Shorthorn Genetic Problems

Anst1579 · Sep 10, 2015

Are there any experts on this site who can explain what their shorthorn association policy is on managing the growing number of genetic defects within the breed? The USA seems to look away and won't meet the challenge head on and Canada follows?? What about Australia and other countries? Buying a shorthorn shouldn't be like a dance through a genetic minefield. And now Johnes seems to be the latest challenge for the breed.
Every breed has these genetic issues. It's how they deal with them that matters I suppose. Who is standing up to protect this excellent breed? And, why are these associations allowing the registration of progeny sired by known, tested and identified genetic defect carriers?

shortybreeder · Sep 10, 2015

The discussion on shorthorn genetic problems is like beating a dead horse... But what I want to know is why you believe that Johnes is a "challenge for the breed"? Johnes is herd-based, not at all transmitted by DNA. Dairies have been battling it for years, and once in a while beef herds show up with it, but it is much less common because they are less likely to feed near the manure of the other herd mates.

oakview · Sep 10, 2015

Contact Jake Alden at the ASA. He can answer your questions regarding the ASA's protocol with genetic defects. I think the TH and PHA carriers have been pretty well identified by those that use the genetics. DS doesn't seem to be much of a concern based on the lack of discussion about it. Identification of DS carriers continues to improve. I haven't heard of the disease you mentioned being much of a problem. Growing number of genetic defects within the breed? I'm sure glad I don't have to manage all the Angus defects.

sue · Sep 10, 2015

oakview said:
Contact Jake Alden at the ASA. He can answer your questions regarding the ASA's protocol with genetic defects. I think the TH and PHA carriers have been pretty well identified by those that use the genetics. DS doesn't seem to be much of a concern based on the lack of discussion about it. Identification of DS carriers continues to improve. I haven't heard of the disease you mentioned being much of a problem. Growing number of genetic defects within the breed? I'm sure glad I don't have to manage all the Angus defects.

DS is not even recognized by other breeds, Maines especially. If you read the Wide Track Simmental article, American Simmental tests 249 bulls for 10 genetic conditions and DS is not one of them... TH and PHA were included in the 10 tests for American Simmental recent tests conducted in April of 2015. DS marker was public in June of 2013 ? BTW: It's a bummer that Wide Track's information was messed up, he looks promising !

WinterSpringsFarm · Sep 10, 2015

100% agree shorty, we occasionally had issues with johnes while we were milking. Some culling and cleanliness took care of it. Certainly not a breed issue

JTM · Sep 11, 2015

Last year I was a member of the Shorthorn breed image and promotion committee. In our talks I brought up using a colored system that would identify animals within the database that were carriers of genetic defects. This new identification system was included when they upgraded to the new database system. So if you go to the ASA site and look up some animals, you will see if they are TH, PHA, DS, or if they have potential to be a carrier because of a known carrier within so many generations. I believe lots of progress is being done. I don't believe the answer is to immediately deny registration for any known carriers because our registrations would be hurt too much. I believe more transparency and education like has just been done is a good step in the right direction.

shortyjock89 · Sep 11, 2015

Are you suggesting that TH is a huge problem? I'd have to strongly disagree.

What about Johnes? Are you sure you know what issues are genetic?

ifinditfunny · Sep 11, 2015

So since you are such an outstanding leader I await patiently your new registry! To say that progeny of known carriers should be denied registry is the same thing as dialing back the progress 50 years. What about all the clean cattle that have been created by dirty parents. Those are to be eliminated? I'm with Olson I'm not sure you know exactly how this deal works.

RyanChandler · Sep 11, 2015

Anst1579 said:
I didn't suggest that carrier animals should be denied registration. I said the progeny of known carrier sires should be. Major difference.

As for using "the association needs the revenue" argument to justify not taking definitive action, that's a clear sign of weak leadership.

I'd be in favor of tested carriers being 'denied' registration, but implicit with the word denied is the understanding that the tested carrier's eligibility for registration hasn't yet been determined. For an animal already carrying a registration number, there is nothing to 'deny' as there is nothing being submitted for reviewal or approval.

