JDMC ROYAL COMMANDO 3Y Discussing pedigrees

Help Support Steer Planet:

librarian

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
1,629
Location
Knox County Nebraska
http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=4181555&member_id=

The weather isn't bad enough yet, but this winter I think it would be productive to look at pedigrees of outcross animals and discuss the blending of old and new.  Looking at pedigrees and hearing comments on the qualities of the different strains would help those of us who can't know all the history understand what we are looking at.
I got interested in this bull while studying trait leaders for $CEZ.
I'd appreciate some insight into how the top and bottom of the pedigree night work together.
 

librarian

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
1,629
Location
Knox County Nebraska
I'd also like to talk about taking entry level epd's into consideration when we look at pedigress where old genetics are close up.
Here is an example of entry level epds taken from Shadybrook Meteor, registered in 1969.
http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=2245586&member_id=

And Shadybrook Commander 47Th, just to belabor that the entry epds are always the same.
http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=2462688&member_id=
It seems like some of the numbers we see on old bull blends are artifacts of these entry epd's.
Probably I am just slow to realize this.
 

Attachments

  • C__Data_Users_DefApps_Windows Phone_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_rankings_chart_...png
    C__Data_Users_DefApps_Windows Phone_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_rankings_chart_...png
    3.6 KB · Views: 154
  • C__Data_Users_DefApps_Windows Phone_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_rankings_chart_...png
    C__Data_Users_DefApps_Windows Phone_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_rankings_chart_...png
    3.6 KB · Views: 142

sue

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,906
The maternal grand sire Max 335 had plenty of kill data entered into ASA back when Nick Hammett ran the shorthorn feed trials. Later I am not sure if all of it was entered or not - any way great bull.  Semen is probably still available - check with  A&T cattle.
 

librarian

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
1,629
Location
Knox County Nebraska
Yes, it looked like a lot of neat stuff was going on with this bull.
I did not mean to imply his epds were out of whack, I had just been thinking about that entry level stuff in general.
I studied the progeny of 3Y's dam. She has a 2015 bull calf that is interesting to me.
(BC YELLOWSTONE 16C) 16C has a marbling epd of 0.44
His sire was JT YELLOWSTONE 87Y, http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=4215593&member_id= out of Saskavalley Transport

87Y has REA ( 0.63) and MB (0.75) numbers are identical to entry level numbers. His CED and CEM numbers are impressive too.
Sorry if its rude to discuss other peoples animals this way. I just think there is some real imaginative breeding going on here and its educational.
 
J

JTM

Guest
sue said:
The maternal grand sire Max 335 had plenty of kill data entered into ASA back when Nick Hammett ran the shorthorn feed trials. Later I am not sure if all of it was entered or not - any way great bull.  Semen is probably still available - check with  A&T cattle.
Looking at Max's accuracy numbers it looks like the data probably did make it. He has really good marbling numbers. REA not so good.

librarian, I agree that the pedigree is intriguing. Seems like some really functional cattle lines there. Would like to see his epd's improve on REA and Marbling once he starts to get some accuracy. Since Loving's seem to be using him hopefully some data will be submitted.
 

mbigelow

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
189
RS and RR come from the same herd all Sneed cattle not sure what the reason for the different prefix.  The same with the dam she is ML which is from loving's breeding. I think many families do this to separate the kids cattle then seem to return them to the main prefix later.  The COI on this bull is amazingly low! I know we have a new system for epd's but we still have the same small data set most based off random numbers made up for older generations so, it takes time to build a decent data set to correct the issue.  I remember when I first started using JPJ he was a negative for growth traits and Dr. Bole asked me why would I use a bull like this.  I told him until we all get better at submitting data the epd's don't mean a thing and I was certain that once data was submitted his numbers would change and they did.  Not that they changed dramatically but, they moved in a positive direction and the calves achieved my growth targets.  Not all cattle need to be in the top ten percent for growth.  Look at kaper 4508 great bull plain numbers but, I think you would be hard pressed to find someone that has used hin that did not have enough growth to their calves.  Can someone post a picture of the bull if possible I am curious as to what he looks like.  I thin the max line from Sneed goes back to Mantua's Max bull this line has some of the best udders in the breed.
 

huntaway

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
135
librarian said:
Yes, it looked like a lot of neat stuff was going on with this bull.
I did not mean to imply his epds were out of whack, I had just been thinking about that entry level stuff in general.
I studied the progeny of 3Y's dam. She has a 2015 bull calf that is interesting to me.
(BC YELLOWSTONE 16C) 16C has a marbling epd of 0.44
His sire was JT YELLOWSTONE 87Y, http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=4215593&member_id= out of Saskavalley Transport

87Y has REA ( 0.63) and MB (0.75) numbers are identical to entry level numbers. His CED and CEM numbers are impressive too.
Sorry if its rude to discuss other peoples animals this way. I just think there is some real imaginative breeding going on here and its educational.

