knabe
Well-known member
genes, yes. for any population under study, there should be a random distribution centered around a mean, ie a bell curve. if there isn't a normal distribution, something is going on. obviously steers don't get reported for SC, so that skews the curve and will skew to the right where people think normal is and what is acceptable for progress. from the data it appears carcass traits and fertility (SC), are at least slightly antagonistic. summit primetime is extremely negative for SC, and is in an area of the curve which doesn't mirror the other end, which it should if it was a random distribution. with enough culling it probably doesn't matter, since people are looking for the big nuts anyway, and a distribution wil appear around a skewed mean, but it may discourage people from using bulls who are "balanced" for all traits and encourage the artfully, fixed trait, bred bulls to fetch more money. i am not saying primetime is balanced. I am saying that not enough people are using artfully bred bulls as they continue to rationalize single trait selection as evidenced by their pocket book with curve bender bulls, and future disappointment.
the reason i would like to see the data points is because i would like to see if bulls have a loose or tight distribution for a particular trait. there may be reasons to use differently distributed bulls to make progress with appropriate selection in searches for genetic diversity and future selection.
the primetime bull was obviously saved because of his tenderness scores, but may have otherwise been cut due to his low growth and lack of muscle and obvious low SC. it appears some seedstock producers just haven't been culling strongly enough, and have been expecting wide semen distribution of otherwise average bulls due to their high stars. EXT is a high star bull and he also is -.36 .96 for SC. so is 6807, both with good epd's for other traits and obviously artfully bred before tenderness testing. so is that acceptable in the long run to fix carcass traits with SC's on these types of bulls, and do shorthorns and maines not have this relationship, understanding that maine epd's are in a state of flux as they are moved to a more moderate size.
epds may have little reflection on reality and why cattle breeding remains an art. I am extremely encouraged that OCC has persisted as a quality source of seedstock and commend the participants on this board for their strong convictions of cattle breeding, quality cattle, knowledge of the past and enthusiasm for reaching in the past for progress.
the reason i would like to see the data points is because i would like to see if bulls have a loose or tight distribution for a particular trait. there may be reasons to use differently distributed bulls to make progress with appropriate selection in searches for genetic diversity and future selection.
the primetime bull was obviously saved because of his tenderness scores, but may have otherwise been cut due to his low growth and lack of muscle and obvious low SC. it appears some seedstock producers just haven't been culling strongly enough, and have been expecting wide semen distribution of otherwise average bulls due to their high stars. EXT is a high star bull and he also is -.36 .96 for SC. so is 6807, both with good epd's for other traits and obviously artfully bred before tenderness testing. so is that acceptable in the long run to fix carcass traits with SC's on these types of bulls, and do shorthorns and maines not have this relationship, understanding that maine epd's are in a state of flux as they are moved to a more moderate size.
epds may have little reflection on reality and why cattle breeding remains an art. I am extremely encouraged that OCC has persisted as a quality source of seedstock and commend the participants on this board for their strong convictions of cattle breeding, quality cattle, knowledge of the past and enthusiasm for reaching in the past for progress.