What I would highly oppose is 'revoking' registrations of known carriers. There are many clean progeny being offered this fall out of carrier dams. Look at the Leveldale sale for example: there are 2 quality heifers- lots 11&15, both out of cows sired by a bull I now own, JSF Maestro who is a DSC. Both of these heifers are DSF. JSF Prince of Jazz and all his offspring are DSF, despite Prince being sired by DS carrying JPJ. It would be beyond foolish to bar registration to these clean cattle just because their sire or grandsire was a carrier.

Going forward, an effective approach to rid to breed of defect carriers without having to discard useful genetics altogether would be to require testing of all progeny out of carrier parent stock before their application for registration could be submitted. Registration eligibility could be approved for clean offspring and denied for carriers. I think this approach not only effectively accomplishes the goal of ridding the breed of these issues, but it's a compromising solution to the 'devaluation' or any 'concern of reducing the genetic pool' arguments that come from those currently holding carrier cattle.

I agree with you that the "association needs the revenue" argument is weak in terms of acting in the long term best interest of the breed but just like with all dilemmas we face, the underlying issue is the agency conflict: that is, the constant need to balance the establishment's (self preservation) interest with what's in the best interest of the members and the cattle we breed.

jaimiediamond · Sep 11, 2015

Anst1579 said:
Are there any experts on this site who can explain what their shorthorn association policy is on managing the growing number of genetic defects within the breed? The USA seems to look away and won't meet the challenge head on and Canada follows?? What about Australia and other countries? Buying a shorthorn shouldn't be like a dance through a genetic minefield. And now Johnes seems to be the latest challenge for the breed.
Every breed has these genetic issues. It's how they deal with them that matters I suppose. Who is standing up to protect this excellent breed? And, why are these associations allowing the registration of progeny sired by known, tested and identified genetic defect carriers?

I am amazed at this post, for multiple reasons

The lack of education regarding genetically transferred defects and a disease caused by bacterial transmission being the main one.

From johnes website (-Johne's (pronounced “Yo-nees”) disease is a chronic, contagious bacterial disease that affects the small intestine of ruminants such as cattle, sheep, goats, deer, antelope and bison. All ruminants are susceptible to Johne's disease). This is not just a Shorthorn problem

Shorthorns have three known defects which as JTM pointed out the new Digital Beef is very transparent. In reviewing a herdsire of ours (photos below) that has been tested DSF, THF, PHF you can still see all the carriers and possible carriers in his pedigree even though he is clean. If we as breeders took responsibility for our own selections and quit blaming the associations for the outcome we would all be further ahead.

We personally recognize the importance of testing and identifying carriers of the genetic defects. Our policy regarding carriers is the following - We will not sell carrier cattle for purebred or commercial breeding stock. Our top end carrier females were bred to non carrier bulls, the resulting offspring tested we eliminated TH through this process. Luckily so far we've never had a animal test positive PHA or DS.

oakview · Sep 11, 2015

I will not knowingly use a carrier of any of the three defects and insure any animal I'm thinking about using is triple clean. However, I absolutely defend the right of those that want to use one to do so and get it in the herd book, as long as it is identified. The color coding on the pedigrees is fine, although it is hard for some of us to tell the red from the orange. I'd say the success of Cates' recent sale is a testament to the fact that there is excellent demand for cattle that descend from carrier genetics. I applaud them for identifying them as such. How can it hurt the breed if the carriers are identified? Have sales of Angus bulls dropped to zero because of the presence of 16, or whatever the number is, defects? Has Certified Angus Beef disappeared from the stores because the genetics used to produce it no longer exist? My father in law doesn't even know that Angus have genetic defects. If they're black, they're great to him. This is an old worn out topic some seem to want to dredge up every now and then to beat down Shorthorns. Raise the defect free cattle and maybe they'll beat a path to your doorstep.