At the moment his accuracies are quite low, why do the epd's not follow the sire and dams more closely. I would have thought mid parent should be the start point and as more information comes in adjust accordingly. Introducing them at the top of the breed seems misleading to me.
 

Okotoks

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
3,083
huntaway said:
librarian said:
Yes, it looked like a lot of neat stuff was going on with this bull.
I did not mean to imply his epds were out of whack, I had just been thinking about that entry level stuff in general.
I studied the progeny of 3Y's dam. She has a 2015 bull calf that is interesting to me.
(BC YELLOWSTONE 16C) 16C has a marbling epd of 0.44
His sire was JT YELLOWSTONE 87Y, http://shorthorn.digitalbeef.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=_animal&file=_animal&search_value=&animal_registration=4215593&member_id= out of Saskavalley Transport

87Y has REA ( 0.63) and MB (0.75) numbers are identical to entry level numbers. His CED and CEM numbers are impressive too.
Sorry if its rude to discuss other peoples animals this way. I just think there is some real imaginative breeding going on here and its educational.

At the moment his accuracies are quite low, why do the epd's not follow the sire and dams more closely. I would have thought mid parent should be the start point and as more information comes in adjust accordingly. Introducing them at the top of the breed seems misleading to me.
I agree, having the numbers higher than average for entry level does not make any sense. Back when we started submitting information Dr. Hunsley said that since the system had nothing to go on new animals were basicly put in at zero or average. As more info was recorded they would begin to move. He suggested AI breeding to some bulls with higher accuracy to get some connectivity between our herd and the one's that already had more data in order to increase the accuracy of our numbers.
 

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
mbigelow said:
RS and RR come from the same herd all Sneed cattle not sure what the reason for the different prefix.  The same with the dam she is ML which is from loving's breeding.

While there are some ML (Matt Loving?)prefix cattle bred by Lovings, the ML prefix seen in Commando's dam line is that of Harold Bertz's Meadow Lane Farms in Missouri.
 

coyote

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
499
JDMC ROYAL COMMANDO 3Y
 

Attachments

  • JDMC ROYAL COMMANDO 3Y.jpg
    JDMC ROYAL COMMANDO 3Y.jpg
    21.2 KB · Views: 230

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
With the growth numbers this calf has and the fact that he is at 50% accuracy its probably safe to say he won't be a growth dynamo.When I see growth numbers above 60  on the other hand. I start thinking high input type cattle.I know there are exceptions but those higher numbers warrant further investigation.
Dan makes a good point about using a reference sire to build accuracies.The problem is that at least for the carcass traits we as a breed need to make a high accuracy reference sire first.
 

sue

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,906
RS and RR are the same operation. Rob's first wife was the former other  R in the prefix, after the divorce he switched to Rob Sneed or RS.

ML is Meadow Lane farms  formerly the Harold Bertz Shorthorn of MO

And here is another deal if you're digging in older pedigrees: HHKA is now HUB's, Virgel Wegner's daughter married Steve and they switched to HUB's.




 

librarian

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
1,629
Location
Knox County Nebraska

mbigelow

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
189
The accuracy of our numbers is getting better as most of us are trying to submit more data.  If we would have embraced ultrasound sooner we could be further along with carcass traits.  I do think some of these older genetics have some usefulness.  I am also amazed at the number of breeders on here that spend as much time as I do looking at pedigrees.
 

mbigelow

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
189
The accuracy of our numbers is getting better as most of us are trying to submit more data.  If we would have embraced ultrasound sooner we could be further along with carcass traits.  I do think some of these older genetics have some usefulness.  I am also amazed at the number of breeders on here that spend as much time as I do looking at pedigrees.
 

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
r.n.reed said:
The problem is that at least for the carcass traits we as a breed need to make a high accuracy reference sire first.

