Shorthorn $ figures now have % rankings

[Okotoks]

HC timeline's sire :
 SULL GNCC Salute  post a -38.25 for CEZ .  333 progeny with a epd accuracy for calving ease of 85 %  and MCE of -9.8 with a acc of 85%.  It's going to take  awhile to prove a son....

If the $ values are based on  pedigree?  

The grandsire of  Timeline  is -10.4  CE  82% acc   -11.1 MCE 81% acc and his $ CEZ is -27.28??

You need more people using timeline to prove otherwise?  Sell semen  maybe?




Sue, I know why Timeline's numbers are what they are, and it is probably pedigree based. He is not my main concern with these numbers. My concerns are with several other animals that I have used. I know that there are always going to be inconsistencies in EPDs until the accuracies become higher. What I struggle with is the fact that in some cases I see little correlation between the numbers and the usefulness the animal possesses. Our Bar Code bull's EPDs are BW  1.6, WW +7, YW +14, Milk 0. The new EPDs are $CEZ  +16.96,  $F +19.25, $BMI +23.75.  If I was considering buying this bull to use in my herd, how could I use these numbers to evaluate his actual performance. Many people would stay away from him because he has a WW EPD of +7 ( due to the old genetics of his sire) . Bar Code weaned at 692 (adjusted to 205 days - no creep). His YW was 1121 adjusted ( actual was 1230 lb). He weighed 2020 at 24.5 months. How would these EPD numbers help me decide that this bull has adequate growth when they are so moderate?
Maybe I just don't understand how these numbers are generated but take a look at the EPD s of his sire and dam:
                                                     BW           WW             YW           Milk            $CEZ                $F                $BMI

Pheasant Creek Leader 4th              -3.0            -6                -5             -2             +52.82             +7.98            +31.37

B Good Red Sue 1P                         +6.2          +21             +21          -1              -18.24              +30.64           +20.48

I just don't know how some of these numbers are arrived at? I can see how some of them have been arrived at, but what was used to base the numbers on some of these older genetics like Leader 4th? Look at any older sire and their numbers always suck.  Both sire and dam have negative Milk EPDs yet his Milk EPD is 0. The Milk EPDs suggest that Red Sue should be a lower than average milking cow. In reality, she is one of the few cows I own that I wish had a bit less milk as her calves only suck one or two teats for several weeks after birth. I consider her to be a much above average milking cow. I guess my biggest problem is I have to wonder how I would use Bar Codes EPDs to use them to make a selection decision?
As I mentioned previously, I look at the EPDs in many of my heifers and I am left scratching my head as to how I would ever use these numbers to select my replacements. They just don't seem to match reality!

Believe me, I want to believe the numbers. I want to be able to use the numbers. Maybe I haven't drank enough of the Kool-Aid, but common sense seems to leave me with a bunch of questions after I study the numbers. I hope before I leave this earth, I will be able to see some EPD numbers that will allow me to feel comfortable with them, and be able to know that they can be the tool to help in selection of breeding stock that they were intended to be.

In the case of HC Bar Code you have to remember that he is an ET so his EPD's are simply an average of his parents.(Red Sues YW is +33, Leader 4th -5 ave is 14 which is what they show for Bar Code) When his calves are inputted you will probabably see a significant change in his numbers. The computer just calculates what it knows and with ET's they just use averages so that a good or poor recipient mother does not influence the numbers. I am guessing that what you see will start to show up after his calves data has been put in the system and the spring 2013 EPD's are published. With any mating we really don't know what the calves genetics will be and how they will be expressed and with a bull sired by a bull from the 60's it is even more the case. I have a couple of bulls like that myself. In the meantime you have the evidence walking your pasture and most people want actual numbers as much or more than EPD's.

 

[DL]

Well the old adage if you can't dazzle 'em with facts dazzle 'em with bull****!

I have read what okotoks posted about what these numbers mean, I have read what I can find on the ASA web site (which is identical to what okotoks posted) but nowhere can I find anything about how these numbers were derived and what they are really suppose to do in terms of helping breeders make decisions - nor can I determine if there is any accuracy associated with these numbers of if we are suppose to believe because the percent is high (or should it be low) despite it being from a skewed sample it is all good .....????

