Shorthorns, there doesn't appear to be the level of concern about DS as opposed to TH or PHA. Following the Angus Association's lead, the ASA might have rules similar to those you outlined for CA and less strict rules for DS? Does the Angus Association have the stated goal to eliminate the defects altogether? By sheer rules of probability, half of the calves of carrier dams will carry the defect gene when mated to clean bulls, so little if any progress towards eliminating the gene will result unless the breeders make a conscientious effort to eliminate carrier females as well. Just interested in other breeds' guidelines.

aj · Sep 15, 2015

If the Shorthorn breed would not allow semen to be sold.........I would think in theory that that in itself would cut down on carriers propagated. The only thing is that a th carrier has the look......so people will keep going back to the use of carriers. The Angus genetic defects do not correlate to have a positive"look" so having the carriers around is a no brainer from that aspect anyway.

caledon101 · Sep 15, 2015

aj....I don't think the association should stop anyone from selling semen on carriers, showing carriers, selling carriers or registering carriers.
All they need to do is stop people from registering the progeny sired by carriers regardless if those calves are clean or not.
That would dissuade anyone from trying to produce carrier bulls or sell carrier bulls to fellow breeders and, it would certainly stop semen sales to any purebred producer too. Problem solved.
If Shorthorn breeders are tired of people talking about their genetic defects then all they have to do is take action on it. Because they won't, I can only assume they like talking about it decade after decade.

Belties R Us · Sep 15, 2015

oakview said:
Is it correct to assume, then, that the Angus Association has defined the severity of different defects at different levels? So, for example, if they determined that PHA is worse than TH, the rules you outlined might apply to PHA and not TH? In Shorthorns, there doesn't appear to be the level of concern about DS as opposed to TH or PHA. Following the Angus Association's lead, the ASA might have rules similar to those you outlined for CA and less strict rules for DS? Does the Angus Association have the stated goal to eliminate the defects altogether? By sheer rules of probability, half of the calves of carrier dams will carry the defect gene when mated to clean bulls, so little if any progress towards eliminating the gene will result unless the breeders make a conscientious effort to eliminate carrier females as well. Just interested in other breeds' guidelines.

Ok I looked into it more. M1 and DD are the two defects the Angus Association will register all calves regardless of status. All other defects, CA, AM, D2, and NH, follow the policy I posted above. Carrier females can be registered but carrier Bulls cannot. I personally would not buy a carrier female and I haven't ever seen one offered for sale. Had a breeder we wanted to buy embryos from basically say they were not for sale because they were old embryos before one of these tests. So the offspring could be potential carriers and they didn't want to pass that onto us. Their words. My family has always been more of the opinion that there are so many good non carrier cattle out there in the angus breed we don't need something else to manage. But we are also trying to get into the bull market and cannot do that when getting carrier Bulls. I do think it is a valid point that none of those defects that I know of in the angus breed are associated with anything positive. So we have no reason to want carriers.

oakview · Sep 15, 2015

Thanks for the info. Always nice to get another perspective. I agree that there are plenty of non-carrier choices out there. Years ago there was an Angus bull called "Sport", I believe, that carried mule-foot. If my memory serves me correctly, I think the Angus Association dealt with that rather definitively. Perhaps someone associated with Angus can shed more light on that situation. Didn't the Hereford breed have some issues with diluter genes in the late 80's or early 90's? It seems as though I remember some so-called Hereford bulls were siring grey calves out of black cows. I think that was dealt with rather abruptly, too.

huntaway · Sep 15, 2015

aj said:
If the Shorthorn breed would not allow semen to be sold.........I would think in theory that that in itself would cut down on carriers propagated. The only thing is that a th carrier has the look......so people will keep going back to the use of carriers. The Angus genetic defects do not correlate to have a positive"look" so having the carriers around is a no brainer from that aspect anyway.

It seems that every day that passes is a day closer to the next genetic defect in angus or any other breed. What happens if the next one does have the positive look or some commercial value like increased feed efficiency or something.

You are able to hold your own herd to a higher standard than the breed society but by the sounds of it you didn't.

librarian · Sep 15, 2015

ASA could just jack the price on registering carriers to $$1000/animal.

Anst1579 · Sep 15, 2015

Huntaway, I see your point but a problem is a problem; not an opportunity.
And until these genetic defects in shorthorns are considered a problem and not opportunities nothing will change.
You are probably very correct that new defects will be discovered over time. This is also why it makes sense for the association to take a leadership position and bring in the measures necessary to eradicate them. Or at least work in that direction. There are only so many letters in the alphabet and only so many acronym combinations that will fit in a sale catalog or magazine ad.

Anst1579 · Sep 15, 2015

Libra, yes, they could jack the registration fee to $1000 but unfortunately that wouldn't bother many of the breeds top show calf producers. That's lunch money to them. Instead, these rich and very successful breeders should actually be leading the way to do what's right for a breed that's been awfully good to them instead of lawyering their association.

