Help understand BW EPD's

[OH Breeder]

When I was a kid growing up the breeds they use to say stay away from for big calves were Charolais and Simmental. The Angus and Hereford use to be easy calving bulls. Now last night I was reading and reviewing some EPD's. The Simmental and the Charolais BW EPD's seem to have moved toward easy calving. Lower overrall BW EPD with Higher CE. BUT The Herefords in alot of the AI catalogs have horrible BW EPD's and alot of the Angus have moved toward lower CE's and higher BW EPD's. I guess I am just trying to figure out what happened over the past 15 years or so. Have those breeds moved their focus toward easy calving genetics? I realize AI catalogs are just a small snap shot of the breed as a whole but the more popular angus bulls are not some of the easier calving bulls.
Maybe this is a stupid question but it was just an observation on my part. I am not the sharpest crayon always in the box but I just don't get why Herefords in one catalog in particular BW EPD's were so high. It seems like a huge shift.

 

[sue]

you're right .  what happened.

 

[kfacres]

I think, if I remember correctly from many days ago on a judging team-- the overall EPDS of the Herf breed are higher. I'm wanting to think that 2.5 is considered breed average- and people are breeding 2.0 plus bulls to heifers.. make the 4.0 and 5.0 bulls not so high as you would consider with say an Angus where breed average for calving ease is a negitive number- and there are 4 and 5.0 bulls being used.. 

 

[OH Breeder]

I think, if I remember correctly from many days ago on a judging team-- the overall EPDS of the Herf breed are higher. I'm wanting to think that 2.5 is considered breed average- and people are breeding 2.0 plus bulls to heifers.. make the 4.0 and 5.0 bulls not so high as you would consider with say an Angus where breed average for calving ease is a negitive number- and there are 4 and 5.0 bulls being used.. 

Okay that makes sense. I didn't know what. I wish there was an all breed average. Calving ease hereford would be 2.0 BW EPD ? It just seems strange all those Simmi's and Char are -.1 etc and they use to be such hard calvers.
So if that is the case then is a -.1 Char as easy calver as a 2.0 Hereford? I guess I am trying to figure how it fits together.

 

[kfacres]

I think, if I remember correctly from many days ago on a judging team-- the overall EPDS of the Herf breed are higher. I'm wanting to think that 2.5 is considered breed average- and people are breeding 2.0 plus bulls to heifers.. make the 4.0 and 5.0 bulls not so high as you would consider with say an Angus where breed average for calving ease is a negitive number- and there are 4 and 5.0 bulls being used.. 

Okay that makes sense. I didn't know what. I wish there was an all breed average. Calving ease hereford would be 2.0 BW EPD ? It just seems strange all those Simmi's and Char are -.1 etc and they use to be such hard calvers.
So if that is the case then is a -.1 Char as easy calver as a 2.0 Hereford? I guess I am trying to figure how it fits together.

I THINK>>> don't quote me though-- you'd better look that info up on your own if you really want to know...

 

[kfacres]

Most Recent Breed Average EPD Value** 
Breed Birth
Weight Weaning
Weight Yearling
Weight Milk
Angus +2.1  +44.0  +82.0  +21.0 
Charolais +0.6  +24.0  +42.0  +7.0 
Hereford +3.6  +42.0  +70.0  +16.0 
Maine-Anjou +1.9  +40.0  +79.0  +20.0 
Red Angus +0.3  +31.0  +56.0  +16.0
Shorthorn +2.3  +15.0  +25.0  +2.0
Simmental +1.2  +31.0  +56.0  +4.0 
*These are within-breed averages. They can not be used to compare breeds. All numbers have been rounded except for birth weight.

http://animalscience.tamu.edu/ansc/publications/beefpubs/epdavg.html


IMO- the 'hard calving' breeds did this- to appear easier calving.. and when the average cattleman just looked a EPD numbers- he saw an lower BW, or higher anything else EPD, and assumed that to be better than the Angus he was used to seeing historically...  It's all in the numbers, and lying/ cheating scheme of things.

 

[OH Breeder]

http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/news/livestock/2009/06/APS-20090605.html


Still trying to figure out how to use this table they speak of to compare across breed EPD's.

 

[Mill Iron A]

Wait a minute, lying/scheming/cheating? really? Do u give conspiracy theories out for free or do you charge for them? Ridiculus. No it is not because anyone is cheating at all. every breed has a different base they are comparing to. for example those angus epds are compared to the 1970 model while other breeds reset every few years. Dont trust the across the breed epd chart because it isnt right either. only compare within breed and if you want a better solution look to the red angus and simmental and canadian angus assoc epds as they will soon be completely merged together and will be able to compare them with each other and will be more accurate than even angus epds.