 

[mark tenenbaum]

Ist-HATS OFF to Larsons-whos cattle are right there-just-not quite as big,and not everyday conversation pieces. Long story short-there are alot of real world Shorthorns that are PROVEN -low BW and shaped right that dont have curve bending EPDS-like: ALM Surf, ALM Chiller,Perfect Image,GB Daybreak Express,Waukaru Candidate,FHF Rodeos Hope,a bunch of Deertrail bulls,-and many more including a 2yr old( in FEB 2012) that I bred. (YEA-one of my very few)HE has been with cows-since he left Hawkeye as a long yearling-His first calves(approx 20 pures and somex-breds) are being weaned,NONE of them went over 80 pounds.His second crop ( falls) will start hitting the ground soon at the home of Milestones Moonlighter in Texas(he must have brought the drought with him when he returned to Iowa) and 20 plus cows or so hes been with all spring-summer in Iowa:will calve next spring.Anybody who wants to add some good,AVAILABLE CE Shorthorns that didnt get thier due-please chime in. O0

 

[justintime]

HC timeline's sire :
 SULL GNCC Salute  post a -38.25 for CEZ .  333 progeny with a epd accuracy for calving ease of 85 %  and MCE of -9.8 with a acc of 85%.  It's going to take  awhile to prove a son....

If the $ values are based on  pedigree?  

The grandsire of  Timeline  is -10.4  CE  82% acc   -11.1 MCE 81% acc and his $ CEZ is -27.28??

You need more people using timeline to prove otherwise?  Sell semen  maybe?




Sue, I know why Timeline's numbers are what they are, and it is probably pedigree based. He is not my main concern with these numbers. My concerns are with several other animals that I have used. I know that there are always going to be inconsistencies in EPDs until the accuracies become higher. What I struggle with is the fact that in some cases I see little correlation between the numbers and the usefulness the animal possesses. Our Bar Code bull's EPDs are BW  1.6, WW +7, YW +14, Milk 0. The new EPDs are $CEZ  +16.96,  $F +19.25, $BMI +23.75.  If I was considering buying this bull to use in my herd, how could I use these numbers to evaluate his actual performance. Many people would stay away from him because he has a WW EPD of +7 ( due to the old genetics of his sire) . Bar Code weaned at 692 (adjusted to 205 days - no creep). His YW was 1121 adjusted ( actual was 1230 lb). He weighed 2020 at 24.5 months. How would these EPD numbers help me decide that this bull has adequate growth when they are so moderate?
Maybe I just don't understand how these numbers are generated but take a look at the EPD s of his sire and dam:
                                                     BW           WW             YW           Milk            $CEZ                $F                $BMI

Pheasant Creek Leader 4th              -3.0            -6                -5             -2             +52.82             +7.98            +31.37

B Good Red Sue 1P                         +6.2          +21             +21          -1              -18.24              +30.64           +20.48

I just don't know how some of these numbers are arrived at? I can see how some of them have been arrived at, but what was used to base the numbers on some of these older genetics like Leader 4th? Look at any older sire and their numbers always suck.  Both sire and dam have negative Milk EPDs yet his Milk EPD is 0. The Milk EPDs suggest that Red Sue should be a lower than average milking cow. In reality, she is one of the few cows I own that I wish had a bit less milk as her calves only suck one or two teats for several weeks after birth. I consider her to be a much above average milking cow. I guess my biggest problem is I have to wonder how I would use Bar Codes EPDs to use them to make a selection decision?
As I mentioned previously, I look at the EPDs in many of my heifers and I am left scratching my head as to how I would ever use these numbers to select my replacements. They just don't seem to match reality!

Believe me, I want to believe the numbers. I want to be able to use the numbers. Maybe I haven't drank enough of the Kool-Aid, but common sense seems to leave me with a bunch of questions after I study the numbers. I hope before I leave this earth, I will be able to see some EPD numbers that will allow me to feel comfortable with them, and be able to know that they can be the tool to help in selection of breeding stock that they were intended to be.

In the case of HC Bar Code you have to remember that he is an ET so his EPD's are simply an average of his parents.(Red Sues YW is +33, Leader 4th -5 ave is 14 which is what they show for Bar Code) When his calves are inputted you will probabably see a significant change in his numbers. The computer just calculates what it knows and with ET's they just use averages so that a good or poor recipient mother does not influence the numbers. I am guessing that what you see will start to show up after his calves data has been put in the system and the spring 2013 EPD's are published. With any mating we really don't know what the calves genetics will be and how they will be expressed and with a bull sired by a bull from the 60's it is even more the case. I have a couple of bulls like that myself. In the meantime you have the evidence walking your pasture and most people want actual numbers as much or more than EPD's.

I know that Bar Code was an ET calf and that is why his EPDs are the average of the sire and dam. If he had been a natural calf, do you think his EPDs would have been much different? I don't know how they arrive at the EPDs of many of these older bulls who have been dead for 30 or more years? Are they just set low and hopefully their calves data will help correct them to more accurate numbers? Many of these older bulls have had less than 10 calves born in the past 20 years so it is going to be a slow process if that is the case.

