Why more bone?

knabe said:

elephants lack muscle.

Click to expand...

Hey, that's it!...substance of bone is directly and positively correlated with length of nose! I think we've solved this one. Next question please...

Heaviest muscled breeds are the finest boned. 

-XBAR- said:

Heaviest muscled breeds are the finest boned.  

Click to expand...

Galloway cattle are generally bigger boned and have high yielding carcasses.  They are typically lighter musceled in the lower round.  (edited to add)  Galloways also are high marbling.

knabe said:

Showkid48 said:

I think y'all may be missing the point, then again I could be wrong. To me, it would seem like big bone in market cattle would be a desirable characteristic from a carcass standpoint. It's really simple, the more surface area of bone, the more surface area of meat. Think about it, which are you gonna be able to get more meat on, a scronny roping calf or a big boned show calf?

Click to expand...

please provide evidence.  you've provided two extremes.  please provide bone to meat ratio's.

Click to expand...

http://jas.fass.org/content/42/5/1077.

"Correlations calculated over-all breed crosses indicated that cannon bone size scores were positively correlated (P<.01) with birth weight, 200-day weaning weight, feedlot ADG and slaugther weight (range, .21 to .60). Cannon bone size was positively correlated (P<.01) with cutability and retail product percentages (range, .25 to .42), but negatively correlated with longissimus marbling score, quality grade and carcass fat percentage (range, -.18 to -.39). Cannon bone size was also positively correlated (P<.01) with carcass bone percentage (range, .15 to .31). Pooled within breed cross correlations were considerably lower than correlations calculated over-all breed crosses. "

leanbeef said:

Each of these posts have valid points in relation to the question asked. Substance of bone related to foot size & shape is a function of soundness, so from a productivity standpoint, adequate bone should be preferred over light bone. I like the comment that sometimes we don't when enough is enough...too much bone is obviously related to round joints which are not an indication of structural soundness and longevity, and extreme bone can also lead to calving difficulty. Jist like most of the peices of a beef animal, there is an optimum range somewhere in between the extremes, and most of us like to push everything we can to the upper limit of the optimum range. Since stoutness sells and is appreciated by most people who evaluate cattle, we want as much bone as possible without causing problems. Many of us just can't see that train coming until the wreck happens.

Click to expand...

Leanbeef has made some very good points here. I have been thinking about his comment "substance of bone rlated to foot size is a function of soundness", and I think he is exactly right. I don't ever recall seeing a fine boned animal of either sex with good well formed feet... in any breed. When I see the heavy muscled breeds, there are lots of feet issues. Personally, I like cattle that have big well formed feet as they seldom create any problems and I find that they also hardly ever require to be trimmed. I have had some finer boned cows that needed trimming on an annual basis just to travel properly. They don't stay long around here.
I was also thinking about the Horned Hereford breed, and I can't remember seeing a fine boned, small footed bull in this breed. I imagine there are some around but they must get sent to market at weaning. I think this one of the reasons ranchers who need bulls that will walk long distances and stay in shape, love these cattle. I also agree that I am seeing many Angus cattle that have become fine boned with poorly designed feet. Over the years, one of the highlights of my trips to Denver was to head down to the yards and see some of the Angus carload pens of bulls. There were 2 or 3 prominent Angus outfits that used to be there with sets of big thick loose hided, rugged bulls ... and they always had plenty of bone and good feet. Some of these same breeders have, in the last decade or more, started to chase carcass EPDs. I have gone into their pens each year since and I am usually disappointed with what I find there. The bulls they bring out may have great carcass EPDs, but, IMO, they have also bred out the ruggedness and structual soundness of feet and legs. Usually these bulls are fine boned, small footed, and apple a$$ed.... not my type of critters at all.
Larissa started this thread and I think she shows mainly Polled Hereford cattle if I remember correctly. Of the main beef breeds, I think both branches of the Hereford breed ( Horned and Polled) have not experienced the same issues as some other breeds in the regard to bone, feet and general soundness. That may be part of the reason she has never heard a judge comment much on the issue of the amount of bone an animal has.

I hope not to kill the momentum of this thread, but I just want to say that I am liking the way this thread is going. Constructive and intriguing.

the question is do heavier boned individuals have disproportionately more muscle, not just co-linearly.

there are no graphs in the link and thus no distributions are apparent as well, also, due to no raw data ,which most papers don't have links to.

i can't remember her name, but there was a shorthorn girl on here who told me they only keep calves who's cannon bones are around 12", can't quite remember the number, but the rest lose the fancy bits.  notice the comment on marbling in the link.

knabe said:

i can't remember her name, but there was a shorthorn girl on here who told me they only keep calves who's cannon bones are around 12", can't quite remember the number, but the rest lose the fancy bits.  notice the comment on marbling in the link.

Click to expand...

Back in the 80s, many of us measured cannon bones on new born calves on a routine basis. We were in the chasing height era and it seemed to be more important than even birth weights. I have not measured a cannon bone in probably 25 years and I have no plans to ever start measuring them again. It might have some relationship to skeletal growth, but I have not seen any relationship to weight gain in pre and post weaning. I suppose if you want to go back to raising tall harder doing critters, it can be a useful tool.