mark tenenbaum · Sep 15, 2015

Anst1579 said:
Libra, yes, they could jack the registration fee to $1000 but unfortunately that wouldn't bother many of the breeds top show calf producers. That's lunch money to them. Instead, these rich and very successful breeders should actually be leading the way to do what's right for a breed that's been awfully good to them instead of lawyering their association./// Sullivan has been going in the direction of some commercial acceptance for quite a while-and even will sell semen on Red Demand-So by attrition, there have been some changes.I dont think he ever pushed TH posisitive cattle, some of them were,and even I got a little semen on a double clean full bro to his Stockman x Vegas tribe-they are good, especially if you can use a clean one. The problem is the same smug ludicrous greed- Either they are syndicated, or limilted to only a few calves a year like Steck with Charisma,the Hot Commodity on and off availability etc. Not very much of the usefull or potentially usefull genetics are available to mere mortals, nor are they proven in real world conditions..And the deals like Capiche that started people using Shorthorns just fade away, with no Shorthorn x bred calves to be seen for many a mile. I applaud Waukaru tho-they have made most of thier genetics available, so have people like JIT, JTM, OKOTOCS,several good breeders in Minnesota,the Ralph guy from Montana, Gary Kaper in Ill., Sue,Loving if you find his homepage, and a quite a few others who aren't on here. O0

Anst1579 · Sep 15, 2015

Mark, you have misrepresented this quote. Where did all this come from???

trevorgreycattleco · Sep 15, 2015

Seriously, you are the one who comes off bitter. The ASA is identifying defect carrier cattle. How much do you need them to hold your hand? It's a free country. Breed what you want, let the market decide if they are useful. You lost all credibility when you said Johnes. You seem like you just want to bitch. That's your right I suppose.

Use clean bulls. Be honest with your buyers. Linebreed for your type. Use home raised bulls out of your best cows. Have a coke and a smile a shut the F up.

mark tenenbaum · Sep 16, 2015

mark tenenbaum said:
Anst1579 said:

Libra, yes, they could jack the registration fee to $1000 but unfortunately that wouldn't bother many of the breeds top show calf producers. That's lunch money to them. Instead, these rich and very successful breeders should actually be leading the way to do what's right for a breed that's been awfully good to them instead of lawyering their association./// Sullivan has been going in the direction of some commercial acceptance for quite a while-and even will sell semen on Red Demand-So by attrition, there have been some changes.I dont think he ever pushed TH posisitive cattle, some of them were,and even I got a little semen on a double clean full bro to his Stockman x Vegas tribe-they are good, especially if you can use a clean one. The problem is the same smug ludicrous greed- Either they are syndicated, or limilted to only a few calves a year like Steck with Charisma,the Hot Commodity on and off availability etc. Not very much of the usefull or potentially usefull genetics are available to mere mortals, nor are they proven in real world conditions..And the deals like Capiche that started people using Shorthorns just fade away, with no Shorthorn x bred calves to be seen for many a mile. I applaud Waukaru tho-they have made most of thier genetics available, so have people like JIT, JTM, OKOTOCS,several good breeders in Minnesota,the Ralph guy from Montana, Gary Kaper in Ill., Sue,Loving if you find his homepage, and a quite a few others who aren't on here. O0/// Basically its a pretty naieve and presumptuous statement saying that the large breeders have attornies taking shots at that ASA over TH issues etc. PS-Some of the better known breeders are represented in my "misreprepresentation", long story short-One stupid statement gets followed by some simple facts. O0

Click to expand...

OLD WORLD SHORTIE · Sep 16, 2015

Freedom of breeding : 28th Amendment to the constitution
CF Trump for president
Breed what you want to whatever you want on your land.
Just don't expect the association to let you register it. I don't care for carriers, but who am I to tell people how to breed their cows.

We show in the Texas majors and hold our own in the breeding female side. On the steer side as long as no registration papers are needed people will continue to have a false sense of what a real shorthorn is. It's a flawed system that runs deep. I for one don't have a problem with people breeding to carriers or composite cattle just as long as you don't try to pass the off as being shorthorn cattle.

Old Cows for the olds

https://youtu.be/Ly2q46iv700

Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR · Sep 22, 2015

caledon101 said:
aj....I don't think the association should stop anyone from selling semen on carriers, showing carriers, selling carriers or registering carriers.
All they need to do is stop people from registering the progeny sired by carriers regardless if those calves are clean or not.
That would dissuade anyone from trying to produce carrier bulls or sell carrier bulls to fellow breeders and, it would certainly stop semen sales to any purebred producer too. Problem solved.
If Shorthorn breeders are tired of people talking about their genetic defects then all they have to do is take action on it. Because they won't, I can only assume they like talking about it decade after decade.

Only...PERFECT!

(clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping) (clapping)

librarian · Sep 22, 2015

OLD WORLD, thank you for posting that video. Of course, I loved it. Here is one from another Classroom series, 'What Happens Next?'
beware of bull
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym9R4HeMMhE

phillse · Sep 23, 2015

I believe everyone here would agree that single trait selection is a horrible idea. We must seek to balance traits. When completely eliminating carrier animals from the gene pool we are essentially performing single trait selection. When looking at population genetics for a breed as a whole it might be a good idea to work to breed clean animals from the dirty to preserve diversity. As second more about genetics, I am sure we will find many more defects . If all carriers are subsequently "thrown away" the breed may find itself lacking diversity to survive and adapt.

This article on breeding dogs and cats might be interesting to read as it relates genetic testing and breeding.
http://www.esmondrott.com/breeding_counseling.htm

JTM · Sep 23, 2015

I don't think it's too far of a stretch for the Association to disallow registrations of calves sired by carrier bulls. I thinks it's a responsible direction to take. Should have been done long ago. Name me some TH and PHA carrier Shorthorn bulls that are improving the commercial viability of the breed and longevity of the breed. Do these bulls not have non carrier alternatives?

Shorthorn Genetic Problems

Help Support Steer Planet:

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

JTM

Guest