 

[OH Breeder]

Wait a minute, lying/scheming/cheating? really? Do u give conspiracy theories out for free or do you charge for them? Ridiculus. No it is not because anyone is cheating at all. every breed has a different base they are comparing to. for example those angus epds are compared to the 1970 model while other breeds reset every few years. Dont trust the across the breed epd chart because it isnt right either. only compare within breed and if you want a better solution look to the red angus and simmental and canadian angus assoc epds as they will soon be completely merged together and will be able to compare them with each other and will be more accurate than even angus epds.

thank you. I was looking at a Shorty, Simmi and a Char - the across table EPD's on BW would shake out  as following.These were bulls I pulled at random from the breed. Doesn't make any sense.
Simm -3.8 but goes to -1.7
Shorty -5.1 goes to -1.0
Char -0.4 goes to +9.3

 

[Lucky_P]

Most of the 'Continental' breeds have worked hard, over the past 20 years, to improve calving ease/BW issues - and, to some degree, frame scores.
When I've been to bull tests or attended bull sales any time in the recent past, the Simmental bulls generally have lower frame scores than similar-age Angus bulls. Haven't really paid much attention to other breeds.
First Simmental bull I used, back in about 1985, has CED/BW epds of +4.4/+2.8 - and was considered an easy-calving bull at the time; current sire that's getting the most use here has CED/BW epds of + 11.7/-1.9 , and is listed, by the AI stud, as safe to use on heifers of any breed - and I think he is, based on the calves we've had here.
 
While I do look at BW epds, I pay more attention to Calving Ease Direct - most heifers have an easier time delivering a 75-lb snake than a 75-lb brick.  Calf shape and conformation are as important as weight, if not more so.

2011 Across-Breed epd comparison chart here:
http://animalscience.tamu.edu/images/pdf/beef/2011-across-breed-adjustments.pdf

While it's not perfect, it is a tool.
As I understand it(and I could be wrong), Angus are set as the 'zero point' - so, for instance, based on the 2011 numbers, a theoretical Simmental bull with BW/WW/YW epds of 0/0/0 would be comparable to an Angus bull with BW/WW/YW epds of +4.8/26/24
IOW, the current Simmental sire I'm using, with  BW -1.9, WW +35.9, YW + 62.1, would be comparable, based on the across-breed adjustment factors (BW 4.8, WW 26, YW 24) to an Angus bull with BW +2.9, WW +61.9, YW +86.1 - at least, that's how I see it.

 

[leanbeef]

Right...the differences have to do with differences in base. And you can't compare EPDs for different breeds calculated on a different base and using different input data. In the 1990s, the Simmental association held a bunch of meetings all over the country and basically told breeders the cattle were NOT working for commercial cattlemen. Breeders responded, and the breed has changed completely since then. But any time an association goes through a base change like we have a few times to "reset" the average for the breed, it changes things. What never changes is an animal's rank in the breed...if a bull is high for birth weight compared to other cattle in the breed, and the base changes, he's still high for birth weight.

In July, Simmental and Red Angus will go to a common base, meaning all the animals in both databases will be combined, and EPDs for both breeds will be calculated using the same base. After that, then all Simmental, all Red Angus, all registered percentage Simmental and all other registered animals from other breeds that are IN THE SIMMENTAL DATABASE as Foundation stock can be compared on the same playing field.

And this isn't about "lying and cheating"... if anything, there may be some marketing involved in terms of aligning the reality of the breed and some perceptions and changing some common MISperceptions that are out there. For instance, folks who may not have used Simmental in the past 15 years... I've been involved with Simmental cattle for 40 years, and what we have now is not the same breed of cattle we had 15 years ago.

 

[sue]

Right...the differences have to do with differences in base. And you can't compare EPDs for different breeds calculated on a different base and using different input data. In the 1990s, the Simmental association held a bunch of meetings all over the country and basically told breeders the cattle were NOT working for commercial cattlemen. Breeders responded, and the breed has changed completely since then. But any time an association goes through a base change like we have a few times to "reset" the average for the breed, it changes things. What never changes is an animal's rank in the breed...if a bull is high for birth weight compared to other cattle in the breed, and the base changes, he's still high for birth weight.

In July, Simmental and Red Angus will go to a common base, meaning all the animals in both databases will be combined, and EPDs for both breeds will be calculated using the same base. After that, then all Simmental, all Red Angus, all registered percentage Simmental and all other registered animals from other breeds that are IN THE SIMMENTAL DATABASE as Foundation stock can be compared on the same playing field.

And this isn't about "lying and cheating"... if anything, there may be some marketing involved in terms of aligning the reality of the breed and some perceptions and changing some common MISperceptions that are out there. For instance, folks who may not have used Simmental in the past 15 years... I've been involved with Simmental cattle for 40 years, and what we have now is not the same breed of cattle we had 15 years ago.

