Jerry Cassady
Association Perspective
The magic number!
Years ago, when I was in grade school, we would often watch educational short cartoon clips known as Schoolhouse Rock on Saturday mornings. One particular message focused on the number three, where "Three" was a magic number. As I matured it was clear to me that there was nothing magic about the number three, it was simply a catchy song that helped young people learn mathematics.
Today it seems that in the arena of beef cattle selection we place an overabundance of emphasis on certain "magic numbers" in order to create the next generation of Angus-sired calves. Here's a good example. It has been my experience here in the Midwest that one standout "magic number" is an expected progeny difference (EPD) for birth weight of +2 pounds (lb.). This benchmark seems to be the line in the sand for many seedstock and commercial producers alike; bulls above this magic number are quickly overlooked regardless of other numerical or phenotypic strengths they may offer.
Time after time during bull sale season I have witnessed quality Angus bulls that can genetically provide a positive boost in many economically important traits simply get passed by due to the fact that they are above a +2.0 for birth weight EPD.
Is the entire industry breeding all virgin heifers that are genetically predisposed to dystocia problems? I doubt it.
Don't get me wrong, I am well aware of the issues involved with calving difficulty, and by no means am I promoting large calves with excessive birth weights. I am also mindful that, in most cases, we are selling yearling bulls with non-parent EPD values, and the probability for change is real. There are also environmental factors that can play a huge role in the birth weights of calves born on any given farm or ranch. However, birth weight EPD is an indicator trait for calving ease, and should be used as such. My point is this: What is the magnitude difference in genetics between bulls with a +1.9 compared to +2.1? In reality, it's not much. However, the difference in purchase price on sale day can be substantial.
Science will support coupling birth weight EPDs with calving ease direct EPDs. This has proven to be a highly effective selection tool as it more directly predicts the economically relevant trait of calving ease compared to using the previously described indicator trait for predicting birth weight. Many seedstock producers in my region are now utilizing both EPDs to more accurately predict calving ease in future progeny with great success.
Another frustrating fact is how difficult it can be to sell Angus bulls that are above breed average for birth weight EPD with excellent growth numbers, while watching commercial cattlemen unknowingly purchase bulls of another breed with more birth weight potential to achieve comparable growth. If we consider the latest adjustment factors for calculating across-breed EPDs (AB EPDS) provided by the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC), one can easily see how this oversight can potentially result in more calving problems in the next calf crop if selection tools are not considered to reduce the incidence of difficult births.
Here's an example: Let's say you purchase a Simmental bull that is listed in the sale catalog as a -1.0 BW EPD. He may even qualify for an in-state heifer development program. However, after you add the USMARC adjustment of +5.2, this so-called calving-ease bull would have an Angus-based equivalent BW EPD of +4.2 pounds. None of the 4-lb. Angus bulls qualify for the in-state heifer development program, and none of them should. These are not considered calving-ease bulls.
Ultimately, it comes down to the accuracy and reliability of the database to predict future generations. We as Angus breeders are fortunate to have the largest and most accurate set of data in the entire industry. Our challenge is to continue to educate our bull-buying customers, and to be cognizant of the fact that there are no "magic numbers."
Editor's Note: Regional Manager Jerry Cassady covers Region 9, including the states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin. Click here to find the regional manager for your state.
Reader's comments:
• The article on the "magic number 3" caught an issue that I have struggled with for some time. In my program I have AIed for years using bulls with birth weight EPDs -1 to +0.8. In keeping my heifers for some 25 years, am I creating a heifer that genetically is predisposed to dystocia? My herd has EPDs for birth weight close to "0." Because I have a small herd I do not have a sampling to give a "big" picture. Your thoughts!
• Great article on birth weight EPDs. As a muti-breed seedstock breeder, I agree with you that a lot of commercial buyers want to buy Angus heifer bulls for all their cows.
A huge mistake. During the past two tough winters we've had numerous commercial cattlemen lament the early gestation little calves that are short on enough muscle mass and weight to survive bad weather, mud, scours and other challenges most commercial producers experience. Their cattle are NOT PETS, nor do they want to treat them as such.
For the most part they are not Nichols' customers, but are coming to Nichols Farms to buy Simmental composites to get muscle and heterosis and calving survival. Talk about a sea change from recent years! Most have not seen or studied the MARC. adjustments for EPDs. We're happy to give them a hand out with this critical information.
I would disagree with you on one of your statements: "Angus-based equivalent BW EPD of +4.2 pounds. None of the 4-lb. Angus bulls qualify for the in-state heifer development program, and none of them should."
First, at Nichols Farms we have always believed ANY heifer in a seedstock situation should be able to calve unassisted to a breed average birth weight sire of their breed.
Second, I would much rather sell an Angus yearling bull to a 70-year-old customer with a +4 birth weight EPD and a CE direct of +8 than a +1 with a CE direct of -4.
I believe the American Angus Association should give serious consideration of not publishing birth weight EPDs and focus on the CE direct. Why are we advertising and merchandising actual birth weights and birth weight EPDs when in fact we should be selecting for and selling maternal CE, manageable calving ease and calf survival?
Keep up the good work.
[Click here to go to the top of the page.]