Another old bull who has low EPDs is  Four Point Major who was born in 1966. Major was one of the biggest bulls ever used here. We are presently flushing a couple donors for Australia to Major. Here are his EPDs:
BW -4.9, WW -4  YW 0  Milk -1. We have sold a considerable amount of semen from Major in the past 3 years. Obviously, the people using him aren't concerned about the offsprings EPDs. I plan on using him again as I think his offspring could be very close to what is being demanded today. They were thick, easy fleshing and big bodied. His daughters had great udders. Unfortunately, the EPDs of his calves will suggest that they are inferior to many of today's genetics. Major had the biggest and best formed feet I have seen on a bull. At 12 years of age they had never been trimmed and looked like he had just come off a trimming table.

 

[maineshorthorn]

I suspect that these numbers are nothing different than EPD numbers prior to them arriving.

Those who agree, and have good numbers, will promote them as such.
And those who don't believe, or have poor numbers will say they are bogus.

I find it ironic, that the biggest believers- are now questioning the system and asking where the numbers came from.  The numbers came from parent averages, progeny reports, and other EPDs.  Dollar indexes are nothing special, just a compilation of other EPDs with significant importance placed on certain EPDs over others. 

 

[coyote]

Here is a cow that is working down at Larsons in Montana. I don't know what her numbers are but it looks like she is doing a good job on her calf. Looks like she is maintaining her condition well. I don't think she would win many first prizes in the show ring in the states, but by golly I would like to own 100 cows just like her.

 

[JTM]

It's becoming evident to me over that last few years that you can pretty much tell which genetics and which programs can be trusted when it comes to EPD's. Overall, I think the epd's in the breed are getting more accurate over time because of crackdowns on manipulating and also because people are using the same genetics over and over and over. Therefore, the numbers eventually will get more accurate from the very small percentage of those who are recording them accurately. 

 

[huntaway]

Would it be easier and more of a worry to manipulate actuals than EPD's
Are EPD's just an easy target when the performance of an animal disapoints.
Do EPD's have a minimum accuracy or must data be recorded for that trait  before they will be published.
The most important part of an index is that it has been moduled right to identify the right animals at the top. It seems to me that most are pretty happy with the animals at the top and that they are commercially focused real world bulls. Are there many bulls that have made the top 10-20% that really shouldn't.
Below is a link to show how our indexs are promoted showing the ebv weightings and the expected trend if selecting sires from the top 20% of the index. Sorry its angus but i couldn't find the shorthorn one which is very similar except we don't have a days to calving ebv.
http://angusnz.com/internet_solutions_indexes.php

 

[RyanChandler]

The 23J cow looks to be the real deal. She is still in production, calf at side, and being flushed. You should post a picture of your 05X, he looks good

 

[trevorgreycattleco]

With all due respect, you couldn't have posted are worse picture to show off your bull. I can't really tell much about him.

 

[RyanChandler]

Here's the one in my avitar taken the same day after I cleaned the lense on my phone.

 

[sue]

Would it be easier and more of a worry to manipulate actuals than EPD's
Are EPD's just an easy target when the performance of an animal disapoints.
Do EPD's have a minimum accuracy or must data be recorded for that trait  before they will be published.
The most important part of an index is that it has been moduled right to identify the right animals at the top. It seems to me that most are pretty happy with the animals at the top and that they are commercially focused real world bulls. Are there many bulls that have made the top 10-20% that really shouldn't.
Below is a link to show how our indexs are promoted showing the ebv weightings and the expected trend if selecting sires from the top 20% of the index. Sorry its angus but i couldn't find the shorthorn one which is very similar except we don't have a days to calving ebv.
http://angusnz.com/internet_solutions_indexes.php

Sure you can manipulate actuals and epds... If you use a young unproven bull in a contemporary of older proven/high acc bulls. Report all of the calves on the young bull lighter at birth then the older bulls and  Bingo- new young bull's numbers climb... what's even better though is if a second or third  herd can do the same ( using your new bull and alll of the Old/proven bulls).  Huntaway- thanks for posting !

 

[RyanChandler]

How's that scenario manipulating, sue?  Unless you mean they lie about the bws.  In that case, I'd still call that lying, not manipulating.  Manipulating would be like having many many calves but registering only a cpl in each contemporary group. 

