cowman said:
farwest said:
OK, genetics 101 is a little presumptuous. Monopoly is proven, clones are just a little different. To call it Genetics 101 is like calling a 4-H bottle rocket project "Rocket Science".
The interaction of mitochondrial DNA transferred from the recip dam has not been entirely understood to this point. Neither has the survivability and/or fickle nature of the cloned animals. They are not identical to the DNA donor.
Just keeping perspective. Genetics 101 it isn't.
Cowman, Steerjockey & Everyone,
Let me please first say, that I do not have a "dog in the fight", and I am not promoting any bull by my following statements.
With respect and regards to your remark about genetics and mitochondrial DNA, I believe Farwest was only trying to make a point about which bull to use.
I ask everyone? How has himself Monopoly worked for you? Which bull is more proven, Monopoly or a new yearling son of Monopoly? If you look at the clones of other bulls, they have seemed to reproduce the calves, that replicate the offspring of their bull they were cloned from,very similarly.
I do believe agree with Farwest's statement, that you would have a much greater "idea", not proof, of how the Monopoly clones would work on your cows, than a yearling Monoply son that has no progeny.
That being said, I think you need to look at your breeding goals when selecting your A.I. sires. So, do you like Monopoly and want to use more of him but perhaps a more reasonable price per unit of semen? Or do you want to try something a little different, but still have some Monopoly influence? IMHO <cowboy>