Two breeds combining/using the same base and saving the  breeders  some money? now there is a idea... ? you could wait until your breed drops to 5 or 14k reg head Or just do it now at 45k hd? smart smart

 

[Limiman12]

As said in other posts........

You cannot compare epds from one breed to another......

A plus five angus is probably still easier ona commercial heifer then a minus two charlios

 

[Mark H]

You can't compare EPDs across breeds as Mill  Iron A has stated.  You are comparing two different populations and baselines making comparisons invalid.  This is not even getting into the problems with EPDs (not enough room here).  The only valid comparison is to progeny test  the bulls concerned.  Then you can definitively tell which bull is easier calving.
By the way a double muscled Angus bull is on stud for ABS Genus in the UK.  From his background he would likely be in the +5 to 6 Birth Weight range.  Still think that bull would be easier calving than a -2 BWT Charolais? 

 

[knabe]

why is this so hard to understand?  the continental's needed lower bw and got less growth.

english breeds needed more growth and got more bw.

maybe all these genomic companies are using the wrong dna to figure this stuff out.

 

[DRB]

Right...the differences have to do with differences in base. And you can't compare EPDs for different breeds calculated on a different base and using different input data. In the 1990s, the Simmental association held a bunch of meetings all over the country and basically told breeders the cattle were NOT working for commercial cattlemen. Breeders responded, and the breed has changed completely since then. But any time an association goes through a base change like we have a few times to "reset" the average for the breed, it changes things. What never changes is an animal's rank in the breed...if a bull is high for birth weight compared to other cattle in the breed, and the base changes, he's still high for birth weight.

In July, Simmental and Red Angus will go to a common base, meaning all the animals in both databases will be combined, and EPDs for both breeds will be calculated using the same base. After that, then all Simmental, all Red Angus, all registered percentage Simmental and all other registered animals from other breeds that are IN THE SIMMENTAL DATABASE as Foundation stock can be compared on the same playing field.

And this isn't about "lying and cheating"... if anything, there may be some marketing involved in terms of aligning the reality of the breed and some perceptions and changing some common MISperceptions that are out there. For instance, folks who may not have used Simmental in the past 15 years... I've been involved with Simmental cattle for 40 years, and what we have now is not the same breed of cattle we had 15 years ago.

Anyone know who is handling the data generation for the joint-EPDs?  Like what company or organization.  -Thanks

Across the board EPDs for all cattle would be interesting, but I don't know if it would result in everyone driving their breed to the same average...

 

[leanbeef]

Right...the differences have to do with differences in base. And you can't compare EPDs for different breeds calculated on a different base and using different input data. In the 1990s, the Simmental association held a bunch of meetings all over the country and basically told breeders the cattle were NOT working for commercial cattlemen. Breeders responded, and the breed has changed completely since then. But any time an association goes through a base change like we have a few times to "reset" the average for the breed, it changes things. What never changes is an animal's rank in the breed...if a bull is high for birth weight compared to other cattle in the breed, and the base changes, he's still high for birth weight.

In July, Simmental and Red Angus will go to a common base, meaning all the animals in both databases will be combined, and EPDs for both breeds will be calculated using the same base. After that, then all Simmental, all Red Angus, all registered percentage Simmental and all other registered animals from other breeds that are IN THE SIMMENTAL DATABASE as Foundation stock can be compared on the same playing field.

And this isn't about "lying and cheating"... if anything, there may be some marketing involved in terms of aligning the reality of the breed and some perceptions and changing some common MISperceptions that are out there. For instance, folks who may not have used Simmental in the past 15 years... I've been involved with Simmental cattle for 40 years, and what we have now is not the same breed of cattle we had 15 years ago.

Anyone know who is handling the data generation for the joint-EPDs?  Like what company or organization.   -Thanks

Across the board EPDs for all cattle would be interesting, but I don't know if it would result in everyone driving their breed to the same average...

Don't know the answer to that...that would be a question Wade Schafer could answer. I'm not sure that Simmental and Red Angus haven't been using the same IT support in the past...that would make the transition easier. But like I said...I'm not sure that's the case. Is it Cornell?... I feel like I should know that lol

In regards to across the board EPDs for all cattle, that will never happen. I think the industry and the people who make it up are way too competitive and worried about another breed getting the upper hand for that to become a reality. And I don't think breed averages are really what matters. I think every breed association (and hopefully breeders) are at least trying to produce cattle that outperform the averages. Until our averages = optimums, and until we're all aware what those optimums are, we'll still be trying to beat the average of the population. As I think about that, though, I CAN think of traits where I don't always think we're helping ourselves by selecting for more and more... Yearling weight, for example. We talk about moderate frame and efficient cow size and optimum slaughter weight... none of those are really the goal of generation after generation of the heaviest yearling weight we can produce. Just a thought...