Back in the era of taller cattle are better cattle, I used to wonder why shows selected high profile judges as the guy carrying the shovel around the ring, was probably quite capable of placing the classes. All he had to do was start with the tallest, and work his way down to the smallest framed.

justintime said:

knabe said:

i can't remember her name, but there was a shorthorn girl on here who told me they only keep calves who's cannon bones are around 12", can't quite remember the number, but the rest lose the fancy bits.  notice the comment on marbling in the link.

Click to expand...

Back in the 80s, many of us measured cannon bones on new born calves on a routine basis. We were in the chasing height era and it seemed to be more important than even birth weights. I have not measured a cannon bone in probably 25 years and I have no plans to ever start measuring them again. It might have some relationship to skeletal growth, but I have not seen any relationship to weight gain in pre and post weaning. I suppose if you want to go back to raising tall harder doing critters, it can be a useful tool.

Back in the era of taller cattle are better cattle, I used to wonder why shows selected high profile judges as the guy carrying the shovel around the ring, was probably quite capable of placing the classes. All he had to do was start with the tallest, and work his way down to the smallest framed.

Click to expand...

I seem to recall a frame score prediction chart based on length of cannon bone of newborn calves, and I believe that 12" was regarded as a kind of minimum length for a bull prospect back then.  I feel just like justintime about that now.

justintime said:

chambero said:

Every judge I've seen the last 2-3 years has been moving toward balance whether its steers or heifers.

There are plenty of cattle that are way too fine boned - particularly British breed catte - particularly Angus, which is what I bet the original poster heard the judge comment about.  Lack of enough bone is just an early indicator on young calves that they won't have enough muscle, that they aren't masculine/feminine enough, etc.  I got to quite a few steer and heifer shows and frankly it is pretty rare to find an animal - steer or heifer - that is way over the top on too much bone.  I've never seen a fine-boned calf that had adquate muscle in the end.

You'll run across babies that look to be "freaks" as far as bone goes from time to time.  Everyone I've been able to follow as they've gotten older are usually the ones that blow out structurally at a young age.  Those calves usually don't get big enough either.

Overall, I don't think there is a common problem of too much bone in show cattle.

Click to expand...

I agree that some of these show cattle, especially in the clubby world have too much bone ( there is a difference between the amount of bone and the amount of hair an animal has on its legs!  Some animals appear to have tremendous bone, but actually most of it is hair). Like I have commented before on here, I believe every trait is best in optimum amounts, including bone. Too much bone can lead to calving problems if it is too excessive. Like muscling, you can't just muscle to one area of the body very well. Selection for rib eye area will lead to animals with more muscling in all areas of their body. Selection of animals with more bone in their legs will also lead to animals with more bone throughout their skeleton. There is also a difference in the shape of the bone, and this can be a significant factor. When I was young, I used to hear breeders talk about certain animals having great flat bone and this was a very desired trait. I'm not sure what this was based on exactly. I have noticed in myt herd, that finer boned cows never seem to produce calves that rise to the top of my calf crops. I also have found the finer boned females tend to go to town at younger ages. I have no scientific data on this but this is what I have noticed.

I have a bull customer who is a very well respected cattleman who always wants to be able to grab a bulls tail just above it's twist. He will not buy a bull if his fingers overlap a little when he does this. He says they will not be hardy enough to handle his conditions. I suppose this would depend on the size of your hands, but this guy firmly believes this to be an important factor in his bull selection. I have seen him run bulls behind a gate or into a corner of a pen so he can grab it's tail and he decides if he is still interested in this bull or not. I remember my grandfather doing the same thing as he would always put his hand around a bulls tail if he found one he liked at a show or sale. I was too young to ask enough questions to find out more about this, but the bull buyer I mentioned firmly believes this is a significant sign of an animal's doing ablity and fleshing ability.

Click to expand...

I am a firm believer in the thickness of the tail as well. My experience tells me that if you can find a calf with the right design and lines that may be a little green but has a thick tail they will feed well and mature into what we look for too aften in babies.

Freddy said:

What I have noticed on some of these black cattle that needs changed some how is hind legs are to straight ,no flex ,and to small feet ...When they pull all that black leg hair up it make those back feet way out of portion and balance  ....IMO

The Charolais catttle or crosses have gained popularity because of the extra bone ,flex ,and solid foundation that there on.....They have there problems also but gives you some more options to use ....

Click to expand...

I agree, I feel that a lot of these clubby calves end up with little bitty feet that begin to suffer when you started putting all that weight on them. That probably has something to do with it also, when we get these calves so stout and massive you need that big boned frame to keep him sound. But, that's just my opinion.

But how can club calves have small feet or light bone? Aren't they supposedly heavy muscled? According to some people, muscle and bone go hand in hand...

Fullblood Chars have a lot of bone and are heavy muscled. Fullblood limis are light boned and heavy muscled.  Guess it just depends on selection.