I think this is the underlying issue with Shorthorn EPDs in general.  The legitimacy of the EPDs of many of the 'reference sires' is suspect at best (who/what was their performance originally benchmarked against? )

Besides the promotion of mongrels as seed stock,  the second most troubling occurrence is the promotion of a bull as 'proven' when he may have only sired a hundred calves.  Even a couple hundred calves is NOTHING in terms of validating a bull as a benchmark reference for the entire breed!!! So not only are the EPDS of these reference sires themselves suspect, but now the EPDS of these 'proven' ::) reference sires are being used as an index to evaluate the performance of other bulls??? You haaaaaave got to be kidding me. 

With the limited use of shorthorn bulls, there is no check and balance.  We have breeders using these 'reference sires' not because they know the reference's  EPDs accurately reflect their true performance, but rather because they know the reference's EPDs are overinflated to the point that they feel with certainty their walking bull can easily outperform them.  You see this approach used by those who are just too honest  ::) to blatantly falsify the performance with their contemporary groups.  Many others just rely on the tried and true approach of simply lying and burying the references sires' calves in the very bottom of their contemporary group. 
Wildly enough, with the new database showing the (stated) performance of all calves in each reported contemporary groups, you would amazed at how often I come across the latter approach being implemented.

  In other breeds, by virtue of many many breeders having access and using the same bulls, these questionable breeders and their practices are exposed when other breeders submit progeny data that glaringly conflicts with their reportings.    In shorthorns, all you need to do is find you a buddy breeder that'll collude with you, and the next thing you know you've got "the #1 blah blah bull in the breed."  It's a win win for the shady:  they get to say their bull is whatever they want, and because the bulls not available on the open market, there's no one who can ever contest the claims.  Even better is that once they engineer their bull's EPD's to where they want them, the bull will suddenly die  ::) and then they'll use him AI as a reference sire for their next bull.  Occasionally, you'll see semen on that bull consigned to a sale but, in order to prevent any honest progeny reporting going forward, the shady bastards will collude with a pre determined 'buyer' who they know will not only run the price of the semen up far above any reasonable market value, but who'll also "buy into the exclusive offer' and play their game. 

At this point I don't know what the solution is.  We need a way to set the cheap talk and manipulated numbers aside so that we can objectively identify the most superior cattle.   

 
 

Okotoks

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
3,083
I am not sure of the reasons the American Shorthorn Association decided to leave ABRI but they are now on their second system since leaving.  Since ABRI does the EPD’s/EBV’s for the Shorthorn Associations in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand  it seems an opportunity to share data especially for carcass might have been lost. I wonder if it would be possible to still share some data from one system into the other? There are a few bulls that have been used in more than one country. One is JR Legend 78H an American bull with a lot of influence in Australia. He is a trait leader for IMF in Australia with a +1.2 with an accuracy of 93%. He has 471 progeny analyzed and 252 scanned. In the US he is in the top 25% for Marbling with an accuracy of 43%.
The Canadian bred Rockdell Pride 50K has been used in Australia, USA  and Canada. In Australia he is a trait leader for Marbling +1.6 accuracy 75% and Eye Muscle +5.6 accuracy 68% with 49 scanned progeny. In the American system is above average at -0.01 accuracy of16%. While marbling is below average with +0.05 with an accuracy of 19% .
The Australian bull Belmore Jackaroo Z109 is the trait leader for Eye Muscle with a +12.9 accuracy 80% 476 progeny and 224 scanned but in the American system he is a -0.13 with an accuracy of 0.07 which puts him in the bottom 20%. We had a bull by Jackaroo scan 16.8 actual ribeye at 1203 lbs. That data is in the ASA data base but he is only a -0.08 which puts him in the bottom 40% of the breed with a 0.03 % accuracy! :eek:
It seems the American system could use some of that scan data!
 

uluru

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
541
Location
Oakville, ON. Canada
Waukaru Prime Minister
148 progeny registered on ASA
324 progeny on ABRi in Australia
Eye Muscle on ABRI +6.6 with 86% ACC.
REA on ASA 0.12 with ACC 0.31

Can we compare this data or do the calculations differ? 
 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
My experience with the old system was that the Australian data did not have much effect if any on the US numbers.The bull came in from Canada with basically no numbers and for the record I was  admonished by the then EX.Sec. for using a bull with no performance.There was a fair amt of growth data turned in in the US and those numbers compared favorably with the Aussie growth numbers for this bull.There was very little carcass data here and quite a bit in Australia on this bull.Comparing the carcass epd's you would think you were looking at 2 different bulls at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Hats off to XBAR for exposing another issue with our thin line of data.This is another value of studying the pedigrees.Does the breeder make epd's or do the epd's follow the direction of the breeders program.
 
Top