 

[sue]

Would it be easier and more of a worry to manipulate actuals than EPD's
Are EPD's just an easy target when the performance of an animal disapoints.
Do EPD's have a minimum accuracy or must data be recorded for that trait  before they will be published.
The most important part of an index is that it has been moduled right to identify the right animals at the top. It seems to me that most are pretty happy with the animals at the top and that they are commercially focused real world bulls. Are there many bulls that have made the top 10-20% that really shouldn't.
Below is a link to show how our indexs are promoted showing the ebv weightings and the expected trend if selecting sires from the top 20% of the index. Sorry its angus but i couldn't find the shorthorn one which is very similar except we don't have a days to calving ebv.
http://angusnz.com/internet_solutions_indexes.php

Sure you can manipulate actuals and epds... If you use a young unproven bull in a contemporary of older proven/high acc bulls. Report all of the calves on the young bull lighter at birth then the older bulls and  Bingo- new young bull's numbers climb... what's even better though is if a second or third  herd can do the same ( using your new bull and alll of the Old/proven bulls).  Huntaway- thanks for posting !

Yes XBAR, lying about what you report would manipulate the numbers based on the scenerio I posted.

 

[huntaway]

Hadn't thought of manipulating a whole sire group which i guess would work, was more thinking of an individual where it would be buffered by the pedigree info.
I'm not sure only recording a couple of your top calves helps their numbers at all, it could actually hurt them. If you only record your top calves their weights wont be that far ahead of the average and your good calves will now be below average. If you record all your calves your top calves will be well above average and have better numbers.

 

[DL]

Would it be easier and more of a worry to manipulate actuals than EPD's
Are EPD's just an easy target when the performance of an animal disapoints.
Do EPD's have a minimum accuracy or must data be recorded for that trait  before they will be published.
The most important part of an index is that it has been moduled right to identify the right animals at the top. It seems to me that most are pretty happy with the animals at the top and that they are commercially focused real world bulls. Are there many bulls that have made the top 10-20% that really shouldn't.
Below is a link to show how our indexs are promoted showing the ebv weightings and the expected trend if selecting sires from the top 20% of the index. Sorry its angus but i couldn't find the shorthorn one which is very similar except we don't have a days to calving ebv.
http://angusnz.com/internet_solutions_indexes.php

Sure you can manipulate actuals and epds... If you use a young unproven bull in a contemporary of older proven/high acc bulls. Report all of the calves on the young bull lighter at birth then the older bulls and  Bingo- new young bull's numbers climb... what's even better though is if a second or third  herd can do the same ( using your new bull and alll of the Old/proven bulls).  Huntaway- thanks for posting !

Since I have no idea how these new numbers are created nor what they mean I can't really speak to them but the more animals included from the more herds the less one animal matters in the overall scheme (however we are really talking whole herd reporting not pick and choose).

For example look at Buffalo Creek Cherokee Canyon 4912 - the most bull with the most registered Red Angus progeny -
http://search.redangus.org/animal/id/574873#/animal/574873 - his accuracy for CED, BW, WW, and YW (as well as some others) is extremely high >97%) - these numbers represent many offspring from many herds and shows a bull whose EPDs are breed average for all traits - which of course makes him fairly unusual. One unreported or wrongly reported animal or group of animals sired by this bull will have minimal to no effect on these numbers.

However if you start looking at breeds with smaller data base and those that do not require whole herd reporting, there are very few animals with high accuracy EPDs and the reported EPD numbers need to be evaluated with a large grain of salt

below is a link to the Red Angus Simmental multibreed EPDs which is interesting and pretty explanatory

http://redangus.org/assets/media/Documents/Genetics/Brochures/Profit_%24implified_Brochure_2012.pdf

 

[RyanChandler]

Until performance reporting is mandatory (not whole herd reporting), we will continue to have these  problem.  What is the resistance?

 

[trevorgreycattleco]

Two things IMO. 1. The actual numbers on very popular bulls suck. Or 2. Folks don't believe the numbers and don't want to waste money and time on reporting there own numbers. Dover ranch is a ex of this.

 

[DL]

Until performance reporting is mandatory (not whole herd reporting), we will continue to have these  problem.  What is the resistance?

I am not sure how you differentiate whole herd from performance reporting - IMHO whole herd reporting is inclusive of performance and includes information on dam (did not calve, why?) as well as reason cows have left the herd (ie infertile, bad attitude, injury, sold etc)

If the information is not important to the people with the cows then the information will not be collected - it's kind of interesting really - any breed or registry that made it's make as a show breed or registry rolls back to the notion of hybred vigor and we need numbers to prove that not all are calves weigh 120 lbs at birth - history repeating itself - what they fail to realize (time and again) is that the numbers are meaningless, but they make people think they are doing something 

 

[RyanChandler]

i distinguish performance reporting as only having to report information on calves that you register as opposed to having to register all calves you have born.  Some calves aren't seedstock quality- they shouldn't be registered.