mark tenenbaum · Sep 11, 2015

ifinditfunny said:
So since you are such an outstanding leader I await patiently your new registry! To say that progeny of known carriers should be denied registry is the same thing as dialing back the progress 50 years. What about all the clean cattle that have been created by dirty parents. Those are to be eliminated? I'm with Olson I'm not sure you know exactly how this deal works.//// <party> <party> <party>-MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY WELL PUT-THERE AINT A THING WRONG WITH PRODUCING CLEAN ONES FROM CARRIERS-AND EVERY DAY THERE ARE MORE CLEAN CLUB CALF DEALS THAT OUGHT"A BE BUT AREN"T DIRTY. I PRODUCED A TH BULL YEARS AGO THAT SIRED VERY FEW CARRIERS,AND THEY REALLY MADE GOOD COWS PLUS THEY SHOW"ED-IM GONNA USE HIM AGAIN. O0.

shortyjock89 · Sep 11, 2015

So who has a problem with Johnes? Very confusing that you'd mention it as a breed specific issue.

I think there are far fewer elite show ring animals that are carriers of TH and PHA than you are suggesting. DS is a newer issue, but I still don't think it's all that big of a deal. Don't use carriers if you don't want carriers.

mark tenenbaum · Sep 11, 2015

Nobody in the breeding show deal is telling ANYBODY that they need carriers to win-The focus of the breed right now is towards the commercially appealing,clean, lower BW Lauer-DMCC Limited Edition backed cattle. Shorthorns at the moment have very little place in the commercial market-and given some of the bws rightfully so-There are hi BW genatics in ALL breeds of purebred show cattle-INCLUDING ANGUS. Shorthorns are for the most part show cattle-and so-on with the search for some kind of medium. Shorthorns brought THE ENTIRE club calf scene into a new era- Heatseeker and Double Stuff-And at one time-they ruled. If I want to produce some like that-its my business,and if the assoc. wants to completely bury the breed with the foolish idea that the industry will change-and that club calves arent the reason that people even saw a Shorthorn in many areas-then dumb is DUMBER.The TH thing is about club calves, and it too is winding down some with powerfull clean ones showing up:and they dont come from osmosis O0

shortyjock89 · Sep 11, 2015

There sure are a lot of accusations bring thrown around with out any evidence to back it up. Johnes being more prevalent in Shorthorns? Please. Show me.

I think it's safe to say that my herd is focused on winning as many shows as possible, but we certainly don't happily propagate genetic defects. All of our donors have been tested clean of any defects that we can currently test for, as has been our herd sire. He's even from a program that hasnt shown in decades, and I couldn't be happier with him.

I'd challenge you to go to some of these elite breeders and actually talk to them about these issues. Not one will tell you to use defect carrying cattle to win shows, and nome of them will blow you off.

I'm guessing you've never tried to raise show cattle for a living. The vast majority of us are not swindlers and crooks out to take your money and run.

JTM · Sep 12, 2015

I'm seeing some validity to what Anst is saying about people purposely breeding TH and PHA. This has been going on for about 10 or more years now. I've heard it out of the mouths of purebred breeders that the TH carriers give them more bone, hair, and a particular look. It is happening and they are promoting it.

Now that we are done with show cattle I am going to try to focus on promoting the commercial acceptance of Shorthorns that I know for a fact work in the commercial industry. Any additional transparency when it comes to genetic defects is a good thing in my opinion. Also, I don't believe those genetics belong in the commercial gene pool or should be intentionally bred for placing in commercial herds.

aj · Sep 12, 2015

JTM......I really like the way they do the computer deal......with the aspect of listing a potential problem due to carriers in pedigree. I think in reality everyone knows where the Shorthorn breed is currently positioned as far as its genetic defect policies. The breed is not a factor in the beef industry today. Maybe 20 years from now.....or 100 years from now who knows. There may be something to just surviving as a breed the next 20 years. What will gene splicing capability be in 20 years and other new technology.

Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR · Sep 12, 2015

knabe · Sep 12, 2015

aj said:
What will gene splicing capability be in 20 years and other new technology.

what isn't being done now that you want done.

we can make carriers out of non-carriers.

probably can even make triple dirty out of anything.

can probably even make them sterile.

aj · Sep 12, 2015

I pray to God every night that you.....knabe.....and your ideas......never leave the borders of California.

Shorthorn Genetic Problems

Help Support Steer Planet:

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

JTM

Guest

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

JTM

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member